baz
 
Reply Wed 8 Feb, 2006 08:16 pm
Evil is all that which destroys and corrupts. . .
Each thing has its evil . . . for instance, ophthalmia for the eye, and disease for the whole body, mildew for corn and for wood, rust for iron . . .
The natural evil of each thing . . . destroys it, and if this does not destroy it, nothing else can . . .
(a) for I don't suppose good can ever destroy anything,
(b) nor can what is neither good nor evil,
(c) and it is certainly unreasonable . . . that the evil of something else would destroy anything when its own evil does not.
Then if we find something in existence which has its own evil but which can only do it harm yet cannot dissolve or destroy it, we shall know at once that there is no destruction for such a nature. . . .
the soul has something which makes it evil . . . injustice, intemperance, cowardice, ignorance. Now does any one of these dissolve and destroy it? . . .
Then, since it is not destroyed by any evil at all, neither its own evil nor foreign evil, it is clear that the soul must of necessity be . . . immortal
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 734 • Replies: 7
No top replies

 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Wed 8 Feb, 2006 09:30 pm
Have you ever read and considered Plato's The Republic, from which the tidbit you've quoted was excerpted, or did you merely lift the quote acontextually from some blog or forum post?
0 Replies
 
the sleeper
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Feb, 2006 08:01 pm
why get on him for making a good point, he would have had to read it to get the quote
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Feb, 2006 08:36 pm
It's sort of an unwritten rule not only to include some of your own thought in each post, but to cite your references.

Otherwise we could just post the all purpose link.
0 Replies
 
real life
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Feb, 2006 10:03 pm
Well, he titled the thread "Plato" , so I don't think he is pretending to be the author, is he? Maybe he just thought it was a good springboard for discussion.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Feb, 2006 12:23 pm
the sleeper wrote:
why get on him for making a good point, he would have had to read it to get the quote

No, that quote is splattered all over the internet, on forums, groups, blogs, and boards mostly of the religionist sort - and notably not in evidence on any of the strictly philosophic, rhetoric, or logic forums, groups, blogs or boards I frequent. Frankly, I doubt anyone who's cut-and-pasted it since first it appeared some years ago on a usenet group has read The Republic

rl wrote:
Well, he titled the thread "Plato" , so I don't think he is pretending to be the author, is he? Maybe he just thought it was a good springboard for discussion.

No question of claim to authorship. However, should one wish a plank to serve as a springboard, one might be expected to provide an anchor and a fulcrum ... as it is, the plank baz tossed out pretty much is just laying there unattached to anything, getting kicked around but not getting used by anyone who's noticed it so far. I'd say what was accomplished more resembles littering than building a discussion framework.
0 Replies
 
Dartagnan
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Feb, 2006 12:26 pm
I agree with Timber, though I tend to feel that way about any thread that begins with something pasted, with no comment at all by the poster...
0 Replies
 
real life
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Feb, 2006 02:56 pm
timberlandko wrote:
the sleeper wrote:
why get on him for making a good point, he would have had to read it to get the quote

No, that quote is splattered all over the internet, on forums, groups, blogs, and boards mostly of the religionist sort - and notably not in evidence on any of the strictly philosophic, rhetoric, or logic forums, groups, blogs or boards I frequent. Frankly, I doubt anyone who's cut-and-pasted it since first it appeared some years ago on a usenet group has read The Republic

rl wrote:
Well, he titled the thread "Plato" , so I don't think he is pretending to be the author, is he? Maybe he just thought it was a good springboard for discussion.

No question of claim to authorship. However, should one wish a plank to serve as a springboard, one might be expected to provide an anchor and a fulcrum ... as it is, the plank baz tossed out pretty much is just laying there unattached to anything, getting kicked around but not getting used by anyone who's noticed it so far. I'd say what was accomplished more resembles littering than building a discussion framework.


Laughing

I always enjoy your manner of expression, Timber. Hope you are having a great day, my friend.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

700 Inconsistencies in the Bible - Discussion by onevoice
Why do we deliberately fool ourselves? - Discussion by coincidence
Spirituality - Question by Miller
Oneness vs. Trinity - Discussion by Arella Mae
give you chills - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence for Evolution! - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence of God! - Discussion by Bartikus
One World Order?! - Discussion by Bartikus
God loves us all....!? - Discussion by Bartikus
The Preambles to Our States - Discussion by Charli
 
  1. Forums
  2. » plato
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 12/26/2024 at 10:55:35