/lit/ - Literature

Read Plato's Sophist.

>>18191063
>>18202345
‘From time to time objects meet; a moving one colliding with a stationary
one disintegrates, but if it meets other objects traveling in the opposite
direction they coalesce into a single intermediate substance, half one and
half the other.’ ‘Yes, I agree to your statement of the case.’ ‘Further, such
combination leads to an increase in bulk, while their separation leads to
diminution—so long as the existing states of the objects remain unimpaired;
but if either combination or separation entails the abolition of the existing
state, the objects concerned are destroyed.
894 ‘Now, what conditions are always present when anything is produced?
Clearly, an initial impulse grows and reaches the second stage and then
the third stage out of the second, finally (at the third stage) presenting
percipient beings with something to perceive. This then is the process of
change and alteration to which everything owes its birth. A thing exists
as such so long as it is stable, but when it changes its essential state it is
completely destroyed.’
So, my friends, haven’t we now classified and numbered all forms of
motion, except two?
CLINIAS: Which two?
ATHENIAN: My dear chap, they are the two which constitute the real
purpose of every question we’ve asked.
CLINIAS: Try to be more explicit.
ATHENIAN: What we really had in view was soul, wasn’t it?
CLINIAS: Certainly
ATHENIAN: The one kind of motion is that which is permanently capable
of moving other things but not itself; the other is permanently capable
of moving both itself and other things by processes of combination and
separation, increase and diminution, generation and destruction. Let these
stand as two further distinct types in our complete list of motions.
CLINIAS: Agreed.
ATHENIAN: So we shall put ninth the kind which always imparts motion
to something else and is itself changed by another thing. Then there’s the
motion that moves both itself and other things, suitable for all active and
passive processes and accurately termed the source of change and motion
in all things that exist. I suppose we’ll call that the tenth.
CLINIAS: Certainly.

>>17644346
Are you all deaf???

>>17552717
It's arbitrary. Which makes none of your thoughts superior than any past or future thought you might have. Solipsism makes all things equal, there is no basis for truth or falsity. Everything and nothing is true.

It does everything essential in Heidegger already, even implicitly being-towards-death at both the very start and very end of the piece.

>The third passage of the Parmenides is the most profound point to which Occidental metaphysics has ever advanced. It is the most radical advance into the problem of Being and time—an advance which afterwards was not caught up with [aufgefangen] but instead intercepted [abgefangen] (by Aristotle)
- Heidegger
>If the second half of his [Plato’s] Parmenides would be performed anew with today’s methods (and not Neoplatonically), then all bad metaphysics would be overcome, and the space would be open for a pure hearing of the language of Being.
- Karl Jaspers in a letter to Heidegger:

>>16723488
>it is artistically great but philosophically poor
Consider then, he said, whether you share my opinion as to what follows,
for I think that, if there is anything beautiful besides the Beautiful itself,
it is beautiful for no other reason than that it shares in that Beautiful, and
I say so with everything. Do you agree to this sort of cause?—I do.
I no longer understand or recognize those other sophisticated causes,
and if someone tells me that a thing is beautiful because it has a bright
color or shape or any such thing, I ignore these other reasons—for all these
confuse me—but I simply, naively and perhaps foolishly cling to this, that
nothing else makes it beautiful other than the presence of, or the sharing
in, or however you may describe its relationship to that Beautiful we
mentioned, for I will not insist on the precise nature of the relationship,
but that all beautiful things are beautiful by the Beautiful. That, I think,
is the safest answer I can give myself or anyone else. And if I stick to this
I think I shall never fall into error. This is the safe answer for me or anyone
else to give, namely, that it is through Beauty that beautiful things are
made beautiful. Or do you not think so too?—I do.

That Plato has oldest Socrates say this as opposed to what young Socrates said in Parmenides, is no accident.

>>16633499
I'll post what I wrote a while ago:

>-Plato Five Dialogues(Euthyphro, Apology, Crito, Meno, Phaedo which includes the trial and death of Socrates)
>-Laches
>-Ion
>-Protogoras
>-Gorgias(best possible explanation and condensing of all of Plato's typical philosophy and orientation)
>-Cratylus
>-some other smaller/earlier dialogues
>-Symposium
>-Republic
>That's a pretty good intro-to-middle list. As far "last dialogues", there are quite a few and the Republic isn't one of them. There's a radical change in late Plato from early Plato which is an even greater genius than what most people see, it's truly remarkable. How he was able to, as it were almost begin a new start in a philosophical orientation. Nevertheless such dialogues are:

>-Phaedrus(has the secret to the whole structuring of the dialogue, as well as the reason for Plato's use of it, and in the case of the dialogue, especially his late, Plato's poetic as well as philosophical genius comes into its greatest ability--; and Plato does nothing and puts nothing in the dialogue for no reason, it is all, working backwards to forwards or vice versa, structurally it is all there purposefully, even ideas one might first think are "silly"[I felt this much when I was younger and first read him] Plato is very self-aware of, that is a normal reaction or conception of them)
>-Philebus(continues from Gorgias, but I should say a lot of Plato's dialogues intersect with each other in very interesting ways where you have to keep in mind where something he previously arrived at is being rejected, or built upon or such)

>-Parmenides
>-Theaetetus
>-Sophist
>-Statesman
>-Timaeus
>-Critias
>-Laws

>>16633499
I'll post what I wrote a while ago:

>Op, you will value it in the end if you focus and actually appreciate the ideas and poetic content, especially Phaedo, but the others are still great works(often you will come back to them after reading the other Plato's works and really enjoy them for what they are, this was the case for me, but I was modest and kept reading thinking that it was evidently on my side that I did not see him as the cornerstone), and here's something I wrote a few weeks ago for another anon:

>-Plato Five Dialogues(Euthyphro, Apology, Crito, Meno, Phaedo which includes the trial and death of Socrates)
>-Laches
>-Ion
>-Protogoras
>-Gorgias(best possible explanation and condensing of all of Plato's typical philosophy and orientation)
>-Cratylus
>-some other smaller/earlier dialogues
>-Symposium
>-Republic
>That's a pretty good intro-to-middle list. As far "last dialogues", there are quite a few and the Republic isn't one of them. There's a radical change in late Plato from early Plato which is an even greater genius than what most people see, it's truly remarkable. How he was able to, as it were almost begin a new start in a philosophical orientation. Nevertheless such dialogues are:

>-Phaedrus(has the secret to the whole structuring of the dialogue, as well as the reason for Plato's use of it, and in the case of the dialogue, especially his late, Plato's poetic as well as philosophical genius comes into its greatest ability--; and Plato does nothing and puts nothing in the dialogue for no reason, it is all, working backwards to forwards or vice versa, structurally it is all there purposefully, even ideas one might first think are "silly"[I felt this much when I was younger and first read him] Plato is very self-aware of, that is a normal reaction or conception of them)
>-Philebus(continues from Gorgias, but I should say a lot of Plato's dialogues intersect with each other in very interesting ways where you have to keep in mind where something he previously arrived at is being rejected, or built upon or such)

>-Parmenides
>-Theaetetus
>-Sophist
>-Statesman
>-Timaeus
>-Critias
>-Laws

>>16550100
>Look at this guy still stuck in dualism
Look at this guy still stuck in the dualism of dualism and monism

I have read Plato's "Phaedos" today.

Pseud.
Filtered.
>didn't even finish the whole dialogue before critiquing it
It's like critiquing Plato for Justified True Belief in Theaetetus, when he literally refutes it himself at the end of the same fucking dialogue.

>>16381002
>>Then Layla the angel of conception shows the soul their entire life and everything they will experience

>>16277897
BAsed, I saved this image with the same filename as you and it's based.

Because people don't read Plato's Sophist.
Just as Parmenides didn't deny all plurality.

>>16226966
sophist and philebus contain everything

>>16218743

>>16192141

>>16190233
>things change in the real world
>identity over time exist objectively
No it doesn't.
To be 'a thing' requires Rest in the identity of its identity, if all is change that includes identity which leads to nothing existing because identity requires rest over time.

>>16053089
>Some say there are nine Muses. How thoughtless! Look at Sappho of Lesbos; she makes a tenth.
>T. Plato

>>15788832
>>15788875
Agency is by definition some level of input, any input is freedom. Being a subject is 'distinguishment' from the rest of the world, I, the inanimate world does not create distinctions, to be a subject is to be distinguish yourself. Therefore, if freedom does not exist, on any level, then I do not exist. Nor does anything else, except the 'Indefinitely Indefinite'.

Was INTP in my edgy teens.
Now ISTP, supposedly, for all it's worth.

>>15708630
>determinist
>basic bitch pantheist
>you know who
>>>15708664
>unoriginal

>>15370065
No.

Then a exoteric reading Plato's Philebus, you can read his Protagoras and Gorgias.
Then you can read the rest of Laws and Republic, although unlike Philebus, you'll have to read Republic esoterically, since by reading it exoterically you might like all idiots think it's actually about political philosophy and not the ψυχή.