0
   

The Whole of Platonic Philosophy

 
 
Reply Sat 18 Jun, 2011 09:35 pm
Hello,

I have enjoyed many of the posts on this forum. Most seem to respond with intelligence, so allow me to get some opinions from those interested.

I'm curious as to your opinions on the whole of Plato's teachings. In other words, how does his philosophy compare to his critiques and opponents (Aristotle, Nietzsche, etc.)? From what I have read of him and criticisms of his thought, in my opinion, his depth and range seem to be the most enduring and I don't see how an avid reader of his works can be led astray in living a fulfilling life; the only true challenge to this statement would be by his student Aristotle, who I'm less familiar with.

Regardless, if any of you believe that his foundations are seriously flawed or that there is a school of thought far more beneficial than his own, I would love to hear constructive advice or criticism.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Question • Score: 0 • Views: 899 • Replies: 2
No top replies

 
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Sun 19 Jun, 2011 01:21 am
@TheIntegral,
I doubt whether you will find anybody here familiar with the "whole of Plato".
No doubt there will be examples of particular arguments for and against "Platonic forms", or his political views voiced in "The Republic". However such arguments will always be couched within terms of a constantly evolving philosophical historicism, which Derrida argued may have little to do with the "thoughts" of Plato himself. In short, all text is as clay in the hands of particular sculptors.
0 Replies
 
G H
 
  1  
Reply Sun 19 Jun, 2011 12:52 pm
@TheIntegral,
Quote:
Regardless, if any of you believe that his foundations are seriously flawed or that there is a school of thought far more beneficial than his own, I would love to hear constructive advice or criticism.

Little point in asking for recycled fare that has already been hashed out over time by professional discourse. Start with Kant, who limited theoretical reason to appearances only -- "the central figure in modern philosophy" (Rohlf), who "eradicated the last traces of the medieval worldview from modern philosophy" (Guyer). If after reading the second installment in his series of critiques -- Critique of Practical Reason -- you should feel that Kant was yet humping Plato's "Good" in his own roundabout way, then you're probably on your way to confirming an agreement with Whitehead that "All western philosophy [still] consists of footnotes to Plato".

Bear in mind that something like Rorty's neopragmatism entered the venue of comparative literature -- it's a rejection of that tradition. Yet another, actually, since analytic philosophy --his former school of philosophy-- itself either originally claimed to have been such or retrospectively has been conceived to have done such. Yawn.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
DOES NOTHING EXIST??? - Question by mark noble
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
morals and ethics, how are they different? - Question by existential potential
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
 
  1. Forums
  2. » The Whole of Platonic Philosophy
Copyright © 2017 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 12/15/2017 at 08:06:08