/lit/ - Literature

Because you want to get into philosophy?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VDiyQub6vpw

>>10609057
>"I finished the /lit/ starter"
>people actually follow those guides

Different thinkers and periods are influenced by all sorts of shit, historical, cultural, religious, linguistic stuff that makes for what they are talking about. The philosophy that the west takes into account today, and I mean not simply what philosophers say, but any common sense political concept or sense of self and the world, regardless of how accurate it is or not, any constitution or moral debate, artistic expression and so on will have borrowed from others of the past. In the history of western philosophy, you can look back to the modern philsophers, medieval philosophy, any time you want and you'll see they are discussing things with a basis on what Plato and Aristotle and others were talking about in ancient Greece.

It's not an universal thing. If you want to get into Confucius, a good way is to understand the work of other chinese philosophers or something of chinese history. They will talk of the world or man or politics not only in different opinion, but in a different way to put the question itself.

If you want to get into western philosophy, you'd want to question the questions and if you want to know how the questions we have today came about, take a look at how the Greeks came up with most of them, or most of the crude forms of some which were developped later.

>>10609057
>and I’m guessing I need to start reading Plato next and the like, but I want to know why?

I don't agree that knowledge has to be in some sort of linear a to b route. Alternate between Plato, Descartes, Locke, Chalmers at the same time. It's so boring to approach literature/philosophy from beginning to end.

>>10609070
Off yourself you fucking moron

>>10609057
Because it's peak comfy like Tolkiens Elves but irl

I'm reading Plato right now and he is way worse than i expected. I'm used to medieval and pre-industrial revolution thinkers, and the way he does argumentation feels weak as fuck.

Strawman: Hey man, i don't think we should go into the rapebeast cave
Plato: A cave is like a vagina, right? - Yea - And Penis goes into vagina right? - Yea
Plato: And if you don't like to stick penis into vagina you are a faggot right?
Strawman: Yeah, i can't refuse that.
Plato: So if you don't get into the rapebeast cave you're a faggot

Now Strawman gets raped to death by the rapebeast

Angry Dude: Oh my fucking Zeus, you killed that lad, a moron would know not to go into the rapebeast cave
Plato: I know i don't know shit, and now you do as well. But knowledge is like a vagina, am i right?

>>10609057
>why?
Because Ancient Greek civilization remains one of the purest and greatest civilizations in history, and all of Western civilization after them was influenced by them in some way.

>>10609057
But the Greeks ARE the lit starter kit


>>10609449
From your post I've learned the reason you dislike him is your double digit IQ

>>10609506
From your post i learned that you didn't got how to write an argument even if you claim to love people that are supposed to be good at arguing

>>10609076
autism is an amerikan health crisis my dude

>>10609568
no, he did not got how. what a shame!

Start with the sumerians, Gilgamesh's story is fascinating anyway.

>>10609449
They will hate you because you’re right. His arguments are shit and his conclusions are even more shit.

start with the sumerians
then begin with the babylonians
after that go on to the greeks
resume with the romans
change course toward the chinese
hop on over to the hindus
peruse the persians

>>10609449
The Greeks and especially Plato suffer from the Seinfeld effect. Just don't read it if you do not like it.

>>10610469
Seinfeld blows, everyone knows that

Plato’s Republic and Symposium and Statesman are works of symbolic art, absolutely beautiful. To say they are overrated because of argument I’m ad populum is wrong. Many people into philosophy do not even read Plato. This is the flaw with modern thinking: not enough time spent thinking about, or reading into Plato

>>10610469
How does the Seinfeld effect have anything to do with what he said? That style of argumentation is Plato’s signature, he hides behind Socrates and has his close associates agree with him. Probably because he had a cult-leader personality. Who else could use the image of a very respected, recently deceased man as a sock puppet for his ideas?

>>10610482
I do agree, but i doubt the person I was replying too is suffering from a lack of Ancient thought for the purpose of contributing to philosophy. They sound like they do not know what they like. You get what you put into it. If it's a chore you will not see anything deep about it. If you think they were Mediterranean fucbois then that's what you will get out of it. I see it as a foundation and who would build a structure without a foundation?

>>10610537
what are you arguing? that plato is inferior to socrates and aped his style? yes he did.
just because his style is simple does not mean it should be dismissed. why should a good argument be complicated?
I was just stating he seems boring and predictable because it's a 2400 year old text that a lot of people have read and produced more mature works. would you say greek theater is boring and predictable in the same way? everyone copied and refined it in some way.

>>10609449
>>10609659
>Plato's dialogues are arguments