Plato, Plotinus, and the Platonic Tradition: A Review of 'Plotinus the Platonist' by David J. Yount

Plato, Plotinus, and the Platonic Tradition

A Review and Appreciation of Plotinus the Platonist by David J. Yount

For over a thousand years Plotinus was thought of as a Platonist.  Plotinus himself, as well as all of the contemporaries of Plotinus, and the philosophers who came after in the Late Classical Period, thought of Plotinus as a Platonist; nothing more and nothing less.  The emerging Christian Platonism also thought of Plotinus as a Platonist; this was true both in Latin Christianity (for example, St. Augustine) as well as the Greek tradition of orthodoxy.  And this continued right through to the early modern period; for example, Ficino viewed Plotinus as a Platonist.

Then some academic scholars in the 1600’s decided that Plotinus was not actually a Platonist; instead Plotinus was a ‘Neoplatonist.’  This created a separation in the history of Platonism that did not exist before it was conjured in an academic setting.  And ever since the idea of ‘Neoplatonism’ was conjured it has negatively affected the West’s understanding of Plotinus by creating a separation where none actually exists.

I have posted about this before, usually out of a sense of frustration.  When I hear a youtuber say that ‘Plotinus was the founder of Neoplatonism,’ a statement heard often, I realize that a deep misunderstanding is at the root of what they are about to present.  It’s not that someone who makes a statement like that has nothing to offer; but this opening thought about Plotinus will feed distortions and misunderstandings.  It’s like trying to write a song in major, but only using a minor key; some aspects of the song, like rhythm, will come through, but the overall presentation will not be accurate.

I recently came upon an antidote to this distortion.  David J. Yount, a philosophy Professor at Mesa College, has been equally frustrated by how the idea of ‘Neoplatonism’, and in particular the idea that Plotinus has something to do with it, as I have been (as well as many others).  But Yount has the scholarly ability to counter the idea of ‘Neoplatonism’, and how that idea has been used.  Yount’s findings are presented in two books; the first is Plotinus the Platonist and the second is Plato and Plotinus on Mysticism, Epistemology, and Ethics.

Yount’s method is to focus on particular features of Platonic philosophy, or particular topics in philosophy in general, and then meticulously compare how Plato and Plotinus treat these topics.  In doing so Yount demonstrates the unity of the two.

For example, in Plotinus the Platonist Yount has chapters dedicated to The One, Beauty, Intellect, World-Soul, The Three Hypostases and Emanation, and Matter and Evil.  In the second volume Yount takes the same approach with Mysticism, Epistemology, and Ethics (because the topics in the second volume are broader, the chapters are longer.)  In each chapter Yount takes quotes from Plato and Plotinus on the selected topic, compares them, showing how the two agree. 

In addition, Yount references modern scholars who disagree with the idea that Plato and Plotinus are in agreement on the specific topic being considered.  Because most academics have signed on to the idea that there is a meaningful difference between the two, Yount only takes a representative sample of those who argue against Yount’s view of a basic unity.  Yount then explains why he does not think that those holding to the idea that, for example, the understanding of the One is the same in Plato and Plotinus, are not reading the two philosophers accurately. 

This approach means the books are a rich treasury of material on various aspects of the Platonic tradition.  If you are interested in a specific topic, such as Beauty, you can go to that chapter and find relevant references in Plato and Plotinus, as well as what others have to say about Beauty in Platonism, along with a defense for the basic unity of the tradition.  This makes the two volumes an invaluable resource for those who regularly read and study the Dialogues of Plato and the Enneads of Plotinus, a resource that will prove helpful for their studies for many years.

The books are not easy reads and the prose at times is a bit plodding.  But I think that is a necessary consequence of Yount’s thoroughness and the inherent complexity of some of the issues; Yount needed to be thorough and meticulous because many, but not all, academics have accepted the idea of a division between the two, rather than comprehending their basic unity.  I am impressed, to the point of being in awe, of Yount’s command of the material and the ease with which he cross-references material from Plato with relevant material from Plotinus.  It must have taken Yount a long time to work on a project like this; it takes a lot of dedication to organize material in this way.  In addition, Yount is able to communicate to the reader how these passages are related with a sure voice which, at the same time, does not talk down to the reader. 

Yount says in the ‘Introduction’ that the reason for this foundational agreement is that Plato and Plotinus had the same experience of the Good and the One.  And it is from this experience that their philosophy flows.  In other words, Plato and Plotinus are talking about the same thing, guiding others to the same realization, showing readers the path to the transcendental source of all things that is beyond all affirmation and negation.