Constantly get told to "start with the greeks"

>constantly get told to "start with the greeks"
>finally read Plato
>he's a dumbass

Explain yourselves

Your start with the ionians not the athenians

No you start with the Egyptians

>wants to learn chemistry
>reads alchemy

start with Quine

>Not reading them in the right order

He really is a dumbass, all his analogies are bullshit
Just start with Descartes

>Starting with the wrong greeks

The face of a man full of fear

You really need to read Aristotle to appreciate the significance of Descartes, though.

do people actually unironically think Plato was a dumbass?
surely this is bait?
the republic is one of the most incredible thought experiments i have ever read, if you think it's dumb you clearly don't understand the historical context of 5th-4th century Athens enough to appreciate what Plato was trying to do.

>t. Plato
Brainlet go away

People only think he is a dumbass because they don't understand the point of his dialogues. He was putting forth ideas to foster discussion and meditation. He didn't claim to be a knower of the truth dispensing it to everybody else as fact.

That is why Plato is an important read regardless of where you are intellectually. Literally everybody can gain something by reading his dialogues and contemplating them.

>people pay money to read books

Lmao

>people pay money to have twice-weekly one-on-one tutorials with world-leading scholars in various topics, ending up with a renowned degree from a renowned institution and a £87k job offer in the city...

You sound like a fagot. Go do some math.

>£87k job offer in the city
Keep dreaming, humanities cuck

>showing off on Veeky Forums
Very Sad!

U wot?

top banks and law firms in London all pay that much to graduates, and they all accept a huge number of humanities students
thankfully, London hasn't yet fallen for the STEM meme that is ruining the American education system

STEM autists, everyone.

>top banks and law firms in London all pay that much to graduates, and they all accept a huge number of humanities students
Nothing productive or worthwhile, then. Pretty fitting for someone who can't think and can only regurgitate his professors' opinions.

fair enough, a lot of our finals were simply lessons in theory regurgitation, not like maths or science students then whom i imagine are constantly developing groundbreaking new theories? right?

>STEM meme that is ruining the American education system

Care to explain this?

As an engineer, most of my finals past freshman year were actually programs my team and I wrote, or projects we designed.

yes... like each of my essays
you use theories that you've been taught to develop your own essays/projects/dissertations etc.
two of my best friends from Oxford are engineers and their final group projects were hardly groundbreaking developments in their fields, just like my dissertation wasn't going to change the face of Classical studies
it's all the same until you start doing high-level postgrad/masters stuff

humanities in America seem to literally have no value, pushing people into STEM subjects which stunt their ability to be creative, thoughtful, and imaginative that leads to a huge number of people well-versed in theory and experimentation etc. but without the lateral skills needed to excel in a large variety of workplaces and in companies where interpersonal communication is vital
this is of course a broad generalisation, i know a lot of STEM subject students who are good with people and good with language, but, on average, the humanities students are far more successful in the UK at getting top jobs at banks, law firms, etc, which pay the most money and rely on great communication and lateral thinking

People only think he's a dumbass because he points out things many think are obvious or dumb without the realizing the only reason its obvious and dumb to them is because he was the first to say it.

>the humanities students are far more successful in the UK at getting top jobs at banks, law firms, etc, which pay the most money and rely on great communication and lateral thinking
This is false causation. Humanities students are the ones who get the well-paying jobs because their parents have connections. Humanities students also have the leisure to pursue a humanities degree (where jobs are, while potentially better paying, not as guaranteed as a STEM degree), because their parents are rich.

Personally, I love literature and philosophy and would have pursued one of them as a degree if my parents had money. As they don't, I went into engineering since that is a guaranteed $60k job when I graduate.

yes, this exactly
so much of Plato was filtered down through successive philosophers
he was literally the man who laid the foundations for the future of western philosophy, and thus the foundation of various ideas now seen as so common that anybody who stated them nowadays would be called dumb

okay fair i agree with the fact that STEM subjects are a safer bet for guaranteed money, but i studied humanities on a full student loan without rich parents because it was what i loved, and i've now secured one of the highest paying grad jobs in the UK
i could have taken the safe road and applied for astrophysics like my parents wanted me to during my final school years
i admit it's a huge risk, but if you're confident in your abilities, it's not always a bad decision in the long run, and doesn't always mean you were 'at leisure' to study a humanity

>wanted to start with the Greeks
>bought the odessy
How brainlet am I?

Nah, the Odyssey is a pretty good way to get into the mind set of the Greeks. Not so much because of historical context or anything, but just because of their love of travel and various cognitive dissonances such as how Odysseus was raiding other villages and selling slaves and this portrayed as heroic yet the suitors invading his palace and not even killing anyone was evil.

It's not cognitive dissonance, and you think that it is because you're thinking of Greek literature in the context of your own culture and morality. You are in serious need of a classics course. Second of all, Odysseus slaying all of the suitors, even the ones described as noble, is addressed by the poet and is therefore purposeful. Maybe you're just really fucking dumb.

It is cognitive dissonance. I'm not saying the Greeks were bad offenders of this or that I'm any better, I only have the moral positions I do because others laid the foundation. Ever culture throughout history has them and there's no doubt we hold cognitive dissonances we don't even recognize but those in the future will. But they did have many standards they'd set for one group, and then turn around and deride another group for it.

>not Babylon
you had one job

Get into Stoicism and read Epictetus user. Unlike Plato, it isn't dated shit.

Let me explain why I'd recommend this book to everyone: Plato is stupid.

Seriously.

And it's important that you all understand that Western society is based on the fallacy-ridden ramblings of an idiot. Read this, understand that he is not joking, and understand that Plato is well and truly fucked in the head.

Every single one of his works goes like this:

SOCRATES: "Hello, I will now prove this theory!"
STRAWMAN: "Surely you are wrong!"
SOCRATES: "Nonsense. Listen, Strawman: can we agree to the following wildly presumptive statement that is at the core of my argument?" {Insert wildly presumptive statement here— this time, it's "There is such a thing as Perfect Justice" and "There is such a thing as Perfect Beauty", among others.}
STRAWMAN: "Yes, of course, that is obvious."
SOCRATES: "Good! Now that we have conveniently skipped over all of the logically-necessary debate, because my off-the-wall crazy ideas surely wouldn't stand up to any real scrutiny, let me tell you an intolerably long hypothetical story."
{Insert intolerably long hypothetical story.}
STRAWMAN: "My God, Socrates! You have completely won me over! That is brilliant! Your woefully simplistic theories should become the basis for future Western civilization! That would be great!"
SOCRATES: "Ha ha! My simple rhetorical device has duped them all! I will now go celebrate by drinking hemlock and scoring a cameo in Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure!"

The moral of the story is: Plato is stupid.

>one group of men(tribe) fighting and beating another tribe is heroic
>men weaseling their way into the home of a woman, who is still married with her husband missing, and then abuse her goodwill is bad
>cognitive dissonance
Are you fucking retarded, mate?

Stoicism isn't dated because is so vague and unfounded you can easily use it as philosophical cover up for your lack of discipline and intelligence (which is demonstrated by the fact that you don't to read an actually systematic and throughout thinker).

That's great

made me laugh desu

It's not you dumbass, invading Illias was justified since they were the first ones to break the law by defending Paris, someone who had violated the customs of hospitality.
On the other hand, the suitors were just some sneaky assholes who were living off of another man's riches and destroying his household while he was away and could do nothing to protect his possesions.

Philosophies are best when they have a degree of flexability. Adhering to a strict code of morals and ethics to the letter simply isn't practical in day-to-day life.

What? Day to day ethics isn't the business of philosophy, get a grip.

Well yeah if you're saying is worse than the other, it is cognitive dissonance. Odysseus was sat there crying like a bitch when the Lystrogonians slaughtered his group, but perfectly happy to do it to the cicones.

Ah, no I was talking about the Cicones, not the events of the Illiad.

Descartes, Hegel or Hume are all three great starting points for reasons.

No, its more like this.

Socrates: Hello Smart Man! I hear you are the smartest person in the land about _____!
Smart Man: Yes! I am very smart at _____, in fact I teach it for a living!
Socrates: Well then sir you must know, so I might ask, what exactly do you believe _____ means?
Smart Man: Well I think _____ means [insert reasonable definition of _____]
Socrates: But sir! What happens if [insert specific set of facts that goes against traditional ethics that violates the definition]
Smart Man: Well shit Socrates, I guess I gotta rethink all this shit. Thanks a lot asshole. I'm going home.
Friend's of Socrates: Oh, SOUH KRATES, U R SO WIZE!

People think he's "dumb" because they only see philosophy as a vehicle for spitting out truths. They don't see it how Plato saw it, with its primary value being the method and execution of thinking in and of itself.

>Odysseus was sat there crying like a bitch when the Lystrogonians slaughtered his group, but perfectly happy to do it to the cicones.

>STEM subjects which stunt their ability to be creative, thoughtful, and imaginative t
lol nice assumption mate.

Typical STEMtard
>this is of course a broad generalisation, i know a lot of STEM subject students who are good with people and good with language, but, on average,

Is Plato the biggest hack?

I'm an intellectual and well-versed in the history of Western Thought and Idea, and it feels like Whitehead's observation "all of western philosophy is a footnote to Plato" would be more accurately formulated as "all of western philosophy is a continuous BTFOing of Plato."

Plato is like the pseud who comes on Veeky Forums to samefag his own arguments and false flag his "opponents." By fortuitous happenstance Plato's writings survived in greater volume and quantity than other more insightful and coherent thinkers.

Now, Plato is essentially something for people who aren't intellectuals to read on the subway, and even Black folk have started to realize this. When are we going to collectively stop focusing our philosophical efforts on BTFOing the non-entity that is Plato and instead start spending our time and effort on more worthwhile endeavours?

Pic related.

What's the problem with my statement?

...

Your conduct in the world and your epistemological understanding of the world are inseparable things.

At the end of the day, Stoicism argues that you should be one with nature and not let Earthly troubles bother you. If you come to the understanding that man is designed to live in tune with nature and that everything else is unnecessary, then you're more likely to lead a "live and let live" style of life from day to day.

>Plato
>Greek

lambda mu alpha omicron

Unironically, this.
God I hated reading the Greeks. Fuck the entire Socratic memethod as portrayed in Plato's writings. It must've been such a fucking stupid practice because people must've been due to reverse Flynn effect gigamorons back then.

What are some examples of this?

The fact that you can't even for a second imagine what the world-view of the ancient world is, and it isn't even the ancient world, even up to today. It's human nature, it's just more exemplified in the past because it was not only simpler in terms of life(everything from technology to societal behavior) but harder, and premature death was normal. Kill or be killed, conquer or get conquered.

you seem to think that the problem with American students and/or our educational system begins in college. the STEM meme about people being autists is because those autists are (probably) bullied in our sub-par public schools, recognize the fact that, later in life, (wealth > physical appearance) and therefore pursue STEM because a) few dumb aggressive people are in STEM and b) STEM careers earn more, on average, than humanities.

i was in private school (montessori, then regular, then a southern boarding school) since the age of 5 and did not encounter this at all. i went to two public schools, one of which was horrible in the wealthy suburbs of chicago, and one of which was excellent, in the poor black ghetto of boston.

i can't speak for other countries, but our public schools are most often like a prison experiment.

Related, how can I get into The Republic? The amount of names thrown about makes it a bit hard to get into

The Republic was just made up as a thought experiment, it's not an existing state. So you can't actually get into it. Sorry user.

>Hegel as starting point
ISHYGDDT

There's an issue here? He crafts a new system, influential one. In not-POS he elaborates on it very clearly, even providing a dictionary for the reader. Kierke started with Hegel. Hegel's own work arguments against the notion of starting with the Greeks in order to get Hegel at all.

You're completely misreading what I said. They are cognitive dissonances, but no, I don't believe in retroactively judging people based on morals we understand now.

Gerasimos Santas' "Understanding Plato's Republic" is the perfect introduction.

Yes, but ethics is subsumed under epistemology and metaphysics, not the other way around, ethics by itself is worthless. And this ridiculous 'connection' with Nature is impossible and disingenuous.

what a horrible thread, sheep

I really doubt anyone just starting to read philosophy is going to understand much of what he says without any previous background, it's a question of simplicity rather than anything inherent of his philosophy.

Dude you can't even wrap your head around the first point made against you, and you're still misinterpreting everybody's arguments. If you can't think of ancient literature in the perspective of ancient people, you can't possibly identify the true contradictions to deconstruct it. I seriously hope you're not a humanities major.

And after months of trying, the twitterfolk were still unable to comprehend the basis and basics of epistemology. They also still failed to understand Stoicism. Smash that mf like button senpai.

I am thinking about in their terms, stop acting like I'm condemning them. I'm not, I'm just saying they are, objectively, cognitive dissonances

Cognitive dissonances is "the state of having inconsistent thoughts, beliefs, or attitudes, especially as relating to behavioural decisions and attitude change." That accurately describes how the Lystogonians attacking Odysseus and killing his people was portrayed as a tragedy, while Odysseus killing and enslaving the Cicones was fine.

Have a little faith in the consciousness bro.

I actually started with Hegel myself, but by God it was frustrating, a less autistic person might have given up.

Maybe philosophy is not for you, user. Have you considered genre fiction?

go back to r/books

take, for example, his tripartite psyche of rational thought interacting with appetitive and spirited desire
one might compare Freud's id, ego, and superego if looking for a modernised version, but the concept itself of a psyche split into rationality and desire is a commonplace these days, but was probably not so before Plato's Republic and his Phaedo/Timaeus

>Not starting with the Minoans
Brainlet detected

kek, IQ really is everything isn't it bro? God I just love science so FUCKING much, these stupid fucking "philosophers" (which has always been a stupid field really) from 2000 years ago don't know shit compared to Dawkins and Kraut.

Also I haven't seen you post on r/atheism in some time, why is that bro?

his Forms exist, you fucking braindead materialist morons. Beauty doesn't exist materially, it is an Idea that can only be perceived through the mind. Holy fuck the Greeks are supposed to be entry-level but postmodern/scientific thought has dulled all your brains to the point that you can't even understand even the most accessible of philosophical truth

I think it was rewarding

Me too, but it might be too much for a beginner, that's all.

Athenians are Ionians, but I assume you mean OP should begin with the literature, philosophy, and art which emanated from the Ionian colonies in Asia Minor and the greater Mediterranean coastal region rather than that which is attributed to Athens.

samefag

>No Glaucon you stupid faggot
im dying faggot.

Start with the Dorics

Great bait.

The ideas and concepts discussed in the dialogues are in fact not the most important aspect in them, it is more so how they are approached and discussed. Plato is demonstrating an epistemological methodology, not simply discussing his views on a variety of subjects and topics.

Of course, you need to be able to read critically to understand this.

>read critically
Something most of Veeky Forums can't do.

How much of a bourgeois philistine do you have to be to hold getting a job in a bank or law firm as the measure of success. Wew lad

You sound like a pussy who can't think.

The dialogues are supposed to make you question what you believe to know and to be true, and they're frustrating because they do not give definitive answers that resolve the inquiry. Try harder.

how come anti-semites never get uptight about this and start spamming about "muh culture of critique" etc when ppl talk about the greeks

Starting with the Greeks is just an old meme used on Veeky Forums to try and make newfags fall for it and waste their time.
It's like the Starting Strength meme on Veeky Forums.
If you really want to get on our level, you need to start with the Mesopotamian and supplement your reading with some Phonecian poetry
This is the only guarenteed way out of brainlethood.

There is a difference between rational inquiry of truth and critique for the sake of critique.

Moreover, Plato is attempting to examine the process of how we might best inquire and to understand why we ought to inquire. It isn't about what he 'critiques', it's about his method of inquiry.

>ss is a meme

I mean, following the book word for word is a meme, that man knows nothing about dieting. But doing a 3x5 or 5x5 for a strength base with assets is a great way to start lifting. Until you hit a plateau a few times post nervous system training period and your returns are diminishing there's no reason NOT to do a full body lifting routine.
So I'm going to assume that start with the greeks is a meme with a kernel of truth. The joke being that you always have to go further back for context, and there are always multiple supplements to understand every part of the primary text, and every primary text must be read to full completion. But wouldn't starting with the greeks always be a good idea? I mean they have 2 primary works of literature and 2 primary philosophers.


Would I not get "almost" the same benefit of reading:
>any version of the Iliad and odyssey
>Euthyphro, Apology, Crito, Meno, Phaedo
>The republic
>Organon, Nicomachean Ethics, Rhetoric, Politics

Yeah, I'll miss out on quite a bit of context, but I don't think anyone is attempting to become a scholar in these topics, just as no one is trying to become a professional body builder.

pretty much everything can be done better by a high iq person. so yes, its nearly everything.

Salinger had an IQ of 104, so clearly having a high IQ doesn't help you with being a great writer, and very likely doesn't help you with any sort of artistic pursuits, with an artist like Warhol only having an IQ of 86.

It's precisely because I can practice some modicum of thinking that I could see for the brain dead aspect of the method as portrayed in his writings. It's like reading a conversation between two down syndrome toddlers. If you get intellectual stimulation from that I have bad news for you.

Why the FUCK wasn't this piece of shit thread saged on the spot? It feels like Veeky Forums is getting worse and worse every fucking week. I'll comfort myself by believing that all the people in this thread unironically calling Plato an idiot are the same handful of morons who savagely attacked Ontologicool, I'm basically picturing a group of lowlifes who don't even sincerely care about literature and would much rather just shitpost and meme about it instead

>Not starting with the ancient hieroglyphics

Yes, that must be it. Plato cannot possibly be dumb, it's just everyone else is wrong. Cool.