/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.21281342]

What am I in for?

[Anonymous No.21281401]

Idealistic faggotry that pales in comparison to the realist works of the Chad known as Aristotle.

[Anonymous No.21281444]

>>21281342
an example of how philosophical conversations are supposed to go. get cozy

[Anonymous No.21282904]

>>21281342
Lots of stuff:
>the nature of justice
>the nature of wisdom and virtue
>the ideal city
>the ideal man (the true Guardian)
>the education of the ideal man
>the definition, meaning and purpose of philosophy in actualising the ascent of the soul to the divine realm
>an examination of the soul
>a typology of souls
Great read, I learnt a lot.

[Anonymous No.21283597]

Pre-modern elitist fever dreams of a great-reset. They've always dreamt of doing this to us.

[Anonymous No.21283605]

>>21283597
hilariously, correct. but it is a good intellectual exercise on the nature of justice, cities, man, and other ideas.

[Anonymous No.21283610]

Is there any way to read The Republic in its original Ancient Greek language?

[Anonymous No.21283611]

>>21281342
https://sayorilinganderson.wordpress.com/2020/11/18/north-korea-is-platos-perfect-republic/

>Plato’s Republic is absolutely the worst book I have ever read. I tried to hold my nose and keep reading just a bit more, but the nonsense is just too strong that I can no longer continue. Not to mention the severe censorship that Plato places on his perfect utopia—all performance art would be banned, all music other than the most harmonious would be banned, all poets who do not adhere to “improvement of soul” would be banned—the ruler can lie to the people, but the people must always be honest to the ruler; the law only applies to the people, but the ruler is above the law; and this is not all. In Plato’s perfect Republic, men and women will be assigned the same roles and in fact Socrates compares the differences between men and women as that between men with hair and men who are bald, and, in the words of Socrates, “If bald men can be cobblers, do we forbid hairy men to be cobblers, and conversely?”

[Anonymous No.21283635]

>>21283610
>is there any way
have you tried learning greek?

[Anonymous No.21283638]

>>21281342
Kino

[Anonymous No.21283670]

Write me a debate between Socrates and Phallus about the size of the cock mattering or not.

[Anonymous No.21283677]

>>21283611
I just got past that part recently (I read it at work) and I thought it was tongue in cheek, like he was building up to a "but how is that just?" gotcha moment.

[Anonymous No.21283690]

>>21283635
Yes

[Anonymous No.21283778]

>>21283670
>[The following excerpt is from the Socratic dialogue 'Phallus', which is now mostly lost, except for its introduction and its middle section, which can be found below. Textual analysis has led modern scholars to conclude that prior to this exchange, Socrates and Phallus had made two other attempts to determine the truth about the nature of good cocks, before finally arriving at the answer with their third argument. The dialogue continues on further and judging from commentaries by other members of Plato's academy, the discussion drifts over several other topics, including the proper use of a cock, whether a good or bad one, and also the right way of taking care of one's cock, as well as the relationship of a cock to the soul and the body, before finishing off with an exposition on the different types of cocks and the manner in which their appearances inform us about the quality of the soul of a man, based on the metals analogy of The Republic.]
>Phallus: I see what you are doing and you should give up on it, Socrates. Your lies will not persuade me. A large cock is always better than a smaller one, and having the largest cock is by far the best.
>Socrates: Very well then, Phallus. If you are not satisfied with our previous argument, then let us take a look at the problem again from another perspective. You make sure to stay watchful like a Spartan hound and alert me if I make a mistake, for I would not willingly lie to you, but would necessarily have to lie to myself first. Now, you said that a bigger cock is always better than a small one, correct?
>Phallus: Yes, and this is obviously the truth!
>Socrates: Very well. Then you would agree that if a large cock is better than a small one, it is better because a large cock is something good, whereas a small cock is something bad?
>Phallus: By the dog, yes! I fully agree with you! We are finally on the same page, Socrates!
>Socrates: Perhaps we are, but see if you agree with me on this here as well: now, if a large cock is good, and a small cock is not as good, then a large cock will also share in virtue to a greater extent than a small cock does. Or doesn't what is good necessarily share to a greater extent in wisdom and virtue than what is bad?
>Phallus: You speak the truth, Socrates, for even when we admire the physique of men or animals, we too speak of the virtues inherent to them.
>Socrates: Would you say then, that if a large cock is always superior to a small one, then it would consequently be superior also in every respect?
>Phallus: This can only be the truth, otherwise there would be cases in which a small cock would be superior to a large one, and that is sheer absurdity.
>Socrates: By Zeus, Phallus! Why, we seem to have arrived at just such an absurdity! Now consider this - if a big cock always shares to a greater extent in goodness and virtue than a small one, then it must exceed a small cock not just in a part of goodness or virtue, but in all of it?

[Anonymous No.21283781]

>>21283670
>>21283778
>Phallus: Yes, Socrates, but why would that lead us into a contradiction?
>Socrates: Because, my dear Phallus, this would mean that a good cock also exceeds a bad cock in terms of moderation, and what is moderate is neither too big nor too small. Now, a thing which is at its best when it is at the upper limit of bigness could not possibly fulfil this requirement of being moderate, for if it is to be at its best - and truly share in the Good as far as it is able - then it would need to dispense with moderation. Consequently, the best large cock - or any such thing that derives its value from the greatness of its size - can be superior to another thing in regards to its size, but not in regards to its moderation, and therefore it can enjoy only a partial superiority, and not a complete superiority. Therefore, an average-sized cock - assuming that it shares in all the other virtues of the large cock - will necessarily always be superior to it, because, by being moderate, it shares to a greater extent in virtue, and therefore also in goodness, making it better.
>Phallus: Good God Socrates, I am forced to agree!
>Socrates: And I think you would agree to this also - namely, that a moderate, average-sized cock, blessed with beauty and fit to do its own work, would also enjoy greater harmony and conformity with the rest of the body. Now, since any cock - be it good or bad - is ultimately a part of the body and not an independent object in its own right, this harmonious and moderate quality is precisely what allows it to attain wholeness as a part, and consequently also a holistic superiority - for a cock poorly fitted to its body, no matter how superior it may be in its own right, would invite only laughter and mockery. Consequently, the most important thing for a cock is not at all absolute size, but indeed, moderation in proportionality.
>Phallus: I can no longer oppose your argument - I have been defeated.
>Socrates: Then until some sage or god can reveal his wisdom to us, let us agree to consider the most supreme cock to be the average one, and that it is in all cases better than a big cock. For now, this shall be our truth, and provided that we were right, we can rest easily and return to our previous inquiry into the nature of cocks.

[Anonymous No.21283934]

The most disastrous book in history.
Plato was evil, wrong about literally everything, and quite possibly retarded.

[Anonymous No.21284085]

>>21281342

[Anonymous No.21284467]

>>21284085
>When your country is founded by Anglos

[Anonymous No.21284507]

>>21284085
People still fall for the "It's satire!" or "It's just an analogy, don't think too hard about it!" cope to this very day. Sad, many such cases!

[Anonymous No.21284513]

>>21283934
>wrong about literally everything
but he wasn't, anon

[Anonymous No.21284999]

>>21281342
Totalitarianism

[Anonymous No.21285187]

>>21284085
>the Founding Fathers were pseuds utterly filtered by Plato
IMAGINE MY SHOCK

[Anonymous No.21285278]

>>21281342
highly annoying writing style (imo), but a pillar of the western canon.

>>21281444
checked

[Anonymous No.21285496]

>>21284085
is this legit wtf? is that what those jokesters actually thought?

Holy fuck lol

[Anonymous No.21285762]

>>21283781
damn. This is wonderful

[Anonymous No.21285793]

>>21281342
Try reading it.

[Anonymous No.21286328]

>>21281342
lmao why even read this sophistic nonsense, just skip to the good stuff and read Schopenhauer