/lit/ - Literature

Sounds like Christianity may be for you, anon.

>>18290613


HERAKLITOS IS THE FIRST GREAT OF PHILOSOPHY, BUT YOU EXAGGERATE.

>>18290613
>Hera-clitoris
retroactively refuted by ParMENides

>>18290635
>HERACLITUS WAS A PROTO-CHRISTIAN!

>>18290635
Wasn't Heraclitus a nihilist

>>18290715
>anti-subtantialist
That could mean that he was a nihilist; but I think that, from Heraclitus perspective, subtantialists are the actual nihilists

>>18290613
No man ever posts in the same thread twice.

Where do I start with him?

>>18290863
He didn't commit any treatises or long books, all we've got left after him are few extant fragments so I guess you should give them a read

>>18290613
Change isn't real.

>>18290881
Do you have any recommendations for the version?

NEITHER ANGLOIDS, NOR GERMANOIDS, COMPREHEND HERAKLITOS, THEREFORE THEY RESORT TO THE SKEWED LENS OF POSTMODERNISTIC, JUDAIZED SOPHISTRY IN A FUTILE ATTEMPT AT APPREHENSION, WHILST REGURGITATING NONSENSICAL DRIVEL IN THE PROCESS.

HERAKLITOS WAS NOT A RELATIVIST OF ANY TYPE; HE WAS NOT A NIHILIST; HE WAS NOT A FATALIST; HE WAS NOT AN ATOMIST, NOR A MONIST; HE WAS NOT AN «ANTISUBSTANTIALIST» —REGARDLESS OF WHATEVER THAT MEANS—; HE WAS NOT A PANTHEIST, ET CETERA —STOP DISTORTING HIS PHILOSOPHY, BARBARIANS.

>>18290911
Spaniards (Visigoths) are barbarians too. You're not any different

>>18290935


YOUR REPLY IS NONSENSICAL.

>>18290952
As is suggesting that any ethnic group is incapable of comprehending some philosopher's philosophy because they were born to a wrong ethnic group

>>18290964
He's right though.

>>18290964


NOONE IS MENTIONING «ETHNIC GROUPS» BUT YOU; JUST STOP POSTING.

>>18290964
He is trolling. No one believes that

>>18290969
You did above tho

>>18290952
your mum is nonsensical

Christians don't understand Heraclitus.

>>18291131
What? Christians (catholics) are the ones who best understand him.

>>18291131
>>18291171
He was a cryptobuddhist.

>>18291171
>>18291174
He was Zeusist.

>>18291174
>cryptobuddhist
try taoist

>>18290613
The small mind and the big mind are the same size: the small mind can't think; the big mind can't think.

The acorn doesn't fall very far from the oak; each has its own smallness and its own largeness, its own freshness and its own weariness.

And yet in spite of their separation, the two are united by a single care.

Of all the historical lost works, losing his book was the biggest tragedy.

>>18290715
>>18290826
there are no substances but relationships between "substances" in process philosophy right? like in hegel? so wouldnt they just believe in the relationships instead of being nihilists?

There awaits men when they die such things as they look not for nor dream of.

>>18291194
>The wise is one only. It is unwilling and willing to be called by the name of Zeus.

>>18291235
There's no substances but processes. So, yes, it's not-nihilism by virtue of just redefining how things-that-exist exist. Buddhism does something similar when it's playing up the Emptiness angle rather than the pseudo-monism angle. You can argue that Taoism also does this as things come from the 道, they aren't literally made up of it (as far as I'm aware Thales literally was saying everything is physically made up of water, whereas "Fire" fire Heraclitus is clearly something more than just literal actual fire).

So, a river exists by virtue of being stream (heh) of continuity, not by virtue of having some essential essence. The parts that make up any given snapshot of that stream are thus arbitrary and give it reality by their relationship, not their character. You could argue that a stream of continuity, by virtue of never beginning and never ending, IS an essential essence of sorts, but that's clearly different than the sort of (pseudo-)Platonic idea of a singular discrete thing that does actually start and stop in space if not also in time such that a car's essential essence doesn't bleed into a tree, whereas a process philosopher would very much say that no, a car does actually bleed into a tree (even if just very minutely).

Is he burning in Hell, bros?

>>18291276
BUT, one thing is for sure.

It is certainly important to know that these things are all made up of the same thing.

At the very least, you can't say that a Taoist who gets angry with you is angry with you because you don't get your point across clearly.

He might well be angry with you for that.

Sometimes, I have to do that with my daughter.

>>18291606
nature is not human hearted

>>18291613
We have learned.

We have heard a lot of chit chat, poo poo, and cluck.

Nature is still God's creation; just as Adam and Eve were made in God's image.

We are just are not His image.

Our being human is that we, like the tree, reproduce and bear fruit.

To give birth to life is to give birth to death.

Not to mention the struggles that we go through with so many pregnancies and baby births.

It is not to say that I blame her parents.

>>18291606
A man's character is his fate. Probably.

>>18291606
No. They who did not know Christ, cannot be condemned.
Ignore the trad larpers.

Wow, reading Heraclitus through process philosophy? Reading Heraclitus through Hegel? Reading Heraclitus through Nietzsche?

No one understands Heraclitus in this thread.

>>18291606
Christianity didn't exist yet, so he gets the benefit of an extra reincarnation as a Christian.

>>18290675
>>18290911
>>18290952
>>18290969
Your stupid fucking tripfag posts have made me realize how fucking weird and pathetic this place can be.

>>18292599
You're a newfag if you haven't filtered all of them yet.

>>18292567
Yes, and neither do you

>>18292599
Back to R*ddit with you

>>18291131
nobody understands Heraclitus

>>18291606
It is death to souls to become water, and death to water to become earth. But water comes from earth; and from water, soul.

>>18292608
Yes I do, I know he's saying more than "dude everything is change".

I like you C ΠM G E N V S, I'm glad you post here.

>>18291276
i think i can really internalize the idea that things dont exist and only the relationship between "things" exist and moments dont exist and only the relationship of other "moments" exist but ive heard hegel applies this to reasons too. so ultimately everything doesnt have a reason (you cant ground the absolute) but for him the process of getting to the absolute and the relationships of reasons is sufficient reason for the absolute. it aint for me but i dont know why it is for him and im sure as hell not willing to go trough his tomes

>>18291276
>Buddhism does something similar when it's playing up the Emptiness angle
This is only with respect to samsara.