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 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.’  First philosophy is metaphysics.

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 authors 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 “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.