I cant stand veneration of Greek-Roman culture in this day and age because its usually backed up by loaded nonsense by...

>I cant stand veneration of Greek-Roman culture in this day and age because its usually backed up by loaded nonsense by aesthetically inclined people
>Well especially greek thought is generally held in high regard due to its supposedly innate, self evident and intuitive nature. However this paradigm is proported by peoples who once thought they could examine the phonemes and alphabet of their language to discover the secrets of the universe
>this is entirely antithetical to the analysis-interpretive-induction paradigm we use today, while partially cumbersome avoids sublimation of categories by subjective tendencies
>So it generally appeals to people whose hearts are tinged by the words "High, low" and those who take for granted human understanding, without first analysing the causal chain of such states of affairs
>the self purporting universals of Greek thought are little more than 3rd rate structures induced by presentational immediacy and sublimation of difference as accidental
>or its ironically and painfully Sophistic

Friend just sent me this, how do I respond to seem smart?

Attached: Aristotle.jpg (1700x2275, 2.19M)

The greeks are important from a historical standpoint but philosophy and science have of course evolved since then. Stop being so irrationally fucking stupid. Prick

call him a faggot

>tfw aesthetically inclined

Attached: akio small.jpg (300x400, 26K)

Have you actually read Plato and Aristotle?

I'd generally agree with your friends minus the hostility. I don't buy into his premise; who the FUCK venerate's Greek-Roman culture? It's not a topical conversation piece.

In terms of explaining the universe, religion was our first attempt, philosophy then science. They all have their place but it's a natural progression.

Hes right. The Greeks had good insight and can still be read woth profit today but there are no different from, say, the Hindus in that respect. And worshippong them at the beginning of everythong os retarded, particularly when you remember than their apparent primacy is often a consequence of lacking records from earlier era.

>the fucking sophists amirite?

your friend sounds like a colossal faggot, but he is right

Tell your friend to learn how to actually use big words, stop using ad hominem, and stop trying to sound intelligent. The only part of this argument that's either not ad hominem or completely meaningless sentences clearly designed to look "intellectual" is the second to last sentence. And that, when translated from pretentious-speak, literally just means "Greek thought looks kinda cool but it's wrong lol."

Yeah no shit it's wrong but it laid the foundation for all the modern ideas you'll never understand.

Seriously why are you friends with this dude?

^This, also ask him if he has a real argument or if he feels satisfied tearing down strawmen in his head

>However this paradigm is proported by peoples who once thought they could examine the phonemes and alphabet of their language to discover the secrets of the universe
Based and antiLogospilled

i bet you had this BTFO coming to you, you must have been a real obnoxious faggot about the greeks in your circles

reply these exact words
>Yeah, pretty much nailed it, I have no criticisms.
since he's correct. if you disagree with him you're retarded
>tfw discovering the meaning of life through phonetics

Attached: 1550629358128.jpg (461x461, 34K)

t. his friend

>>if i could have chosen anything, i would have chosen to have been born in the roman republic so i could live in my villa and have a harem of olive goddesses tonguing my balls every day, but sadly i can't fucking choose that. and if that's a question that's implying "DUDE I KNOW I PICKED A DEGREE BUT I WISH I PICKED THIS ONE INSTEAD IM SURE MY LIFE OWULD HAVE BEE NSO MUCH BETTER" then i say this without even a shred of irony, go fuck yourself up the ass you pathetic fuck because you make me sick. if you wanted to have picked something you would have fucking picked it you fuck. Maybe the fact that modern academia is making you miserable isn't a symptom of your degree you fucking mutt., please do yourself a favor and take the dildo out of your ass for at least a few hours a day. maybe you'll start to think about things logically, fucking cockscukcker. where was i? oh yeah...Rome. That's was a fucking civilization.

>I cant stand veneration of Greek-Roman culture in this day and age because its usually backed up by loaded nonsense by aesthetically inclined people
The veneration for a culture as a whole will obviously be reserved to people aesthetically inclined, can we think about the Greeks and Romans without thinking about the images painted by Homer, Hesiod, Sophocles, Virgil, Horace, etc.?
>especially greek thought is generally held in high regard due to its supposedly innate, self evident and intuitive nature
I don't think so, the greek thinkers are generally held in high regard for being the first to address problems in a systematic way, forming the framework in which modern thought was built. People generally praise Plato for writing works that are intuitive and simple to understand (and a lot of people like to use his works as introductions to philosophy for that reason), but that's not the only reason why he's praised.
>entirely antithetical to the analysis-interpretive-induction paradigm we use today
That's not true for either Plato or Aristotle.

Punch him in the nose and tell him not to forget that the Greeks and Roman's respected force and strength

lol retarded moderns who will never understand platonic mysticism on a level any higher than the philosophical tourism anglos have reduced the entire history of human thought to

Aristotle practically founded the "paradigm" he's fellating there, but gave it much more life than the soulless husk that Anglos have left it

>OP's friend

Attached: PinkieSwear.jpg (768x1024, 88K)

>analyse the alphabets and phenomes of their language to discover the secrets of the universe
What is wrong with this?

Based
>It is only as an aesthetic phenomenon that existence and the world are eternally justified

>acting like these developed one after each other
Read history Bucko

Attached: IMG_4887.jpg (454x324, 19K)

ass

I wish I was smart smart enough to sounds as smart as your friend sounds

This is the most pretentious shit I have ever heard. Your friend is a cunt.

Attached: cunt.jpg (1048x695, 366K)

He's right, and honestly he resembles Nietzsche's comments in "We Philologists". People rarely have a defense for ancient Greek culture without resort to its prestige, "grandeur", or other qualities that either presuppose the value of the Greeks or completely misattribute qualities that would either insult a Greek or make him burst into laughter.

For example, Greeks are far from humane, despite how their defenders often portray them as the root of modern ideas like democracy and equality, or as ethical and philosophical sources of Christianity. In fact, the best thing the Greeks offer is an un-Christian culture that is very familiar and very concerned with violence, brutality, and inhumanity. Plato begins the Republic, for example, with a violent sophist who confronts Socrates with ideas that most Greeks would have accepted about justice--that it means to help oneself. And Socrates is never able to disassociate self-benefit from his theory of justice, only redirect it to show the benefit one might gain in supporting and benefiting others. Thucydides does something similar. He never condemns Athenian brutality, but only censures it when it becomes immodest or loses control of itself from mob rule.

TLDR: The Greeks are not what anyone says they are; even here on this board people are misled about the Greeks. But the offer an example of an anti-modern, anti-Christian, ant-democratic culture. See Arnheim for more.

She's a beauty

DORITO-KOTO-MOTO
Repeat this 5 times everyday and you will gain a sixth finger. To fuck yourself with, naturally, Yes?

Christians had been Aristotelian since reintroduction of Greek philosopy from Arabs through the Iberian peninsula (Thomas Aquinas) untill the XVII century, also they were very influenced by neo-platonism at the late antiquity

>inb4 Thomas Aquinas was Italian
see Averroes and Toledo School of Translators

>nonsense by aesthetically inclined people
We must ascend, therefore, once more to the Good, which every soul desires. If anyone has beheld It, he will know what I say, and in what manner It is beautiful, for it is as good that It is desired, and all appetency is towards goodness. But the attainment of the Good is for those who mount upward to the heights, set their faces towards them, and strip off the garments with which we clothed ourselves as we descended hither. Just as those who penetrate into the innermost sanctuaries of the mysteries, after being first purified and divesting themselves of their garments, go forward naked, so must the soul continue, until anyone, passing in his ascent beyond all that is separative from God, by himself alone contemplates God alone, perfect, simple and pure, from Whom all things depend, to Whom all beings look, and in Whom they are, and live, and know. For He is the cause of Being, Life and Intelligence. If, then, anyone beheld Him, with what love would he be inspired, with what desire would he burn, in his eagerness to be united with Him! With what bliss would he be overcome! He that has not yet beheld Him may desire Him as Good, but, to him that has, it is given to love Him as Beauty, to be filled with wonder and delight, to be overwhelmed yet unharmed, to love with true love and keen desire, to laugh at other loves, and to despise the things he formerly thought beautiful. Of such a nature is the experience of those who have beheld visions of Gods or angels—no more do they seek aught of the beauty of other bodies. What, then, shall we think of one who beheld The Beautiful Itself and by Itself, pure and untouched by flesh or body, existing neither in earth nor in heaven, because of Its very purity? For all these are contingent things and mixed, nor are they primary but proceed from It. If, therefore, he beheld That which provides for all things, which, remaining in Itself, gives to all and receives nothing into Itself, and if, remaining in the contemplation of This and tasting of Its bliss, he should be assumed into Its likeness, of what other beauty would he then have need? For This, since It is Beauty Itself and the First Beauty, makes those who love It beautiful and beloved. And this is the greatest and ultimate task which lies before the soul, for the sake of which all her toils are undertaken— not to be left without portion in that most sublime vision, to obtain which is to be blessed by the vision of blessedness, but not to obtain it is wretchedness. For not he that has no share of beautiful colours or bodies, or of power or dominion or kingship, is unfortunate; but he that lacks this one thing alone, for the sake of which it were well to let go the possession and kingship and rule of the whole earth and of the sea, aye, and of the heaven itself, if a man, by leaving behind all these and looking beyond them, might be converted to This and behold It.

Attached: plotinus[1].gif (295x422, 105K)

Your friend sounds like a weak nerd. Tell him the Greeks would beat the shit out of him and then fuck his boyhole.

Nietzscheans don't understand Plato, and certainly not the Greeks.
And imagine venerating power while proclaiming this bullshit as right.

Attached: Socrates Contra Nietzsche.jpg (749x692, 206K)

i can tell your friends is a tryhard faggot contrarian, so why bother user

>People rarely have a defense for ancient Greek culture without resort to its prestige, "grandeur", or other qualities
just like every other civilisation on earth

You say
>big if tru

>aesthetically inclined people
Is this shit coming back in vogue? It has a retro 1910s-1920s ring to it by subversives buttblasted by catholicism and some traditional movements outside europe. Later rehashed it against /fa/scism and their superior costumes.

Arabs (the people cited aren't even Arab) had nothing to do with it. The latins translations of Aristotle happened from Greek sources. And it happened before Aquinas who was already raised in a thoroughly aristotelician environment.

In the middle ages lots of Latin translations of Aristotle came from Arabic translations, not directly from the Greek.

This post just gave my life meaning. Thanks user

>this is entirely antithetical to the analysis-interpretive-induction paradigm we use today
i.e. that paradigm that makes philosophy impossible. You can't make an argument if every single term has to go through a deconstruction wringer before it can be used, and even then only used in certain specialized contexts. Greek philosophy, while less rigorous, is more than just good literature. It's no coincidence that people from vasty different cultural backgrounds still find the stuff useful over 2000 years later.

I've literally always felt this way but have never seen it articulated as elegantly

Attached: Art and nothing else!.jpg (750x402, 37K)

Send a smug anime girl.

Academic philosophy is only a very minor reason people venerate the Greeks and Roman's (Roman replubic).
And his only argument against it is thst its different than modern philosophy. Does he think his "analysis-interpretive-induction paradigm" will still be cutting edge in 2500 years?