Up@dawn 2.0

Wednesday, November 2, 2016

Aristotle at the Googleplex

Aristotle at the Googleplex is a book I would rather read. That is not to say that I don’t love Plato so far, in fact, I love it; I’m just critical of the endeavor it undertakes. Plato admits himself, in both his actual writing and through his character in Goldstein’s book, that he never penned his true philosophies. Who may definitively say Plato did not always play the Devil’s advocate in his dialogues? How could anyone, including Goldstein, be confident enough in Plato’s character and true dispositions to assign them to a fictional representation of the man himself? Aristotle, then, would probably be the earliest candidate for the place given to Plato in our reading.
            That is only speaking of technicalities though, and I would like to imagine the historical Plato would have been much like the book’s representation of him.  Perhaps Aristotle at the Googleplex may be the sequel. In fact, given the entertaining nature of this book, I want a series including, but not limited to, Euripides, Diogenes, Montaigne, Descartes, and Spinoza editions! I think we should all take a moment at this point to sit back and imagine just how horrible, grotesque, and entertaining a book titled Diogenes at the Googleplex would have to be.
Cheryl: What is this nonsense you’re trying to tell me about “defacing the coinage”?
Diogenes: ….. Let me explain it this way… *stands on table and pees on Marcus*


  1. I think that it would be less of a stretch to put Aristotle at the googleplex because his mind is in fact here on earth with us as opposed to Plato who always had his head in the clouds.

  2. Agreed, re: Aristotle.

    The Diogenes scenario is both appalling and hilarious, somehow.