3 ms·
You're comparing oranges to apples, and depreciating philosophy, which is more science than art. No one seriously discusses papers of guys who believed odd scie
by maurycy 18y ago
You're comparing oranges to apples, and depreciating philosophy, which is more science than art. No one seriously discusses papers of guys who believed odd scientific theories from XVI.
- river_styx 18y agoMy point is that, even if you dismiss those works as having little scientific value, they have great literary value as well.
- maurycy 18y agoSo, their place would be in the literature courses, not philosophy ones.
- river_styx 18y agoYou're still not getting it. What I'm saying is that Plato's works have both philosophical and literary value. Even if you dispute the first, there is still the second. I'm not sure why this is would mean moving them from philosophy to literature courses (or why those should be mutually exclusive in the first place).