Plato was discoursing on his theory of ideas and, pointing to the cups on the table before him...

Personally, I prefer the yo-mama's contest between Leibniz and Bayle.

That cup's name? Adolf Hitler Einstein.

Diogenes : destroyed

The Ancient Greeks ruined thought.

sauce? asking for a friend.

>ONE WINTRY SUNDAY MORNING, my husband and I were luxuriating in our cozy bed.
> "Let's get the Sunday paper and read it here!" I suggested.
> He yawned lazily. "Okay," he responded.
> "But which one of us is `Let's'?"

see and then they all clapped.

>If i hadn't the responsibility of being Alexander i would be Diogenes
It's for this that I know Diogenes as a great man, an exemplary individual.

daily reminder to all Jow Forumsacks that loves the edgy side of Diogenes that he also was a promoter of cosmopolitanism. You can't be a nationalist and love this cunt.

Plato was unironically the dumbest faggot of all philosophers. Wish I could go back in time and buy him as a slave so his cancerous ideas wouldn’t have spread like the plague. Imagine being able to sell a concept that can’t exist physically and can never be proven— fucker should have been a politician.

>"I think you will find here is the 'emptiness'
not an argument

No one has responded to my point that Diogenes agreed with Plato. The concept of emptiness exists in Plato's head.
>lol what an intellectual epic burn see how smart I am
"Existence precedes essence" fags btfo.

Attached: Orbital sides.png (717x436, 314K)

Boomtastic.

checked
he wasn’t really agreeing though. he was saying plato isn’t really saying anything and is wasting everyone’s time

>Plato says concepts/forms/essence exists in our heads
>Diogenes says "where is emptiness?"
>Plato can't keep up with bantz
>Diogenes points to the exact place where Plato says forms exist
(you) - he wasn't really agreeing tho
Seems like he was.

Remember that Plato also made a point of describing these perfect forms as something that the common man can never hope to perceive— that can only be done by the righteous philosopher kings that know good from wrong and can control all of society perfectly with his knowledge on these make-believe, unprovable concepts.
It’s an interesting thought exercise. It’s also how you birth and promote communism for the next 10,000 years.

I appreciate your honest input. You have not addressed that actual argument in itself. Taking away the context, the logos of what I have said is indisputable, unless you can tell me why I am wrong. Diogenes's bants was good, but he still agreed with Plato.

I mean I see it as a blatant criticism on Diogenes’ part, as in they’re not agreeing. The conclusion may be the same in terms of concepts but it seems like Diogenes’s point is that Plato isn’t really saying anything. Like no shit you know what a cup is because the concept of ‘cup’ exists
But I don’t know much about the era

>The conclusion may be the same in terms of concepts
>Plato isn’t really saying anything
You must pick one, and only one.

Okay... Diogenese is saying that Plato doesn’t have a whole lot of brain. That’s not agreeing with Plato’s argument. You’re also mischaracterizing Plato’s realm of ideals. Just because concepts exist in our heads doesn’t mean there’s an alternate world that holds the perfect form of “cupness.” Being that you’re Plato’s “common man” also means that you can’t reach into this alternate world and describe to us what the perfect form of cupness is— only a philosopher king can do that. According to Plato.

you can smell the "fart", but can you smell the "fartness"?

playing along does not necessarily mean you agree with someone.

You can see the "Bruce", but can you see the "Bruceness"?

Attached: 1560116987820.jpg (700x539, 96K)

cringe but also based

You are retarded.
He was a true stoic absurdist.
He made fun of the cosmopolitan sophists. He made fun of the hetaerae. He called out the pederast sophist tutors.
He had nothing to lose and pulled no punches. He epitomized sincerity, fearlessness and disregard for appearances.

Diogenes can't see the cupness? Then tries to argue something he readily admits he doesn't understand. What an idiot .

Diogenes is literally saying that the essence of emptiness exists in Plato's head under the veneer of a bantz of saying "lel you have no brain man." The fact that we can agree on the concept of emptiness to understand this epic bantz means that it exists in our brains, preceeding existence.
Autisticaly speaking, emptiness = no life
This is something that we have only experienced before our birth yet have no conscious recolletion of, yet we understand it.

>intention is always relevant
Not an art school fag are you?

numbers, archetypes, colors

You can experience emptiness by examining the nothingness all around you. If you think insulting someone proves their argument right, I don’t know what to tell you. Diogenese denies Plato’s unprovable “cupness,” insults him, and that means Plato’s won? Come on now. I can imagine a planet I’ve never seen before called Tantar vii, does that mean it was a perfect concept I experienced in the womb? Fuck off.

Diogenes is using the form of the argument of plato against him, proving plato's argument that there is only one original idea.

>Diogenese denies Plato’s unprovable “cupness,”
Wrong. Diogenese says he cannot see "cupness" while "seeing" - in the style of bantz - "emptiness" in Plato's head.
>You can experience emptiness by examining the nothingness all around you
>Nothingness
>around
>you
Lel, please read what you write before posting

checked and lit post af

The fact that you're all even debating this makes you a retard, that was his point.

>posts in thread he is obviously above
fucking rekt man, tight.

>obviously above

Obviously not. *taps on forehead*

You understand that you’re just reducing the argument so that you don’t have to address any of it don’t you?
Cupness is not provable because you can’t see it or measure it. It exists only in the make-believe realm of forms.
Emptiness, as you defined, is the absence of life, such as the space between your face and your computer. But you’ll just downplay it again and say something retarded like “no there’s actually air in that space! xd”

Diogenes grabbing the chicken was the ancient equivalent of BTFO post that gets gigantic string of replies with reaction images.

>*taps on forehead*
Nice. Glad we agree.

Another fucken rekt post. Nice.

Philosophy is a spook.

no he plucked a chicken and masturbated in public he was mentally ill

Let's get some modern Greek opinions on this.

Attached: gxgdfg.png (931x693, 949K)

right on brother

I am reducing the argument to logos because that is the whole point, aside from the dopamine released from pretty solid Grecian bantz that might as well be some made up academic bullshit but why the fuck would that matter
>Emptiness, as you defined, is the absence of life, such as the space between your face and your computer
So you agree that emptiness must be defined in relational/relative terms. Nice, glad we agree.

I clapped!

apocryphal

>lets ask the shitskins

Based and cup pilled.

I see an instantiation of Bruceness and can infer its existence from said instantiation.

Another one of Allah's fine warriors proved God exists. Blessed be he

>Diogenes is using the form of the argument of plato against him, proving plato's argument that there is only one original idea.
Most coherent post in entire thread.

He also jerked off in public.

Fuckingbaste.

And the very first post I made in response stated that you can’t prove a realm of perfect forms exists just because you and I have concepts in our heads. All you’re saying is that we can give meaning to what has no meaning, but you’re not proving that we can ascribe that meaning to a perfect realm of forms.
It’s crazy that you live out your life relying on your five senses to guide you on your day-to-day, but you can just completely forget about all that when you hear Plato’s name because you just have to tongue his ass and play with an unprovable concept like this. Or are you secretly Plato’s prized philosopher king that knows anything and everything because you remember all the perfect forms from your time as a sperm?

In this case Diogenes was correct, Plato's "essense of an object" and "abstract world of forms" are occult nonsense.

Wittgenstein stated "Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent." which essentially means: hold your dick or you'll look like a dumb cunt.

There's no essense or perfect form of cupness, the cup is a solution to a problem caused by the geometry and curvature of spacetime, the local environment, and the properties of liquids, it's so specific to this context it's laughable and cupness itself is too slippery a fish to ever nail down.

Attached: 1561117648977.jpg (443x332, 12K)

boomerposter BEGONE

So basically Plato was trying to be a smug asshole and Diogenes was just like “lol nigger”.

agree with point, the whole post however... time to kys.

>cupness
so, Plato was a turbo brainlet?

>women not allowed to act in the theatres
He jerked it to traps

Here's plato's cupness
I don't get how he couldn't understand such a simple concept

Attached: drawing-high-quality-free-rhclipartxtrascom-holding-collection-Cupped-Hands-Holding-Water.jpg (1900x1261, 51K)

>Oi cunt, fuck off out the way, you're blocking me rays
> *Resumes masturbating furiously*
Diogenes was the primal Aussie

How are we possibly able to argue about concepts that we can't prove to exist? Read because it cannot be more simplified or distilled that that. Also, learn to argue with less emotion unless you want to come across as a woman.
>All you’re saying is that we can give meaning to what has no meaning
Once you learn how to do this everything in your life will become so much more easy, including loss.

not having abstract thought makes you merely an NPC, but denying the existence of abstract thought makes you a solid retard

you are clearly oblivious of the fact that one of communism's philosophical cornerstones is dialectic materialism, which is closer to your retarded ideas than to those of Plato

Plato's Idealism was put to rest once and for all when Schopenhauer BTFO'd Kant's Ding-an-sich.

He was basically ancient reddit.

>cupness doesn't exist
>lel I'll use cupness in a joke to show how intelligent i am
faggot who is also brainless

Because we give concepts meaning. It’s why we can argue ethics even though it’s not measurable. But Plato suggests that there’s a perfect form of ethics that gan only be grasped by a brave philosopher king, which is nothing more than sophistry.
I’ll say it as many times as I need to:
Just because concepts exist in our heads doesn’t mean that there is an alternate world that we pull those concepts from, and the perfect forms that Plato suggests exist for those concepts is bullshit and unprovable.
>one of communism’s philosophical cornerstones is dialectic materialism
We’re talking about Plato’s realm of forms that can only be grasped by the wise and righteous philosopher king that should rule over all of the less enlightened common folk. Read as ‘dictatorship.’

Plato and Diogenes were two opposites, tho Diogenes never really debunked his theory's as he did just make fun of them.

>Because we give concepts meaning
What are concepts and what is meaning? How can we talk about these things unless we already know what they are?

Based.

oh shit, that's based as fuck

What are words? How can we talknif we dont know what words are? How can we think if we dont know what thought is? Philosophy is a spook.

don't bring hegel into this

tripnaughts

It is irrelevant as to whether Diogenes understands Plato's argument in this particular example, Diogenes may have even been aware of this, however his point was aimed at a different meta: does Plato's discussion on 'cupness' change anything tangible immediately? Does it bring Plato closer to the understanding of a cup in its relation to society at large?
It's a very feminine mindset to argue from and not wholly without value, however, Diogenes was just looking for an argument, he didn't give Plato time to respond and probably didn't care to. That being said Diogenes and Plato were men nonetheless.

Stop being so retarded with that flag displayed cuckboy.

Attached: Mike Tyson Drinking Tea.jpg (348x232, 13K)

>muh perfect form be bad and sheiit
all concepts ought to be perfect, because imperfections are a result of complexity and the per se goal of concepts is to overcome complexity and find generalities. this is how you got mathematics, arithmetic, geometry, physics, and everything else you cherish in the modern world

>muh philosopher king be bad and sheiit
you do realize that in Plato's time the vast majority of people were illiterate and venerated wooden idols, right? even in our time of 100% literacy, only a small portion understands complex logos

Shit man that's really deep good thing I am not able to understand you because everything is so fucking relative and subjective (and that's totally not a universal claim man, cuz those don't exist, even though I am using a universal claim to argue against something I am unwittingly arguing for cuz I am epic smart) otherwise my world would be fuckin blown to shit man.

>Obviously not. *taps on forehead*
I'm in stitches

>what are concepts?
Abstract ideas.
>what is meaning?
Definitions we give words and ideas so that we can discuss them.
Here’s the thing, we don’t have to play with words because all they are is a means to an end. I didn’t make up the definitions for any of the things we’re talking about. Im just using them to prove my point. If there is a philosopher king in this thread, he can reach into Plato’s realm of forms and give you the TRUE ESSENCE of concepts and meaning. What a joke.
And where are you going to get those perfect concepts from? Are you the fabled philosopher king? Please describe to me the truest, purest form of ethics so that I can spread your gospel to the unenlightened. What a joke.

Oh man what a imageboard in my mind

What are abstract ideas, and what are definitions and words man? Why do you keep reducing everything? This is pretty deep to be honest I don't know if i can keep up with your intellect. If there was only something I could use as a reference to understand these really complcated terms that I simply cannot see like the concept of "cupness" even though there doesn't seem to be a cup in front of me at this moment. "Emptiness" on the other hand though, I don't know man, that's a little too deep. I must not be a philosopher king after all.

what is cupness but a basic item and shape we have a word for?
There is no need in deconstructing it beyond that.

Based boomer fairytale

>overcome complexity
given the near infinite bounds of every possible semantic concept there's no way to prove that every concept has a simple and perfect form or decomposes to them.

that idea doubleplusungood

>muh philosopher king be bad and sheiit
who're going to be the philosopher kings then? the lit crit majors? the jews doing creepy sex shit on richard branson's island? some randos in flyover states? reddit? the royal we?

My god, are Americans this proud of being slaves to the Jewish people? Hahaha at least there's no merchants running things in my shithole!

>There is no need in deconstructing it beyond that.
Unless it is for bantz right Diogenes?

You haven't stated how Plato is wrong abomutt cunt. Is the sun a bit too warm today?

are you capable of grasping the idea of a perfect sphere, despite the fact you won't find one en materia? this is a simple enough concept even for you to grasp, and obtain valuable deductions such as the Pi.
more complex ideas require more intricate and trained minds, and can be achieved with proper intelligence and training. that should be a given, but you insist to insist on the absurd

Diogenes just called him stupid in a sugarcoated ancient way. He was a dirty vagrant degenerate, but he was a brilliant mind also.