knew thered be a mccarthy in the top 10 😄

🙏

I read 'The Republic' in college. The professor was shockingly superficial. Not once did he critique the text or invite us to respond to it. We read, he lectured, explaining what he believed Plato meant. That was it. As a budding songwriter and novelist, I was taken aback by its enthusiastic call for state based censorship and the eugenics, if you can call state sanctioned murder eugenics, were beyond belief. I'm glad I took the course. As you said, The Republic is a seminal work of western civilization but, as you also noted, it's also one of the most unrepentant buckets of bullshit ever created.

It is a great pity that you read the Politeia as the first of Plato's dialogues, because unfortunately this has led you to misunderstand most of it under false premises. The first thing to note is that the Politeia may be the most famous dialog, but as an example of the Socratic method it is one of the worst, which is certainly related to Plato's intentions. Then it is important to realize that a Platonic dialogue should not be read like a philosophical treatise, at least not according to Plato's intentions. There are good reasons why Plato writes dialogues. One of them is that the things that are said should not be taken without reflection as his own opinion. So to call Socrates his mouthpiece is, generally speaking, not correct. Since I'm not sure whether it's worth catching up or whether you've already passed your final judgment on Plato, I'll just give a small hint about the actual content of the dialog: the first book contains a discussion about the question of justice. (And this is also the part that best illustrates the Socratic dialog). The second book then states the actual intention of the further investigation. The aim is to find out whether the difficulties in determining the nature of justice that emerged in the discussion in relation to the individual can perhaps be overcome if the question is transferred to the scale of a state. To this end, the concept of an ideal state is to be sketched out in order to recognize how justice manifests itself there. I would like to derive two ideas from this. Firstly, that it is not about designing a state for practical implementation. Secondly, the question of whether Plato perhaps meant the same thing by an "ideal" state as we would understand it today. (In German, it is a little easier to make sense of this, because "ideal" = "ideal", but "form" = "idea").

Good review

Well, philosophy drives us, people, as our way of (mis)interpreting the world. But the world doesn't need to interpret itself, so it can't be driven by philosophy. To be useful, a philosophy needs to be grounded in objectivity and experience of reality.

Really enjoyed it. Do you think Plato was being a bit tongue and cheek in describing his ideal Republic? Perhaps making a statement about the insanity of logical reasoning and the deeply flawed nature of all of man's endeavors?

I haven’t read it in its entirety yet, but The Republic is probably the most terrifying thing I’ve ever read. Philosopher King? To do what? Regulate “misinformation” on our behalf? No thanks.

19:19 🤨🤨🤨

Roy Batty? 😂

Interesting, your points help to show how it can be overwritten. Ill try and be aware of this when i feel tired reading a novel This repetition is kind of a modern move but can definitely get frustrating. Atwood does it a lot Comically overwrought

Are you going to read his unfinished novel?

Everyone says "show don't tell", while never mentioning how telling itself can be exquisitely done. 28:00 is probably my favourite, because almost no one seem to be aware of just how flawed and limited their perspective is when it comes to pretty much anything, starting with what's going on with their own body, yet everybody is desperate to convince everyobody else that they know the truth. Storytelling has always been torn between two mindsets - works that want to dictate a way of thinking and works that want to explore themes with a reader, it's often be a mix of both but usually easy to tell which direction is predominant. The essence of art lives on the side of exploration, being unbiased towards the reader. I don't think I have enough focus to go through the whole work, but I admire that you had and glad it gave you unique insights on life, and who knows, maybe Proust would've chose the circular narrative ending if he had time to finish it himself.

Great opening!

Good content bro 👍🏻

👍🏾

😃 🙏🏾🙏🏾🙏🏾

I just finished, and i enjoyed it. I laughed, though, when i looked at the back cover and saw that it read, "Fiction"

Excellent story; one of Dean Koontz' best. Sounds like you're coming from a position of jealousy.

16:20 "Frankenstein is Victorious" So what you're saying is Percy Shelley would have written *Young Frankenstein*

And my favourite of all philosophers is this one. 🌈 💝💝💝💝💝💕🎶 🤭 There is absolutely fascinating biography about him he was expert musician. 🎶 ( etcetera ) 🎶 Which is why he was so clever. 🤭 + it was what it was. = and now it is what it is. 🎶 Spinoza is more difficult . And he got even more answers. 🌈

Underrated channel. This was a brilliant summarization and review of the book. Thank you. Although, it is interesting to note and should be pointed out that while Alamut is an absolutely wonderfully written novel, a lot of what Bartol makes out to be immutable facts about the Order of Assassins has, in more recent times, come to have been largely disproven and outright debunked. The main myth being the Assassins or Hashashin's being influenced by herbs, mixtures and extracts Hassan-i Sabbah did not in fact drug his Assassins (fida'is) in order to trick them into believing they had been allowed entry into Paradise and come to have briefly glimpsed what it held in store for the faithful. The political situation in 11th century Syria and Persia was so dire that Sabbah did not at all need to deceive or delude his faithful soldiers so that they would perform their duties to the best of their abilties and sacrifice themselves wholly for their great and noble cause if need be. The Nizari Isamili were beset by multiple rival religious and militaristic groups that boasted dedicated armed forces far larger than their own. As they were essentially trapped, cornered and condemned on all sides by various factions and sects relentlessly pursuing or harassing the Nizari Ismaili's, what they really needed was a leader and strategist capable and effective enough to turn the tables. That's exactly what Hassan-i Sabbah, with the help of his loyal assassins proved to be; frighteningly capable and effective. This is something Bartol portrays well in his book but Hassan-i Sabbah, while incredibly shrewd, discerning and calculating, was still a wholly devout and dedicated muslim. He was not a secret atheist pretending to be an utterly devout and dedicated follower of Muhammad while largely denying the beliefs, tenets and creeds that Islam espoused, endorsed and advocated. Regardless, though Bartol's novel is rife with innacuracies, myths and misinformation (and is largely based on the biased accounts of europeans who may well have been attempting to disparage and demonize their enemies by spreading what are essentially slanderous lies), the book Alamut is still, as I said before, an absolutely wonderfully written novel that has a lot of very important things to say about how religion can be twisted and corrupted to suit the schemes, personal politics and agendas of the overly ambitious and duplicitous.

🧛‍♀️. 🌈 💕💕💕💕💕😊 I am getting in the bath 🛀 I Feel like i am Lee Miller in Hitlers apartment 🛀

Kant was poet to the max. Love him so much. 🌈 💕💕💕💕💝💝🫠

🌈 💝💝💝💝💝💚💯 🫠 In my real life version the collectors are weirdo women. @ Vampires 🧛‍♀️

As usual, a solid review of a book which I have zero interest in reading.

Wanted to quit after the first 20 pages. Soldiered on until 100 pages in. That was enough.

"Good old fashioned rape-rape." Quotable as always no matter how dark haha. I had never heard of this book, but the first thing that came to mind was: is this even real? Based on what you said, it does seem over the top to be a true account. I'm which case, who would concoct this?

I just can't. Yucky. 🤢

Never heard of this one but it sounds somewhat interesting.

I've actually read that man is the only mammal that mistreats the females of it's own species.🤔 If true, what an Honor to behold, huh. But it wouldn't surprise me at all.🙄

If it makes a reader feel violated, it does it's job.

The way the writing constantly stops itself to get angry at the fictional people he made up is very typical of the fascist mindset. I think because so much of fascist media just propaganda, their stunted view of the world keeps them from actually creating anything meaningful

I've heard about this one, and I've edged away from it. There are some tales that I'm not at all sure I want to hear. But come Saturday morning, I'll be listening in to this. I won't try to justify lmyself-- I'll be there to realize (once again) how horrible humans can be to one another.

How can it be _better_ "not to be" when you didn't exist, yet a life was still imposed? I didn't exist, yet a life was still imposed. This is true for _all_ lives that ever existed. Not existing didn't stop a life from being imposed, therefore not existing is incapable of stopping a life from being imposed. Therefore, not existing cannot be better (or whatever synonym you'd like to use). If not existing couldn't stop a life from being imposed, then how would have not existing (via not being born) been able to stop some _other_ life from doing "the imposition" (of a life)?

The dark masters of occult psychology have, through social engineering, managed to get the herd to cull itself. Truly remarkable.

Thank you! 🙂

The title alone got me 🏃🏾‍♀️