Amen to that! Well said 🙏

Over Symposium! Lets do a cage fight!!!!! LOL

You are most welcome. Happy you enjoy the Platonic Dialogues! 🙏

I knew that Plotinus was a Neoplatonist, but I didn't know that he read Theatetus before giving that lecture. I would like to bring the Enneads to the channel some day. Glad you are enjoying the audioebooks! 👍

Hey Alfredo. Happy to hear that you find value in the audioebook. There is a Platonic playlist with 13 of the dialogues, and I intend to complete the full works at some point. Check them out, here is the link: kzfaq.info/sun/PL65ijVzWl9kvQmBMv7nFo5FkqMSWN-q16

Your welcome! 👍

There is a PDF of the translation I use at the bottom of the description. If you download that you can follow along with the whole page. Let me know how you get on.

@@lewiskirk8289 thank you!

It’s a pleasure to see you are enjoying the dialogues my friend! 🙏

😀👍

Ha ha. I'm glad you find value in the audioebooks! 🙏

Thanks. Glad you liked it.

@@lewiskirk8289 there are sections of that dialogue which could twist anyone's tongue. When Socrates is going off about., what we not know? And know ? and think we know not? ... to Theaetus! hahah even Theaetus does not follow hahaha Could I use your readings on my channel in the study of the dialogues regarding Atlantis?

Yes of course. I hope they help your studies and the growth of your channel! 🙏

@@lewiskirk8289 thank you sir!

Who says that ''present''' knowledge is actually '''present'' and that it never existed in the past?? Not to mention that compared to other Greeks actually knew, this was way easier to know from simple observation of dead animal bodies.

@@jimakisspd c'mon... These dudes thought that the eyes projected out beams that interacted with the environment and brought visual information back to the eye.

@@K_F_fox And Einstein believed in the steady state universe theory. Your point is?? This was called by modern critics as ''extromissionism'' theory as opposed to the intromissionism(which was accepted by Aristotle) which is that visual perception comes from something representative of the object (later established to be rays of light reflected from it) entering the eyes. This theory was established by Empedocles from a metaphysical point of view and is much more complex than how you present it to be. Because Empedocles and Plato perceived the ''light''(or the element of ''pure fire'') to be associated with the soul and to this essence all living beings participate and he supposed, that part of the pure element of fire is seated in the eye. When you want to dismiss a theory you need to understand both its viewpoint as well as the complexity from which it was derived and formulated. Cause even if they happen to come out ''invalid'', the validity of other theories was established after complex counter-arguments against arguments supporting that theory were formulated and thus made another theory valid. Otherwise if you do not study hard and realise how important ''false'' or ''theories of the past'' are for the true or ''supposedly'' true theories of the present(which may at any time be proven wrong) you will be ignorant of how modern or ''true'' theories are being established and why. And to dismiss something or a theory only by claiming it's ''an outdated theory of the past'' or ''moderns do not accept it'' would amount to intellectual laziness at best.

Or even thrice. The more listenings and time contemplating will mean more understanding. That’s the only way with Plato. Slow, steady and often 🙏