Re Plato essay

[Iris Sirius]

Good point, Kohuticus.

You know whats funny though, is that this  society could really use some,
whats the word, Plato, baby, censorship.

Holy fuck, am I fucking Crazy?!?!

And, censorship, yes, but also, truth.

What is truth, master Markus Kohuticus?
On Jan 21, 2013 3:34 PM, "Markekohut" <markekohut at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Plato is worth a lot of words. but some of them MUST be that he was a
> crypto-fascist ( or worse) in The Republic and he wanted to banish writers
> and other artists cause they made citizens think, roiled emotions and
> otherwise brought chaos to that Republic.
>
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Jan 21, 2013, at 1:41 PM, alice wellintown <alicewellintown at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > How do we or how should we read Plato?
> > As a younger lady, I read Plato and thought that Socrates was just the
> > badest badass of all the philosophers. He has nija moves and can punch
> > holes in a locamotive faster than a falling building in a single
> > bound.
> >
> > Of course, I hadn't even studied a handful, when I became convinced
> > that Aristotle was, as the famous phrase sez, "the philosophers
> > pholosopher."  And, when I discovered that the "Socrates" of Plato's
> > dialogues was but a shadow of the real philsopher, the great old greek
> > with the buff physic, with the bumps and lumps and pecs of an American
> > footballer, pointing to the heavens under the brass lamp hangind in
> > the museum down the block, well...and when I discovered that
> > Aristotle, who actually cared about getting the ideas of others in the
> > history of ohilosophy right, unlike Plato, who distorted and reduced
> > their ideas to punchingbags, well, but then, I began to see that logic
> > was riddled with problems and that often itz driving force is getting
> > things right, or winning the day....and I decided that success was not
> > a very good way of going about evaluating what was valid....and that
> > what follows from beginning, or in the beginning, and moves to the
> > heavens often involves a great Fall, and, as I was raised by
> > Jesuits...I began to think that what comes at the end of days may
> > make valid what we put away as childish things, though these will be
> > valid enough in their time, for everything there is, of course a time,
> > the whole determining the parts or the other way about. But this, even
> > though I always suspected those Jesuits, for who didn't suspect them,
> > of putting to much on a transcendence they, half-agnostically preached
> > bu did not care to calculate the graces of...and anyway, a unified
> > theory or theories smacks of conspiracy...and so, after losing my
> > cherry, I decided to consider the preterit again, so back to
> > Aristotle, sort of, only this time I would focus on the losers. Yes,
> > dialctic is certainly Not about winning the day, in fact, itz not even
> > against the day, but about losing, losing one's position, one's
> > struggle against the other by taking turns at talk. Or better song.
> > The battle of songs or poems.
> >
> > I hope that the President and the Congress will try a little Plato in
> > the coming years. But first, they shall need to surrender the idea
> > that winning is a win, that a win-win is about dialogue. The pragmatic
> > American, however, is essentially a student of Aristotle. So were all
> > our Metaphysical Club members, pragmatists, but, there is, in the very
> > Principles of the American, something Creative. This nis something
> > Plato would ban and Aristotle would turn into a vocational school for
> > the Booker T Boyz in the hood, but this Creativity is what makes of
> > us, we the people, we Americans, the most innovative people in
> > history.
> >
> > Now if only we can elect someone who believes this is more than mere
> rhetoric.
> >
> > Did enjoy that poem, though a halmark ripp-off of Walt.
> >
> >
> >> Mm. Ages since I read Pirsig. Interesting idea for an argument, though,
> I
> >> admit. It was my impression that Pirsig mostly got Plato pretty wrong,
> in
> >> that Plato, like his teacher, was all about the nature of dialectic and
> what
> >> might be gained in terms of human understanding through mastering the
> >> method. Was writing down those examples of dialectic inquiry useful in
> >> expanding human understanding? Was it useful in expanding the
> manipulation
> >> of human understanding? Was it to posterity a gift and a bane alike?
> Maybe
> >> it depends on who reads Plato, and how.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20130121/4e29c111/attachment.html>