THE DUEL BETWEEN PLATO AND ARISTOTLE


Victor Pross

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 141
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

LMFAO.

*crazy homeless lady with a tinfoil hat shouting, "THEY'RE COMING!"*

Ya know, I think, if we arent careful, we are going to make some people mad. :)

*strange looking doctor with too many piercings and an odd voice telling you that it wont hurt too bad*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LMFAO.

*crazy homeless lady with a tinfoil hat shouting, "THEY'RE COMING!"*

Ya know, I think, if we arent careful, we are going to make some people mad. :)

*strange looking doctor with too many piercings and an odd voice telling you that it wont hurt too bad*

Mad? But why? *hillbilly style* We ain't do no harm!

*proctologist glancing at your ass, gasping and exclaiming, "Why, there's a crack right down the middle!"*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I repeat, this time in the form of a direct question:

HOW are you going to make good on your statement that it won't happen again unless you either ban Victor entirely or bar him from posting on the intellectual threads (as you did with that one art thread)?

A quick note from the ether:

I'd more-or-less decided to disavow myself of this discussion forum for a number of reasons, not the least of which was the ownership's attitude towards repeated plagiarism and consequently the basic intellectual integrity of the list.

Since I've been a regular here and elsewhere, I feel the need to state for the record: I agree with everything that ES has written on this thread with regard to Victor and his literary kleptomania. Without question his actions here were morally wrong, and as someone who is on the verge of simply not returning to this place because of them (and how they were responded to), I'd like to know the answer to Ellen's as of yet unanswered question.

RCR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
It's easy in hindsight to look at what Aristotle did and didn’t do and insist that we would have been much wiser, but to look at the context of the world which Aristotle lived reveals how truly monumental his contributions were. To skip over his incredible contributions in nearly every human endeavor and chide him for making a mistake or two is ridiculous, and to hold him accountable for the brain dead 'Aristotlean-droids' is even worse intellectual dishonesty. Nobody should be held responsible for what people did 'in their name' a thousand years later.

Aristotle's failure to see the necessity of checking results goes beyond "a failure or two". There are none so blind as those who -will- not see. Aristotle share a flaw which many of the Greek thinkers had in common. He was essentially an a priorist. He believed there were indefeasible principle from which all truths could be deduced. He concede to empirical observation only as a means of finding these indefeasible principles. Once found they needed (in his estimation) no further checking.

In addition to getting motion wrong, he got anatomy wrong, space wrong and time wrong. But he was in excellent company. Aristotle's view of space and time were shared by Isaac Newton who turned out to be wrong too. The big difference was that Newton realized his theories needed to be tested after they were formulated.

Ba'al Chatazaf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bob,

I do not know the history of Artistotle enough to answer this question, but it just crossed my mind.

Did Aristotle worship the Greek gods or was he more skeptical about them? Have you read anything about this?

Michael

Aristotle had a rather abstract idea of God

"God (another surprising part of Aristotle's non-supernatural world) is the ultimate final cause. Starting with ordinary observation, Aristotle notes that things move, and that the source of their movement is some other moving thing. If what efficiently causes x to move is always some other thing y, then there can never be an original efficient cause of movement itself. Movement in the world must be eternal. But there must be some reason why there is movement at all. If not an efficient cause, this reason must be a final cause. And since the movement in question is eternal, its final cause must be eternal. So there must be an eternal cause of all movement. Aristotle calls this prime mover God.

But what is God? Obviously God is not material (that would be absurd and degrading), so he must be spiritual or intellectual (a bit like Plato's forms in fact). As a superior, intellectual being, he must not lower himself to physical acts but instead must only ever use his intellect, i.e. think. And, being perfect, he must think only of what is best, i.e. himself. So Aristotle's God is thought thinking thought. "

This from http://academics.vmi.edu/psy_dr/Aristotle....r/Aristotle.htm

Ba'al Chatzaf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael;

So much of Aristotle has been lost that he may have written on the gods. Much of Aristotle was lost after the fall of the Roman Empire in the West.

More was lost by one of the Islamic conquerors of Alexandria who destroyed many of the books in library.

My last sentence can't be true Islam is a religion of "peace". I will make amends.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael;

So much of Aristotle has been lost that he may have written on the gods. Much of Aristotle was lost after the fall of the Roman Empire in the West.

More was lost by one of the Islamic conquerors of Alexandria who destroyed many of the books in library.

My last sentence can't be true Islam is a religion of "peace". I will make amends.

The Romans were the first to burn the library. There were several other burnings as well including the burning done by Caliph Umar. By that time most of the library was looted or ruined.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now