If Plato was alive today and a poster on Atlas....

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Absolutely. He was an unquestionable douchebag.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I get the impression it'd be another case where Gustaf would vigorously defend him while everyone else piled on him and made posts about how much of a douchebag he was.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I get the impression it'd be another case where Gustaf would vigorously defend him while everyone else piled on him and made posts about how much of a douchebag he was.

Or Americans once again failed to detect sarcarm :>

I don't think Gustaf's said defenses of CARLHAYDEN and J. J. were sarcastic.

I thought Plato was already here under the screen name of "Alcon." 

LOL no, just look at Alcon's display name. He's quite far from an elitist douchebag.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

So, wait, BRTD's latest attack on me is that maybe I would have sided with one of the greatest minds of all time rather than a bunch of autistic teen nerds with a mob mentality, defending said mind's right to free expression?

...guilty as charged?

I think I'm going to give up on trying to understand the logic of BRTD. Did you read an internet meme bashing Plato or something?

It's more that you frequently defend unpopular and awful posters who are extremely hackish and quite narrow minded and thick skulled for seemingly no reason at all but to be contrarian.

My dislike of Plato stems from reading his stuff in one of my Ancient and Medieval Political Philosophy classes, where he came across an extreme elitist douchebag, and his ideal "Republic" was a terrifying ideal and a horrible form of government. Just about everyone in the class hated him.

Nice going with the wormyguy/Kyle Mercado style ad hominem in the first paragraph by the way ("LOLZ ANYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH ME IS AUTISTIC HA HA!" was a pretty common tactic of those two.)

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

That was a great post.

Gustaf's rebuttal reminds me of Libertas. "You can't get it because you're also a thick skulled hack." I mean look at my predictions (they are visible on my profile), if anything they have on average been a bit more conservative than reality. I underestimated Obama's performance both times in fact. I'll admit to being rather partisan, but not hackish.

All I'll say is that I sure as hell don't want to live in some totalitarian "Republic" ruled by "Philosopher Kings" anymore than I want to live in a so-called Randian Objectivist society or Leninist regime. And one could also argue that Rand and Lenin were intelligent people as well, does that make what they wrote worthy of value? But that's not really the point here, it's a debate for another forum. I just thought that anyone with Plato's views in the modern day would disgust probably well over 90% of the population but Gustaf just loves defending such people for seemingly no reason than to be contrarian (see also Sarah Palin) yet also mercilessly rips into people that are somewhat controversial but also more polarized in opinion and not as universally hated (in addition to me see how he constantly gets on px.) But meh. What Gustaf thinks of me affects me and is just as relevant as what Libertas or Kyle Mercado did, so whatever. The thread was worth it regardless just for Linus' post, so this was definitely a net plus.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

That was a great post.

Gustaf's rebuttal reminds me of Libertas. "You can't get it because you're also a thick skulled hack." I mean look at my predictions (they are visible on my profile), if anything they have on average been a bit more conservative than reality. I underestimated Obama's performance both times in fact. I'll admit to being rather partisan, but not hackish.

All I'll say is that I sure as hell don't want to live in some totalitarian "Republic" ruled by "Philosopher Kings" anymore than I want to live in a so-called Randian Objectivist society or Leninist regime. And one could also argue that Rand and Lenin were intelligent people as well, does that make what they wrote worthy of value? But that's not really the point here, it's a debate for another forum. I just thought that anyone with Plato's views in the modern day would disgust probably well over 90% of the population but Gustaf just loves defending such people for seemingly no reason than to be contrarian (see also Sarah Palin) yet also mercilessly rips into people that are somewhat controversial but also more polarized in opinion and not as universally hated (in addition to me see how he constantly gets on px.) But meh. What Gustaf thinks of me affects me and is just as relevant as what Libertas or Kyle Mercado did, so whatever. The thread was worth it regardless just for Linus' post, so this was definitely a net plus.

Do you not realize how little sense you're making? What I write reminds you of Libertas? So? How is that relevant for anything? These things you say really aren't coherent.

Plato was not only a political philosopher. And since I'm not an idiot, like you, I can hold nuanced opinions of people. So while I also oppose his ideal society, I can recognize that his views on that is probably heavily influenced by his time and the experience of Athens killing Socrates. And I can appreciate Plato's writings in general and on other subjects.

Your attitude to these things is so infantile that it defies comprehension.

Anyway, you really think that it is a negative thing to not agree with the majority? That disliking someone who is popular is somehow bad? See, the value of critical thinking is something Plato could probably explain to you if you gave him a chance.

Oh yeah I'm an idiot. That's why I was just running training for a very technical-intensive job this week and was selected by the Division Manager to substitute for supervisors because of technical knowledge and ability to answer questions when many were gone the past few weeks.

I don't know where you get this idea from that I never ever show any nuance and never have in my 67000 posts. Sure I often get pretty passionate and use some extreme rhetoric. But that doesn't mean there's no nuance on anything. I just made this post only a day ago:

I kind of agree on a lot of the good things LBJ doing being inevitable, it kind of reminds me of the Nader apologists who argue that Nader is the only reason cars have seat belts today (because obviously without Nader no one else would ever propose or push for legislation mandating them and they wouldn't become a standard feature every car company would include anyway even if not mandated. So dumb.) It's pretty absurd to believe that without LBJ segregation and the type of voter suppression present in the South at the time would've survived to the present day and that there would've never been any Civil Rights Act or court decisions against them in the last 50 years. However that doesn't mean the situation today would not have been worse had that action not been taken early. And as far as the Great Society goes, most of those programs were not necessarily inevitable.

It's just as annoying though to defend him by arguing that Vietnam as it turned out (or a similar war) was inevitable as well no matter who was President.

And really considering one of the people I was thinking of that was unpopular but still inexplicably defended by you was CARLHAYDEN...uh well I'll just say that if you seriously think he was a poster who normally held very nuanced opinions and never delved into extreme black and white dichotomies, then, well I don't think much more needs to be said...

Anyway my view is basically that Plato's political philosophy is so awful it eclipses anything else he wrote. It's like Hugo Chavez actually (hey I actually have a more nuanced view on him than most right wingers do!), his authoritarianism and awful associations invalidated the good things he did that were brought up so much recently. It most certainly puts him behind Aristotle who didn't get anywhere near as  much of a negative reaction from the class or me. And it's clear he was a personal asshole.

But my point (along with this thread obviously) was never too serious. This is a political forum, so if someone started posting on it advocating Platonic government, they would be labeled and troll and be unpopular. And you have a tendency to defend such posters. It was just a jocular statement and the fact you took it so seriously is just more evidence of how little of a sense of humor you have.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

What was Plato position on emoviolence?

He likely would've opposed it and wanted to censor it, seeing as what he thought about poetry.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I dislike the Chaucer stuff I had to read in high school, though nowhere near as much as Shakespeare (who I f**king HATED, though he wasn't even the worst*), I thought Dante had a talent for visuals but overall was too pretentious and overdone, and I don't know what the other two are.

*That would be Hawthorne. I'd rather read a dissertation written by krazen on unions and education than have to read The Scarlet Letter again. Ugh.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Hey what's this, another post I made that involves nuance:

Never and honestly this is an issue I'm not particularly principled on, if I did have a unionized job and it called a strike over an issue I personally disagreed with it and did not agree with the strike I'd have no problem whatsoever scabbing (especially since scabbing might result in more pay to boot.) Especially if the reason for the strike wouldn't particularly affect me (like some pension thing that would only be a big factor to olds for example.) Of course if I agreed with the reason I would participate in the strike.

Granted, I'm not an expert on these things (we really don't have unions in Mississippi), but isn't that not allowed?  I thought union members were forbidden to return to work during the strike and scabs were replacements hired by the company.

No, they are allowed to "scab", but if the strike is successful, a good union will do everything possible to discipline them.

Of course I'd have to weigh benefits and all that, but in Harry's scenario, I'd be willing to scab if I felt a union was striking for a bad reason. Taking a position that unions are always right in all circumstances and all strikes are justified and thus scabbing is always wrong is just as absurd as the krazen position of that unions are always wrong. Also honoring a strike I disagree with kind of strikes me as equivalent to not using marijuana just because it's illegal.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

With Shakespeare I just found his stuff boring. Hideously so. It was also incredibly predictable and never had any interesting plot twists or anything like that, and the dialogue was stilted and unwitty. I also hated the long drawn out monologues some characters would do, now granted this is also a tactic good writers use, like Tarantino does all the time (such as Leo's large rant with his bleeding hand in Django Unchained, or Brad Pitt's opening speech in Inglourious Basterds or the Christopher Walken scene in Pulp Fiction, etc.) but he keeps the monologues interesting and easy to follow. Plus the actors get to go crazy with them, not really present in Shakespeare's plays. Truthfully we have posters on this forum with a more interesting, witty and funny writing styles, opebo and Tweed are both far superior. So yeah just wasn't fond of his stuff.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

This is better than any monologue Shakespeare wrote:

ok, Inks, I won't curse you out.  just don't do that anymore.  because you want the numbers to look a certain way.  we all do.  but hey, it doesn't work out like that.  let me tell you a story, Inks.  back in the summer I hung out with this group.  we called it, The Group.  we hung out from mid-afternoon everyday to past midnight.  but then this girl came in.  well, she was there anyway, but she ed sh**t up hardcore.  and one of my friends was in love with her, but it was painfully obviously he'd never get with her.  then another of my friends fell in love with her around August 10th.  and she actually liked him.  but there was a problem.  my two friends that were in love with the same girl, they had been best friends forever.  literally.  so the friend that.  oh who cares.  the point is, it ed sh**t up.  and now The Group is no longer.  and I've tried to wink towards my past, but winking towards it doesn't work.  I've become obsessed with it.  and I want The Group back, but it's no longer.  I want the numbers to look a certain way.  but they don't.  sorry Inks.  it happens.  so don't mess with my entries and I won't mess with yours.  it's better that way.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

FWIW, I don't see how this is controversial, how many people actually enjoyed the stuff they were forced to read in high school? Certainly not any of my classmates.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

FWIW, I don't see how this is controversial, how many people actually enjoyed the stuff they were forced to read in high school? Certainly not any of my classmates.

So, some random dude on an internet message board versus the figure almost universally acknowledged as the most influential and most read English-language writer of all time?

That's right, this should not be controversial at all.

No, I'm saying not enjoying Shakespeare's works being controversial. And really, most people in the demographic frequented by this message board would much rather watch the works of Quentin Tarantino or Lena Dunham than a Shakespeare production.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

BRTD, have you ever seen a decent Shakespeare production, by actors who respect the material for what it is but also know what they're doing?

Kind of a both narrow vague standard, but I have only seen film adaptations of his works.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Actually most of its scenes would work pretty well. Especially the best one (DESCRIBE WHAT MARCELLUS WALLACE LOOKS LIKE!) Would be kind of tricky to fit in John Travolta shooting the guy in the face though.

Killer Joe is a great example of a stage play that translated to film rather well, though I have not seen the play.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I guess it's the hipster thing to not like Shakespeare now?

I'm pretty sure most hipsters would prefer the works of Tarantino and Dunham to Shakespeare, although in this case it's not really so much "hipsters" as people under 35 in general.