Brief Notes on Various Topics -- 74

24 November 2025

Brief Notes on Various Topics – 74

1.  Life and Meaning

Recently I listened to an online talk by a young philosopher who argued that it is not the job of Philosophy to teach people the meaning of life.  The young philosopher put the argument in analytic terms by arguing that asking ‘What is the meaning of life’ isn’t actually a question, that such a question, paradoxically, has no meaning.

It was frustrating to listen to such a talk at this point in the 21^st century.  I would have thought that the analytic tradition’s tropes about what falls into the category of meaningful would have, by now, exhausted themselves.  But, apparently, that is not the case.

If I were speaking directly to someone who has this person’s view my response would be to refer them to Plato’s Phaedo and to The Consolation of Philosophy by Boethius.  Both of these are examples of Philosophy taking on the task of guiding the characters in these works, and the reader, to the meaning of life in the face of impermanence and death.  These works are salvific; and it used to be the case that philosophers thought of Philosophy as the means whereby it is possible to be guided to the meaning of life, to the point of existence, to how a human being can transcend the difficulties that life brings and how to transcend those difficulties by going beyond the mundane.

2.  Continuities

In the West those who are interested in Buddhism have access to the full range of Buddhist traditions.  In Buddhist history that is unusual, perhaps unprecedented.  Traditions that were separated for many centuries by geography, culture, and language (such as Theravada and Tibetan Vajrayana) are found rubbing shoulders on bookshelves and they are available at online retail outlets.

Years ago I was thinking about what holds these Buddhist traditions together?  Is there some kind of underlying unity that runs like a common thread among all these traditions?  If you contrast Theravada with Tibetan Buddhism you find that they have different collections of Buddhist texts, that they have different philosophical interpretations of what it means to be a Buddhist, that they have different rituals, and so forth.

What came to mind when thinking about this is that in all of these traditions there is one thing that unites all of them and that is the Monastic Sangha.  It is the institution of monasticism that provides a sense of unity among all of these variant Buddhist traditions. 

When I look at Platonism I see similar kinds of variations among contemporary Platonists.  Some Platonists are theurgists and others eschew a theurgic interpretation of Platonism.  Some consider Platonism to be grounded in mystical experience and others regard Plato as an analytic philosopher, or proto-analytic philosopher. 

Looking at this and thinking about it, I came up with a source of unity among these variations and that is the Dialogues that Plato wrote.  All the various interpretations of Platonism are rooted in that common canon; the Dialogues of Plato.

It’s interesting, I think, to consider that in Buddhism it is an institution that provides a common basis for the tradition as a whole; the Monastic Sangha.  In Platonism it is not an institution that provides a common basis, it is a book, the Dialogues. 

I think this happens because the Dialogues are attractive at many levels; as literature, as analysis, as dialectic, and as a guide to the transcendental.  The Dialogues are like an eternal spring of crystal clear water that flows forth nourishing everything that it contacts.

3.  Doing Platonism

Most people are introduced to Platonism through the reading of some of Plato’s Dialogues.  Usually this happens in college but it can also happen if someone is interested in becoming familiar with the foundations of Western thought in general, or Western Philosophy in particular.  If interest in Platonism takes root this often manifests as understanding Platonism as primarily a scholarly activity; I mean reading the Dialogues and related material, commenting on them, and exploring how others have understood them.  All of this is wonderful and inspiring and I, and many others, have benefitted greatly from this kind of activity.

At some point some people ask how to embody these teachings in one’s life; I think of this as asking how to do Platonism or what does Platonism indicate, or even demand, of its followers.  This is when an individual becomes interested in wanting to ground the teachings of Platonism in one’s behavior and in comprehending Platonism as not only a way of thought, but also a way of life.  By ‘way of life’ I mean that Platonism manifests in identifiable behaviors.

I have posted previously about what I think of as the Precepts of Platonism that offer a framework for doing Platonism, a doing that goes beyond ‘thinking about.’  I think the question that those interested in taking this step have is where to start.  The reason that is not easy to answer is that Platonism has not generated a guidebook for the basic steps, or practices, or precepts, in the way that, for example, Jainism, or other Dharma traditions, have.

But it is possible to glean from the Dialogues ethical practices and precepts that define a way of life that is consistent with being a Philosopher.  If I were asked by someone interested in what I call doing Platonism, I would make the suggestion that the first step is simply to become a vegetarian.  I say this because it is relatively easy to do; there is a lot of material to support a change to a vegetarian diet and there are a lot of vegetarians to offer support in such a change. 

I also make this suggestion because vegetarianism, in a Platonist context, is directly tied to the teachings of non-harming and non-retaliation found in Dialogues such as Crito and The Republic.  Non-harming is the most important ethical teaching of Platonism and the source for all other ethical teachings and precepts.  But it is often the case that when first encountering non-harming it seems to be too big of a demand when considered in the abstract; and often the mind will raise objections.  Vegetarianism, however, is easy to access, provides an experiential basis for what non-harming means, and deepens one’s understanding of non-harming so that when a reader comes across these teachings in Platonic literature the reader has an experiential basis for understanding what non-harming means.  This is why I consider vegetarianism to be a significant teaching of Platonism rather than something peripheral.

There is a lot of material in the Platonic tradition that supports becoming a vegetarian.  This is helpful for those who want to practice Platonism in their lives.  Porphyry’s On Abstinence is the most significant example of a work on the topic of vegetarianism and it links vegetarianism to non-harming and living a philosophical life.  But there are others such as three essays on this topic by Plutarch.  The combined impact of these kinds of writings is to show the function of vegetarianism for those wanting to walk the Path of Platonism, for those wanting to become Philosophers.

I would also suggest that becoming vegetarian sheds a new light on reading and study of Platonic literature such as the Dialogues and the Enneads.  Once someone embodies Platonism through the practice of vegetarianism they begin to see reading and study of the Platonist tradition as a way of doing Platonism, as another practice that embodies Platonism in the life of a practitioner.  This is a subtle shift in the understanding of what someone is doing when they are reading Platonic literature.  The tendency is to understand such reading, at first, as a means of acquiring information in the same way that someone might read a history or even fiction.  When one begins to embody Platonism by doing Platonism then reading Platonic literature more closely resembles a musician playing music on their instrument, or the daily practice a musician has to maintain their musicianship.  Vegetarianism is similar to this kind of relationship; it is a practice that deepens one's understanding of what it means to be a Platonist and at the same time deepens one's understanding of what it means to read and study Platonic literature; the two practices mutually nourish each other.

So that is my suggestion to someone wanting to embody Platonism, wanting to do Platonism, in their life.  It is a first, or perhaps more accurately, an early step on the path that leads to the Good and the One.

4.  The Unseen Sun

At dusk the sun swiftly sets behind the distant November mountains.  On a moonless night the stars come out above the desert with its cacti and creosote bushes.  The sun has disappeared but its presence remains.

Brief Notes on Various Topics -- 73

17 November 2025

 Brief Notes on Various Topics -- 73

1.  Addendum

Last week I posted ‘Evaluating the Relationship between Christianity and Platonism.’  In some ways it turned out to also be a post on the relationship between Orthodox Platonism and Theurgic Platonism.

Over the last week I have thought of some aspects of this topic that I overlooked that I think deserve to be included.  This addendum offers one additional observation:

1.1  In last week’s post I mentioned a few differences between Orthodox and Theurgic Platonism.  One difference that I neglected to include is the place that Henads hold in Theurgic Platonism and how that undermines Orthodox Platonism.  In Theurgic Platonism the Gods are thought of as Henads (sometimes translated as ‘unities’) that are placed between the One, the first hypostasis, or highest level of reality, and the Noetic realm of eternal objects, the second hypostasis, or level of reality.

In Orthodox Platonism there are no Henads between the One, and Nous, or eternal objects.  The flow of emanation from the One goes directly to Noetic realities such as numbers, being, life, and mind, and so forth.  The principle that governs, or gives us insight into, the nature of emanation is differentiation; the Noetic is more differentiated than the One (which is undifferentiated), and the material level of reality, or hypostasis, is more differentiated than the Noetic.  This is the metaphysical map, and cosmology, of Orthodox Platonism.

When Theurgic Platonism places the Gods, or Henads, between the One and the Noetic the result is a disruption in the flow of emanation because the Gods are more differentiated than the eternal objects of Noetic reality.  And, from the Orthodox Platonist perspective, there is no necessity, or even a casual reason, for adding this complexity; I mean that there is no problem in Orthodox Platonism that is in some way solved by adding the Henads, or Gods in this disruptive way.

This is, I think, a major difference between the Orthodox and Theurgic approaches.

2.  The Good and the Material Realm

Human beings are not good.  I don’t mean that human beings never do good things; sometimes, not often, but sometimes human beings do good things.  What I mean is that when human beings do good things it is because of the presence of the Good and the One, it is because of the presence of eternity; the good that human beings do does not arise from human nature rather the good that human beings do arises in spite of human nature.

3.  Chatting with ChatGPT

Recently I have engaged with ChatGPT in philosophical discussion.  Most of my discussions are about whether a particular interpretation I have of a philosophical issue has some kind of precedent and if it does where I can find that precedent, such as what philosophers also held this view or something close to this view.  For example, I have the view that the three old men who are depicted in Plato’s dialogue Laws are allegories for, or symbols of, the three hypostases (the transcendental One, the Noetic realm or the realm of eternal objects, and the material realm).  The Athenian Stranger represents the One, the Cretan represents the nous, and the Spartan represents the material realm.  I asked ChatGPT if there were any commentaries or essays about Laws that took the same, or a similar approach to Laws.  It turned out that there are examples of those who take a similar approach but differ as to the specific allegorical nature of the three old men.  ChatGPT added that this allegorical approach to the Laws is a minority approach and most writing on Laws uses a more straightforward kind of analysis.  Nevertheless, this was encouraging to me.  Finding that others understand Laws as a vast and complex allegory made me feel more at ease regarding taking that approach.

Thinking about this, I think the kind of question I asked is the kind of question that AI is good at.  I wasn’t asking AI it’s own opinion; rather I was seeking information, using AI as a research tool.  It felt comfortable and I was able to find the information I was looking for. 

I don’t know where AI is headed or how AI will impact the field of philosophy.  My observation is that new technologies never live up to the initial hype that its creators and early enthusiasts predict.  I don’t see why AI will be any different.  Nevertheless, I don’t feel any qualms about using it; we’ll see what happens.

4.  Retreat

When I lived in Northern California I would go on spiritual retreats on an irregular basis.  There was one retreat center in particular that I found very congenial; it offered very small facilities that were like hermitages.  I structured my retreat by using the Eight Monastic Hours (Matins, Lauds, Prime, Terce, Sext, None, Vespers, Compline) as a way of framing what I would do and when I would do it on my retreat.  I usually modified the Monastic Hours so that they began at 6 a.m. and then unfolded through the day at two-hour intervals (6 a.m., 8 a.m., 10 a.m., Noon, 2 p.m., 4 p.m., 6 p.m., 8 p.m.).  This kind of structure worked very well for me.  Every two hours I would do some spiritual reading, such as from the Enneads, followed by some contemplation.  I wasn’t too strict about the timing; sometimes I would combine two of these hours into one session, for example.  But in general I stuck with this framing and it worked well.

And I continued to use this structure now and then when I had a day off for a kind of mini-retreat.  And now that I am retired and have more free time, I have thought about using this structure as the basis for all the days of my life that remain.

Such a commitment has the disadvantage of taking time away from other activities; but most of these other activities are no longer attractive.  Such a commitment has the advantage of structuring my day in a manner that quickly becomes familiar so that I don’t have to think about if I have the time for spiritual reading and contemplation since that is the purpose of my days.

It is a retreat from the world and its concerns.  It is walking on the road to eternity.

Brief Notes on Various Topics -- 72

10 November 2025

Brief Notes on Various Topics – 72

1.  Evaluating the Relationship between Christianity and Platonism

I was listening to a short video on an atheist channel because the channel had a focus on Platonism and I was wondering what contemporary atheists might think about the Platonic tradition.  (As an aside, Book X of Laws, where Plato offers an extended critique of atheism was not mentioned.)  The question was focused on whether or not Plato would have approved of the way Christianity incorporated Platonism into its theology.  The discussion remained at an abstract level; by ‘abstract’ I mean that the historical context in which this process of the absorption of aspects of Platonism into Christianity was not mentioned.  Personally, I think it is crucial to take the specific historical context into account.  Here are a few comments:

1.1  By historical context I mean that Platonism was dealing with two strong interpretations of the world that ran counter to what traditional, or Orthodox, Platonism presented.  These two were Christianity and Theurgy as presented by Iamblichus.  What I’m getting at is that for Platonism the historical situation wasn’t a choice between Christianity and traditional Platonism.  Instead, I see the historical situation as a choice between two views that equally diverged from what Platonism had previously, or originally, taught.

1.1.1  I think it is helpful to look at the specific teachings that I see as running counter to what I call Orthodox Platonism.  For example, Christianity offered a personal view of ultimate nature in the person of Jesus Christ.  In contrast Platonism’s philosophical path to the ultimate was a journey to the impersonal transcendental; an ineffable realm without any material features that would form a personality.

1.1.2 Platonism also rejected the idea of bodily resurrection; even some early Christian Bishops, such as Synesius of Cyrene (373-414), rejected bodily resurrection on Platonist grounds.  Bodily resurrection is taken very seriously in Christianity, but in Platonism the path to the ultimate divests the practitioner of individuation, particularly the individuation of the body.

1.1.3 Platonism argued for the everlasting nature of material existence, the material cosmos.  Christianity argued for the creation of the material cosmos by God at a specific point in time.  In addition, Christianity argued for the dissolution of the material cosmos at the end times.  Proclus wrote a treatise called On the Eternity of the World which contained 18 arguments supporting the everlasting nature of the material cosmos.  This irritated Christians; John Philoponus wrote a treatise attacking the treatise written by Proclus.  There was a lot of theological and philosophical activity centered on this issue because how one views this issue shapes one’s conception of creation, God, and the transcendental.

1.1.4  There were other disagreements, but the above touches on some significant disagreements that, ultimately, could not be reconciled.  Instead of reconciling these differences, Christianity chose a supersessionist approach in which Christianity was presented as the completion of philosophy (you could also call it the correction of philosophy).  Plato was thought of as wise, but unable to encounter the whole truth because he was born before Christ.  This allowed Christianity to absorb what was consistent with Christianity and at the same time to put aside those aspects of Platonism that were not consistent.

1.2.1  It is also useful to list aspects of Theurgy that were undermining traditional Platonism, or were in conflict with traditional Platonism.  These differences, or conflicts, were presented by Iamblichus in various writings.  The first conflict centered on vegetarianism and the sacrifice of animals for ritual purposes.  Traditional Platonism rejected such sacrifices and took a vegetarian approach to diet which Platonism absorbed from Pythagoreanism and Orphism.  In contrast, the Theurgy of Iamblichus vehemently argued for the necessity of animal sacrifice in certain circumstances, such as when a particular deity required such sacrifice in order to make contact with that deity.  This was a direct attack on the heritage of Platonism in general, on Platonism’s ancient foundations (the above-mentioned Pythagoreanism and Orphism), and on Porphyry in particular who wrote two treatises arguing for abstaining from either eating animals or sacrificing animals for the purposes of ritual efficacy. 

This attack on Platonism by Iamblichus undermined Platonist ethics as well as to how Platonism understood how reincarnation works.  This usage of animal sacrifice also ignores the teachings of Platonism on non-harming and non-retaliation. 

1.2.2  The second disagreement that arose from Iamblichus’s teachings was the idea that the soul is fully descended from higher realities such as the noetic and the transcendental; that is to say the soul is separated from these higher realities by falling into materiality and has no ability to ascend to higher realities. 

In contrast, Orthodox Platonism regarded the soul as in some way always in contact with higher realities and for that reason when we follow the soul we find the path to the divine. 

1.2.3  These two disagreements are connected.  The inability of human beings to ascend to higher realities means that they must depend on the rituals of Theurgy because human beings need the assistance of the Gods who are contacted through these rituals. 

1.2.4  I should also mention that Iamblichus didn’t consider the traditional Platonist approach of wisdom, and the approach of Theurgy to be alternate paths to the divine.  Iamblichus and his heirs, like Proclus, dismissed the approach of wisdom as inefficacious; from their perspective only Theurgy, including animal sacrifice, could lead someone to the divine.

1.2.5  From the perspective of wisdom (sophia), the teachings of Iamblichus were, and are, more pernicious for Platonism than those of Christianity.  I say this because Christians didn’t claim that, for example, creation at a moment in time was what Platonism really taught.  In contrast, Iamblichus argued that animal sacrifice, and the fully descended soul are actual Platonism and this sleight of hand remains with us today.

1.3  Given the historical circumstances I think Plato would have approved of the absorption of Platonism into Christianity as a means of preserving the teachings and passing them on into the future.  When I say ‘approved’ I don’t mean ‘agreed’; rather I mean something closer to ‘accepting.’  I say this because Plato was familiar with the ups and downs of political strife and the shifting nature of political power.  Plato lived through several dramatic changes in how Athens was run by different political groups; it was a politically chaotic period.  This kind of background gives people who experience intense political strife both the capacity for resilience and the strength of endurance.  Based on this, I speculate that Plato would have been fine with Christianity’s appropriation of Platonism for its own purposes, knowing that this would eventually pass.

2.  Tim Addey on Philosophy as a Yoga

Last week I posted from an essay by Eric Fallick on Platonism as a type of Dharma, akin to the Dharma traditions of Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism (as well as Pythagoreanism and Orphism).  Continuing with this theme of Philosophy in general, and Platonism in particular, as a spiritual tradition that resembles Indian spiritual traditions, or Dharmas, here is a quote from Tim Addey’s Preface to the book Philosophy as a Rite of Rebirth: From Ancient Egypt to Neoplatonism by Algiz Uzdavinys:

“Ancient understanding viewed reality as a series of descending steps, starting with the most ineffable and most simple which is first unfolded through divinity and then moves down through varying conditions of existence – the highest of which are closest to the originating simplicity and are purely intelligible, but the lower being increasingly complex and changeable, ultimately becoming perceptible to the senses.  These lower conditions of existence were not rejected as evil or illusive, but they were seen as deriving their worth and trustworthiness from their relation to the highest.  Each plane of reality had its answering correspondence in the nature of the human being.  Since the highest levels possessed the greatest intelligibility and stability, it was here that philosophers sought to centre the art and science of philosophy.  For this reason philosophy was seen as an interior discipline which allowed a conscious and active participation in a divine and intellectual drama – in more modern terms it was considered to be a spiritual path, or a yoga of enlightenment.”

(Page i from Philosophy as a Rite of Rebirth by Algiz Uzdavinys, ISBN: 9781898910350)

2.1  Tim Addey is one of the leaders of the Prometheus Trust in England.  The Trust is focused on making available the translations of Platonist works through the translations of Thomas Taylor.  The Trust also publishes books by contemporary authors and scholars on the Platonist tradition.

2.1.1  As an aside, many of the Trust’s publications are at very reasonable prices.  This is noteworthy because many academic publications on Platonism are very expensive and I want to take a moment to express my thanks for the Trust’s pricing policies.

2.2  This quote is a bit more general in focus than the quote I posted last week on this topic.  Nevertheless I think it is worth sharing because Addey has a gift for concisely writing about the past of Philosophy and how it contrasts with contemporary Philosophy. 

2.3  Addey writes that “philosophy was seen as an interior discipline.”  I take ‘interior discipline’ to mean a discipline that is based on withdrawing from a focus on the sensations of the world around us and turning inward to the realms of mind and soul.  There are practices and disciplines that were, and still are, used to assist in this turning to the interior and cultivating a relationship with this interior realm of clarity and peace.

2.4  Addey closes this paragraph by saying, “in more modern terms it [Philosophy – my addition] was considered to be a spiritual path, or a yoga of enlightenment.”

I’m not sure if Addey is using the word ‘yoga’ in the kind of loose way it is used in the West, or whether Addey is referring to the Classical tradition of Yoga as found in The Yoga Sutras of Patanjali.  But either way Addey is linking Ancient Philosophy with Dharma traditions by using this kind of reference. 

2.5  Addey continues by writing about the loss of a spiritual focus in Western Philosophy:

“But at some point in the passage between the ancient and modern era, this view of philosophy and its purpose was largely lost, and today we find that . . . what is still called philosophy has allowed its centre to slip down the levels of reality.  And, of course, the human faculties upon which modern philosophy is based are necessarily at the lower levels of thought: where philosophy was meditative, contemplative and even unitive, it is now confined to a narrow form of logical reason – forever stuck in the temporal world.  Reason, once valued as a launching point to the realm of eternal intellect and thence super-eternal divinity, is now an end in itself.  Modern philosophy has lost its nerve: like a pilot who no longer trusts his aircraft the forward thrust of reason races us along the ground but is never transferred to an upward movement into the free air.”

(Ibid)

2.6  I think this is beautifully put.  But it is worth noting that there are exceptions to this generalization.  For example, there are modern works of Indian philosophy that express this ‘upward movement’ that Addey is referring to.  Many of the contemporary works on philosophy that have this upward movement are commentaries on ancient works, but I would still consider them to be philosophical works in the sense that Addey is suggesting.

3.  No Gaps

I have commented now and then on this blog that philosophers in the East (India, China, Japan, and so forth) are often very well read on Western philosophy, but the opposite is not true.  However, there do seem to be signs that this is changing.  There is a series of books published that are collectively called The History of Philosophy Without Any Gaps.  It is a multi-volume work and is an ongoing project.  It includes Indian philosophy as well other regions such as Islamic philosophy.

My sense is that these works are introductory; they are modest in size and price.  I think that is a good thing because it offers those who are inclined to explore non-Western philosophy an entry point for their studies.  As someone who spent many years studying Buddhist philosophy, I am happy to see this kind of thing emerging.

4.  Haiku

Rereading a book,

Words run across the desert

In Autumn darkness.

5.  Time’s Arrow

It is said that time only flows in one direction and that it is not possible to recover the past.  I think about this in the context of Platonism because I am interested in shifting the way Platonism is thought about in modernity to something that, in my view, more closely resembles the spiritual tradition that it was in the Ancient period of its origin.  Perhaps that is futile.

The thing about modernity, for all of its flaws and drawbacks, which I tend get a bit obsessed about, there are also aspects of modernity which providentially serve Platonism and create a space in which Platonism might flourish.  I am thinking of what is often observed as the dissolving nature of modernity, how modernity disintegrates every tradition and every concern except those that are of a material nature. 

As an example, think of how modernity dissolves, or threatens to dissolve, the status of religious traditions that had been central for society until very recently.  This is true in the East and in the West.  From the perspective of Platonism this dissolving, this weakening, of dominant religious traditions creates an opening for Platonism, a kind of grotto for the contemplation of eternity.  It wasn’t too long ago when such a project as creating, or finding, a grotto of eternity for the study of Platonism would have been impossible because Platonism was not considered to be a complete spiritual tradition.  There are still many who think of Platonism as deficient in comparison with dominant spiritual traditions.  But that view of the deficiency of Platonism is no longer enforced.

I don’t know exactly what Platonism will look like if Platonism does find its grotto of eternity.  It will bear some resemblances to the past, but in significant respects it will differ from the means and methods whereby Platonism was presented in the past and transmitted to the future. 

Brief Notes on Various Topics -- 71

3 November 2025

Brief Notes on Various Topics – 71

1.  Absence of Spaciousness

I think I already mentioned that I am rereading Process and Reality by Whitehead.  One thing that strikes me in this reading is how deeply connected Whitehead is with the Western philosophical tradition.  For example, there is a section where Whitehead unpacks his own philosophy, which he refers to as the philosophy of organism, by comparing it to the philosophies of Descartes, Locke, Hume, and Kant.  It’s quite a tour de force.  Whitehead easily highlights the points in these philosophers’ works and then contrasts them with his own understanding.  Sometimes Whitehead agrees, sometimes Whitehead disagrees, sometimes Whitehead will add another dimension to the discussion that Whitehead feels is missing from the previous philosopher’s work which Whitehead then fills in for the reader.

As I was reading these presentations it came to mind that from my perspective there is no practice of meditation or contemplation that is referred to.  In other words, Whitehead is using cerebral, intellectual analyses in his discussions and there is no sense that there might be another way of approaching the topics under consideration.  (As an aside, it occurs to me that Whitehead is influenced by his mathematical background.  Mathematicians use the analytic mind to wrestle with and hopefully resolve difficulties in the realm of numbers.  It is a highly intellectual endeavor and I think in significant ways Whitehead uses this approach in Process and Reality.)

In contrast, Plato depicts Socrates in meditative, or contemplative, trances; in the Symposium there are two such episodes, one near the beginning and one towards the end.  And there are other examples of this in other dialogues.

In addition, Plato uses allegory, and other devices, to depict the experience of mystical ascent, such as in the allegory of the cave.  The use of allegory creates a sense of spaciousness in the Dialogues because allegory can be unpacked in numerous ways with numerous dimensions involved.  This is why rereading the Dialogues is rewarding, because new layers of allegorical meaning come to the foreground. 

In the Western philosophical tradition of modernity, which is what I am referring to when Whitehead begins these discussions with Descartes, the analyses are not grounded in contemplation or interior cultivation of mind (or noetic understandings).  I am a huge admirer of Whitehead but Whitehead does not seem to step outside of this limitation of modern Western philosophy.  And as an aside, I think it is instructive that Descartes refers to one impactful work of his as Meditations on First Philosophy.  ‘First Philosophy’ is metaphysics.  What Descartes means by his title is ‘Thinking About First Philosophy.’ 

But First Philosophy in Plato and Plotinus is illuminated not through thinking about; rather it is illuminated by the direct experience of the ineffable, of the ultimately spacious, of the spaciousness of eternity.

2.  Variations on a Theme

More and more I think of the Platonic tradition as consisting of a series of variations on a theme.  There are certain melodies that are attractive enough that multiple composers use them after they are introduced.  A well-known example is La Folia which appears to have originally been a dance tune from Spain and Portugal but has been picked up by multiple composers down the centuries.

I’m thinking of the basic metaphysical insight of Plato, which I understand as a metaphysical cosmology that explains the origin of all things in the ineffable One, as a Theme, a grand theme that encompasses all of existence and also that which transcends existence.  It has proven to be in its basics very attractive and enduring. 

By ‘Variations’ I mean that over the thousands of years of the Platonic tradition philosophers and theologians have taken this basic view and unpacked it in unique ways.  For example, I’ve spent time on how different Platonists understand the Noetic Realities, the Forms, or the Eternal Objects, that are part of the basic metaphysical structure of Platonism.  Just what the Forms are, and how they are related to the One, and how they  are related to material realities (in other words, how emanation works) varies, but the theme of the Forms is recognizable among all these variations.

My intuition as to why many philosophers are attracted to basic Platonist themes is that Platonism is true in a transcendental sense.  This truth is an invitation to eternity and the beauty that eternity offers. 

3.  Platonism as a Dharma Tradition

I have often posted that I think it is more accurate to comprehend Platonism as a spiritual tradition in the way that Dharma traditions in India are spiritual traditions.  I’m not the only one that has that perspective.  And I think it would be helpful regarding this perspective to post what others have to say about Platonism as a Dharma tradition.  Accordingly, I am going to irregularly post excerpts from those who have this perspective so that readers can see how this perspective works and why people hold it.  The first example of this kind of writing will be by the author and Platonist Practitioner Eric Fallick.  His essay is called An Extremely Brief Introduction to Platonism:

“Platonism is a spiritual or religious or soteriological system that offers a path to release from the endless cycle of reincarnation and its concomitant misery.  It belongs to a family of such systems, comprising Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism, Orphism, Pythagoreanism, and Platonism, that all accept the facts of reincarnation, the cycle of repeated birth and death, that this works by karma, that this state is wretched and painful and unsatisfactory and a fallen and mistaken condition, and that it is possible through great and correctly directed effort to be released permanently from this state.  All these systems consider that the path to this release consists of renunciation, asceticism, detachment, celibacy, vegetarianism and non-harming, abstinence from alcohol and intoxicants, study, and meditation or spiritual exercises.  Platonism differs from the others, as they do from each other, in its metaphysics, its description of reality and how it relates to the spiritual path, the true nature of release or the condition of having attained the freedom of the goal of the path, the texts that it takes for study, its exact method of implementing the required behavioral and ascetic practices, and its method of meditation and spiritual exercises.”

3.1  This short essay, of which the above contains the opening sentences, can be found online at platonistasceticism (dot) blogspot (dot) com.  It can also be found on Youtube at the author's channel; go to Youtube and search for the author, Eric Fallick, or for the title as above.  The video on Youtube gives the listener the opportunity to hear vocal emphasis. 

3.1.1  In addition to the blog and youtube channel, Eric has published a book of his essays on Platonism called "Platonist Contemplative Asceticism: Practice and Principle."  You can get it on Amazon.  The essay I am quoting is not in this collection because it was written after the book was published.  

3.2  The essay is a remarkably cogent condensation of what I like to call ‘Orthodox Platonism.’  I mean by that the presentation does not incorporate later modifications such as those found in Christian or Theurgic Platonism.  As far as I can tell the author’s sources are exclusively the Dialogues and the Enneads, and, of course, his own experience as a practitioner.

3.3  I like the way that this essay opens by placing Platonism in the overall context of Dharma traditions; and I also like that the author doesn’t include just Platonism, but also the Orphics and the Pythagoreans.  I think in other essays the author uses the phrase ‘Indo-Hellenistic’ to refer to those broad groupings.

3.4  Having placed Platonism is this broad context he then goes on to point out the differences between Platonism and the other Dharma, or Indo-Hellenistic, traditions; pointing out that all these traditions have their unique practices and texts.  Thus we get a picture of a broad-based tradition with many variations.

3.5  I think the most important point that the author makes about Platonism is that it is a “religious or soteriological system.”  This is the primary reason why I started to think of Platonism as a Dharma and looked to Indian Dharma traditions to make sense of what Platonism is teaching.  Philosophy and religion are, in modernity, thought of as different tasks; academic philosophers, with a few exceptions, don’t think of their task as that of offering salvation from the endless cycle of suffering to their students.  But for most Dharma philosophers that is exactly what the purpose of philosophy is.  And it is my view, and the view of many others, that Western Philosophy also viewed itself as having that task in antiquity.  The story of how that task was lost is a sad one, and complex as well.  But fortunately we have the example of Philosophers from Dharma traditions, authors like Patanjali, Buddhaghosa, Shankara, and many others, whose example shows the soteriological mission of Philosophy and how that mission is embodied in the Dharma of Platonism.

3.6  In the rest of the essay the author unpacks some of the unique aspects of the Dharma of Platonism such as the texts of Platonism, the hypostases or levels of existence, and so forth.

3.7  I think this is an excellent essay, carefully written.  It is a clear presentation of the relationship between Platonism and other Dharma traditions; both their similarities and their differences.  If you get a chance I recommend spending some time with it.

 

Brief Notes on Various Topics -- 70

27 October 2025

Brief Notes on Various Topics -- 70

1.  The Wonder of Philosophy

“Socrates: . . . I, who do not, at my age, either increase in size or diminish, am in the course of a year first larger than you, who are young, and afterwards smaller, when nothing has been taken from my size, but you have grown.  For I am it seems, afterwards what I was not before, and I have not become so; for it is impossible to have become without becoming, and without losing anything of my size I could not become smaller.  And there are countless myriads of such contradictions, if we are to accept these that I have mentioned.  You follow me, I take it, Theaetetus, for I think you are not new at such things.

“Theaetetus: By the gods, Socrates, I am lost in wonder when I think of all these things, and sometimes when I regard them it really makes my head swim.

“Socrates: Theodorus seems to be a pretty good guesser about your nature.  For this feeling of wonder shows that you are a philosopher, since wonder is the only beginning of philosophy . . . “

(Plato, Theaetetus, translated by Harold North Fowler, Loeb Classical Library, Harvard University Press, Cambridge University Press, 1928, pages 53-55, 155b-155d, ISBN: 0674991370)

1.1  This is a famous passage from Plato’s dialogue Theaetetus.  It has been quoted often.  I can understand why.  Philosophy begins in wonder (awe, amazement, and so forth).  And we have all had that experience of wonder and awe when we face the cosmos or when we wonder why we are here and what we should be doing.

1.2  I also like this passage because it contrasts with how contemporary views of philosophy function.  Contemporary philosophy begins in doubt; this can be seen very clearly in Descartes.  We doubt everything and this has led our society to a kind of militant skepticism.  Doubting has become a compulsive habit rather than a tool to be used when needed.

This compulsive doubting has manifested in the view that the philosopher’s task is to write devastating critiques, particularly of traditional views.  Kant played an enormous part in this way of looking at philosophy because of the huge impact of works like The Critique of Pure Reason.  I don’t think Kant intended to transform philosophy into love of critiques (as opposed to love of wisdom).  I suspect that Kant wanted to provide some philosophical justification for some eternal truths, not the least of which was God.  But what subsequent philosophers learned from Kant’s critiques was not the conclusions that Kant himself reached, but, rather, that critique itself was what was significant.

Plato criticizes movements like the Sophists but his purpose in doing so is to clarify what the meaning of philosophy is; that is to say that in these critiques the ultimate task of Plato is a positive one which is to reveal what Philosophy is and how the path of Philosophy is undertaken.  The Sophists mimicked Philosophy in significant ways and because of this it was easy for young people to be led astray by Sophists.  Plato’s criticisms counter this possibility. 

1.3  I think that the word ‘wonder’ has an aura of the mysterious around it.  Ultimately the cosmos is a mysterious place.  And as we ascend higher on the path of Philosophy it becomes more mysterious, until we merge with that which is the great mystery of life and death.

 2.  Haiku

An old Autumn house –

Dust settles on the table

Of eternity.

3.  Misology

I have some old friends who dislike philosophical discussion, argument, and dialectic.  It might surprise readers that I have such friends.  But friendship has many facets and functions.

In fact, engaging in philosophical discussion is rare; if by ‘philosophical discussion’ one means things like dialectic and related procedures.  Philosophical discussion often irritates people; it makes people feel frustrated and, sometimes, embarrassed.  This goes all the way back to Socrates; it is a frequent observation.  It is discussed in Phaedo where Socrates says that he considers this dislike of philosophical discussion, or misology, to be a major flaw that will prevent people from becoming Philosophers.

Instead, Philosophers tend to be lovers of discussion.  Is this something people are born with?  I’m not sure, but in my own case I was raised by parents who enjoyed having discussions about many issues (primarily politics, but other things as well) at the dinner table.  My parents really liked engaging in this way and I, and my siblings, never got the impression that discussions like this would strain their relationship.  I think having this model while growing up made it much easier for me to engage in philosophical discussion, to be a lover of philosophical discussion rather than someone who dislikes philosophical discussion.

4.  The Joy of Diminishing Sexual Desire

I have posted often about Platonist ethics as the practice of turning away from sensory stimulation and turning away from using pleasure as a measure of the worthiness of various activities.  I have most frequently posted about vegetarianism as a kind of ethical restraint.  I have also posted about refraining from alcohol.  And I have posted about the Platonist perspective on non-harming and non-retaliation.  I have mentioned sexual restraint in passing, but I have not posted about the restraint of sexual activity, meaning the diminishing of sexual activity, as a Platonist practice.  It is time to explore this aspect of Platonist asceticism.  Here is a quote regarding this topic from The Republic:

“Yes indeed, Cephalus,” I [Socrates] said, “and what’s more I do enjoy talking to very old men.  As they have already traveled along a road, as it were, which we too perhaps will have to travel, I think we should find out from them what kind of a road it is: is it rough and difficult, or easy and passable.  I should very much like to ask you in particular what you make of it, since you are now at that point in your life which the poets say is ‘on the threshold of old age’: is it a difficult time of life?  What report can you give of it?

“By Zeus,” he [Cephalus] said, “I’ll tell you how I feel about it, Socrates.  For a number of us of about the same age often meet together, just as the old proverb says.  Now at these meetings most of us lament, long for the pleasures of youth, and recall the sex, the drinking, the good food and other things of that sort.  And we feel irritated, as if we have been deprived of something important.  We imagine we had a good life then, but now no life at all.  Some also moan on about the abuse shown to their advanced years by their families, and it’s especially for this reason that they harp on about the great miseries old age causes them.  But in my opinion, Socrates, these people are not putting the blame where it belongs.  For if old age were the cause, I too would have had just the same experience, at least as far as old age is concerned, and so would all the others who have reached this time of life.  As it is, I have long encountered others who don’t feel like this, and again I was once present when someone asked the poet Sophocles: ‘How do you get on with sex, Sophocles?  Can you still make love to a woman?’  And he replies, ‘Mind what you say.  Let me tell you I am so glad to have escaped from it; it was like getting away from a raging, savage master.’  I thought his answer was good then, and I still do now no less.  For undoubtedly there is considerable peace and freedom in old age from such things as these.  Whenever our passions stop torturing us, Sophocles’ remark is entirely relevant: it’s an escape from a great many raging masters.  But for all this, and our relationship with our families, there is just one thing to blame: not old age, Socrates, but human character.  For if individuals are orderly and contented, even old age is only a moderate burden.  But if not, this makes both old age and youth hard to bear, Socrates.”

(Plato, The Republic, Book I, translated by Chris Emlyn-Jones and William Preddy, Loeb Classical Library, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 2013, pages 9-11, 328e-329d, ISBN: 9780674996502)

And here is a quote from Phaedo regarding ethical restraint, including the restraint of sexual desire:

“Now, my friend, see if you agree with me; for, if you do, I think we shall get more light on our subject.  Do you think a philosopher would be likely to care much about so-called pleasures, such as eating and drinking?”

“By no means, Socrates,” said Simmias.

“How about the pleasures of love?”

“Certainly not.”

(Plato, Phaedo, translated by Harold North Fowler, Loeb Classical Library, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1914, page 225, 64d, ISBN: 0674990404)

4.1  In the first quote from The Republic Plato writes about the natural decline in sexual desire and performance in old age.  In Phaedo Plato writes about the conscious rejection of sexual activity in order to become a Philosopher.

4.1.1  In Plato’s time, and for almost all of human history, the natural decline in sexual desire and activity was the norm for both men and women.  In contemporary culture, which has a deep contempt for nature, this natural decline in interest and activity is regarded as unfortunate and mitigated through technological means.  The push is to be as sexually interested and active as we were in our early teenage years.  I find this to be depressing and unfortunate.  But here we are.  I can’t help but think that such technological intervention will, in the long term, have unfortunate results.

4.2  It is difficult to talk about the renunciation of sexual activity, either naturally or for Philosophical reasons, in our culture at this time.  The giving up of sexual activity for Philosophical or spiritual reasons is often reinterpreted in modernity as a sign of psychological problems and labelled a neurosis or due to trauma.  The positive benefits of voluntarily giving up, or restraining to a degree, sexual activity are rarely acknowledged.  There are some exceptions to this; for example I have run across men reporting that they withdrew from sexual activity in order to overcome being constantly derailed in their lives by various levels of lust.  This is what I call strategic asceticism, but I think it is worth noting.

4.2.1  The giving up of sexual activity in order to become a Philosopher would seem to most people, and especially to most academic philosophers, weird.  Most would not be able to draw a causal connection between becoming a Philosopher and refraining from sexual activity.  This only makes sense if you regard Platonism as a spiritual path whose primary practices are various asceses.  This is one of the reasons why I like to say that Platonism more closely resembles Dharma traditions than it does contemporary philosophy.

4.3  It is worth pondering that sexual activity is very often an occasion for negative results.  If we think about it, this is obvious.  For example, sexual activity is very often the occasion for the spreading of serious, even fatal, diseases.  It is surprising to me how seldom this aspect of sexual activity is brought up.  From the perspective of Philosophy as a spiritual path, even if sexual activity had no negative consequences, those on the spiritual path would still want to abandon, or at least restrain, sexual activity.  I mention the frequent consequence of the transmission of diseases because it shows how strongly people are drawn to sexual activity even when the risk of physical harm is great.

4.4  The restraints that Plato refers to in multiple dialogues, but most explicitly in Phaedo, are standard asceses (ascetic practices) found in multiple spiritual traditions.  Such restraints are usually confined to those who become monastics or otherwise follow some set of vows.  In Platonism I don’t detect a monastic grouping that is distinct from non-monastic Platonist practitioners.  It seems to be the case that these ascetic practices, these ethical restraints, are, in the mind of Plato, defining practices for being a Philosopher at all.  This will sound strange today because our conception of Philosophy has drifted very far from Plato’s conception; modern philosophy is a completely secular enterprise that does not require any kind of ethical restraint, or ascetic practices, in order to claim the mantel of Philosophy.

4.4.1  One way of looking at this is to think of something like the Buddhist monastic Sangha as defining what it means to be a Buddhist.  I know that isn’t the case; but follow along as a thought experiment.  If, historically, being a Buddhist was defined by the practices of a Buddhist monk this would be an example of having the same relationship that I detect in Platonism as found in Plato. 

Or you could look at the Benedictines who follow the Rule of Saint Benedict.  A person becomes a Benedictine by following the ascetic rule that Saint Benedict wrote.  In a similar way, a person becomes a Platonist by following the ascetic practices found in Plato.

4.5  An objection to this approach is based on the view that ethical practices should be universal; that is to say, that ethical practices should be for everyone.  Kant’s influential Categorical Imperative also takes this approach.  If everyone became chaste, that is to say renounced sexual activity, that would mean the end of humanity. 

But Platonism does not think of itself as a universal path, or a path for everyone.  In fact, it has the view that the ascent to the transcendent is something that only a few people will ever undertake.  

4.5.1  Plato often compares learning the way of Philosophy to learning a craft (techne); Plato’s understanding of ‘craft’ is broad and includes such things as learning the specifics of body training for sports like wrestling, learning how to be a Doctor, learning how to be an artist, learning how to be a musician.  None of these crafts are something that people think everyone should study and perfect.  All of them are only for the few who are called to practice that particular craft.  In a similar way, the student of Philosophy learns the skills and practices that constitute the way of Philosophy and perfects these skills over time.  A musician learns the ins and outs of rhythm and pitch, the Philosopher learns the ins and outs of a vegetarian diet and other ethical restraints.  And so forth.

4.5.2  A Doctor takes care of illnesses that strike the body.  A physical trainer takes care of the cultivation of bodily strength.  The musician is focused on the care of the sonic domain.  The carpenter takes care of the craft of creating tables, chairs, and so forth.  The Philosopher is focused on taking care of the soul.

4.6  Returning to the specific practice of avoiding, limiting, or abandoning sexual activity, the reason this is recommended by Plato is that such activity makes it difficult to cultivate an awareness of the soul.  Sexual activity easily becomes obsessive and very time consuming, leaving little, or no, time left for the cultivation of asceses or virtues.  I don’t think it is difficult to understand this.  For example, if someone has a difficult exam coming up they will often step away from the pursuit of sexual pleasure in the lead up to that exam.  This kind of thing is common and it applies to the care of the soul, though the care of the soul is a much more difficult and subtle task than taking an exam.

4.7  In our contemporary society turning away from sexual activity is difficult for the standard reason that its pleasure is very enticing, but also for the reason that at this time there has arisen the idea that our sexual nature is, in some sense, our actual identity.  We no longer think of our soul as our identity, or true self, because we reject the idea of non-material realities.  In the absence of an understanding of the soul, there has been a turning to things like sexual orientations of various kinds as the defining, even the inner reality, of people’s lives.  This creates a barrier to the practice of sexual restraint because it feels to people like you are attacking their inner core by suggesting sexual restraint of any kind.

The antidote to this is to step back and really look at sexual activity and its results, especially, as I mentioned above, the very frequent negative consequences that follow sexual activity.  Thinking about this is helpful to overcoming the compulsion of sexual desire and helps to build a foundation for living a life that is free of sexual activity, a chaste life.