The Story of Philosophy, 5

The preparation of Plato


Plato’s meeting with Socrates had been a turning point in his life. He had been brought up in comfort, and perhaps in wealth; he was a handsome and vigorous youth—called Plato, it is said, because of the breadth of his shoulders; he had excelled as a soldier, and had twice won prizes at the Isthmian games. Philosophers are not apt to develop out of such an adolescence.

But Will: Had NS Germany been allowed to thrive, instead of the most serious crime of all History that your government perpetrated when you were of my age, some athletes would certainly be philosophers right now…

“I thank God,” he used to say, “that I was born Greek and not barbarian, freeman and not slave, man and not woman; but above all, that I was born in the age of Socrates.”
He was twenty-eight when the master died; and this tragic end of a quiet life left its mark on every phase of the pupil’s thought. It filled him with such a scorn of democracy, such a hatred of the mob, as even his aristocratic lineage and breeding had hardly engendered in him; it led him to a Catonic resolve that democracy must be destroyed, to be replaced by the rule of the wisest and the best.

Exactly what we must feel now about American democracy: delete it! By the way, ‘Catonic’ is an allusion to Cato’s Carthago delenda est.

We must be prepared to find in these dialogues much that is playful and metaphorical; much that is unintelligible except to scholars learned in the social and literary minutiae of Plato’s time.
[Plato] complains of the priests (who go about preaching hell and offering redemption from it for a consideration—cf. The Republic, 364),

The Republic, 364: ‘And mendicant prophets knock at rich men’s doors, promising to atone for the sins of themselves or their fathers in an easy fashion with sacrifices and festive games, or with charms and invocations to get rid of an enemy good or bad by divine help and at a small charge. They appeal to books professing to be written by Musaeus and Orpheus, and carry away the minds of whole cities, and promise to “get souls out of purgatory”, and if we refuse to listen to them, no one knows what will happen to us’.

but he himself is a priest, a theologian, a preacher, a super-moralist, a Savonarola denouncing art and inviting vanities to the fire. He acknowledges, Shakespeare-like, that “comparisons are slippery” (Sophist, 231), but he slips out of one into another and another and another; he condemns the Sophists as phrase-mongering disputants, but he himself is not above chopping logic like a sophomore.
The Dialogues remain one of the priceless treasures of the world. The best of them, The Republic, is a complete treatise in itself, Plato reduced to a book; here we shall find his metaphysics, his theology, his ethics, his psychology, his pedagogy, his politics, his theory of art. Here we shall find problems reeking with modernity and contemporary savor: communism and socialism, feminism…

You see? The damned baobab seeds…

“Plato is philosophy, and philosophy Plato,” says Emerson. Let us study The Republic.

7 Replies on “The Story of Philosophy, 5

  1. A new form of National Socialism designed for our era and unique circumstances seems essential for whites.
    But there’s a problem. By definition, 50% of the population is below average intelligence and the effectiveness of education systems in “white” countries is declining. Even the upper half of the Normal Probability curve is disinclined to read anything on the ancient philosohers because there’s no immediate payoff for acquiring the knowledge. The dumb ones, of course, just don’t understand anything more complex than a label on a can of beans.
    This is what Christianity has over NS. The essential message is simple and clear.
    So I would pose the question…how can NS convey its message and how can the sophisticated messages of Socrates, Plato, Aristotle and the rest be laid out to a dumbed down and lethargic white population so it becomes effective?
    I certainly don’t know the answer.

    1. The masses don’t need Plato, only films of real Xtian history so that values may be revalued back to Greco-Roman mores.

      1. No: that Spanish director is a liberal. He didn’t represent well the ethnic differences and isn’t jew-wise.

  2. Plus. Hypatia is played by a Kikess, rather than a Nordic woman, which Hypatia was. They look nothing alike.
    When I see a Jewess acting out a rape scene, I don’t see an innocent girl being brutalised, I see a sow ghosting someone she is fundamentally jealous of.
    Also, contrary to that film, Hypatia was gang raped in front of a crowd and then, like in Predator, she was skinned alive.

  3. Of course like all movies it is a jew production, hence I regard it ‘an introduction’. I mean an introduction to that way of thinking about christianity. Because the whole notion that Christianity is the foundation of our decline is one that the average non-thinker – christian or ‘atheist’ – will never come up with. So it could definitely be a starting point.
    When I saw it, in 2010, In was very surprised that there even existed a movie depicting Christianity from that angle. My first thought then was that it was a PC project to demonstrate that ‘ oh yes, just like the Islam today christianity was also violent and terrorism bullshit etc.’, and perhaps that was actually the whole purpose of it. But it doesn’t matter. The point is a completely opposite POV about christianity.
    Besides, if this should be an argument against watching it then there are no films to watch, period. Because practically all are and were produced by jews and shabbo liberals.
    My guess is that when the average white christard watches it he will probably be outraged by yet another attack by jews on his precious religion, ( btw based on a squabble among aliens, WTF??? ) which will only strengthen his convictions.
    I myself don’t need to be convinced, I live outside the mainstream. So much so that for example I didn’t even know that last week 27 April it was a national holiday in my country. I heard that on April 26 and realised I had the day off tomorrow, seriously. Haven’t had a connected TV for over 10 years now. No radio, newspapers, movies and absolutely no ‘music’, which is all niggerbabble nowadays anyway. BUT ….. BUT …. again, the average non-thinker is not like that. The average non-thinker is still swimming in an endless MSM ocean. And for those I would say a film such as Agora could be a good starting point. That’s all.

    1. You make a good point. But I think that Hypatia being depicted by a Hebraic woman is just a bad image. And even the fact that her death is portrayed falsely is bad enough. Imagine having to explain that a bunch of Jews and Sand Niggers kidnapped a girl who never hurt a fly, pissed on her purity more than once in front of a mob, then treated her like a blunt pencil. Imagine having to tell that to the general public, specifically that Jews were the primary perpetrators.
      The film industry moguls would never allow such news to surface.
      However, you may actually be correct. I am doubtful because the film is not as widely talked about as it should be in that case. I also think that WNsts who come across it will just say that it is Jewish propaganda, especially since Rachel Weisz is in it, the same woman whom was in the film Denial playing Deborah Lipstadt. They have themselves a perfect circle of logical convenience