Well? Of these two authors, who is the better philosopher? The better writer?

Well, IQfy? Of these two authors, who is the better philosopher? The better writer?

UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68

DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68

UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Plato. Dostoyevsky is for college-aged brainlets.

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Plato wasn't a literature writer and Dostoevsky wasn't a philosopher. Frick off.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      And yet he wrote better literature than dostoyevsky damn

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Wrong, Wong.

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Plato was known for not practicing pederasty and arguing for a ban on homosexuality. This meme was written by the illiterate.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      No, he was a pederast according to Diogenes Laertius. I came to this thread expecting this comment and the irony is those of you who write this stuff only know about Plato’s thoughts on lgbt from a blurb in Laws book 3 which is posted here as nauseum.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        I'm guessing your edition of Laertius doesn't come with editors' commentary. Plato's authorship of the verses to Aster are largely rejected by scholars, and the verses to Dion are disputed.
        >Plato's relationship to Dion...is not described as erotic in the Seventh Letter, nor does evidence outside this epigram indicate it was so.
        Laertius also lived centuries after Plato and was only citing the material available to him, a lot of which is spurious, lost, or uncorroborated by other sources.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        You mean Aristippus' hearsay? What, Diogenes wrote many things, from the rumors of their times to common facts, but it is not in accordance with Plato's written words to say that he engaged in pederasty. It takes more mental gymnastics to say he was in favor of banning homosexuality yet a pederast than to say Aristippus was trying to spread rumors about Plato's relationship with his students.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >It takes more mental gymnastics to say he was in favor of banning homosexuality yet a pederast
          Does it? There's a powerful modern inclination to lump together homosexuality, pederasty, effeminacy, gay sex, and a dozen other related concepts into the vague category of "gay shit," and then to point to any endorsement or condemnation of any one of those as proof that so-and-so was a gay, or hated gays. In reality, it's possible to separate all of those concepts, and it's not unexpected that people in other cultures might approve of some but not others.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Because in Laws VII he was specifically mentioning children/the underaged and how "unnatural lusts" would prevent them from becoming good citizens. He was clearly considering both pederasty and typical sodomy (which was already shunned anyway). Go read.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >He was clearly considering both pederasty and typical sodomy
            You're going to have to make a more specific citation for that claim.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >ATHENIAN: Very likely; I will endeavour to explain myself more clearly. When I came to the subject of education, I beheld young men and maidens holding friendly intercourse with one another. And there naturally arose in my mind a sort of apprehension—I could not help thinking how one is to deal with a city in which youths and maidens are well nurtured, and have nothing to do, and are not undergoing the excessive and servile toils which extinguish wantonness, and whose only cares during their whole life are sacrifices and festivals and dances. How, in such a state as this, will they abstain from desires which thrust many a man and woman into perdition; and from which reason, assuming the functions of law, commands them to abstain? The ordinances already made may possibly get the better of most of these desires; the prohibition of excessive wealth is a very considerable gain in the direction of temperance, and the whole education of our youth imposes a law of moderation on them; moreover, the eye of the rulers is required always to watch over the young, and never to lose sight of them; and these provisions do, as far as human means can effect anything, exercise a regulating influence upon the desires in general. But how can we take precautions against the unnatural loves of either sex, from which innumerable evils have come upon individuals and cities? How shall we devise a remedy and way of escape out of so great a danger?
            Read the whole of Book VII. Here he specifically mentions youths and young people. Youths being men old enough to engage in pederasty with. I'm tired of people refraining from doing any reading at all. I am not going to spoon feed you random excerpts on this from Plato's entire collected works. You need SOME measure of reading on your part.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >He was clearly considering both pederasty and typical sodomy
            You're going to have to make a more specific citation for that claim.

            boys old enough*
            Either way, you see any age group was considered in the unnatural lusts.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >I am not going to spoon feed you random excerpts on this from Plato's entire collected works. You need SOME measure of reading on your part.
            Certainly, I'm just not going to play the game where I have to guess what passage you claim is making your (very specific) point, and then you say I'm strawmanning by not posting exactly the passage you had intended.

            In regards to the except you posted, what do the following 3 or so sentences say in your translation?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            > Truly, Cleinias, here is a difficulty. In many ways Crete and Lacedaemon furnish a great help to those who make peculiar laws; but in the matter of love, as we are alone, I must confess that they are quite against us. For if any one following nature should lay down the law which existed before the days of Laius, and denounce these lusts as contrary to nature, adducing the animals as a proof that such unions were monstrous, he might prove his point, but he would be wholly at variance with the custom of your states. Further, they are repugnant to a principle which we say that a legislator should always observe; for we are always enquiring which of our enactments tends to virtue and which not. And suppose we grant that these loves are accounted by law to the honourable, or at least not disgraceful, in what degree will they contribute to virtue?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >For if any one following nature should lay down the law which existed before the days of Laius, and denounce these lusts as contrary to nature, adducing the animals as a proof that such unions were monstrous
            You can argue that homosex is bad by appeal to nature
            >but he would be wholly at variance with the custom of your states.
            But homosex is customary in Greece.
            >Further, they are repugnant to a principle which we say that a legislator should always observe; for we are always enquiring which of our enactments tends to virtue and which not.
            And these laws would go against our principle that we should only enact laws that encourage virtue.

            Doesn't really sound like he's arguing against all homosexualry categorically here, anon.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Is this bait or are you actually mentally handicapped?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            ," the gay lisped

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >I'm tired of people refraining from doing any reading at all.
            And im tried of people using cherry picked verses from Plato's works, to try to defame him.
            It's like, you people can't get passed some points, and fixate on some small details to the point you miss the whole context, and you don't actually get the whole figure of who plato was.
            Basically you don't get his core identity or who he really was.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Cherry picking what? Do you want to get into the Synposium and claim the words of Pausanias and Aristophanes are Plato's, before I ask you why not Callicles' in Gorgias?
            >But if there were a man who had sufficient force, he would shake off and break through, and escape from all this; he would trample under foot all our formulas and spells and charms, and all our laws which are against nature: the slave would rise in rebellion and be lord over us, and the light of natural justice would shine forth. And this I take to be the sentiment of Pindar, when he says in his poem, that
            >“Law is the king of all, of mortals as well as of immortals;”
            >this, as he says,
            >“Makes might to be right, doing violence with highest hand"
            >Written by Plato, from Gorgias
            Plato?? Whyyyyy!

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        midwit thinks greeks don't gossip

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Im not going to believe Diogenies Laertius though.
        If it's not in plato alone, or in the inmediate successors like aristotle, i can discount it.
        Getting your information about plato from Laertius is like believing what the Alexander romance says about Alexander, it's just moronic.

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Thought an elite few should rule the world
    Did he actually believe that?
    I might be misremembering but doesn't The Republic present the need for absolute monarchy/oligrachy as an issue, a flaw with city-states that had yet to be solved?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      The philosopher king is Socrates and has no want of money. He's just a bum that sits around doing dialectic all day. He has a dog man army while everyone else just makes shoes or boats and chills.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        So the perfect king?

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    You forgot that Dostoyevsky was a drunk piece of shit

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Literally me.

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Comparing apples to oranges.

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    How is Dostoyevsky a philosopher, all he could manage to talk about is ethics and morality?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      He was a writer who expressed philosophical ideas, but not a philosopher per se. Just like Plato was a write/philosopher, but not an author of literature

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    >I'm more on the Dostoevskian at heart but also practice pederasty
    based.

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    i choose neizche cause Christians are pedos too

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >thread turns into asperger's clinic on homosexualry
    apropo of this place

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >blocks your path

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