/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.19314461]

Introduce me briefly to the concepts developed by Socrates, Plato and Aristotle. You can also chime with pre-socratic stuff.

[Anonymous No.19314468]

There is horse. There is other horse. Is not same horse, but still is horse-y. So, there is horse-ness which make all horse

[Anonymous No.19314473]

>>19314461
too wide a range of subjects

[Anonymous No.19314481]

>>19314461
Sophists evil, we good guise etc.

[Anonymous No.19314488]

>>19314461
You will not read poetry and you will be happy

[Anonymous No.19314500]

>>19314461
Figure it out, zoomer.

[Anonymous No.19314502]

>>19314461
socrates - you're a dumbass and you dont know it
plato - you are a fag
aristotle - if you think about it and break it down to it's core, you're a fag

[Anonymous No.19314520]

>>19314461
being a faggot or a coomer is bad, loving God is good

[Anonymous No.19314599]

>>19314461
Plato: Dis nigga can go to h*ll
Aristotle: Naw he chill

[Anonymous No.19314609]

>>19314461

Heraclitus: the cosmos is fundamentally an unintelligible flux of oppositions between each thing and every other thing it relates to. This capacity for the interrelation of the parts within the whole causes motion and change. And the two causes of human confusion are the inherent difficulty of conceptualizing particulates and their conglomerations, and the problem of pervasive "antipodes" or "normative universals" where suppose generalizations / principles could be ascertained about how the world works, these principles must possess in their inner idea the activity of tension and change which Heraclitus refers to as metaphysical fire. We deal with these two confusions clumsily, through repetition in memory and language while failing to realize that language ignores the particular and satisfies only the moment thus we are doomed to unintelligibility and confusion

Socrates: hideous brain freak hated by man's instinct. Had an axe to grind about how human instinct ascertains appearance more readily than inner nature, such as between an ugly face but a handsome mind. Truly the reviewbrah of his time.

Plato: his project was the opposite of Heraclitus'. He wishes to demonstrate that the cosmos intelligible. I haven't read most of his dialogues, but he mainly seems to suggest a structural coherence between the mind and reality "as above, so below". He also loves these Greek words for image, appearances, vision, gazing, perceiving. In English one might say "I see that there" and also "yes, I truly see things that way. Plato's heavyhanded "mind's eye is like the real eyes too derr"

Aristotle: haven't read. Superficially, he seemed to describe reality in terms of balances and compositions but I don't know too much

[Anonymous No.19314647]

>>19314609

Oh, and I forgot to mention Plato's insistence on "seeing" as intellectual perception reminds me of Hamlet. A knack for perceiving the inner nature or general nature of things as though it were equivalent or more pressing than the particular and apparent nature

[Anonymous No.19314849]

>>19314468
All science is based on this.

[Anonymous No.19314976]

>>19314609
>I haven’t read most of his dialogues
Then why do you think you are qualified to speak on the subject? They aren’t even that long. It’ll save you the embarrassment of being a retard who talks of things he doesn’t know.

[Anonymous No.19315034]

>>19314976

I don't think my post was embarrassing but you're right. And that requires more practice with Greek because I can only read it at a snails pace. Translations of Plato are usually "poetic" with an Anglo style interpretation so I don't think I'm missing out on much