/lit/ - Literature

Welcome to /clas/!

Possible ways of improving the thread:
>Make/suggest new charts or improve the old ones
>Suggest useful links to free sources/scholarship or good websites to learn classical language
>Suggest any idea you have to make /clas/ better

Previous Thread: >>10287149

Paideia: The Ideals of Greek Culture by Jaeger are my favorite secondary sources on Greece, includes pretty much everything, and is well written with interesting interpretations.

>>10304390

That's a great fucking book, and it should be in the charts.

Hey /clas/, what should I read after the Odissey?
I have all the playwrights.

>>10304524

If you haven't already, you can check out some Hesiod. The Theogony and Works and Days are very useful to get used to gods and lots of mythological characters that are not in the Odissey and the Iliad.
If you already read the Iliad and the stuff by Hesiod, just go with Aeschylus, Sophocles and Euripides - in that order

>>10304349
No megafile?

>>10304592

Is there a classics megafile? Would you send me a link? That would be very useful

Anyone know about Aristotle's Poetics? I'm interested in aesthetics.

>>10304620

I do! You got any specific questions?
I think it is a great text, but it should not be read as an isolated piece of aristotle philosophy. You need to have in mind at least Nicomachean Ethics for the relation between contemplation and mimesis.
Check out Stephen Halliwell's Aristotle's Poetics and The Aeshethic of Mimes, those are great books and can give you a lot of insight on the Poetics.

Anyone know some good books on the pre-socratics?

>>10304660

The Texts of Early Greek Philosophers should be a good edition, otherwise if you are interested in someone in particular, go for the phoenix supplementary volumes should be good (I have not read them, though - I have just been told they are good).

Bought Aristotle: A Very Short Introduction

Gonna read it and then dive into Aristotle, wish me luck boys.

Gib Paul Roche's Sophocles theban cycle plays pls pls

>>10304955
Good luck, anon. Report back with your findings.

Anyone know of accounts of exercise routines of the Greeks and Romans?

Preferably primary sources that I could read on perseus or similar, but I’d be happy with a book recommendation, too.

Thanks and happy Thanksgiving to fellow Amerifags.

>>10305132
>Anyone know of accounts of exercise routines of the Greeks and Romans?
i miss /fitlit/

>>10304950
Nice! Ty

>reading the preface to Finley's World of Odysseus

Well I can't contradict him but why did the kike have to dispel all the magic?

>>10305132
http://greece.greekreporter.com/2013/10/09/calisthenics-the-yoga-of-greeks/
>According to Herodotus, when Xerxes sent spies to watch the military camp of Sparta, they said the Spartans exercised their bodies with synchronized and rhythmic movements, a fact that was misinterpreted by the Persians as a form of dancing and therefore a sign of weakness. Now everyone knows how wrong they were.

>>10305228
Just wait until you get to Plato.

>>10305336
>no fun allowed
t. greek intellectuals

>>10305228
What does he say?

>>10305397
That the Homeric poems are utterly fictional with very little historical correspondence and that the largesse of Menelaus to Telemachus was just a manifestation of a gift economy rather than heroic magnanimy

>>10305411
I forgot to add that from what I recollect from the preface, the contents of my post are the pharaphrase of his proposition. I'm not certain of my reading retention abilities and since then I've only read 1 chapter of the book that emphasizes the fictional and mythical character of the poems which was taken literally by a majority of Hellenes

>>10305411
If they are utterly fictional why does the generosity need to make sense like it actually happened lmao

>>10305438
I was just going on about flexing my vocabulary like a pansy faggot, the point is to treat on how the Odyssey conserves the morals of early Archaic Greece in fictional text

>>10305448
Alright. It makes sense but at the same time it heavily depends from person to person.
I hate how these "rational" people always need to shit on everything as a form of intellectual masturbation.
Have a Pepe now.

>>10305228
>Author is Jewish, biography included in the book acknowledges him as a member of the Frankfurt school
>Uses the BC/AD notation over the B/CE

>>10305411
Yes? It really was a combination of both. You were expected to give gifts, but Menelaus still likes Telemachus.

>>10305119
pls

I need the last piece of the Greekino cyclic universe trilogy

bump.

>>10305119

It's not on libgen, anon, sorry. :(

>>10304349

Anyone here learning ancient Greek to read the originals?

I've learned latin enough to translate pretty much any author (can't really "read" outside of Caesar, however) and would like to start on classical Greek. Anyone have any good tips/ resources?

Also just finished Juvenal's Satires, good stuff, definitely the most entertaining thing I've read so far (translations don't do it justice at all)

Maybe this is a silly question but why is Apollonius' Argonautica never mentioned in any discussion about classic literature? It's the only surviving Hellenistic epic poem and it had a big influence on the Latin poets.
Is it just not as respected by modern scholars?

>>10304349
I just read Antigone and I have a very sad feeling that no Greek tragedy will be able to compare with it.

Am I right?

>>10306254

>https://i.warosu.org/data/lit/img/0086/04/1476211635020.jpg

In this chart you'll find some books you can use to learn Greek.


>>10306268

I think it's mostly because it is considered derivative and manneristic. It's not a bad work in itself, and I think it can actually be an entertaining read. But the Greek is not that beautiful, and it falls short when compared to other long poems.

>>10306280

you are right that it's dissimilar, not a very tragic tragedy, a drama from antigone's pov with some skeleton of tragedy from creon's pov

What is everybody's recommended translation of The Aenid?

>>10306436
F I T Z G E R A L D

>>10306436

Learn latin and read it as intended, not to sound pretentious but it's a different experience from reading it in English. The Aeneid is a classic because of its unparalleled mastery of the latin language; the plot is highly derivative.

To me Dryden's translation best captures the beauty and "feel" of the original, more modern translations better capture the letter but not the spirit of the original

>>10306436
Dryden is quite good, better than Pope's Greek

>>10305228
After Finley, you may read the structuralists like the French triad (Vernant; Vidal-Naquet and Detienne), then their French and Italian followers like Loraux and Cantarella (Eva, the daughter)

>>10306254
Yes, wouldn't mind creating a discord to get others on board but whatever.

Hansen & Quinn are generally considered the best ancient Greek textbook but it's quite dense. Athenaze is supposedly decent as well. There's Polis, which uses the natural approach to teach you Koine Greek. It's basically like a kids textbook but entirely in Koine Greek. The author, Christophe Rico, argues Koine is a good starting point for ancient Greek, making it easier to then tackle Attic and Homeric. There's audio and video accompaniment as well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJrGaOF-bOw

Erasmus did nothing wrong.

>>10305228
I know of the book, what are you whining about?

>>10305277
> tfw never uncover archaeological evidence of technology similar to a modern-day barbell and realize that the Greeks were already training the most primordial exercises, the snatch and the clean & jerk

>>10305132
You're best off looking to military training, since that is probably what literate people of the day would have been asked to write down. Stephen Pressfield did a fair amount of research on the Spartan agoge for his book gates of fire. You might want to look into that. Also Vegetus wrote to the Emperor Valentinian on the Roman military, giving an overview of their lives from enlistment to their actual career. It isn't exactly detailed, but if you read it you can get an idea of what they considered to be good training. They placed an emphasis on actual combat simulation and marching.

>>10305132
Do olympic weightlifting because the Greeks literally trained for strength and speed. They'd laugh at your slow-twitch muscle fibers.

>>10305132
Read Arete by Stephen Miller. It's a collection of ancient Greek texts that refer to sports. It's the closest thing you'll get to Starting Strength with the Greeks.

>>10306459
Any reason Fitzgerald is a better option?

>>10306254
I've been using the Italian edition of Athenaze and have had good results.

>>10307752

>>10307753
is this any good?

>>10308449

The book is great, I don't know about the edition. Together with the Nicomachean Ethics and the Platonic tetralogy Euthyphro-Apology-Crito-Phaedo I think they are the best text to begin getting into Greek philosophy - and into philosophy in general, I would say.

>Once, when Zeus and Hera were having a fearful quarrel, the limping god attempted the role of peace- maker, filling the cups with nectar for all the assemblage. ' And unquenchable laughter was stirred up among the blessed gods as they watched Hephaestus bustling about the palace

Does 1 greek deity get more JUSTed than Hephaestus?

>>10308737
That's what happens when you don't have a father.

>>10308737
It's more that they laugh with him than at him. Friendly banter and all that.

>>10308737
Yeah but he got to bone Aphrodite. Then got cucked by Ares

Damn

Did anyone save my "Resume with the Romans" post from the last thread? I was thinking about making a chart but am lazy

>>10304390
Amazing. I don't know if there's a easy way to get it in english, though. I read it in my native language.

>Several generations of such calculated dealing out of daughters and assorted female relatives created an intricate, and sometimes confusing, network of obligations. That was one reason why the heroes memorized their genealogies carefully and recited them often. When Dioli1edes and Glaucus 'came together in the middle between the two [armies ], eager to do battle', the former stopped and asked a question. 'Who are you, brave sir, of mortal men? For never before have I seen you in glorious battle.' Glaucus's reply was a long recital, full sixty-five lines, chiefly of the heroic exploits and the begettings of his grandfather Bellerophon. His final words were: 'Of this lineage and blood I vaunt myself to be.'

>'So said he,' the poet went on, 'and Diomedes of the brave war-cry rejoiced. ..."In truth, you are my paternal guest-friend of old; for illustrious Oineus at one time entertained excellent Bellerophon in his palace and for twenty days he kept him, and they gave each other fine gifts of guest-friendship. ...Therefore I am now a dear guest-friend to you in central Argos, and you [to me] in Lycia whenever I come to your-land. So let us avoid each other's spears" .-there are Trojans enough for me to kill, and Greeks for you. ' "Let us exchange armour with each other, so that they too may know that we avow ourselves to be paternal guest-friends."’*

>This is not comedy. [...]

It is to me now

>>10308872

>>10309392

Thanks anon for saving it! This will be in the next version of the thread.

I just realized I made this a while back. Reposting it since it may be interesting for people in this thread.

>>10309829

Will be added and thank you! Have a happy Plato.

>>10309063
Is this from Hamilton's mythology?

>>10309829
Not to always be hating on Fagles but I'd say that isn't a very good representation of his verse, and that passage was picked by some news article, I recognize it because there was an analysis of the rhythm and the alliteration being akin to waves. So definitely not random

>archaic Greece is the anarchist's utopia

Who would'v'st thunk

Those of you who have read them in Greek, which one of these is easier:
>Lysias's "Against Eratostenes"
>Xenophon's Cyropaedia/Anabasis
>Longo's Dafnis and Cloe

>>10306460
>the plot is highly derivative
Well what the fuck else is it supposed to be? It's an homage based on what are practically folk tales. Not to mention that a poet's worth used to be tested by their ability to pay allusion to classic works.

>>10311949

Lysias should be very basic

>>10304660
History of Greek Philosophy by W. K. C. Guthrie is a great start, both volumes.

>>10311949
Haven't read Logno, but Lysias and Xenophon are both famously easy. If you are doing it for fun, start with Lysias 7 on the olive stump then go on to Against Eratosthenes

>>10306460
>the plot is highly derivative
>I have no idea what classical literature is nor what it was trying to do. Names like Conte and Hinds mean nothing to me, and "intertextuality" is probably something I scoff at

bump.

What is the benefit of starting with the greeks? Honestly... what should one expect to learn?

Would it be a good way of raising children? Starting them out with the greeks when they're like to get them on Jordan Peterson's level when they're in 5th grade?

>>10315129

The first and most immediate thing is that there is a lot of wisdom in the Greeks and Romans, even in works that are not directly philosophical. Ancient people saw a lot of terrible things and life - for as much as it had many beautiful things - was more painful back then. Classical authors, though, were very smart men and women: they can teach you how to face hardships in life. If there is such thing as books that can make you a better person, those are the classics.

On the other hand, if you like reading in general, classics will put you into the habit of reading slowly and work calmly through the text. These are books that require work and attention, and learning how to work through them can be very rewarding. It will teach you how to read and approach a text in general.

Third thing, which is maybe the most important, they are beautiful and it's great fun reading them.

to Sacred Kinship: the Greek actually says ‘to Zeus who presides over the family’.

alone among mortals: the translation omits the important point that Antigone goes to her death ‘autonomously’ (auto-nomos), i.e., of her own free will.

I don't get it. Why would the translator omit things and then tell that they were omitted. From Antigone (Oxford World's Classics)

What are some good commentaries on the Nichamachean Ethics?

I've been trying to find a specific prayer from one of Plato's dialogues. I think Socrates is instructing somebody else how to best pray to Zeus and his advice is that we should only pray for what is good rather than for wealth or other things like that since we don't know if they would actually be good for us. I'm pretty sure it's from one of the early dialogues but I can't be sure and some of the details could be wrong.

Any ideas?

>>10317040

Could it be the prayer at the end of the Phaedrus?

Socrates: Shouldn't we first offer a prayer?
Phaedrus: Of course.
Socrates: Dear Pan, and all you other gods who live here, grant that I may become beautiful within, and that whatever outward things I have may be in harmony with the spirit inside me. May I understand that it is only the wise who are rich, and may I have only as much money as a temperate person needs. -- Is there anything else that we can ask for, Phaedrus? For me, that prayer is enough.
Phaedrus: Make it a prayer for me too, since friends have all things in common.
Socrates: Let's be going.

>>10308820
Then he made them the laughingstocks of the gods,

>>10317056

I don't think that one is it because there was a short discussion about how best to pray before actually offering a prayer to Zeus.

>>10317040
Maybe is the Pytaghorian (or Spartan I don't remember) prayer in Pseudo - Plato, Alcibiades, II, 138-139?

I'm kind of confused, is there a role for Titans/old Gods like Pontus, Gea etc. outside of just "being there"?
Shouldn't Ocean outrank Poseidon (just one of many examples)?
Are the Titans/old Gods just the deposed gods of old civilizations, were they ever revered at all?

>>10318859

I think that might be it. I would have sworn there was a direct prayer to Zeus but my memory could be faulty because its been a long time since I've read it.

>current read: de rerum natura by lucretius
>currently translating: de bello gallico
Studying classics at uni. Love the subject

>>10306254
Athenaze is what we use at uni
John taylors greek to gcse is very stream lined and better for people who have dealt with inflected languages before

im reading the iliad atm boys. when does the action start?

>>10306436
David west. Prose but english is best conveyed in prose. But the latin is incredible learn latin and you will discover the joys of the aeneid

How is Fagles translation of The Iliad for someone like me who is pleb as fuck and will not appreciate anything related to metric, rhymes, alliteration and so on.
Is there a big loss in reading a version that reads more like prose?

>>10319512
Page 1

>>10320118
The Iliad will teach you to appreciate form, even in translation.

>>10319512

The action starts on like page 2 when apollo fucks shit up, my dude.

>>10320118
Yes read Fitzgerald instead. It's not much harder.

Why did he do it, lads...

>>10317040
i'm 90% sure it is in Crito

>>10320118
don't read prose and read Lattimore instead

>>10321105
>picture of a drawing of a bust of a man
whoah...

>>10321620
Image of an image, Socrates might've something to say about that.

I desperately want
a. a pdf of The First Poets
b. A pdf of Sophocles' Theban plays translated, Roche's variant if available, if not any would do but give me the most literary one at your disposable pls

What's this meme of Loeb editions being expensive? They seem to hover around $25 where I live, and that's surprisingly cheap.

>>10321787
>google for another translation of the Theban Plays but don't find anything for free

Why did no anglo think to translate this shit before copyright?

>>10304349
Something to add in Online Resources could be http://www.hexameter.co/ which is a website which gives you Latin poetic lines and you have to see if you can scan them properly.

>>10304955
I hope it's better than Plato: A Very Short Introduction. Annas butcher that intro.

>>10321787
>>10322012
>I-I'll just skip to H-herodotus I suppose
>pdf is 17 hundred pages

>>10306560
He did actually, while he tried to approach the pronounciation he didn't have the modern info we have now which allows us to come way closer than he ever did.

>>10322056
what fucking version has 1700 pages? that shit isn't right

>>10322123
It was some crappy one with very large fonts and much space wasted in the margins, I found another which reckons at 600 pages, better I suppose? I'll be at it for 12 days or so.

>It's another get stuck in a rut with the Greeks episode
captcha: Extra STOP

>>10322135
I'm about to read the Histories too, which edition are you using? I'm reading it in translation, so I'm using the Landmark Histories, pic related.

>>10322025
The same guy has aeneid.co too which goes over the aeneid line by line in Latin (with grammar and vocabulary aids)

>>10322218
https://www.romanroadsmedia.com/materials/herodotus.pdf

First non-garbled pdf available by means of google, since the original was not in verse I don't think a translation can lose much of the original's significance

>>10322235
Exactly why I chose to go with the Landmark edition, since it has introductory essays, margin notes, etc. I tend to avoid such invasive elements in the actual text with poetry, but again, with prose, and with the Histories being the type of work that it is, it feels appropriate. For what it's worth I believe Rawlinson is considered a good translation of the Histories.

>>10321947

In italy you can have translations that are 1. more recent 2. with notes 3. with 100 pages of detailed intro for half the price. All with the original text.
When we go abroad and have to buy loebs it feels as if you are being robbed.

>>10322340
Ah, so that's why Loebs are considered expensive. It's because of Italians!

>>10304542
I've read Theogony and Works and Days and I'm reading Aeschylus right now. Would it be a big deal if when I'm done with all his plays I get to the Presocratics?
Should I maybe read the Histories before that to have a better frame of reference?

>>10321947
In other countries they are more expensive because exchange rates and whatnot.

>>10322438
You can do the Presocractics easily without the Histories. Most are speaking about thoughts and not places. They're only grouped geographically because those teachers would have a greater impact locally.

>>10304349
I was reading Plutarch’s Age of Alexander and was almost done with Demetrius when some fucking faggot piece of shit spic nig fucking worthless maggot scum shitstain took it out of my bag while working on project in computer lab with classmates. Im so fucking PISSED

>>10304660
don't trust the ones who call Heraclitus a physicist.

>>10324105
I love Plutarch.

>>10322355

Well, they cost more than a paperback book.

>>10319512
Starts immediately, but skip book 2, it's literally just a catalogue of ships

t. pleb

>tfw going to read the Theogony and W&D in one day

>>10326526
>he produced the unplowed (?) open waters raging
with swell, Pontos, without philotês.

Doesn't "unplowed" simply mean "unsailed"? I remember the exact translation in the Pope translations. The translation would be correct and figurative.

>tfw know more greek than the translator

Just saw that Landmark is going to release a version of Julius Caesar's commentaries next week.
I know what I'll get for Christmas.

>>10325254

Me too! I love reading him. It gets really difficult when you try to make sense of him philosophically, though...

>>10326694
Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres etc etc

>>10326526
Hey I just did that yesterday!

>>10327051
Horum omnium fortissimi sunt Belgae..

>>10327051
>>10327082

A-alea iacta est!

>>10327195
Carpe diem

I'm really starting to suspect Popper was right about Plato being a proto-fascist.

>>10327643

lt's the fascist who tried to be Platonic - and failed.
There is nothing bad with desiring a society ruled by good wise people who can only do good. Why would you need freedom if a philosopher-king knows better? Would you want freedom on a ship, without knowing the art of piloting, or would you rather trust a wise pilot?
Freedom is an american meme. Philosopher-kings would work perfectly well.

>>10327699
> if a philosopher-king knows better?
That's the problem. Philosophers can't agree on even the most basic shit.

>>10327699
>Freedom is an american meme.

>>10327711

Yeah, but like this you do not refute the idea that the better and the wise should have power of the inferior and the ignorant. You just say it is unlikable to happen. The point of the Republic is saying: if there was something like the wise philosphical man, he should be the one ruling.

>>10326526
>make this post
>several hours later
>only get to read Theogony because I had to buy groceries

>>10327768
Works and days is better imo. Hesiod was such a grumpy old farmer, very comfy. Enjoy this afternoon.

>>10327699
>implying someone else knows how to live my life better than I do

>>10328374

B-But Nietzsche sempai! What if the spirited part of your soul is dominating the rational part of your soul and preventing it to know what is truly good for you? Are you truly doing what you want, then, when you do what you desire but you don't know that it is harmful to you? Wouldn't the fact that, by knowing better, you would change your course of action, justify that someone who knows better for you can force you to act according to this knowledge because he would be doing what you truly want i.e. your own good?

>>10328404
>What if the spirited part of your soul is dominating the rational part of your soul and preventing it to know what is truly good for you?
I'd love to hear how your philosopher king could determine this without a shadow of a doubt.

>Are you truly doing what you want, then, when you do what you desire but you don't know that it is harmful to you?
Experience is a perfectly valid means of acquiring knowledge. You can pass all the nanny-state laws you want; it is only when one is harmed that he can truly understand that something is bad for him.

>Wouldn't the fact that, by knowing better, you would change your course of action, justify that someone who knows better for you can force you to act according to this knowledge because he would be doing what you truly want i.e. your own good?
Your line of reasoning is outlandish. If I truly want to be nourished, does this justify your philosopher king force-feeding me?

>>10328726

>I'd love to hear how your philosopher king could determine this without a shadow of a doubt.
That is the problem with Platonism. It tells you what is there to know and what are the only objects capable of providing actual knowledge (Forms) but gets very obscure when it comes to explaining how to actually know them.
The fact that this knowledge is very unlikely, though, does not undermine the fact that if it was possible, it would justify someone imposing their will on you.

>Experience is a perfectly valid means of acquiring knowledge. You can pass all the nanny-state laws you want; it is only when one is harmed that he can truly understand that something is bad for him.
Actually, that is not true. A lot of people are harmed by their own actions, and don't understand that they are bad for them. And even if they know they were bad, this does not imply they would have the spiritual strength required to actually do what is best - e.g. smokers, compulsive eaters, acoholics, they all know what they are doing is bad, and yet they cannot help it. Wouldn't authoritative imposition from a wise all-caring philosopher-king with fascist tendencies help with all that?

>If I truly want to be nourished, does this justify your philosopher king force-feeding me?
Isn't this exactly what doctors do, when you are sick and don't feel like eating? Doctors know what is best for you.

>>10328864
>The fact that this knowledge is very unlikely, though, does not undermine the fact that if it was possible, it would justify someone imposing their will on you.
Let me see if I'm following you here.
>(1) It is unlikely that anything can truly be known.
>(2) It is possible for someone to impose his will on you.
>Therefore:
>(3) The person mentioned in premise 2 is justified in imposing his will on you.
That's your reasoning as I understand it, and if that's what you're saying, it simply does not follow. Might does not make right, even if "what is right" is unlikely to be known. If anything, the high uncertainty of knowledge makes it less justifiable for someone to force his will on others.

>A lot of people are harmed by their own actions, and don't understand that they are bad for them.
Perhaps you can give an example of this, because I have a hard time conceiving of something harmful whose danger is observable and comprehensible.

>even if they know they were bad, this does not imply they would have the spiritual strength required to actually do what is best - e.g. smokers, compulsive eaters, alcoholics
Perhaps this is so, but those are minorities. The average person can develop an understanding of the danger in those behaviors in getting a cough after a smoke, getting a stomach ache from over-eating, and getting a hangover after drinking too much.

>they all know what they are doing is bad, and yet they cannot help it.
They put themselves in their situations, even after experiencing impaired breathing, stomach pains, and dehydration from the first time. It's hard to break an addiction, I'll concede, but it's very easy to avoid it in the first place.

>Wouldn't authoritative imposition from a wise all-caring philosopher-king with fascist tendencies help with all that?
One man's need for help is not another man's license for absolute power over all. Morality is not a function of such arbitrary variables as the competence and spiritual resilience of a given population. If morality is subject to change, it is essentially the same as if there were no morality at all.

If someone wants help, he has a right to seek it peacefully, but that does not imply the right of another to supply help despotically.

>Isn't this exactly what doctors do, when you are sick and don't feel like eating? Doctors know what is best for you.
No, I go to a doctor's office when I'm sick, I pay him to inspect my body and interview me, and he gives me a diagnosis, advice, and/or prescription according to his knowledge of medicine (that I trust him to have). Where I come from, doctors do not coerce people into check-ups or force-feed them pills, independent of the consent and trust of their patients.

My favorite story:

Alexander the great visited Diogenes the cynic who lived in a barrel like bum on the side of the road.
"Diogenes you are praised as a great philosopher and have contributed quite a lot to society. Since I'm a pretty big shot around here i'll grant you anything you want. Just name it."
Diogenes though about this for a mere second and said, " Well now that you mention it, could you move to the left, you're in my sunlight"

>>10328960

>Let me see if I'm following you here.
The reasoning is this:

1. You always want what is best for you
2. You don't always know what is best for you
3. If someone knows what is best for you, then he has can impose his will on you, because you what you truly want is what is best for you.

3. follows from the fact that if you knew what it was good, you would actually want it, so the person imposing his will is actually doing what you want.

your (1) it is unlikely that anything can be truly known. is simply something I am taking from your objection about the possibility for someone to know what is best for you.
It does not feature in my argument. The argument just says: if it was possible, it would be justified. It does not argue for or against the possibility for someone to know what is best for you, only for the fact that if someone like that existed, it would be right and desirable to you to surrender to their will.

>Perhaps you can give an example of this, because I have a hard time conceiving of something harmful whose danger is observable and comprehensible.
Alchohlism, smoking, compulsive eating are good examples, since you have immediate negative ripercussions in indulging in that. Then there is actual masochism, which has many forms and means enjoy what is harmful to you both physically and mentally.

>Perhaps this is so, but those are minorities. The average person can develop an understanding of the danger in those behaviors in getting a cough after a smoke, getting a stomach ache from over-eating, and getting a hangover after drinking too much.
Compulsive smokers and alcoholics may be a minority, but it continuously happens in everyday life that people do things they know they are harmful but can't help it. The greeks called it "akrasia" or "weakness of will". And it is not only that: also the way you spend your time e.g. playing videogames all day, posting on 4chan all day, not exercising at all, can enter this case. You know that it would be better do something productive or healthy, and yet you indulge in doing something which is negative to you.

>One man's need for help is not another man's license for absolute power over all.
Plato's point, though, is that YOU would want that help if only you truly knew what is best for you and how to act to reach it.

>Where I come from, doctors do not coerce people into check-ups or force-feed them pills, independent of the consent and trust of their patients.
I do not know where you are from, and maybe you are very lucky and have never have been to a hospital. Because that is what happens when you have serious life-threatening illnesses (e.g. cancer) and you don't feel like eating, and you are force-fed through drips or tubes. For as much as this is unpleasing, you allow doctors to do that because you trust that they know better.

>>10327738
My point is that you can't possibly know if a person is indeed wise or better until you have seen their actions in the real world. This is the same old extreme fetishization of intellectualism (mainly of philosophical intellectualism) which runs through all western civilization (just look at the endless debate on the role of the intellectual). A flexible sistem, like contemporary democracy, is the best simply by virtue of being adaptable: rulers are held accountable for their action.

Not to mention that there's the whole problem of how you define "wise" and "better". Was Plato wise? Was Marx wise? Was Carl Schimdt? I think so, yet they had completely different ideas on how a civilization should be ruled. Self proclaimed "wisdom" can also be incredibly shortsighted.

>>10329154

Ok, but you are not engaging with my argument this way, because I am not arguing that the wise man exists or that it is possible for it to exist.
The argument if hypothetical. IF the the wise man existed. should we surrender our will to him because he knows better? The argument just asks you to imagine a certain situation, and then to establish whether the consequences of that situation look plausible to you. In this case, you engage with the argument when you give a yes or no question and motivate it.

>started reading up on greek history on wikipedia in September
>started reading introductions on the presocratics at the same time
>got to Plato in late September
>when I found out that Plato makes a lot of references to Homer and others, I decided that I can't just build up my knowledge of philosophy without also investing deeply in history and literature
>Suddenly have to work a lot (seasonal driver) only get to listen to stuff, not read
>Listened to the Literature & History podcast on 1st of October, and got to episode 40 (last one on the Greeks) last Friday
>Listened to the first 34 episodes of History of Philosophy Without any Gaps in between (everything up to and including Plato)
>Listened to the "Kings of Kings" trilogy by Dan Carlin today and yesterday while driving
>Read a little bit out of Tom Holland's translations of Herodotus' The Histories every night before going to sleep
>Have the Iliad and Odyssey coming in the mail probably by Friday, I'm probably going to get to read a lot again in about 2 weeks. Am currently planning to finish The Histories, then read the Iliad, then Odyssey, then the Oresteia, then the Theban plays, and then it's maybe time for a secondary text in between. I was thinking about Persian Fire.
>Also ordered Edith Hamilton's book because of the memes,


How am I doing lads? Is my Start with the Greeks journey going in the right direction? Am I skipping obvious stuff? Am I making mistakes? Are there things I should stop doing?

>>10329200
I understand the argument and what you're saying. I was originally responding to the other anon who claimed that philosopher kings would work perfectly well. The other anon wasn't being hypothetical.

>>10329232
You probably want a lot more secondary texts for the plays and for the poetry.

>>10329232

Still it is remarkable that you are doing all this stuff while working as a seasonal driver. Good job anon. May the gods smile upon you.

I'm interested in starting a hardcore reading of Aristotle. Does anyone have good preliminary material aside from >>10304624 >>10304955

I would love a good biography, if anyone could recommend. I want to truly understand the Aristotelian mindset and the later Scholastic innovations.

>>10329097
>1. You always want what is best for you
I can accept this.

>2. You don't always know what is best for you
I can accept this.

>3. If someone knows what is best for you, then he has can impose his will on you, because what you truly want is what is best for you.
This is where you lose me. From premises 1 and 2, I choose to seek out a doctor, a financial advisor, a psychiatrist, and a host of other experts on any other issue I have, as do many other people. If I always want what is best for me, but I do not always know what that is, it only follows that, in order to fulfill my desire, I should seek out the help of others who know better than I do. Nothing about the first two premises implies the third, in your argument. You haven't closed the is-ought gap.

In any case, who decides who knows best? How can such a thing be verified? If it can be verified, what should one do if it turns out the philosopher king isn't the wisest in the land?

>The argument just says: if it was possible, it would be justified.
Possibility is not justification.

>Alchohlism, smoking, compulsive eating are good examples, since you have immediate negative ripercussions in indulging in that
My mistake, I meant to say "something harmful whose danger is NOT observable and comprehensible". You were originally talking about people who don't understand that their own actions hurt them, so I'd like an example of that.

>it continuously happens in everyday life that people do things they know they are harmful but can't help it
Those people are free to seek help with their vices, but again, you haven't justified the forceful imposition of a philosopher king's will upon these people, much less upon others, who do not harm themselves at all.

>You know that it would be better do something productive or healthy, and yet you indulge in doing something which is negative to you.
Having fun by watching movies, reading books, playing games, etc. is what people do when health (diet/exercise) and productivity (job) have been taken care of for the day. People who participate in such leisures in excess fall into the aforementioned minority, and even by silly utilitarian standards, would not justify the imposition of one man's will upon all.

>YOU would want that help if only you truly knew what is best for you and how to act to reach it.
You still have not answered the problem of how one verifies supreme knowledge, or even superior knowledge. Couldn't anyone claim to know better than me and then proceed to impose his will on me, by your reasoning? Could any one doctor interrupt my visit with my PCP and overwrite my diagnoses/prescriptions, simply because the former believes he knows better than I or my PCP do?

>>10329097
>that is what happens when you have serious life-threatening illnesses (e.g. cancer)
Do rogue medical squads randomly abduct people, diagnose them for cancer, and execute whatever treatment they see fit? After all, that should be completely permissible under your reasoning that he who knows best is right to impose his will on others.

>you don't feel like eating, and you are force-fed through drips or tubes
Correct me if I'm wrong, but that's for people with dysphagia, who CANNOT properly eat—not people who'd rather not eat.

>you allow doctors to do that because you trust that they know better.
What about doctors that I don't trust? In the real world, I simply don't engage in business with those doctors, and instead pay the doctor(s) I've built the most trust in. In any case, I was under the impression that your argument was that people who "know best" have the unmitigated right to impose their wills on others. The word "trust" doesn't appear in any of your three premises.

>>10329097
>>10329810
I'm absolutely loving this exchange, but I feel as though the underlying premise has not been noted. Without a clear teleological aim for the political system, we will be caught up in all of these arguments. We must define what a political system ought to achieve clearly and then we can debate the merits of the philosopher-king.

In my view, the State exists primarily for Order (Well-being of the State), and secondarily for Virtue (Well-being of the Individual). The philosopher-king would be one who would best be able to create and maintain Order. Too much of an imposition of will would create dissatisfaction and, thus, breed Disorder. Too libertine a view would cause laxity which would breed Disorder.

The parent ought not to dictate ever aspect of the child's life, but a swift reprimand, or an imposition of circumstance could improve the life of the child despite the short term discomfort. So it is with the philosopher-king - an absolute authority of action appointed by the authority of wisdom (with the participatory consent of subject).

What are some good Sappho translations? I think a neo-classical Pope feel would work best

>>10330082
Just read the Greek brainlet

>>10330134
>"Just learn ancient Greek bro"
>"What? Dialects? You mean I have to learn a whole new language?"
If I learn a language for poetry it's gonna be French desu

>>10330140
Dialects are not that difficult in Greek desu, just learn either Attic or Homeric and you are good to go.
It's totally worth it too.

>>10330082
>>10330142
If you're going to learn Greek, Attic is better than Homeric or Koine.

While I'm no expert on Saphho, and I wish I knew a 'neo-classical Pope feel', the most I can push your way is 'If Not, Winter: Fragments of Sappho' by Anne Carson. It is all the rage in Canadian Classics departments, although I don't know why. What I appreciate about it is that it leaves all the lacunae. If you have a Left/Feminist lean, you'll love it, but otherwise, I have nothing.

>>10330140
The differences between dialects are minimal friendo. Knowing Ancient Greek and Latin is essential to being a man of letters.

>>10329272
Yeah I figured as much. Keep in mind that I did listen to the Literature and History podcast, so that's about 9 hours on Homer, 2 hours on Hesiod, about 5 hours each on Aeschylus and Sophocles, and about 3-4 hours each on Euripedes and Aristophanes. My version of the Iliad and Odyssey will have the Bernard Knox introductions. Do you think that will be enough to start the Iliad with? Or are there other secondary sources I should read first?

Erasmus pronounciation did nothing wrong.

>>10330209
>It is all the rage in Canadian Classics departments, although I don't know why.

Because she is a Canadian classicist and maybe the best (only) poet we got.

>>10331224
But would Canadian Classicists be so blind as to simply hail their own great because they are their own?

As in contemporary poets, perhaps - I still appreciate the 'wordsmithing' that Christian Bok does.

Otherwise, Canada has a pretty rich poetic history. At the very least: Roberts, Lampman, Carman, Service, Johnson, and Cohen.

>>10331238
Canadian academia suffer a from inferiority complex that is only rivalled by Germany.

>>10331250
To quote a character in Robertson Davies' 'What's Bred in the Bone'
>“Of course you’re a Canadian. Do you know what that is? A psychological mess For a lot of good reasons... Canada is an introverted country starting like hell to behave like an extrovert. Wake up! Be yourself, not a bad copy of something else" (305)

>>10330061
>We must define what a political system ought to achieve clearly and then we can debate the merits of the philosopher-king.

Isn't this a point covered by Nietzsche - should society exist for the benefit of the majority or for its highest achievers?

Most people I've encountered recently that are 'politically energized' never seem to have considered this end-point scenario.

I think Nietzsche believes it should be a constant state of revolution, so a chaotic system should replace an ordered on endlessly.

Does this mean trying to define an end goal for a political system is futile?

>And he called this woman Pandora (2), because all they who
dwelt on Olympus gave each a gift, a plague to men who eat bread.

Is this attempting to note the attitudes of migratory peoples by exclusion?

>>10331814
Quote from W&D, II 69-82

>>10331720
Society should exist to maintain the majority, and permit the highest achievers to excel. To some extent, permitting the great to grow in power would benefit the majority. Let the genius live so that masses might have great art, great innovations, and a great city. This is the difference between the philosopher-king and mere tyranny.

From Wikipedia's 'Thrasybulus of Miletus':
>Thrasybulus was an ally of Periander, the tyrant of Corinth. He features in a famous anecdote from Herodotus's Histories, in which a messenger from Periander asks Thrasybulus for advice on ruling. Thrasybulus, instead of responding, takes the messenger for a walk in a field of wheat, where he proceeds to cut off all of the best and tallest ears of wheat. The message, correctly interpreted by Periander, was that a wise ruler would preempt challenges to his rule by "removing" those prominent men who might be powerful enough to challenge him; this story gave the name to Tall poppy syndrome.

The philosopher-king would not worry about tall grains of wheat, as he himself is one, and, if one should be taller, than the philosopher-king would be wise enough to abdicate to the wiser.

>I think Nietzsche believes it should be a constant state of revolution, so a chaotic system should replace an ordered on endlessly.

I think this is an incorrect interpretation of Nietzsche, as Nietzsche embraced the Dionysian so that the tyranny of Apollo could end. I believe he thought both forces should be balanced, but to be balanced he had to become Dionysos himself! So revolution wouldn't necessarily be the right term, for it is not pic related, but rather a scale which totters.

A great example of this is his comments in the Genealogy of Morals wherein he does not want us to undo the morality flip of Bad-Good to Good-Evil, but rather he wants to go beyond it. So despite his comments in GoM about the Jews possessing 'ressentiment', in Beyond Good and Evil he praises them as making history more interesting and that the intellectual state of Europe would be that much the poorer. He seeks not to undo, but push forward. His philosophizing with the hammer breaks the idols, but does not allow us to forget them. That's the issue with post-modernism as we smash with the hammer, expunge our memories, and let the pieces lie. I think Nietzsche would want us to smash the idols, clear the ground, recognize this ground was holy, and build new temples to new gods - precisely as the Christians converted the Pagan temples to Churches, or Enlightenment France did to Notre Dame.

>>10331814
Interesting. It might be. I assumed it meant all men (who eat bread, instead of ambrosia or nektar like the gods)

Just got hold of Aeneid and Suetonius.

>>10331882
Would that interpretation follow that female goddesses were not as much of a blight to their male peers, perhaps that the female gods embodied a feminine ideal?

>>10331238
>At the very least: Roberts, Lampman, Carman, Service, Johnson, and Cohen.

literally who? Christian Bok is okay but I can find a million things I'd rather read.

> But would Canadian Classicists be so blind as to simply hail their own great because they are their own?

Yes

>>10331847
>Society should exist to maintain the majority, and permit the highest achievers to excel. To some extent, permitting the great to grow in power would benefit the majority. Let the genius live so that masses might have great art, great innovations, and a great city. This is the difference between the philosopher-king and mere tyranny.
Generally I agree, certainly as real politk - but isn't this a great mundanity? Where is the balance set? Doesn't it mean that the geniuses are forever weighed down?

>The philosopher-king would not worry about tall grains of wheat, as he himself is one, and, if one should be taller, than the philosopher-king would be wise enough to abdicate to the wiser.

Interesting. This reminds me of the Greek ostracism. It also connects with the need for constant competition to drive society - something widely commented on in Athenian society, including by Nietzsche. It's also a bit like the self-sacrificing hanged god in The Golden Bough et al.

>I think this is an incorrect interpretation of Nietzsche, as Nietzsche embraced the Dionysian so that the tyranny of Apollo could end.

I'm not sure I agree with this - Nietzsche's early & end positions (& definitions) on Apollonian/Dionysian change & contradict. I'd need to research & write an essay to answer this!

>I believe he thought both forces should be balanced, but to be balanced he had to become Dionysos himself! So revolution wouldn't necessarily be the right term, for it is not pic related, but rather a scale which totters.

I should have said 'constant re-evaluation' as revolution has negative connotations.

>I think Nietzsche would want us to smash the idols, clear the ground, recognize this ground was holy, and build new temples to new gods - precisely as the Christians converted the Pagan temples to Churches, or Enlightenment France did to Notre Dame.

Let's do it!

What are the roots that clutch, what branches grow
Out of this stony rubbish? Son of man,
You cannot say, or guess, for you know only
A heap of broken images, where the sun beats,
And the dead tree gives no shelter, the cricket no relief,
And the dry stone no sound of water. Only
There is shadow under this red rock,
(Come in under the shadow of this red rock),
And I will show you something different from either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust.

>(ll. 286-292) To you, foolish Perses, I will speak good sense. Badness can be got easily
and in shoals: the road to her is smooth, and she lives very near us. But between us and
Goodness the gods have placed the sweat of our brows: long and steep is the path that
leads to her, and it is rough at the first; but when a man has reached the top, then is she
easy to reach, though before that she was hard.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dv13gl0a-FA

>>10331929
It wasn't that Pandora or women were a plight to men, but that she opened the box full of evils which she couldn't put back.
Pandora was a gift, but her curiosity (not malice) led to evil on earth.

>>10331960
>And he charged Hermes the guide, the Slayer of Argus, to put in her a shameless mind and a deceitful nature.
>Also the Guide, the Slayer of Argus, contrived within her lies and crafty words and a deceitful nature at the will of loud thundering Zeus, and the Herald of the gods put speech in her. And he called this woman Pandora

I misread the part concerning the plight but she is not described in complimentary terms

>>10331960
>>10331983
>(ll. 373-375) Do not let a flaunting woman coax and cozen and deceive you: she is after your barn. The man who trusts womankind trust deceivers

Damn the BLACK Greeks had really high lac-thot intolerance

>Bring home a wife to your house when you are of the right age, while you are not far short of thirty years nor much above; this is the right age for marriage. Let your wife have been grown up four years, and marry her in the fifth.

Is this a call for his brother to become a wizard pedo or am I not grasping him?

>>10332100
>(ll. 746-747) When you are building a house, do not leave it rough-hewn, or a cawing
crow may settle on it and croak.
What did he mean by this?

This concludes my commentary of Hesiod's Work and Days, I hope you are thankful for the bumps

>>10332100
4 years after her first period probably desu

>>10332138
Probably crows were bad luck/omen/etc.

>>10332138
You should take a look at Hesiod scholia:

https://archive.org/stream/bub_gb_-E1WAAAAcAAJ#page/n227/mode/2up
(Greek text. pp. 219-220)

https://archive.org/stream/epicsofhesiodwit00hesiuoft#page/102/mode/2up
(The Epics of Hesiod by F.A. Paley 1883 - p.103)

>>10332100
He's saying not to marry a woman you just met ("take a few years to get to know her").

>>10331250

With the great difference that Germany actually contributed to the field of classics, at a certain point :DD

>>10330679
You don't need much introduction other than the Bernard Knox one. Understanding the Iliad and the Odyssey is more a retroactive process regardless, so there's no way to be "done" preparing for it. In addition you'll find out more about Ancient Greece while reading about other works that informs your reading of the Iliad, even years after you've read it for the first time.

There's thousands of books about the Iliad and the Odyssey, so you have to pick which ones you read, depending on what interests you. I'd recommend "The Mortal Hero: An Introduction to the Iliad" by Schein and "Homer: A Collection of Critical Essays" by Steiner and Fagles after reading it for the first time. A small sidenote there is that I was more interested in the themes and structure of the book, rather than the poetics of it, since I read it in translation. If you want to read about poetic structure, language, etc. with any kind of depth you'll have to read it in the original language.

Finally, don't get bogged down with those two books. They're great, and you could spend a lifetime studying just one or the other of them, but odds are you don't want to do that. You need learn to know how much secondary material to dedicate to each work, with some receiving more and some less. I for example found the Iliad way more interesting than the Odyssey, so I read 3-4 books on the Iliad, but only one on (purely) the Odyssey. Oh, and read both of them before diving into secondary material, since almost all of it presupposes that you've read both works.

Most important plays?

>>10319075
Prometheus has always been my favorite, although a Titan certainly the greatest regarding humanity.

>>10333908
>Weinstein

>>10309829
I just started Fagles and I'm enjoying it so far but I heard Pope's was better, should I switch immediately or finish Fagles and then read Pope's at a later date?

>>10334566
Lattimore is the best prose translation. Pope's Iliad shouldn't even be considered a translation.

>>10334576
I don't care much about its quality as a translation, but instead about its quality as something to be read. I feel like trying for an accurate translation would be pointless when it would be so much better to learn Greek in order to read the original.

>>10334594
Why not learn Greek then? Fagles is only for casual readers.

>>10304660
Heidegger's lectures

>>10334594
>>10334576
Lattimore is the most accurate, Pope is a beautiful re-interpretation. I just read them alongside each other, lattimore in the morning and Pope's couplets with wine in the evening. Fitzgerald is good as well.

>>10334594
Christopher Logue

>>10331944
Charles G. D. Roberts
Archibald Lampman
Bliss Carman
Robert Service
E. Pauline Johnson
Leonard Cohen

I highly recommend Service and Johnson if you don't know them.

>>10333777
I would say Antigone or Oedipus Rex as far as the general West is concerned.

>>10331954
>Generally I agree, certainly as real politk - but isn't this a great mundanity? Where is the balance set? Doesn't it mean that the geniuses are forever weighed down?

I understand the perspective, but even the mundane can inspire great genius. Furthermore, what sort of society would make the genius free and unbound? Certainly, to my mind, a conclusion such as Bioshock's 'Rapture' seems not too far-fetched - that is, the boiling tensions, the forming of factions, and an ultimate disintegration of values. What also seems ever apparent in my mind is that the closer one is to another in ideology the more fractureous one becomes - one now has Pragmatists and Pragmaticists, just as the three major Abrahamic faiths have split and split again.

>This reminds me of the Greek ostracism. It also connects with the need for constant competition to drive society - something widely commented on in Athenian society, including by Nietzsche. It's also a bit like the self-sacrificing hanged god in The Golden Bough et al.

No need to go as far as ostracism, but I see the parallel. As for The Golden Bough, I have not read it. Although, I do recall in Susan Deacy's 'Athena' that proto-Greek civilization did have a king appointed annually who would be allowed to 'take' any woman he wanted for the year, but as a king of fertility would, at the end of the year, be slaughtered, and his blood be plowed into the fields for a bountiful harvest. Fair comparison?

>I'm not sure I agree with this - Nietzsche's early & end positions (& definitions) on Apollonian/Dionysian change & contradict. I'd need to research & write an essay to answer this!

I would legitimately love to write an essay for you about it, lol.

>Let's do it!

Oh, well, you know - I got a busy schedule, but I could probably pencil arson in at some point. Ultimately, while I appreciate Nietzsche's grand destruction of the Tradition, I am, despite my faithful love of N, a greater lover of the Tradition as a whole. I certainly believe I am a man who can build new temples to new gods, I do have great nostalgia for those old temples, as, being born amidst its great undoing, I have never truly paced through their gilded halls; at their distance they shine the brighter, far brighter than the halls I would make.

>I will show you fear in a handful of dust.

Damn...

So, anon... I like the cut of your jib. How the heck does one anon contact another anon outside of this ephemera?

>>10322438
Don't get bogged down in order, that being said Just the first 30 pages of Histories give you enough context for the Pre-socratics, since they were primarily Elatics and Ionians

>>10316896
Haven’t started any myself but Aquinas will almost certainly be excellent, and the cambridge companion should be (at least mostly) good. Also consider the cambridge critical guide.

>>10317040
>King Zeus, whether we pray or not, give us what is good for us; what is bad for us, give us not, however hard we pray for it.

Second Alcibiades 143a

>>10321947
They’re expensive compared to modern translations of the same works (when available), which isn’t a factor if you’re buying them to read the original text or are reading something nobody else has translated.

For example the complete loeb Livy is like 14 volumes, so compare the ~$350 on loebs to the ~$40 or $50 you would spend on penguin, oxford.

>>10334720
>So, anon... I like the cut of your jib.
Likewise! Here's a burner email you can hit me at choprujatr@2anom.com

>>10335067
I buy Loeb because I have a green bathroom.

Some great but rather forgotten (more or less) books about the ancients:

>Friedrich Albert Lange - Geschichte des Materialismus und Kritik seiner Bedeutung in der Gegenwart

A great book split in two volumes. The first volumes offers a rather materialistic outlook on presocratic philosophy with a focus on the Atomists. Still very interesting.

>Jacob Burckhardt - Griechische Kulturgeschichte

Great work on Greek art, culture, mindset and everything else. Obviously a bit dated but still very worth reading.

>Max Pohlenz - Die Stoa; Der Hellenische Mensch

Pretty self-explanatory.

Unironically, Nietzsche, especially the Birth of Tragedy, Human all too Human and Philosophy in the Tragic Age of the Greeks. Although you can find the Greeks in all of N. works. People tend to forget that N. was a philologist first and foremost and I found his opinions on the Greeks very interesting. People see N. as a rather impulsive thinker, which might be true, but his opinion on Heraclitus, for example, isn't that much different from the exhaustive and very traditional and scholarly account of Heraclitus by Guthrie. Basically, he was right about things and evaluations of the Greek spirit.

Also, let me post one of my favourite quotes I found in Burckhardt. I never read the original work. Its about the influence of Homer on the Greek spirit.

Dio Chrysostomus in seiner Rede über die Nichteinnahme von Troja redet die Ilienser folgendermaßen an: »Es soll mich nicht wundern, wenn auch ihr, Männer von Ilion, eher dem Homer glaubt, der so schlimm über euch gelogen, als meiner Wahrheit, und wenn eure Kinder von frühe an Gedichte lernen müssen, die nichts als Verwünschungen über eure Stadt enthalten. Käme ich nach Argos, so würde man dort ebenso Atreus und Thyestes nicht aufgeben wollen und mich am Ende aus der Stadt treiben. In Theben freuen sich die Leute, daß Heras Zorn ihnen die Sphinx brachte, welche ihre Söhne fraß, und daß Oedipus den Vater tötete, die Mutter heiratete und dann geblendet herumirrte usw. Denn so sehr ist das Gemüt der Menschen von Ruhmsucht zerrüttet, daß sie lieber durch das größte Unglück berühmt als ohne Unglück obskur sein wollen«.

I don't own the English translation but I guess you can find a translation. This way its just for the German speaking Anons. (Protip, there are quite a few of them, I'm not German either).

>>10321735
Actually it's an image of an image of an image.

>>10335067
But penguin and Oxford are translations only

>>10335214
You have to put your email in the body of the text I think - I only got the bit before the @

At some point I downloaded a MEGA-archive that contains all of Plato's work, including like 4 or 5 different translations of The Republic and I have no clue if there is a significant difference. Any specific version that's recommended?

>>10336579
Oxford, Cambridge, or Loeb.

guys what the fuck was a hitwaw

>>10337057
A woodpecker