/lit/ - Literature

The weirdest thing is Plotinus is never even mentioned as frequently as Plato and Aristotle. Normies don't know anything about Plato and Aristotle but they have probably never even heard of Plotinus despite the fact that Western Civilization wouldn't exist without him because of how influential he was on Augustine and really the totality of late-Classical thought.

>>22039445
>transforms Plato into something entirely different
That is were you are wrong, boy.

>Who was Plotinus?

>>22039445
he got it from his teacher Ammonius Saccas, who probably got it from earlier unwritten tradition. He would resent your post because he believed he was a follower of Aristotle and Plato and a lot of his philosophy arose out of the belief that Aristotle and Plato were in full agreement.
>>22039454
I don't think Plotinus directly influenced Augustine, but some other neoplatonists did, it was a popular school at the time and it existed before Plotinus.
>>22039458
the neoplatonists got most of their ideas from Plato but it's a hermeneutical fact that their system is a big departure from plato.

>>22039634
>he believed he was a follower of Aristotle
No he didn't, he was conscious of his rejection of Aristotle. He rejected Aristotle's Unmoved Mover as the One.

>>22039445
>He never mentions Christianity,
That's because his teacher was a Christian.

>>22039634
>I don't think Plotinus directly influenced Augustine
He absolutely did and translators/commentators on Augustine like Henry Chadwick cite multiple direct parallels in Augustine's works.

>>22039634
>hermeneutical fact
Yikes, sounds awfully temporal and eschatological. Stop reading Germans.

>>22040071
recognizing the existence of historical development does not make me "eschatological"

>>22039931
Proof that he read Plotinus himself

>>22040071
>>22040077
What's a "hermeneutical fact"?

>>22039739
Not decisively proven

>>22041162
Cope, the arguments are just anti Christian bias

>>22039454
Well why would he be? Plotinus was entirely esoteric while Plato made an effort to care about exoteric stuff as well. Only mystics are interested in Plotinus. It's basically pagan Eastern Orthodoxy. Has nothing to offer to Catholics or Protestants. Obviously speaks an entire different language than atheists so there's zero potential of communication there.

>>22041116
I just meant you can’t honestly get a lot of neoplatonist doctrines from reading Plato’s writings. For example, “the Good” was a Form in Plato’s works and there are no three hypostases in Plato.

>>22039454
This. Shows how little normies can into philosophy. For all the lip service that it gets 99% interested in it are total dilettantes, a lot more so than other fields I find.

>>22041186
Shut the fuck up about anti-christian bias. Every Christian for the first 10 centuries of christianity’s existence falsified history as easily as they breathed

From what I know The Enneads is long and I, not sure if I’m gonna want to sit down and read thousands of pages of mystical jibber jabber

>>22041478
I think the penguin edition is abridged and you can probably fund shorter selections. Unfortunately the mystical tractates are the ones that tend to get selected most heavily because people find them more interesting

>>22041328
Why do you call it a hermeneutical fact wtf do you just mean reading? What's wrong with you?

>>22039454
>The weirdest thing is Plotinus is never even mentioned as frequently as Plato and Aristotle.
Why should he be. He's more or less responsible for starting the biggest waste of time in the history of thought.

I thought he got it through esoteric codes which he found and interpreted in Plato's writings

>>22041478
That's my usual impression of the Enneads too. But so I happened to read Porphyry's biography of Plotinus in OP's pic related and it was so entertaining I am going to read one of the Enneads and judge for myself.

>>22041545
He did, and he synthesized them with Aristotle. Really he just repeated what other Platonists had been saying for ages, but moderns are incapable of conceiving of ideas being transmitted if they can't find them in one of the few remaining writings from the time.

>>22039445
>No one even knows almost anything about his life.
In the version I have the intro says he sucked milk from titties until he was like 7 when someone shamed him for it then he hardened up.

>>22041545
there weren’t any ”esoteric codes” he just extensively read into plato’s works

>>22041541
Based

>>22041541
>makes hylics seethe to this day
Holy based

Bump

Read the middle platonists breh

>>22039445
>He never mentions Christianity,
Would you expect to find Churchill mentioning the Juggalos?

>>22039454
>Western Civilization wouldn't exist without him because of how influential he was on Augustine and really the totality of late-Classical thought.
Amusing if true, since he refutes the non-material basis for any claims of anything.

>>22039445
He was a good guy.

>>22042466
>middle platonists
Like who?

>>22042482

>>22041685
Wtf based

>>22039445
It's in a metaphysical short hand which complicates translation. Get the Thomas Taylor partial one and the Loeb guy for a complete one (latter's weak on Emanationism and it comes across in the translation decisions).

>>22039634
>it's a hermeneutical fact that their system is a big departure from plato
Only by dint of the partition of Europe in '45.

>>22043132

>hermeneutical fact

Plotinus was a psychologist

>>22041223
>the guy directly responsible for informing Augustine, Boethius, and Pseudo-Dionysius
>has nothing to offer Catholics or Protestants

Shame you weren't with us on the Enneads general early this year, i got completely filtered by the categories on the middle Enneads, don't remember which ones, but grinded through it and completed his works leaving me with an undescribable joy in my heart and yearning for the ascension to God, doesn't surprise me the influence he had on Christianity and Islam also. I will be re-reading the Enneads once the new edition on Spanish comes out this year, because I want to suck his knowledge like he sucked on his maid's udders for 7 whole years.

>>22043292
Whatcs the name of that girljak? Trying to find the kym page.

>>22044825
i don't know.. i didn't know they had names.

>>22039445
Isn't there a theory that what he was writing down were the teachings of Plato that were not written down but only passed orally to selected students?

>>22039445
>Was he a prophet?

He was born when Christianity was the first religion in Rome.

>>22039445
Plotinus doesn't attack any of those figures, he just criticizes certain doctrines established by them. He probably agrees with Aristotle more than he disagrees, and even uses him as somewhat of a framework, even though he departs.
>and then transforms Plato into something entirely different
No, not really. It's just a major elaboration. Plato was never really "something" to begin with from our perspective, just some dialogues which can be mashed together to form a vague picture of what he might have thought.

>>22045633
>No, not really. It's just a major elaboration. Plato was never really "something" to begin with from our perspective, just some dialogues which can be mashed together to form a vague picture of what he might have thought.
Nta, but I don't think that's necessarily true; if Plato is paradoxical and obscure on certain things, Plotinus makes an active effort to make him clear, at least comparatively so. Take as an example Plotinus' treatise on Eros. In Plato's Symposium, Eros is not a god, but in the Phaedrus, Eros is. How does Plotinus resolve this? By appealing to the speeches of Pausanias and Eryximachus in the Symposium, who both say there are two Eroses, a vulgar and a high one. This helps him bridge one difficulty between two dialogues, but the result is a difference from how Socrates is depicted talking about Eros, where in both Symposium and Phaedrus it's one and not two, and Plotinus' defense of his position has to depend on two speeches in the Symposium that are refuted by Socrates there, so the choice seems willful and not necessarily adequate to the purpose.

>>22045710
All I'm saying is that Plato is not totally clear himself, so it's wrong to say that Plotinus has necessarily departed from whatever the Platonic doctrine actually was. We're not in the right position to judge either way.

>>22045769
Granted we don't know anywhere near enough about how Plato intended himself to be understood nor how his contemporaries understood him (the best we have are Aristotle, who appears to disagree with Plato on various points, and quotations from Speussipus and Xenocrates who charge Aristotle with misunderstanding Plato and their own positions that apparently also differ from Plato, and then the occasional reference in 4th century comedies), but one can still use the writings as some kind of standard, even if not fully adequate, and judge Plotinus by how he seems to use and read those writings. I'd think the example of Eros is a good and solid one insofar as his treatise makes it very clear what he's trying to resolve in the dialogues, and how he comes up with a resolution from the dialogues. For me, it seems specious of Plotinus to argue for two Eroses, a god and a lower daimonion, based on speeches from the Symposium that neither Socratic account either there or in the Phaedrus supports, but maybe you would disagree with me on that.

There was no The One for Plato. This is critical and it changes everything downstream between the 2.

>>22041328
just because there was not formulated three hypostases in Plato does not mean he did not trace out such a doctrine in the many dialogues he wrote, of which he did not care to merely jot down teachings but wanted to provoke the reader into dialectical thinking

>>22046046
anon did not read parmenides

>>22039445
Ancient schizoposting

>>22041525
because hermeneutical fact obviously means that it is a fact in the interpretation of the text, which is what I meant as you have to interpret Plato's texts at least a little to get at what he believed, why are you so scared of a word?

>>22046647
Aristotle didn't mention anything like the three hypostases either when discussing Plato's secret doctrines. he didn't "trace out" the doctrine, the material to come up with the idea of the three hypostases was present in it, but I doubt Plato was conscious of such a distinction.

>>22041469
Not that anon but you've evolved from cope to seethe

>>22046694
The three hypostases are older than Plotinus and seen in every developed system of occult sciences and medicine in the world. I don’t think the genealogy of these concepts even develops from metaphysical contemplation necessarily but rather from the work of physicians working with the bodies subtle energies and the post-Axial mind-body problem or from the wisdom of shamans and Egyptian priests even earlier before this knowledge bifurcated into streams. Plato’s unwritten doctrines are just his Pythagorean background, further evidencing this.

>>22039445
>Was he a prophet? A genius? An anomaly?
A god. Just like you and me. Only a more far-sighted one.

>>22047737
satanposting

>>22047760
All you're doing when you worship Jesus is attempt to evoke the divine nature within yourself. Unfortunately for you, Christianity rejects henosis so the best you can hope for is to be in the company of god rather than to be one with him, and consequently realise your true dignity. Nevertheless, you remain a god, and nothing you do can overturn this fact.

>>22047780
>Christianity rejects henosis
>he doesn't know

>>22047722
source?

>>22047807
I do, and unfortunately the Orthodox draw a really precise distinction between God's essence and his energies. One can partake in God's energies, but one can never be one with God. And it necessarily had to be this way, because otherwise an accomplished ascetic would be able to say "I am God" (as ascetics among many other religions do) and he would be right.
But I do admit that even in Catholicism, high mysticism offers a lot of room for spiritual growth. However, true henosis remains forbidden. God is one thing, and you another - complete unity with the divine is prohibited.

>>22047836
Except if you're his son. Fucking nepotism.

>>22047829
This is revealed knowledge iykyk

>>22047946
I know more than you could ever dream, you are just a faggot who wishes he had schizophrenia but is nothing more than a sad, pathetic larper

>>22047948
spoken like someone who doesn't know

>>22047722
>post-Axial
Might I assume you're some kind of ImperiumPress schizo?

>>22047991
I'm saying separation of mind and body, the final development in human consciousness, occurred after the Bronze Age Collapse. It's not that schizo.

>>22048012
So, are you an ImperiumPress schizo or not? Or do other kinds of people also use this terminology in a more respectable way?

>>22048031
>Or do other kinds of people also use this terminology in a more respectable way?
I don't know what you mean by that. I am neither what you said nor an academic. I don't "keep up to date with the literature" if that's what you're asking. I read old books and do my own thinking.

>>22047836
Ok Lucifer

People who say that Plotinus' metaphysics was just Plato's remind me of Guenon's mental acrobatics to claim Hindu is like Abrahamic religions.

>>22048052
A coherent metaphysics can't be innovated, there's only one or two hard questions it stems from. Variety is superficial.

>>22048070
Pseud

>>22048070
name the questions.

>>22048042
I am asking if you're taking your ideas from ImperiumPress, anon.

>>22048117
no

>>22048120
Cool. Apparently the idea comes from a man called Karl Jaspers. All I needed to know. Thanks

>>22048116
The question of the One or the first principle and how it generates multiplicity. I am sceptical of Guénon's claim of a "supranatural" revealed tradition from a singular pre-historic source. I just think there are only very few limited ways to answer this question in terms of language and religious traditions are culturally specific experiential approaches or plans that derive from this. There's nothing schizo about it.
>>22048107
(you)

>>22048136
the question is wrong. it assumes
a) that multiplicity doesn't produce the One
b) that the idea of logical "priority" which leads to the idea of a "first" principle in western thought has real efficacy in the universe outside of human cognition, i.e. that buddhist-style interdependence is false.
c) that the One is not the same as multiplicity.

>>22041685
so that's why he understood the true nature of reality.

>>22047722
Interesting post, despite the petty detractor. I’ve seen this same similarity you note. It’s essentially the same repeated tale of a tripartite division of the soul, the. with God/Monad/Logos/the One/an otherwise Monistic principle above it, repeated in many religious guises. Plotinus’ three hypostases are the One, the Nous (Intellect), and the Psyche (Soul), and it’s strangely similar, for instance, to the Vedantic three bodies + Brahman categorization: in “descending” order, Atman/Brahman (the One), the causal body (jivatman or karanasharira, corresponding to Nous), and the subtle body or psychic soul (sukshmasharira, corresponding to the Soul). Or, essentially, the emotional mind, the rational mind, and then the “Oversoul”, God or One they derive from. A difference, of course, is Plotinus is hypothesizing these explicitly as a World Nous and a World Soul that the individual nous and soul derive from, whereas in that Vedantic sense they’re referring just to the individual intellects and souls of incarnated human beings.

>>22048131
Yes, some qualified degree of perennialism, as well as of multiple categories within the self, and, finally, of a possible broadening, heightening, expansion, fulfillment, realization and/or consummation of this self, which is found in much ancient to modern philosophy, is vaguely comparable to his notion of “the encompassing”, but for him it verges more on being a psychological and existentialist concept than an entirely mystical one. And of course it’s Jaspers who came up with the idea of the Axial Age in the first place. But it’s not really solely and entirely dependent on Jaspers to make such a point (apart the specific use of the term “post-Axial”), it could pretty much be derived and independently noted even apart from having read Jaspers.

>>22047946
>>22047959
fucking based

>>22048165
>that multiplicity doesn't produce the One
This is technically schizo gobbledygook as it's illogical. See: below.
>that the idea of logical "priority" which leads to the idea of a "first" principle in western thought has real efficacy in the universe outside of human cognition, i.e. that buddhist-style interdependence is false.
I agree, this is an important part of the question and I should have included it at least as an addendum. This cuts at the heart of morality/ethics in my opinion as platonic moral realism presupposes logical progression whereas four-fold phenomenalist Buddhist logic doesn't leave any room for approaching the question in the first place. I see these as the two main valid approaches to the question of metaphysics and lack the experience to comment beyond that. I suppose a more immanent form of the same question could be if the world and its origin are hermetically sealed within the laws of logic. This is not, however, religious pluralism, which is what I was responding to.
>that the One is not the same as multiplicity.
If it is then the previous question subsumes this anyway. See: above.
>>22048178
Right exactly. It's the only possible approach to a logical metaphysics.
>A difference, of course, is Plotinus is hypothesizing these explicitly as a World Nous and a World Soul that the individual nous and soul derive from, whereas in that Vedantic sense they’re referring just to the individual intellects and souls of incarnated human beings.
I would argue that these differences of scale are unknowable at least within the bounds of communicable discursive language since all we're really doing is mapping out our own processes phenomenologically and projecting that onto the world soul in accordance with microcosm-macrocosm principle, this saw its most recent revival in the Rennaissance which was in earnest a rebirth of occult sciences and not as taught in schools, the resurrection of classical philology and a forgotten vocabulary. I will say however that modern science with its measure problem gives us an astonishing impression that there's more to this ancient approach than we think, but this is probably trivial given how much it relies on mathematics/logic.

>>22048268
>This is technically schizo gobbledygook as it's illogical.
it's not illogical because manifolds are constantly unified, and also because it as easy to cognize pure manifoldic chaos as being self existent as it is to cognize any unity as being self existent and in fact I would even say it is almost easier to believe that chaos is self existent because when you ask what kind of unity is self existent you get the problem of what kind of unity is self existent as all unities have a particular essence. one may argue that all manifolds are composed at bottom of unities, but the problem is also that every unity we perceive also seems to be composed at bottom of manifolds since for example it seems like a pretty acceptable hypothesis that the experience of blue is produced in the brain as a manifold yet the conscious part of our brain cannot divide up into this manifold due to divisions in the brain.

>>22048287
>it's not illogical because manifolds are constantly unified
We are talking sub specie aeternitatis here. What you're describing only occurs in the chaos within phenomena, where one contingent factor leads to another. If some multiplicity external to the universe leads to the One this question would be as irrelevant to us as any other meaningless string of words, i.e. commie gobbledygook. That all manifolds are composed at bottom of unities is the basis of the principle of sufficient reason in the first place.
>but the problem is also that every unity we perceive also seems to be composed at bottom of manifolds
That's what I was addressing in my post. The mind can only know the world insofar as its dimensions allow. My assertion was that religious pluralism is excess baggage attached to this basic question of how far we can go with that. A primitive god is just a special category of thing or idea of things in our minds, but that's not what label God itself is getting at when we refer to him in the metaphysical context.

>>22039445
Good question anon. Just quick corrections: many of the things he attacks/rejects, such as Aristotle and the Stoics, are actually being integrated in his philosophy more than he openly shows.
As for where he "comes from", I had the same question for a long time during my PhD and did some research on the topic - especially on Eastern influences and the possibility he might have gotten something from the "gymnosophists" or more generally from Indian philosophy. The track is extremely feeble, and academic consesus is that he never came to contact with Indian philosophy.
My conclusion is personal experience: Plotinus is a new object in western philosophy, because his experience is new. I believe he had literal mystical experiences, and was possibly the man who got closest to the "truth" in western thought - not because he read about it, but because he had direct experience of what lies beyond the senses. He is one of the greatests.

>>22048887
What do you think of Proclus?

>>22048887
Doubtful you did on PhD on this. He may very well have gotten this from his teacher, who was also the teacher of Origen, who was the first Christian to propose the 3 hypostases just the same way Plotinus did.

>>22048887
this is like intro to anc phil tier insight for someone who did research in their PhD. learn more and reflect

>>22044825
basedlita if memory serves me right

The problem with Plotinus is that it's not enough to be intellectually and philosophically advanced you have to be spiritually advanced too. It's the culmination of a lot of human effort throughout the centuries that he synthesises so it's so advanced overall that it's foreign to most people today. It's basically extraterrestrial in a culture dominated by capitalism, consumerism, and judaism. So most people simply can't comprehend much of it so they just read it from a sociological/anthropological perspective since they simply cannot spiritually relate to something so advanced.

>>22039445
Blessed thread.

>>22048012
What will happen to human consciousness after the Industrial Age Collapse?

>>22050381
>tfw spiritually advanced schizo but intellectually underdeveloped brainlet

>>22051261
Don't worry bro cultivate your soul instead

What did Plotinus mean by the Soul?

>>22051261
I'm the opposite and would trade with you anon

>>22039634
>I don't think Plotinus directly influenced Augustine,
Augustine is called "The Christian Plotinus"

>>22053257
By whom? By people who never read Plotinus? They're nothing alike.

>>22053267
St. Augustine's Confessions, The Odyssey of Soul by Robert J. O'Connell.

Also it's generally known that Augustine holds to a strand of Neoplatonism closely connected with Plotinus. Feel free to state any difference you think exists and I can explain how you're either misunderstanding Plotinus or Augustine. I find most people who say this erroneously think Plotinus was a monist and not a theist.

>>22053279
>St. Augustine's Confessions
? He calls himself that? He does not.
>The Odyssey of Soul by Robert J. O'Connell.
Ah, a retarded American. Makes sense xe would say that.
>Feel free to state any difference
They're entirely different. The Christian world is not eternal, the creation is separate from the creator, there's no returning to a source through gnosis, the cosmogony, the eschatology, the soteriology, the hammartiology, etc. are entirely different and these serve as the foundation of Christian doctrine. If you think otherwise you're superificial and most likely a retarded perennialist.

>>22053306
The underlying theistic philosophy is the same. Maximos the Confessor is highly Neoplatonic as well. The dogmatic structure placed on top is largely incidental.

>>22053310
You're a midwit and you shouldn't discuss metaphysics or theology.

>>22053375
Orthodox Theology flows directly from Pseudo-Dionysius who is Proclus with some Christian varnish. Western theology flows from Augustine who is Plotinus from some Christian varnish. I can guarantee I've read more Christian theology and metaphysics than you have. You should read the Meaning of Idealism by Florensky.

>>22053403
>Meaning of Idealism by Florensky.
I'll excuse your pseudery if you got a PDF for this.

>>22047780
Neoplatonists are such smug trannies.

>>22053403
>>22053465
>Florensky
Florensky was a heterodox / heretical Orthodox. No wonder that guy thinks neoplatonism is the same as Christianity. This is just modern gnosticism and should be shunned and avoided. It will never be part of the Church. Never was, never will be.

>>22053479
>Florensky was a heterodox / heretical Orthodox
Oh you're one of those guys

>>22053403
>Pseudo-Dionysius
How do orthobros cope with the fact a pagan shaped their entire mystic theology?
It's things like this that are the reason I can't get behind Orthodoxy, like asserting that the Wisdom of Solomon was indeed written by Solomon or Hebrews by Paul.

>>22053756
Plato shaped the entire thinking and language of the world, who cares? It's God's plan

>>22053756
>How do orthobros cope with the fact a pagan shaped their entire mystic theology?
Not well. The current state of Orthodoxy is creating ever finer distinctions to try and justify why they uniquely have the correct theology and everyone else are heretics. The neopatristic school was a huge mistake and Orthodoxy would be much healthier if they had listened to Bulgakov and Solvyov instead of Florovsky and Lossky.

y'all should read this

https://energeticprocession.wordpress.com/2020/01/03/on-books-and-the-spiritual-life/
https://energeticprocession.wordpress.com/reading/

https://energeticprocession.wordpress.com/2005/04/17/response-to-fr-kimel/ - about Catholicism in general
https://energeticprocession.wordpress.com/2006/03/08/spit-spat/ - Platonism of Augustine
https://energeticprocession.wordpress.com/2006/03/10/the-bickersons/ - more about Augustine
https://energeticprocession.wordpress.com/2007/08/25/an-apologetic-two-fer/ - Protestants do not oppose filioque even though it is an unbiblical doctrine
https://energeticprocession.wordpress.com/2007/10/17/heres-a-dot/ - Arianism and Platonism
https://energeticprocession.wordpress.com/2007/10/19/two-sides-same-coin/ - Latin theology is based on Platonism
https://energeticprocession.wordpress.com/2007/12/03/killing-your-father/ - Protestants are the heirs of Catholic theology

>>22053245
The sensitive, supra- or immaterial part of you necessary for receiving conscious impressions (making you sentient, as opposed to a rock or clod of dirt), as well as for feeling emotions, or having a “psyche” (which is quite literally, the old Greek word for soul from which we now derive “psyche” and “psychological”). Animals are also ensouled in this model (basically taken from Platonism and Aristotelianism, where the roots of this whole division and hierarchical conception also shows up), but do not have Nous (Intellect) which is above even the Psyche (Soul), responsible for reason, not emotions. Or, to repeat it less clunkily, animals are ensouled but with no higher intellect, while humans are considered ensouled while also possessing higher reason or intellect (at least in Neoplatonism and even much of former Greek philosophy from Plato onwards).

>>22054366
tldr?

>>22053893
I agree completely, but they do not

Plotinus is incredibly based. To understand him you have to work back to the source of where he/plato were drawing from. Pic related can help.

>>22053490
Sophiology was a Western (heretical) movement adopted by demonically possessed (prelest-afflicted) Eastern theologians. It all had esoteric universalism at its core, and the Church defended against it just as easily as they defended against exoteric universalism (neoliberalism). Every human organization on earth has been decimated by evil and the only salvation and protection is inside the One True Church.

>>22039445
>Where did Plotinus come from with this?
Numenius

>>22054854
Tldr?

>>22054366
>Energetic procession
Orthobro meme blog

>>22055389
The only two relevant Orthodox countries in the world are currently killing each other. GG.

>>22054854
>>22055799
>From the z library link
Philosophy as a Rite of Rebirth challenges our understanding of philosophy - indeed it challenges many centuries of assumptions which have reduced othodox philosophy to a shadow of its original. Algis U¿davinys returns to the very roots of philosophy in Ancient Egypt, and shows why the Greeks revered that land of pyramids and priest-kings as the source of divine wisdom. Bringing his understanding of many great traditions of philosophy - Indian, Islamic, Greek, and others - he presents the case for considering philosophy as a human participation in a theophany, or divine drama Casting aside the unnatural limitations of modern philosophy, as well as the grave misunderstandings of Egyptologists, radical and exciting possibilities emerge for the serious philosopher. These possibilities will certainly change our view of the universe in general, but most particularly our view of ourselves. The Rebirth of the title is one that implies an expansion of consciousness both upwards towards the divine heights of reality, and outwards to embrace the whole of creation as a living image of the gods. The exercises of philosophy thus move from the rational to the intuitive, onward to pure contemplation and, ultimately, to a god-like energy in the divine drama.

>>22054854
Fantastic book

>>22055389
>protestantism not even listed

>>22054854
>it's another gunenon spawn
Fuck you I almost bought it

>>22046685
>Hermeneutical "facts"
Disproved by gadamer

>>22046685
>a fact in the interpretation
kek

>>22057970
It's good despite his traditionalism. He also traces the ur - tradition before indo euros and into egypt and babaylon and is not a dogmatic advaitist but a platonist.

>>22058065
Guenonists are all occultists and talented at creating complex and sophisticated narratives to advance their satanism. They pretend to be disinterested but once you delve deeper you see they have a clear agenda. I can only assume that guy distorts both Egyptian pseudo-history and hellenistic tradition to advance whatever crap he got from reading the Traditionalists.

I wonder sometimes if Hegel was influenced in the way he writes by Plotinus and neo-Platonism in general. Very similar argumentation style.

>>22039445
The first neoplatonist is thought to be Numenius. They thought of themselves as Platonists tho. And Plato seems to have thought himself Pythagorean as much as Socratic.
>>22045094
Yea. See tubingen school.
>>22047722
Good post. Bicameral mind? Ya. Pythagoras... Pythagorean sourcebook is good source on this. Also everything by uzdavinys as mentioned traces the egyptian pagan mystery religion stuff. Shaw is pretty good on theurgy too. Presocratics generally are believed to be mystics or at least some of them. Kingsley, terrible jungian writer, has a first book which has an interesting take on parmenides and empedocles. Basically that they were shamans. Unfortunately, everything he's written after is just ranting and repeating this point. Some sort of ego disturbance methinks.
>>22058073
Prisca theologia is orthodox and orthopraxis

>>22058084
That's pretty well accepted. He does innovate however. Perfection as movement rather than stasis. The one as a process.

>>22058093
>Kingsley, terrible jungian writer, has a first book which has an interesting take on parmenides and empedocles. Basically that they were shamans.
Can you give a longer qrd on this? I have his books on my list but I honestly can't be bothered for these doorstoppers, especially since you say he's a bad writer.

>>22058093
>Prisca theologia is orthodox and orthopraxis
Yeah if orthodox has nothing to do with Orthodoxy and all to do with whatever your cult made it out to be

How well does Plotinus mesh with Parmenides and other Presocratics?

>>22058110
Read his first book as mentioned. Ancient Philosophy, Mystery, and Magic. It's his most scholarly. Least poppy. Tl;dr: parmenides and empedocles were shamans, poems describe visionary experience, developed thru practice of dream incubation, goddess in parm is eros(?) iirc, he also identifies the gods with elements in emped which has been a debated category, also as an aside I feel another essential work on presocratic elemental metaphysics is Lakoff cog phenom take which is suggestive albeit reductive...

>>22058113
What is Plato but Moses speaking Attic Greek?
- Numenius

Supposedly Plato read OT even...
>>22058121
Yes

>>22058128
>Tl;dr: parmenides and empedocles were shamans, poems describe visionary experience, developed thru practice of dream incubation, goddess in parm is eros(?) iirc, he also identifies the gods with elements in emped which has been a debated category
Does he at least do some textual analysis to justify this? I believe the Empedocles claim about the elements; any understanding of the nature of the sacral view the ancients had lends credence to it.

>>22058153
He uses textual evidence alongside arhaeological. Apparently there was a discovery of a statue of parm iirc with an inscription describes him as a latromancer or dreamweaver (shamanic greek type person) which was key to his understanding. I dislike how he blames Plato for forgetting or hiding this wisdom. I blame Aristotle if anyone. And the neoplatonists are quite mystical and enlightening imo. Altho mayb it ties into Heidi's forgetting of being or whatever.

>>22058168
*iatromantis

Also translation is more like doctor - seer I suppose. Dreamweaver is how he describes it tho. But he makes some wild claims about how the incubation is more like an altered state than ordinary dreams. Links it to nirvana and samadhi i eastern trad.

>>22058168
First of all you type like a Twitter retard. Secondly, there's no wisdom or insight, you're an idiot and a pseud.

>>22058187
Oh no. My shorthand offends you. Whatever. Fuck off. Idgaf

How do I understand Plotinus without reading him?

>>22058932
nofap

>>22039445
>He never mentions Christianity
Could that be mayhaps because the book survived from Christian copysts?

>>22059066
false

>>22058073
>Guenonists are all occultists and talented at creating complex and sophisticated narratives to advance their satanism.
t. giga-hylic

>>22039445
Was he a basedboy? Is he worth reading?

>>22058132
>the mentally ill ramblings of Moses are the same as divine philosopher Plato
doubt
>Plato actually read the scribbles that some irrelevant tribe in the middle east wrote to keep track of all their whacky adventures
Why would he do that?

>>22058932
Bash your head into a wall over and over until you behold the hypostasis of the Monad. It works, trust me.

>>22053893
Yes the midwits should al be thrown out from universities (also this board) and start cooking my french fries. And go to war.

>>22059212
Are you a woman? You go to war too if you're not.

>>22059253
T. In university because affording it through socialism. Plato would have laughed and handed you the frying pan.

>>22059271
Are you a schizo woman?

>>22059276
>Projecting this hard

>>22045710
Do tell me about this higher Eros.

>>22060148
There isn't any for Socrates and Plato. Pausanias posits two Eroses to defend his lifestyle of "chaste and virtuous" pederasty against vulgar controversial pederasty, and Eryximachus posits two Eroses to reconcile his work as a doctor with his belief that the activity of the soul is higher. Socrates just says there's one Eros, and you either miss the mark and produce children or art in a confused attempt to achieve immortality, or you aim at philosophy in recognizing wisdom of ignorance and seek the good.

>>22061267
Huh? Socrates, Plato, Aristotle all had children

>>22061647
Plato didn't, and recognizing that it's illusory doesn't mean you won't fall into it, but compare Socrates' relationship with his children to his friendship with his friends. The children aren't as meaningful, and Socrates doesn't pretend they are.