Brief Notes on Various Topics -- 94

28 April 2026

Brief Notes on Various Topics – 94

1.  The Soul of Philosophy

Recently I listened to an interview with Robert Greene.  Robert Greene is an author of popular self-help books.  Unlike most self-help books, Greene’s books are thick.  His best-selling book is The 48 Laws of Power, but other titles are similar in format but focus on other topics.  Greene’s approach is to tell stories, mostly from history, to illustrate the point he is making or the topic he is writing about.  This approach is an engaging format and has been well-received.

The interview was between a British Podcaster and Greene.  At one point the interviewer asks Greene to comment on what happened to philosophy in the 20^th century.  Greene responds by saying that ‘philosophy lost its soul’ starting in the early 20^th century.  I thought that was an interesting answer.  Greene is not a Platonist, as far as I know he is a secular materialist; this means that he is not using ‘soul’ in the way a Platonist would use the word.  But I found it intriguing that Greene chose to use that particular word; this kind of response isn’t typical of the way Greene talks.

Whatever Geene meant by the word ‘soul’ I am comfortable using a Platonic perspective to interpret what was said even if Greene would not sign onto that interpretation.  I have an overall agreement with Greene’s description of what happened to Philosophy.  I also suspect that at least some philosophers would also agree with Greene but would likely celebrate that loss because they think of this situation not as a loss, but as progress; I am thinking of materialist philosophers who are proud of their dismissal of anything transcendental, as well as an ethic that is disconnected to metaphysics and arrived at through the process of purification.  Materialist philosophers, what Plato through Gerson describe as ‘naturalists’, dismiss the idea of a soul, just as they dismiss the idea of Ideas. 

It would be interesting to find out if Greene has unpacked this observation in one of his numerous volumes; if anyone knows where such comments can be found, please indicate in the comments section.  Thanks.

2.  The Beauty of Metaphysics

There is something almost miraculous about the heritage of metaphysics.  When I use the word ‘miraculous’ what I mean is that it is difficult to square how material beings, such as human beings, could move beyond the material, the physical, and dwell enough in the metaphysical to unpack what they found to the best of their abilities after their return to the material domain.  If human beings were merely physical, I suggest that it would be impossible to do so.  The fact that there is metaphysics at all indicates that human beings are not reducible to their physical components.

3.  Ethical Restraints and the Virtues

I have been thinking a lot about the ethical restraints as they are found in Platonism for a long time.  One thing that I have noticed is that there is a lot written about the Platonic Virtues.  Most of the writing on the Virtues has blossomed from the seed of Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics.  It’s not difficult to find books dedicated to the Platonic Virtues.

But the ethical restraints are not written about with the same focus and dedication.  Porphyry writes about them in several of his works, but Porphyry did not receive the approval that Aristotle did and though Porphyry’s influence is profound, it’s not the same as that of Aristotle’s influence.  My point is that Porphyry’s writings on ethical restraint and asceticism did not act as a catalyst for a lot of writing about the place that restraints have in the Dialogues of Plato. 

I would like to see greater attention placed on the ethical restraints, or asceses, that are found in the Platonic corpus as a whole.  One reason I would like to see this is that from my perspective the idea that Platonism is a Way of Life only makes sense if the restraints, or asceses, are looked at as foundational for such a project.

4.  Proclus and Plotinus

I listened to two Platonist philosophers talking about their favorite subject, Platonism, the other day on a long YouTube podcast.  At one point they agreed that they don’t find Proclus of much value. 

This reminded me of how, even today, Platonists tend to divide into two groups with one group finding satisfaction with Plotinus and the other group thinking of Proclus as going beyond what Plotinus had to say.  I fall in the first group; the one that finds satisfaction, and inspiration, in Plotinus but doesn’t find those qualities in Proclus. 

This has led me to think that perhaps this division is, at least in part, a difference in personality types.  Proclus is highly analytical and deductive; Iain McGilchrist would say that Proclus is ‘left brained.’  Plotinus can be analytical; for example I just finished reading Enneads VI.1, 2, and 3 which is Plotinus’s analysis of Aristotle’s categories.  It is very dense and contains discussions about the nature of substance, form, and intellect.  But even here Plotinus’s approach differs from that of Proclus in that Plotinus will often circle around an issue, presenting various possibilities, before settling on what Plotinus offers the reader as his own solution.  In contrast, Proclus often goes straight for a deduction with much less of this kind of circling motion of thought.

My sense is that some people very much like, and are attracted by, structures of deduction.  And when I say ‘deduction’ I mean reasoned inference in a manner consistent with the logical works of Aristotle and subsequent logicians.  In contrast, there are others, like myself, who enjoy the way Plotinus ‘circles around’, some would even say ‘drifts here and there within the range of the topic he’s discussing.’  I think people who admire this about Plotinus are often, not always, people who enjoy, and learn from, things like metaphor, myth, and allegory.

The Dialogues of Plato contain examples of both approaches; but Plato is exceptional in having the ability to write in many philosophical modes with equal skill (like a composer who can write equally well in major, minor, and modes like the pentatonic scales).  Most philosophers tend to lean in one direction or another.

5.  Haiku

Wandering mountains

Sing hymns to the end of time –

Dry creek, empty sky.