Theaetetus

[Anonymous No.18682470]

Forgive the Jezebel post, an unfortunate but necessary evil.
Ok, I read the intro to this one and it says this is the beginning of Epistemology and is one of the more difficult dialogues to grasp. Wittengeinstein was mentioned. What can I do to avoid being filtered? I'm just gonna read through it low and slow first and see what sticks but is there anything crucial I should be aware of before so?

[Anonymous No.18682508]

Imagine she's lying on the couch in the living room watching netflix, munching on chips, drinking cola and burping occasionally, scratching her bare belly with her long fingernails. She just came out out of the bathroom after a long session. You were hidden in the hall closet, so she didn't notice the sound of your cock. You push your way through the ajar door into the bathroom, holding your breath, and quietly pull the door shut behind you. And now, now you breathe in, through your nose, the warm, fragrant air of feces. A real streamer girl bathroom. You make your way across the plush carpet to the toilet, your eyes fixed on the bowl as if on the holy grail - and lo and behold! A turd! Bread of the Gods.

[Anonymous No.18682551]

>>18682508
I used to be like you, I used to *imagine the smell* until I got a gf...until one day it wasn’t just in my imagination anymore...
>storytime
Caught my gf pooping...so I broke up with her
She said shes off to pee while were watching a movie, now shes been gone 5 minutes and i knew something was up, i knocked on the door and asked if everything is ok, she said yes she'll be right out...her voice was labored and i became suspicious...so i yelled "IM COMING IN!' she screamed no but there was no stopping this, i smashed through the door and i see her sitting on the toilet seat, i told her to get the fuk up, she didnt so i threw her off, i looked inside the toilet...just as i suspected, a goddam log, bitch u better pray this isnt yours. i looked around and saw no pet in site, I KNOW THIS IS UR POOP U WHORE, she screamed at me that im crazy and that shes calling the cops, all the while toilet paper in her hands. i told her no need to call the cops, im breaking up with u u some kinda poop whore. and that was that. I feel like a new man and off to find a woman who doesnt poop.

[Anonymous No.18682578]

>>18682470
>Jezebel
this isn't a trendy word anymore, i get the sense you haven't been here in roughly a year

[Anonymous No.18682585]

>>18682508
>>18682551
>>18682578
Please stay on topic.

[Anonymous No.18682644]

This reminds me of the Japanese scientist who invented a machine that could turn feces into a burger patty. Picture this: You gather your top ten hottest babes and get every girl except your number one to produce the spiciest, hottest, greasiest, most delicious poop imagineable. The droppings are collected in the machine and turned into a huge feces patty. Now your number one dream girl comes and eats the patty. Before that, her stomach was pumped out so that nothing but the patty is now inside her. She digests it and shits it out and the new feces is filled back into the machine. A new patty is made and eaten again by the Dream Girl. The procedure is repeated.

I don't want to make this too long. The process would continue for a few years until the dream girl is no longer hot enough. Then it would be replaced by the new dream girl. I imagine that in the delicatessen cellar of a French billionaire you would find a something under a glass dome that looks like a brownie on a golden plate. When asked what it is - we are now far in the future, by the way - he answers, it is a millionfold re-digested shit brownie produced by the hottest women.

He would then be free to lift the dome and let you soak in the tart, sweet scent.

[Anonymous No.18682651]

See a description of Platonic epistemeology:

As with many other Platonists, Proclus’ epistemology is based on a theory of innate knowledge (in accordance with the Platonic dictum that ‘all learning is recollection [anamnêsis]’). Proclus refers to the innate contents of the soul as its reason-principles (logoi) or Forms (eidê). These innate reason-principles constitute the essence of soul. That is why they are called ‘essential reason-principles’ (logoi ousiôdeis) (Steel 1997). The traditional translation reason-principles was chosen on purpose, because on an ontological level these same logoi serve as principles of all things. They are extended or unfolded images of the Forms that exist in intellect; and by means of them the world-soul with the assistance of Nature brings forth everything. In other words, the psychic logoi are instantiations of Platonic Forms on the level of soul as are the logoi in Nature and the forms immanent in matter. According to the fundamental Neoplatonic axiom panta en pasin (‘all things are in all things’), Forms exist on all levels of reality. But the logoi in soul also offer the principles of all knowledge and are the starting points of demonstration. At In Parm. IV 894.3–18 (ed. Steel) Proclus argues that only with reference to these notions within the soul predication is possible (see Helmig 2008), since they are universal in the true sense of the word. On the other hand, both transcendent Platonic Forms and forms in matter are not taken to be universals proper by Proclus. The former are rather intelligible particulars, as it were, and cannot be defined (Steel 2004), while the latter are strictly speaking instantiated or individualised universals that are not shared by many particulars (see Helmig 2008, cf. above 3.1–2). For this reason, it does not make much sense to talk about ‘the problem of universals’ in Proclus.

[Anonymous No.18682664]

It is another crucial assumption of Proclus’ epistemology that all souls share the same logoi (Elem. Theol. § 194–195). In terms of concept-formation this entails that psychic concepts, once they are grasped correctly, are universal, objective, and shareable (see Helmig (2012) 13–24). Moreover, if all souls share the same logoi, and these logoi are the principles of reality (see above), then by grasping the logoi souls come to know the true principles or causes of reality. Already Aristotle had written that to know something signifies to know its cause (Met. A 3, 983a25–26 and An. Post. I 2, 71b9–12). In his Commentary on Plato’s Timaeus, Proclus introduces an interesting distinction. Taking his start from the problem of how we can recognise certain objects, he considers the example of an apple. The different senses tell us that there is something sweet, red, even, with a nice smell. And while common sense (koinê aisthêsis) can distinguish the different impressions of the special senses, only opinion (doxa) is capable of saying that the object there on the table is an apple. Doxa is able to do this, because it has access to the innate logoi of the soul. However, as Proclus explains (In Tim. I 248.11 ff.), opinion only knows the ‘that’ (hoti), that is, it can recognize objects. Discursive thought (dianoia), on the other hand, also knows the ‘why’ (dihoti), that is, the causes of something. This distinction can also be rephrased in terms of concepts, implying a distinction between factual concepts that allow us to identify or recognise certain objects, and concepts that fulfil an explanatory role. On the whole, Proclus’ reading and systematisation of Plato’s doctrine of learning as recollection makes Platonic recollection not only concerned with higher learning, since already on the level of object recognition we employ concepts that originate from the innate logoi of the soul (Helmig (2012) 299–333).

Proclus argues at length that the human soul has to contain innate knowledge. Therefore, one should not consider it an empty writing tablet, as Aristotle does (Aristotle, De anima III 4). He is wrong in asserting that the soul contains all things potentially. According to Proclus, the soul contains all things (i.e., all logoi) in actuality, though due to the ‘shock of birth’ it may seem as if the soul has fallen to potentiality. At In Crat. § 61, Proclus asserts that the soul does not resemble an empty writing tablet (agraphon grammateion) and does not possess all things in potentiality, but in act. In Eucl. 16.8–13 expresses the same idea: “the soul is not a writing tablet void of logoi, but it is always written upon and always writing itself and being written on by the intellect.” As with his philosophy of mathematics, Proclus presents a detailed criticism of the view that universal concepts are derived from sensible objects (by abstraction, induction, or collection).

[Anonymous No.18682678]

From
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/proclus/#PsyEpi

[Anonymous No.18682706]

>>18682651
wtf this is straight-up just Kantian categories and their schemata

[Anonymous No.18682809]

>>18682651
thank you my man

[Anonymous No.18682907]

>>18682651
>he thinks the Theaetetus follows Platonic epistemology

[Anonymous No.18682972]

>>18682470
>an unfortunate but necessary evil.
you tried asking a serious question and managed to attract nothing but seat-sniffing degenerates. its not a necessary evil you idiot, its a click bait strategy that attracts the untouchables like moths to a flame. i hope you continue to get filtered btw.

[Anonymous No.18683060]

>>18682972
shut up fag

[Anonymous No.18683072]

>>18683060
neck yourself you underage niggerprole