>tfw I knew everything already in a past existence
>I only have to recollect it all
thanks to Plato, I now know why social sciences and history are bullshit. how can you recollect about a present human nature when it was different in the past? how can you recollect about all the times and circumstances that happened when you could have only lived through a limited set of them despite reincarnation? only philosophy, math, and science (natural law) can be considered knowledge
 It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
 Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
Okay, but who asked?
I did. The first step to recollection is asking a question.
And we care about this?
In case you haven’t figured it out yet. I just saved you a lifetime of learning bullshit
>social sciences and history are bullshit.
True indeed
In Meno, Plato also thought that a fact such as “the fastest path to Larissa from Athens” couldn’t be knowledge, as it would be historically contingent. The fastest path in the past could have been a series of roads, passes, and shortcuts, but now it would clearly be travel by air. Since such facts are not eternal, it would be impossible for a soul to have known them prior to living, so Plato would not consider them “knowledge” but rather “true opinion.” Yup, he’s that much of a moronic grifter that he’d rather handwave away major inconsistencies through semantic sleights of hand than discard superstitious metaphysics. You can put end the trad LARP now and come back to modernity.
I would like to challenge that interpretation.
First, history is eternal in the sense that, for an event to occur, it must also close all other possibilities for that moment. It then becomes crystallized in the annals of the universe. What’s done is done, and that will never change. History in an extremely loose sense (an account of all time going beyond written memory) can also be seen as eternal if the universe is held to standards of cause-and-effect. An omniscient being who was present prior to the universe’s beginning would know its beginning, middle, and end. Therefore, an immortal soul can still recollect history, and it would be true knowledge. Second, social sciences, defined as the study of humans, can be viewed as knowledge insofar as they study the unchanging form of humanness and all those beings who participate in it. Whether human nature changes is a misnomer—it is more of a matter of recognizing degrees of participation in the form of humanness and other related forms such as the Form of the Good. Therefore, the immortal soul can also find knowledge in the social sciences.
#
There’s something bizarre about this reply, besides the extremely loose reading of the passage from Meno being reference, that I can’t quite put my finger on. If we took your logic to its extreme, it would be like saying that the only possible knowledge regarding the fastest path to Larissa would require the most superlative technology possible. Admittedly, I have a difficult time rebutting this, since I don’t read Plato as a philosopher who advocates for practical solutions, but I would suggest viewing the forms as an evaluative tool. The ultimate measuring stick, the forms which make the world intelligible, never changes. Aristotle also has a better exposition of translating wisdom into praxis through phronesis in his work Nicomachean Ethics.
Knowledge for Plato is justified true belief, where “justification” is defined as knowing why one’s belief is true, investigating the matter deeply through reason, etc.. Presumably one could use mathematics to determine the fastest route between those towns, but the reason most people don’t know the fastest route is because they haven’t investigated the matter themselves. If you asked them why such and such a route is the fastest, they would say, “Well, everybody knows it is. It’s common knowledge, ask anybody!” or “the other routes I’ve tried are slower” and so on. This is not a valid justification because it’s just an appeal to testimony. Plato’s point is that most people don’t know the things they claim to know, they just have true (or approximately accurate) opinions about them. True opinion is a great guide in informing their lives but it’s not knowledge.
boomp
Lots of science is bullshit too.
>muh recollection
how about you study neuroscience and learn how we actually learn things
>how can you recollect about a present human nature when it was different in the past? how can you recollect about all the times and circumstances that happened when you could have only lived through a limited set of them despite reincarnation?
Through personal integresis, and via the universal noetic,light of sciopt, which encords all of history —all of the moments that are ever created, and all of the events that are ever formed— within the kosmos, and beyond.
This is also how, in the spirit, one virtually relives one's own, and/or spectatorially observes others', experiences of the past, as if one were really there (again).
Thanks for the heads up.
I legit did not get the geometry structure he made the slave conceive of in Menon
First, Plato showed the slave boy that his intuitions were wrong, that doubling a smaller square’s length gives you a new, larger square with more than double the area (4x of course). Then, he showed the slave boy that if he’d cut each quarter of the new square in half by the diagonal, forming a new square with all the diagonals which lays inside the larger square, then he’d find a square that is double in area compared to the old one. In other words, he taught the slave boy to remember the Pythagorean theorem in the calculation of area.
You have to remember (HAHAHAHAHA) that PLATO is more like POOTO amirite guys. ie the greek pooto stole everything from the Hindus.
Plato's moronic idea is that because an uneducated slave can prove some basic maths theorem by following some rules XYZ, it means ''his soul knows maths from before he was even born''.
The same rhetoric is used by the Poos in brahminism, mahayana and vajrayana, ie "the buddha says you can get enlightened by doing XYZ, so it means ''enlightenment is your true self''.
Plato and the Poos have the same problem has any primordial heaven believer: the problem of evil and karma. Buddhism doesnt have this problem, because The buddha rejects this rhetoric of a heaven preceding some fall into suffering.