/lit/ - Literature

>>23321219
>18 Plato, it seems, was the first to bring to Athens the mimes of Sophron which had been neglected, and to draw characters in the style of that writer; a copy of the mimes, they say, was actually found under his pillow. He made three voyages to Sicily, the first time to see the island and the craters of Etna: on this occasion Dionysius, the son of Hermocrates, being on the throne, forced him to become intimate with him. But when Plato held forth on tyranny and maintained that the interest of the ruler alone was not the best end, unless he were also pre‑eminent in virtue, he offended Dionysius, who in his anger exclaimed, "You talk like an old dotard." 19 "And you like a tyrant," rejoined Plato. At this the tyrant grew furious and at first was bent on putting him to death; then, when he had been dissuaded from this by Dion and Aristomenes, he did not indeed go so far but handed him over to Pollis the Lacedaemonian, who had just then arrived on an embassy, with orders to sell him into slavery. p295 And Pollis took him to Aegina and there offered him for sale. And then Charmandrus, the son of Charmandrides, indicted him on a capital charge according to the law in force among the Aeginetans, to the effect that the first Athenian who set foot upon the island should be put to death without a trial. This law had been passed by the prosecutor himself, according to Favorinus in his Miscellaneous History. But when some one urged, though in jest, that the offender was a philosopher, the court acquitted him. There is another version to the effect that he was brought before the assembly and, being kept under close scrutiny, he maintained an absolute silence and awaited the issue with confidence. The assembly decided not to put him to death but to sell him just as if he were a prisoner of war.
>20 Anniceris the Cyrenaic happened to be present and ransomed him for twenty minae — according to others the sum was thirty minae — and dispatched him to Athens to his friends, who immediately remitted the money. But Anniceris declined it, saying that the Athenians were not the only people worthy of the privilege of providing for Plato. Others assert that Dion sent the money and that Anniceris would not take it, but bought for Plato the little garden which is in the Academy.
https://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Diogenes_Laertius/Lives_of_the_Eminent_Philosophers/3/Plato*.html

Best secondary sources on Aristotle's theory of cognition/perception/psychology?

What would he have thought of the three Abrahamic religions?

Why is the problem of unviersals even a thing? It seems quite simple, ie: if you are atheist then universals are a result of human perception and cognitively drawing connections between things. If you believe in a god its more a question of theology and how much God affected our world

>>17419758
I think Aristotle even more so than Plato is the one every philosopher after him probably disagrees with but still always deeply respects

>>17400611
Aristotle
You have a soul because you have the ability to think abstract patterns of particulars into universals An example of such an ability is that after you see many triangles drawn on a page, you can understand the universal "triangle" which is beyond any particular triangle with it's imperfections. This capability cannot have a material basis since universals do not exist in the material world. The world only consists of particulars, but since you somehow have access to this world of universals, it follows that you have access to some realm beyond the material. This ability is what we call the soul.

How should I be studying Aristotle?

which translation should I read?

and should I learn some ancient Greek?

Bros... I just heard that Aristotle died...

>>13996937
Other gooduns:
>My favourite celebrity/authority in some field irrelevant to the question at hand says X, therefore X.
>All the cool kids say X, therefore X.
>X must be true because everyone who denies it is an idiot. (The evidence for their idiocy is their denial of X.)
>Oh my God anon how can you hold this belief that I've defined in advance to make it sound as implausible as possible?
>You're either [in total agreement with me] or [literally Hitler]. Pick one.
If only there were some, I don't know, academic subject or something that could teach us how to avoid this nonsense.

>>13631410
Aren't you forgetting one?

>Willingly reading the ramblings of a inept moron
This guy was literally wrong about every single thing he had an opinion on.

Does education make a man more virtuous? Or leaving behind the term in its Aristotelian sense to be a little more general, does education make a man better?

What should I read to gain an understanding of political science? I've read The Republic, should I now read Aristotle's Politics or should I read some of the earlier dialogues such as Apology?

>>11527510

> But as for those who posit the Ideas as causes, firstly, in seeking to grasp the causes of the things around us, they introduced others equal in number to these, as if a man who wanted to count things thought he would not be able to do it while they were few, but tried to count them when he had added to their number.

>arr-yas-thot-lè

How can an unschooled (social isolation of home schooling with none of the education) person with no friends meet Aristotle's ideal of a virtuous person?

More generally, how does someone without the breadth of experience that comes through adolescence and early adulthood ever know what the golden mean is?

Organon > Metaphysics > Physics > De Anima > Nicomachean Ethics > Politics > Poetics > Rhetroric > *BONUS* Physical Treatises

First three works define his philosophical orientation, metaphysics and philosophy of nature. De Anima concerns life in general and begins to segue into human matters in increasing degrees of organization - from the individual, to friends, to polis and so on (NE, Politics, Poetics & Rhetoric) -
but I would argue that these texts are heavily grounded upon his aforementioned views on first principles, nature and the methods by which he seeks to demonstrate his conclusions. Read in isolation from one another, his works lose a great deal of richness (ex. Metaphysics, Physics
and the Logical works inform how he views the basic principles of life in general and makes important distinctions on an ontological level regarding living in the strict sense of the word to a more qualified sort of life that humans lead).

>tfw you read Aristotle and the rest seem like pale imitations

>>10628736
NO NO NO

>>10629560
>le happy & unironic platonist man

I would say start with the Organon, or at least just the Categories (though the Categories is probably the least similar in
format to his other works as there is no discussion regarding endoxa) as is reflects some of Aristotle's most basic views and
general direction of his work. Introduces the notion of Ontological priority, i.e. primary substances and the categories, as well as
accidental and essential properties.

After that, I would say read the Metaphysics, then the Physics (I would qualify this by making the point that his metaphysical
preliminaries have priority to his philosophy of nature) followed by De Anima, Nichomachean Ethics, the Politics, Poetics and then Rhetoric.

While the /lit/ doc does recommend,
>Ethics>Politics>On Poetry>The Organon>Physics>On the Soul>Metaphysics>Rhetoric

I would personally disagree as it makes it more difficult to appreciate just how strange, rich and metaphysical Aristotle's thought was at every turn.
For example, I think a reading of Politics or Nichomachean Ethics will suffer if one does not read De Anima before as points regarding human teleology
insofar as being the rational animal inform what the concepts of polis, friendship, virtue and so on insofar as they are higher forms of organization and development in respect to human life.
Implicitly from this, one may lose out a bit if one doesn't read Physics and the Metaphysics before De Anima.

This may be an idiosyncratic view, but I think Aristotle's thought is highly underrated and often misunderstood now. To illustrate somewhat, I have seen work come
out from major academic publishers like Oxford that misattributes a view Aristotle is criticizing as one of his own, or bust him down to the status of an empiricist - which is true
in a sense - but majorly underestimates the scope of his work.

>>10609901
Achieve your own eudaimon- uhh clean your room

i just think people would be better served by engaging with Aristotle, and it disappoints me peterson finds more popularity due to being slightly controversial

why do people still posit transcendental objects while holding a kantian view of noumena/speculative philosophy

is platonism continually reproduced merely because it is sexy ?