Has anyone done as much irreparable damage to western thought as this retard?

Even if absolutely pure nothing was all that eternally existed, the concept of a circle and triangle would still equal themselves and 'exist' as eternal truisms, and 2 (potential objects) brought and grouped towards 2 (potential objects) would equal a grouping of 4 (potential objects).

A quintillion years ago, this current moment, and you, 'existed as potential', Many things could have occurred that may have allowed for you to not exist. But even if that was the case, the potential for you to have existed would have still existed (as we are aware, it is possible for you to exist).

In a quintillion years there are many possible outcomes (at least in relation to the potential powers of 'consciousness' /free will) out of many possible futures, there is only always, the one that continuously is (begat), in 20 seconds I can lift my arm and wave it around (maybe over thousands of different subtle differences I can do this, speeds, angles, rotations, slight movements to the left and right etc.) I am aware of this, even if I choose to not do such in now maybe 8...7...6.... seconds, that potential still """"""""exists"""""""

Likewise, the realm of forms exists, even if it doesnt, or especially because it doesnt.

When two people on opposite sides of the globe, and/or universe, conceive of a sphere, without speaking to each other (before books were invented), did they invent the concept of a sphere?

plato was right about everything
everyone else just doesnt want it to be true

>dat filename

howdy, fellow redditors!
*cuckboats*

In today's news:
>Local autistic virgin undoes all of western philosophy in one single critique

Back to Popper to illiterate cunt

But he wasn't even close to being wrong about everything. Faggots who have never read him like to harp about his biology, but there is absolutely nothing wrong with his philosophy.

universals and forms aren't the same things :^)

>universals and forms aren't the same things
What is an example of a universal and how can they be related to no form?

I think the problem people have with Platonism is the idea that these "potentials" exist in a special realm outside the mind, when they are so clearly a part of your imagination

It's like asking if anyone did as much damage to you as your mother did. I guess you know the answer.

>when they are so clearly a part of your imagination
any concept is the product of the imagination, no matter what a rationalist (of any kind) claims.

Politics and Republic are both terrible reads.

>Has anyone done as much irreparable damage to western thought as this retard?

Yes.

YOU.

>part of your imagination

Forms do not need your imagination to exist. If you ceased to imagine them, or if they ceased to manifest in physical objects, the forms could and would still exist.

That's the necessity of having them exist elsewhere. If they existed physically they would be tied to the fate of the physical world (untrue) and if they existed in your head they would depend on the existence of your head (untrue).

great post

horrendous post

this. Socrates/Plato solved philosophy, and even if Plato didn't manage to write it all down, they left enough behind to work with.

Aristotle then fuckedst everything up. His return to sophistry marked the slow unraveling of human thought which had culminated after millenia in his mentor.

Then the Romans fell for the Stoic meme and eventually Jesus himself had to come and vindicate Plato.

The price for telling the Truth? Socrates drank hemlock and Jesus was nailed to the cross.

though yes maybe, of course obviously, some potentials, or most, or all, human potentials, cannot and do not exist without the human mind, the human mind does not exist without (the world, and its inherent) those potentials