/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.15936405]

Is there anything else worth reading i feel that nothing can top Plato

[Anonymous No.15936426]

>>15936405
1. Plato
2. Aristotle
3. Kant
4. Heidegger
And there are other great thinkers like Hegel and Schopenhauer, or Nietzsche, or the presocratics like Heraclitus. There are also the great Eastern philosophers like Laozi, who if you're looking for someone who can top Plato, you might want to look into the Tao Te Ching. Absolutely amazing. And there is after all the Bible, specifically the New Testament, which lays the base for all further philosophy in the West after the Greeks; you have to understand Christianity to understand Hegel, or any of these thinkers. Even if you disagree with it, it's genius and enormous value cannot be denied.

[Anonymous No.15936498]

Proclus
Eriugena

[Anonymous No.15936505]

>>15936405
what makes it so great?
t. guy who's never read a book before

[Anonymous No.15936541]

>>15936405
Plato was already codification of a past culture. In essence Plato was already writing in a time of decadence of ancient Greek culture. Imagine how retarded western civilization was/is to base its cultural forms on writings of a man from a decadent culture. Western civilization is nothing but copying and then thousands of years of ruminations on a copy of a decadent written down copy of something that once existed authentically as a living experience. The west is not even an original culture.

[Anonymous No.15936546]

>>15936498
Yeah they're pretty great, but of course the anon has to read the rest of the Greeks, the Bible, and of course still some of the Romans before he reads them.

[Anonymous No.15936557]

>>15936541
>Plato was already codification of a past culture. In essence Plato was already writing in a time of decadence of ancient Greek culture. Imagine how retarded western civilization was/is to base its cultural forms on writings of a man from a decadent culture. Western civilization is nothing but copying and then thousands of years of ruminations on a copy of a decadent written down copy of something that once existed authentically as a living experience. The west is not even an original culture.
Retard. It's not even your statement that this "original state" was the noblest or most moral, or that Plato wasn't living in the Golden age of Greece, but that you completely ignore all developments in the West since and before Plato himself.

[Anonymous No.15936562]

>>15936541
The main problem of the western civilization was that it squandered the unique gift of the gospel. We alone had the opportunity to accept the gospel as a living experience but instead we codified it, institutionalized it and bastardized it by mixing it with old, tired greco-roman decadence. This is why the west will collapse.

[Anonymous No.15936584]

>>15936562
>The main problem of the western civilization was that it squandered the unique gift of the gospel. We alone had the opportunity to accept the gospel as a living experience but instead we codified it, institutionalized it and bastardized it by mixing it with old, tired greco-roman decadence. This is why the west will collapse.
That's an interesting take, and contrary to what one normally thinks and hears. I suppose it might have been possible for the West to achieve a more Buddhist/Hindu civilisation in the simplicity of the Christian religion, which was itself influenced by Buddhism. Though I still disagree and see the Greek influence as undeniably great and necessary in our own existence and development, it's an interesting take still.

[Anonymous No.15936605]

The Mahayana Buddhists.
The Theravada Buddhists.
The Taoists.
The Confucians.
The Hindus.
The Jains.
The Mesoamericans.

There, that's seven Really Old schools of thought. I thought about adding Aristotle, but I lump him in under Plato (if you're already saying Plato is tops, you think Aristotle is pointless). This also excludes all Western Philosophy after Plato, because all (Western) Philosophy is just footnotes to Plato.

[Anonymous No.15936642]

>>15936426
>Schopenhauer
>Gook book
>Picture of Japan
Minors are not supposed to be posting on this board.

[Anonymous No.15936646]

>>15936562
>we should have just let it pass down by word of mouth and left the unwashed masses (you included) to figure out salvation for themselves.

[Anonymous No.15936727]

>>15936405
All the Neoplatonists.
>>15936426
I wouldn't say Laozi is greater than Plato, but the Tao te Ching truly is great - along with the Stoicism embodied in Meditations. They are simplicity and beauty in action, but Plato's view is a lot broader and more complex - despite metaphysically being similar to both.

[Anonymous No.15936788]

>>15936605
>if you're already saying Plato is tops, you think Aristotle is pointless
I think Aristotle is the necessary counterpount to Plato. I don't believe one is better than the other although I personally subscribe to the Platonic view, they represent two different kinds of thinking that are both valid and depends on what the individual values most.

Mesoamericans isn't a "school of thought," though, either, but rather an ethnic designation that embodies a myriad of religions and different beliefs - the same thing is essentially true of the designation "Hindu."

[Anonymous No.15936862]

>>15936562
New testament books are divinely inspired and selected by a catholic council.

[Anonymous No.15937251]

>>15936405

[Anonymous No.15937253]

>i feel like nothing can top Plato

Disgusting idealist.

[Anonymous No.15937266]

>>15937253
A sophist, nominalist, atheist, materialist monist, nihilist, panmobilist professor was teaching a class on Heraclitus, known weeper.

“Before the class begins, you must momentarily accept that a new class is beginning every moment, and that once the class is over you will never be able to recall the same class (or infinite number of classes made up of an infinitude of moments, as it were) again.”

At this moment a brave Platonic, Aristotelian, Thomist who full understood that the problem of universals was the central problem of all metaphysics and philosophy and who knew that all modern philosophy was the misguided following of Ockham’s nominalism, stood up and said:

“Everything flows, panta rhei; is that right, professor?”

The amorphous professor smirked quite formlessly and ambiguously replied, “Yes, it’s been approximately 2500 years since Heraclitus established the doctrine that everything flows.”

“Wrong. If everything flows, as you say, then the statement "everything flows” also flows, making it as permanent or established as the proverbial river that was no doubt was made up of babby Heraclitus’ tears, probably because he knew that he would never be a true philosopher.“

The professor was visibly shaken, and dropped his copy of "Wild Ones ft. Sia” by Flo Rida . He stormed out of the room crying those nominalist tears. The same tears that are not the same tears when they leave the eye as when they hit the floor. There is no doubt that at this point our professor, Jacques Derrida, had contemplated the Forms instead of peddling ancient sophisms among a degenerate Academia. He wished so much that he had a self to kill, but he himself had argued that the self is nothing but a transitory event in the great flow of things!

The students applauded and all read the Republic and accepted that everything derives its existence from one universal Form, Αγαθών. The Apology was read several times, and Socrates himself showed up and acted as midwife for all the noble truths that the students’ souls were pregnant with.

Nothing became of the professor because according to his own logic he ceases to be by the end of this post.

Χαλάζι Πλάτωνα.

[Anonymous No.15937293]

I know everyone asks this all the time, but I want to reread Plato's dialogues. I made the silly mistake of falling for the 'start with the greeks' meme and started with Plato. Now I want to go back and truly appreciate Plato's works. I was thinking of going like this:
>I Alcibiades > Meno > Phaedrus > Gorgias > Thaetetus > Symposium > Phaedo > Republic > Sophist > Statesman > Philebus > Timaeus > Parmenides
Any other essential dialogue I am forgetting (Not including Apology, Crito and Eutyphro)?

[Anonymous No.15937305]

Italo Calvino

[Anonymous No.15937332]

>>15936405
I had that feeling too when I finished Plato (esp. Republic), anon, and trust me that what is yet to come will give you greater understanding and more developed reasoning, but it's hard to top that excitement of discovering philosophy for the first time with Plato. You will love/hate Aristotle

[Anonymous No.15937347]

>>15937266
Kek, (you)

[Anonymous No.15937350]

>>15937332
Good post. I would also add this applies to many philosophers, not just Plato. You want to approach philosophy open-minded, and you want to think about what you read, apply some ideas, but don't become victim to the ideas.

[Anonymous No.15937372]

>>15936426

And what’s wrong with the Old Testament?

[Anonymous No.15937433]

>>15937293
>he didn't start with pythagoras

[Anonymous No.15938554]

>>15937266
>Wrong. If everything flows, as you say, then the statement "everything flows” also flows
Kek, nothing better than sophistry like this. Nothing reveals the pseud faster than when someone says something like "If you know nothing, how can you know that you know you know nothing??" - absolutely meaningless rhetorical sophistry, god I HATE it.

[Anonymous No.15939169]

>>15937266
>Χαλάζι Πλάτωνα

[Old Man No.15939196]

>>15938554
If nothing is true, then is that statement true? Or am I overestimating the efficacy of such a response?

[Anonymous No.15939343]

[Anonymous No.15939419]

Plato is a fucking hack, how does anyone like his shit?
>Have you ever been formally taught addition?
>No, Socrates, I have not.
>Here's a simple math problem, 2+2, can you solve it?
>Yes, Socrates, by Zues, I believe the answer should be 4.
>See, Meno, I was able to bring your slave from a state of not having an understanding of addition to a state of understanding addition through merely a query of his own opinions with no education in the manner whatsoever! This is proof that he knew the laws of addition already, is it not?
>That does seem to be the case, Socrates.
>But he was born into your household and has received no education in addition from when he was born until now, as we have previously confirmed. As such, he must have been given knowledge of addition before he was born. This proves that the soul exists before we were born.
>I dare say you're correct yet again, Socrates. Someone would have to be pretty fucking stupid to disagree with you at this point.
>Oh no, Meno, I don't actually know anything, but yes you're right, I'm so fucking smart.

[Anonymous No.15939564]

>>15939419
He's right though. The Piraha are like the Druze, in that their souls are locked into being born that way, and therefore never can learn math. Many such cases.

[Anonymous No.15939569]

you need a good grasp of the western nonfiction-canon first and Ancient Myth.

[Anonymous No.15939582]

>>15937266
blindingly based

[Anonymous No.15939743]

>>15937293
Laws is tragically underrated.
Also Lysis read more esoterically reveals the truths of Agathon and prefigures Symposium.
Protagoras prefigures dialogues such as Gorgias and Theaetetus and firs third of Republic, it's also an answer to the accusations held against Meno.
And Crito, obviously, as a defense against the supposed rationalizing by Plato, the so common accusations that Plato was a 'demystifyer', same with Phaedrus that ends with prayer.
Euthydemus is also a hilarious dialogue that works against deconstructionists and relativists, it's not 'necessary' but nor is it a hassle and rather an enjoyment to go through.
The most important thing to know about Plato is that all the dialogues share in UR-Platonism and that they form a coherent proto-systematic whole, one must discard the false interpreters that sprung form Schleiermacher's vomit over the past 2 centuries that have now been undone and cleaned up Gerson, the Diadochus of our time.

[Anonymous No.15939761]

>>15939564
The Piraha learn math just fine, and have demonstrated such. They intentionally choose to remain innumerate in order to keep "civilized" society from destroying theirs, as it has done to other tribes that have decided to integrate.

Their analysis is spot on, as they're literally too useless for Liberalism to use them for anything, so they're left alone.

[Anonymous No.15939769]

>>15937266
xalazi is "hail" as in that snow thing not as in hail hitler

[Anonymous No.15939804]

Filtred.

[Anonymous No.15939845]

>>15937293
why not start with the greeks? where should one start if not there?

[Anonymous No.15939860]

>>15937293
It's not a meme. You're supposed to start with the Greeks, and then do it all over again when you learn ancient Greek.

[Anonymous No.15940013]

>>15939743
thank you for the post. how does gerson see the relation between a unique chain of transmission between egyptians-plato-neoplatonists? does he even mention something like this? for what reason would you say gerson is worth reading and how different is his analysis from those of ancient platonists/neoplatonists? btw would you say it is better to read his books after plato and neoplatonists?

[Anonymous No.15940065]

>>15936541
>"Philosophy, as the thought of the world, does not appear until reality has completed its formative process, and made itself ready. History thus corroborates the teaching of the conception that only in the maturity of reality does the ideal appear as counterpart to the real, apprehends the real world in its substance, and shapes it into an intellectual kingdom. When philosophy paints its grey in grey, one form of life has become old, and by means of grey it cannot be rejuvenated, but only known. The owl of Minerva takes its flight only when the shades of night are gathering."

[Anonymous No.15940096]

>>15936405
If you like the politician Plato then you should also be reading Nietzsche.