/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.10906639]

Plato was a bore.

[Anonymous No.10906658]

I've dropped the republic three times. When will I learn.

[Anonymous No.10906695]

>>10906658
Same. People saying Plato is funny are the same people who hang--and laugh--on every word of their professor in a college class because they look at authority figures like they (in italics-phoneposting) have the answers, and are lucky to be in a room, or read, someone of such prestige. It's a cucked mentality, and they are just as much herd as any pleb they scoff at. Unless you can stand independantly, without seek outside validation, you are weak and pathetic. Nietzsche>philosophy

[Anonymous No.10908929]

>>10906695

I agree with you but you sound jaded to the point of confusion

[Anonymous No.10908947]

"Nietzsche is dead."
- God

[Anonymous No.10908953]

>>10908929

are you that anon who really really really likes Redon?

I seem to remember art discussions here in the past where an anon passionatly and admirably discussed his appreciation of Redon. If so good on you though I think the cyclops looks weird in the pic.

[Anonymous No.10908961]

Reminder that Plato anticipates Nietzsche by millennia in the character of Thrasymachus, only for Socrates to destroy him in a brief argument. And, as if that weren't enough, Thrasymachus' argument is strengthened and amplified by Glaucon and Adiemantus, and Socrates STILL refutes it, though this takes longer to do.

[Anonymous No.10908965]

>>10908961
Reminder that Plato was intellectually dishonest and came up with muh Forms rather than engage with the reality that the Sophists had already revealed

[Anonymous No.10909001]

>>10908953

no, not me.

the cyclops definitely looks weird.

he probably thinks you look weird too.

[Anonymous No.10909018]

>>10908965
>sophists
>reality
Powerful.

[Anonymous No.10909020]

>>10906658
The Republic is Plato's worst.

[Anonymous No.10909826]

>>10908947
>>10908947
>>10908947
>>10908947
>>10908947
6 dank 243432439 ye boi
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZHvd0ks7Es

[Anonymous No.10909973]

I'm reading Beyong Good and Evil and so far it's literally just Nietzsche condescendingly berating other philosophers with baseless counterarguments and ad hominems.

When does it get good?

[Anonymous No.10910000]

>>10909973
>it's literally just Nietzsche condescendingly berating other philosophers with baseless counterarguments and ad hominems.
>When does it get good?

[Anonymous No.10910026]

>>10909973
you obviously havent read the Greeks

[Anonymous No.10910046]

>>10906658
>>10906695
>>10909020

[Anonymous No.10910057]

>>10906695
You're retarded. Just because you watch too much TV to appreciate all of the humour in Plato's dialogues doesn't mean that it isn't there. Also, they're pretty funny because of how retarded he is sometimes. The absurdity of some of the situations he sets up to support his points is probably funnier than the intentional humour.

[Anonymous No.10910061]

>>10906695

Nah. Plato is a brimming panoply of subtle humor.

[Anonymous No.10910133]

>God is a bore

[Anonymous No.10910240]

>>10908961
>Thrasymachos' arguments (or the proposed modified forms thereof) resemble Nietzsche's position

[Anonymous No.10911354]

>>10906695
Not funny but entertaining. You read a lesser dialogue like Charmides and you see one of the most famous intellectuals of all time getting a boner because of a little boy.

[Anonymous No.10911576]

>>10908929
Explain yourself
>>10908961
Except Thrasymachus cucks within one chapter. He started so beautifully aggressive, and then concedes to a bad argument, with literally so many baseless assumptions: he didn't anticipate--with any actual understanding--shit
>>10910057
I didn't say it wasn't there you retard. I said it was only their for authority-pleasing faggot
>>10910061
>subtle
More like dry. And he makes many baseless assumptions.

Dostoyevsky, not even Nietzsche, has displayed for all to see how you make philosophical dialogues with real characters and not just names! Name with minimal character development said this, Socrates rebutts, etc. Dostoyevsky not only introduces and elucidates each sides argument, but does so with emotion and realism that make the characters alive. Plato is pathetic in comparison. I get he started the train, so I respect him for that, but still reading him today for anything other than context is pointless.