Can one be a Platonist in the modern world?
>>24113900You can be anything you set your mind to but be warned, “the world of the perfect chair” does seem a bit far fetched.
>>24113900Yes, but it might make you a fat retard.
notry it in my face, see what happen
>>24113913Well, Plato does love gluttony according to the Hipparchus dialogue.
A lot comes down to what you mean by Platonism. Inevitably, some kind anon will remind us once again of what Plato said about not writing his teachings down in the 7th letter. If by Platonism you mean “the ideal is prior to the concrete; materialism doesn’t work; skepticism doesn’t work; also, God is real” - many philosophies fall under that umbrella. There are whole universities dedicated to Aquinas, who was (in important ways) a Platonist even if he only knew Plato via Augustine and Avicenna etc. The dominant theology of Iran is quite Platonist, via Plotinus and Mulla Sudra. Etc. But there is no such thing as “just Platonism”, Plato’s own students disagreed with each other and most of them rejected the crude theory of Forms you see in the Phaedo. Did Plato hold it? Probably not imo but who can say? He appointed his nephew to succeed him, Speusippus, even though he was opposed to that theory. So yes and no - there is no unitary Platonism and never has been; but yes Plato is still a live influence, even if, by the nature of his works, he is not a “live option”, as they say, because there are no set teachings, just tendencies. There’s a good blog post by Feser about “ur-Platonism” you might like, though the idea is Gerson’s, laying down the “five antis” of anything that can be called broadly Platonist: anti-materialism, anti-skepticism, anti-nominalism, anti-mechanism, anti-relativism. If you oppose those things, you’re in the tent, the theory goes. Billions of people, and a solid share of professional philosophers, fall in those bounds.
>>24113900>are we using math?>do you think numbers are real?>yes>no I mean ACKtually real?>endless debate over origin of math>turns out math works and people might be wrong>analytics and continentals brought to the peace talks at gunpoint>so, we doing math?>yes>are we going to ask stupid questions and try to insert nonsensical opinions?>yes>alright then we're likely Platonists>posters flood in with memes and serious comments about how Plato was right about everything the entire time and everything after is a waste.>Humefags still claim math should just be removed from philosophy. NOTHING FUCKING CHANGES
The modern world is basically Epicurean. Plutarch’s Moralia critiques Epicureanism from a Middle Platonist perspective.
>>24113900Not without getting on a registry.
>>24113979Plato already has an epicurean dialogue himself, the Hipparchus. It is epicurean or even stoic in its pursuit of pleasure at the detriment of things like rigid ethics you see in other dialogues.
>>24113979It’s not the modern world anon it’s the baseline assumption of anyone. Acquire happy, shun not-happy. That’s how the vast majority of people have always been and always will be, nothing to do with modernity. Not saying we’re right but it is true that this is not a modern issue, it’s a human issue.
>>24113910isn't that what capitalism sells, the perfect product, the best delusions, the best glimpse into the platonic realm
>>24114098woah
>>24114098Hylic
>>24114098Shadows on the wall, anon, shadows on the wall. No Plato did not think you should seek fulfillment in some perfect object or feeling, he thought that whole line was evil.
>>24114170i'm saying that capitalism is the closest we have come to understanding those shadows, have you seen how obsessed the japanese are with craftsmanship and cooking, that zen sense of practice towards creation
>>24114194Hylic
>>24113979In some respects, that seems right, but I'd maybe qualify it by saying it's a, paradoxically, Christianized Epicureanism, since Classical Epicureanism didn't set out with humanitarian aims.
>>24114219We worship the goddess of Parmenides here. You heathens had your chance.
I mean you could. You would be comically wrong and usually made fun of for being wrong, but you are allowed to be wrong.
>>24114194Na I don’t man, if you think Plato was exalting the artisan classes and their “artistic productions” you just need to read more Plato. There is no way any product - not even a philosophical “product”, a set of supposedly airtight arguments - could answer the questions Plato was asking. To me this is one of his main points.
>>24114303Glad you're on board with the goddess, unless you want to prove your false god exists.
>>24114266zen craftsmanship is the closest we have of platonic beauty, maybe not other kinds
>>24114170Aren't we meant to pursue the forms?
>>24113910>You can be anything you set your mind to but be warned, “the world of the perfect chair” does seem a bit far fetched.Aren't we sold that all the time? I believe >>24114098's view of this phenomena as a capitalist thing is retarded, capitalism simply preys on the already pre set desires for ideal beauty, form, being and so on. This line of philosophical thinking predates capitalism dumbass and it's also present in communism about as much as in capitalism.
>>24113900YesHave you ever heard of woman?
>>24114112religious
Platonism is incomplete. Sure it adequately incorporates simpler notions like numbers and shapes but fails on complex ideas like man and woman.
