Chances are you've read more books than Plato, Aristotle,

I doubt I've read more than Dante or Aquinas

>>9402284
They didn't have access to a nigh unlimited supply of literature in the way we do.

Even if you don't think it applies to them, it certainly does to the old Greeks. Very few people will have read less than Socrates.

>>9402303
I imagine they read everything they could and I do not do that

Just consuming a bunch of literature won't make you superior to anyone. It's more about what you take from and make of it. Quality over quantity and all that.

>>9402261
the two answers you'll get are 'how do you define meaningful contribution' or 'i don't care if i contribute meaningfully to society'

>>9402326
This

/thread

>>9402326
>>9402463
I think that was the point.

This does not include understanding, availability of books, and more importantly how much there is to offer. Back then they really knew fuck all so you just had to give a meh bit to seem superior.

>>9402261
Plato is the historical example of "first post best post"

>>9402326
Depth > breadth, 90% of books are shit and not worth your time.

>population of entire greece in plato's time was probably like 5 million
>most of them weren't in the right places and positions to do shit, most people in the city-states were literally slaves
gee I wonder why it as relatively easy to make humongous contributions to society back then if you were in the position to do so