[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 23 KB, 313x500, 41iN7wbdqBL.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17005756 No.17005756 [Reply] [Original]

I'm going to shill this every day until you read it.

>> No.17005769

>>17005756
I can go on not reading it longer than you'll last

>> No.17005789
File: 10 KB, 250x250, 1604961048165.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17005789

>shilling one of Plato's dialogues

Anyone who hasn't read all of them doesn't belong on this board

>> No.17005795

>>17005789
i find his old english hard to understand

>> No.17005844

>>17005795
Jowett? This dialogue should not be hard to comprehend at all. It's alos like 10 pages.

>> No.17006253

>>17005756
https://www.deviantart.com/uthp/journal/The-Legend-of-Twilight-Zelda-Princess-part-I-348420007

>> No.17006472

>>17005756
I'll bite, why is this more important than other dialogue?

>> No.17006552

>>17006472
It shows the REAL Socrates and basically contradicts some of his most important teachings in dialogues such as Crito, showing them as nothing more than Plato's later use of Sokrate as a mouthpiece.

>> No.17006590

>>17006552
What's your proof that the Socrates of Crito isn't a mouthpiece? What's your proof that the Socrates of the Republic isn't as much representative of the real spirit of Socrates and his activity?

>> No.17006600

>>17006590
This may have been written earlier. Also most historians tend to agree the stuff with Forms is Plato not Socrates. That's the common view nowadays.

>> No.17006662

>>17006600
1) Does having been written earlier indicate greater fidelity to a historical portrait of Socrates?

2) How do you know (or on what basis do you claim) that Hippias Minor may have been written earlier than Crito?

3) Plato scholars commonly claim; but on what grounds do they justify reading some dialogues as "historically accurate" and others as portraying "mouthpieces"? Why aren't the "earlier" dialogues just as much mouthpiece works?

>> No.17006711

>>17006662
If it is written closer to his life it is probably closer to his actual beliefs. The more Plato would age the more he would diverge towards his own path. Common sense.

>> No.17006837

>>17006711
That would only match common sense if a deterioration of mental powers were present in "later" dialogues indicative of a failing memory, but that doesn't even agree with why scholars argue that point, namely, that they think Plato came to find Socrates' manner of philosophizing too unsatisfying for want of answers to the "what is x" questions.

Regardless, that still doesn't address how one would precisely measure that if the standard against which you're measuring Plato dialogues is "other Plato dialogues".

Another tact: what are the doctrines you see in Hippias Minor that contradict the doctrines in Crito?

>> No.17006882

>>17006837
Committing immoral acts voluntarily is seen as more positive in Hippias Minor than in Crito. In Crito, he says doing them involuntarily is preferable.

>> No.17007041

>>17006882
It's not viewed as positive, not even comparably with the Crito, but as a simple result of following the argument. (Hippias: "I cannot agree with you in this, Socrates." Socrates: "Nor I with myself, Hippias. But this appears now, at any rate, as the necessary result of the argument.") I'm looking back at the Crito, and the closest passage in connection I can find is 49a-b, where Socrates asks Crito if they would assert doing injustice to be in no way noble; note that Crito affirms that, Socrates just asks the question. A good many seeming differences between the dialogues are explainable by way of attention to who the interlocutors are and what Socrates pulls out of them. Crito is a nice and simple man who's partly concerned about his own reputation, what people would say about him if he didn't try to help his friend escape execution. Hippias is a traveling sophist who's reputation and livelihood depends on his wisdom, and his love of the simple and truthful Achilles is in tension with his worship of the powers of wisdom, powers that necessarily imply the capacity to do evil.

As for whether this shows the dialogue to be "more originally Socratic", the argument about Odysseus being better for lying voluntarily has an analogue in the Republic with the discussions about the Noble Lie and the hated lie in the soul.

I do agree for different reasons on the importance of this dialogue; the conclusion at the end is a bit of a slip of the mask that Plato and Socrates hid behind.

>> No.17007079

>>17007041
Positive or preferable I would say. Not the best option but a different conclusion. What's more, Achilles is shown HIMSELF to be not entirely truthful and yet Hippias refuses to admit this.

>> No.17007125

>>17007079
Sure, but the argument is a comment on wisdom, not morality per se. The wise man is capable of both good and evil *because* of his wisdom. Hippias loves wisdom, Achilles is shown to only do wrong involuntarily because of his lack of wisdom, Odysseus does wrong voluntarily because of his wisdom. Wisdom is the issue, Hippias is shown that he doesn't really understand what the consequences of being wise are.

>> No.17007151

>>17006552
In what ways does it contradics the "real" Socrates?