Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by jonathanstrange 400 days ago
The author quotes Plato only to make a point that Plato explicitly dismisses, and completely ignores the rest of The Republic, which is a sophisticated thought experiment devised to counter the unsatisfactory ending of the first book and Thrasymachus's position.

This is really not how you should deal with other authors. It would be much better to make the point he wants to make without false witnesses and name dropping.
1 comments
bondarchuk 400 days ago
The article mentions that.
link
jonathanstrange 400 days ago
No, the article does not mention that it completely dismisses the rest of The Republic and just name drops Plato while deliberately ignoring one of his main points. It's particularly bad in this case because the remaining books of The Republic are basically a long reply to the aporetic ending of the first book.

It's intellectually lazy and rude. Don't grab quotes out of context to make a point the author never made, mentioning that you do so just makes things worse, not better.

My 2 cent, sorry if it sounds like nitpicking.

link
bondarchuk 399 days ago
No worries, that's what we're here for ;) I thought the text right after the quote makes it sufficiently clear that this is the losing side of a socratic dialogue but I can see your point.
link