/lit/ - Literature

I've always hated how people look at ancient philosophers and said "Wow, look at these guys, what secrets of knowledge did the achieve though decades of dilligent thinking unpolluted from modern conceptions?"

Ancient philosophers were pretty much retarded by modern standards. The standards of ancient greek culture are so different from today's scientific and logical world, their work is completely obsolete, better to look at and laugh like we laugh at the theory of spontaneous generation.

Socrates wasn't even the biggest culprit. Aristotle, now that guy was just plain dumb.

>>4100799

It's kind of easy to pot-shot Aristotle because he spent a lot of his time trying to do "science" which was pretty much all wrong, though I can't really expect him to be accurate based on the time in which he lived. Socrates and his chief dick rider Plato just argued intangible shit, which really hasn't had (and can't have) much formal disproving through science. All we can do is look at their silly arguments and wonder why no one was smart enough to say shit about it.

did you think you'd get responses

>>4100814

You responded.

You're absolutely right, Socrates.

I agree.

Undeniable.

Bggrrrblrllggllrlglgglbbrggl, gagged Crito.

>captcha: hypostatical ing

take 1 god damn anthro course you insufferable faggots, christ.

>>4100850

How would anthropology make shitty arguments somehow palatable? Are you implying that taking a class will make you dumber and more gullible?

>implying Greek culture and knowledge wasn't a high point for humanity relative to the time period

What if Socrates had a bigger dick?

I like Diogenes.

>>4100789
There were dissenting points of view, but hey didn't survive Christianity and the dark ages. Epicurus and Democritus for example.

Let me guess...edgy Nietzche fan?

>>4100789
Socrates was extremely clever - like some other, uh, rhetoriticians I know of. Never take a position, just keep changing your own and trying to talk around the subject and get your opponent confused.
very clever like pic related

>>4100899

No, Nietzsche was an edgy faggot and I fucking hated every second of his works

>>4100919
What's your opinion of Hume?

>>4100922

I haven't read any Hume yet, regrettably. Once I get through my backlog of platonic dialogues I might move on to him

>>4100908
racism is against the rules

>>4100932
whatcha mean?

>>4100919
What about Machiavelli, my friend? Have you joined the dark side?

>>4100931
I'd recommend it. He's kind of where modern thinking starts.

>>4100944
>the dark side?
You mean the Jew side? Plz don't do that. It would make pic related cry

>>4100944

Loved reading The Prince though I don't know if I would necessarily say I agree with Machiavelli on his conceptions of morality. The Prince was a very cool read though.

>>4100951

Thanks for the recommendation!

>>4100932
jews arent a race, theyre much more akin to a disease than anything else.

>>4100970
i know, rite? like... rats! they even look like them, too!!!

>>4100965
The Discourses on Livy are also an excellent read and are a great follow-up to "The Prince"

>>4100990
>>4100965
I'm really not joking this time. Machiavelli was talking about the joos taking over. De Medici was a Jew.
srsly, people. This is like Talmud stuff here.
you can even google it.

Everything we know about Socrates comes from his eromenos. Greeks could've been calling him on his shit left and right, but Plato just didnt mention it.

>>4100789
>The standards of ancient greek culture are so different from today's scientific and logical world
translation
>the men who developed Logic and the philosophical underpinnings of science aren't equipped to deal with science and logic
Suuuuuure.

>>4100892
>the dark ages
not a valid term. Do you mean Late Classical or Early Medieval?

>>4100789
Socrates is generally calling them out on their bullshit. He tricks them into saying something dumb and then takes it to its logical conclusion. They do call him on it,though. It is pretty well documented throughout the dialogues that popular Athenian opinion was that Socrates was a dick.

If you really think Socrates is stupid though, you would fail hard in calling him out on his bullshit.

>There's a magical realm of ghosts where a ghost of the perfect chair resides. Every earthly, non-perfect chair is a pale reflection of that ideal, perfect, complete magical chair ghost. This is true.
- typical Greek philosopher.

so you guys know that socrates embraced his ignorance and that was like the whole point of his putting speakers into the position of deconstructing their own arguments, right? right guys? fuck's sake this board is fucking shit

>>4101271
>that magical realm is our minds

how could you not put this together

>>4101289
Yes,see
>>4101240
He was the kamikaze pilot of ancient Athenian rhetoric.

>>4101299
Pretty sure forms are supposed to be extramental, atemporal and aspatial.

So I guess the search for virtue and the fear of misliving is just retarded, too. Because there were no insights to the human character and dynamic at all during that time. Especially not ones that we still use today. And these dumbest people ever definitely didn't basically start the Long Debate, which continued with the Stoics and Epicureans, and mutated to Christianity, and was held with an in'shallah spin by the muslims, and then brought back to life with the Renaissance and then the Enlightenment with Newton, Hooke and the rest, and taken yet further with Hume, Kant, and on and on in a beautiful crescendo until now. When you have my god shown it all to be a farce. Thanks for the insight, if only we could tell the last two thousand years of growth and progress to fuck off for a while and let you get on it the right way. I mad bro

>>4100813
I fucking hate all of aristotle's polisci shit
I had to read about that shit every year in english class in high school, they never even read his fucking books in class which were so obviously wrong
why did they do that?
why do shitty english teachers cum over aristotle so much? he was wrong about fucking everything, fuck rhetoric so bad

>>4100932
I'm a jew
I don't have a problem with these sorts of comics
they accurate depict some jews I personally know.

narrativism chokingo

>>4100799
spontaneous generation was an aberration Aristotle used to honestly explain why he found animals without apparent genitals (in contrast to his general notion that animals resemble their parents), but I suppose it's better to be disingenuous and pretend you're better than everyone else

When a book and a head collide and a hollow sound is heard, must it always have come from the book?

>>4102181
The implication, though, is that it's some kind of inherent quality of every Jew in the world. That's the problem.

I mean, I think Israel is horribly cruel to the Palestinians, and I still think those images are ridiculous.

>>4102225
no one believes every jew is like this

>writing down your philosophy instead of living it

Not ALL of the Greeks were shit, OP.

>Socrates is stupid they were like so stupid compared to us we have smartphones and shit, if they were so smart they'd at least have TV but they so lazy and stoopid that they can't even have lighters.

You guys should not criticize what you don't understand. Let alone what you don't understand WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF ITS TIME.

>>4100789
It was 2000 years ago circa. This entire thread is stupid.

>>4102229
I do

>>4102229
have you been to /pol/? Their use of "the Jew" is comparable to medieval moralists who used it as a byword for evil; you can't explain that.

>>4100799
>The standards of ancient greek culture are so different from today's scientific and logical world, their work is completely obsolete, better to look at and laugh like we laugh at the theory of spontaneous generation.

Read the republic by Plato and Politics by Aristotle and cry more about how wrong you are.

>>4102295

My alethiometer says 2500.

Its just a problem because you are to stupid to understand the historical context it was written in.

>>4102299

You should browse /pol/ more often. There's far too much correlation between anti-white bullshit and Jewish involvement for anybody not to trace a connection.

>>4102309
Only if you presume anti racist is code for anti white dickwad.

>>4102314

You'll notice I didn't say anything about 'anti racism'. Why so hostile?

>>4102325
Because fags piss me off.

>>4102331
>muh feelings

>>4102299
you realize /pol/ is mostly satire, right?

>>4103369
I wish

>>4103369
It was once. But then that whole community that gets laughs out pretending to be stupid blah blah stupid people come thing happened

>>4101289

This. Why are there so many uninformed scientism fedoras invading this board?

>>4103369

oh my god did someone seriously use the phrase "dark ages" ITT

what is the world coming to

>>4100799
>>4100789
>anyone responding to this obvious troll thread

>>4102304
Not the guy you're responding to, but the Republic pretty much confirmed exactly why Plato and Socrates are unimpressive by today's standards.

He argues his positions starting from these absurd, arbitrary baselines that his critics seem to just take at face value (ie the soul has three components: lust for truth, lust for honor, lust for all other things).

>>4103369
Not anymore. The satire is so interwoven with serious conspiracy theorists that most posts on there are made by people who genuinely self-identify as national socialists/monarchists/fascists.

>>4100789

What was exactly this bullshit?.

>>4104172
The fact that so many books still name Socrates "the greatest or most significant or most influential" philosopher ever only tells you how far philosophy still is from becoming a serious discipline. Scientists have long recognized that the greatest scientists of all times are Charles Darwin and Albert Einstein, who were not the most famous or richest or most published of their times, let alone of all times. Classical physicists rank the highly controversial Newton over physicists who were highly popular in courts around Europe. Philosophers are still blinded by dialectical success: Socrates knew more than anyone else (not true, by the way), therefore he must have been the greatest. Scientists grow up reading a lot of science of the past, classical physicists grow up reading a lot of physics of the past. Philosophers are often totally ignorant of the philosophers of the past, they barely know the pre-Socratics. No wonder they will think that Socrates did anything worth of being saved. In a sense Socrates is emblematic of the status of philosophy as a whole: too much attention to commercial phenomena (be it Heidegger or Merleau-Ponty) and too little attention to the merits of real philosophers. If somebody schematizes the most divine System but no school picks him up and sells him around the world, a lot of students will ignore him. If a major school picks up a philosopher who is as stereotyped as one can be but launches her or him worldwide, your average student will waste rivers of ink on her or him. This is the sad status of philosophy: philosophers are basically publicists working for free for major schools, publishers and sages. They simply publicize what the philosophy business wants to make money with.

>>4104202
>The fact that so many books still name Socrates "the greatest or most significant or most influential" philosopher ever only tells you how far philosophy still is from becoming a serious discipline.

hahahaha

>got B- or lower on his phil exam
>butthurt as fuck from here on out

I will probably be banned for this, as I have been banned for pointing it out before, but philosophy is, for the most part (%90+) verbal bullshit.

If you can't explain in anglo-saxon what you can in french, go fuck yourself, you're a con artist.

>>4104202

why did you write so much garbage?

>>4104226
The core ideals of philosophy are still the same today as they were two thousand years ago plus and will be the same tomorrow

We just dumb them down for the entirely autistic and idiotic masses to consume it easier

Basically goes down to three things:
Everything is a death cult
Question everything
Live your own life and enjoy the show

>>4104226
>I have been banned for pointing it out before, but philosophy is, for the most part (%90+) verbal bullshit.

Why would you get banned for this?
After all, Wittgenstein beat you to it.

>>4104251
And remember, all this don't mean shit

>>4104202
the fuck is this post

>Philosophers are often totally ignorant of the philosophers of the past, they barely know the pre-Socratics
every western philosphy 101 starts off with Pythagoras and friends. socrates is popular because of the socratic method

by the way, all science starts off as philosophy. science is philosophy that has been proven with empirical evidence.

>>4104257
Corollary one quintillion: Everything that can be missunderstood, will, to the very smallest observable detail

>>4104253

Janitor is a philosophy major.

>>4104202

I believe Socrates dialectics are just a basic tool to link the 'void of thought' and the growing of philosophy within oneself.
But it was something so simple that he just used it to back up his own beliefs.

I can't recall where but he supposedly said that everyone can reach that point by themselves (maybe the principal reason why he didn't wrote anything).

>>4104272
Illumination

Its something he's got in common with Cynics, Taoists and Buddhists in general

>>4104226
this is sadly true, I hope you don't get banned. we spent an entire week of class discussing how many philosophers make up words and bullshit. the more convoluted your argument gets, the easier it is to trick your audience into thinking you've proven it, but really you just have slick wordplay. most philosophical works are indecipherable without the help of someone who already had it taught to them. but we can still gather little pieces of good ideas even from bullshit

>>4104288
>most philosophical works are indecipherable
This is a ruse

Most philosophical works are just easy to interpretate once you get an idea of who wrote them

Its all the same regurgitated reaction to injustices perceived, or scumfaggotry observed in the world, done by Flavour of the Year Philosopher on his 15 minutes of fame

>>4104295

And therefore why indecipherable works should be ignored.

>>4104217
>>4104237
>>4104258
>>4104272
>>4104217
>>4104237
Hopefully, one not-too-distant day, there will be a clear demarcation between a great philosopher like Hermes Trismegistus, who never sold much, and commercial products like Socrates. And philosophers will study more of the history of philosophy and realize who invented what and who simply exploited it commercially. Socrates' "Hellenistic" philosophy removed any trace of Egyptian thought from philosophy: it replaced syncopated African mysticism with linear western dialectic, and lusty negro attitudes with cute Greek-kid smiles. Contemporary philosophers never spoke highly of the Socrates, and for a good reason. They could not figure out why Socrates' theories should be regarded more highly than their own. They knew that Socrates was simply lucky to become a folk phenomenon (thanks to "the Socratic method", which had nothing to do with his philosophical merits). That phenomenon kept alive interest in his (mediocre) philosophical endeavours to this day. Nothing else grants Socrates more attention than, say, Anaximander or Heraclitus. There was nothing intrinsically better in the Socrates' philosophy. Pythagoras was certainly a far better mathematician than Socrates & Plato. The Milesians were certainly much more skilled scientists than the 'Peripatetics'. And Zeno was a far more accomplished writer, capable of "Republic" and "Discourses". Not to mention later and far greater Greek philosophers. Not to mention the Eleatic thinkers who created what Socrates later sold to the masses. Socrates sold a lot of dialogues not because he was the greatest philosopher but simply because his philosophy was easy to sell to the masses: it had no difficult content, it had no technical innovations, it had no creative depth. He theorized a bunch of catchy forms and he were ugly. If somebody had not invented "the Socratic method" in 399, you would not have wasted five minutes of your time to read a post about such a trivial philosopher.

>>4104305
>should be ignored
All opinions must always be taken in consideration

To do otherwise is to declare oneself a true believer in a decadent religion of feels and imbecility

i.e: left wing plebeian

>>4104306
*he was ugly

>>4104306

Marketing is everything.

only wasted about ~1minute to read that shit

Look at faggots like Malcolm Gladwell selling 10,000 hours to greatness or Zizek and his critique of McDonald's and shit nobody cares about.

>>4104310

You will come to realize that feels and the truth and logic are all the same.

A woman's emotion = a man's intellect.

>>4104306
If your ideology fails to gain traction then its shit

Plurality of opinions is only worth for something, helping the majority or when possible (in the end, its just an utopia to think its for all, but that's something to dream about)

After all, old nordic and pagan religions became extinct due to far more than just the northern crusades

>>4104321
On the contrary, women are far more rational than men are. As GKC said - Women are the only realists; their whole object in life is to pit their realism against the extravagant, excessive, and occasionally drunken idealism of men.

>>4104321
There's more to observation than emotion though

This is distinction that all good scientists know, and for which fundamentalist christians are criticized, just so you know

Whenever you put emotion and ideology above the things you observe, you are cheating yourself at the solitaire, one would say, maybe, like a brute, like myself

>>4104328
You're both mysoginist pricks. Women are equally likely to be idealists, assholes, cynics, materialists, or realists as any other person you meet. Spend some time with women, and you'll realise that almost all mars/venus sayings, are total bullshit.

>>4104335
You are a man, aren't you?

>>4104306
>socrates is SO mainstream
le hipster face

okay so maybe socrates wasn't the first or most brilliant philosopher in the greek era, but he was able to communicate his ideas most effectively and thus made him popular. he made philosophy easy to digest for people, increasing interest for science and reason. i don't see how that's a bad thing. he's like carl sagan or bill nye inspiring kids to study science because they made science look cool

>>4104332
>Whenever you put emotion and ideology above the things you observe, you are cheating yourself at the solitaire, one would say, maybe, like a brute, like myself

Doesn't account for religion.

>>4104328
>women are far more rational than men are.

This is a lie.


In the end we are simply organic molecules reacting with each other. We are perfect. All that we do is perfection. Every truth, every lie, every unknown. Every idiot, every genius. We are all perfect human beings because for a billion years we have evolved to fit together in a perfect way. There is no such thing as an irrational behavior. When the human race goes extinct, that will be just as planned, as our molecules will just become part of something else (a monkey? gay niggers from outerspace? a tree? a meteor? dust?).

Even stupidly emotional women and autisticly rational men have their part to play in the web of human interaction.


Nonetheless, philosophy is (for the most part) bullshit. But males evolved strong verbal skills to defeat other males in arguments and win mates, so philosophy exists.

>>4104347

>ok socrates u want to die or get exiled
>fuck you im a real human bean pass the poison YOLO

>>4104335

>>4104354
>Doesn't account for religion.
Are you autistic or deliberately picking straws in my post in order to further confirm your idiotic and closely held 'true' belief in post modernist mouthbreathing?

What I said applies FIRST to religion, and then to the imbecility that follows the same tradition as religions do,

>start reading a few posts about an obtuse but valid set of points over ancient philosophy's place in modern discourse
>skip to the bottom of the thread
>another gender argument

God damn it /lit/, I know you're comfortable where you are, but can't you surprise me just once?

>>4104354
>Nonetheless, philosophy is (for the most part) bullshit. But males evolved strong verbal skills to defeat other males in arguments and win mates, so philosophy exists.

I think you're missing the point of philosophy.

>>4104371

Oh look I'm missing a point

>>4104369
>surprise
>with reactionaries
/lit/ is to Philosophy
What the South is to the Republican Party

>>4104226
>>4104288

Woah, that's harsh, guys. Let's take a breather and think about what we're saying. What isn't %90 "verbal bullshit?" Most of the stuff we do that doesn't involve experimentation is going to deal with arguments. And since arguments are verbal, most stuff is going to be "verbal bullshit," I guess. Maybe I'm just not understanding what you mean by "verbal bullshit," but there seems to be very little justification for that claim, unless you agree with my current assessment.

What's really funny about that claim is that it's metaphilosophical - the guy that responded to your post mentioned Wittgenstein. The fact that you made that statement is you engaged in philosophy. Provided that I did understand your statement, you were a part of the 10% not spewing "verbal bullshit."

What's the problem with making up words? There are some ideas for which we don't have words. Think about Heidegger for instance: "being is always the Being of a being." Noticed the nuanced difference between big 'Being' and little 'being'? How else would we talk about what makes that thing which is, a thing which is? Instead of having to describe what you're talking about in excruciating detail every time you bring it up, it helps to come up with words for it. There are a lot of things that we think about for which we just don't have words; it's not just philosophers that do this, it's scholars from a whole range of disciplines. And besides, a lot of the time they aren't neologisms as much as they are using real words in weird ways.

But I can see how the whole "convoluted arguments" thing can be a problem - but that's why philosophers are trying to fix it: Analytic philosophy. Trying to communicate thoughts clearly has become philosophy's main priority in the last century. A lot of the continental stuff you're probably reading has a lot of interesting history, and was undoubtedly helpful in bringing us where we are, but to take it too seriously is a fatal mistake. We read philosophy of the past to learn what mistakes not to make, and to figure out what some of these extraordinary individuals were like, where they came from, and why they said what they said.

>>4104391

professor pls

>>4104391
They both said the same exact thing you did, somehow their aggression made the message a bit too convoluted for you

>>4103369
>>4103577
>>4104113
>people still telling themselves this
God damn, man. /pol/ was started to get the nazi threads off of /int/. Why do people always swear that any site where people have strong opinions which differ from theirs started as jokes?
It's like for every hard left board, there's a skinhead who thinks "muh community pretending idiots xDDD" and for hard right ones there's a leftist who thinks the same.

Imagine how funny this shit would be IRL
>hipster finds KKK branch pops up near his house
>joins the first day figuring everybody there's just pretending
>instantly becomes the most extreme in the group ironically
>people following his ironic orders march into a black neighborhood and start killing
>he gets freaked out and wonders where all the newfags came from

>>4104419
Fucking this. You're not fooling anyone, damagecontrolfags. Except yourselves.

>>4104358
that toilet bowl was purchased solely so she could lick off it

>>4104419
I still wish /k/'s plan to buy a house in Detroit, fortify it, and start "clearing out" gangs actually happened

>>4104251
English isn't my first language nor the second one, but could someone explain what does this guy mean by "death cult".

>>4105048
it's not really any clearer in English but I think he's just trying to say everything is focused on death or ends in death or something
Stoicism is a reaction against death, sex is a reaction against death, religion is a reaction against death

what's that famous novel where nobody can die and all the institutions break down? I think it's by Saramago or someone

>>4101040
I mean both, faggot. I'm using the term broadly to denote e transitionary period in which the roman empire disassembled and lit became confined to the monks' cloisters.

Deal with it. It's a coherent term.

>>4104306

Thank you, based scruffy.

So, hermeticists are hipster as fuck?

>>4105195
Did you mean hermeneutics?

On topic: I'm currently reading Ciceros conversations in Tusculum and I feel I could destroy each and every argument he has for anything(the soul for example). How should I approach these dialogues?

>>4105195
most hermeticists are hipsters in the style of Washed Out or Best Coast, but yes
by Crowley, one can feel the movement of machinery in their thought

>>4104237
>>4104258
>>4104272
>>4104314
>>4104326
>>4104347
>>4104356
>>4105195


I absolutely love this copypasta for two reasons:
1. It can be bent and adapted to your imagination's whim
2. To some extent a corollary of 1. People generally fall for it.


>>4104202
>>4104306

Great personal adaptation, 8/10 at least.

>>4104483
That plan wasn't designed to "clear out" anything from what I heard. One of the leader of the plan even said he had grown up in a proeminently black poor neighboroughood and knew how to handle urban violence peaecefully.


>>4106268
>How should I approach these dialogues?

By remembering that they were written more than a thousand years ago and that the culture you now live in owes a lot to those dialogues. Basically you have a millenium-long edge over him, it's only natural that he sounds inaccurate or misinformed to you. But it would be interesting to see how what he said in his dialogues partook in forming what you are and how it can still be relevant today.

>>4100789
>Why were all of the Greeks too fucking stupid to call Socrates out on his bullshit?
You know they killed him, right?

>>4107028
>Greeks killed Socrates
Yeah right. The Jews killed Socrates

>>4101319

Outside of the mind, or outside of the conscious mind?

>>4106268
Hermeticism is a Greco-Egyptian mystery tradition based on an ancient text called the Corpus Hermeticum which is supposed to be the teachings of a demigod, Hermes Trimegestus.

The movement is non-Christian, but has existed in European culture through the ages. Hermeticists were known for their alchemy, astrology and other mystical bullshit. The Corpus itself is very esoteric and obscure, which is where the name 'hermeneutics' comes from as well.

As for Cicero, if I remember correctly he was a skeptic so he probably doesn't fully believe any of his arguments himself. Although, as a statesman, he attempted to be pragmatic in his approach to ideology and the various philosophical schools and their teachings.

>>4107152

Also...

http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/herm/

The Corpus.

>>4104202

this is what hack music critic piero scarruffi wrote about the beatles

Aristophanes made fun of him so much he eventually got him killed. I always wondered whether he didn't feel a little bad about that.

>>4104202
>Albert Einstein
>mfw I work at a Space Physics and Aeronautical Engineering Department

>>4104113
That's Voltaire on the pic.

>>4104226
>If you can't explain in anglo-saxon what you can in french, go fuck yourself, you're a con artist.
And vice versa.

The philosopher I detest more than anyone else is John Locke who provided an excuse for colonalist land thieves.

>>4104113

>>4100882
Greeks liked small dicks

>>4100899
nope... edgy "muh rationalism" Dawkins fedora.

You guys are so stupid, this place is full of autism.

>>4102325
Anon is saying you'e not going to find much 'anti-white' bullshit in society, only anti-racist stuff that you can take that way, if you're a dickwad.

Anon's sentence was grammatically fucked up and it took me like three minutes to figure this out.

>>4100970
It's funny because it's true.

>>4102177
Aristotle was wrong in just about everything he examined objectively, and flawed in everything he examined subjectively--what's worse, he sounded as fucking grandiose and wise as possible as he went about it. Nonetheless he invented forms of reasoning and logic that persist to this day, so that's a pretty big deal.

>>4100789
did you take in account that
>most greek texts did not survive up to this day
>a great slice of greek culture was trasmited through the oral tradition
>plato's texts are there to illustrate Socrates' speech
>that even today many theories that have been disproved and called out survive?
>The greeks were still in the babysteps of systematic knowledge regarding theoric puzzles

So how do you know they didn't call him out? Debate is also a popularity context and logic so their survival depends not only in their correctness but in their influence.

>>4100789

OP: you're stupid, etc., etc.

>>4101271
Plato's forms were a thinking device, you pleb. They were somehow similar to thought experiments except they would be to thought experiments what allegories are to metaphors

>>4102299
O'Reilly?

>>4108282
So that's the real reason of his death...

>>4104113
That's Voltaire.
Descartes looked like a cool motherfucker.

>>4110662
And that quote is totally made up, we know... it's a troll picture.

>>4110662

And the quote is by John Awdeley. But you knew that too, right?

Wheel? You couldn't invent a jet engine? Fucking berrypicker.

>>4100970
>>4108298
Spartan hoplite here, burning you with fire.

I guarantee nobody on this board can call out contemporary writers on what will be considered bullshit 2500 years from now, either.

>>4110965
Still, Platon [Socrates] and Aristoteles reads better than many contemporary and modern authors.

This thread is top edge.

>>4100789
Philosophy after Socrates dead is pseudo-science. No different than Mythology or Religion. Literature and stories which people tend to give more importance than it deserve.

Philosophy before it, was a proto-science. Sophists are not included.

>>4104202
>Scientists have long recognized that the greatest scientists of all times are Charles Darwin and Albert Einstein

stopped reading there