Typical Bourgeois Fair

A bizarre distortion of reality - deliberately employing inverted thinking - and a set of disturbing and dangerous straw dog arguments by an author who is attempting to convey his own insidious and hidden agenda. Indeed, Jacques Derrida's Writing and Difference certainly comes into play as we strive to "deconstruct" the surface meaning from the deep intention the author applies whilst utilising all types of camouflage and deception. The author is set on justifying totalitarian, oppressive and fascistic attitudes - whilst simultaneously suggesting that a genuine criticism of moral deviancy is "misplaced" should a reader feel that the Greek (aristocratic) tradition of (routinely) sexuslly abusing male children is "wrong". Yes, Socrstes and Plato - for all their wisdom and genius of thought - were both sexually abused as children and were abusers of children when they were adults. Indeed, Socrates talks openly of abusing teenage boys - whilst Plato was never married (although advocating in Laws that all men should marry between 30-35). Many hundreds of years later, however, Plotinus fully rejects this old Greek tradition - which demonstrates that clear thinking need not be entwined with the politics of accommodating sexual deviancy. The author is further mistaken when he assesses the notion of "Impiety" - a crime that Socrates committed - although not necessarily on purpose or with the original intent the crime defined. Socrates emphasised a multifaceted, open and free state of mind that can seriously consider more than one interpretation of reality without siding with one aspect of a duality. Socrates understood both "Piety" and "Impiety" with an equal vigour. The corrupt Greek State chose to interpret this in a partial manner - whilst Socrates chose to punish this corrupt behaviour by holding the corrupt officials to the consequences of their actions. The author's somewhat ahistorical and childish misappropriation of the name of Joseph Stalin may be rectified by accessing the work of Grover Furr and numerous other reliable historians. Needless to say, some of those modernists who like to pass themselves off as "Philosophers" - are often the worst type of manipulators. Remember to always think for yourselves. Extract what is useful from this self-serving work - and move on. As Hanlet says - "The rest is silence."

You voted on this review!

You reported this review!