Why?

[Anonymous No.18370869]

>have sister over
>talking to her about literature and philosophy
>she says Shakespeare is a hack
>ask her why
>"Othello is super sexist and racist"
>ask her if she means the character or the play itself
>she says its the play itself
>ask her why
>"Othello is portrayed as the good guy even though he kills his wife"
>try to explain to her that Othello isn't portrayed as the 'good guy' and that part of his character is being manipulative and jealous (it has been a while since I read it so forgive me if I am wrong here)
>switch the conversation topic to be about Plato and Socrates
>she says she hates all the Greek philosophers because they are super racist and sexist (literally called Plato an incel)
>ask her if she has read them
>"No I don't need to"
>ignore her complaints and press on, giving her a summary of Euthyphro and Republic.
>try to explain forms to her
>she gets bored and I give up. I just offer to watch a movie or something and that's the end of the conversation
Why is she like this? I love her but sometimes she says such stupid stuff it drives me crazy

[Anonymous No.18370897]

[Anonymous No.18370901]

>>18370869
That never happened and we both know it

[Anonymous No.18370911]

>>18370901
It did. Why would I lie on fucking /lit/ of all places?

[Anonymous No.18370914]

>>18370911
Well why would you?

[Anonymous No.18370916]

>>18370914
I wouldn't

[Anonymous No.18370927]

>>18370916
You just did

[Anonymous No.18370930]

>>18370927
No I didn't

[Anonymous No.18370947]

>>18370930
Yes, you did.

[Anonymous No.18370955]

Why are 90% Plato fans pseuds ? If you ask them to talk about Plato they can't say anything besides "the forms". If they do manage to say more, they got no ability to sustain how is Plato's philosophy relevant besides saying that they read somewhere that all philosophy is a footnote to Plato.

Yeah, Plato did influence all subsequent philosophy, just as you need a foundation to build a house, but Plato's philosophy is pretty outdated yet there's a lot of pseuds that talk about Plato as their favorite philosopher because "the forms" are one of the only things they understand.

I bet they don't even know that Plato's political views were nazism+communism combined.

[Anonymous No.18370956]

>>18370869
Who would hang out with their sister and talk about philosophers and watch movies?

[Anonymous No.18370984]

>>18370956
Because I am autistic

[Anonymous No.18371022]

You were trying to seduce your sister isn't it?

[Anonymous No.18371026]

>>18370947
Nuh-uh

[Anonymous No.18371038]

>>18370956
I don’t see how it’s that weird. I sometimes have conversations about movies and philosophy w/ my family

[Anonymous No.18371059]

>>18370869
>invent shitlib caricature who has a whole nonsense belief system in my head
>fabricate a conversation in which this being in which they act retarded
>tell strangers about this fake event
>now these strangers know you're a retard and a terrible storyteller

Nice job man

[Anonymous No.18371071]

>>18370956
Not everybody has retards for family anon

[Anonymous No.18371074]

>>18370869
>>switch the conversation topic to be about Plato and Socrates
>>she says she hates all the Greek philosophers because they are super racist and sexist (literally called Plato an incel)

[Anonymous No.18371082]

>>18370955
>Why are 90% Plato fans pseuds ?
> I bet they don't even know that Plato's political views were nazism+communism combined.

[Anonymous No.18371091]

>>18370869
>why is she like this?
dude I don’t fucking know, I’ve never met your sister, what the fuck are you talking about? is this your blog?

[Anonymous No.18371105]

>>18370869
I think fucking her might solve your problems OP

[Anonymous No.18371134]

>>18371022
This op, talk about the ideal form of females and relate it to current science. They get weird and horny being told they're different and correct cause philosophy and science says so.

[Anonymous No.18371152]

>>18371082
>you

[Anonymous No.18371156]

>>18371134
Sir. This is a wendys

[Anonymous No.18371171]

>>18371156
It works for me tho. I'm too much of an incel but it makes left wing art hoes horny

[Anonymous No.18371191]

>>18370869
Why would you try to talk to her about Plato if she hasn’t read Plato? Conversations should be about mutual interests

[Anonymous No.18371199]

>>18371082

You're clearly a pseud since you don't know what I'm talking about. Plato unironically advocated eugenics and manipulation and divided society into lower castes which should not be able to ever climb into higher society no matter what their ability is.

[Anonymous No.18371203]

>>18370869
You should have raped her instead

[Anonymous No.18371213]

>>18371199
Yes I forgot if you mix labor theory value and race-founded states you get the theory of forms, mathematical platonism, socratic dialogue etc.

[I hate women No.18371214]

>>18370869
>Why is she like this?
>she
The answer lies within you, anon

[Anonymous No.18371216]

>>18370869
>literally called Plato an incel
>calling plato an incel even though socrates made sweet love to him

[Anonymous No.18371227]

>>18370869
Did you fuck her at least?

[Anonymous No.18371232]

>>18371191
This is the truth and everyone ignores this

[Anonymous No.18371236]

>>18371199
the entire state described by socrates in the republic is just an analogy for the soul. not something to be taken seriously in of itself. this is explain in book 2 or 3

[Anonymous No.18371238]

>>18371213

What's your point ? I don't get it and you probably don't either.

Are you saying that because Plato is justified in his political views because he also produced the theory of forms and mathematical platonism ?

Correlation is not causation. Also, a person can be a great thinker and create metaphysical theories, yet have blatantly stupid political views.

The more you type, the more you prove to me that you're a pseud.

[Anonymous No.18371251]

>>18371236

How is eugenics and dividing society into castes continued ereditarily an analogy for the soul ?

[Anonymous No.18371254]

Lol imagine talking to your sister like she's a normal person

[Anonymous No.18371257]

>>18370869
>(literally called Plato an incel)
Kek based sister

[Anonymous No.18371258]

>>18371251
Not the anon you’re talking to but you a sound dense. I wouldn’t waste time talking to you if I were that anon...

[Anonymous No.18371279]

>>18370955
> Why are 90% Plato fans pseuds
> I bet they don't even know that Plato's political views were nazism+communism combined.

MFW I'm reading some bullshit.

[Anonymous No.18371285]

>>18371258

Yea, in your head I sound dense, because you're a retard as well. There's university professors which study Plato that admit that the way Plato envisions the ideal state is wonky as fuck. That's why Plato is not known for his political views, but for his ontology and metaphysics mostly.

[Anonymous No.18371290]

>>18371199
Filtered. The Greeks, including Plato, operated on the ideal as integral to understanding the real, but not as necessarily existing in the real.

[Anonymous No.18371302]

>>18371285
Or maybe you just sound dense because you are...
>Plato is not known for his political views
Yup.
Bye.

[Anonymous No.18371304]

>>18371290
>calls someone filtered and proceeds to use Hegelian terminology to describe Plato (which is even wrong in itself because Aristotle and Plato both had opposite philosophical approaches to forms).

[Anonymous No.18371338]

>>18371304
>Claims I'm using Hegellian terminology
>I'm using Straussian terminology(famous post-heideggerian/hegelian platonist)
>Literally have Strauss' picture posted in prior post.

when placed in conjunction with,

> That's why Plato is not known for his political views, but for his ontology and metaphysics mostly.

concludes that you're a gigantic fucking retard.

QED.

[Anonymous No.18371339]

>>18370869
>I love her

[Anonymous No.18371355]

>>18371290
>>18371279
>>18371258
>>18371213

Since you're all dumbass pseuds, as most Plato fans (see my first comment, as I succesfulyl predicted):
Republic 459d+e:

In our marriages, then, and the procreation of children, it seems there will be no slight need of this kind of ‘right.'” “How so?” “It follows from our former admissions,” I said, “that the best men must cohabit with the best women in as many cases as possible and the worst with the worst in the fewest, and that the offspring of the one must be reared and that of the other not, if the flock1 is to be as perfect as possible. And the way in which all this is brought to pass must be unknown to any but the rulers, if, again, the herd of guardians is to be as free as possible from dissension.”

Republic [460c] The offspring of the good, I suppose, they will take to the pen or créche, to certain nurses who live apart in a quarter of the city, but the offspring of the inferior, and any of those of the other sort who are born defective, they will properly dispose of in secret,1 so that no one will know what has become of them.” “That is the condition,” he said, “of preserving the purity of the guardians' breed.”


Manipulation:

[460a] suitable to the marriages that then take place. But the number of the marriages we will leave to the discretion of the rulers, that they may keep the number of the citizens as nearly as may be the same,1 taking into account wars and diseases and all such considerations, and that, so far as possible, our city may not grow too great or too small.” “Right,” he said. “Certain ingenious lots, then, I suppose, must be devised so that the inferior man at each conjugation may blame chance and not the rulers.” “Yes, indeed,” he said.


You're such fucking cock sucker retarded pseuds, it's unimaginable. When confronted with your own ignorance all you can do is group up like niggers and talk shit, fucking retarded kids.

https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0168%3Abook%3D5%3Asection%3D459e

To search.

[Anonymous No.18371361]

>>18371338
>Strauss
Damn, you're even dumber than I thought. Hegel would've been less embarrassing.

[Anonymous No.18371392]

>w*men
>Arts and Philosophy
lel

[Anonymous No.18371397]

>>18371238
>the whole post
I don't want to make you feel that way but yeah that's a good rendition. The politics follow from his metaphysics and conjoining two political ideologies couldn't ever equal the politics just the metaphysical derivation can.

[Anonymous No.18371416]

>>18371397

It doesn't matter that he uses certain characteristics of his metaphysical theory applied to society. Read post above where I quoted 4 of you talking bullshit to me. It's irrefutable and undefensible. The least you can do is admit I'm right.

[Anonymous No.18371428]

>>18371416
I want to admit you're right. If you tell me you've read this >>18371213
I'll say you're right.

[Anonymous No.18371437]

>>18371134
How do I pull this off?

[Anonymous No.18371446]

>>18371428

It doesn't matter if I've read it or not because I gave you exact quotes from Plato's own work.

What you're doing right now is akin to saying: "uhh.. yea I'll admit that Plato said that (despite being shown that he did) only if you have knowledge of some other irrelevant shit for the discussion since I was already proven wrong with exact quotes from The Republic".

You're just aiming for ad hominems now, pseuds to the end. Ngmi.

[Anonymous No.18371481]

>>18371437
Whenever smart conversation comes up talk about studies showing females are more people oriented and males are object oriented and how it's been observed in babies. Say males have more volatility at the ends of the bell curve so you have more smart and more dumb men. Just random gender facts and they start to assume the position.

[Anonymous No.18371504]

>>18371361
>>18371355
A) While Strauss is a controversial reader of most texts, in particular the moderns, he is unquestionably one of the most important readers of Platonism of the last century, and his readings are furthermore immensely important to virtue ethics as well as Christian philosophy, especially thinkers like MacIntyre and Charles Taylor, as you do not know, the former was strongly influenced by Jaffa's Thomism and Aristotelianism. Given that MacIntyre and Taylor are probably 2 of the biggest names in political philosophy of the latter 20th, early 21st century, it renders your claim that
> Plato is not known for his political views, but for his ontology and metaphysics mostly.
Absolutely retarded.
B) I'm not even a platonist lmao, I'm far more in line with Aristotle.
C) You're literally citing a book that was written in a completely different context from the one you're reading it. None of what Plato wrote in the Republic was meant to be taken at face value. In fact none of what he wrote is supposed to be taken in that way. The Parmenides is specifically written in such a way, for example, that you can find obvious logical gaps which Socrates doesn't, it's meant to challenge the reader in that way. The same dynamic is playing out in the Republic. The point of the Republic is to challenge the reader to think of how they can strive to meet the ideal, or if the ideal is even possible to be reached. This is in fact also where "The Republic as metaphor for the well ordered soul comes from." Philosophy, for Socrates, is specifically a way of life, it is inextricably tied to practice. Plato diverges from Socrates, philosophy is a practice of the mind, as unlike the finite life, the infinite mind is capable of reaching the ideal through thought. This is where the notion of the contemplative philosopher emerges from. This is a huge separation between the philosophy of Socrates as well as of Aristotle, for whom action was everything, or as Hegel would later put it, doing, would be the only way to actualize the good. Pure judging though on its own is pure insofar as it is empty. That is why the argument that the Republic is metaphorical has been taken seriously, because of the deep skepticism of the political life that exists throughout Plato's philosophy, which makes complete sense given his own experience with the Athenian execution of Socrates, as well as his own political misadventures on, I believe sicily. This is all to say, that you can't just take specific chunks out of any of Plato's works at face value. There's a lot of subtleties both in the context in which they were written, as well as in the the text itself, Plato specifically wrote dialectically to give his works this ambiguous character. As Anscombe would later put it, "where there is an ought, there is a God." Plato was keenly aware of this fact, he's not giving you any oughts, he's giving you material to think

But now we really get to the best part of your whole...

[Anonymous No.18371518]

>>18370869
>Why is she like this?
women are not very smart, on average.

[Anonymous No.18371520]

>>18371504
>>18371446
pseud parade,

>It doesn't matter if I've read it or not because I gave you exact quotes from Plato's own work.

You haven't even read the text! You can't just take a specific quote from a work that's written dialectically, while having no clue about the context it is in, and think that that proves anything. If you do that on a paper in an academic setting you'd get laughed out of the room. I mean, if you really take that methodology to it's conclusion, then Locke was a god-fearing monarchist!

[Anonymous No.18371526]

>>18370947
go back to redd*t faggot

[Anonymous No.18371529]

>>18370869
The public education system has done this to her. Where else would someone intellectually satisfied with dismissing people based on "muh sexism" get exposed to thinkers like Plato?

[Anonymous No.18371564]

>>18371520

Nigga, if you even bothered accessing what I gave you, they literally have footnotes saying the same shit that I tell you. I did undergrad+grad school in philosophy. My university teacher (who specializes in greek philosophy) told me that I'm right when I pointed out that the way Plato enivisons society has elements which are also present in Nazism (eugenics, manipulation) and he agreed with me.

But I guess you know more because you're a fucking retard

>>18371504

Read above + it doesn't matter what Strauss says, I gave you quotes from Plato.

"Although philosophers have contemplated the meaning and value of eugenics at least since Plato recommended a state-run program of mating intended to strengthen the guardian class in his Republic [...]"

^https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/eugenics/

Another source that says the same. Idk how many you want to be satisfied.

[Anonymous No.18371598]

>>18371504

Related to C), you're just rambling about taking things literally. Yeah, I understand that the Republic is not written literally, but not everything has a much deeper meaning than what's written.

Plato's metaphysical and ontological views have no relation to eugenics and manipulation. Yeah, you can say that since Plato sees the soul as tripartite, he applies the same characteristic to society (with 3 castes), yet this doesn't defend him saying that eugenics should be employed to keep the peasants in misery and the high-caste in the same caste by ereditary rule alone.

As you see, I'm talking about HOW he would assure a society as he envisions, not WHY he envisions the society as he does (thus the "uhh his political view stems from his metaphyiscs is irrelevant).

[Anonymous No.18371628]

>>18371564
Cool story bro, currently doing JD/PHD in classical philosophy.

You're furthermore weakening your position ex post facto, your initial claim was,

> I bet they don't even know that Plato's political views were nazism+communism combined.

Which is different from

> Plato enivisons society has elements which are also present in Nazism (eugenics, manipulation) and he agreed with me.

Rousseau has elements present in Nazism, the same is true of Hobbes, Locke, Constant, and pretty much the whole liberal canon. This is without even mentioning the fact that eugenics was also a liberal project at the turn of the century. I never questioned that Plato pronounces eugenics as part of the ideal regime, I questioned his commitment to it as an ethical and political project, ie, the whole "a should implies a can". In fact I questioned the notion that Plato even gives the reader a call to action in his political philosophy at all.

> thus the "uhh his political view stems from his metaphyiscs is irrelevant
Didn't make that claim, different anon.

[Anonymous No.18371633]

>>18371446
Do you have Asperger? Since you can only interpret literally a text it seems so.

Also from the Symposium:
>That is good, Eryximachus, said Alcibiades; and yet the comparison, of a drunken man's speech with those of sober men is hardly fair; and I should like to know, sweet friend, whether you really believe-what Socrates was just now saying; for I can assure you that the very reverse is the fact, and that if I praise any one but himself in his presence, whether God or man, he will hardly keep his hands off me.

And in the seventh letter Plato says:
>[344c] And this is the reason why every serious man in dealing with really serious subjects carefully avoids writing, lest thereby he may possibly cast them as a prey to the envy and stupidity of the public. In one word, then, our conclusion must be that whenever one sees a man's written compositions—whether they be the laws of a legislator or anything else in any other form,—these are not his most serious works, if so be that the writer himself is serious: rather those works abide in the fairest region he possesses. If, however, these really are his serious efforts, and put into writing, it is not the gods but mortal men who [344d] “Then of a truth themselves have utterly ruined his senses.

Ngmi Anon.

[Anonymous No.18371699]

>>18370869
I doubt this actually happened

[Anonymous No.18371701]

>>18371628

Of course I don't mean that Plato's political views are ENTIRELY nazism and communism (meaning identical). I'm obviously hinting that it shares important aspects with these ideologies.

I didn't say either that Plato actively calls for society to act like that, but he envisions it that way. I'm blaming the methods through which he envisions the manifestation of such a society, not telling people directly what they ought to do.

Also, it doesn't matter if eugenics was part of the liberal canon or not, I'm assuming that eugenics is a far-right tool only concept and such a broad political spectrum didn't exist in Plato's time anyway, thus it's irrelevant speak in terms of the political spectrum to justify that eugenics is not that bad (you seem to imply that by saying that even the liberal project sought to apply eugenics).

Plato's commitment to the ideal regime is irrelevant, I was criticizing the way the ideal regime he envisions is supposed to work.

>You're furthermore weakening your position ex post facto, etc

Yeah, I didn't want to bother having to specify too much. The similarity to nazism is the eugenics and manipulation of masses to not make them aware of eugenics and to communism (not theoretically, but practically) the fact that he envisions the lower cast (the masses) working to support the upper classes and that this should be their only duty, unable to ever surpass their condition (this is how communism was in fact, practically. Theoretically of course it's different).

>>18371633

Both quotes irrelevant. You're quoting to make a point for why you shouldn't take things literally. We're arguing on another level now, which is how Plato envisions the manifestation of his ideal society, which isn't a metaphor by the way.

Ngmi retard.

[Anonymous No.18371730]

>>18371701
>Of course I don't mean that Plato's political views are ENTIRELY nazism and communism (meaning identical). I'm obviously hinting that it shares important aspects with these ideologies.

Now this is a far more reasonable position, but it's not really saying anything all that new, this was practically Constatn's thesis in "The Liberty of Ancients Compared with that of Moderns," that the ancient conception of liberty is not the same as the one we have today, and that it is in fact a form of tyranny for us modern men. If your claim is simply that Plato's ideal regime is authoritarian, and in many ways totalitarian, I don't think that anyone would disagree with that, but that's a far different claim from "Plato is Nazism + Communism".

[Anonymous No.18371747]

>>18371730

Yeah, it's nothing new and I don't have any claim for it to be new information, just information that most Plato readers ignore cause all they retain from Plato is "muh formsss brooo".

Yeah, in other words I mean that his ideal regime is totalitarian and authoritarian, but it's easier for me to synthesize it by saying "Plato is nazism + communism" since I can't bother giving a detailed account of it (unless I have to).

[Anonymous No.18371754]

>>18371598
The how is derived from the why. I'd be interested in you trying it once. When someone says "do x" say why and the how must be in line with the why, more particularly it should be derived from it.

[Anonymous No.18371772]

Gen Z is lost to the Neo-Communist metaparasite

[Anonymous No.18371776]

>>18371754

Bro.. just stop. You literally have a PhD agreeing with me a few posts above, yet you persist in keeping the same retarded argument that you shouldn't take Plato at face value. I don't take him at face value where I don't have a reason to. As I said, Plato's view of the ideal society and what it requires for it to manifest IS NOT A METAPHOR.

[Anonymous No.18371777]

>>18371747
Seriously give up. I don't know what high you're getting from this but it should be shame. You were forced to walk back your statement to a watered-down position. While Plato's Republic may seem to be totalitarian, it isn't necessarily so. What is necessary are his metaphysical assumptions which are directly derived from that. He's not fundamentally pro totalitarian and I imagine him dropping a lot of the totalitarian crap once his Republic becomes self sufficient. Again it certainly never adopted nazi or marxist fundamentals.

[Anonymous No.18371788]

>>18371776
You're on the wrong board. Go act like an idiot somewhere else.
>I'm saying take him at face value you are not saying that
Literally what?

[Anonymous No.18371831]

>>18370947
>not posting the infinite loop one

[Anonymous No.18371904]

>>18371777

It's not a watered down position, it's literally what I said from the beginning, maybe just expressed myself wrongly. Nobody could seriously say that Plato is entirely nazist and communist simultaneously AND in Ancient Greece (an anachronism - since nazism and communism has aspects which just aren't present in Plato's time, like worker class vs burgeois conflict or nazi's holocaust of the jews). To me, the fact that you even thought that's what I meant is pretty stupid, because no one would seriously be able to argue something like that. So yeah, I wasn't "forced" to back to a watered-down position, that position was literally what I meant the whole time, but you'll now think that I wasn't thinking that since you weren't in my mind to know that I actually meant it that way, thus irrelevant to discuss it further.

Selected breeding, murder of the infirm or less gifted, caste "membership" being judged hereditarily, not by merit, always keeping to your duty and not aiming for more, just fulfill your role as cattle. These all seem like pretty important points to me. It doesn't have to emulate the entire nazist or communist ideology for it to be condemnable, which again, was my point. Just saying that his political view has a lot of landmines, thus in effect being in a considerable part nazism and communism in the same time.

Also, related to his metaphysics, I only claimed his metaphysics is irrelevant strictly in relation to the aforementioned totalitarian characteristics. From his metaphysics Plato mainly draws his outline of the society, but eugenics, etc is not directly in relation to his metaphysics, it's more of Plato's personal take on how a society (as drawn with inspiration from his metaphysics) should come to be. Meaning, how this society should work in practice. His eugenics, etc has no equivalent in his metaphysics, because it can't, thus it's a bit of mental gymnastics to justify eugenics from the tripartite conception of the soul for example. At most you justify that society should have 3 castes, but not the relations of these castes or the totalitarian measures to make sure no one in these castes tries to escape their condition.
What would have Plato done if his Republic became self sufficient is just hypothetical thinking and no argument can be made from this. Once you say "I imagine...", it's just a subjective interpretation.

>>18371788

What the fuck are you talking about with that quote ? Can you even comprehend what's written ? You're the one saying that I'm taking Plato literally (at face value) and I told you that it's pointless to make this argument and that I don't take him at face value (since the part we're talking about is pretty literally written, doesn't have a hidden meaning).

Dumbass.

[Anonymous No.18371924]

>>18371059
plato did the same thing in his dialogues

[Anonymous No.18371965]

>>18371904
>I said communism+naziism but I didn't mean it
Also thank you for explaining what an anachronism is for the board. It was fun watching you justify what that was.

>these all seem to be important points
They are not. There is merit just intra class. Selected breeding isn't a deliberate process it's just what people do in the philosopher-king class. Just look at pr

[Anonymous No.18372025]

>>18371965

>I said communism+naziism but I didn't mean it

I literally told you there's no further point to discuss it cause there's no way to prove that's what I meant. If I was so oblivious and uninformed, I wouldn't have been able to keep any argument at all, yet you talk like I just randomly said out of my ass that Plato is communism and nazism with absolutely 0 basis.

>Also thank you for explaining what an anachronism is for the board. It was fun watching you justify what that was

No problem, I was pretty correct there actually. Since you're seriously thinking that I'm making a case for Plato embodying the whole nazism and communism ideologies to the smallest detail, I'm assuming you're just arguing in bad faith, which is the case.

>They are not. There is merit just intra class. Selected breeding isn't a deliberate process it's just what people do in the philosopher-king class. Just look at pr

So people that should be content with the role they're given in society (in which they have no saying btw, just because they weren't born in the right caste) and that should follow duty without question, life as a cog in the machine, where you don't even choose the type of cog you are is sugar-coated as "intra-class merit" ? I see.

>Selected breeding isn't a deliberate process it's just what people do in the philosopher-king class

Yes, of course. You're typing out an assumption with which you discussed until now then you make it look like I didn't know about it. I know it happens just in the upper caste (after all, there's no reason to selectively breed the lower castes, that would be contrary to the point of eugenics). Yet it doesn't make it less condemnable.The point still stands, that disposal of those unfit for the higher caste and manipulation people as to not realize selected breeding is being applied to them, that it's just a game of chance by drawing lots present themselves as elements of nazism.

Anything else?

[Anonymous No.18372071]

>>18371701
>the fact that he envisions the lower cast (the masses) working to support the upper classes and that this should be their only duty, unable to ever surpass their condition (this is how communism was in fact, practically. Theoretically of course it's different).
Do you have shares in the stock market?

[Anonymous No.18372089]

>>18372071

Strawman.

[Anonymous No.18372099]

>>18372025
It would never cross my mind to conflate race-based state and class warfare+dialectical materialism (deriving labor theory of value, lysenkoism, japhetic theory linguistics) with Platonism. They have entierly different derivations. That might be because I am completely divorced with politics but taking some traits is ridiculous and trying to compare is ridiculous. It's like saying an apple and blood are the same because they're both red. I guess if you didn't make this whole argument based on that then take several posts with different people you're replying to to have this insight then the conversation wouldn't be here. Do keep in mind that the conversation, while still being fundamentally concerned with that, has branched off and you're defending the branches while giving up the trunk or root of your whole point.

You were pretty correct there? Thanks anon. Very cool.

Unless there are separations by heredity inside the three classes (there are not) it stands to reason merit plays minor divisions (who scoops poop out of the donkey and who feeds it is meritoriously decided and not hereditarily).

That wasn't my point. It's what it means but you brought up me saying there won't exist totalitarianism once it starts becoming self-sufficient. You called it my "I imagine" argument. My point was the deliberate process. It contradicts your point about selective breeding being a nazi(?) and platonist trait. It's not a platonist trait because it's not external and deliberate. The picture was my point backing that up.

[Anonymous No.18372103]

>>18372071
>>18372089

[Anonymous No.18372117]

>>18371236
>the entire state described by socrates in the republic is just an analogy for the soul.
>>>/reddit/

[Anonymous No.18372132]

>>18371236
Kinda weird he tried to enact it twice on syracuse then write the laws later then

[Anonymous No.18372140]

>>18370869
>why is she like this?
because she's a woman, retard. you shouldn't blame her for it, either.

[Anonymous No.18372142]

>>18372071
Why are tranny commies incapable of honest argumentation?

[Anonymous No.18372144]

>>18370901
>>18370911
>>18370914
>>18370916
>>18370927
>>18370930
>>18370947
samefag, stop using your phone to talk to yourself.

[Anonymous No.18372145]

>>18372089
>Strawman.
Not a strawman, I'm saying "you" as in general. To me is EXACTLY the situation you're describing.

[Anonymous No.18372181]

>>18372142
>Why are tranny commies incapable of honest argumentation?
Just an example, bro. Tell me why this isn't honest argumentation?

Also, not a fag. Your mom is a fag!
You're under five full fathoms of ideology.

[Anonymous No.18372184]

I'm jumoing into the conversation
>>18371904
>it's literally what I said from the beginning
No it wasn't. You said, and I quote:
>Plato's political views were nazism+communism combined
Which is one of the most stupid things I've read. Even if they're meant to be taken figuratively.

>being judged hereditarily, not by merit
Everyone, in the attainment of a political or economic position, is judged by who they're affiliated with. I don't see where you've taken the fact that people around the world are actually judged by merit.
>Selected breeding
>murder of the infirm
Care to give an insight on why this is bad? Is it because of muh fwedoom? I think I'm picking *american vibes*
>always keeping to your duty and not aiming for more
Your duty is to act in accordance with the Logos; there's nothing Higher than It.
>It doesn't have to emulate the entire nazist or communist ideology for it to be condemnable, which again, was my point
There's nothing "condemnable" hitherto.
> thus in effect being in a considerable part nazism and communism in the same time.
Loooool, Political Platonism has nothing to do with either, but ilude yourself in your ignorance.

>I only claimed his metaphysics is irrelevant strictly in relation to the aforementioned totalitarian characteristics.
Ok, you're actually braindead.

[Anonymous No.18372224]

>>18372099

-It also never crossed my mind to say that Platonism is both entirely nazism and communism combined. This is like the 3rd or 4th time I'm making the same point, so I'll stop replying to anything related to this, cause it's getting repetitive. If you're listing the characteristics of the communist ideology, you don't gain anymore argumentative power, only credibility for those that think that throwing more complicated terms means to win the argument.

-Yeah, I was pretty correct, unless you want to unironically argue that it was wrong because anachronism works only towards the past and that's the only way it can ever be used.

-I'm not talking about merit distinctions between members of the same castes, but merit distinctions between castes. If someone that's gifted with a higher intellect is born in the lower caste, he has no way to maximize his potential and change his condition.

-How isn't it deliberate when the rulers interfere with marriages ? I literally quoted above Plato's idea that lots should be drawn to decide who marries who and these lots should be manipulated as to have certain individuals arbitrarily paired, unbeknown to them. If this is not deliberate, I don't know what it is. Also the killing of the "unfit" children which aren't nurtured or disposed of, again not deliberate, huh ?

Also >you're defending the branches while giving up the trunk or root of your whole point.

We talk about branches right now because the trunk has been settled in my favor. I made a statement: "Plato is nazism + communism combined" (while assuming people won't make such a stupid assumptions as to believe I mean that entirely these 2 ideologies are embodied in plato's view on society), instead of being asked to elaborate, some pseuds rise and say it's not true despite given proof. You bring out an argument which makes me realize people actually make that stupid assumption I've mentioned so I had to explain myself further, then you use this to pretend "I was forced to accept a weaker position" when that position was what I meant.

Since we settled that there cause you have no way to know what I meant without having telepathic powers, there's no point in discussing this "trunk" anymore. It's not that I "lost" any argument, it just reached a point of limbo. But you, again in bad faith, use this and my defensive position to pretend I'm wrong (after agreeing I'm right on the "trunk" argument that I actually meant). So you turn the discussion to "branches" and again, in bad faith, after continuing the discussion on branches and forcing me into the discussion, you say that because I'm discussing the branches is proof that I lost the argument.

This is what they teach you in PhD ? Taking people's words literally and twisting them in a favorable argumentative position, I see, very intelligent indeed (not).

[Anonymous No.18372281]

>>18372224
Authoritarian implies an external control these are internal per pr in >>18371965

I mean at this point we're just arguing about things very derivative of the original point. You can try and justify a similarity or not but in the end that's not why anyone replied.

[Anonymous No.18372330]

>>18372145

I see. Well, I personally don't, but I said strawman because I assume the point you wanted to make is that when you invest in stocks, you're basically lending resources for someone else to exploit (which is true, but not the same thing as when a working class is exploited for resources).

In stock investition, you're first of all free to choose if to invest or not and everyone stands to gain something (both the investor and the one taking the investition). Yet in work-class exploitations, they don't choose to be working-class members (they're born into it), the resources invested (time, effort) are basically the consequence of having no other option to subsist and they stand to gain nothing significant in return because, well, they're being exploited and treated as cogs in the wheel.

>>18372184

>No it wasn't. You said, and I quote

I already discussed this point. I don't refute that I worded it in that particular way, I refute that I meant something so stupid as what has been assumed. Of course I also think it's stupid to believe Plato's political views were the equivalent of nazism and communist, entirely and combined. I didn't mean it figuratively, I only meant that it shares considerable elements of what we find in communist and nazist ideologies, but since I worded it bad in the start, it can be used to twist the argument.

>Everyone, in the attainment of a political or economic position, is judged by who they're affiliated with. I don't see where you've taken the fact that people around the world are actually judged by merit.

That doesn't make it right though. If these affiliations aren't the result of merit, then it's just nepotism. But Plato goes further than that and propose that the caste you're born into decides your whole existence.

>Care to give an insight on why this is bad? Is it because of muh fwedoom? I think I'm picking *american vibes*

Because it corrodes the value of human life and once you're given the power to do such things, the criteria for it can be arbitrarily twisted as well. Who is to judge who should and not and on what basis ?

Keep in mind that people like Stephen Hawking would be killed in Sparta for example for being infirm, yet he was one of the most brilliant minds. In this case an infirm person contributed to humanity more than a lot of healthy individuals put together ever will.

>Your duty is to act in accordance with the Logos; there's nothing Higher than It.

If you assume that Logos is the independent manifestation of everything as according to its nature, then arbitrarily taking human life and structuring society on totalitarian rules isn't really acting in accordance to Logos.

>Loooool, Political Platonism has nothing to do with either, but ilude yourself in your ignorance.

It has, as I've claimed and quoted in my posts above, from the Republic itself. It's just elements, not entirely, obviously, but nonetheless pretty considerable elements.

Last part - ad hominem.

[Anonymous No.18372350]

>>18372281

>Authoritarian implies an external control these are internal per pr in >>18371965

You mean that in the case of well-ordered state, there's no need to rely on eugenics ? I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "internal control" here.

>I mean at this point we're just arguing about things very derivative of the original point.

That's because you and other derivate, so I have to answer the derivations. You can't say that I lose the argument because people choose to derivate the discussion and I answer the derivations.

[Anonymous No.18372363]

>>18371355
>he thinks the republic is about politics

[Anonymous No.18372373]

>>18372363

Not politics in the modern sense, but the conceptian of the state includes "politics" or the way it's ruled, whatever. Again, more twisting of arguments.

[Anonymous No.18372407]

>>18370947

[Anonymous No.18372608]

>>18372330
>it shares considerable elements of what we find in communist and nazist ideologies
I'm especially intrigued by the Platonic elements in communism, where did you take that from?
I could (maybe) see it in NatSoc, but this wouldn't account that it is a anthopocentric weltanshaaung .
In all honesty, really? You discredit the platonic metaphysics because it's "totalitarian"?
>If these affiliations aren't the result of merit, then it's just nepotism.
Following your line of thought, we've always lived under nepotism, for there aren't, by your standards, people who have intrinsic superior value to others.
>But Plato goes further than that and propose that the caste you're born into decides your whole existence.
Plato makes an idealized efficient system which is, ironically, more just than what we have now.
>Who is to judge who should and not and on what basis ?
By the Kshatriya and Brahmins who are intrinscly more intelligent.
>then, arbitrarily taking human life
Yes, the Hylics.
>and structuring society on totalitarian rules
Neither of these contradict the Logos, but sure.
>pretty considerable elements.
This goes in referance with my first question regarding the "Platonic elements in communism".

[Anonymous No.18372620]

>>18372608
I forgot to add that Stephen Hawking wouldn't even exist in a pre-industrial society. And his contribution to humanity is dubious at best; nule at worst. Not that I hold a particular grudge against the man.

[Anonymous No.18372675]

>>18370955
>outdated
Since when is math outdated you fucking midwit?

[Anonymous No.18372721]

>>18371236
It's actually both about politics and is an analogy for the soul.

[Anonymous No.18372780]

>>18372144
Schizo

[Anonymous No.18372804]

>>18370955
>Why are 90% Plato fans pseuds ?
>I bet they don't even know that Plato's political views were nazism+communism combined.

[Anonymous No.18372821]

>>18370955
Plato was for Aristocracy you fucking nigger