>Starts with the Greeks>Read Plato’s very first dialogue>Disproves GodThis is why you start with the Greeks
>Whiteness was associated with femininity. Aristophanes’ Thesmophoriazeusae 191-192 has Euripides criticising Agathon as λευκος (white), γυναικοφωνος (woman-voiced), and ‘απαλος (soft). His Ecclesiazeusae 428 similarly has a young man described as λευκος proposing that women should rule the city. Xenophon’s Hellenica 3.4.19 records Spartan soldiers, on seeing that their enemies are λευκος, deciding that fighting against them would be ει γυναιξι δεοι μαχεσθαι (like having to fight women). Euripides’ Bacchae 457 has Pentheus describe Dionysus as λευκος, and also ουκ αμορφος […] ‘ως ες γυναικας (not ill-formed […] as unto women, 453-4). The association is quite consistent.> Meanwhile, Aristotle’s Politics makes a ‘golden mean’ argument about geography and ethnicity, if not precisely skin colour, claiming that Europeans and people living in cold places are θυμοῦ μέν ἐστι πλήρη, διανοίας δὲ ἐνδεέστερα καὶ τέχνης (‘full of courage but lacking in intelligence and skill’), and thus are too disorganised to conquer their neighbours, whilst Asians are διανοητικὰ μὲν καὶ τεχνικὰ τὴν ψυχήν, ἄθυμα δέ (‘intelligent and skilful, but without courage’, Politics 7, 1327b), and that Greeks occupy the perfect mean between the two and thus have intelligence, skill, and courage. Pale-skinned northern Europeans, then, he represents as inferior.> As with Ancient Egyptians, Mycenaean Greeks and Minoans generally depicted women with pale or white skin and men with dark brown or tanned skin. As a result, men with pale or light skin, leukochrōs (λευκόχρως, "white-skinned") could be considered weak and effeminate by Ancient Greek writers such as Plato and Aristotle.> White skin was so strongly associated with women that Aristotle felt compelled to offer a biological explanation: women lose so much blood during menstruation, that it makes them pale.> The examples given in LSJ indicate that leukos, meaning "white-skinned" (entries II.b and c), is "a sign of youth and beauty" (II.b) when applied to women, but means "weakly, womanish" (II.c) when applied to men.> Furthermore, Agathon's effeminate good looks feature white skin (leukos, 191). Stehle notes that "His mask was probably white, the standard type for an effete male in Aristophanes"> In Xenophon pale skin comes to signify 'physical debilitation,'> Aristophanes’s schema is simple and essentialist: white skin = woman, tan skin = man, and suggesting the opposite = comedy.This is why you start with the Greeks
>>23314309Yeah, people think Plato was some kind of proto-monotheist when in reality the main characteristic of the monotheistic God is how personal he is. Yes, I've read Laws where Plato argues that the gods must be directly involved in human affairs. But this is NOT in the same way the monotheistic God is. Even if you can construe Plato's gods as "personal" they still have no personality in the way Yahweh and Allah do. The monotheistic God is SEPARATE from the world and is an INDIVIDUAL, whereas in Platonic Theology the gods are essentially just ideas that only permeate the world because in Plato's philosophy, ideas permeate the world. This becomes obvious in Proclus. Despite Proclus being superstitious as fuck compared to Plato, you can still see that the way his gods are conceptualized as being involved in the world just has nothing in common with monotheism, they are still just Ideas that perform the same function as the Ideas but are placed above Being just because. Compared to monotheism this is atheism.
>>23314321Good for you anon, I'm shocked to see anyone read any of the Platonists and notice this. A surprising number of people take the gods as in revealed religion.
>>23314309Ignore OP, he's retarded once again and cannot read
>>23314316Is this not the same today?Men who are more tanned seem more manly while pale men seem soft and weak.
>>23314309How retarded is OP?
>>23314309Is it really possible to be this stupid, anons? How are you this stupid, OP?
