Monism, Monotheism, Paganism, and the Ineffable

1 November 2023

Monism, Monotheism, Paganism, and the Ineffable

I was searching for a book about Platonism on Amazon, but I couldn’t remember the title, so I was searching by guessing at search terms.  A book came up called Mystical Monotheism: A Study in Ancient Platonic Theology by John Peter Kenney.  I had not heard of this book before.  It made me think of a book by Eric Charles Steinhart, Atheistic Platonism: A Manifesto.  I haven’t read either of these books (the Steinhart book is way too expensive), but I find it intriguing that contemporary Platonism could generate such a diversity of interpretations.

I have read recently a few books that see in Platonism a resource for developing a philosophical foundation for contemporary Paganism; this includes books by Edward P. Butler, and Polytheism: A Platonic Approach by Steven Dillon.  And finally, I have a longstanding interest in Christian Platonism, particularly as presented by Peter Kreeft; I hope someday to take the time to read Christian Platonism: A History by Alexander Hampton.

And personally I tend to take a view closer to monism and idealism when talking about the Platonist perspective.  I think that fits especially well with Plotinus.

Perusing these strands of contemporary Platonism has recently made me think about how this is possible; I mean how is it possible that all of these various interpretations of Platonism could be simultaneously present at this time.  There is precedent for this situation; I am thinking of the late Classical period which simultaneously included a nascent Christian Platonism, and an articulate Pagan Platonism.  The two didn’t get along which contrasts with the more genteel atmosphere of today.  But I see some resemblance between today’s many varieties of Platonism and the different approaches to Platonism all those centuries ago.  This may be due to both historical periods being transitional; I mean that there is a sense today of the passing away of long held cultural norms, just as there was in late Classical antiquity. 

How is it possible for Platonism to be foundational for all of these differing views?  Tentatively I suggest that this happens because of the commitment that Platonism has to an ineffable ultimacy; that is to say that the One is understood to be beyond conceptual understanding.  The ultimate is inherently mystical; I mean that the ultimate can only be accessed through mystical practices that take the practitioner beyond name and form.

A consequence of this is that when human beings want to communicate with each other about the ultimate, the transcendental, the words they use are going to reflect their own commitments; these commitments are possibly prior in time to their engagement with Platonism.  The words used to discuss the Good and the One are inherently interpretations of the experience of that which is beyond experience.  Everyone does the best they can in this kind of situation.  For a Christian, the ineffable will be interpreted to accord with their theological concerns.  For a Monist, the ineffable will be interpreted in accord with their commitments to a unitary source and idealist understanding.  For contemporary Pagans the ineffable will be the source of multiple unities or varieties of oneness.  For a modern secularist, like Steinhart, the ineffable will be interpreted in a manner that accords with their concerns and commitments.

As I mentioned above, I lean towards a monistic interpretation of Platonism.  But I am comfortable with the variety of Platonisms that are emerging at this time.  (There are a few others I haven’t mentioned such as Whitehead’s Process Philosophy, and developments in the Philosophy of Mathematics.)  I think it is a sign of health, though I realize some might take it as a sign of disintegration. 

Some of these interpretations will, I expect, fade; for example, I can’t see a secular interpretation of Platonism having much of a chance.  But that has happened to Platonism in the past; I am thinking of the period when Platonism took on the trappings of a rather extreme skepticism in its early history. 

On the other hand, some of these interpretations will bear fruit.  Nourished by the presence of eternity and the light of the transcendent, they will continue to offer humanity the Way to Wisdom and freedom from all sorrow.