Ti si taj koji odvlači pažnju sa očite suštine, suština bivajući da je LGBitd stvar nešto loše. Ja sam samo ukazao na tvoje greške i poništio tvoje tvrdnje o tobožnjoj "okovanosti" antičkih filozofa u "okove" Crkve.Škobo Habu wrote:Bojim sa da odvlačimo pažnju od srži teme.Irsar wrote:Osim što su Platon i Aristotel praktično prožimali nebrojeno mnogo vrhunskih filozofa i teologa Crkve, pa sam naziv Neo-Platonizam aludira na to, a Neo-Platonisti su mahom bili Kršćani. Srednjovjekovna Crkva je zapravo visoko cijenila dobre antičke filozofe, a upravo su "prosvjetitelji" ti koji su ili pogrešno razumjeli te filozofe ili su ciljano i maliciozno se fokusirali samo na određene ideje koje potiču od njih, zanemarujući svu širinu i dubinu toga koja je nužna da bi svaka pojedinačna ideja bila ispravno postavljena u sveukupnosti znanja.Škobo Habu wrote:Platon i Aristotel nisu osnove nikakve "evropske misli", jer u vrijeme njihovog djelovanja ništa takvo nije postojalo.
Platona i Aristotela su iz inkvizicijskih okova rehabilitovali nosioci evropske renesanse, kao i ukupnu grčko-rimsku filozofiju.
Upravo oni koji su se duhom Platona i Aristotela borili protiv dogmi Crkve.
Među njima je bilo i dosta homoseksualaca.
Opet si paradoksalan.
Otud i naturalizam i kasniji racionaltardizam renesanse, a pogotovo kad se javio modernizam.
Evo ovdje imaš naslikanog i Platona i Aristotela, a u centru je Toma Akvinski, slika iz 1472. godine. Ovo ujedno pokazuje koliko su zaista Platon i Aristotel bili cijenjeni od strane Crkve, a ujedno dokazuje tvoju ignoranciju po ovom pitanju. Čuj "duhom Platona i Aristotela se borili protiv dogmi Crkve", koja glupost. Borili su se duhom Šejtana/Sotone ako ćemo već pravo.
U Srednjem vijeku, filozofija, barem onakvu kako je danas poznjemo, kao i ono što je bila u antičko doba, je promatrana sa čisto teološkog stanovišta i neodvojiva od teologije.
Na primjer u svojim poglavljima Republika i Zakoni? Ovdje:No, ti nikako da mi odgovoriš gdje to Platon osuđuje ljudsku homoseksualnost?
A upravo su ova poglavlja direktna vizija Platona kako bi društvo i država trebali biti organizovani.REPUBLIC:
(Socrates:) Do you know of greater or keener pleasure than that associated with Aphrodite?
Glaucon:) I don't, he said, nor yet of any more insane.
S: But is not the right love a sober and harmonious love of the orderly and the beautiful?
G: It is indeed, said he.
S: Then nothing of madness, nothing akin to license, must be allowed to come nigh the right love?
G: No.
S: Then this kind of pleasure may not come nigh, nor may lover and beloved who rightly love and are loved have anything to do with it?
G: No, by heaven, Socrates, he said, it must not come nigh them.
S: Thus, then, as it seems, you will lay down the law in the city that we are founding, that the lover may kiss and pass the time with and touch the beloved as a father would a son, for honorable ends, if he persuade him. But otherwise he must so associate with the objects of his care that there should never be any suspicion of anything further, on penalty of being stigmatized for want of taste and true musical culture.
G: Even so, he said.
S: Do you not agree, then, that our discourse on music has come to an end? It has certainly made a fitting end, for surely the end and consummation of culture is the love of the beautiful (Republic III 403a-c).
LAWS:
Ah, my friends, how difficult it seems to ensure that the working of an institution shall be as unquestionable as its theory! Presumably it is with states as it is with human bodies – one cannot prescribe one definite treatment for one subject which involves no physically injurious consequences along with its beneficial effects. For example, these physical exercises and common meals you speak of, though in many ways beneficial to a city, provide dangerous openings for faction, as is shown by the cases of the Milesians, Boeotians, and Thurians. And, in particular, this practice is generally held to have corrupted the ancient and natural rule in the matter of sexual indulgence common to mankind with animals at large, and the blame for these corruptions may be charged, in the first instance, on your two cities and such others as are most devoted to physical exercises. Whether these matters are to be regarded as sport, or as earnest, we must not forget that this pleasure is held to have been granted by nature to male and female when conjoined for the work of procreation; the crime of male with male, or female with female, is an outrage on nature and a capital surrender to lust of pleasure. And you know it is our universal accusation against the Cretans that they were the inventors of the tale of Ganymede; they were convinced, we say, that their legislation came from Zeus, so they went on to tell this story against him that they might, if you please, plead his example for their indulgence in this pleasure too. With the tale we have no further concern, but the pleasures and pains of communities and of private lives are as good as the whole subject of a study of jurisprudence. (Laws I 636a-d)
That was exactly my own meaning when I said I knew of a device for establishing this law of restricting procreative intercourse to its natural function by abstention from congress with our own sex, with its deliberate murder of the race and its wasting of the seed of life on a stony and rocky soil, where it will never take root and bear its natural fruit, and equal abstention from any female field whence you would desire no harvest (Laws VIII 838e-839a).
S druge strane, da se vratim na tvoj citat:
Puno više je rečeno od ovoga što ti tvrdiš, a Sokrat (i posredno Platon) ipak ne tvrde ono što ti misliš, već Platon praktično pokazuje Aristofanu zašto je u krivu. Uostalom, ovo što si citirao jeste mišljenje Aristofana, ne Platona.Plato also writes of the origin of same and opposite sex urges. In his Symposium, Plato has Aristophanes tell a tale of human origins in which everyone was once a four legged creature until Zeus cut each in half. Each half tried to reunite with its mate and this explains the nature of human beings:
https://global.oup.com/us/companion.web ... wed/plato/Men who are a section of that double nature which was once called androgynous [made up of a man and a woman] are lovers of women, adulterers are generally of this breed, and also adulterous women who lust after men. The women who are a section of the woman do not care for men, but have female attachments: the female companions [that is, lesbians] are of this sort. But they who are a section of the male follow the male, and while they are young, being slices of the original man, they have affection for men and embrace them [the Greek verb implies a sexual sense], and these are the best of boys and youths, because they have the most manly nature. [bracketed material in Crompton] (Crompton, 2003, p. 58).
U zaključku mogu samo reći da, baš kao i sva priča o navodnim "liberalnim i tolerantnim drevnim civilizacijama", riječ je o ničemu drugom doli o selektivnom prihvatanju šta je ko rekao, i to još posredstvom modernih historičara koji svakako imaju želju da deformišu historiju kako njima je ćejf. Šteta za njih pa imamo i primarne izvore da iz prve ruke vidimo šta je ko rekao i mislio, a već sam naveo šta je Platon u ovom slučaju rekao.


