>reading plato's euthyphro
>19 pages of fine-tuning definitions
>they end up back where they started, and reach no conclusions
what the hell was the point of that?
discuss greek philosophy here
> what the hell was the point of that?
>19 pages of fine-tuning definitions
QED
>what was the point of Plato actually trying to get me to think of the topic discussed rather than spoon feeding me an answer
>>7694317
That's the whole point. Please, be bait. He was saying that when you get down to it, everything is subjective. What is pious to one is impious to another.
>>7694324
i already have thoughts on the matter, you little shit. i read plato in hope of seeing other perspectives. he offers definite conclusions in many of his other dialogues
>>7694328
>everything is subjective
doesn't like something plato would say desu
>>7694329
>i already have thoughts on the matter
>thoughts
>have
Huh.
>>7694335
What? Did you read the dialogue? He says what one God believes is pious may contradict another God. Therefore each God sees something else as pious and impious.
>>7694366
>what one God believes is pious may contradict another God. Therefore each God sees something else as pious and impious
he was pointing out that this conclusion followed from euthyphro's premises which is why euthyphro's premises couldn't possibly be true since it's an absurd conclusion
>>7694361
i have multiple perspectives in mind that i weigh against each other, so let's not fine tune what exactly i mean by "have" and "thought"
i could have worded the op better. (great now we're fine tuning our statements) i should have said definite perspectives. they just fine tune definitions the entire time. they never offer any kind of "complete perspective" (inb4 you ask me to define complete perspective)
>>7694385
I think there is no 'definite perspective' because different, opposed perspectives aren't different thoughts, but only one thought that is differentiated, determined with itself. There is no pure thought that doesn't contain its other (non-identity), its negation implicitly, e.g. there is no conception of justice without injustice first &c.
>>7694374
I am agreeing with you but I worded it badly. According to Socrates, each God views piousness/ impiousness differently so there can be no firm conclusion.
>reading plato knowing nothing about greek society
well, you do it to yourself
>>7694417
why do you think i know nothing about greek society? please enlighten me
>>7694366
I'd argue you've misread it. Or at least you've got part of Socrates argument right, but jumped to the conclusion that he was promoting a relativist philosophy. I'd type more and it would be a good discussion, but I'm having a poo then going to bed.
>>7694412
no, i think you are misunderstanding. they discard that perspective itself as being invalid.
>>7694399
they don't offer one perspective and then it's opposite (which would have been fine and dandy in my book), every tentative point of view they bring up they end up discarding for being circular, absurd, incomplete, or invalid
Yep, early dialogues.
>>7694434
Maybe the point was exactly that? Negating everything always have a positive result too, I confess I'm still reading about the sophists before heading into Plato.
>>7694436
exactly what i was thinking. maybe he was just experimenting with the dialogue format, or something
>>7694439
Read the Stanford Article on Plato before you write off the early dialogues as mere experiments. There's far more too them than that, and I doubt you're such an authority to disregard them.
>>7694438
> Negating everything always have a positive result too
i would say this corresponds to some of his other dialogues (that's basically the dialectical method), but not this one. no positive result is proposed. it feels like the dialogue was cut off half way through.
>>7694445
>on Plato before you write off the early dialogues as mere experiments.
i didn't "write it off" as an experiment, i merely offered a tentative hypothesis
>>7694442
>discarding the judgements was the whole point.
considering how disappointed socrates was at the end, and considering how eager to reach a conclusion he was portrayed...i'm inclined to doubt that
>>7694447
>writing was cut off half way through
He had to go to his trial.
>>7694450
You getting cheeky with me?
>>7694458
>He had to go to his trial.
it's a fictional dialogue not real life (based on true events, sure). plato could have written in that he was called to the trial after a conclusion was reached
>>7694459
u wot m8
>>7694464
It was a joke, m8. :^)
>>7694464
There being no clear conclusion is all part of Plato's method.
>>7694468
i've seen people say dumber things on this board, so excuse me if i mistook for being in earnest
>>7694471
his other dialogues (that i've read) offer very definite conclusions. the symposium is a good example of one where they offer a variety of "complete perspectives"
>>7694480
It's common in other dialogues such as Theaetetus.
In very brief, the point is to leave your mind at a blank, so your left to contemplate the ideas on your own and find them within yourself. Read Socrates Midwife speech.
>>7694493
fair enough, i guess there is a value in that too.
>>7694317
there's only on greek i listen to
>>7694493
Your post remember me of this:
'
I think Phaedo is good, more than any other work . It's not any one dialogue really, though, it's the entire process of dialogue itself. You have to see Plato's dialogues as a ritual, an initiation. If you read Plato in an analytic way to break down his points and discover his opinions and try to assess where he fits in the history of Western philosophy, etc., you are reading him wrong (or, at least, not on his own terms). The point is to have your mind swept up in the process of the dialogue, to be fully and completely engaged in it. The dialogue begins with the presentation of an idea, then that idea is attacked, a new idea is offered to correct it, etc., all the while your mind is being trained to contemplate ideas fairly without dismissing them out of hand. Then, when the dialogue reaches its peak, your mind reaches a state of aporia (loss, confusion). This is when your mind feels completely blank. It's hard to describe. Your mind loses all perception, you totally forget the world, your surroundings, your self, and are just in the immediate presence of your own mind. This is when you realise that you have a mind and how immanent it is. The danger here is that you will fall into the Hindu trap of believing that you are part of the divine mind that makes up existence, the experience is that powerful. And then the dialogue introduces its best take of the ideal (usually given by Socrates), and your now freed-up mind is able to contemplate the idea as though it were a statue stood right in front of you.'
>>7694499
bruce willis?
>>7694501
thanks, for you perspective, anon. i was hoping for some kind of substantial l response like this when i made the thread.
does anyone care to either affirm or deny this post?
>>7694509
Not my perspective though, this is a post I saved.
>>7694512
well i screencapped it for future reference, so thanks anyway
question: how literally is plato's theory of forms meant to be taken? does he actually believe there is a form corresponding to "table", or is this example merely meant to demonstrate his idea?
>>7694519
From what I recall it's buy a guy who's been studying Plato for at least 5 years.
Honestly, there's so much depth to his works you could study him for decades.
>>7694534
It varies really, due to the dialogue style it's hard to pin certain ideas to Plato directly.
Forms can be thought of as universals and templates.
But still, how could you think of a form, without it preexisting? What I mean is, just because something is a concept or idea, it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
>>7694538
i don't doubt that, which is why i made the thread i the first place. i asked "what's the point?" because i was sure there would be one
oh my god, don't even bother you fucking retard
>>7694317
can someone explain this picture?
Did that event weaken the empire or something?
>>7694760
it was just a bit of banter
>>7694442
No it was just a short episode on Socrates showing that another zealous believer was full of shit and knew nothing about what he was talking about.
Euthyphro is the most succinct of Socrates' calling knowers out dialogues
Euthyphro really makes it look like Socrates was an annoying guy to be around
>>7695859
>Have to deal with my drunken dad
>Oh Socrates is here
>Please, before you go, tell me about Piety
>Uh, its about what the gods like, but I really have to go
>Wait, please, I need more details
>Ends up going full circle
>>7695862
>goes into the trial in a state of mental dissaray
>mumbles
>gets confused, can't think straight
>total mental breakdown
>stabs the judge in delirium
thanks a lot socrates, ya fuckin shit
>>7695872
disarray*
>>7695859
Yeah that's why they killed the faggot.
![[SEVERE CONTEMPT].gif](https://i.imgur.com/jnWNRu2.gif "[SEVERE CONTEMPT].gif")
>>7695859
>hurrr durr
>You all don't know anything durr
>I'm the smartest man ever, cuz I don't know anything more than you hurrrp
Mfw people actually think it is a tragedy that the Athenians killed this retard
>in b4 "I was only pretending to be retarded" or "twas merely a gadfly"
>>7697111
trips of truth
>>7697121
>>/b/
Homer is the only greek shit i respect, the rest is mostly stupid or obvious
>>7697121
>year of our Lord Socrates ~2,415
>not pretending to be retarded
hurrrrrr
is it really any shock that the ancients converted to christianity? just look at how stupid and annoying all this greek shit is, then look how glorious the bible is...
bump
don't you faggots want to talk about greeks
>>7694802
bants witth the lads at cheeky nandos. absolute madmen the lot
>reading Plato's Protagoras
>enjoying every second of Socrates dismantling Protagoras' prolix bullshit
>very engaging dialectic discourse
>each changes their viewpoint (arete is teachable and not a bunch of orthogonal traits)
>Socrates leaves to deal with some trivial crap
God damn it finish the damn argument.
>>7698477
cathlics is taking it way outta proportion, innit?
nice dubs m8
>>7694501
>aporia
oh my god i remember when this first got posted and i was trying tor remember this exact word the other day, you're the best
How is Odyssey, The/Iliad, the Boxed Set, the Robert Fagles translated books?
9780670779642 isbn
>>7699366
I prefer Fitzgerald but fagles is cool
>>7694317
Aporetic dialogue
>>7694317
Divine Command theory gets btfo
