Plato's Statesman

>read the whole dialogue three times
>read a bunch of commentaries on it, including several graduate dissertations on it
>still have no idea what the frick a "due measure" is
... I guess by analogy it's something akin to a paradigm or a goal? e.g. the weaver makes a sweater out of wool for the purpose of staying warm, and if he makes it efficiently (with no waste) and it the sweater itself keeps the wearer warm in the winter, then the due measure has been attained?

That's all I got bros.

Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68

DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68

Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68

  1. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    What do the commentaries say?

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      They circumlocute around the concept and rarely speak of it on its own terms. I've read entire dissertations ostensibly about the due measure comment on every possible tangential issue:
      >its an evolution of Plato's theory of forms!
      >it solves the problem of universals!
      >its the progenitor to Aristotle's doctrine of the mean!
      >blah blah blah
      .. only to neglect giving the due measure a clear, workable definition. All I know is what it is not. It is not a relative comparison between things, and it's not any old quantitative measurement (e.g. length, width, width, etc.). Rather, it's something beyond those two. But that was already obvious from the dialogue itself! The problem is that we need the due measure... with respect to what, exactly? Hence I remain perplexed.

  2. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    A measure? Perhaps you should not be ignorant about geometry, did Glaucon give due mesure when Socrates asked him to divide the line

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >did Glaucon give due mesure when Socrates asked him to divide the line
      I don't know, did he? I don't recall "due measure" or any concept like that being invoked.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        He had to cut a line at ratio this is a measure

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          From one of the commentaries I've read:
          >The Stranger uses "to metron" and "to metrion" almost interchangeably, and many translators have used the same words for both.
          >In particular: Fowler translates both as “the standard of the mean”; Rowe and Annas and Waterfield follow Skemp and translate them as “due measure”; Seth Bernadete translates both as “the mean”. Sayre calls to metrion ‘due measure’ and to metron ‘measure’
          >to metrion is the substantive form of the adjective metrios, which translates as “moderate”. By contrast, to metron generally means “that by which anything is measured”, or simply “measure”, “due measure”, “limit”, or “proportion” (LSJ).
          >I follow Miller and Sayre as much as possible, since I believe their translations of ‘mean’ (Miller) or ‘due measure’ (Sayre) for "to metrion" and ‘measure’ for "to metron" are the truest representations of these words both in general and in the context of this dialogue.
          From another commentary:
          >(Note that, although some translators render the verb not as “measuring” but as “assessing,” and “the due measure” in a variety of ways, including “the mean,” it is the same root all the way through.)
          I think you've made a good point. There seems to be a measure, and then there seems to be a "due measure" which can also be read as a "moderate measure." And "measure" can be used both in a loose sense (the "judgment" necessary to make a cut), in a stricter sense (making a "measurement" and cutting accordingly), and in the strictest sense (the resulting cut is a "measure" in that it is a ratio, a proportion, etc.).

          But then the problem becomes, what measure will we take? With the instructions given in The Republic, a whole slew of possible cuts are possible that satisfy the requirements given by Plato. And does Plato use the same, or even similar, terminology in The Republic?

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Thank you and good question

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            I happen to be reading The Republic book one right now and Plato does talk about justice being defined as giving 'due and appropriate' benefits and injuries to friends and enemies respectively. Here it seems the sense of the word is 'proper' or well-measured, but there's no criteria offered for what well-measured actually entails

            I have an idea. I'm going to compile a version of Plato's Republic in the original Greek into a simple, plaintext document, and then I'm going to have ChatGPT comb through it for me.

            I also have another idea based off of how the due measure is described and linking that to the "structure" of the divided line and what it refers to. But that'll be a hot minute.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            [...]
            [...]
            ChatGPT is having a hard time parsing the textfile and I ran out of tries for about an hour and a half. So let's shelve that for now and move onto the divided line/due measure connection.
            >Intimations of the doctrine of the mean – in literature, medicine, mathematics, and philosophy – seem to have been around well before Aristotle, but, for the purposes of this chapter, I will go no further back than Plato, beginning with the Statesman at 283c–284e. >Here “length and brevity, and excess and deficiency in general” are said to be the things to which the art of measurement relates (283c), and a distinction is drawn between measuring things that are large and small relative to each other, and things that exceed and fall short of “the due measure” (metrion) (283e).
            >Later on, this is filled out as measuring the “lengths, depths, breadths, and speeds of things in relation to what is opposed to them” and measuring “in relation to what is in due measure/moderate [metrion], what is proper/fitting/appropriate [prepon], what is fitting/appropriate/timely/ [kairon], what is as it ought to be/fitting/necessary [deon] and whatever avoids the extremes for the mean [meson]” (284e).
            >Plato also claims that exceeding and falling short of due measure is what differentiates bad and good people (283e), and that, quite generally, all skills produce all the good and fine things they do produce by avoiding the more and the less than what is in due measure and by preserving measure (284a–b).
            To recap, we have:
            >measure (to metron)
            And we also have:
            >appropriate/fitting (prepon)
            >timely (kairon)
            >necessary (deon)
            >mean/intermediate/middle (mesos)
            All of which aim at:
            >"due measure"/moderation (to metrion)
            How do we fit these all together? It seems like we have elements involving context, time, and reason. And this seems like it corresponds with elements on the divided line, on both the sensible and and intelligible sides.

            Yeah I'm back, and ChatGPT is fricking moronic, even 4.0. It'll hassle me over a plaintext text file that it allegedly "can't read", until it suddenly can. It's a pain in the ass to get it to exhaustively read the whole thing and provide the instances of what I wanted it to retrieve. And then 90% of what it brings up were literally made up. b***h ass homie is making up Platonic-babble in Ancient Greek to spit out at me and waste my time.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            I happen to be reading The Republic book one right now and Plato does talk about justice being defined as giving 'due and appropriate' benefits and injuries to friends and enemies respectively. Here it seems the sense of the word is 'proper' or well-measured, but there's no criteria offered for what well-measured actually entails

            [...]
            I have an idea. I'm going to compile a version of Plato's Republic in the original Greek into a simple, plaintext document, and then I'm going to have ChatGPT comb through it for me.

            I also have another idea based off of how the due measure is described and linking that to the "structure" of the divided line and what it refers to. But that'll be a hot minute.

            ChatGPT is having a hard time parsing the textfile and I ran out of tries for about an hour and a half. So let's shelve that for now and move onto the divided line/due measure connection.
            >Intimations of the doctrine of the mean – in literature, medicine, mathematics, and philosophy – seem to have been around well before Aristotle, but, for the purposes of this chapter, I will go no further back than Plato, beginning with the Statesman at 283c–284e. >Here “length and brevity, and excess and deficiency in general” are said to be the things to which the art of measurement relates (283c), and a distinction is drawn between measuring things that are large and small relative to each other, and things that exceed and fall short of “the due measure” (metrion) (283e).
            >Later on, this is filled out as measuring the “lengths, depths, breadths, and speeds of things in relation to what is opposed to them” and measuring “in relation to what is in due measure/moderate [metrion], what is proper/fitting/appropriate [prepon], what is fitting/appropriate/timely/ [kairon], what is as it ought to be/fitting/necessary [deon] and whatever avoids the extremes for the mean [meson]” (284e).
            >Plato also claims that exceeding and falling short of due measure is what differentiates bad and good people (283e), and that, quite generally, all skills produce all the good and fine things they do produce by avoiding the more and the less than what is in due measure and by preserving measure (284a–b).
            To recap, we have:
            >measure (to metron)
            And we also have:
            >appropriate/fitting (prepon)
            >timely (kairon)
            >necessary (deon)
            >mean/intermediate/middle (mesos)
            All of which aim at:
            >"due measure"/moderation (to metrion)
            How do we fit these all together? It seems like we have elements involving context, time, and reason. And this seems like it corresponds with elements on the divided line, on both the sensible and and intelligible sides.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            I happen to be reading The Republic book one right now and Plato does talk about justice being defined as giving 'due and appropriate' benefits and injuries to friends and enemies respectively. Here it seems the sense of the word is 'proper' or well-measured, but there's no criteria offered for what well-measured actually entails

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      He had to cut a line at ratio this is a measure

      [...]
      [...]
      ChatGPT is having a hard time parsing the textfile and I ran out of tries for about an hour and a half. So let's shelve that for now and move onto the divided line/due measure connection.
      >Intimations of the doctrine of the mean – in literature, medicine, mathematics, and philosophy – seem to have been around well before Aristotle, but, for the purposes of this chapter, I will go no further back than Plato, beginning with the Statesman at 283c–284e. >Here “length and brevity, and excess and deficiency in general” are said to be the things to which the art of measurement relates (283c), and a distinction is drawn between measuring things that are large and small relative to each other, and things that exceed and fall short of “the due measure” (metrion) (283e).
      >Later on, this is filled out as measuring the “lengths, depths, breadths, and speeds of things in relation to what is opposed to them” and measuring “in relation to what is in due measure/moderate [metrion], what is proper/fitting/appropriate [prepon], what is fitting/appropriate/timely/ [kairon], what is as it ought to be/fitting/necessary [deon] and whatever avoids the extremes for the mean [meson]” (284e).
      >Plato also claims that exceeding and falling short of due measure is what differentiates bad and good people (283e), and that, quite generally, all skills produce all the good and fine things they do produce by avoiding the more and the less than what is in due measure and by preserving measure (284a–b).
      To recap, we have:
      >measure (to metron)
      And we also have:
      >appropriate/fitting (prepon)
      >timely (kairon)
      >necessary (deon)
      >mean/intermediate/middle (mesos)
      All of which aim at:
      >"due measure"/moderation (to metrion)
      How do we fit these all together? It seems like we have elements involving context, time, and reason. And this seems like it corresponds with elements on the divided line, on both the sensible and and intelligible sides.

      Thank you and good question

      Why are we connecting something that has to do with time and "context" (e.g. due measure and kairos, prepos, etc. respectively) to something that has to do with the unchanging (i.e. the divided line and the intelligible realm)?

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >did Glaucon give due mesure when Socrates asked him to divide the line
      I don't know, did he? I don't recall "due measure" or any concept like that being invoked.

      He had to cut a line at ratio this is a measure

      From one of the commentaries I've read:
      >The Stranger uses "to metron" and "to metrion" almost interchangeably, and many translators have used the same words for both.
      >In particular: Fowler translates both as “the standard of the mean”; Rowe and Annas and Waterfield follow Skemp and translate them as “due measure”; Seth Bernadete translates both as “the mean”. Sayre calls to metrion ‘due measure’ and to metron ‘measure’
      >to metrion is the substantive form of the adjective metrios, which translates as “moderate”. By contrast, to metron generally means “that by which anything is measured”, or simply “measure”, “due measure”, “limit”, or “proportion” (LSJ).
      >I follow Miller and Sayre as much as possible, since I believe their translations of ‘mean’ (Miller) or ‘due measure’ (Sayre) for "to metrion" and ‘measure’ for "to metron" are the truest representations of these words both in general and in the context of this dialogue.
      From another commentary:
      >(Note that, although some translators render the verb not as “measuring” but as “assessing,” and “the due measure” in a variety of ways, including “the mean,” it is the same root all the way through.)
      I think you've made a good point. There seems to be a measure, and then there seems to be a "due measure" which can also be read as a "moderate measure." And "measure" can be used both in a loose sense (the "judgment" necessary to make a cut), in a stricter sense (making a "measurement" and cutting accordingly), and in the strictest sense (the resulting cut is a "measure" in that it is a ratio, a proportion, etc.).

      But then the problem becomes, what measure will we take? With the instructions given in The Republic, a whole slew of possible cuts are possible that satisfy the requirements given by Plato. And does Plato use the same, or even similar, terminology in The Republic?

      Thank you and good question

      I know this is a bit of a crank meme, but mathematically speaking, it seems that it is most likely that Plato was referring to the "mean and extreme ratio" (aka the Golden Ratio) when he was making the cuts. Granted, multiple cuts which make the sections of the line satisfy the instructions, as well as maintain commensurability of the line (if we're dealing with rational lengths), but there is only ONE ratio that preserves commensurability between the visible parts (A+B) and the noetic part (D) REGARDLESS of the lengths of the line. And that is the Golden Ratio. Granted, there are still problems with that solution, chiefly that there still wouldn't be a commensurability between the dianoetic part (C) and the noetic part with that solution. But perhaps that was the point. Irrational, or perhaps with the Greek spin, a-logos (without an account). Does the Good need an account? Or is it Good simply because it is Good, the principle beyond being?

      The metaphysical implications being communicated here are still beyond my grasp, and I still am not sure how to make this related to the Statesman's due measure, but I think there is a worthwhile argument being communicated here and worth exploring.

      Regarding commensurability, you can find the logic in the below paper (not a crank paper, gives a lot of reasons for and against, goes into the math in pretty in-depth detail, yet remains unconvinced). Skip to Section 5: Epistemological Argument.
      >https://www.yuribalashov.com/Papers/divided_line.pdf

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        I've read the paper before but didn't want to go down the rabbit hole as like you've said is crank attractant but you've introduced it well

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          The problem is figuring out the metaphysical implications of the Golden Ratio. What is it supposed to communicate? What problems is it supposed to solve? Is it a "soft" metaphor or a "hard" structural feature that's meant to solve certain intractable problems? The Mean and the Extreme Ratio coincidences are nice, and tbh I feel like there's a good chance that Plato knew about it and was communicating it, but what does it even mean? I never get a good answer for that.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Yeah, and statesmen is a strange book compared to the others, it's easy to look at the metaphysics in the other books

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            The irrationality of the ration might be the most important part of it, the Pythagoreans were unhappy with the discovery. See,
            https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hippasus

            Same deal smack dab in the middle of the Meno with the specific geometry example of seeking the diagonal, the line incommensurable with the sides of the square it resides in. That's supposed to be the example for how to figure out the nature of virtue.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Irrationality, in what sense? While "alogos" and "irrationality" seem to be communicating similar things, metaphorically speaking, I think that the English word is "loaded" and the Greek word is "broader." Alogos can simply mean "without an explanation", not necessarily something that is poorly explained, is done for bad reasons, refuses to explain itself, etc.
            >Same deal smack dab in the middle of the Meno with the specific geometry example of seeking the diagonal, the line incommensurable with the sides of the square it resides in. That's supposed to be the example for how to figure out the nature of virtue.
            Kek, I thought that was kind of a funny exercise. He almost introduced a poor slave boy into a mathematical mind-melter of a problem and quickly had to tell him not to bother trying to "count" the initial hypotenuse. It's like when a gigabrain autist tries to come up with an example or an analogy on the fly and it's totally bonkers for the situation.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Euclid uses arheton literally unspeakable and that gets translated as irrational in elements

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            That makes sense. Does anybody else use "alogos" or is that more a Platonic thing? The logos/rheton connection (sorry if I'm butchering a declension or something) is pretty strong regardless.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            I think it would be in the sense of not having an account, so it presents an even greater difficulty for understanding. That or that it can't be understood?

            That makes sense. Does anybody else use "alogos" or is that more a Platonic thing? The logos/rheton connection (sorry if I'm butchering a declension or something) is pretty strong regardless.

            https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/wordfreq?lang=greek&lookup=a)%2Flogos

            Looks like it appears in Thucydides a few times, a poet here or there, and more often in the rhetors contemporary to when Plato was writing. In the one Sophocles I checked, it had the sense of "without words" and in Thucydides it looked like the sense was "unreasonable".

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            And again, the search engine sucks because it clearly missed
            >αἰσθήσεως ἀλόγου
            from Plato's Timaeus, 28a.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >I've read the paper before but didn't want to go down the rabbit hole as like you've said is crank attractant but you've introduced it well
          i just read the paper and i don't get the comment on the last page where the author and des jardins claim that the golden ratio makes it seem like the visible is an "image" of the whole

          ...

          how tf did they get that? if the visible is an image of the intelligible, then the intelligible is an image of the whole, no? and how is that a problem? that sounds perfectly reasonable to me. how do they read "the subordination of the whole to the visible" into the golden ratio?

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            I don't understand you, consider how extreme and mean is first introduced to people with squares and what a hypotenuse is and what the word actually means, anyway one dimension line squared now two dimensions then a stretch tween the two laid down on the first line and.... anyway its a lot to get into

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            well now you've lost me completely.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Yes, we should be drawing lines together and talking about due mesure

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Well we can’t do that. Why not try to speak in the terms I’ve used?

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            A point, it has no part, no dimension,

  3. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I don't have any more to say on that for now. But maybe that might help somebody make a few connections?

  4. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Why are you making this harder. Just look up metrion on Perseus for instances.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Because every time I look up a word, it spits out "no results", It doesn't matter if I spell it out in Greek or in English, and it doesn't matter if I'm using a word that I *know* is in the passage. It's a broken function

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Perseus is a bit clunky but you have to use the proper "orthography" so to speak, i.e search all forms of me/trios
        the bar / is necessary as the search function is sensible to accents and spirits

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Oh, so that's the key. Well, it's picking up something now, but not everything. Weird.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          So, I played around with it. The search function IS HOT GARBAGE. I've searched for words in English, found the corresponding Greek in an excerpt and searched the Greek term, only to find not the original excerpt but a different one. I don't know what the frick is going on, but the search function is very, very unreliable, even with the tricks you've shown me.

          The absolutely non-exhaustive list (most likely) below:

          >metrios
          Appears three times.
          >For if men are temperate and cheerful, even old age is only moderately burdensome.
          Book I, 329d.
          >and they will toast myrtle-berries and acorns before the fire, washing them down with moderate potations and so, living in peace and health, they will probably die in old age and hand on a like life to their offspring.”
          Book II, 372d
          >but I think rather that if you find in me one who can follow you and discern what you point out to him you will be making a very [fair] use of me.”
          Book IV, 432c

          >metro, metron
          Appears twice, in one instance.
          >But as to saying that God, who is good, becomes the cause of evil to anyone, we must contend in every way that neither should anyone assert this in his own city if it is to be well governed, nor anyone hear it, neither younger nor older, neither telling a story in meter or without meter for neither would the saying of such things, if they are said, be holy, nor would they be profitable to us or concordant with themselves.”
          Book II, 380c
          >meson
          Does not appear.

          Look up a passage that you know has an instance of a word. So I look up Statesman 269c which has "measure" = "metron". I click on it and go to Wird Frequency Statistics at the bottom of the entry and click on "more statistics". Then I use "find" to go through the Plato entries and select the text I want to look in.

          https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/wordfreq?lang=greek&lookup=me%2Ftron

          I don't know how to read the word frequency statistics. They make the each word seem more common than they appear. Yet when you search for them specifically, there's much, much less than you'd expect.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Look up a passage that you know has an instance of a word. So I look up Statesman 269c which has "measure" = "metron". I click on it and go to Wird Frequency Statistics at the bottom of the entry and click on "more statistics". Then I use "find" to go through the Plato entries and select the text I want to look in.

        https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/wordfreq?lang=greek&lookup=me%2Ftron

  5. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Isn't this literally just "acting according to the Forms"? Giving something what is proper, due measure, justice, etc, these are all just "doing what you should given the Forms". You can only ever gain information by referencing the Forms, after all.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Yeah, no shit. Here's the issue though: How can something unchanging inform something that has to deal with the changing? What does that even look like?

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        1+1=2 this does not change, the chickens had 7 eggs to for me, how can I have seven eggs when 4+3=7 and these numbers don't even exist physically and never change,

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Trick question, one isn't a number, if this confuses you then your whole understanding of the one is whack

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            I have a number of reasons why I agree with you.
            >the Greeks never considered one to be a number

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          These are the easy questions to answer. The harder questions include:
          >how many eggs should I eat a day?
          >is it more economical to buy eggs or to raise chickens?
          >how do I raise chickens effectively?
          >will I have the means to support my chickens given trends in the economy?
          Basically, anything that is variable and can change on a whim. And I haven't even gotten started on anything relating to the good (except maybe health, distantly).

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Well, and again this is just going off of Plato, but: you're supposed to apprehend the Form that the thing participates in and act accordingly.
        >no, put it into words!
        That's not how it works, you're supposed to astrally project your soul.
        >but what about the words?!
        It's not a rational thing that you can put into words. You're doing the spiritual equivalent of asking us to put "dribbling a basketball" into works. You don't do it with words, you do it with something else. That's the whole point of the religious aspect, it's something you do.

        And you have to do that constantly because we live in the sublunar realm ergo we're subjected to generation and decay.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          No, kys

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Why can't you put it into words? Why can't you even try to circumlocute around it with words, as if you're mapping out the boundaries of the object itself in order to make it stand out more?
          >You're doing the spiritual equivalent of asking us to put "dribbling a basketball" into works. You don't do it with words, you do it with something else.
          People instruct others in how to dribble a basketball in words all the time. It can clearly be done in a better way or a worse way, depending on the basketball expertise and verbal acuity of the instructor. The only problem is that receiving the information isn't enough to attain "knowledge", as one must then practice and build the requisite muscle memory. Yet even in that case, we have something akin to something "rational" in that the "logic" of handling a basketball is being thought of and ingrained in oneself. There's even strategies in basketball.

          If you examine the issue carefully, everything you do implies something that can be thought of, and something that can be thought of has a close connection to something that can be spoken of, at least in theory. You're trying to create this bifurcation between thinking and doing when thinking is a kind of doing and nobody does anything without at least the tiniest shred of thought involved. It's a nonstarter. If there is an insurmountable gap, we certainly haven't demonstrated it yet.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            What's a measure

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            A measure is a judgment about something, typically its size, its quality, its magnitude, etc. It can be done in relation to something else, e.g. a proportion or ratio, or it can be done ostensibly in absolute terms, i.e. in quantities. If something is measurable, then it is intelligible. Keep in mind, the intelligible and the speakable tend to be connected to each other, in that thought can be spoken of, and speech is a product of thought.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Thanks

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            damn bro, why you gotta give me blue balls like that

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Where did I put an absurdity, I said bullshit somewhere, if you can find it then your response is not ai

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Are you trying to steal my post? What in the schizo hell... if you think there's a problem with my definition, then just say so.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Lol you failed

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            That's okay. I'm not interested in playing schizo games where you steal my posts and pretend that there's an error in them.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            What are you gonna do about,punk, are you a man who can be pilfered with impunity

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            You can always pass off my statements as your own, but you'll never be able to replicate the formula for yourself. I'm lightning in a bottle.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Caps the bottle now you are impotent

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            fr? no cap?

  6. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    fitting, without waste
    just

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >just

  7. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Sounds like the question is "what's the right thing to do" and the answer is "it depends".

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      fookin pisses me off bruv

  8. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I love the statesman

  9. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >still have no idea what the frick a "due measure" is
    Because you're a moron who reads contemporary sophist shlop. Its meaning is self-evident once you take off the politically correct goggles and actually think like a human being, not some cretin drunk on the kool-aid of "liberal values" (this includes conservashits by the way). Rid your mind of Kant and Mill and every other Anglo moron, and you will begin to understand.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      I've spent about at least several dozen times more hours on Plato and Aristotle than I ever spent on Kant, and that can number probably expands closer to infinity when we compare P&A with JS Mill. Stop being a blustering moron and explain how it all works together. Because I certainly can't, and I'm almost positive that my reasons for why it doesn't work are better thought out than your reasons for why it does work.

  10. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    platos nigman

  11. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Dharma

  12. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Tween any two points a straight line can be drawn,this is one dimension

  13. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    That one dimension line squared becomes 2 dimension it has a hypotenuse that stretches across and its the greatest line in a square you can call it the extreme

  14. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    The middle of the line is the mean

  15. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Lay the hypotenuse down at the mean and you get extream and mean ratio

  16. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    If this is to much we can do the problem in meno and double the square so we can better understand the hypotenuse. Honestly we should and we should create the divided line in republic as well

  17. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    This is cool and all but what the frick do the divided line and the golden ratio actually do?

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      You have to construct them or you won't understand, please start by drawing a line in the sand

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Open your book well, did you even bring your book

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        N-n-no s-s-sensei

  18. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    If you can't do geometry then please frick off from plato

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      we're not trying to do no geometry, we're just trying to play GAMES homie

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        A measure is geometry, it is the subject of the thread and I'm not a Black person

  19. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    What ever, I said some bullshit to see if anyone was paying attention and no, nobody was

  20. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    If you haven’t started studying Greek, are you even trying to understand Plato?

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *