> Nobody is confusing importance with value.
I think Doug was, actually. Thought I smelt a whiff of Canon-smoke amid the small-arms fire of Henwoodian wisecrackery. But perhaps I misunderstood him.
Of course it's true that anybody who's interested in the history of Western thought has to grapple with Plato, and his nice prose style and good ear for dialogue make the grappling more pleasant than it would otherwise be. But as a *thinker* he seems quite meretricious and dishonest -- sophistical, in a word. Aristotle is a lot more interesting, because he's really trying to *figure things out*.
Of course I don't *really* approve of taking books off library shelves -- even Plato. Or Dick Dawkins.
-- --
Michael J. Smith mjs at smithbowen.net
http://stopmebeforeivoteagain.org http://fakesprogress.blogspot.com http://cars-suck.org