Materialism>idealism
I’m not trying to get into a whole debate, it’s just interesting to me the way some people cling to these idealist philosophers. Same w the stoics imo. As a guy who used to read all of them… they’re useless to actually understanding life. Like it can be helpful to read them in order to understand how the Western worldview evolved, but they really shouldn’t be taken as some sort of handbook - which many seem to do. (reactionaries). People who read Nietzsche or Plato and think they have some sort of secret insight is my biggest red flag irt pseudo-intellectual who is just going to waste your time… same with Dostoevsky btw.
Confucius is based af though.
Edit: Also, yes these kinds of people exist- my former mentor/boss who spent decades at a white shoe DC law firm would accept any idea if you found a quote by Plato to justify it lmao.
Well, Plato was right about one thing at least.
But the fact remains that he and Aristotle were still misogynists and slavery apologists, not to mention wrong about subjects that we now take for granted, such as atomic theory and evolutionary theory.
(Funnily enough, I believe that it was Epicurus who not only promoted those theories but was also one of the few authorities in Greece who allowed slaves and women to study at his schools.)
Meanwhile chad Diogenes:
Diogenes 🥵🥵
I suppose I should have specified that I’m referring to people who try to use it like a compass in life. They all had some interesting ideas (imo the one you link is pretty obvious though right?) You can’t get rich if you want to be good and the way to get rich is to exploit others…
The natural philosophy side of things is a bit different, they were exploring ideas that were later built upon, even if refuted. But in regards to applied philosophy, the emphasis on specific virtues rather than specific acts lends itself incredibly to manipulation by an oligarchy or fascist leaderhsip.