this post was submitted on 19 Dec 2025
299 points (99.0% liked)
History Memes
1221 readers
1385 users here now
A place to share history memes!
Rules:
-
No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia, assorted bigotry, etc.
-
No fascism (including tankies/red fash), atrocity denial or apologia, etc.
-
Tag NSFW pics as NSFW.
-
Follow all Piefed.social rules.
Banner courtesy of @setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world
OTHER COMMS IN THE HISTORYVERSE:
- !historymusic@quokk.au
- !historygallery@quokk.au
- !historymemes@piefed.social
- !historyruins@piefed.social
- !historyart@piefed.social
- !historyartifacts@piefed.social
- !historyphotos@piefed.social
founded 7 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Philosophers aren't immune to being assholes though. You can be a deep thinker, but lack the insight for empathy and sympathy.
I'm a recovering alcoholic and I've been sober now for over 30 years .... but what you just said is a common thing that is mentioned by the best treatment counsellors out there.
If you were an asshole when you were drinking ... chances are you, you will still be an asshole when you become sober ... you can be treated for any condition you may have, but if you are an underlying asshole to begin with, you'll stay that way no matter what happens to you.
And philosophers wouldn't be immune to that ... you can be a brilliant mind and know and remember many things ... but you can still be an asshole
Congrats on your sobriety.
Thanks
It was one of the funniest revelations I learned about in recovery and had it explained to me by one of the best treatment people I know and am lifelong friends with.
We were talking about a particular person who was going through recovery that we both knew ... the guy was a complete jerk, an asshole, completely without empathy or care for other people ... and he was an alcoholic. My treatment counsellor friend was helping him.
I said at one point that once this jerk does become sober, maybe he'll lighten up and be a little bit nicer to other people.
My treatment counsellor friend explained that what he was doing has nothing to do with a person's personality ... all they wanted to do was help him to stop drinking ... then he added ... "if he was an asshole before he got sober, he'll probably still be an asshole when he gets sober, our job is to help you to stop drinking, it has nothing to do with anything else about how a person is. I really don't care what he's like after, as long as he stops drinking."
That's practically the summary for Ron Livingston's tv-series Loudermilk.
That is an amazing show that all my recovery friends recommended and we all enjoyed. I'm even thinking of rewatching the whole series. One of the greatest disappointments in TV history for me was that they never continued the show. One of the best pieces of TV writing I've ever enjoyed.
It's not only serious in talking about the subjects but it's also really very funny and honest.
I recommend that everyone watch it as it's one of the best shows out there that deals with one of the most important ideas of society today .... soberity
Dude have you even read the republic? They're literally preordained golden gods used as a metaphor to explore what righteousness means through a theoretical society. They're presupposed to be better than the rest of the population so the discussion can move on instead getting bogged down with figuring out who goes in what caste.
But even if you interpret it literally, a ruling caste that can't ever own personal possessions, and has been brainwashed since childhood to put the needs of the community over their own, would be a better system of governance than a bunch of rich, corrupt bastards puppeteered by corporations.
How's North Korea doing?
You seem to have a very distorted view of what is being proposed here if you're making comparisons with dictatorships.
No, no, this is exactly what's being proposed. North Korea is a vast and complex bureaucracy which boils down to a state run by a ruling caste that cannot own property and has been brainwashed since childhood to put the needs of the community over their own.
Sure, and USA is a land of freedom and chances, where people are equal and nobody is being persecuted for their religion or the colour of their skin, and where money trickles down to water all of the working class.
Get real dude.
Afaik personal property is illegal in theory, but you can buy a car and have your family inherit it. The ruling class in theory doesn't own any private property, yet the Kim family owns a private island, yachts, luxury cars, and enough money to pay NBA players for a sleepover.
Also, you're forgetting a few key steps in making the Plato's polis like:
Edit:
But again, you're comparing the myth of an actual society and it's actual state, with a hypothetical society that wasn't ever supposed to have an actual state. Plato purposefully Deus exes problems away so you can focus on what the polis represents - a metaphor for a righteous person.
"a state run by a ruling caste that cannot own property and has been brainwashed since childhood to put the needs of the community over their own." is not a positive or ideal description of NK, and I'm not entirely sure why you think a mythological interpretation of the USA is a response.
Wow. Almost sounds like the theory is a bit flawed.
Oh boy, do I have some exciting news for you about the development of the DPRK
Nominally true, but the system of collective education and totalitarian interest in family is close.
... individuals are assigned to their caste at birth according to their parentage, reassignments to another caste are done at adolescence or adulthood according to the Republic, and not by a magical system, but explicitly by the Guardians themselves.
As I said before, the argument fails on both metaphysical and political grounds - and you are here overwhelmingly supporting the political arguments of the Republic, so don't try to fucking cop-out with "It's all abstract philosophy, actually" now. Even if it is (and there is debate), you're sitting pretty here defending the literal and oligarchic arguments presented. The metaphorical (or not) nature of the work is thus irrelevant to the discussion thus far.
Ok this may be what is written on paper but the major difference - if I may state the obvious here - is that NK is a dictatorship. You have the fat guy on top of everything being worshipped as a god. His dad was before him and someone else from the family will be after, if the people don't wake up in the meantime. If you're learning about Plato from chatgpt or something you will see terms like philosopher kings etc which sound weird and may give off the wrong impression. To understand the concept you need to keep in mind what the world looked like back then. Also I understand that we now live in an era where philosophy is not appreciated as much as it was back then, the very term has been corroded by the capitalist ideas that prevail today. The main issue that Plato identified was that people in power are becoming corrupt and seek personal gain. His idea to have philosophers at the top is that people who have the capacity to think deeper understand the meaninglessness of such behaviours and can see the world from a selfless perspective, overcoming the greed for personal power and wealth. Now I'm not saying that Plato's vision is the perfect solution, but at the very least you should be able to see the benevolent nature of the proposal. You hating on it so much tells me you have not grasped the intention.
Christ.
No, I'm literally paraphrasing the Republic, with occasional glances at specific passages when I'm uncertain if I'm remembering correctly.
... one of the core complaints of the Republic, and the reason for the in-narrative dialogue, is the perception that contemporary people don't value philosophy
On the contrary, the argument remains based on a selfish premise - one of the very first things established as a prerequisite for the whole discussion is the idea that just behavior leads to happiness for the just person. The point of making the ruling class philosophers is that philosophers will be able to understand what is and is not just (and, according to Plato's arguments there, no one chooses injustice except out of ignorance).
Oh, I'm sorry, the system of oligarchic hereditary oppression has good intent, so I shouldn't hate it. Of course. Silly me. I'll start glazing the Chinese Confucian bureaucracy, medieval theocratic feudalism, and the Stalinist regime next.