[ 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: 20 KB, 283x370, Parmenides.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
23093513 No.23093513 [Reply] [Original]

Did the pre-socratics write something? Is it a good idea start with them?

>> No.23093528

>>23093513
Yes they did but don't read them, everyone who cares about them are pseuds. Also don't read Aristotle until after you've read Kant and several modern philosophers or you will become a pseud. You can read Plato but you gotta be careful.

>> No.23093538

>>23093513
No, they are a complete meme. You can get the basic gyst of what they believed by an even slightly coherent reading of Plato.

>> No.23093539

>>23093513
Parmenides and Pythagoras ended philosophy. Everything afterwards is just a cope because their conclusions are unsettling.

>> No.23093574

>>23093539
Parmenides is a meme and Pythagoras is basic shit, pick a first principle and then pick a duality and you can turn it into an all encompassing system. Literally every philosopher does this

Pythagoras - Monad, Limit, Unlimit
Aristotle - God, Matter, Form
Taoists - Tao, Yin, Yang
Neoconfucians 1 - Supreme ultimate, yin, yang
Neoconfucians 2 - Li, Li again (similar to how God is associated with act in Aristotle, Li has aspect both as supreme principle as the individual principles of things that have Qi), Qi
Neoplatonists - A more complicated version of Pythagoras
Descartes - God, Mind, Matter
Kant - Manifold of sense, intuitions, concepts
etc

>> No.23093621

>>23093574
also this is why I say not to read Aristotle and not to read these ancient niggers because you'll become a pseud. retards will look at this and think that it is pointing to some kind of profound truth when in reality it is a parlor trick of the mind that allows you to tyrannize individuals through concepts that are so general as to be meaningless.

>> No.23093666

>>23093513
Heraclitus and Parmenides are extremely good reads

>>23093574
>>23093528
>>23093538
retards

>>23093539
why does everything have to be so hyperbolic on philosophy /lit/ threads? they didn't end philosophy. Pythagoras was hardly a philosopher himself and Parmenides essentially created ontology ex nihilo, not that he finished it

>> No.23093772

>>23093528
This is actually true.

>> No.23093778

>>23093528
>Also don't read Aristotle until after you've read Kant and several modern philosophers
>implying all philosphers between Aristotle and Kant were pseuds
Actually, you might be on to something...

>> No.23093810
File: 102 KB, 624x434, antiquity pepe.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
23093810

>>23093513
They are extremely good reads. Insofar as later thinkers stray from Parmenides and pals, the later thinkers are hopeless retards doomed to failure.

Also, read Elea:

https://amazon.com/dp/B0CTXF64CJ

Western philosophy went off the rails and never recovered. If you want to have any hope of successfully doing philosophy, you need to go back to Elea.

>> No.23094353

>>23093528
Parmenides is worth the time

>> No.23094362

>>23093513
I like them as in, they are pretty charming and charismatic to learn about.
However you are not going to learn anything of note, in the same way that you would learn reading plato or aristotle.
I still think they are important to know about, though, since plato and aristotle and others reference them, so as a background knowledge they are great.
As philosophers, they are....
well i let you decide.

>> No.23094461
File: 194 KB, 658x1000, IMG_4040.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
23094461

>>23093513

>> No.23094472

>>23094362
They are an historical curiosity and nothing more. Garbage heads like Tweetophon prove what being obsessed with presocratic sophistry leads to.

>> No.23094559

Heraclitus's logos is literally the only way modern man can spiritually cope with reality. Everybody else will paint a beautiful picture for you to enjoy but you'll be incapable of believing any of their metaphysics or cosmologies. So you must cope as a modern man not even capable of faith but simply hope that logos will prevail for it is all we will ever have.

>> No.23094568

>>23094559
Interesting.
How did you, get, that profound insight into Heracitus philosophy, being more powerful than the others for modern man's usage, if we don't even have all the fragments?
Im curious.

>> No.23094581

>>23093513
dont read any greek philosopher, they are all retarded
jump straight to kant

>> No.23094594

>>23093513
The term pre Socratic is BS much like the term Byzantine (when referring to the Romans after 476) is also BS. It is an invention of 18th century historians.

>> No.23094605

>>23094594
Source?
I never heard of anyone comparing the term "pre-socratics" to the "byzantine" case.
So i want to see the sources that made you think that.

>> No.23094607

>>23094568
Because it's so simple. There is chaos and order, logos the most ultimate of orders. It is both inevitable and not so one most appreciate it when it manifests in something such as the beauty of a sunset. It's purposefully naive, everything else is a cope.

>> No.23094611

>>23094605
I don't know man I'm just fucking with you. I googled "pre Socratic" and the first result was from Stanford and it said something about the term "pre Socratic" being a problem.

>> No.23094618

>>23094611
Oh.
I didn't even see that.
Im leaving it here for anyone that wants to read it.
I didn't even realize the term was created in the 18 century by a "hermann diels".
So thank you for pointing that out.
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/presocratics/