http://plato.thefreelibrary.com/Republic

I suggest you read...kierkegaard followed hegel's dialectic - but he didn't agree with hegel's premises. Should I use aristotle's definitions? I can use rozenzweig's defintions about things as well he was a young hegelian.

Here's something else:
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=republic

representatives are entitled to vote...there's no mention of how/why they're entitled to vote or who decides the representatives

compare that to:
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=democracy...

read before you speak. [/b][/quote]
I've read "the Republic". There's nothing in there about logic that I can remember. Maybe you are referring to his critique of Democracy but that has nothing to do with the argument.

What do Kierkegaard or Hegel have to do with it?

haha. I can't believe you are using dictionary.com in this discussion. What a joke.

dictionary.com is a fine reference if you just need to skim to get the idea about something;) details and history and logical thinking are not important, Colin, didn't you get the memo?

"We (the British) have hated the French for years. Now you (the United States) have just joined the club. It makes you much more likable." - Simon Cowell

I've read "the Republic". There's nothing in there about logic that I can remember. Maybe you are referring to his critique of Democracy but that has nothing to do with the argument.

What do Kierkegaard or Hegel have to do with it?

haha. I can't believe you are using dictionary.com in this discussion. What a joke.[/b][/quote]
Hegel created the modern dialectic...just like Plato created the original idea of a republic. Kierkegaard used Hegel's concept just like Aristotle did. It's called an analogy...familiarize yourself with it.

You chose aristotle's interpretation...justify it and show me what "democracy" has to do with a leader bound and governed by laws.

Good luck...

Hegel created the modern dialectic...just like Plato created the original idea of a republic. Kierkegaard used Hegel's concept just like Aristotle did. It's called an analogy...familiarize yourself with it.

You chose aristotle's interpretation...justify it and show me what "democracy" has to do with a leader bound and governed by laws.

Good luck... [/b][/quote]
You're confused. I didn't say anything about dialectic. I was referring to Aristotelian logic and even gave an example.

Plato did NOT create the original idea of a Republic. Plato wrote in the 4th century BC. The Roman Republic was founded in the 6th century BC. Duh. I have a suspicion you've never read Plato's work just like you've never dined with the Queen of England.

Well then...who wrote the republic?

You should enlighten me...who created the concept of a leader governed by laws?

The queen's old - I like em' young...

I'm all ears Dr Colin - or in the case...all eyes.

Plato wrote a book called "The Republic". He did not "create the original idea of a republic". I know the Roman Republic was founded about 500 BC. I don't know if there were any republican governments before that.

???

I thinks maybe you flunked western civ or something....

The Iroquois Indians actually....

Just noticed this and had to respond :)

Prior to the ratification of the nineteenth amendment on August 18th 1920, there is no way on earth the United States could be termed a democracy.

Denying over half your population the vote is really not democratic.

So I would claim New Zealand as the longest continual democracy in the world, which authorized women's suffrage in 1893, a full 27 years prior.

Oh fuck!!!!


Excuse my little brother , he didn't know.......


Technick ,

Mike doesn't like people to bring facts up.It interferes with his rhetoric.


;-))

I call anachronism. How about 5th century BC Athens? Considered the prototype and yet not everyone had the right to vote. Not even close.

I call anachronism. How about 5th century BC Athens? Considered the prototype and yet not everyone had the right to vote. Not even close. [/b][/quote]
Abosolutely there is no question the Athenian "democracy" was not a true democracy in today's sense of the word but a prototype as you stated.

My point is that whilst the United States is ahead of the curve when it comes to embracing democratic ideals, it has by no means been the leading light it claims to be.

I'd say the US was by far the most influential promoter of democracy the past three centuries. Both as the result of hot wars and cold. ;-)

I'd say the US was by far the most influential promoter of democracy the past three centuries. Both as the result of hot wars and cold. ;-) [/b][/quote]
Last 100 yrs , I'd agree.

Last 100 yrs , I'd agree. [/b][/quote]
Somehow democracy spread from 13 colonies westward. Somehow! ;-) Once that was done the US built up the navy and went out doing it elsewhere. *laughing*

I'd say the US was by far the most influential promoter of democracy the past three centuries. Both as the result of hot wars and cold. ;-) [/b][/quote]
That's undoubtedly true.

But just because the US style of democracy has been marketed the hardest does not make it any more established, advanced or superior to many of the democracies in the rest of the world.

Some would argue to the contrary.

Advances in democracy have historically been adopted by other countries before the United States embraces them, just without the fanfare.

Sure, but it's very tricky because of state laws. Abolishing slavery for example. Happened in much of the world before the federal abolition in the US but happened in many states well before it happened in those same countries.

I agree. It doesn't make it a better brand. Pepsi might win taste tests but more companies still look to Coke as brand number one.

I'm waiting for the perfect opportunity to call someone a commy. Patience, patience.

If you bait them, they will come...... :okthumb:

Somebody looking for me?

Pinko!

Plato wrote a book called "The Republic". He did not "create the original idea of a republic". I know the Roman Republic was founded about 500 BC. I don't know if there were any republican governments before that.[/b][/quote]
Since you aren't able to understand the concept of analogy or answer the question, I'll make this simple, as I've had to do before with you, show me where democracy - without giving you anymore hints, as defined, as the whole of the people electing their leaders, is a direct necessary condition for a republic?

Having a bachelors in science or whatever, does not make you adept or even able to engage philosophy, history, political science , etc, - in fact, it doesn’t make you capable of even engaging your own discipline on an academic level. It’s doubtful you could even get a job within your own claimed discipline.

I know shit about quantum cosmology - it’s not my deal...the historical method - beyond me - ask me to do an ethnograph...it‘ll be a clusterfuck...and I don’t claim that shit.

I just want to hear about the necessary condition honestly.

Since you aren't able to understand the concept of analogy or answer the question, I'll make this simple, as I've had to do before with you, show me where democracy - without giving you anymore hints, as defined, as the whole of the people electing their leaders, is a direct necessary condition for a republic?

Having a bachelors in science or whatever, does not make you adept or even able to engage philosophy, history, political science , etc, - in fact, it doesn’t make you capable of even engaging your own discipline on an academic level. It’s doubtful you could even get a job within your own claimed discipline.

I know shit about quantum cosmology - it’s not my deal...the historical method - beyond me - ask me to do an ethnograph...it‘ll be a clusterfuck...and I don’t claim that shit.

I just want to hear about the necessary condition honestly. [/b][/quote]
Haha. Everyone sees right through you. Soon you'll be telling us you dined with Socrates.

You write like someone trying to "sound smart" but keep going way off topic when you're not busy being completely wrong. Your references to Kierkegard were pointless, you mixed up dialectic with Aristotelian logic for some reason, Plato did not "create the original idea of the Republic" and you have obviously not read that book. Maybe you think DeTocqueville created the original idea of Democracy because he wrote a book with Democracy in the title? lol.

You're absolutely correct, Einstein. A BS in physics does not make one adept or even able to discuss a number of disciplines. I'm just a pornographer trying to make a living. Don't take things so seriously.

My god, man. Go actually read "the Republic" instead of the encyclopedia entry, study some Roman and Greek history and come back when you know enough to stick to the conversation instead of the rogue's gallery of randomness you are spewing.

Haha. Everyone sees right through you. Soon you'll be telling us you dined with Socrates.

You write like someone trying to "sound smart" but keep going way off topic when you're not busy being completely wrong. Your references to Kierkegard were pointless, you mixed up dialectic with Aristotelian logic for some reason, Plato did not "create the original idea of the Republic" and you have obviously not read that book. Maybe you think DeTocqueville created the original idea of Democracy because he wrote a book with Democracy in the title? lol.

You're absolutely correct, Einstein. A BS in physics does not make one adept or even able to discuss a number of disciplines. I'm just a pornographer trying to make a living. Don't take things so seriously.

My god, man. Go actually read "the Republic" instead of the encyclopedia entry, study some Roman and Greek history and come back when you know enough to stick to the conversation instead of the rogue's gallery of randomness you are spewing.[/b][/quote]
Thank you - there will always be the iron...if you actually read the work like you claim - you'll know what that means.

I win.

:inlove: :inlove: I just love it when you declare victory !!!! :yowsa:

It reminds me of rhymer :inlove:

Actually, that was a lie.