be metfw no one on this board actually reads to win, they just LARP as "enlightened" faggots circlejerking about muh self-actualization and "the good life"I don't give a fuck about becoming wise. I don't want truth. I don't want to actualize shit. I want to read just enough philosophy and literature so I can drop Socratic questions that make retards seethe, especially troons, leftoids, and pseuds on this board and elsewhere. I want them typing paragraphs, calling me schizo, then ragequitting. Pure psychic damage. Insufferable autist arc.Fastest path only. No "read the whole western canon bro" bullshit. I want the cheat codes:Which parts of Plato hit the Socratic method hardest for owning people in debate?Rhetoric tricks from Aristotle or whoever that make normies short-circuit?Logic/fallacy stuff so I can trap them in their own words?Any literature excerpts that are pure midwit destruction ammo?If you recommend a book, don't say "read Republic." Tell me exactly which dialogues or sections turn me into a debate gremlin. I will skim for seethe potential only. No reddit self-help philosophy. No "actually understanding the text." Just weaponized autism.Prove you're not all posers and give me the actual schizo speedrun. Or seethe and cope like usual.(bonus: if your rec doesn't make people visibly upset online I will call you a faggot in the thread)Also drop any Nietzsche bits I can use. I want to become the Übermensch of internet trolling — last man seething edition. Something about becoming a hammer that smashes their little idols and makes them ressentiment-maxxxing.
> Which parts of Plato hit the Socratic method hardest for owning people in debate?For someone like you I recommend Euthydemus. The point here is that the arguments look retarded but this is just how sophists do argue, at least logically/structurally.> Rhetoric tricks from Aristotle or whoever that make normies short-circuit?Topics and Soph En will be more relevant. The latter in particular is literally a scientific manual on how to argue like a twat.
>socratic method>ask niggas questions till they feel dumbYou reallyy needed to read books to come up with such a method?
>not scrotum gremlingood luck making people seethe, idiot
>>25261085ubuntu?
>>25261110Marvin?
>>25261134scrotus?
>>25261142That's right my nane is scrotusBut you can call me potus
>>25261149aight now we making the seethe
>>25261149Bogus locusDaddies money the dopest I shit on the popesses
Schopenhauer said the essence of sophistical arguing is finding a middle term that is only partly related to the extremes. You can argue for anything this way.
>>25261158fund a church get that indulgence
>>25261163ah, only a sophist would make such a claim
>>25261164Uhhh that doesnt rhyme
>>25261165I think it‘s one of maybe two intelligent things he ever said. The other being when he said philosophers can‘t ignore mysticism.
>>25261085Why?
>>25261169you are pretending to know what rhyming means
>>25261199I already determined you were esl and i would appreciate it if you did not respond to this post
>>25261085As >>25261094 already pointed out the Topics and Sophistical Refutations from Aristotle's Organon are like the platonic ideal (no pun intended) of what you're looking for. Going back to read Socratic dialogues after those Aristotle books it's like you're just watching Socrates button-mash combos of rhetorical tricksDon't expect people will actually react to you like the characters in Socratic dialogues though, even Socrates got BTFO once when Protagoras preemptively called him out on the fallacy he was about to set up (treating a universal affirmative as convertible)
>>25261163/lit/ is the only place in the world where people reference Aristotelian logic as authoritative and argue about the Analytica but almost no one seems to know anything about modern logic.
>>25261101here's one
>>25261252meh. you aint even a scrote hair. go suck some ass smegma
>>25261221Modern logic is reddit and the meme that Aristotelian logic is faulty because it doesn't consider "existential import" is so stupid I can't even call it midwittery
>>25261337Yeah it is. Plus he does talk about existential import, that‘s what the goatstag is about. It‘s not important for him because he thought scientific propositions did not refer to existence as such but to universals.
