Question about philosophical rhetoric (please read, I need some opinions)

[ZombieNixon]

Working on my paper...as I'm supposed to write my own paean to love as if I had given a speech at the Symposium described in the Platonic dialogue of the same name, but am writing from a more modern perspective, I have a question about a rhetorical technique.

If I were to blast Athenian attitudes regarding pederasty as the only "true" type of love by couching it in general terms of a group with power forcing their beliefs on others, do you think this is a decent way of drawing a sidelong glance at the issues of the religious right and the GOP today casting non-heterosexual relationships in an immoral light? As in drawing attention to a group of people with influence pushing their views of love on the population at large simply to maintain the status quo and their hold on it?

I didn't want to post this in GD as I can see how this question could tread close to a flamewar provoking line (which I do no need right now), but my entire essay has a rather Colbertish feel to it and working in this layer seemed to lend itself naturally.

:shrug:

[JVS]

1. You shouldn't ask questions about homework online. It is not cool

You don't see me trolling around looking for information on the role of Martin Luther in the development of the Modern German written language.

Your work is for you!

[hfojvt]

4. Lewis Mumford said that his sermons had a role in the development

of German anti-semitism. Or was that Bertrand Russell? :hide:

[sciouscience]

45. yeah... however, smoking online is cool. so is judging.

judging is actually super, uber-cool, when done online of course. in fact, way cooler than using a discussion board as a sounding group. don't you know that only what you knew before you started cohering thought counts?!? all that tangentially-aquired confirmation, however solicited, is fakesmart and cheaty, you bad advice-seeker, you! why don't you just wiki that feces that the rest of the world has learnt for you! valid learning only occurs when defined grading criteria flirts in the vacuum of innocent genius with potent truth, duh! curse you for research and damn you for ever speaking to another soul about your work. it is for you! YOU!

[hfojvt]

2. was that their conclusion?

That pederasty was the only true type of love?

[ZombieNixon]

3. Yes, it was. No one said I had to agree with that conclusion.

I didn't think any of the versions proposed in the dialogue works, and the assignment is to write my own. :shrug:

[hfojvt]

5. interesting that

we would condemn that as child abuse.
Is there any version that could stand the scrutiny of Socrates?

[ZombieNixon]

6. Interestingly, Socrates' speech in the most open-ended.

He (nor Diotima, from his narration) doesn't really commit to anything. The pederasty-as-true thing is really the most concrete conclusion they come to. :shrug:

[JohnKleeb]

7. can you explain to me what they saw in kids

God makes me want to vomit just thinking about it.

[ZombieNixon]

8. Not a clue.

Yeah, it made me wanna :puke: too. That's why I'm delighting in tearing it up! :D

[JohnKleeb]

9. Good

It's disgusting honestly. Funny how they had the basic idea of democracy down but were fucking pervs when it came to well fucking. Guess it shows there's a side to every coin.

[ZombieNixon]

10. And they basically said that if you didn't take pleasure in

humping little boys, you had no handle on the concept of love. :wtf:

[JohnKleeb]

11. Crossing out philosophy on possible courses for the fall semester list

That really is disturbing. It should be a great slam really. I slammed extreme right wing thinking in a satire last year.

[ZombieNixon]

12. I really enjoy the course, precisely because I can tear shit like this

apart. When you get down to it, philosophy is just a bunch of dead guys gassing on about their own opinions. There is no reason why Plato's or Nietzsche's opinion is more valid that yours or mine...they simply wrote and published more of it. :shrug:

[JohnKleeb]

14. I didnt like Nietzche when I had a philo class either

You know who really made me vomit a little bit inside though. Ayn Fucking Rand. Hated her because she basically promotes the greed is good because you can do it shit.

[ZombieNixon]

17. Oh, yeah.

Thank God we're not doing Rand in this course. The prof and I had a good laugh making fun of Randians on Monday. :)

[JohnKleeb]

18. A lot of people asked after we saw a clip of her

on Phil Donohue back in the 70's, "Can you imagine that being your grandma", thank god my grandmothers weren't like that. So grandma where's my christmas presents and my easter basket? I didn't want to get you any so I didnt. Oh thanks Granny Ayn.

[ZombieNixon]

19. Haha...yeah, true.

:rofl:

[JohnKleeb]

21. We saw the movie the Fountainhead with

Gary Cooper as Howard Roark. That woman had a skewed idea what a hero was.

[ZombieNixon]

23. I've tried to avoid her.

I read Anthem in 9th grade...:scared: What a warped worldview.

[JohnKleeb]

24. You know that Alan Greenspan the former federal reserve I think

chairman was once a Rand devoutee in his younger years.

[ZombieNixon]

26. Didn't know that.

Doesn't surprise me, though.

[JohnKleeb]

28. The Daily Show tribute to him was so touching

The end of an era :cry:. I'll cry when Cheney admits that he's a robot from a distant planet too.

[ZombieNixon]

30. I miss the Daily Show.

:cry: No Comedy Central here. :(

[JohnKleeb]

31. Oh man

That sucks. I rmeember the first daily show I saw it had a profile about Orrin Hatch. Apparently his parents named him Orrin because they hated him.

[ZombieNixon]

32. LOL!

:rofl:

[JohnKleeb]

33. I actually went to a committee hearing when I was an intern

and saw the ass myself.




for some dumb reason he reminds me of an owl.

[ZombieNixon]

34. Eeww...I've been lucky.

The only members of Congress I've met or seen speak have been Democrats. Dennis Kucinich, Tom Udall and Dick Durbin. All great guys. :)

[JohnKleeb]

35. To be fair

I've seen Teddy Kennedy speak in that same committee hearing. I also got to see Conyers speak on the floor. I've met two senators: Landreu and Hagel. Even got to ask Hagel a question about how service in a war relates to how one votes on issues. Udall huh I think my dad is aquainted with someone in that family somehow, same with Al Gore actually.

[ZombieNixon]

36. That's awesome!

Dick Durbin was really cool. People say he really knows how to work a room and they weren't lying.

The Udall family's pretty large, there was Stewart Udall (Secretary of the Interior under Kennedy and Johnson), Tom Udall, my congressmen (NM3) is his son, Mo Udall (D-AZ) who ran for president in '76 was Stewart's brother and Mark Udall (D-CO) is his son.

[JohnKleeb]

38. Yeah apparently my dad knows a lot of people

because he grew up in Arlington which is right near DC. Yeah the Udalls are great especially on environmental issues. Mark Udall I think is my aunt's congressman since she lives in Boulder, Colorado. I think he may run for senate in a few years and could win.

[ZombieNixon]

39. I think he was actually considering a run this time around,

but eventually decided against it.

[JohnKleeb]

40. He's still young politically speaking

Always time down the road. Going to sleep now by the way, I really really need to check out Colorado because it's supposed to be beautiful.

[ZombieNixon]

42. Have a good night!

Colorado is really beautiful. :)

[hfojvt]

20. that is a common philosophy taught these days

that all philosophies or all opinions are equally valid. Preposterous on the face of it. So the opinion of a 14 year old George W. Bush is just as valid as the conclusions reached by a group of scholars who debate and examine an issue drawing from the accumulated knowledge of the whole human race. Because there's no such thing as truth?

[ZombieNixon]

22. Actually, you could argue that they're all equally invalid,

since even those who could reasonably claim to have access to the accumulated knowledge of the human race are still colored by their societal perceptions and prejudices. And if you overcome those, then you simply assimilate into another set of perceptions and prejudices.

[hfojvt]

27. its the same thing

if they are all equally valid, then they are all equally invalid, because you are saying that there is no such thing as truth. It's all relative, perceptions and prejudices. So beating the crap out of somebody is no different than running into a burning building to rescue somebody. :crazy:

[ZombieNixon]

29. Does someone who claims to know truth really know truth?

I don't believe there's no such thing as truth...but I doubt we can ever, in our current states, really know what it is. So someone who says he knows what the truth is doesn't know it, and is really just saying "this is what I think the truth is..."

[hfojvt]

41. well, I think there is some nitpicking there

My analogy is that the truth is like pi = 3.1415926535897932384626433832795... and of course we can never know precisely what it is, but that does not mean that saying pi = 3.1415 and saying pi = 14 or pi = -6 or pi = googolplex are all equally valid just because we will never know precisely what pi is equal to. So I am stuck in the reality based world where the Bush tax cuts primarily benefit the rich no matter what Bush or Rush think (or say they think) and where Bush's opinion about economics is not as likely to be true as Krugman's. So maybe it is not exactly true, but it is close enough to work, and closer than a fool or a liar's "wild a$$ed guess".

[LouisianaLiberal]

43. Man, I don't know where to start.

Its late and I have to go to bed - you're WAY off on the Symposium.

There's much more to Plato than you think. "Philosophy is just a bunch of dead guys gassing on about their own opinions" is the quickest way to learn nothing. This is a rhetorical dialog, not really a philosophical one. Your "dianoia" is maddening, and a perfect example of "truthiness".

I don't mean to be harsh, and I was your age once. But please change your attitude. Now. Brilliant people have studied Plato for many years, and still find him challenging. Believe me, you DON'T understand Plato. There's nothing I can say here that hasn't been said in many available articles on Plato. Going to bed.

[LouisianaLiberal]

44. Dupe. Tired.

[hfojvt]

13. tsk, tsk

that is so judgemental. :spank:

Perhaps part of it is they felt like gods, and a child is a lover who is not an equal, more like a worshipper

[ZombieNixon]

15. And my view of love entails equals, not worshipper and worshipped.

And why is the preference of some dead Greek guy more valid than mine simply because it's in a book?

IMHO, anyone who seeks love to be worshipped should have his head examined.

[hfojvt]

37. "You're not perfect, sport, and neither is she"

from Good Will Hunting. I think it is common when you are madly in love to imagine that the one you love is perfect. So there is mutual worship, not worshipper and worshipped. Yet, with equals it is too easy for them to be competitors rather than partners.

The reason a dead Greek guy might have more insight is a) They were pretty smart guys, b) they were well educated, c) they are older and have more experience, and d) they spent alot of time with other smart guys speaking, thinking, discussing and learning.

Of course, they did not have the advantage of the internet and moderated discussion boards.

[JohnKleeb]

16. They'd be popular in prison if htey lived today

It's disturbing to think about in all honesty.

[hfojvt]

25. it is disturbing because you have been taught

to see it as abhorrent. Was their society more dysfunctional than ours? Probably from what I read in Joseph Heller's "Picture This" but I am not convinced that it was pederasty that made it so. Our own prison system seems as dysfunctional to me as anything the ancient greeks did.