Plato’s Republic

[K-Gun]

The Founding Fathers did not write original philosophy. They were highly inspired by Enlightenment thought, but they were law makers, not philosophers. Law is founded upon philosophy.

In an attempt to better understand the philosophy underpinning our Constitution, I would like to go back to Plato’s Republic and attempt to answer some serious questions of man, nature and state.

Is anyone else willing to tackle this topic this summer?

[shiva2999]

Can we talk about Socrates and the Sophists as well?

[K-Gun]

Can we talk about Socrates and the Sophists as well?

of course.

[shiva2999]

I'm in.

Do you think we can get the big brains on the right to play?

They'd loooooove Thrasymachus.

[K-Gun]

I'm in.

Do you think we can get the big brains on the right to play?

They'd loooooove Thrasymachus.

Well, they are the "Republicans."

[TRIPLE P]

Do you see our current leaders/government as the antithesis of what Plato envisioned......?

He was after brilliant philosophical minds to lead.....we get oil barons and businessmen......

I haven't read Plato in forever, but I just found Republic and Dialogues on the bookshelf....should get me even more depressed about the current state of affairs.....

When you read the old stuff it seems like they were on the right track, but somewhere along the line the rest of society got off.....probably for some easy $$$

[shiva2999]

The Ancient Greeks said it all and lived it all.

Athens vs Sparta.

Socrates forced to kill himself.

The Sophists claiming there is no morality, only self interest.

[uppy]

What's a Thrasymachusa ?

[K-Gun]

What's a Thrasymachusa ?

It's like Tiramisu.

[shiva2999]

What's a Thrasymachusa ?

Thrasymachus is one of the two greatest villains in western history.

The other was St Paul.

[K-Gun]

The Sophists claiming there is no morality, only self interest.

How do you feel about the Allegory of the Cave, and its conclusion in regards to knowledge and The Good:

Then what gives the objects of knowledge their truth and the mind the power of knowing is the Form of the Good. It is the cause of knowledge and truth, and you will be right to think of it as being itself known, and yet as being something other than, and even higher than, knowledge and truth. And just as it was right to think of light and sight as being like the sun, but wrong to think of them as being the sun itself, so here again it is right to think of knowledge and truth as being like the Good, but wrong to think of either of them as being the Good, which must be given a still higher place of honor....
The Good therefore may be said to be the source not only of the intelligibility of the objects of knowledge, but also of their existence and reality; yet it is not itself identical with reality, but is beyond reality, and superior to it in dignity and power. [508e-509b, Lee translation, p.273.]

[uppy]

Thank you

[Mouldsie]

I think we should be run by an enlightened despot.... namely myself... or maybe my HS social studies teacher

[shiva2999]

How do you feel about the Allegory of the Cave, and its conclusion in regards to knowledge and The Good:

Then what gives the objects of knowledge their truth and the mind the power of knowing is the Form of the Good. It is the cause of knowledge and truth, and you will be right to think of it as being itself known, and yet as being something other than, and even higher than, knowledge and truth. And just as it was right to think of light and sight as being like the sun, but wrong to think of them as being the sun itself, so here again it is right to think of knowledge and truth as being like the Good, but wrong to think of either of them as being the Good, which must be given a still higher place of honor....
The Good therefore may be said to be the source not only of the intelligibility of the objects of knowledge, but also of their existence and reality; yet it is not itself identical with reality, but is beyond reality, and superior to it in dignity and power. [508e-509b, Lee translation, p.273.]

Well, you know mw, I tend to think that philosophy without psychology is kind of impotent.

I like Socrates take.

"There is only one good, knowledge, and there is only one evil, ignorance."

[K-Gun]

So when do we start reading Book I?

[Wally]

Remember... always reach for "The Good"

[nehemiah]

i'm in.

should we do a book a week?

[sukie]

You won't read a book . Stop it. You are weakening your stance.

[RabidBillsFan]

Livy and Herodotus must be out, huh? :rofl:

[nehemiah]

why livy or herodotus?

although i'm in for any classical literature - history or philosophy.

[RabidBillsFan]

I'm not big on philosophy to tell the truth... I am burdened with it based upon its influence throughout history. I'm more of a realist than a conceptualist. :)

[nehemiah]

I'm not big on philosophy to tell the truth... I am burdened with it based upon its influence throughout history. I'm more of a realist than a conceptualist. :)history books are not reality.

how about thucydides? i liked that one the best - gossip, intrigue, sluts... all the makings of a new HBO show!

[uppy]

Dereliction of Duty ~LTC.Robert Patterson

its about bill clinton

[nehemiah]

Dereliction of Duty ~LTC.Robert Patterson

its about bill clintonplease be serious.

[Mouldsie]

history books are not reality.

+1

.

[uppy]

please be serious.


I thought it was funny :wooter:

[RabidBillsFan]

history books are not reality.

how about thucydides? i liked that one the best - gossip, intrigue, sluts... all the makings of a new HBO show!

They are more real than philosophy! :)

History: The Battle of Hastings was won by William the Conqueror and his army in 1066.

Philisophy: War is nothing more than man's population control.

One is fact, the other is opinion.

[K-Gun]

They are more real than philosophy! :)

History: The Battle of Hastings was won by William the Conqueror and his army in 1066.

Philisophy: War is nothing more than man's population control.

One is fact, the other is opinion.

Please, you’re expressing a philosophical view, in the shadows of logical positivism.

You just don’t know where your opinions, historically, come from.

[Mouldsie]

well then your definition of reality/history seems like a waste of time.

[RabidBillsFan]

Please, you’re expressing a philosophical view, in the shadows of logical positivism.

You just don’t know where your opinions, historically, come from.

Re-read my original post- philosophy is a tougher nut to crack because it's not completely grounded like history is. History tells of actual people and their struggles, triumphs, relations, and such. Philiosophy is much harder to understand because it takes a different approach.

I can admit my weaknesses- I am not afraid.

[nehemiah]

Re-read my original post- philosophy is a tougher nut to crack because it's not completely grounded like history is. History tells of actual people and their struggles, triumphs, relations, and such. Philiosophy is much harder to understand because it takes a different approach.history BOOKS are not completely grounded in reality. which is not to say they aren't useful... and they could be the source of interesting discussion. but the classical histories such as herodotus, livy, and thucydidies (especially) all have :bs: within them.

[K-Gun]

You won't read a book . Stop it. You are weakening your stance.

I take it you won't be joining us, killer?

[RabidBillsFan]

history BOOKS are not completely grounded in reality. which is not to say they aren't useful... and they could be the source of interesting discussion. but the classical histories such as herodotus, livy, and thucydidies (especially) all have :bs: within them.

Every writer has bias and weaknesses in their writing (some obviously more than others), but generally speaking, History is more grounded. :)

[K-Gun]

Re-read my original post- philosophy is a tougher nut to crack because it's not completely grounded like history is. History tells of actual people and their struggles, triumphs, relations, and such. Philiosophy is much harder to understand because it takes a different approach.

I can admit my weaknesses- I am not afraid.

I took issue with the fact that you called philosophy "opinion." as if to say, it's all subjective and thus bullshit. i have a big problem with that notion.

[RabidBillsFan]

I took issue with the fact that you called philosophy "opinion." as if to say, it's all subjective and thus bullshit. i have a big problem with that notion.

Ohhh.. I can see how that can be misconstrued! I hope my post after clarified it more. :)

[nehemiah]

generally speaking, History is more grounded.nah...

100% disagree with that.

one of the functions of philosophy is to provide a structure that is used by historians. it stands to reason that the "filter" provided by philosophy is more realistic than the results written by using that "filter".

[RabidBillsFan]

nah...

100% disagree with that.

one of the functions of philosophy is to provide a structure that is used by historians. it stands to reason that the "filter" provided by philosophy is more realistic than the results written by using that "filter".

History uses more of a different science than it does philosophy, to be sure. Evidence must be gathered and sorted and put into a logical, sound format. Philosophy is a bi-product of historical events and reaching conclusions based upon what happens.

philsosphy:
Investigation of the nature, causes, or principles of reality, knowledge, or values, based on logical reasoning rather than empirical methods.

It's two different animals, but on the same tree. :)

[K-Gun]

nah...

100% disagree with that.

one of the functions of philosophy is to provide a structure that is used by historians. it stands to reason that the "filter" provided by philosophy is more realistic than the results written by using that "filter".

Speaking of which, were you ever lucky enough to take a class with Joseph Margolis?

This is some good shit:

http://texts.cdlib.org/xtf/view?docId=ft6t1nb4gf&chunk.id=d0e41

[shiva2999]

...completely grounded like history is...

“The very ink in which history is written is merely fluid prejudice.” ~ Mark Twain

"History is philosophy teaching by examples." ~Thucydides

Until lions have their historians, tales of the hunt shall always glorify the hunters. ~African Proverb

"Poetry is nearer to vital truth than history." ~ Plato

"Most history is guessing, and the rest is prejudice." ~Will and Ariel Durant, Our Oriental Heritage

"History: An account mostly false, of events mostly unimportant, which are brought about by rulers mostly knaves, and soldiers mostly fools." ~Ambrose Bierce

"History is written by the winners." ~Alex Haley

[Gibby]

The Founding Fathers did not write original philosophy. They were highly inspired by Enlightenment thought, but they were law makers, not philosophers. Law is founded upon philosophy.

In an attempt to better understand the philosophy underpinning our Constitution, I would like to go back to Plato’s Republic and attempt to answer some serious questions of man, nature and state.

Is anyone else willing to tackle this topic this summer?

I've read Plato several times. Here's a good summer reading list for anyone interested in our nation's politics.

1. Plato
2. Aristotle
3. Machiavelli (especially useful if you're trying to establish a friendly regime in an area of the world where the populace hates you)
4. Hobbes
5. deTocqueville
6. Rousseau
7. Locke
8. More, Utopia

[sukie]

No reading list of anyone that might still be alive and modernly relevant?

[Gibby]

No reading list of anyone that might still be alive and modernly relevant?

dude, these are very relavent. If you want a country that works then do what the founding fathers did and read these people. Want to know about the constitution, read these books. Want to know how to win in Iraq and help establish a good government read Hobbes, Locke, and Machiavelli. just because they weren't written this century does not mean they aren't relavant. Read the works I have posted and you will actually have hope in our republic again.

[sukie]

Theses are different times unimaginable by the authors. I understand historical relevance and all but my question still remains... Anyone worth reading that isn't part of an archeaological dig?

[SpikedLemonade]

Are you telling me that some of you political retards have NOT read Platos Republic?

[Gibby]

Theses are different times unimaginable by the authors. I understand historical relevance and all but my question still remains... Anyone worth reading that isn't part of an archeaological dig?

Okay you want a modern list. Here is a short list of books I've read recently that I'd recommend

1. "Republic Not an Empire", "Death of the West", or my favorite "Where the Right Went Wrong" all by Pat Buchanan

2. Anything by Francis ***ayama

3. Bowling Alone by Putnam

4. Al Franken's "Lies and the Lying Liars who Tell Them" and "The Truth"

5. 'Citizen's Guide to Democracy Inaction by Jon Stewart

This is just a starting place.

[sukie]

I'l pass on Franken...LOL Stewarts looks interesting.

[K-Gun]

Are you telling me that some of you political retards have NOT read Platos Republic?

take a hike, tool

[RabidBillsFan]

“The very ink in which history is written is merely fluid prejudice.” ~ Mark Twain

"History is philosophy teaching by examples." ~Thucydides

Until lions have their historians, tales of the hunt shall always glorify the hunters. ~African Proverb

"Poetry is nearer to vital truth than history." ~ Plato

"Most history is guessing, and the rest is prejudice." ~Will and Ariel Durant, Our Oriental Heritage

"History: An account mostly false, of events mostly unimportant, which are brought about by rulers mostly knaves, and soldiers mostly fools." ~Ambrose Bierce

"History is written by the winners." ~Alex Haley

"Other's quotes are the crutch by which the simpleton rests his laurels" -ME

[RabidBillsFan]

I've read Plato several times. Here's a good summer reading list for anyone interested in our nation's politics.

1. Plato
2. Aristotle
3. Machiavelli (especially useful if you're trying to establish a friendly regime in an area of the world where the populace hates you)
4. Hobbes
5. deTocqueville
6. Rousseau
7. Locke
8. More, Utopia

Or, we can take a more historical approach to our beginnings:

1. Daniel Boorstin
2. Edmund Morris
3. Francis Parkman
4. Gouverneur Morris
5. Arthur Schlesinger
6. Richard Middleton
7. Samuel Eliot Morison

[SpikedLemonade]

take a hike, tool

Golly geez, you can actually type besides just bumping.

Did you use your forehead to type that last post?

[shiva2999]

"Other's quotes are the crutch by which the simpleton rests his laurels" -ME

Comedy really isn't your thing pal.

[K-Gun]

Golly geez, you can actually type besides just bumping.

Did you use your forehead to type that last post?
:thebird:

[SpikedLemonade]

:thebird:


AND here it is.

[K-Gun]

AND here it is.
:thebird:

[SpikedLemonade]

:thebird:

A repeat performance.

It was much better the second time.

Ah, just ignore me, just wait until the reviews come in tomorrow morning since we both know the critics are going to love your performance.

[BillsRGreat]

dude, these are very relavent. If you want a country that works then do what the founding fathers did and read these people. Want to know about the constitution, read these books. Want to know how to win in Iraq and help establish a good government read Hobbes, Locke, and Machiavelli. just because they weren't written this century does not mean they aren't relavant. Read the works I have posted and you will actually have hope in our republic again.

always remeber... the most intelligent words will be worth nothing when someone who doesn't understand these words tries to apply them...


:thebird:
examples of how an intelligent conversation are lost

[RabidBillsFan]

Comedy really isn't your thing pal.

And serious rebuttal in your posts isn't you thing either ( :homer: esque? )