Sarnia weather

My understanding of western philosophy is only the level introduced in Sophie's World I read four or five years ago, and I almost forgot the contents of the books I read four or five years ago. To put it bluntly, this is the first time to read western philosophical works.

Some time ago, I read a sentence in Meng Shi's books on humanities: "In terms of thinking, it is best to read all Plato's dialogues, or at least the Republic, which was written by dialogue. From ancient times to the present, no philosopher can explain things in a simple way and convey profound truth in extremely ordinary and beautiful words like Plato. " I always put writing first and thinking second. Mr. Montessori's brief recommendation on the beauty of writing aroused my interest. I went to the library and couldn't find any books, The Republic. I don't think I have time to deal with such a big book. I came across this pamphlet on drinking and borrowed it back. I borrowed it for almost half a month and didn't read it. I read a volume of Liu Zongyuan's letters last night, and thought it was still early to go to bed, so I picked up this booklet and began to read it. I can't help but be fascinated. Although they are trivial things, it is a wonderful and grateful fate to be able to get in touch with a good book and the world behind it through these unintentional things.

I have always been interested in western philosophy, and my impressions of western philosophical works are basically rigorous logical arguments and boring texts. Often accused of lack of logical thinking, emphasis on literature and light thinking, so I haven't read any western philosophical works. I occasionally look through those works in the library, because I am used to the writing habits and thinking patterns of China's classics and volumes, and I can't understand them at all. I borrowed some recently out of interest in aesthetics, but I can't understand them either. Drinking is the first book of western philosophy that I read without hesitation, and it is also the problem that I found myself when I contacted western philosophy before.

Western philosophy should first pay attention to philosophy rather than the west, and I lost my attention to the west. Western philosophy is also a kind of philosophy, so it makes sense to understand western philosophy by understanding China's philosophy. Just as I don't read China's philosophy from Zhu Cheng Lu Wang, it is natural for me to read western philosophy from modern works. The pre-Qin period corresponds to ancient Greece, so it may be my right way to start with the works of ancient Greece (not just philosophy). Plato's Drinking Articles really suits my taste.

The love in Drinking is embodied in the image of Cupid. At first, I just thought it was their habit and wanted to restore Cupid to abstract love, which was more in line with my thinking habit. After reading it a little, I found I couldn't go back. Love is not a simple transformation between abstraction and concreteness. To get in touch with their thoughts, we must first accept this way of thinking. They use gods to construct their own thoughts, not simply based on gods, but sublimate and integrate gods and thoughts. As for their reference to the mythical image of the goddess of love to illustrate love, it seems to have the same effect as China philosophers' reference to three generations of old things to discuss love. Their way of thinking is very new to me, but I know too little about them now, and my understanding must be biased. What I have summarized now must be supplemented in the future. I like this process very much.

Explaining philosophy in the form of dialogue, more than one third was refuted. I wonder if he just wants to make a record or describe the evolution of his thoughts. Anyway, his works are really attractive.

The second speaker Bauza Virginia's eulogy began like this:

"But God loves more than one. We should explain from the beginning which one we want to celebrate. So what I have to do now is to correct this shortcoming, first get the topic right, point out which cupid to praise, and then praise it in a language suitable for this worship of God. 」

The fifth speaker Agathon mentioned:

"No matter what you praise, there is only one correct way, which is to explain what the object of praise is first, and then explain the effect of this object. So, to praise God, first say what he is, and then say what he has given. 」

Looking at the whole dialogue process, it seems that there is a process of more and more rigorous thinking. When people talk about something for the first time, it has no clear definition, only a vague concept. In the process of discussion, the concept is accurate, and it should be accurate. The precise process ranges from distinguishing who is the object of discussion (Bauza's eulogy) to defining the object of discussion (Agathon's eulogy).

"Only lovers swear not to obey can they be forgiven by the gods. 」

It is mentioned below that a bad lover breaks his oath because his lover's color drops, so the oath here should not refer to the oath of the lover to the lover, but the oath of the lover to others against his will in some cases. This oath can be broken because it is for the lover.

"The power of God's love is incredible, dominating everything of God and people. 」

In the words of Kyle, love seems to be extended to "the combination of two things", far from being confined to people. Just like his last example, the weather is not smooth because the love of cold, hot, dry and wet (that is, the combination) is out of control, and once this love is restrained, the weather will be fine.

Socrates' eulogy is based on Cupid's definition and can be summarized as follows:

Socrates said, "I ask you now: Is a brother someone's brother? 』

He said, "of course, isn't it just a brother or sister's brother?" "He said yes.

Then please apply this truth to Cupid and say: Is Cupid a love for a person? 』

"Of course, it's love for someone. 』 」

Here, the love described by Herod Kyle has changed: the love described by Herod Kyle is "combination" and the two are interactive; What is described here is "pursuit", which is one to another. The scope of love discussed by Elukxi Marco is too large, so it is meaningful to bring it back here.

"If someone says to us,' I am healthy, but I still want to be healthy, I am rich, but I still want wealth, so I look forward to what I already have. Then I should answer him like this: "my friend, you have wealth, health and strength, but you hope to have these things in the future, because you have them now whether you like it or not." 』」

"Since a person loves something, he hasn't; He wants it, that is, he wants it now or in the future. 」

According to the first paragraph, the second paragraph should read as follows:

A person loves something. If he doesn't have it now, he just wishes he did. If he has it now, he just hopes to have it again in the future.

Then the description in the second paragraph of the original text is not valid, and the conclusion that "loving something means not having it" is one-sided.

From this conclusion, the following contents can be deduced:

"God loves something first, and then what he lacks. 」

"What a person loves is what he lacks and doesn't have. 」

"So, God's love is lacking, and there is nothing beautiful. 」

It can't be established, because loving God can make you beautiful, and I hope I will continue to be beautiful in the future.

"If you have a correct view and can't say why, then you are not knowledgeable (because there is no basis), but you are not ignorant (because there is correct content, you can't call it ignorance). 」

Wonderful, not that this truth has not been revealed before, but that he presented this truth with fluent and easy-to-understand sentences. So I read a lot. If I knew everything he said, his sentences were not as fluent as mine, and I didn't need to read them at all.

"Because this is the right way, you can follow it to love, or you can be led by others to love. Starting from the beauty of this individual, you can rise step by step to achieve unified beauty, just like climbing stairs, from one to two, from two to all bodies, from bodies to those beautiful actions, from beautiful actions to beautiful knowledge, and finally from all kinds of knowledge, you can reach the kind of knowledge that is nothing more than beauty itself. " 」

My personal opinion is that life exists for beauty, and I think people should make themselves beautiful. Although it is a little different from the conclusion here, I still feel cordial. By the way, in my opinion, although there are problems in the above discussion, the conclusion itself is beautiful.

Plato used dialogues beautifully, many of which are interesting but have nothing to do with the philosophy to be expounded, such as dialogues with similar introductions at the beginning, and the treatment of hiccups mentioned by Elucci Kyle. These places also give me a sense of intimacy.

In addition, the so-called Platonic love seems to have no good correspondence here. At most, it was just the eulogy of the first few speakers, and then it was denied by Arisdorpan (Mr. Wang's translation pointed this out, thank you for your comments). In addition, the so-called platonic love in the eulogy of the previous speakers seems to refer to the love of adult men for young men. This concept may have been played in the future? At least I didn't find the concept of posterity in Drinking.

20 16-0 1-09