Brief Notes on Various Topics -- 19

20 April 2024

Brief Notes on Various Topics – 19

1.  I finished reading Plato of Athens by Robin Waterfield.  It is well written; by that I mean that Waterfield is a good stylist, the sentences are well shaped and are not obscure.  The sentences are well formed; these days that should not be taken for granted.  Like any good biography, this book tells a good story.

Waterfield has an amazing grasp of the relevant literature and is capable of making his own decisions regarding reliability and inclusion.  It was nice to see that kind of independence.

The one drawback for me is that Waterfield seems to think of Plato as primarily a political philosopher; to be fair that is a view shared by a lot of scholars.  But it differs from how I understand and approach Plato and I don’t think that Classical Philosophers viewed Plato that way either.  It’s intriguing that three or four times Waterfield mentions Plato’s ‘religious’ inclinations, meaning that there are religious elements in his philosophy.  But this is mentioned only in passing; it almost sounds like an afterthought.  My perspective is that Plato was a spiritual teacher and that Platonism is a spiritual tradition in the manner of Dharmic traditions from India.  Waterfield skirts this, I think, by leaving out antecedent spiritual influences on Plato such as Orphism; with Pythagoreanism he mentions them, but mostly in a political context rather than in the context of numbers as forms and primary realities.

I enjoyed reading the book and the range of reading and study Waterfield has done is impressive.  But from my perspective Waterfield sees Platonism through a modernist lens and because of this misses what are for me the heart of Plato’s teachings.

2.  When Porphyry edited Plotinus’s writings he would sometimes take a longer work and divide it up into the different Enneads that Porphyry was using to arrange the writings topically.  Some of Plotinus’s essays covered more than one topic and this allowed the kind of division that Porphyry used.  Fortunately Porphyry carefully tells us all about this in his Life of Plotinus.

This came back to me because I am reading Ennead V.5, That the Intelligibles are not Outside the Intellect, and on the Good.  Ennead V.5 is part of a long essay that was divided into four different essays among three Enneads: III.8, V.8, V.5, and II.9; I believe German scholars refer to this as the Great Treatise.  I wonder if it might be helpful to read these four as a single work and that this might be facilitated by including the four of them as a single work in an appendix?  The translator, A. H. Armstrong, in his ‘Introductory Note’ to Ennead V.5, suggests that “It is best read after V.8 which is completely continuous: the last sentence of V.8 directly introduces the argument which occupies the first three chapters of V.5.”  I’ll give it a try and see how it feels.

3.  Recently I have read several works by contemporary philosophers in the anglo-sphere that retain a strong influence from the analytic tradition.  I don’t know whether these philosophers identify with the analytic tradition, but they show that the influence is still quite strong.  What I am referring to is the tendency to put forth their insights in abstract presentations, in this case through the use of graphs and other types of scientific looking symbolic means, even though the graphs are not data based or data driven.  I have thought for a long time that this way of presenting philosophy obscures what the author is saying rather than clarifying.  I keep thinking of how Whitehead wrote Process and Reality without using any of those kinds of tools, though he was very well versed in them.  In almost all cases when I have rethought the abstract, graphic, presentation into discursive statements, the ordinary discursive statements have been clearer.

4.  Ennead V.3, On the Knowing Hypostases is one of the great works of spiritual literature; it is difficult for me to think of anything that surpasses it; though some of Plato’s Dialogues are at the same level.  The work steadily builds, point by point, step by step, to the last paragraph, and to the last sentence, “Take away everything” (ephele panta).  It is like listening to a steady rhythm that carries you along as it grows steadily stronger, until it reaches its final cadence and closing.

5.  Sometimes there is remarkable wisdom to be found in popular culture.  There is a song by the rock group Kansas called ‘Dust in the Wind.’  It is well-written with a minor melody and well-crafted supporting harmonies.  The refrain changes through the song beginning with “All they are is dust in the wind,” referring to the singer’s dreams and plans.  In the second verse the refrain says “All we are is dust in the wind.”  And the third verse says “Everything is dust in the wind.”

What is surprising is how popular this song is; it has been covered by other groups and solo singers countless times; it is performed very frequently.  I see this as a contemplation on impermanence, obviously.  I think appearances like this song show that certain core spiritual truths are just below the surface of our busy ordinary lives and every now and then they manage to emerge and have their say or, as in this case, sing their song.