What is the point of the dialogue form when it's always one speaker agreeing with the other?

>>24537949 (OP)
But it's not, have you actually read any of his dialogues? All the other nibbas disagree with Socrates in the beginning.

>>24537958
That is precisely so, anon.

they are written from plato's perspective. he most likely wrote them with his own bias

>>24537949 (OP)
If we're talking about Plato in particular, we can guess or speculate n a number of reasons. Though, like >>24537958, I disagree that the dialogues are simply interlocutors saying, "yes, of course, Socrates." Think of the Euthyphro, where Euthyphro himself both has trouble following some of Socrates' arguments, and who, towards the end, even expresses some disdain towards the way Socrates articulates a definition of piety. Same goes for the Meno, where Meno both has trouble following Socrates, and at the same time is used to memorizing what someone else (Gorgias, in his case) explicitly teaches, and so is resistant to inquiring the way Socrates does. And there's all sorts of other moments or dialogues, like the combative Euthydemus or the Gorgias, or things like the complaints and objections of Glaucon and Adeimantus in the Republic.

But as for reasons why the dialogue format:

1) Plato is paying tribute to the man who more than any other turned him to philosophy, and that tribute depicts a man who didn't necessarily always straightforwardly teach something, but who inquired together with others through conversation.

2) Dialogues give Plato a kind of plausible deniability in taking responsibility for certain things said in the dialogues. His friend Socrates was after all put to death, and if an Athenian hostile to the memory of Socrates thought to charge Plato too, he has the excuse, "but where do *I* say these things? It's only Socrates, or Timaeus, or whoever who said them." Observe how dialogues like Phaedo (in which Plato brings himself up to say he was absent), Theaetetus, Symposium, and Parmenides are attributed to the memories or authorship of others, or how Republic, Charmides, Lysis, and Rival Lovers are portrayed as reminiscings of Socrates.

3) It may be that Plato thought that writing treatises was inappropriate to pedagogy towards the activity or way of life that he took philosophy to be, and so he may have considered it important for potential students of the ages to see examples from different viewpoints and circumstances, and with different kinds of people as interlocutors, of how to approach thinking about these topics.

>>24538048
Is this ChatGPT slop or actually worthwhile to read through?

>>24537949 (OP)
>>24538048
And just to add re: the interlocutors being "yes men," you can still learn something interesting by noticing when someone agrees with Socrates. To use Meno again, in the first part of that dialogue, when Meno offers possible definitions of virtue that amount to "ruling" or "getting a lot of gold," Socrates keeps testing Meno to see how good he is, by asking, "but surely ruling or getting much gold *justly*?" to which Meno quickly agrees. And, if you read about the kind of person Meno was in Xenophon's Anabasis, you learn he was a very vicious man, so the agreements are dishonest (Plato offers little hints about how tyrannical he is for those who wouldn't be familiar with his history).

>>24538052
If it were chatgpt, the numbered sections would've been something like,

>1) Tribute To Socrates: Plato is paying tribute to...

But I get it, there's a bunch of AI posting on the board now, which blows.

>>24538052
chatgpt give false information sometimes

>>24538118

>>24537949 (OP)
But that's wrong

>>24538118
That's not ChatGPT.

>>24537949 (OP)
>What is the point of the dialogue form when it's always one speaker agreeing with the other?

Socrates: "Next, then, compare our nature in respect of education and the lack of it to a state of things like this. Imagine human beings living in an underground cave..."

Glaucon: "I am ready," he said.

Socrates: "...and within it a fire burning, and above and behind the prisoners a road, and along the road a low wall... And do you see, then, men passing along the wall carrying all sorts of vessels and statues and figures of animals made of wood and stone and every material?"

Glaucon: "I see it," he said.

Socrates: "And do you think that these prisoners would talk about anything other than the shadows which they saw moving?"

Glaucon: "How could they, if they were compelled to hold their heads motionless all their lives?"

Socrates: "Now consider what would happen if one of them was released and suddenly compelled to stand up... what do you think he would say if someone told him that what he had formerly seen was all nonsense, and that now he was much nearer to reality...?"

Glaucon: "He would be perplexed, Socrates, and would regard what he formerly saw as more real."

>>24537949 (OP)
Dialogue:

You: "I was really hurt when you said that comment about my outfit yesterday. It felt like you were trying to embarrass me."

Friend: "Oh my god, you're still on about that? It was just a joke! You're being way too sensitive. Nobody else thought it was a big deal."

You: "But it wasn't funny to me, and it made me feel self-conscious."

Friend: "Honestly, you overreact to everything. I can't even say anything without you getting dramatic. You need to lighten up."

Why it's gaslighting: The friend invalidates your legitimate feelings, labels you as "too sensitive" or "dramatic," and then projects their own discomfort with accountability onto you. This makes you question if your feelings are valid

It's a sign of how bad /lit/ is now that an effortpost could be taken for Chatgpt, and then be followed by ss of AI and AI responses that add nothing to the thread.