I ask you, o men of /lit/, would it not be true that not all

neither.

what matters is justice, whether if be the product of right opinions or of understanding. Understanding is superior, but in the end the soul will earn its felicity whether it has felt or thought its way out of its corrupted vessel.

>>9312953
adds = improve upon?

>>9312953
Yes, I suppose so, Socrates

>>9312953
No. No it's not true.

Now read Montaigne.

>sniffs that finger
>smells like Plato's bum
What do?

Wittgenstein was proudly ignorant of western philosophy, which probably caused Tractatus to end up as such a meaningless blunder

File: socrates1.jpg (28KB, 239x300px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 239x300px

>>9314744
You are saying the smell of Plato's bum is a quality of my finger. Would I be right in saying the quality is common to all fingers or just to mine? Surely you would agree it is unique to mine. We would then say it is a quality separate from fingers in general. Can it then be a quality of the finger if it is a separate quality from fingers themselves?

>>9314474
>>9312953
Enjoying this thread so far.

>>9314774
Yes.

>>9314774
I'm sorry Socrates, but you seem to have misunderstood my point. It is not physically your finger which smells of Plato's bum, but instead the fecal particles which remain on your finger as a result of it having been placed within his rectum. Like with most of your arguments, as well as those of your student, the problem boiles down to your inability to understand the way people use language.

>>9314812
Except now you've just made it "the quality of having faecal particles on your fingertip" you stupid nigger.

>>9314821
Damn Socrates, your dialogue skills have really gone downhill

>>9314862
Sophisticated barbarian*

I mean in the archaic senses

>>9314821
And here we can see the reading comprehension of a society whose greatest "poet" told only silly war stories

>>9314875
Oral tradition ;)

>>9312953
Most people willing to become great scholars actually don't.
Most people willing to become great thinkers actually don't.
I doubt that your choice could makes a big difference.

Btw though, wouldn't you say that great scholar and great thinker are completely exclusive ?

>>9314988
Well I would say that they aren't, but the question is which man would be greater, not if its feasible that one could have the qaulities of both.

>>9314474
>>>/qa/1191620

The one who knows how to spell canon

>>9312953
It could not be certain that an infinite collection of learned knowledge can be trusted, but it would be known that anything understood by logic alone would be absolute. But it would also be true that attaining knowledge of a philosophic nature may be of a different process, one in which the mind has logically concluded what is written on the page as it is reading it? For to learn anything, you must first recollect, since all new information is based on what we know, and all we're doing is applying a new pattern to the data which we already have. Would it not be true also, then, that for one to realize an already discovered philosophical thought may be the same as finding it on a page?

Socrates is an erhesfgewyu6r34weghw.
All erhesfgewyu6r34weghws are wrong about everything.
Therefore Socrates is wrong.

>>9317505
Your argument has no value since you merely asserted that socrates was A, and that A is always wrong. Without attaching logic to a supposition all you have are meaningless words.

>>9314882
Plato gave Socrates the oral tradition constantly.

>>9314821
No, the particles are not a quality, they are a substance you nong.

>>9313061
That wasn't the question, idiot.

>>9317512
Socrates is an erhesfgewyu6r34weghw and all erhesfgewyu6r34weghws are wrong about everything are axioms around which an entire system of knowledge is built.

>>9314474
kek

"By Zeus Socrates, you're right. Talk for as long as you want, and argue my position too, if you please. I don't need to say anything here. In a while, I'll give an obviously faulty definition of a concept you propose so you can smartly question it."

>writing is inferior because it's dead and unarguable
>all my books consists of people agreeing with me

Why?

You need a scholar to become a thinker yourself