HexHammer wrote:No, you quote where he has actual relevance, it's the usual idiocy from you, when you also ask me to quote something useful from Kant, even tho every sane person should know he's outdated too.
The trouble with you pea-brain is you've created a straw man from your weeb trolling of philosophy forums and think it is the actual animal. You ask where the study of philosophy is relevant and when told where it is, i.e. in teaching people to think critically(something you show a complete inability to do) by examining the thoughts of some of the greatest thinkers in the subject and subjecting them to a critique based upon one's own thoughts and readings, you just repeat your tired old mantra of nonsense and babble without ever having actually read what has been said, hence you did not even bother to try and understand what I said about Logic as you have a closed-mind to any view that might challenge your pre-conceptions.
The questions raised by the Greeks are still pretty much the questions that some people still ask today, how should we live best, how should we govern best, what is a good life, how should we act morally, etc, etc, and when you study Philosophy now-a-days at least what you get from the subject is a understanding of whats been said so far which at least means that you don't keep re-inventing the wheel. That you think you are telling those who have studied Philosophy that it has no relevance today is laughable as those who have studied it know that its pretty much had no relevance, in Britain at least, for decades as those who fund the educational world had decided that economic relevance is the criteria for most subjects but, and pay attention here, things are changing as it is, for the first time, becoming a subject at the lower levels of education as they are discovering that it assists with the other subjects and teaches the students how to think and converse with others. Now what is being taught is not the higher-level academic approach of studying the philosophers but explorational philosophy that uses the themes expressed by them to explore what students think about their world today. Another reason for what appears to be a resurgence of interest is that the answers given by the other subjects appear not to satisfy the questions that people actually want an answer to and lo' and behold they appear to be the ones that the old philosophers have discussed, so personally I think it a good thing as without such an exploration people will turn back to religion and away from science in their search for answers as they don't actually understand what it is that science says because they have no framework with which to understand what science can and cannot say.
I'm tired of you trying to make me run a blatant fool's errand.
What the one where you actually respond to a question or two other than just yakking on about nonsense and babble? For example, you blithely say that Platos' Republic was the precursor for communism, as tho' you've said something true, but this just shows your prejudices as it's more like the precursor for fascism as much as tho' you don't like it communism has an egalitarian streak, something fairly antithetical to Plato's world(although I know I'm being too harsh here) which is more suitable for the totalitarian fascist.
Quote something useful or shut your stupid mouth!

Where do you get the idea that to study philosophy now-a-days is to be able to produce quotes? Still, just for you,
“The society we have described can never grow into a reality or see the light of day, and there will be no end to the troubles of states, or indeed, my dear Glaucon, of humanity itself, till philosophers become rulers in this world, or till those we now call kings and rulers really and truly become philosophers, and political power and philosophy thus come into the same hands.”
