/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.14321855]

Just finished the first chapter of this , from what i understand it's just people arguing semantics , what am i supposed to get out of this ?

[Anonymous No.14321869]

>starting with Republic
When will this meme die and all who recommend that get kidnapped by the cartels?

[Anonymous No.14321872]

You're supposed to keep reading it to the end.

fpbp & /thread & /board

[Anonymous No.14321877]

>>14321855
It's not really semantics because they are debating values.

>>14321869
I don't know maybe because it's a highly influential piece of classical literature that won't die

[Anonymous No.14321879]

>greeks

[Anonymous No.14321885]

>>14321872
I plan to , but it's a drag to read took me 3 hours to finish the first chapter , and i am also esl so i'm not sure if it's just me not understanding the stuff.

Did i also mention they argue like fags ?

[Anonymous No.14321901]

>>14321885
Why don’t u read a translation in your language then?

[Anonymous No.14321936]

>>14321901
I tried reading in my mother tongue but the translator sounds like a fag and other than a few words nothing was that much different
>>14321869
Where should i start then ?

[Anonymous No.14321943]

>>14321936
The Apology

[Anonymous No.14321975]

>>14321936
Euthyphro

[Anonymous No.14322033]

>>14321872
Is this true ? Does music play a big part in this book ? I f*ing hate it when westerners use music as an analogy or talk about music in general. Music does nothing for me i don't understand it and i don't wish to think about it.

[Anonymous No.14322047]

>>14322033
>Music does nothing for me i don't understand it
Oh come on anon. Music is a wonderful thing. Maybe you just never found any quality tunes. At least try a single Zappa track.
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HFQKP3Ehucg

[Anonymous No.14322070]

>>14321855
>people arguing semantics
That's half of what philosophy is.

[Anonymous No.14322101]

>Semantics (from Ancient Greek: σημαντιkός sēmantikós, "significant")[1][a] is the linguistic and philosophical study of meaning in language, programming languages, formal logics, and semiotics. It is concerned with the relationship between signifiers—like words, phrases, signs, and symbols—and what they stand for in reality, their denotation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics
>Linguistics.
>the study of meaning.
>the study of linguistic development by classifying and examining changes in meaning and form.
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/semantics

You mean actual semantics, or the colloquial usage of the word? People have falsely associated the word semantics with trivial questions.
Semantics means defining your terms and words for the purpose of the argument or discourse.
Not employing semantics means purposefully submersing the argument in nebulous speech, accepting vague assumptions, and muting higher reasoning. Ironically, those who whine about "arguing semantics" are the ones filling conversation with trivial contrivances, because they prefer to keep the language based on subjective feelings and connotations, both avoiding the bigger picture and lacking a particular point.
It's ironic, or hypocritical, really.

[Anonymous No.14322118]

>>14321936
Alcibiades I

The easiest dialogue.

[Anonymous No.14322198]

>>14321872
Probably the latter , they spent a lot talking about what justice is , as if justice was a tangible thing that exists out there. And not just whatever humans agree it means.
I don't know , but i just think that arguing about something that is just so subjective is stupid.
Does it even matter if we know what the word means or not ?

[Anonymous No.14322203]

>>14322101
Also they use way too many words to get to the point , why shouldn't someone just read a résumé of the ideas presented instead of reading the book ?

[Anonymous No.14322207]

>>14322198
>implying wittgenstein solved philosophy
words must have a concrete definition, anon, they can't just be whatever the consensus agrees to because that changes over time.

witness: the notion of 'justice' in America over the past 300 years (esp. with regard to negroes)

[Anonymous No.14322276]

>>14322207
>>implying wittgenstein solved philosophy
He did though.

[Anonymous No.14322279]

>>14322276
that's just a /lit/ meme propagated by meme scholars, most of whom are neets

[Anonymous No.14322280]

>>14321936
Meno

[Anonymous No.14322287]

>>14321855
It is not the best book to start with Plato.
The book is about the right management of the soul and uses a "state" as a way to explain it.

One thing of interest is when he talks about the 5 regimes. Over 2,000 years ago he predicted the problems of modern society.

[Anonymous No.14322312]

>>14322287
Shit one of my friends wanted to get into Philosophy and I told him to start with Platos Republic. Is he gonna be retarded forever?

[Anonymous No.14322338]

>>14322312
at least it wasn't nietzsche

[Anonymous No.14322345]

>>14321943 >>14321975 >>14322118 >>14322280
Which one is it then ?

[Anonymous No.14322346]

>>14322345
Start with The Republic.

[Anonymous No.14322351]

>>14322345
You can always go back and read The Republic again after reading Platos other books

[Anonymous No.14322354]

>>14322345
Gorgias

[Anonymous No.14322373]

>>14321936
Start with what actually interests you. You won't understand everything, so read other stuff that will put things into perspective that you don't understand. Rinse and repeat until you die. Just start reading.

[Anonymous No.14322374]

>>14322345
two of these are good answers
one is an acceptable answer
the other is a poor, somewhat understandable, answer, but flawed in its underlying reasoning, though that reason also underlies one of the good answers.
but there are meaningful differences in the circumstances which make it good in the good but poor in the poor.

[Anonymous No.14322386]

>>14322345
>>14322374
>>14322346
Good: Apology, Meno, Republic
Okay: Euthyphro
Shit and probably not even written by Plato: Alcibiades 1

[Anonymous No.14322392]

>>14322386
So the Republic is a good start after all ? What am i missing then ? How do i make it enjoyable to read ? Is it ever enjoyable or does everyone read it as a sort of intellectuel right of passage ?

[Anonymous No.14322399]

>>14322392
The beginning of the book is just arguing "semantics" as you said. But that is important, because the rest of the book is built upon and uses the definition of Justice that is defined in the beginning.

The best parts are Platos Cave Allegory, Platos Archetypes and the ideal civilisation described by him, which come later in the book.

But yes, you should try and understand how they define Justice, because it is important for the rest of the book

[Anonymous No.14322404]

>>14322392
>>14322399
Pretty much just read Republic, Apology and Meno in any order you want, as long as you read all 3 of them you should be fine to understand them

[Anonymous No.14322405]

>>14322386
>following 19th century poorly read hacks who say First Alcibiades is spurious

[Anonymous No.14322410]

>>14322405
I said 'probably', its not like anyone can go back in time and ask him. Its still worth reading, just not as your first Plato book

[Anonymous No.14322446]

>>14322399
>But yes, you should try and understand how they define Justice, because it is important for the rest of the book

But he doesn't define justice , he clearly states so in the last part of his speech

[Anonymous No.14322451]

You should go like this:
Alcibiades 1&2; Ion; Last Says of Socrates; Cratylus; Clitophon; Charmides, Meno; Theaetetus-Sophist-Statesman; Protagoras, Gorgias, Lysis, Laches, the two Hippias, Symposium; Phaedrus, Republic, Timaeus, Critias; Euthydemus, Parmenides, Philebus; Minos-Laws, Epinomis.

[Anonymous No.14322457]

>>14322451
Whoops.
Meant to put Timaeus-Critias after Laws and Epinomis.
Also
>Days
Not says

[Anonymous No.14322464]

>>14321855
Dude, I commend your commitment. I've wanted to get into philosophy for years but I've been to overwhelmed. You did good, just keep reading and go from there. That's an exceptional book so you're not wasting your time.

[Anonymous No.14322473]

>>14322457
I also guess you might enjoy Clitophon more after Meno, and some would put Meno before 'Last Days'. Making yourself be against Socrates, reading those two before.

[Anonymous No.14322497]

>>14322473
>>14322457
>>14322451
Yeeep.
You should go like this:
Alcibiades 1&2; Cratylus, Charmides, Ion, Meno, Protagoras, Clitophon; Last Days of Socrates; Theaetetus-Sophist-Statesman (should be read together), Gorgias, Lysis, Laches, the two Hippias, Symposium, Euthydemus, Phaedrus, Republic; Parmenides, Philebus; Minos-Laws, Epinomis, Timaeus-Critias.

[Anonymous No.14322738]

Why does have have to include so many wrong argument for Socrates to refute. Why can't Socrates just tell us the truth.
This overwhelms the reader and makes it hard to remember what the right answer actually is.

[Anonymous No.14322754]

>>14322738
>Why does Socrates have to refute the prevailing worldviews of the Greeks of the time

[Anonymous No.14322758]

t b h. Just skip Plato and go straight to Hume and Kant

[Anonymous No.14322790]

>>14322754
So is the book now useless when the prevailing worldview of most first worlders is more in line with that of Socrates than the average ancient greek.

[Anonymous No.14322793]

>>14322738
Plato isn't always interested in presenting the correct answer, in fact many dialogues end with the question still open and no definitive position reached. You are being drawn into the argument and invited to reflect on the topic and the points yourself, instead of simply being dictated to. This is why Plato is such a wonderful philosopher and a great place to start: he teaches you not only his own philosophy, but also how to philosophise.

[Anonymous No.14322803]

>>14322198

The point usually isn't that the greeks were right, but that they set the foundation for philosophy

[Anonymous No.14322813]

>>14322790
>Thinking the prevailing worldview of first worlders is anything like that of Socrates

Lol, no. Just take a look at Plato/Socrates views on Democracy, God, Women, the Immaterial world, "True" Wisdom as opposed to people who "think" they are wise (ie. Pseuds). Its diametrically opposed to modern Secular Humanism.

Platos books are actually more important now than they ever were but most people just assume that someone somewhere has already refuted all of his ideas. Which is only somewhat true.

Also this >>14322803

[Anonymous No.14322812]

>>14322803
>The point usually isn't that the greeks were right, but that they set the foundation for philosophy
If that's true then i don't need to know their works , i just need to have a vague idea about it.
It's like in a video game when you skip the tutorial.

[Anonymous No.14322814]

>>14322207
>they can't just be whatever the consensus agrees to because that changes over time
kek you're a fag

[Anonymous No.14322817]

>>14322812
Unfortunately, Philosophy is much more sophisticated than any video games. And requires a very good Knowledge of the tutorial

[Anonymous No.14323715]

>>14322203
>why shouldn't someone just read a résumé of the ideas presented instead of reading the book ?

It's better to arrive at a destination having journeyed there yourself, as opposed to being taken to a destination without knowing how to get there.

Or something like that

[Anonymous No.14324349]

>>14321879
y-ye... iq... because of...

[Anonymous No.14324418]

>>14321855
Plato was a retard, you'll just have to power through him to understand everyone who came after

[Anonymous No.14324603]

>>14322392
The last book of the Republic and very enjoyable. It describes a lovely and weird creation myth

[Anonymous No.14324657]

>>14322345
>>14322386

I reccd Alcibiades 1 because thats what i read first after following some guide.
I found it a good starting point because it's basically just Alcibiades realising he doesnt know much about the things he had thought he knew well.

Of course, i dont know what it's like to start with any other text.

Also, regarding the authorship: yes, this is noted in the complete works but... it's still a nice intro to Platonic thinking.

[Anonymous No.14324972]

So i finished chapter 2, and just when you thought that it couldn't get anymore boring, he starts talking about what things should songs be about and what things it shouldn't.
The last 5 pages have been , the gods should be like this ,the gods shouldn't be like that. AAAAAAAAH i wann pluck my eyes out who the fuck wrote this shit.

[Anonymous No.14324993]

>>14322047
>not posting Willie the Pimp

Wow I'm saddened.