File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
>> Anonymous
Hm... I'm not familiar with this image or the title at all. Please give a brief description, for I am too lazy to use google. Kthx.
>> Anonymous
lolwut
>> Anonymous
matrix copied plato's allegory of the cave.
People are told what certain images are but never know outside the cave.
His argument was that would people believe the shadow truth or the truth of the real world.
or something like that, i fell asleep in philosophy
>> Anonymous
/sigh, truth is not always what you are let see. Just like in the matrix, you cant accept everything by face value. But plato was talking most about reality and what ppl take as truth. meaning if you were born in a cave and all you saw was the shadows on the wall, you think that was all life had to give. since you knew no better, why you would complain?:D. Wich is why conplacency is such a dangerous thing.
>> Anonymous
the prisoners ability to turn their heads to see outside their view of the shadows on the walls is restricted by chains. one prisoner is given a chance to leave the cave, so he ascends to see the firelight which cast the shadows. this blinds him for a time, before he adjusts to it and understands it. he ascends to the sunlight which increases as he leaves the cave. this, too, blinds him, for his eyes are unused to seeing true light. when he leaves the cave, the sun blinds him for a time as well, until he adjusts to this and is able to see things for what they are in their truest form.

when I took philosophy I asked the teacher like - how it concretely related to reality at all. I don't think I got a straight answer. I suppose it can be applied to any situation where you learn more about something you thought you had already known to the full extent, like about people or politics or living.

the plato era was full of a lot of this crap, which didn't give realworld examples of what it meant. It probably made more sense back then, when /everything/ was an allegory.
>> Anonymous
Here's what Plato really meant. He believed that there are "forms" of things, that is, transcendental kind of things that we only come to know through philosophy. The best way to describe the forms is by using this cave. Things that we recognize as real are only "shadows" of the forms. Someone who has only seen shadows for his entire life may think the shadows are people and things, but the "real" things transcend the shadows and are difficult for him to grasp.

I hope this is making sense.
>> Anonymous
Suddenly I am reminded of Rozer Zelazny's Amber cycle.
>> Anonymous
>>77577
The Form of a chair would be "chairness". The essential attributes that make up the perfect chair. Any actual chair might come close to the ideal, but will most likely fall way short.
>> Anonymous
>>77919
Yeah, that's it. Actual chairs are kinda like snapshots of the form, but they're nowhere near it.

It's worth noting that Plato's primary quest was often to find the form of what is good. This was a central theme of his Republic in which he tries to tackle the question of what justice is, and ends up inventing an elitist tyranny.
>> Anonymous
it's just like the end of utena
>> Anonymous
it also kinda plays into relgiion and what you believe in,

they say when the man that was freed comes back with the news that its a cave and they are not in the real world, plato says that out of every 3 prisoners,

1 would want to leave and escape out of the hole

1 would rather stay in the cave like hes been doing every day of his life

and 1 would want to kill the guy for toppling his world as he knew it.
>> Anonymous
>>77919
> The Form of a chair would be "chairness". The essential attributes that make up the perfect chair.

Which is where Plato gets it wrong. There is no perfect chair. There is a perfect chair for me, but that chair would not be perfect for someone else. Why? Because there are so many different types of butts out there, and each one requires a different chair.

Now Plato might argue that there is also an ideal Butt, which has all the characteristics of ideal Buttlyness, but that's clearly not true. Some perfect Butts are firm and springy, but others are soft and grippable. And each would require a different chair for perfection.
>> Anonymous
>>78043
Just repeat, what you did there.
Chair->Butt.

It will just go down the latter until you reach a descision where it's either black or white, one or zero, yes or no. Perfect or not perfect.

And you will see that each descision in the universe is either yes or no. So you can go up the latter until you find the ultimate chair.
And it will be the ultimate chair, it will be the most perfect chair ever made. And it's "perfect" because no other chair will be better than this one.
>> Anonymous
>Which is where Plato gets it wrong.

Plato got it wrong in plenty of places. The important thing is that he asked interesting questions.

>it will be the most perfect chair ever made.

The most Perfect chair contains contradictory elements--like perfect suitability for all butts. This might be why it is a Form, and cannot be an actual physical thing.
>> Anonymous
someone needs to post that perfect ass right now,my head hurts
>> Anonymous
It's THE VILLAGE goddamit.
>> Anonymous
>Which is where Plato gets it wrong.

But saying that Plato is wrong isn't really correct. It depends on your personal view of the universe but some would say it's impossible to really know if Plato was telling the truth. They may say we don't have enough information to know...

Basically, if you think about anything long enough, you often run into a contradiction. The Socratic Method is based on that idea. The amount of "true" information you are allowed to see at any given point in time affects how quickly you can progress through the Socratic Method and to the truth of which ever matter you are discussing. Sometimes the discussion can reach a point where it seems that there isn't enough information to reach the truth and that's where "bizarre" concepts come from (as far as I understand)...


So unless you've sat down and spent your life thinking about philosophy like Plato did, you can not truly say that he is wrong.

Hell, if I spent my entire life thinking about an idea such as the concept of everything having a perfect form, I'd be pretty damn concerned about the "truth" of the concept...
>> Anonymous
>>78389

Bullshit. Plato just made a life for himself without any heavy lifting by quoting socrates and making up this bullshit as he went along while the slaves did all the actual work.

> Socratic Method

More bullshit. I can think all I want about chair underneath my butt, and never come to a contradiction. The chair is beneath my butt. That is the truth. End of story.

> spent your life thinking about philosophy like Plato did

In other words, engaged in useless mental masturbation instead of actual work and observation. Had he actually gone out into the world and payed attention instead of just engage useless contemplation and the occasional philosophical circle jerks known as symposia, he would have realized his whole "perfect form" crap was complete and utter shite. The same for the allegory of the cave. And his whole "republic" ideology with it's applied structuring of humanity.

Plato was a fucktard. He was wrong. It doesn't matter that he lived centuries ago and has been heavily quoted. He was still wrong. That is the truth. End of story.
>> Anonymous
the matrix
>> Anonymous
>>78483
Scrapped Princess used this concept too.
>> Anonymous
any argument put forth which contains the word "matrix" in the context of the film isn't worth listening to.
>> Anonymous
>>78491
I wrote a 5-page essay on philosophy in The Matrix for college english and got an A.

I still feel really dirty about it. Eugh.