/lit/ - Literature

Post what you're reading currently and what you'll be reading after:

Roger Bacon - Opus Majus
Jacob Marschak - Economic Information, Decision, and Prediction (vol. III)
Nicolaus Copernicus - Revolutions of the Heavenly Spheres
Jeremy Bentham - Economic Writings (vol. II)
Aristotle - Physics

Next:
Thomas Bradwardine - Speculative Geometry
Gerard Debreu - Mathematical Economics
Galileo Galilei - Discourses and Mathematical Demonstrations Relating to Two New Sciences
John Stuart Mill - A System of Logic : Ratiocinative and Inductive
Aristotle - Nicomachean Ethics

Is it enough to just read the classics? Isn't study of them required too?

Irrefutable fact: the best Platonic dialogues do not have Socrates in them.

This thread is not intended for discussion, but for euphoric exaltation and agreement at this idea. Please proceed.

>Repeats shit Socrates said
Wow what a genius

>tfw recently got accepted into The Republic(Early Decision)
>tfw next fall I will be a rising sophist at The Repubic, ranked as the #1 government system by Athens, making me more educated than the brainlet who was accepted into Sparta

Where can I go to discuss literature now that I've ascended past this board? I have been an avid etcher for the past 18 years of my life. I routinely devour tablets, hundreds of gravings at a time, and average discoursing 50 dialogues a year. Is there some sort of forum where the high-brow intelligentsia congregate?Thanks in advance.

>>10501218
>>10501205
>>10501193
>>10501176
The point you fucking retards, is sometimes reading books isn't that enjoyable. But you do it because you need to have an understanding in something.

>tfw about to read Laws: Book I by Plato

I know it's only 23 pages but still.

What should I expect /lit/?

All Platonic dialogues are essentially the same formula over and over. It works best when he is describing the ideal city-state but it is far too monotonous to just sit there and read two people talking that way when he could convey the same ideas with much less dialogue and words in general!

that you only need one thing, my child

>>10302389
IMBOUTTOOPENACANOFWHOOPASS

>>10274594
Read Gorgias

>>10242720
So if a mob bands together their might makes right?

How was he such a fucking dunce?

My reading is encouraged by the belief that the forces surrounding religion and politics over the thousand years around the birth of Christ shaped Plato's works and bastardized it and if it wasn't for Aristotle's space for metaphysics and the cleansing of religion by the Muslim caliphate, science would have been completely stunted by these institutionalized power hungry historically based forces (I.e. Rome, Judea, etc.). I believe Socrates isn't his "go to" guy, but a clown, perhaps fictional, and one that needs to die. Of course the oracle would say he was the wisest, the oracle doesn't know shit! In my reading of Plato he uses a very creative way of saying what he really believes by having this clown say it in the opposite and that what Plato really wants for us, and for philosophy is nothing short of a phenomenological science. I have found in a few of his dialogue works that, if you keep in mind this creative inversion technique, Plato really believes it is the body, not the soul, that always retains the ability to recollect what it once grasped of reality, and that the lives we lead are to some extent a punishment or reward for choices our ancestors made in their life (genes, inheritance, etc.). We all know this to be obviously true, that we are a product of our ancestors, but the genius of Plato, beyond the technique, is that he is saying that the body itself anchors is to reality and that subjectivity is a weak spook. Plato is doing existential psychology, he is at the forefront of creative writing and the psychology of being and that's why he is still the first, the head of philosophy. I believe that if we read through the bullshit of spooky readings we see that in many of Plato's writings it is asserted or assumed that the truly enlightened —those who recognize how important it is to distinguish the many (the many real things that are called good or virtuous or courageous, which is true) from "the one" (the one thing that goodness is, or virtue is, or courage is, which is retarded) —are in a position to become ethically superior to unenlightened human beings, because of the greater degree of insight they can acquire into the abundance of reality (I.e. zoology, astronomy, geology, etc.). You see that science belongs not to Aristotle, but to his all too brilliant and deceptive teacher, Plato.

(3/3)

You made it. Are you pissed off? You should be faggot

Anyone want to clarify Phaedo 74 a-c for me?
Am I correct if I say he's in a way applying the Analogy of the divided line to equality?

why has he yet to be topped, /lit/?

>>9669029

I just started to read Plato and I was wondering , since I don't want to read the complete work, what are the most philosophically relevant dialogues.

I have already read the apology .

Recommend me secondary literature on Plato.

Plato
Augustine
Aquinas
Scotus
Descartes
Locke
Spinoza
Hume
Kant
Hegel
Wittgenstein

all bachelors

women only hold men back

1. How many people read without first reading the Greeks?

2. Why aren't the Greeks widely taught in schools?

3. Is someone who hasn't read the Greeks able to derive anything from what they're reading? If not, do they realise this?

>tfw you set back philosophy by 2500 yers

What's the best order to read Plato?

YOU do if you turn towards the other end of the corridor.