/lit/ Reads the Enneads

[Anonymous No.21465826]

Starts in 1 week. 1 treatise per day with a 1 day break between each Ennead for catch up / discussion. Read along as we go through the most important western philosophical work ever written

I.1 - "What is the Living Being and What is Man?" 9/1
I.2 - "On Virtue" 10/1
I.3 - "On Dialectic [The Upward Way]." 11/1
I.4 - "On True Happiness (Well Being)" 12/1
I.5 - "On Whether Happiness (Well Being) Increases with Time." 13/1
I.6 - "On Beauty" 14/1
I.7 - "On the Primal Good and Secondary Forms of Good [Otherwise, 'On Happiness']" 15/1
I.8 - "On the Nature and Source of Evil" 16/1
I.9 - "On Dismissal" 17/1

18/1 - Break / Discussion

II.1 - "On Heaven" 19/1
II.2 - "On the Movement of Heaven" 20/1
II.3 - "Whether the Stars are Causes" 21/1
II.4 - "On Matter" 22/1
II.5 - "On Potentiality and Actuality" 23/1
II.6 - "On Quality or on Substance" 24/1
II.7 - "On Complete Transfusion" 25/1
II.8 - "On Sight or on how Distant Objects Appear Small" 26/1
II.9 - "Against Those That Affirm The Creator of the Kosmos and The Kosmos Itself to be Evil" [generally quoted as "Against the Gnostics"] 27/1

28/1 - Break / Discussion

III.1 - "On Fate"
III.2 - "On Providence (1)."
III.3 - "On Providence (2)."
III.4 - "On our Allotted Guardian Spirit"
III.5 - "On Love"
III.6 - "On the Impassivity of the Unembodied"
III.7 - "On Eternity and Time"
III.8 - "On Nature, Contemplation and the One"
III.9 - "Detached Considerations"

7/2 - Break / Discussion

IV.1 - "On the Essence of the Soul (1)"
IV.2 - "On the Essence of the Soul (2)"
IV.3 - "On Problems of the Soul (1)"
IV.4 - "On Problems of the Soul (2)"
IV.5 - "On Problems of the Soul (3)” [Also known as, "On Sight"].
IV.6 - "On Sense-Perception and Memory"
IV.7 - "On the Immortality of the Soul"
IV.8 - "On the Soul's Descent into Body"
IV.9 - "Are All Souls One"

17/2 - Break / Discussion

V.1 - "On the Three Primary Hypostases"
V.2 - "On the Origin and Order of the Beings following after the First"
V.3 - "On the Knowing Hypostases and That Which is Beyond"
V.4 - "How That Which is After the First comes from the First, and on the One."
V.5 - "That the Intellectual Beings are not Outside the Intellect, and on the Good"
V.6 - "On the Fact that That Which is Beyond Being Does not Think, and on What is the Primary and the Secondary Thinking Principle"
V.7 - "On whether There are Ideas of Particular Beings"
V.8 - "On the Intellectual Beauty"
V.9 - "On Intellect, the Forms, and Being"

26/2 - Break / Discussion

VI.1 - "On the Kinds of Being (1)"
VI.2 - "On the Kinds of Being (2)"
VI.3 - "On the Kinds of Being (3)"
VI.4 - "On the Presence of Being, One and the Same, Everywhere as a Whole (1)"
VI.5 - "On the Presence of Being, One and the Same, Everywhere as a Whole (2)"
VI.6 - "On Numbers"
VI.7 - "How the Multiplicity of Forms Came Into Being: and on the Good"
VI.8 - "On Free Will and the Will of the One"
VI.9 - "On the Good, or the One"

7/3 - Final Discussion

[Anonymous No.21465942]

I’m game, anon.
Recommended translation?

[Anonymous No.21465944]

>>21465826
Wow this is a coincidence, I just got a copy today from the book store. I suppose I will read along.

[Anonymous No.21465949]

I'll join in on this and contribute, I have OP translation

>>21465942
OP pic related is very good

[Anonymous No.21465993]

>>21465942
I'm partial to MacKenna because of the poetry. In terms of translations of Plotinus it's the KJV of the Enneads. If you want a solid modern scholarly translation than you can't go past Gersons.

The only other option in Armstrongs translation for the Loeb Classical Library.

[Anonymous No.21466005]

I'm down for this. Is there a pdf or text file of it somewhere for convenience sake?
Also
>most important western philosophical work ever written
More so than The Republic? Idk.
Also I feel like there should be some aim for this.
Paul Henry, (S.J.) claims in his introductory essay from the Penguin edition that Plotinus' salvific system is individualist. This seems to me to contradict the call in the Republic (end of 519) to return to the cave and help the prisoners. I think the resolution of this supposed tension- whether it be real or merely apparent- could be a fertile aim for this reading and could serve as a guiding higher purpose to the enterprise.

[Anonymous No.21466254]

>Starts in 1 week
Good, enough time to read all Plato first

[Anonymous No.21466271]

>>21466254
This could help

[Anonymous No.21466301]

>>21465826
Anyone fuck with John Vervaekee?

[Anonymous No.21466317]

>>21466301
>fuck with
purge this twitter faggotry from your vocabulary

[Anonymous No.21466332]

>>21466317
No thanks.

[Anonymous No.21466368]

>>21466301
He's a secularist who can only view things from a psychological perspective. Not worth the time.

[Anonymous No.21466434]

>>21466254
>>21466271
Forgot link: https://librivox.org/search?title=&author=Plato&reader=&keywords=&genre_id=0&status=all&project_type=either&recorded_language=&sort_order=catalog_date&search_page=1&search_form=advanced

[Anonymous No.21466438]

Why?

[Anonymous No.21466707]

>>21466438
Why not?

[Anonymous No.21466953]

>>21466438
Foundational work of theology in all European religious traditions and the crown jewel of ancient philosophy before Europe moved on to the Christian era

[Anonymous No.21466955]

>>21466005
Beautiful boy..

[Anonymous No.21467216]

>>21466005
Here's a pdf btw:

https://www.pdfdrive.com/plotinus-the-enneads-d158479357.html

[Anonymous No.21467240]

>>21465944
I got a copy for Christmas

[Anonymous No.21467242]

>>21467240
Sounds like fate.

[Anonymous No.21467293]

>>21465826
On Beauty is a typically agreed upon "beginner text" for Plotinus, so maybe shift that one to #1?

[Anonymous No.21467538]

>>21465826
Nice I wanted to read it for quite some time now. This will give me some motivation do to so

[Anonymous No.21467560]

>>21465826
I have this so I will try to contribute.
I found it was fairly difficult, I know most philosophy is, but it was dense in a way that I would not be able to summarize what I had read after I read it. So, a process like this will be very useful.
Might as well ask, can someone tell me why the number nine is so important? I get that the 3-6-9 thing is sacred geometry. But I don't understand exactly what it's supposed to do for you, if you get what I mean.

[Anonymous No.21467574]

>>21467560
>what it's supposed to do for you
It's not your servant anon. Great text you can find free online that might help is called the Theology of Arithmetic. It deals with all the components of the Decad.

[Anonymous No.21467594]

>>21467574
Thanks. I don't see why not though, math is a tool, but if it makes a difference to you then let's say what you're supposed to do with it. Aside from actual math like engineering and so on. Why would Plotinus think it's so important to order his writings into groups of nine for example and name it after that. Maybe he answers that somewhere.

[Anonymous No.21467639]

>>21467594
>Why would Plotinus think it's so important to order his writings into groups of nine for example and name it after that.
It was his student, Porphyry, who ordered his works.He also wrote a biography of him

[Anonymous No.21467658]

>>21465942
>Thomas Taylor (what's there is great, but incomplete)
>(Armstrong. 7 vol. Loeb Classical Library; weak on Emmanationism, but it's complete)
https://archive.org/details/plotinus-in-seven-volumes.-vol.-1-loeb-440
https://archive.org/details/plotinus-in-seven-volumes.-vol.-2-loeb-441
https://archive.org/details/plotinus-in-seven-volumes.-vol.-3-loeb-442
https://archive.org/details/plotinus-in-seven-volumes.-vol.-4-loeb-443
https://archive.org/details/plotinus-in-seven-volumes.-vol.-5-loeb-444
https://archive.org/details/plotinus-in-seven-volumes.-vol.-6-loeb-445
https://archive.org/details/plotinus-in-seven-volumes.-vol.-7-loeb-468

[Anonymous No.21467668]

>>21467594
>math is a tool
You could say that. You could also say thought is a tool. Aristotle says that God is a thing that thinks about it's own thoughts. This isn't the same sort of use of a tool for some end as the way math is used instrumentally. I reckon it's like this: math can be used as a tool, but the Ennead (9) isn't so much a tool as a component of structure, like an element in the periodic table.

[Anonymous No.21467719]

I'll participate. We should do Hegel's Phenomenology of Spirit after this one.

[Anonymous No.21467780]

>>21467293
Shifting around the tractates would end up being too confusing, best to keep it simple and just keep things in the traditional order. On Beauty is relatively early on anyway. Reading the Enneads is difficult because all the tractates assume familiarity with his system, there's no systematic exposition of Plotinus' thought rather each tractate focuses on a specific issue and assumes you already have the background knowledge. It's pretty important to have a supplement to explain the system of Plotinus so you can follow along otherwise you need to read the entire thing at least twice to piece it all together.

[Anonymous No.21468002]

>>21466301
If anyone is interested
https://youtu.be/Lbk3lA6zCic

[Anonymous No.21468026]

>>21465826
And here is a list of dialogues which would have been the standard reading list for them.
Alcibiades I, Gorgias, Phaedo, Cratylus, Theatetus, Sophist, Statesman, Phaedrus, Symposium, Philebus, Timaeus, Parminedes.
So get to work.

[Anonymous No.21468034]

>>21465826
Damn I just read Porfirius introduction, haven't taken part in any previous readings so ill gladly follow you lads

[Anonymous No.21468233]

>>21468026
Lets go

[Anonymous No.21468338]

Alright, I'll re-read em with you guys. I've got the Kenneth Sylvan Guthrie translation and I'd recommend that edition to anyone interested.

[Anonymous No.21468669]

Bump

[Anonymous No.21469896]

I'll read it

[Anonymous No.21470325]

>>21467719
Nah.
>>21467780
>It's pretty important to have a supplement to explain the system of Plotinus so you can follow along otherwise you need to read the entire thing at least twice to piece it all together.
By way of supplement, I recently read Thomas Taylor's Platonic Philosopher's Creed found here: http://www.prometheustrust.co.uk/html/files_to_download.html
I don't think it's a perfect supplement to Plotinus specifically but I think it does a remarkable job of providing at least a general platonic world view that would form a decent basis for the study of Plotinus. More a supplement to Plato himself than to Plotinus. Interesting nonetheless.

[Anonymous No.21471009]

Since Plotinus took from both Plato and Aristotle, is there any of Aristotle I should read before the Enneads? Surely Metaphysics is one of them.

[Anonymous No.21471032]

On Beauty is going to be based. Will love to see /lit/'s reaction as opposed to the faggots in academia and youtube.

[Anonymous No.21471275]

>>21471009
Probably the most relevant stuff is the Organon for some of what Plotinus expects from an argument, and Physics, Metaphysics, and On the Soul for content that he sometimes refers to or uses.

>>21470325
I have to admit to be a little alarmed at the people editing that claiming "this version has each point starting with the words “I believe”, while other versions omit this opening – we offer this one because we wish to emphasize the close relationship between knowledge and belief. The attempt to isolate either knowledge or belief from the other either dismisses philosophy, or reduces it to a lifeless body of clever facts." "Belief" as a Greek term is always going to come from a bunch of verbs that Plato regularly makes out to be problems compared to knowledge. I don't know where they're getting this unless they're importing Christianity or Gnosticism? Odd.

[Anonymous No.21471309]

>>21471009
Certainly it couldn't hurt. If you just want a taste of A's Metaphysics I recommend the Lamda book which has the expositions of his theology.

[Anonymous No.21471340]

>>21471275
Mm. I thought that was interesting too. My guess would be the nature of the trust is less strictly academic and sceptical and more literate and classicist. I don't think it's entirely alarming because, as I see it, at a certain point belief does enter into knowledge (justified, true belief). I hardly think it's tenable for one to claim to be a platonist and yet maintain a scepticism about the belief that good things are good, which is essentially akin to believing a=a.

[Anonymous No.21471349]

>>21471275
>>21471340
Also, many are probably Christians, at least nominally, yes.

[Anonymous No.21471375]

>>21471340
>, as I see it, at a certain point belief does enter into knowledge (justified, true belief)
Whoa, careful there buddy. Platonic philosophy has no place for "true belief". You're anachronistically importing the standard analysis that is the basis of modern epistemology into Neoplatonism. Plotinus didn't think that beliefs were true or not based on whether they could be justified, knowledge is only ever directly obtained from the source by direct experience, you either know or you don't. Doxa are only ever "seemings"

https://as.nyu.edu/content/dam/nyu-as/faculty/documents/Plato's%20Doxa.pdf

[Anonymous No.21471472]

>>21468026
1. Alcibiades
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nDvzIOEyCe8

[Anonymous No.21471540]

>>21471375
Thanks for the clarification. I'll give the article a read. I wonder though, surely belief enters platonic epistemology at least in the sense of being a stepping stone. How else are we move from the cave to the sunlight unless we believe there could be more that what there seems to be?

[Anonymous No.21471549]

>>21465826
What are the prerequisites for this? Assume I'm a barely literate farmer. Will I fare okay?

[Anonymous No.21471567]

>>21471340
Looks like another anon pointed to something re: justified true belief, but I was gonna point out that both true belief and true belief with an account are rejected in Meno and Theaetetus as equivalent to knowledge.

[Anonymous No.21471584]

>>21471375
>>21471540
Immediately from the article I perceive that the sort of belief that would propell us to investigate the upper realm is a belief about the lower realm, the belief that there is more than the lower, world of becoming.

Give the truth of the Platonic position of belief, I'm given even more so to think that the creed produced by the trust is more for the satisfaction of minds that are thoroughly Christianised (I might say dogmatised) but yet that are thrusting for a unified pagan system to adhere to, which just isn't how classical pagan belief structures worked, let alone any given post Socratic school of philosophy. I still think the document is an interesting summary of a generalised neoplatonic position.

[Anonymous No.21471686]

>>21471549
>>21468026
>>21471472
2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xlbqM33klug

[Anonymous No.21471695]

>>21465826
Why should I read it?

[Anonymous No.21471702]

>>21471695
Why would you read anything? It has some pretty interesting insights that help to understand later philosophy and Christian theology. It'll also make you a little more well read so you can be an even more convincing pseud.

[Anonymous No.21471704]

>>21471695
>>21471549
I think a good question is what makes you interested about it? Try to describe what piques yours fancies.
I'll try my best to shill it to you if you want.

[Anonymous No.21471724]

>>21471704
>I think a good question is what makes you interested about it?
Neoplatonism is cool

[Anonymous No.21471739]

>>21471704
You're right, I could have phrased that better. Please shill it to me.

[Anonymous No.21471848]

I'm unemployed until possibly March, so this will be a nice way to spend my time.
>>21471702
But don't I risk loosing my pseud status if I actually read this instead of just arguing with anons while skimming the wikipedia page?

[Anonymous No.21471968]

I propose we read Proclus after, if this goes well.

[Anonymous No.21472168]

>>21471968
That would be cool. The Elements of Theology?
One step at a time though.

[Anonymous No.21472197]

>>21472168
>The Elements of Theology
Yes.
>One step at a time though.
True. I was probably getting ahead of myself.

[Anonymous No.21472221]

>>21471848
Perhaps with regards to the Enneads specifically, but you will remain a pseud in other respects. You can only lose your pseud status if you never speak about what you do not understand, and always act out what you believe to be true. It is possible for an illiterate caveman with no knowledge of any topic whatsoever to be the most genuine intellectual of all time, solely base on the aforementioned qualifications.

[Anonymous No.21472232]

>>21472168
+1 for Elements of Theology since I have a copy on my shelf I haven't gotten around to reading yet

[Anonymous No.21472237]

>>21468002
All these guys on youtube are complete hacks especially that "lets talk religion" guy. Skipped.

[Anonymous No.21472244]

Looks like this was a timely project since there's currently an ongoing collaboration among some Youtubers on Neoplatonism

https://youtu.be/vZEUo_sHoBw

[Anonymous No.21473268]

I'm ready

[Anonymous No.21473280]

>>21473268
The shelf of a true schizo

[Anonymous No.21473323]

>>21473268
Can you please tell me if your hardcover MacKenna translation has the binding glued or not?

[Anonymous No.21473349]

Just finished reading through Plato's Seventh Letter. Very interesting. Anyone know if Plotinus writes about the five types of things Plato alludes to? (names, definitions, images, knowledge, and forms)?

[Anonymous No.21473374]

>>21473323
The MacKenna is a sewn binding

[Anonymous No.21473389]

>>21473268
What are the blue books on the bottom self?

[Anonymous No.21473393]

>>21473389
Ficino's Platonic Theology

[Anonymous No.21473929]

>>21473268
>>21473393
if there ever was a redpill this guy took it

[Anonymous No.21474179]

Questions:
bros pls help me I have not properly done much of the prerequisite readings (honestly only dialogue that I've really read was the republic) and I'm kinda used to professors spoon feeding me necessarily background knowledge and explanations

I've read the First Tractate and had these questions:
First off does anyone have any recs for a reading guide or annotations or anything, haha. But also:

What are ideal forms? What is an animate?
Where do we have Discursive-Reasoning, Sense-Knowledge and Intellection?
What is Intellectual Principle?
Later sections makes distinction between Soul and Couplement- but isnt the couplement both the body and soul? Is this the higher/lower soul stuff?
What is the midpoint talked about in section 11?

[Anonymous No.21474880]

>>21474179
I really liked Plotinus: Road to Reality by Rist and Plotinus or Simplicity of Vision by Hadot. Anatomy of Neoplatonism is great. The bottom shelf has rose and some others. Reading Neoplatonism by Rappe is one of the most useful books on Neoplatonism that I have found for some purposes. I can post some other resources if you want.

[Anonymous No.21475671]

>>21474179
>What are ideal forms?
>only dialogue that I've really read was the republic
Answer is in The Republic. I recommended Phaedo also to help you.

As to where do we have Discursive- Reasoning and Intellection I'd say in the higher parts of our souls. Idk about 'sense-knolwedge', this is in the lower half of the Divided-Line I believe, thus one of our lower faculties.
The Intellectual-Principle is the second Plutarchian hypostasis, I understand it as the Divine Mind that conceives and contemplates perfectly the Forms.
Mid-point is an interesting one. I take it to mean a point exactly between our baser, more animal nature and our higher nature. (Maybe it could be compared to 'the heart' in other traditions?) At any rate its something which needs to be orientated 'upwards', that is towards the more refined, rational side of the Divided Line.
I'm no expert though, these are just my best guesses.

[Anonymous No.21475968]

Oh shit, /lit/ is reading this. I started the Guthrie translation and read like half the book in a week but stopped reading because life sucks. Guess I can't let lazy bastards like you outdo me. Getting back into it.
>>21474179
>What are ideal forms?
tl;dr is matter considered in itself is diffuse and incoherent, it becomes coherent when it conforms to a form but these forms don't just pop out of nowhere, they already exist as subtle, spiritual/conceptual (depending on your interpretation) universal forms that are perfect, immutable and eternal and which stamp their character on all coherent material things
>What is an animate?
No idea. Is that actually a thing? Maybe in the Guthrie translation this is translated differently, or I haven't reached this point yet.
>Where do we have Discursive-Reasoning, Sense-Knowledge and Intellection?
I think the other anon gave an acceptable answer here.
>What is Intellectual Principle?
Depends on context but I assume you mean in a cosmological sense in which case refer to pic rel (and your other knowledge of Plotinus).
>Later sections makes distinction between Soul and Couplement- but isnt the couplement both the body and soul? Is this the higher/lower soul stuff?
I have never seen this term in the Guthrie translation but I think you are referring to the organism. In Guthrie, this issue is discussed in the sense of the body (lifeless and material) coming in contact with the soul (where life is) which results in the organism (a composite union of the two, which does not deny the independence, autonomy and primacy of the soul but certainly affects it).
>What is the midpoint talked about in section 11?
Never heard this term either.

[Anonymous No.21475998]

>>21466005
Didn't he literally help by telling his students

[Anonymous No.21476089]

>>21475998
Yep. I think it's a deliberately skewed essay. It's typical of the Jesuits to misrepresent their opponents.

[Anonymous No.21476143]

>>21465826
He was wrong about gnostics.

[Anonymous No.21476343]

I want to read philosophy like this, but I'm too dumb.

[Anonymous No.21476359]

>>21476343
You can always suck juicy cocks, which is more interesting than philosophy

[Anonymous No.21476366]

>>21474179
Protip - Buy the Penguin edition. It's only abridged and is missing parts of tractates and entire tractates, but it has an excellent introduction that explains most of the terms. Alternatively you can go with Gersons edition and it has a comprehensive index of terms at the back to help you out.

But a problem you're going to have reading the Enneads is that it is NOT a systematic explanation of Plotinus philosophy. Every tractate assumes familiarity with the terms and philosophical worldview of Plotinus which means you basically need a secondary source to guide you as you go through it because Plotinus views on various things are scattered around the book randomly.

[Anonymous No.21476369]

>>21473268
>he even has commentary by Plotinus
I kneel...

[Anonymous No.21476391]

>>21475968
oh man yea I just found a guthrie translation online and it was infinitely easier to read, ty for the help!

[Anonymous No.21476398]

>>21476366
preciate the tips, was honestly just gonna use a translation I could find online; any chance u have any links youd rec? and do you think itd be worthwhile to read the enneads and just do supplemental research when I come across stuff I'm unfamiliar with, or better to do other readings first?

[Anonymous No.21476412]

>>21476398
Here's a text only version of MacKennas translation
http://classics.mit.edu/Plotinus/enneads.mb.txt

Here's a page where you can click through to specific tractates
https://www.john-uebersax.com/plato/enneads.htm

[Anonymous No.21476418]

>>21476398
Here's MacKenna's translation with his excellent introduction provided at the start

https://archive.org/details/plotinustheennea033190mbp/page/n25/mode/2up

[Anonymous No.21476436]

>>21476366
>It's only abridged and is missing parts of tractates and entire tractates,
Only just realising this. Ffs.

[Anonymous No.21476508]

>>21473268
Fuck off, platonist.

[Anonymous No.21476587]

Here's a hand-formatted epub of MacKenna's translation, but it does not contain any introduction.
https://www.globalgreyebooks.com/six-enneads-ebook.html

Gutenberg has a translation by Kenneth Sylvan Guthrie.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/author/33956?sort_order=title

Libgen reliably has epubs of Gerson's translation and his companion book.

[Anonymous No.21476662]

>>21476508
Nietzsche is the slave to Plato's master morality.

[Anonymous No.21477347]

Hi all. New to phil. Want to start reading it. A little book-club style thing like this seems like the perfect way to do that. Are the Enneads a good place to start, or do I need to be learned in other preceding philosophy like Plato, seeing as Plotinus is a notable neoplatonist? Thanks

[Anonymous No.21477452]

>>21477347
I reckon if you read Phaedo and Republic and an intro to Plotinus, (you could do worse than Henry's essay about Plotinus' role in the history of thought found in this edition >>21476418), you'd be alright. We'll help with questions along the way anyway. Have a look at the rest of the thread. There's quite a few good recommendations for prepatory reading as it is.
Honestly I don't find Plotinus all that complicated. Any philosopher who actually loves to communicate wisdom and investigate the truth usually does a good job of communicating ideas. It's only modern sophists more interested in self aggrandisement than truth that are obscure.

[Anonymous No.21477514]

>>21473268
One of the best shelfs I have ever seen in all my years of browsing /lit/.
>>21473393
I kneel.

[Anonymous No.21477826]

>>21473268
Why two copies of the Penguin edition?

[Anonymous No.21477836]

>>21477826
When I got the first one the pages at the beginning of "The Three Primary Hypostases" almost immediately ripped out because they weren't glued in properly. I keep it around because those 6 pages missing is really it's only defect.

[Anonymous No.21477896]

>>21465942
Thomas Taylor if you can find it.

[Anonymous No.21477903]

>>21477896
Thomas Taylors translation is notoriously bad though

[Anonymous No.21477998]

I'll give the preface a try. I've got an old tome from a uni library that closed last year.

[Anonymous No.21478475]

>>21476343
>read Plato
>don't understand?
>read more Plato
>done with Plato
>try to read Plotinus
>don't understand?
>read more Plotinus
>still don't understand?
>go back to Plato
>then go back to Plotinus (and maybe get some secondary literature on Aristotelian and Stoic elements in the philosophy of Plotinus)
>>21477347
If you try to read Plotinus without reading Plato you are probably going to die. Well, not really. But you'll feel like dying.

[Anonymous No.21478537]

>>21477452
>It's only modern sophists more interested in self aggrandisement than truth that are obscure.
"Parmenides appears to me at once, in the saying of Homer, "as awesome to me as uncanny." In fact, I once got together with the man when I was very young and he very old, and he appeared to me to have some altogether grand and noble depth. So I'm afraid that we']] fail as much to understand what he was saying as we'll fall far short of what he thought when he spoke..."
Socrates, Theaetetus 183e-184a

"To discover the maker and father of this universe were a task indeed; and having
discovered him, to declare him unto all men were a thing impossible."
Timaeus 28c

“Don’t you notice,” I said, “how great is the harm coming from the practice of
dialectic these days?” . . . “Surely its students . . . are filled full with lawlessness.”
Republic 537e

[Anonymous No.21479332]

how many people do you expect will be active in the thread during the first ennead?

[Anonymous No.21479614]

>>21477347
It's fairly difficult when he gets into the actual mechanics of the logic of substance and so forth. Some familiarity with the Greek terms and concepts (ousia, on, etc.) will go a long way. I find the Gerson et al. edition glossary helpful but insufficient. It doesn't quite explain the terms, it explains Plotinus' use of them, on the assumption that you already have a general knowledge of them. But at least it tells you how the terms are being consistently and systematically translated.

A lot of the writings you can understand pretty easily, like On Beauty. Some of the cosmological stuff you could probably hack through. It's mainly the nitty gritty concept analysis that will get you in certain parts, since Plotinus assumes not only familiarity with Plato (as revived by the Middle Platonists) and Aristotle (as revived by the neo-Peripatetics around Plotinus' time), but also the Stoic and Eclectic distillations of Platonic and Peripatetic concepts. This isn't to say he assumes a systematic or historiographical knowledge of all this, but that certain concepts, like substance and being, are so ubiquitous in these overlapping discourses that he treats them as starting points for any rigorous philosophical discussion.

Still, I would strongly encourage reading along and just doing your best. You don't have to understand everything, and you do have to start somewhere. Can't get much better than Plotinus. Even having a basic "feel" for the text from an initial half-understood reading will tremendously benefit you if you later develop your interest in classical philosophy. Plus, a Plotinus reading group is a pretty special thing. You're not going to find that on any university campus these days. It's cool that /lit/ is doing one.

[Anonymous No.21479932]

>>21479332
37 posters so far ITT. I'll bet 24 do the first few, but by the end probably only 5 - 10 will complete.
But people can pick and chose and try their best to follow along.

[Anonymous No.21480642]

Going to join in, great idea OP.

[Anonymous No.21480647]

>>21465944
same
>haven't visited /lit/ for few months since I have enough comfy reading on History of Religion and Sumerians
>downloaded few referenced books, decided to start with Plotinus today
>nothing interesting on catalogs of boards I usually read
>ok, I'll check /lit/, maybe there might be some interesting thread
>see this
Seems like God wants us to read it

[Anonymous No.21480835]

Anyone in the thread know any good books on Plato's unwritten doctrines?

[Anonymous No.21480843]

>>21465826

[Anonymous No.21480860]

>>21477903
Explain why.

[Anonymous No.21480935]

>>21480860
Nta, and never really seen Taylor's Plato translations, but a glance at the beginning of his rendering of the Republic appears to me to be accurate, a little peculiar in rendering Glaucon and Ariston as Glauco and Aristo (trying to be consistent in dropping the final "n" if we're calling Platon "Plato" I guess?). Only thing I'd note is he seems to translate casual dialogue as if they were speaking scientific nomenclature, so "your conjecture is not amiss" instead of the tonally better "your guess isn't wrong/that's not a bad guess" and "determine accordingly" instead "decide/choose accordingly". Ho hum.

[Anonymous No.21480961]

>>21480935
That's not scientific, that's just not speaking like a nigger like most people do these days. Victorians and Edwardians had lovely diction.

[Anonymous No.21481041]

>>21480860
He didn't have complete sources available so he had to try to fill in the blanks.

[Anonymous No.21481056]

>>21480860
His Iamblichus translation at least is not even English, it's quasi-Greek Taylorese

[Anonymous No.21481947]

No one reads on /lit/.