4 ms·

> Philosophy at the end of the day is about arguing a point; it isn't about producing an aesthetic experience. So why would you abuse your reader by making it a

> Philosophy at the end of the day is about arguing a point; it isn't about producing an aesthetic experience. So why would you abuse your reader by making it a pain in the ass to figure out what you mean? This is a funny thing to say about a discipline that was more or less founded by Plato, who was notably obscurantist if not outright esoteric. In any case, philosophy is not always about making a point and there is not always a point to be made. Sometimes it's just asking questions.

swayvil 3y ago
When philosophy starts with a real observation (...then words, then discussion), obscurantism is appropriate and expected. Because words can only fit a real observation badly. When philosophy starts with words, a clear point is expected, for the obvious reasons. But that's two completely different worlds.
ants_everywhere 3y ago
This hasn't been my experience of Plato at all. I've always found his dialogs to be written with a surprising clarity. Is there a work in particular you're thinking of?
- serf 3y ago
  Parmenides, unless you're really into classical semi-formalized logic and that comes easily as explanation..
techno_tsar 3y ago
What part of Plato are you referring to? Republic is honestly written at a 10th grade English reading level. The most esoteric work of Plato is Timaeus, but most people do not see that as a foundational text in Western philosophy.
- kragen 3y ago
  platon didn't speak english, because english wouldn't exist for fifteen more centuries, so he didn't write the republic at any english reading level. the various english translations of it vary greatly in their clarity and readability i agree that the timaios is platon's most esoteric surviving work, and it's full of enormous amounts of nonsense, but i think it's still reasonably clearly written. sadly, it is a foundational text in not only western philosophy but eastern philosophy as well, and it took twenty centuries for most thinkers to reject most of its erroneous dogmas
- empath-nirvana 3y ago
  First, the "reading level" of Plato depends on the translation, but that's not what I"m talking about. The way most people are exposed to Plato, they're assigned to read his most straight forward texts, but his dialogues are full of mysticism and ideas that he only hints at in the dialogues (particularly in Timaeus and Parminedes) which his students expanded on later. Plato was skeptical of the written word as a means of transmitting ideas and sort of held some ideas back exclusively for his students at the academy who continued to develop them.

swayvil 3y ago

When philosophy starts with a real observation (...then words, then discussion), obscurantism is appropriate and expected. Because words can only fit a real observation badly. When philosophy starts with words, a clear point is expected, for the obvious reasons. But that's two completely different worlds.

ants_everywhere 3y ago

This hasn't been my experience of Plato at all. I've always found his dialogs to be written with a surprising clarity. Is there a work in particular you're thinking of?

serf 3y ago
Parmenides, unless you're really into classical semi-formalized logic and that comes easily as explanation..

techno_tsar 3y ago

What part of Plato are you referring to? Republic is honestly written at a 10th grade English reading level. The most esoteric work of Plato is Timaeus, but most people do not see that as a foundational text in Western philosophy.

kragen 3y ago
platon didn't speak english, because english wouldn't exist for fifteen more centuries, so he didn't write the republic at any english reading level. the various english translations of it vary greatly in their clarity and readability i agree that the timaios is platon's most esoteric surviving work, and it's full of enormous amounts of nonsense, but i think it's still reasonably clearly written. sadly, it is a foundational text in not only western philosophy but eastern philosophy as well, and it took twenty centuries for most thinkers to reject most of its erroneous dogmas
empath-nirvana 3y ago
First, the "reading level" of Plato depends on the translation, but that's not what I"m talking about. The way most people are exposed to Plato, they're assigned to read his most straight forward texts, but his dialogues are full of mysticism and ideas that he only hints at in the dialogues (particularly in Timaeus and Parminedes) which his students expanded on later. Plato was skeptical of the written word as a means of transmitting ideas and sort of held some ideas back exclusively for his students at the academy who continued to develop them.