Brief Notes on Variosu Topics - 97

8 June 2026

Brief Notes on Various Topics – 97

1.  The Dream of a Common Language

A friend of mine offered the idea that no one should be able to graduate from University without having studied Plato; that is to say Universities would have required courses in Plato in order to graduate.  His view is that we have lost the ability to speak to each other and that this has given rise to growing anger and estrangement from each other.  He suggested that Platonism has the potential of being a common language for communication and discussion of issues where there is disagreement.  Partly, he offered, that this is because the founding documents of Platonism are themselves dialogues.

It’s an intriguing idea.  An idea, that I have to admit, I find attractive.  I don’t know how to go about realizing such an idea and I suspect its chances of realization are rather remote.  On the other hand, it’s good to think of Platonism in such a context and to think about what kind of effect that would have.  (As an aside, my friend is not himself a Platonist but he thinks that Platonism can serve as a Common Language that can be used by divergent traditions and views.)

2.  Some Comments on Hyphenated Platonism

I have in the past contrasted what Gerson refers to as ‘Orthodox Platonism’ with ‘Hyphenated Platonism.’  Hyphenated Platonisms are represented by Christian Platonism, Theurgic Platonism, Jewish Platonism, and so forth. 

What I have noticed is that in Orthodox Platonism the tendency, a tendency not explicitly stated or demanded, is to consider the classics of the Platonic tradition as the sources one turns to in the study of Platonism.  For example, if there is a view that one or more people find obscure in an Orthodox Platonist context, to gain clarity about that view the tendency is to go to Platonic sources such as the Dialogues and the Enneads and to use what one finds in these sources as the starting point for clarification.

In contrast, Hyphenated Platonism will often, or even primarily, go to non-Platonic sources to deal with difficulties found in Platonism.  I noticed this while reading Periphyseon: The Division of Nature by Johannes Scotus Eriugena, translated by J. P. Sheldon-Williams.  In Book I, a number of times, when an issue in theology remains obscure even after giving a Platonist account, the two participants in the dialogue will turn to either Christian Scripture or to the Church Fathers and Saints; and it is this Christian literature which finally affirms, acts as a proof text for, a particular interpretation.  This makes sense in a Christian context; it is the method used to bring Platonism into a Christian context without at the same time granting the high status to Platonist documents that Scripture and the Church Fathers have in the Christian tradition.

I also observe this kind of maneuver in Theurgic Platonism which often treats oracular literature, such as the Chaldean Oracles, in the same way that Christians treat their Scriptures in relation to the status of Platonic writings.  Again, this makes sense if you start from Theurgic principles.

I have sometimes said that I think Platonism is sufficient in the sense that as a spiritual path Platonism contains all the information and tools necessary for spiritual realization.  At the same time, I have been willing to compare Platonism to Dharma Traditions, but it’s not because I want to place Dharma traditions in a position to ‘finish’ Platonism or be the arbiter of what is correct and what is incorrect in Platonism.  Comparing Platonism to Dharma Traditions is used in my analyses to point to spiritual aspects of Platonism that are also present in Dharma traditions, but which are overlooked in our current culture because of its secular orientation. 

3.  A Few More Remarks about the Analogy of Forms as Empty Sets

Last week I posted about noetic realities, or abstract objects, and I used as one analogy that Platonic forms, or abstract objects, are like empty sets that retain rules of inclusion but have no members.  I mean that in the Noetic realm, Platonic forms have no content but because of their rules of inclusion instantiations of the set can manifest in the material realm.

In set theory, though, an empty set can mean something different.  For example, whole numbers between 1 and 2 is an empty set that cannot be instantiated either in the noetic realm or in the material realm.  That’s because by definition there are no whole numbers between 1 and 2.  Similarly, the set of odd numbers that are evenly divisible by 2 is an empty set in that there cannot, by definition, be such items, or things; either noetically or materially. 

In the way I used ‘empty set’ last week I was referring to the absence of members in the noetic realm.  But that absence is not due to a logical contradiction, or due to definitions of arithmetic realities.  Rather the absence of members of sets in the noetic realm is due to the nature of the Noetic; that is to say that noetic realities are immaterial.  However, due to rules for inclusion as a part of the set, inclusion does happen in the material realm as the result of the emanation of the formal numbers into material reality.

4.  Another Observation on Soul

In traditional Platonism, in, for example, Plotinus, soul emerges as a presence in the third level of reality; the material world.  The sequence of levels is:

The One → Abstract Objects/Platonic Forms → Soul

In my reconfiguration, instead of soul at the third level, I place time:

The One → Abstract Objects/Platonic Forms → Time

My view is that soul is the presence of the One in the material individual.  Because of this I think of soul as always present and also present everywhere due to its immaterial nature. 

The sense that we have individual souls emerges from Time and Time emerges from Nous because Time is a further unfolding of emanation which is the basis of Nous.  But Noetic Realities are timeless.  As Noetic realities overflow time, and becoming and begoning, emerge as a reality.  The differentiation that is Time is what gives the appearance of individual souls.  The analogies to describe this (which I use frequently on this blog) is that the individual soul resembles moonlight in many different bodies of water.  It seems like the moon in the water is an individualized moonlight; but it only seems that way.  Or you could use the analogy of a flower in a vase reflected in multiple mirrors.  Each mirror appears to be an individual flower in a vase; but they are not.  Or you can look at it this way: the feeling that we have an individual, separate, soul is like someone saying that the sunlight in a room is ‘my sunlight.’ 

I see soul as a ‘First Thing’.  But the sense that we have an individual soul is a Third Thing because as material realities we can only observe the One as an individualized soul under the Reign of Time.  While Time does not proceed from the One, it is Time that conditions how we perceive and understand soul which is how the One is present in the material domain.

Because the soul never descends but remains in reality in its full unity as a First Thing, the individual soul can lead us back to the Good and the One.

5.  Aphorisms

Soul unifies.

Mind differentiates.

Time disperses.

This is the microcosmos of the human being.

Without soul nothing would cohere.

Without mind nothing would be distinct.

Without time there would be no becoming and begoning.

Soul unifies because it is the presence of the One in the individual.

Mind differentiates because it is the presence of the noetic in the individual.

Time disperses because it is the presence of cyclic becoming and begoning in the individual.

In this way the metaphysical cosmos is instantiated, or present, in the individual.

6.  Introducing Platonism According to ChatGPT

Sometimes I think about how to introduce Platonism to ordinary people.  When I say ‘ordinary people’ I mean people with some college education so that they are literate, but do not have any experience with philosophy.  They probably know the word philosophy but that is often the limit of their experience with it.  Sometimes they have taken an Introduction to Philosophy Class in college, but not necessarily.

I return to this topic now and then.  This blog is a partial answer to that question because I try to use a vocabulary and literary register that fits the parameters mentioned.  I’m not always successful with that focus because at times I touch on more technical issues; but overall, I think I have been able to write in an accessible way.

I decided to ask ChatGPT what it thought about this.  I framed the question this way:  “How would you [ChatGPT] suggest to someone in the West that Platonism is beneficial, that Platonism is something worthwhile for their lives?”

ChatGPT responded as follows: “If I [ChatGPT] were trying to persuade a contemporary Western person that Platonism is worthwhile, I would probably avoid starting with metaphysics (‘Forms exist’) and instead start with problems many people already experience.  A Platonist diagnosis might be:

We are surrounded by distractions, advertising, social media and constant opinion.

We often feel pulled between immediate desires and long-term goods.

We struggle to distinguish what is merely popular from what is actually true.

We want meaning, beauty, justice, and goodness, but often lack a framework for treating them as real rather than subjective preferences.

“Platonism offers a response to these problems.

“1.  It teaches that truth is worth pursuing for its own sake.  One of Plato’s most enduring ideas is that a good life requires a commitment to truth, even when truth is uncomfortable.  For many people, daily life becomes dominated by convenience, entertainment, or tribal loyalties.  Platonism asks a different question: what is actually true?  That orientation can make someone more intellectually honest, less easily manipulated, and more capable of independent thought.

“2.  It [Platonism] encourages self-mastery.  In dialogues such as The Republic, Plato portrays the soul as having different impulses that can conflict with one another.  A flourishing life comes when reason governs rather than being ruled by appetites or anger.  Even someone who rejects Plato’s metaphysics can recognize the practical value of: resisting destructive impulses, developing disciplines, cultivating wisdom, pursuing long-term goods over short-term gratification.  Many modern psychological approaches end up recommending similar habits, though from different philosophical foundations.

“3.  It treats virtue as something objective.  A common modern assumption is that morality is largely a matter of personal preference.  Platonism offers a more demanding view: justice, courage, wisdom, and temperance are not merely things we happen to like.  They are genuine excellences of character.  Many people find this attractive because it gives moral life a seriousness that pure relativism struggles to provide.  It suggests that becoming a better person is not simply expressing yourself; it is moving closer to what is genuinely good.

“4.  It gives beauty a deeper significance.  For Plato beauty is not merely entertainment or personal taste.  Beauty can elevate the soul.  Whether through music, art, mathematics, nature, or love, experiences of beauty can awaken a desire for something higher than immediate consumption.  Many people have had moments where a great piece of music, [an interaction with nature], or an act of moral nobility seemed to point beyond ordinary life.  Platonism provides a language for taking those experiences seriously.

“5.  It offers a vision of human flourishing.  Modern Western culture often defines success in terms of wealth, status, career, achievement, or pleasure.  Platonism asks: What kind of person are you becoming?  This shifts attention from external success to inner excellence.  A Platonism could argue that someone who is wise, just, and self-controlled but not wealth is ultimately more successful than someone who is rich and admired but corrupt.

“6.  It provides a sense of transcendence without requiring immediate dogmatic commitment.  Many Westerners are dissatisfied with both strict materialism and organized religion.  Platonism can serve as a middle path.  It invites people to consider that: truth ma be more than convention, goodness may be more than preference, beauty may be more than chemistry, reality may have a deeper intelligible order.  One can begin exploring these possibilities with immediately accepting every aspect of Plato’s metaphysics.

“A concise way to present Platonism today might be: Platonism is valuable because it teaches that truth, goodness, beauty, and virtue are real and worth pursuing.  It encourages people to rise above impulse, opinion, and social pressure, and to orient their lives toward what is genuinely excellent rather than merely pleasurable or fashionable.  Even for someone who never becomes a full metaphysical Platonist, that orientation can provide a powerful framework for living thoughtfully and purposefully. . . Human beings flourish when they orient themselves toward what is highest rather than what is nearest.”

6.1  It’s interesting to me that ChatGPT (hereinafter ‘Chat’) wanted to avoid using metaphysics to introduce Platonism.  That makes sense to me.  But I think it might depend on the person.  There are some people for whom metaphysics itself is attractive, even if they have not studied it.  In such an instance I might begin with metaphysics.

6.2  Several times Chat mentions how Platonism benefits the soul, which is true.  But I have found that bringing up the soul can be difficult if the person is saturated with secular views, which is a great many people.  I have sometimes observed people briefly frowning or subtly rolling their eyes when the topic of soul is brought up.  I might speak of only one or two aspects of the soul from classical Platonism in such a context rather than referring to soul explicitly.

6.3  But overall I like Chat’s response and thought it was a good start.

7.  Book-Based Traditions

In my ongoing comparisons of Platonism as a spiritual tradition with other spiritual traditions, there is one difference that stands out.  And that is that Platonism does not have a history of building institutions or monumental architecture. 

In thinking about this I think there are two traditions that also refrain from that kind of activity: Confucianism, and Poetry.  What I see in common is that in all three traditions, Platonism, Confucianism, and Poetry, I observe a shared centrality of books which defines what these traditions are.

In Platonism it is the Dialogues of Plato which are the fountainhead of the tradition and remain so to this day.  You could say that a Platonist is someone who reads Plato and applies the teachings of Plato to their lives. 

Platonism has built institutions such as, famously, the Academy in Athens.  But I think it is instructive that when the Academy was destroyed by Sulla in 86 BCE Platonism continued without a sense of a derailment in its presence or activities.  The same is the case when the reconstituted Academy was closed by Emperor Justinian in 529 CE. 

I think this is because for Platonism it is the Dialogues themselves that are the ‘temple’ of the tradition; everything else is secondary; not in the sense of being unimportant but in the sense of being dependent upon the Dialogues of Plato.

There are periods in the history of Confucianism that generated the creation of temples and clan organizations as sites for ritual.  But when these temples faded, Confucianism didn’t disappear and I think that is because, in a manner similar to Platonism, the real temple of Confucianism is the Classics of the Confucian tradition; works like the Analects.  To be a Confucian Sage means to be someone who reads, studies and abides by the teachings of those Classics.

Poetry resembles Platonism and Confucianism in that to be a poet is to read poetry, comment on poetry, and to write poetry.  It is only very recently that people learn poetry at Universities.  For almost all of written history poetry was a calling and someone who felt the calling of poetry learned about poetry by reading it, performing poetry (recitation), and associating with living poets and others interested in it.  Like Platonism and Confucianism, poetry is a textual tradition with reading poetry being a primary activity associated with living as a poet.

There are text-based traditions that do build institutions and monumental architecture.  Judaism is a good example, as is Buddhism.  But I think the relationship to texts in Platonism, Confucianism, and Poetry is somewhat different.  In most spiritual traditions membership in the tradition is not contingent on regular reading of texts; the majority of Buddhists, Jews, and Christians, for example, are not engaged in that kind of activity.  In contrast, I see the intimate relationship between texts and membership in the traditions of Platonism, Confucianism, and Poetry to be more intense and defining of the tradition.

8.  Mornings with Plato

Each morning when I wake up one of my routine tasks is to read Plato or Plotinus.  I’ve done this for many years now.  I like doing this around sunrise; the symbolism of the sun kind of feeds the reading.

I often underline or write brief marginalia in what I am reading.  Sometimes I take notes in a separate notebook, though that is a new practice that I’m not yet used to.  But I find when I take notes they might be in the form of a brief quote which I then comment on.  The comment might be that I don’t understand this passage and I need to look into it (by, for example, checking other translations), or it might be why I find it inspirational, or I might connect it to another passage, and so forth.  This kind of notetaking is recommended by a lot of scholars and ordinary people; I think the idea is that the writing in the notebook assists in memory.

There are a lot of different systems for organizing one’s notes.  I haven’t spent much time following these systems.  But I think they are worth taking a look at and if you feel so inclined to follow one of these. 

For me, reading Plato and other Platonists in the morning is a lot like listening to music.  There are surface attractions like a melody or a rhythm or a chord progression.  And there are also hidden meanings that emerge only with careful listening/reading; which is one reason why repeated reading is so necessary.

Reading Plato and other Platonists in the morning sets the tone for my day.  It stabilizes my mood and in a sense it allows me to feel a modest sense of accomplishment; at least the day begins with one good thing.

 

Wine and its Confusions in Plato's Dialogue "Laws"

21 June 2024

Wine and its Confusions in Plato’s Dialogue Laws

In the first two books of Laws, which scholars widely regard as Plato’s last dialogue, there is an extensive discussion about wine; the circumstances under which it should be drunk, age restrictions, its effect on health, wine’s effect on cognition, the way different cultures use wine (highly restricted to frequent indulgence), ceremonial usage, the effect wine has on the cultivation of the virtues, and more.  I find the discussion a bit on wandering, but perhaps that is my own lack of comprehension as to the overall direction of the discussion.  When I say ‘wandering’ I mean that at times the discussion seems to be reaching a certain conclusion and then it veers away with an additional consideration.  But at the end of Book 2 there is a summation of the points raised which I found very helpful:

“Athenian:  If a city treats the practice that has now been discussed as a serious matter, and uses it along with laws and order as a means to the practice of temperance, and, in accord with the same argument, will in the same way not avoid the other pleasures, but will contrive to have them for the sake of controlling them, then in this way it must make use of all these things.  But if it treats the practice [of drinking wine – my addition] as a sort of play, allowing anyone who wishes to drink whenever and with whoever he wishes, combining it with any other practices whatsoever, then mine is one vote that would not be cast for the use of strong drink at any time by this city or this man.  Indeed, I would go even beyond the Cretan and Spartan usage and cast it for the Carthaginian law requiring that no one ever taste this drink while on campaign, but for all this time drink water at their gatherings.  Even in the city, it requires that no slave, male or female, should ever taste it, nor any of the officials during their year in office; nor should ship captains or jurors taste any wine at all when on active duty, nor anyone who is about to give advice at an important council meeting, nor anyone at all during the day (except on account of bodily training or disease), nor even at night when anyone, a man or a woman, is intending to beget children.  And there are many other circumstances one could mention in which those who possess understanding and correct law think that one must not drink wine.  The result, according to this argument, is that no city would need many vineyards, and that while the other agricultural products and all dietary matters would be regulated, those having to do with wine would turn out to be pretty much the most properly measured and restricted to the smallest quantity.

“Let this, Strangers, if you agree, put the finishing touch to our argument about wine.

“Cleinias:  Good.  We agree.”

(Plato, Laws, translated by C. D. C. Reeve, Hackett Publishing Company, Indianapolis, Indiana, 2022, page 68, 673e-674c, ISBN: 9781647920463)

“Ath.  First, though, if it’s all right with you two, let’s put the capstone on our discussion of the use of drunkenness.

“Kl.  What capstone and what sort do you mean?

“Ath.  If a city will consider the practice that has now been discussed as something serious, and will make use of it, in conformity with laws and order, for the sake of moderation, and will not refrain from other pleasures but will arrange them with a view to mastering them according to the same argument, then all these things should be employed, in this manner.

“On the other hand, if this is treated as something playful, if anyone who wishes will be allowed to drink whenever he wishes, with whomever he wishes, along with all sorts of similar practices, I would not vote for the use of drunkenness at any time by this city or this man.  Indeed, I would go beyond Cretan and the Lacedaimonian usage, and advocate the Carthaginian law which forbids anyone to taste this drink while out on campaign and requires that only water be drunk for all that time.  I would add to that law, and forbid drinking within the city too, among female and male slaves, and among magistrates during the year in which they serve; pilots and judges would not be allowed to taste wine at all while they were performing their services, and the same would apply to anyone who was about to give advice in an important council meeting.  Moreover, no one would be allowed to drink at all during the day except for purposes of physical training or illness, nor at night would any man or woman who was intending to create children.  And someone might list many other circumstances in which those who possess intelligence and a correct law should not drink wine.

“So according to this argument no city would need many vines, and while the other farm products and the diet as a whole would be regulated, the wine production would be almost the most measured and modest of all.  Let this, strangers, if you agree, be our capstone to the argument about wine.

“Kl.  Beautifully spoken, and we agree.”

(Plato, The Laws of Plato, translated by Thomas L. Pangle, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois, 1980, pages 56-57, 673e- 674c, ISBN: 0226671100)

1.  It is clear that drinking is to be severely circumscribed; for example a prohibition against drinking wine during the day, with a tiny number of exceptions, sets the general tone.  And there are all sorts of additional restrictions having to do with one’s job and station in life. 

This is similar to the laws that circumscribe the use of alcohol in the U.S. today.  Limits are placed on how much someone can drink and drive, for example.  And it is expected that people engaged in their duties at work will not have those duties compromised by the influence of alcohol.  Depending on the job, if it is discovered that someone has acted under the influence of alcohol this can lead to their dismissal.  In addition there are age restrictions regarding the sale and consumption of alcohol.

In other words, alcohol is seen both by Plato and by our contemporary society in the U.S. and many other countries, as potentially very harmful to society as a whole and this justifies placing the use of alcohol into a class of highly restricted usage; the violation of these legal restrictions is punishable by the law.

2.  I think it is worth noting that Plato is not referring to distilled alcohol such as whisky, bourbon, vodka, and so forth.  Distilled beverages appear on the scene much later and, in general, they have a higher percentage of alcohol and are more destructive to the body and mind.

3.  I find myself thinking of Porphyry’s On Abstinence from Killing Animals which opens with Porphyry’s suggestion that the philosopher should refrain from eating animal flesh, or participating in animal sacrifices, because of the specific vocation of the philosopher.  The overall view is that eating animals, and sacrificing animals, coarsens the soul and is an obstacle to a life of contemplation.  Porphyry refers to abstinence from eating animals is an ‘ancestral law’ of philosophy and that this teaching is ‘ancient and dear to the gods.’

I think the same kind of analysis can be used to prohibit the drinking of alcohol for philosophers; I mean that the drinking of alcohol is a hindrance for the philosophical vocation; and just as a Doctor should not drink before engaged in surgery, so also a philosopher should not drink before being engaged in contemplation, or even simple study.

This is not a rare opinion.  Traditionally in Buddhism alcohol consumption is prohibited because such usage ‘clouds the mind and leads to heedlessness.’  Although this prohibition is widely disregarded today, nevertheless it is upheld by a number of Buddhist teachers.  Most often these teachers are monastics, but there are even lay teachers, such as Christopher Titmuss and Robert Aitken, who lived up to this basic precept.

And there are many other spiritual traditions that prohibit the use of alcohol for tradition specific reasons.

4.  Porphyry’s On Abstinence also, to my mind, helps to clarify why the Laws would grant limited use of wine among specific, age-restricted, groups on certain occasions.  If Laws is at least in part a general depiction of society, and not solely a guide for those with a philosophical vocation, then that fits in with Porphyry’s view that these kinds of restraints are for the philosopher in particular.  In other words, refraining from animal flesh and wine would both be regulations that a philosopher would live by as part of an overall commitment to philosophy.  

5.  Perhaps the Athenian is telling us his true feelings when he says that if the drinking of wine is unregulated he would cast a vote against any kind of wine drinking at all.  At any rate, it seems clear to me that the Athenian’s preference is to distance himself from wine as much as possible.

6.  Another aspect of this part of Laws may be focussing on dealing with those of different cultures who have different cultural habits.  Those who adopt the Platonic ascetic practices often run into difficulties with the culture around them because the ascetic practices run counter to cultural norms.  This is a complex problem, especially for practitioners who are not part of an institution that supports these ascetic practices, such as solitary practitioners.  In the case of wine and alcohol, there may be pressure to join with other workers at a bar after work, or to take ‘just a sip’ on some special gathering of friends and/or relatives.  This kind of clash is persistent for those who have even a slight ascetic inclination; for those who adopt a more dedicated ascetic practice outside of an institutional context it can be an almost daily negotiation.  I think Laws has the purpose of bringing that difficulty into the foreground without explicitly stating that purpose.

7.  It’s interesting to me that Plato remarks on the agricultural impact of wine production.  Plato notes that “no city would have many vineyards.”  Instead, that land would be used to grow food to nourish the general population, including the philosophers.

8.  “And there are many other circumstances one could mention in which those who possess understanding (nous – translator’s note) and correct law think that one must not drink wine.”  My intuition here is that the Athenian, speaking for Plato and the tradition he embodied, is suggesting that as one’s practice grows it becomes more and more apparent that the philosopher should refrain from wine.  This naturally arises from circumstances that demonstrate alcohol’s negative effects.  These are not unusual circumstances.  Rather they are ordinary occasions, such as parties and interactions with people under the influence of alcohol that bring to the foreground how damaging alcohol is both at the mundane and contemplative levels.

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.

 

 

Plato and Apollo

4 January 2023

Plato and Apollo

“Speusippus in Plato’s Funeral Feast, and Clearchus in his Encomium on Plato, and Anaxilaides in his second book On Philosophy say that there was a story in Athens that Ariston [Plato’s Father] tried to force himself on Perictione [Plato’s Mother], who was then in the bloom of youth, and was rebuffed, and that when he ceased resorting to force, he saw a vision of the god Apollo, after which he abstained from conjugal relations until Perictione gave birth [to Plato].”

(Diogenes Laertius (3^rd Century AD), Lives of the Eminent Philosophers, translated by Pamela Mensch, edited by James Miller, Oxford University Press, New York, NY, 2018, page 134, ISBN: 9780190862176)

“About the time when he [Plato] was born his father had a dream, while his mother was still pregnant with him, forbidding him to have intercourse with her before her confinement.  Its purport was that we should not seek intercourse for the sake of pleasure, but only for procreation, in order that the child that is to come may be born pure, without incurring a taint through later intercourse from base motives.  As for his mother, after his birth she took him up Mount Hymettus, where she wanted to sacrifice to Apollo, God of herds, and to the Nymphs.  In the meantime, she laid him down there, to find, on her return, that he had his mouth full of honey: bees had come and done this, as an omen that the words flowing from his mouth would be, as the poet has it, ‘sweeter than honey’.  The food on which he was brought up was not animal, but vegetarian.”

(Anonymous (date unclear), Anonymous Prolegomena To Platonic Philosophy, translated by L. G. Westerink, The Prometheus Trust, Wiltshire, UK, 2011, pages 4-6, ISBN: 9781898910510)

“But come, let us also describe the parentage and life of the philosopher, not for the sake of ‘much-learning’, but rather to help and prepare those who approach him for this is no ‘Nobody’, but rather the ‘one who reverts human beings.’  For the story goes that Plato was born the son of Ariston, son of Aristocles, from whom he traced his family to Solon the lawgiver (which is also why, in emulation of his ancestor, he wrote the Laws and the Composition of the Republic, in 12 and 10 books respectively): and he was born from his mother Perictione, who was descended from Neleus, son of Codrus.  Now they say that the vision of Apollo coupled with his mother Perictione, and appeared to Ariston in the night, instructing him not to have intercourse with Perictione until she gave birth, and he acted accordingly.  And when Plato was born, his parents took the newborn and placed him on Mount Hymettus, wishing to make sacrifices on his behalf to the gods there, Pan, the Nymphs, and Shepherd Apollo.  And as he lay there, the bees approached and filled his mouth with honey from their honeycombs, so that the saying came true of him,

From whose tongue flows speech sweeter than honey.

And he calls himself in every way ‘the fellow-servant of the swans’, since he came forth from Apollo; for the swan is Apollo’s bird.”

(Olympiodorus (c 500-570 AD), The Life of Plato and On Plato First Alcibiades 1-9, translated by Michael Griffin, Bloomsbury Academic, New York, 2015, page 72, ISBN: 9781472588602)

 

When I was reading Pierre Hadot’s works What is Ancient Philosophy and Philosophy as a Way of Life it changed my relationship to philosophy.  Primarily it led me to think of Classical Philosophy as more akin to various spiritual traditions, particularly Dharmic traditions, than it is to modern philosophy.  This understanding has continued to grow.

One aspect of this shift is that I began to wonder how people in the Classical World viewed philosophy and philosophers.  What was an ordinary person’s understanding and expectation of how philosophers would behave and act; and how did ordinary people think about its practice and practitioners?

I came across tantalizing glimpses pertinent to these questions.  I have previously quoted in this blog the story of a Roman Senator, who lived a luxurious and indulgent life resulting in ill-health.  The Senator decides to leave the Senate and convert to a life of philosophy which meant divesting himself of luxuries and powerful positions, changing his diet, etc.  He lost weight and became a dedicated follower of Plotinus.  One of the things that interested me about this story is that everyone around him seems to understand what his ‘conversion’ to philosophy entails; there is nothing in the story about people feeling bewildered about what will follow or what this all means.  Implicit in this is that the philosophical way of life was widely understood.

Part of that understanding is embedded in the biographies of Plato that have what we today would think of as mythological elements.  Like most moderns, I don’t really know how to understand these biographies.  On the one hand I don’t want to dismiss them.  On the other hand, I don’t know enough about ancient Greek spirituality to understand with ease the meaning of these stories.  Nevertheless, I think these biographies of Plato are worth contemplating:

1.  The three biographies quoted above depict Plato as being the child of the god Apollo and his human mother, Perictione.  This is a very different view of what it means to be a philosopher than the way modernity views it.  The stories of Plato’s divine origin imply that philosophy has a divine mission and that in some way philosophers have to be intimately connected with divine manifestations and energy. 

2.  It is intriguing that the Anonymous Prolegomena connects Plato to vegetarianism through his upbringing; that his parents only fed Plato vegetarian food, not animals.  (This may or may not imply veganism.)  This indicates to me that in terms of how the culture as a whole viewed philosophy, vegetarianism was an important component of the philosophical life; it may even have been a defining component.  If Plato’s parents were Pythagoreans, or influenced by Pythagorean practices without necessarily an explicit affiliation (in the way some people today are vegetarians due to an influence from Jainism without ever becoming explicit members of the Jain community) this would make sense and may even reflect an historical truth.  This would also be true if Plato’s parents were influenced by the Orphic tradition.  In other words, vegetarianism was a central part of the philosophical and religious heritage that Plato would receive.

3.  As I mentioned, I don’t know much about Classical Greek Religion and Spirituality, so the strong connection to Apollo that these stories about Plato’s birth make are somewhat opaque to me.  As a follow-up I hope to take the time to track down the references to Apollo in the Dialogues and other Platonic literature such as the Enneads to see if some kind of connection appears that might clarify the meaning.

4.  According to Diogenes Laertius these stories go back to Speusippus who was Plato’s nephew and the second head of the Platonic Academy.  I know that a lot of scholars these days are fairly dismissive about the reliability of Diogenes and think of him as kind of a gossip-monger.  Maybe that’s true, or partially true.  But, on the other hand, Diogenes mentions a specific person and the specific work by that person in which the story appears; so, there’s that.

5.  Overall, I see these birth stories as a reflection of the way philosophy was viewed in the classical world; that philosophy had what we today would call a spiritual purpose, a transcendental purpose.