/lit/ - Literature

>>22671863
Aristotle believed women and slaves were subhuman and society should be arranged in an aristocratic hierarchy. Nietzsche isn't really political but you can read him as supporting aristocracy as well. I don't know what you're talking about.

>>22671889
But Aristotle and Nietzsche were more lenient toward timocratic fetishisation of pedagogy were they not? Plato was much more pedantic about that kind of thing. For instance Aristotle became much more lenient toward poets and physicists which Plato would be much more pedantic about.

Wasn't Nietzsche a philosemite who dismissed Plato? An 'aristocracy' of schizophrenic inbreds that dismiss Plato or what?

You are most probably a nigsoc leftist so of course you hate right-wing philosophy.
>I don't think you can defend the Right through words
Because the well has been poisoned with sematical games; that's how we have retards like you who think Plato is right-wing.

>>22671966
What is 'nigsoc'?

>>22671889
>Aristotle believed women and slaves were subhuman
No he didn't. He demonstrated that women and slaves were lesser in capacity for moral virtue than the best kind of man, not that they were of lesser inherent value as though animals.
>and society should be arranged in an aristocratic hierarchy.
Predicated on his definition of aristocracy, which is government by an educated and demonstrably more capable elite whose purpose was further right ordering and maintenance of the social system.
OP's a direction-brained idiot and troll for calling Aristotle 'left leaning' but you're just plain illiterate and take your understanding of history from Guardian headlines.

>>22671920
So your definition of right wing is hating poets, physicists, and antisemitism? Plato promoted equality of all souls. That is more left wing than Aristotle
>Wasn't Nietzsche a philosemite
He wasn't a "philosemite." He liked shitting on german nationalism because it was a popular movement at the time and he was a contrarian.
> dismissed Plato?
Plato was a life denier and a moralist. And Nietzsche was criticized of metaphysics. He criticized Plato, but he also didn't "dismiss" him. He was heavily influenced by Plato. Why do you think Plato was right wing anyway?

>>22671996
>He demonstrated that women and slaves were lesser in capacity for moral virtue than the best kind of man
you're being pedantic, I'm not using "subhuman" as a technical term
> not that they were of lesser inherent value as though animals
women's souls are literally inferior. you said it yourself.
> which is government by an educated and demonstrably more capable elite whose purpose was further right ordering and maintenance of the social system
yeah... so, Aristocracy. that's exactly what I said.
>you're just plain illiterate
you're dumb

>>22672013
>you're being pedantic
You're being deliberately imprecise to poison the well
>women's souls are literally inferior
But still human. There are lesser and greater humans, and lesser and greater men and women by necessity. The assumption that this is not true was invented 5 minutes ago and you'd be hard pressed to defend it.
>yeah... so, Aristocracy. that's exactly what I said.
You framed it as an inherently undesirable form of government, and from the rest of your post I was lead to believe you were too illiterate to read past the big scary word and digest his definition of it.

>>22671863
I dont think you know what these terms mean.

Which is fair since they are loose now it seems. Heard one person say its the predilection of being more personally disciplinarian and being more lax.

>>22672006
I always thought right-wing behaviour originated from irrational or neurotic particularly carnal emotions and that Plato valued these things but maybe I have that arseways.

>>22672024
>You're being deliberately imprecise to poison the well
you're overly attached to Aristotle. I was not using subhuman as a technical term. There is no argument here, and I said nothing inaccurate if you're not too retarded to understand what people actually mean when they use hyperbolic language. you just got offended by words.

>>22672026
There is no universal significance to the political spectrum, its literally just a tool for describing relative differences in position vis a vis the current Liberal political paradigm. Abstracting that out to some universal trend of human thinking or behavior gets you retarded pseudointellectual garbage like >>22672030 which is ultimately just projection.

>>22672035
I accept your concession

>>22672030
how does plato value carnal emotions? read phaedrus.

>>22672045
I accept your concession, faggot. I also pre-emptively accept any concessions you make after this.

>>22672046
How do you decide which philosopher to read if not based on what use they have to you?

>>22672049
Die mad, gaybo

>>22672054
what do you mean by "use"? why are you talking about what philosophers are left and right? it's not useful. If you had read Plato you'd understand the purpose of philosophy.

>>22672042
Thats why I said "loose". You can form vague bubbles of "yah, thats more right-ish" or "yah thats more left-ish". You can abstract as you like, you just got to acknowledge the softness of the distinction, and hopefully make it as broadly applicable as you can.

>>22672030
That seems extremely non-fundamental in terms of characterization. Given that a drug addeled hippie wouldnt usually be seen in the category of a rightist, and a cold logical old money stock broker who sends his money to a tax haven might not be commonly imagened to be a leftist.

>>22672006
>He wasn’t a philosemite he just shit on his own people and called jews a superior race

>>22672093
When you've 'loosened' your comparison to the point that it can't stand up to any scrutiny you're better throwing it out. Even the implication that there's some kind of universal directionality in thought that runs in a throughline from ancient thought to the modern day only serves to keep people ignorant. At best there is a throughline in material conditions and human personality type, neither of which cleanly correlate to political platform (and can't, since there's no continuity or direct analog between political platforms across long periods of time).

I’ve followed the Plato Nietzsche strand but where does Aristotle go? I know very little about him I’m now realizing.

>>22672116
Aristotle goes to Aquinas and on to Catholicism. The whole of Western dogma was Aristotelian at its core until around the Reformation when the Church lost ideological control over the population by degrees. Plato is so much more prevalent in modern thought specifically because post-Reformation academics went looking for a philosophical root structure that was outside the Aristotle-Aquinas-Catechism pipeline; Plato had always been there but more prevalently in the form of Neoplatonism and largely in the form of esoterocist/gnostic Christian revisionism and shit like alchemy/natural philosophy LARP.

>>22671863
You're correct. Stop reading philosophy and go back to right-wing twitter.

>>22671863
You clearly either didn't read Aristotle's politics, were filtered so hard by it your butthole still hurts, or simply don't know what right wing is and have mistaken the political spectrum for the austistic spectrum. Possibly a combination of 2 out of the 3.

>>22671863
You're a fucking retard. The only consistent definition for the right-left dicotomy according to how it is used is hirearchy vs equality. The further right the more elitist you are, the further left the more egalitarian you are. And even that fails to make sense of it.

>>22671863
>far-right
more buzzwords

>>22671863

I can sort of see how a dumb person might read Nietzsche and think that he's "left-wing", but I don't see how that could happen with Aristotle.