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*
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.
ReplyDeleteAgreed, re: Aristotle.
ReplyDeleteThe Diogenes scenario is both appalling and hilarious, somehow.