[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

/vt/ is now archived.Become a Patron!

/lit/ - Literature


View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
>> No.16409917 [View]
File: 2.86 MB, 2224x3425, plotinus.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

It wasn't the real world.

>> No.16305937 [View]
File: 2.86 MB, 2224x3425, plotinus.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

the forms are in intellect, they are intellect

>> No.16221309 [View]
File: 2.86 MB, 2224x3425, plotinus.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

try to spell without hierarchy

>> No.16036647 [View]
File: 2.86 MB, 2224x3425, plotinus.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

If, then, these two are one, how can this one also be many?
In fact, it is because it does not contemplate what is one. Since even when it contemplates the One, it does so not as one. If this were not so,it would not become Intellect. But beginning as one, it did not remain as it began, but, becoming many without noticing it, in a way ‘weighed down’34 it unfolded itself in its wish to have everything – how much better it would have been for it not to want this, for it became second–as a circle comes to be by deploying itself; shape, plane, circumference, centre, radii, some parts above, others below. Hence,the starting points are better, the end points inferior. For the goal is not of the same kind as the origin-and-goal nor again the origin-and-goal the same as the origin alone.

And, to express it differently, Intellect is not the intellect of one particular thing, but Intellect as a whole. And being Intellect as a whole, it is the Intellect of everything. And so since it is all Beings and belongs to all Beings even its part must possess all Beings. If this is not so, it will have some part that is not Intellect and it will be composed from non-intellects; and it will be a heap gathered up waiting to become an intellect out of all things. For this reason, it is unlimited in this way and, if anything comes from it, there is no diminution, neither of that which comes from it, because it, too, is everything, nor of that from which it comes, because it was not a composite formed from parts.

§3.8.9. This, then, is what Intellect is like; for this reason, it is not the first, but there must be what is ‘ beyond’35 it – the previous arguments also lead up to this – first, because a multiplicity comes after unity. And while Intellect is Number,36 the real One is the principle of Number and Number of this kind. And this Intellect is also at the same time intelligible,37 so that at the same time there are two. But if there are two, we must grasp what is before the two. What, then, is it? Is it just Intellect on its own? But the intelligible is yoked to every intellect; so if the intelligible is not to be yoked with it, Intellect will not exist either. If, then, it is not Intellect, but shuns duality, what is before these two transcends Intellect.

>> No.15947467 [View]
File: 2.86 MB, 2224x3425, plotinus.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>imagine not being so intellectually overbearing that all philosophy on your side of the world after you has to concede to your philosophy
>imagine there still being oppositions yo your main tenets after your death
Plotinus single-handedly eradicated Stoicism, Peripateticism, Epicureanism, and warped Christian theology (Augustine, Cappadocians, Dionysius, Maximus the Confessor.)
All philosophy since Plotinus in the west has been 'Plotinian'.
Even Advaita likely emerged from contact with Greek scholars dialoguing with Indians (Platonists/Pythagoreans), I bet Greco-Buddhism was the parent of it.

>> No.15740342 [View]
File: 2.86 MB, 2224x3425, plotinus.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

But the highest heaven is beyond time. There is no duration to suffer.

>> No.14979104 [View]
File: 2.86 MB, 2224x3425, plotinus.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

but we are not each other
think of the quantum superposition as an analogy (but fuck many worlds)

>> No.14415877 [View]
File: 2.86 MB, 2224x3425, plotinus.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>> No.14347618 [View]
File: 2.86 MB, 2224x3425, plotinus.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

*makes all plato-less peripatetics too ashamed to exist*
nuttin personnel ariboble

>> No.14132902 [View]
File: 2.86 MB, 2224x3425, plotinus.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

it's basic platonism
>We hold that the ordered universe, in its material mass, has existed for ever and will for ever endure: but simply to refer this perdurance to the Will of God, however true an explanation, is utterly inadequate.
>The elements of this sphere change; the living beings of earth pass away; only the Ideal-form [the species] persists: possibly a similar process obtains in the All.
The Will of God is able to cope with the ceaseless flux and escape of body stuff by ceaselessly reintroducing the known forms in new substances, thus ensuring perpetuity not to the particular item but to the unity of idea: now, seeing that objects of this realm possess no more than duration of form, why should celestial objects, and the celestial system itself, be distinguished by duration of the particular entity?
>Let us suppose this persistence to be the result of the all-inclusiveness of the celestial and universal- with its consequence, the absence of any outlying matter into which change could take place or which could break in and destroy.
>This explanation would, no doubt, safeguard the integrity of the Whole, of the All; but our sun and the individual being of the other heavenly bodies would not on these terms be secured in perpetuity: they are parts; no one of them is in itself the whole, the all; it would still be probable that theirs is no more than that duration in form which belongs to fire and such entities.
This would apply even to the entire ordered universe itself. For it is very possible that this too, though not in process of destruction from outside, might have only formal duration; its parts may be so wearing each other down as to keep it in a continuous decay while, amid the ceaseless flux of the Kind constituting its base, an outside power ceaselessly restores the form: in this way the living All may lie under the same conditions as man and horse and the rest man and horse persisting but not the individual of the type.
>With this, we would have no longer the distinction of one order, the heavenly system, stable for ever, and another, the earthly, in process of decay: all would be alike except in the point of time; the celestial would merely be longer lasting. If, then, we accepted this duration of type alone as a true account of the All equally with its partial members, our difficulties would be eased- or indeed we should have no further problem- once the Will of God were shown to be capable, under these conditions and by such communication, of sustaining the Universe.
>But if we are obliged to allow individual persistence to any definite entity within the Kosmos then, firstly, we must show that the Divine Will is adequate to make it so; secondly, we have to face the question, What accounts for some things having individual persistence and others only the persistence of type? and, thirdly, we ask how the partial entities of the celestial system hold a real duration which would thus appear possible to all partial things

>> No.12995919 [View]
File: 2.86 MB, 2224x3425, plotinus.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Christianity through Pseudo-Dionysius, Islamic Neoplatonic thought, Augustine, Boethius, Anselm, Aquinas, Scholasticism, Calvin, Schopenhauer, Bergson.

>"With Plotinus there even appears, probably for the first time in Western philosophy, idealism that had long been current in the East even at that time, for it taught (Enneads, iii, lib. vii, c.10) that the soul has made the world by stepping from eternity into time, with the explanation: 'For there is for this universe no other place than the soul or mind' (neque est alter hujus universi locus quam anima), indeed the ideality of time is expressed in the words: 'We should not accept time outside the soul or mind' (oportet autem nequaquam extra animam tempus accipere)."

View posts [+24] [+48] [+96]