Hello everyone! My band created a new music album about the greatest dialogues throughout history that we thought you in this group might like. You can listen to it here. We hope you enjoy it. https://youtu.be/-sotzKAPxK8?si=-I0JisTDypW3RRXe

https://preview.redd.it/x9vq22d15vfd1.jpg?width=1400&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0afa4e1bf4dce737694151ccb3304032b5064036

Hey yall, I recently created a productivity app called Kouros surrounding philosophy with many features, give it a try!

https://apps.apple.com/us/app/kouros/id6566171686

Hey yall, I recently created a productivity app called Kouros surrounding philosophy with many features, give it a try!

https://apps.apple.com/us/app/kouros/id6566171686

I am currently preparing for my philosophy exam, and could use some help. If you were to analyse this passage:

A6. “We say that there are many beautiful things and many good things, and so on for each kind, and in this way, we distinguish them in words. – We do. - And beauty itself and good itself and all the things that we thereby set down as many, reversing ourselves, we set down according to a single form of each, believing that there is but one, and call it ‘the being’ of each. - That's true. - And we say that the many beautiful things and the rest are visible but not intelligible, while the forms are intelligible but not visible. - That's completely true” (Pl. Rep. 507b).

..using these three questions:

1.       Context: What is the philosophical context of this passage? What philosophical issue is at stake?

2.       Content: Explain the philosophical point and content of this passage. If it contains an argument, reconstruct it. (If it contains an argument and a counterargument, comment on both.)

3.       Evaluation: Do you agree with the point made in the passage you discuss or with its argument/counterargument? Provide a philosophical justification for your answer.

I am looking into the theory of forms and essence, but dont quite understand "the being". What do you think?

One writer I feel that doesn't get enough credit is Timon of the city of Phlius (Τίμων ὁ Φλιάσιος)

Now he grew up very much in that post-Alexander Greece. He almost reminds me of Lucian with his flamboyant irony.

Diogenes Laertius and Athenaeus of Naucratis, together with Sextus Empiricus provide us with picaresque sayings.

He won the admiration of Ptolemy II and yet he called the Museion of Alexandria a bird cage saying the men there are cooped up and bicker about like exotic birds (Athenaeus book 1.41)

And Epicurus he says. "γαστρὶ χαριζόμενος, τῆς οὐ λαμυρώτερον οὐδέν." Saying he indulges his belly due to his greediness, but he also pokes fun at stern Zeno and his lentil soup and referring to him as an old cranky Phoenician woman. (Diogenes Laertius)

Yet also Plato, Pythagoras, and the sages of old. And Eusebius preserves a passage from his Silloi where he says that mankind is base and born to eat and again he says that men are but bags filled with vain opinions.

Hence he is not afraid to ridicule the philosophers of his day and even earlier as well, such as we see with Lucian in the age of the Antonine emperors who satirized the dinner-crazed philosophers.

And when it comes to food, of course, there's all sorts of stories about Lydian dishes and honey cakes which the old Greeks love to bring up.

Hello everyone,

As a non-native English speaker having to deal with English-speaking academia, I was wondering what translation of Plato's works (all of them) can be considered the best ones - the most used ones, in particular: what I need is to find a standard for translating, in English, Plato's terminology, which I am more familiar with in my native language and in Ancient Greek but less in English.

Thanks!

In this interview with Lex Fridman, Economics Professor Richard Wolff claims that both Aristotle and Plato hated markets, because they fragmented society and ruined social relationships.

I'm not an expert, but this seems like something Marx would have said. Plato, possibly; Aristotle, not likely, though I only read fragments in college, so I'm not sure...

Linked discussion should start at 57:43 (video chapter "Economics")

Can anybody point to where they said this?

Citations?

Is this accurate?

Thank you.

edit: sorry, YT link didn't appear first time.

I'm not certain that he does argue for determinism, but it's what I heard, and I think it is what Aristotle is reply to in De Interpretatione. Thanks in advance.

WWW.GOLDENLADDER.ORG

PHILOSOPHY VS BODY IMAGE : CHALLENGING THE WAY YOU SEE YOURSELF

New website launched aimed at transforming the way philosophy is taught and how we can use it to not only approach real life experiences but to also build happier, healthier relationships with ourselves. Merging ancient philosophical teachings with the complexities of the 21st century, Golden Ladder offers a practical approach to overcoming our current expectations and standards of beauty and aims to combat the growing rise of insecurities, anxieties and self-doubt in the modern world, fuelled by the relentless and unrealistic demand of associating beauty with momentary physical appearances.