Well, this is why people quit philosophy, no?My question was, if philosophical inquiry leads to aporia, then why would anyone engage in philosophical inquiry? — Apollodorus
Through the Socratic method, under the guidance of the teacher.According to Socrates, knowledge of higher realities can be acquired only by looking into them with the soul alone by itself.
Not at all. The above claim probably best describes many people's experience with philosophy, namely, that it "goes nowhere".The claim to the effect that "philosophical inquiry leads to aporia" is spurious and unfounded IMHO. — Apollodorus
Provided we take for granted that Plato knows and take him as our teacher.Plato does no more than to put us on the right track. The Truth-hunting has to be done by each lover of wisdom or seeker after truth, personally. — Apollodorus
At any rate, I think we are more likely to arrive at truth by actively hunting for it than by perpetually questioning things and living a life of self-imposed ignorance, uncertainty, and doubt.
Note how our notion of truth probably entails some kind of relating to others, however "thinking for ourselves" we might otherwise believe ourselves to be. — baker
For their part, I'm not sure. It could be many things -- envy, feeling threatened, bewilderment. It's something I've been keenly trying to figure out. — baker
For their part, I'm not sure. It could be many things -- envy, feeling threatened, bewilderment. It's something I've been keenly trying to figure out. — baker
Well, this is why people quit philosophy, no? — baker
You did not list simply disagreeing with the interpretation.
Assuming that criticism is only a result of a bad reaction to a manifestly true account is the rhetoric of an apologist, not of a critical thinker who judges for herself. — Valentinus
There's a similarity to this in Early Buddhism: In Early Buddhism, the basic prongs of the practice are sila, panna, samadhi (morality, wisdom, concentration).The phrase “upward way”, ano odos, indicates that Platonism is a process of vertical progress that takes the philosopher through a hierarchy of realities ranging from the human experience to ultimate truth, and that the means of entering it are righteousness (dikaiosyne) and wisdom (phronesis}, i.e., ethical conduct and spiritual insight. — Apollodorus
A similar sentiment can be found in Early Buddhism regarding the efficacy of the practice.However, if we encounter Gods or other metaphysical entities on our way to the highest, we will know this as and when it happens.
A similarity to this can be found in Hinduism. A hierarchy of gods, the notion of a Supreme Deity (I'm a bit rusty on this by now).Plato has a hierarchy of divine entities consisting in ascending order of (1) Olympic Gods, (2) Cosmic Gods, and (3) Creator God who is the Good or the One. The One is the unfathomable and indescribable Ultimate Reality, and the goal on which the philosopher must fix his mind.
All we need to know about the One is that it has two aspects, one in which it looks as it were “inward” and has no other experience than itself, and one in which it looks “outward” and sees the Cosmos which is the One’s own creation.
What a bizarre claim!!If one is not religious or does not believe in the Gods, one obviously need not worship or pray to them.
Yes, similar can be found in Early Buddhism (e.g.).For example, starting with the astronomical facts, if you are facing north, you have the Sky above and the Earth below, the setting Moon in the west is to your left and the Sun rising in the east is to your right. By picturing that arrangement in your mind, you organize your inner world, and put yourself in touch with a larger reality. The simple acknowledgement of Sky, Earth, Moon, and Sun, already has a psychological and spiritual effect on your psyche.
I do not recall hearing about such a thing in any Dharmic religion that I know of, though.In Jungian terms, you may create a mental mandala consisting of an outer circle described by the twelve Olympic Gods representing the heavens with the twelve houses of the zodiac and twelve months of the year. Inscribed in the outer circle, you visualize a square with Sky, Earth, Sun, and Moon on its four sides. Inside the square, you visualize the ocean with the Island of Paradise (the Island of the Blessed) in the center, and think of yourself as being there.
Similar can be heard from, say, the Hare Krishnas. I see no point in trying to go into who borrowed (or stole) whose ideas. I also think that the similarities could possibly be only superficial and overrated, and not some kind of evidence that the process is true/real.The point I am making is that contemplating the Forms, e.g. the Good or the One, is an essential element of Platonism and Socrates repeatedly speaks of the need for the soul to look at intelligible or metaphysical realities “alone on its own” whilst turning away from the world of appearance (Phaedo 79d). But this is something that actually transcends religion. It is a highly flexible and adaptable procedure that can be practiced by anyone, including atheists and Buddhists, Hindus, Christians, Muslims or Jews, and using cultural elements from any tradition.
If one is not religious or does not believe in the Gods, one obviously need not worship or pray to them.
What a bizarre claim!! — baker
But he never walked that path himself, did he?Plato bridged the gap between the religion of the masses and the philosophy of the intellectual elite. This is what his theology does. It offers the less spiritually advanced a path to higher intellectual and spiritual experience. — Apollodorus
But can a person have this moral and intellectual foundation without first being religious?But can atheists do it in a way that will have the same positive, life-affirming results as when religious people contemplate the Forms?
My personal experience is, they can't. Without that religious foundation that had to be internalized before one's critical thinking abilities developed, contemplation of "metaphysical realities" doesn't amount to anything.
— baker
Not religious but moral and intellectual foundation.
Indeed. But can one do those preparatory practices outside of religon?/.../ If the philosopher is intellectually and spiritually not ready, then they must revert to the preparatory practices, otherwise they are wasting their time.
But he never walked that path himself, did he?
This is crucial, because if he never did what he instructs others to do, then on the grounds of what should we trust him and his advice? — baker
But can a person have this moral and intellectual foundation without first being religious? — baker
Indeed. But can one do those preparatory practices outside of religon? — baker
When you put it this way, spiritual advancement is sometimes indistinguishable from mental illness. This is cause for alarm.The only valid proof is personal experience and this may well be subjective and distinct from other people's. This doesn't necessarily mean it's just imagination. — Apollodorus
Remember, they sentenced Socrates to death for failing to live up to the religious standards of their jurisdiction.If one is not religious or does not believe in the Gods, one obviously need not worship or pray to them.
What a bizarre claim!!
— baker
Why is that so bizarre?
What I want to know is this: How come more people aren't like this man? — baker
And what is the place of women in all this?For Plato,
/.../
But that doesn't mean that people shouldn't make an effort. By definition, the Platonic philosopher is one who loves knowledge and wisdom and actively seeks after it. And as the saying goes, "seek and you shall find" .... :smile: — Apollodorus
When you put it this way, spiritual advancement is sometimes indistinguishable from mental illness. This is cause for alarm. — baker
The following considerations also will show that perfect happiness is some form of contemplative activity. The Gods, as we conceive them, enjoy supreme felicity and happiness. But what sort of actions can we attribute to them? Just actions?… If we go through the list we shall find that all forms of virtuous conduct seem trifling and unworthy of the Gods. Yet nevertheless they have always been conceived as, at all events, living, and therefore living actively, for we cannot suppose they are always asleep like Endymion. But for a living being, if we eliminate action, and a fortiori creative action, what remains save contemplation (theoria)? It follows that the activity of God, which is transcendent in blessedness, is the activity of contemplation; and therefore among human activities that which is most akin to the divine activity of contemplation will be the greatest source of happiness.
Happiness therefore is co-extensive in its range with contemplation: the more a class of beings possesses the faculty of contemplation, the more it enjoys happiness, not as an accidental concomitant of contemplation but as inherent in it, since contemplation is valuable in itself. It follows that happiness is some form of contemplation (1178b)
Well, he didn't follow up with that there on the spot, but he elsewhere made very disparaging remarks about people (and that's putting it mildly).The Buddha in the story did not follow up: " "I am the rightfully self-enlightened one" with "while you are an ignorant clod whose proximity to the temple of the only Truth is a stench in the nostrils of the Creator." — Valentinus
And what is the place of women in all this? — baker
Think in terms of surviving in the modern economy and society at large. Here, critical thinking is mostly a hindrance, and goodness (as understood in humanism) is considered naive.I think a key distinguishing factor would be that spiritual advancement is supposed to enhance your mental abilities. Plotinus, for example, is not considered as mentally deficient.
If it has the opposite effect, and it impairs you mental faculties, then it is not spiritual advancement. This is why Platonists like Plotinus learned Platonism from a teacher and had his own school. — Apollodorus
But enhance them in what way? You're getting into dangerous territory here, the land of "I do yoga in order to improve my business skills".I think a key distinguishing factor would be that spiritual advancement is supposed to enhance your mental abilities. — Apollodorus
It's not clear where this is coming from.And, in fact, people do experience various degrees of happiness when they practice contemplation or meditation. This is an undeniable fact. So, I can see no reason why people should get attacked for practicing theoria, dhyana, or whatever you want to call it, if they choose to.
On what grounds should philosophy prohibit contemplation and declare it antithetical to philosophy?
And what is the place of women in all this?
— baker
That would depend on what you mean by that question. — Apollodorus
It's no secret that the Ancient Greeks held a dim view of women. — baker
Do you think that because so many religious and other preachers make a point of airing their contempt for other people, this means that a response other than shaking one's head and going one's way is called for? — baker
When Apollodorus calls me anti-Christian, he has picked up that weapon. — Valentinus
You hold identical beliefs.
You share the same anti-Platonist (and anti-Christian) commitment. — Apollodorus
I only complained about your labels when you said this:
You hold identical beliefs.
You share the same anti-Platonist (and anti-Christian) commitment.
— Apollodorus — Valentinus
Now that we have properly located your vision of cowardice and despair as coming from you, and not from any of your interlocutors — Valentinus
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.