[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 31 KB, 470x470, sips.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11195853 No.11195853 [Reply] [Original]

why do people read the greeks when they were malnourished/under-stimulated and consequentially low iq compared to writers today? the smartest greek probably couldnt compete with an average person today cognitively.

>> No.11195860

>>11195853
>Not reading Archilochus
Couldn’t imagine such an intellectually malnourished life.

>> No.11195861

>>11195853
>tfw that 40 year old plantation boomer who likes watching shirtless black men wrestle starts talking shit about the greeks

>> No.11196035

>muh wisdom and IQ correlate
>I learned high school chemistry and therefor I know more than all the past wisdom of the western tradition combined

The absolute state of moderns

>> No.11196791

>>11195853
Read fear and trembling to get an idea as to why.
You seem like the type that wants to start with the quadrilles.

>> No.11196811

Lol, when Plato theory of forums I really honestly believed it was something else but noooope!! he actually fucking belief in some weird floaty idea in the sky or some shit. Literally what the fuck. I was think the allegory of the cave... ok, this must be some pretty deep shit, right??? NO he's a fucking dumb piece of shit and probably a manlet too

/lit/'s start w the Greeks meme is good tho because it means idiots actually fall for it and end up reading that stupid shit lol

>> No.11196915

>>11196811
2/10 too many mistakes

>> No.11196942

>>11196915
Your birth was the only mistake, you fucking piece of shit.

>> No.11197703

>>11195853
Things they wrote were and continue to be universal in all-encompassing ways. Moderns care about little more than our tv shows, the good ones of which contain elements that the Greeks already wrote about extensively and obviously influenced everything thereafter.

>> No.11197738

I would argue that today the ease of access of information has made many peoples' IQs lower due to not essentially needing to retain the information any more.

>> No.11197751

There is not one person alive who can stand up to Homer, Euripides, Thucidydes. Even if we ignore their historical significance, they outdo everyone alive.

>> No.11197768

>>11195853
Chryssipus' donkey was higher IQ than OP, not to mention benefited from a variate Mediterranean diet.

>> No.11198176
File: 96 KB, 382x491, 1527013452328.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11198176

>>11197751

>> No.11198180

>>11198176
Provide a counter-example, surely you must have someone in mind.

>> No.11198737

>>11195853
It's okay to be a virgin little man

>> No.11198767
File: 72 KB, 1200x740, pathetic.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11198767

>>11198180
>the burden of proof falls upon those that disagree with my statements
No you are overestimating them based on their historical significance. Simply being born earlier doesn't make you a many times greater thinker, for fuck sake

>> No.11198778

>>11195853
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUg2cp23rGE

Is this you, OP?

>> No.11198797

>human beings have not evolved significantly in the past two hundred thousand years
>hurr durr we are smarter than genius savants of two thousand years ago because we eat gmo corn syrup with every meal
The absolute state of /lit/

>> No.11198809

>>11198767
>as if this were a scientific thesis
I'll rephrase for Mr. Pedant over here: "I have searched and not found a single person alive who can stand up to [and so on and so on]".
But if it's really so ridiculous, you can give me a counter-example. And if you can't give me one, that says what we have to hear, and your "haha where is the proofs xD burden of proof amirite^^ checkmate theists :P" is at that point utterly worthless, no more than pedantry.

>> No.11198812

>>11196811
7/10

laughed really fucking hard

>> No.11198827

>using IQ unironicly
Who started that stupidity?

>> No.11198976
File: 18 KB, 346x346, get kewl.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11198976

>>11198809
Are you attempting to reach new heights with your idiocy?
There are plenty of intellectuals at his height.

Your assumption that he cannot be reached is based entirely in his historical significance. He was simply another intellectual, and it's you who have gotten obsessed with him

why does people who read ancient greek have to be so unbearable

>> No.11198984

>>11198976
Give me an example then! Go on!
Of your 'plenty', name me one!
Or do I have to respond as you did to me, as it seems this time you're the one making claims (I'm not sure who the "he" you're referring to is, Homer? "simply another intellectual"? But no matter).

>> No.11199072

>>11198984
He is above no one, we can both sit and name random intellectuals and they will be equal.
It's not outdoing but simply being in a earlier point in time.

Work today has not lessened from when Homer, Euripides and Thucidydes wrote. It simply doesn't take up the same space in history because it's from today, where we have countless.

There were fewer writers and people in those days which results in fewer great works. It's easy to hold the biggest name in lit when there's barely anyone competing in the span of 200 years.

>> No.11199092

>>11198976
>>11198767
>>11198176
Just give him a counter-example dude.

>> No.11199093

>>11195853
>no proof given

>> No.11199100

>>11199072
Absolutely incredible. And I'm Ignoring the fact that Homer is not an "intellectual".
You can't do it. You're afraid because you know you can't name a poet of that calibre. Because you know there is no playwrite of the calibre of an Euripides. Because you know that, whoever you name, we will all laugh at you.

>> No.11199110

>>11199100
I'm not him, but we don't value Homer because he was a good novelist. We value him because of the historical significance

Fucking pseuds on this board I swear. Early 20s, all of you.

>> No.11199123

OP is 100% correct. This is why we START with the Greeks but only complete brainlets stay on the Greeks

>> No.11199127

>>11199110
>we don't value Homer because he was a good novelist
that’s probably because he was a poet you dweeb

>> No.11199131

>>11199100
wrong, I am naming every poet and playwriter there is.

Euripides would simply make an oscar or 2 today. Not make history

>> No.11199137

>>11199131
>Euripides would simply make an oscar or 2 today. Not make history

Even that is incredibly unlikely

>> No.11199152

>>11199131
No, Euripides would not make history today, nor would any of those you (failed to) mentioned have made history back then.

that's Themistocles btw

>> No.11199159

>>11199110
>novelist
I knew I was being baited!

>>11199131
I knew it!

>> No.11199166

>>11199159
2/10

>> No.11199202
File: 259 KB, 940x705, temp1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11199202

>>11199152
I'm sorry but I hold no cure to your hubris. Saying that no current day playwriter or poet would make history, if they were placed in historical times is simply too foolish a statement.

I cannot teach you if you refuse to learn, even though I am right and you wrong.

>> No.11199215

>>11199202
It's equally as foolish to say "every poet and playwright there is" would.
We're simply asking for one specific example that you think would.

>> No.11199295

>>11199215
are you actually calling my argument foolish?

>> No.11199303

>>11199093
even americans 100 years ago had vastly lower iqs than americans today due to poorer education and malnutrition. so it's safe to infer that people in antiquity couldnt compete either.

>> No.11199431

>>11199295
What argument?

>> No.11199442

>>11197751
“No”

>> No.11199457

>>11199442
Counter-example?

>> No.11199493

>>11199092

John Green, not even memeing

>> No.11199626
File: 145 KB, 750x500, 750px-Flag_of_the_Qing_Dynasty_(1889-1912).svg.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11199626

>>11197751
I easily outdo them all, I solved philosophy pretty much. I strongly suspect I'm Wittgenstein's reincarnation. And I am better than him too, I came up with what he came up while having much less, and I did it much faster and better and more correctly and fully. To be honest you should be grateful you share a board with me. And same time period. It's just amazing. I hope you feel good as you read this. Wow!

>> No.11199650

>>11195853
>slavery
your understanding is mediocre

>> No.11199672

Are you people actually braindead? This is not about "who could have been better if" bullshit. Homer most likely didn't even exist! The point is that if you enjoy literature for diffefent reasons, then you'll have different opinioms about it, Jesus, it's like what they teach you in your Spongebob cartoons, kids.

The point is, what do you think literature is for? If you think it's for fantasy and great stories and entertainment, then who the fuck cares about Niphelokokkugia, the city of clouds and cuckoos is no more inventive than any random piece of fantasy book around. But I believe this to be the lowest form of enjoyment of literature.

If you read it to learn about the human condition, then you might be interested, they do have weird opinions, and although they might be expressed in a more modern way, they still hold some relevance.

But if you actually want literature to be a _historical_ document of human thought development, then you simply cannot renounce the Greeks. They are at the root of our modern ideas in ways too subtle to explain and too huge to list. I guess this approach fails to explain to an external observer why it is the better one, but there is no doubt in my mind that to know what is human, the purpose of literature, to know the history of our people's thoughts on these mysterious concepts we still wonder about, that is the noblest pursuit of literature, and one the Reader should aspire to in every piece of literature he reads.