The History of Western Philosophy
Bertrand Russell
Ch IX Ecclesiastical Reform in the 11th Century
The level of education rose enormously in the clergy and considerably in the aristocracy during this time. The Normans had kicked out the Saracens from Sicily and curbed the activities of the Scandinavians with their conquests in France and England. Unlike the brief Carolingian renaissance, the gains made in the 11th century had some sticking power.
The reforms were primarily against simony and concubinage.
Simony was a sin, but it also meant that the bishops were selected based on wealth and not merit. And, bishoprics costing a fortune, the newly purchased position was then exploited to recoup the lost income in the purchase.
Clerical celibacy had been admired but was not routine. The imposition of celibacy on the priests made it impossible for a priest to pass Church lands on to his children and further removed the priests from the laity by showing the celibate life of the priest to be greater than the married life of the commonfolk.
The reform of the Church began primarily with monastic reform. The reform of the Papacy was more the work of the Emperor.
Emperor Henry III (1039-1056) deposed the pope Gregory VI, who though a reformer, had acquired the papacy by simony. Henry III would go on to appoint four popes and after the death of Henry III the papacy, which had its moral authority restored by the Emperor declared independence and then superiority over the emperor and two hundred years of tug-a-war ensued.
During the reign of Henry IV the selection of the Pope was codified to essential be a position chosen by the Cardinals, freezing the Emperor out. It was during Henry IV's reign that the investiture crisis began.
The philosophical activity of the 11th century came entirely from monks connected with the reform movement. They including Peter Damian, Berengar of Tours, Lanfranc and Saint Anselm.
Saint Anselm is most famous for the ontological argument, but he also had a foundation in Augustine and Plato. Through neoplatonic arguments he derived another proof for God and proof for Trinity. (Plotinus also had an argument for a trinity, though not one the Christian orthodox could accept).
Anselm, like most of his predecessors were more Platonic in their Christianity. After Aquinas, Christian philosophers became more Aristotelian. Roscelin, a younger contemporary of Anselm, marks the beginning of the Aristotelian bent and scholastic philosophy.
Showing posts with label Plotinus. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Plotinus. Show all posts
Saturday, September 28, 2019
Wednesday, September 25, 2019
Plotinus
The History of Western Philosophy
Bertrand Russell
Ch. XXX - Plotinus
Plotinus, founder of Neoplatonism lived from A.D. 204 - 270, possibly one of the worst times to live in the Roman Empire, full of war, pestilence and instability. His writings however, make no mention of it. Instead of studying the actual world and its miseries, he contemplated an eternal world of goodness and beauty.
"To all of them, Christians and pagans alike, the world of practical affairs seemed to offer no hope, and only the Other World seemed worthy of allegiance. To the Christian, the Other World was the Kingdom of Heaven, to be enjoyed after death; to the Platonist, it was the eternal world of ideas, the real world as opposed to that of illusory appearance. Christian theologians combined these points of view, and embodied much of the philosophy of Plotinus" (Russell, 284).
Plotinus is historically important as an influence in the Christianity of the Middle Ages and of Catholic theology. (Augustine noted that if Plotinus had been a little bit older or born in a different place he would have been called a Christian without too much change to his theories).
Plotinus is also important because he is an archetype for a melancholy optimist. His world was awful and rather than be dragged down by it he escaped it by contemplating happiness on a metaphysical level that is untouchable by the ravages of the real world surrounding him.
Plotinus also improved on Plato by clarifying him and his arguments against materialism are good.
Plotinus' works were edited and arranged by Porphyry who was more Pythagorean and thus, more supernatural than Plotinus. Neoplatonism took on the more supernatural angle of Porphyry in development.
Plotinus begins his metaphysical theory with The One, Spirit, and Soul. The One is similar to the God of Aristotle and is transcendent of everything. Spirit or nous is the image of the One. To know the One then one must study themselves and everything godlike in the Spirit.
Through divine possession and inspiration we can see not only the nous, but also the One. In contact with the One we cannot reason or express this vision in words, we can only do that after the fact.
Soul, lower than nous, is the author of all living things and the author of the created, visible world.
For Plotinus though, the visible world isn't evil. It is just less good than the world of nous.
Matter is created by Soul and matter has no independent reality. Soul desires to entire matter in something analogous to sexual desire. "When the soul leaves the body, it must enter another body if it has been sinful, for justice requires that it should be punished... Sin must be punished; but the punishment happens naturally, through the restless driving of the sinner's errors" (Russell, 292).
The goal of soul is to become one with nous, not in a destruction type of way. "Nous and the individual soul will be simultaneously two and one" (Russell, 293).
"The soul is neither matter nor the form of a material body, but Essence, and Essence is eternal. This view is implicit in Plato's argument that the soul is immortal because ideas are eternal; but it is only with Plotinus that it becomes explicit" (Russell, 293).
The soul desires to copy the creativity of the nous. The soul contemplates the inward realm of nous and seeks to produce something as akin to it as possible. Unfortunately, to create the soul joins itself to a body and cuts itself off from other souls and the nous.
Plotinus believed that the world was imperfect because it was copied from the forms. But, he does not think this is necessarily bad. The copy cannot be both a symbol of the real and the real itself. Therefore, the copy is good enough for us because it is the best copy that could be made.
Plotinus does have to deal with sin because he suggests against determinists and astrologers that sin is the result of free will.
Plotinus marks both a beginning and an end for Russell. He is an end of Greek thought and a beginning to Christendom.
Bertrand Russell
Ch. XXX - Plotinus
Plotinus, founder of Neoplatonism lived from A.D. 204 - 270, possibly one of the worst times to live in the Roman Empire, full of war, pestilence and instability. His writings however, make no mention of it. Instead of studying the actual world and its miseries, he contemplated an eternal world of goodness and beauty.
"To all of them, Christians and pagans alike, the world of practical affairs seemed to offer no hope, and only the Other World seemed worthy of allegiance. To the Christian, the Other World was the Kingdom of Heaven, to be enjoyed after death; to the Platonist, it was the eternal world of ideas, the real world as opposed to that of illusory appearance. Christian theologians combined these points of view, and embodied much of the philosophy of Plotinus" (Russell, 284).
Plotinus is historically important as an influence in the Christianity of the Middle Ages and of Catholic theology. (Augustine noted that if Plotinus had been a little bit older or born in a different place he would have been called a Christian without too much change to his theories).
Plotinus is also important because he is an archetype for a melancholy optimist. His world was awful and rather than be dragged down by it he escaped it by contemplating happiness on a metaphysical level that is untouchable by the ravages of the real world surrounding him.
Plotinus also improved on Plato by clarifying him and his arguments against materialism are good.
Plotinus' works were edited and arranged by Porphyry who was more Pythagorean and thus, more supernatural than Plotinus. Neoplatonism took on the more supernatural angle of Porphyry in development.
Plotinus begins his metaphysical theory with The One, Spirit, and Soul. The One is similar to the God of Aristotle and is transcendent of everything. Spirit or nous is the image of the One. To know the One then one must study themselves and everything godlike in the Spirit.
Through divine possession and inspiration we can see not only the nous, but also the One. In contact with the One we cannot reason or express this vision in words, we can only do that after the fact.
Soul, lower than nous, is the author of all living things and the author of the created, visible world.
For Plotinus though, the visible world isn't evil. It is just less good than the world of nous.
Matter is created by Soul and matter has no independent reality. Soul desires to entire matter in something analogous to sexual desire. "When the soul leaves the body, it must enter another body if it has been sinful, for justice requires that it should be punished... Sin must be punished; but the punishment happens naturally, through the restless driving of the sinner's errors" (Russell, 292).
The goal of soul is to become one with nous, not in a destruction type of way. "Nous and the individual soul will be simultaneously two and one" (Russell, 293).
"The soul is neither matter nor the form of a material body, but Essence, and Essence is eternal. This view is implicit in Plato's argument that the soul is immortal because ideas are eternal; but it is only with Plotinus that it becomes explicit" (Russell, 293).
The soul desires to copy the creativity of the nous. The soul contemplates the inward realm of nous and seeks to produce something as akin to it as possible. Unfortunately, to create the soul joins itself to a body and cuts itself off from other souls and the nous.
Plotinus believed that the world was imperfect because it was copied from the forms. But, he does not think this is necessarily bad. The copy cannot be both a symbol of the real and the real itself. Therefore, the copy is good enough for us because it is the best copy that could be made.
Plotinus does have to deal with sin because he suggests against determinists and astrologers that sin is the result of free will.
Plotinus marks both a beginning and an end for Russell. He is an end of Greek thought and a beginning to Christendom.
Saturday, March 17, 2007
Univocal, Equivocal, Analogous and Negative Language
(Originally written March 17, 2007 in Book 13)
From Unity to Multiplicity
All multiplicity presupposes some prior unity, thus there must be some absolute simplicity as the source of all multiplicity. God is this absolute simplicity.
God does not have being because being involves multiplicity.
God is the One beyond all being.
Creation is the process of the One becoming multiplicity. When it gains knowledge of itself it creates mind. The Mind produces other minds when minds reflect outwards it creates Soul and Soul gives rises to other souls.
Souls create matter. Matter is the most multiplicity.
Being is good; matter is evil. Matter possesses no good in it, only the mere capacity for good.
Eventually all multiplicity will return to unity and evil will give way to good.
From Multiplicity to Unity
Humans are matter and soul, thus good and evil.
In order to travel towrads unity a person must turn from the multiplicity of matter to the unity of soul. Hue must become ascetic.
The Soul must move from what is sensible to what is intellectual. For, what is intellectual is touched by Mind which is almost pure unity.
Once one has achieved union with mind by moving from sensible to intellectual one must move from intellectual to intuitional to achieve whole unity because even mind is multiplicity (knower and known).
The goal is to become one with the One.
The Need for Negative Language of the One (God)
Plotinus states that there can be no positive descriptions about the One.
All the properties Plotinus ascribes the One he denies that he has.
In calling God the One he means, "not many". In calling him good he means, "not evil". But the One is not the first of any series and the One is not good in the sense that anything else is good.
"The One is nothing but itself and cannot be named in terms of anything else" (237).
Plotinus maintains that we "know" God via two ways:
1. Indirectly from his effects
2. by direct mystical intuitions which transcend all cognitive knowledge and provides a positive being for all cognitive negations of God.
Naming God from his Emanational Effects
All that comes from the One is a trace of the transcendent ONe.
If something comes from the One that is beauty then we can God is beautiful in the sense that He causally creates beauty. Thus, his effect is beauty and he therefore is Beauty, but greater.
God is called goodness because causes goodness, not because he possesses goodness.
Unity (God) is beyond Being because he caused being.
The intuitional basis for all naming of God
Giving God positive names from his extrinsically related effects does not provide any proper knowledge of God.
Rational and cognitive through can only point in the direction of God who is knowable only by mystical intuition.
Intuitional knowledge of God comes by purification of all multiplicity and the knower becomes one with the One in a temporary mystical union.
Negative language about God is wholly dependent on a prior positive intuition of God gained via mystical union with the One.
Pseudo-Dionysius brought Plotinus to Christianity in the 6th century A.D.
He affirmed the incomprehensibility of God. He stated God cannot be known directly but He can be known indirectly 3 ways:
1. Affirmation of the God of the Bible (positive theology)
2. Deny that these qualities apply to God in the same sense they apply to the created order (negative theology)
3. Apply these terms to God in a higher way
Moses Maimonides: Negative Attributes of God
Maimonides believed that the literal interpretations of Scripture were the heart of all problematic theology.
The way to positively attribute something to God
He had five ways to attribute a positive quality of God. The first four he felt inconsistent with the monotheistic God of Judaism. So he worked out the fifth way.
1. An object is described by its definition
2. An object is described by part of its definition
3. An object is described by something other than its true essence
4. An object is described by its relation to another object
5. An object is described by its action.
He claimed that Biblical language is anthropomorphic.
The knowledge o the works of God is the knowledge of His attributes.
The Use of Negative Attributes to Describe God
Maimonides held that negative attributes of God are true attributes and that positive attributes imply polytheism.
The function of negative attributes is that they are necessary to direct the mind to the truths necessary to believe concerning God. With each negative attribute learned one inches closer to knowledge of God.
He held that only YHWH indicates God's true essence and its meaning is wholly unknowable.
Mysticism: Ineffability
A definition of Mysticism
F.C. Haploid outlined the nature of mysticism in four points:
1. The phenomenal world is a manifestation of an Absolute and as such this world is not true reality. Only the Absolute is true reality.
2. Human beings can know the Absolute by a direct intuition. In this intuition a union between the human and the absolute occurs.
3. This intuition is a unique function of the true human self, which is usually obscured by the phenomenal self.
4. The possibility is the main goal of human existence and is the door to the experience of ultimate reality.
William James described the mystical union with four points:
1. Ineffability - the experience cannot be contained in words
2. Noetic quality - The impression of having received absolute truth is part of the experience
3. Transiency - The experience will not last very long
4. Passivity - The experience is received by or given to the person. He does not create it.
The mystic does not allow for a difference between the experience of the Absolute and the Absolute.
In the way one cannot doubt he is having a headache, a mystic cannot doubt he is having (or had) a mystical experience.
The problem with mystical experiences is that no one who has not had a mystical experience can know what it is like. Secondly, the mystic cannot describe it because it is ineffable by nature.
Stace's Theories of Ineffability
W.T. Stace provides a number of theories on ineffable experiences:
1. The emotion theory: mystical experience is ineffable because it essentially contains emotions that are too deep for words.
2. The spiritual blindness theory: mystical experience is ineffable because those who have not had it cannot understand it.
Stace rejects these two common sense theories because
a) mystical experience is not merely an empirical perception that must be held to understand
b) mystics themselves admit that it is ineffable, not the fault of their audience
c) The Dionysian Theory: positive language does not apply literally. God is described as "X" because he causes "X", not because he is "X".
d) The Metaphor theory: positive language is merely metaphorical
But, Stace rejects these four as well because if the mystic speaks metaphorically he uses either reducible metaphors (reducible to literal understanding) in which case it is not ineffable or irreducible metaphors in which case he speakings meaninglessly. He rejects c) because it is odd to label the cause of a property with the name of that property.
e) They mystic, during his experience is beyond words, but in describing his experience he is forced to use words which describe his experience as contradictory. But, while this makes it something ineffable, mystical experiences are in fact somewhat contradictory. "The language is paradoxical because the experience is paradoxical" (249).
Thomas Aquinas: Via Negativa
Thomas Aquinas agreed with Maimonides that no one in this life could grasp the essence of God in a positive way.
The knowledge of God by remotion is Aquinas' process of deriving the distinction of God from other beings by way of negative differences.
A creature can be admitted to be God-like but God cannot be creature-like.
Aquinas did hold that one can make position affirmations about God through intrinsic causal similarities between God and his creatures.
The via negativa is the denial of any imperfections in him.
The idea of negation is always based on a positive affirmation.
Positive affirmation are made possible by the intrinsic causal relation between Creator and creatures.
A totally negative God-talk is meaningless.
Complete negation without any affirmation is total skepticism about God.
But, without some kind of negation there is no way to preserve the transcendence of the theistic God.
12: Positive Language About God
There are two basic attempts to develop positive language about God:
1. Univocal (Scotus)
2. Analogous (Aquinas)
The Scotistic Insistence on Univocal Concepts
John Duns Scotus maintained that there can be no meaningful positive talk bout God unless it is univocal.
The Impossibility of Analogous Concepts
Henry of Ghent defended his "analogous concept of being" while Scotus was alive.
Henry claimed that God is known in a universal concept that is analogically common to himself and to creatures.
He claimed that God and creatures are distinguishable by negation of determination. Man is determined, God is undetermined.
Scotus rejects this on a few grounds
1. Differentiation by negation is no different at all
2. The concept of Henry's analogous concept is two concepts and thus equivocal
The Necessity of Univocal Concepts of God
Scouts chose univocal language because it avoids skepticism and meaninglessness.
Univocal to Scotus is that which possess sufficient unity in itself.
He gives four arguments to why concepts of God and man must be understood univocally:
1) The intellect can be certain about the concept of being without knowing it refers to created or uncreated being.
2) It is impossible to have natural knowledge of God without univocal concepts. We have natural knowledge of God. Thus, there are univocal concepts.
3) We would have no proper concept of God without univocal concepts. We have a proper concept of the Trinity, thus of God. Thus, we have univocal concepts.
4) Pure perfection applies wholly proper to God and not to creatures. Thus there must be universal understanding of pure perfection.
Scotus held that if there is no univocity in concepts of God there is no knowledge of God.
Scotus held that there is equivocal talk about God, which is meaningless. There is analogous talk about God which is either equivocal or univocal. If it is equivocal it is meaningless. If it is univocal it is not really analogical.
Thomistic Contention for Analogous Predication
Aquinas held that it was impossible for anything to be predicated of God and a creature in a univocal sense.
Aquinas' rejection of Univocal Predication
Aquinas had 6 arguments against univocality
1. Nothing may be said if God and other things univocally because the forms of the things God has made do not measure up to any specific likeness of God.
2. No creature has the same mode as God thus nothing can be predicated of God and other things universally.
3. Whatever is predicated of many things is a genus or species, but there exists no genus or species of God.
4. Whatever is predicated of many things univocally is simpler in concept than that which it is predicated of. God is wholly simple, thus there can be nothing predicated of God univocally.
5. Whatever is predicated univocally in many things belongs through participation to each of things of which it is predicated. But nothing participates with God, only through God.
6. Nothing is predicated of God and creation in the same order, but rather according to priority and posteriority.
Aquinas also argued that the difference between an infinitely perfect being an a finitely perfect being is infinite and thus, there can be no univocal predication of such beings.
The Need for the Via Negative
God cannot possess perfections in the way crated things possess them.
Properly speaking God dos not posses the properties of perfections; those perfections are the very essence of God.
Univocal predication removes the necessary distance between Creator and created. If any property were univocally attributed to God and created thing it would either limit God or delimit the created thing.
Aquinas' Rejecting of Equivocal Predication
Both Aquinas and Scotus agreed that equivocal predication lends no knowledge of God.
He held that if all knowledge of God came from equivocal terms then there would be no chance of rising from finite things to the infinite.
Equivocal language is false because if it were true there would be nothing known or demonstrable about God.
From Unity to Multiplicity
All multiplicity presupposes some prior unity, thus there must be some absolute simplicity as the source of all multiplicity. God is this absolute simplicity.
God does not have being because being involves multiplicity.
God is the One beyond all being.
Creation is the process of the One becoming multiplicity. When it gains knowledge of itself it creates mind. The Mind produces other minds when minds reflect outwards it creates Soul and Soul gives rises to other souls.
Souls create matter. Matter is the most multiplicity.
Being is good; matter is evil. Matter possesses no good in it, only the mere capacity for good.
Eventually all multiplicity will return to unity and evil will give way to good.
From Multiplicity to Unity
Humans are matter and soul, thus good and evil.
In order to travel towrads unity a person must turn from the multiplicity of matter to the unity of soul. Hue must become ascetic.
The Soul must move from what is sensible to what is intellectual. For, what is intellectual is touched by Mind which is almost pure unity.
Once one has achieved union with mind by moving from sensible to intellectual one must move from intellectual to intuitional to achieve whole unity because even mind is multiplicity (knower and known).
The goal is to become one with the One.
The Need for Negative Language of the One (God)
Plotinus states that there can be no positive descriptions about the One.
All the properties Plotinus ascribes the One he denies that he has.
In calling God the One he means, "not many". In calling him good he means, "not evil". But the One is not the first of any series and the One is not good in the sense that anything else is good.
"The One is nothing but itself and cannot be named in terms of anything else" (237).
Plotinus maintains that we "know" God via two ways:
1. Indirectly from his effects
2. by direct mystical intuitions which transcend all cognitive knowledge and provides a positive being for all cognitive negations of God.
Naming God from his Emanational Effects
All that comes from the One is a trace of the transcendent ONe.
If something comes from the One that is beauty then we can God is beautiful in the sense that He causally creates beauty. Thus, his effect is beauty and he therefore is Beauty, but greater.
God is called goodness because causes goodness, not because he possesses goodness.
Unity (God) is beyond Being because he caused being.
The intuitional basis for all naming of God
Giving God positive names from his extrinsically related effects does not provide any proper knowledge of God.
Rational and cognitive through can only point in the direction of God who is knowable only by mystical intuition.
Intuitional knowledge of God comes by purification of all multiplicity and the knower becomes one with the One in a temporary mystical union.
Negative language about God is wholly dependent on a prior positive intuition of God gained via mystical union with the One.
Pseudo-Dionysius brought Plotinus to Christianity in the 6th century A.D.
He affirmed the incomprehensibility of God. He stated God cannot be known directly but He can be known indirectly 3 ways:
1. Affirmation of the God of the Bible (positive theology)
2. Deny that these qualities apply to God in the same sense they apply to the created order (negative theology)
3. Apply these terms to God in a higher way
Moses Maimonides: Negative Attributes of God
Maimonides believed that the literal interpretations of Scripture were the heart of all problematic theology.
The way to positively attribute something to God
He had five ways to attribute a positive quality of God. The first four he felt inconsistent with the monotheistic God of Judaism. So he worked out the fifth way.
1. An object is described by its definition
2. An object is described by part of its definition
3. An object is described by something other than its true essence
4. An object is described by its relation to another object
5. An object is described by its action.
He claimed that Biblical language is anthropomorphic.
The knowledge o the works of God is the knowledge of His attributes.
The Use of Negative Attributes to Describe God
Maimonides held that negative attributes of God are true attributes and that positive attributes imply polytheism.
The function of negative attributes is that they are necessary to direct the mind to the truths necessary to believe concerning God. With each negative attribute learned one inches closer to knowledge of God.
He held that only YHWH indicates God's true essence and its meaning is wholly unknowable.
Mysticism: Ineffability
A definition of Mysticism
F.C. Haploid outlined the nature of mysticism in four points:
1. The phenomenal world is a manifestation of an Absolute and as such this world is not true reality. Only the Absolute is true reality.
2. Human beings can know the Absolute by a direct intuition. In this intuition a union between the human and the absolute occurs.
3. This intuition is a unique function of the true human self, which is usually obscured by the phenomenal self.
4. The possibility is the main goal of human existence and is the door to the experience of ultimate reality.
William James described the mystical union with four points:
1. Ineffability - the experience cannot be contained in words
2. Noetic quality - The impression of having received absolute truth is part of the experience
3. Transiency - The experience will not last very long
4. Passivity - The experience is received by or given to the person. He does not create it.
The mystic does not allow for a difference between the experience of the Absolute and the Absolute.
In the way one cannot doubt he is having a headache, a mystic cannot doubt he is having (or had) a mystical experience.
The problem with mystical experiences is that no one who has not had a mystical experience can know what it is like. Secondly, the mystic cannot describe it because it is ineffable by nature.
Stace's Theories of Ineffability
W.T. Stace provides a number of theories on ineffable experiences:
1. The emotion theory: mystical experience is ineffable because it essentially contains emotions that are too deep for words.
2. The spiritual blindness theory: mystical experience is ineffable because those who have not had it cannot understand it.
Stace rejects these two common sense theories because
a) mystical experience is not merely an empirical perception that must be held to understand
b) mystics themselves admit that it is ineffable, not the fault of their audience
c) The Dionysian Theory: positive language does not apply literally. God is described as "X" because he causes "X", not because he is "X".
d) The Metaphor theory: positive language is merely metaphorical
But, Stace rejects these four as well because if the mystic speaks metaphorically he uses either reducible metaphors (reducible to literal understanding) in which case it is not ineffable or irreducible metaphors in which case he speakings meaninglessly. He rejects c) because it is odd to label the cause of a property with the name of that property.
e) They mystic, during his experience is beyond words, but in describing his experience he is forced to use words which describe his experience as contradictory. But, while this makes it something ineffable, mystical experiences are in fact somewhat contradictory. "The language is paradoxical because the experience is paradoxical" (249).
Thomas Aquinas: Via Negativa
Thomas Aquinas agreed with Maimonides that no one in this life could grasp the essence of God in a positive way.
The knowledge of God by remotion is Aquinas' process of deriving the distinction of God from other beings by way of negative differences.
A creature can be admitted to be God-like but God cannot be creature-like.
Aquinas did hold that one can make position affirmations about God through intrinsic causal similarities between God and his creatures.
The via negativa is the denial of any imperfections in him.
The idea of negation is always based on a positive affirmation.
Positive affirmation are made possible by the intrinsic causal relation between Creator and creatures.
A totally negative God-talk is meaningless.
Complete negation without any affirmation is total skepticism about God.
But, without some kind of negation there is no way to preserve the transcendence of the theistic God.
12: Positive Language About God
There are two basic attempts to develop positive language about God:
1. Univocal (Scotus)
2. Analogous (Aquinas)
The Scotistic Insistence on Univocal Concepts
John Duns Scotus maintained that there can be no meaningful positive talk bout God unless it is univocal.
The Impossibility of Analogous Concepts
Henry of Ghent defended his "analogous concept of being" while Scotus was alive.
Henry claimed that God is known in a universal concept that is analogically common to himself and to creatures.
He claimed that God and creatures are distinguishable by negation of determination. Man is determined, God is undetermined.
Scotus rejects this on a few grounds
1. Differentiation by negation is no different at all
2. The concept of Henry's analogous concept is two concepts and thus equivocal
The Necessity of Univocal Concepts of God
Scouts chose univocal language because it avoids skepticism and meaninglessness.
Univocal to Scotus is that which possess sufficient unity in itself.
He gives four arguments to why concepts of God and man must be understood univocally:
1) The intellect can be certain about the concept of being without knowing it refers to created or uncreated being.
2) It is impossible to have natural knowledge of God without univocal concepts. We have natural knowledge of God. Thus, there are univocal concepts.
3) We would have no proper concept of God without univocal concepts. We have a proper concept of the Trinity, thus of God. Thus, we have univocal concepts.
4) Pure perfection applies wholly proper to God and not to creatures. Thus there must be universal understanding of pure perfection.
Scotus held that if there is no univocity in concepts of God there is no knowledge of God.
Scotus held that there is equivocal talk about God, which is meaningless. There is analogous talk about God which is either equivocal or univocal. If it is equivocal it is meaningless. If it is univocal it is not really analogical.
Thomistic Contention for Analogous Predication
Aquinas held that it was impossible for anything to be predicated of God and a creature in a univocal sense.
Aquinas' rejection of Univocal Predication
Aquinas had 6 arguments against univocality
1. Nothing may be said if God and other things univocally because the forms of the things God has made do not measure up to any specific likeness of God.
2. No creature has the same mode as God thus nothing can be predicated of God and other things universally.
3. Whatever is predicated of many things is a genus or species, but there exists no genus or species of God.
4. Whatever is predicated of many things univocally is simpler in concept than that which it is predicated of. God is wholly simple, thus there can be nothing predicated of God univocally.
5. Whatever is predicated univocally in many things belongs through participation to each of things of which it is predicated. But nothing participates with God, only through God.
6. Nothing is predicated of God and creation in the same order, but rather according to priority and posteriority.
Aquinas also argued that the difference between an infinitely perfect being an a finitely perfect being is infinite and thus, there can be no univocal predication of such beings.
The Need for the Via Negative
God cannot possess perfections in the way crated things possess them.
Properly speaking God dos not posses the properties of perfections; those perfections are the very essence of God.
Univocal predication removes the necessary distance between Creator and created. If any property were univocally attributed to God and created thing it would either limit God or delimit the created thing.
Aquinas' Rejecting of Equivocal Predication
Both Aquinas and Scotus agreed that equivocal predication lends no knowledge of God.
He held that if all knowledge of God came from equivocal terms then there would be no chance of rising from finite things to the infinite.
Equivocal language is false because if it were true there would be nothing known or demonstrable about God.
Friday, March 16, 2007
More Notes on God-Language
(Originally written March 16, 2007 in Book 13)
Some Attempts at Building an Adequate Religious Language
Negative Language of God
The classic example of Negative theology in the West is Plotinus.
Plotinus felt that the One was so far beyond sensibility and intellectual awareness that it could never be spoken of or written about.
Negative religious assertions avoid verbal idolatry.
Finite concepts cannot be applied to an infinite Being.
But, the problem with Negative language is that it presupposes some positive understanding.
Univocal Language of God
John Duns Scotus believed that language used to describe finite creatures are wholly different then that describing the infinite.
He maintained that unless there is univocity in concepts of God there can be no certain knowledge of God.
Analogous Language about God
Thomas Aquinas pointed out the problem with univocal language. He showed that a created concept cannot be expressed univocally about an uncreated Being.
Aquinas advocated analogous language about God to avoid total skepticism and complete dogmatics.
If language is univocal, having a totally different meaning then we have no true knowledge of God.
He held that finite concepts are adequate in describing God if their finitude can be removed, that is to say if we can remove the limitations of concepts (like goodness, justice, etc.). Then we can apply them to God.
Model Language about God
Analogy of intrinsic attribution has not been widely accepted outside of Thomistic circles.
Frederick Ferré offered six objections to analogous language
1. A wholly extrinsic analogy says nothing about the intrinsic properties of God
2. If there is an extrinsic causal relation between God and the world, why are not all qualities drawn from the world applicable to God?
3. When words are disengaged from their finite mode of signification and applied to God they become meaningless.
4. Analogy is based on the challengeable assumption that the causal relation assumption that the causal relation between God and the world provides a basis for their similarity.
5. Even if analogy could be based on some Platonic ontological similarity between cause and effect, properties dawn from finite creatures could not be attributed to an infinite creature in a univocal sense and if they were attributed in a non-univocal sense then it is an equivocation of the word "cause".
6. If the ontology of similarity is not univocally expressed, it is an infinite regress of equivocations. If it is univocal then there is no need of analogy.
Ian T. Ramsey claims God is revealed via disclosure models.
"Disclosure models are the means by which the inverse reveals itself to men" (227).
Disclosure models point to mystery and allow one to speak about God, even if one cannot describe him.
While disclosure models are not ontologically they help to build 'family resemblances'.
In the disclosure model approach, God-language is the result of family resemblances built out of disclosure models integrated into the term, "God".
Autonomous Language about God
This movement denies that religious language needs to be judged by scientific or any other type of language.
In using Wittgenstein concepts they hold that one who is not religious cannot pass judgment on the meaningfulness of the religious language game.
D.Z. Phillips argued that the believer is under no obligation to the unbeliever to account for his beliefs, but the believer cannot impeach the non-believer's non belief on rational grounds.
Under Phillips' context religious language is justified internally, not externally.
Many believers and nonbelievers are unsatisfied with using Wittgenstein's concepts because it makes religious language completely isolated and some argue completely non-cognitive.
The basic problem of religious language is how one can speak meaningfully about God (infinite) by using finite concepts.
Mystics use the "via negative" - no positive affirmations about God are possible.
Scouts and others argue that if there are no positive assertions about God we are left with utter skepticism.
Thomas's argue that finite concepts have only an analogous meaning to the infinite.
11: Negative Religious Language
Negation has been used in philosophical though since Plato
Plato: Determination and Non-Being
The Parmenidean Problem
Parmenides was the first monist.
He held that there can be only One Being in the Universe because if there is more than One being they must differ by something (being) or nothing (non-being). They cannot differ by non-being because they wouldn't differ. They cannot differ by being because that is the only respect that they are similar. Thus, there is only one Being.
Plato's answer to the Parmenidean Problem
Plato held that things differ from each other by negation. A horse is not a chair.
There are two problems with Plato's negation:
1. One must have a positive understanding of what a chair is if a horse is not a chair.
2. All possibilities of a things characteristics must be negated before that this is truly known.
But, Plato, by placing all differences through negation only left differences in being as not happening. Thus everything that has being is identical and Monism necessarily follows.
Plotinus - Negation by Intuition of the Beyond-Being
Plotinus held that being had degrees and kinds, unlike Parmenides' assumption that being was pure and simple.
A brief sketch of the Plotinus' Solution
"The way things differ is by the degree of unity they have. The more unity something has, the higher degree of being it possess".
All Being begins with absolute unity, which is God.
Some Attempts at Building an Adequate Religious Language
Negative Language of God
The classic example of Negative theology in the West is Plotinus.
Plotinus felt that the One was so far beyond sensibility and intellectual awareness that it could never be spoken of or written about.
Negative religious assertions avoid verbal idolatry.
Finite concepts cannot be applied to an infinite Being.
But, the problem with Negative language is that it presupposes some positive understanding.
Univocal Language of God
John Duns Scotus believed that language used to describe finite creatures are wholly different then that describing the infinite.
He maintained that unless there is univocity in concepts of God there can be no certain knowledge of God.
Analogous Language about God
Thomas Aquinas pointed out the problem with univocal language. He showed that a created concept cannot be expressed univocally about an uncreated Being.
Aquinas advocated analogous language about God to avoid total skepticism and complete dogmatics.
If language is univocal, having a totally different meaning then we have no true knowledge of God.
He held that finite concepts are adequate in describing God if their finitude can be removed, that is to say if we can remove the limitations of concepts (like goodness, justice, etc.). Then we can apply them to God.
Model Language about God
Analogy of intrinsic attribution has not been widely accepted outside of Thomistic circles.
Frederick Ferré offered six objections to analogous language
1. A wholly extrinsic analogy says nothing about the intrinsic properties of God
2. If there is an extrinsic causal relation between God and the world, why are not all qualities drawn from the world applicable to God?
3. When words are disengaged from their finite mode of signification and applied to God they become meaningless.
4. Analogy is based on the challengeable assumption that the causal relation assumption that the causal relation between God and the world provides a basis for their similarity.
5. Even if analogy could be based on some Platonic ontological similarity between cause and effect, properties dawn from finite creatures could not be attributed to an infinite creature in a univocal sense and if they were attributed in a non-univocal sense then it is an equivocation of the word "cause".
6. If the ontology of similarity is not univocally expressed, it is an infinite regress of equivocations. If it is univocal then there is no need of analogy.
Ian T. Ramsey claims God is revealed via disclosure models.
"Disclosure models are the means by which the inverse reveals itself to men" (227).
Disclosure models point to mystery and allow one to speak about God, even if one cannot describe him.
While disclosure models are not ontologically they help to build 'family resemblances'.
In the disclosure model approach, God-language is the result of family resemblances built out of disclosure models integrated into the term, "God".
Autonomous Language about God
This movement denies that religious language needs to be judged by scientific or any other type of language.
In using Wittgenstein concepts they hold that one who is not religious cannot pass judgment on the meaningfulness of the religious language game.
D.Z. Phillips argued that the believer is under no obligation to the unbeliever to account for his beliefs, but the believer cannot impeach the non-believer's non belief on rational grounds.
Under Phillips' context religious language is justified internally, not externally.
Many believers and nonbelievers are unsatisfied with using Wittgenstein's concepts because it makes religious language completely isolated and some argue completely non-cognitive.
The basic problem of religious language is how one can speak meaningfully about God (infinite) by using finite concepts.
Mystics use the "via negative" - no positive affirmations about God are possible.
Scouts and others argue that if there are no positive assertions about God we are left with utter skepticism.
Thomas's argue that finite concepts have only an analogous meaning to the infinite.
11: Negative Religious Language
Negation has been used in philosophical though since Plato
Plato: Determination and Non-Being
The Parmenidean Problem
Parmenides was the first monist.
He held that there can be only One Being in the Universe because if there is more than One being they must differ by something (being) or nothing (non-being). They cannot differ by non-being because they wouldn't differ. They cannot differ by being because that is the only respect that they are similar. Thus, there is only one Being.
Plato's answer to the Parmenidean Problem
Plato held that things differ from each other by negation. A horse is not a chair.
There are two problems with Plato's negation:
1. One must have a positive understanding of what a chair is if a horse is not a chair.
2. All possibilities of a things characteristics must be negated before that this is truly known.
But, Plato, by placing all differences through negation only left differences in being as not happening. Thus everything that has being is identical and Monism necessarily follows.
Plotinus - Negation by Intuition of the Beyond-Being
Plotinus held that being had degrees and kinds, unlike Parmenides' assumption that being was pure and simple.
A brief sketch of the Plotinus' Solution
"The way things differ is by the degree of unity they have. The more unity something has, the higher degree of being it possess".
All Being begins with absolute unity, which is God.
Wednesday, March 7, 2007
Cosmological Proofs
(Originally written March 7, 2007 in Book 13)
8. Cosmological Argument
The teleological, moral and ontological argument for the existence of God must borrow from the cosmological argument to be valid.
Even if the cosmological argument fails (an thus all theistic proofs fail) belief in God may still be credible, but it will not be philosophically demonstrable.
Plato is credited with the first cosmological argument or etiological argument (argument from a cause).
Plato's Argument for a World Soul
1. Things move
2. Whatever moves, is moved by another or is self-moved
3. Self-movers (souls) are prior to non-self movers, for the antecedent is logically prior to the consequent.
4. Self-movers must be eternal or else there would be no motion.
5. There is motion
6. There must be at least two self-movers:
- good - accounts for regular motion
- evil - accounts for irregular motion
7. Therefore, there is a supreme soul (God) who is the self-mover of the good in the universe.
Aristotle's unmoved mover
1. Things do change
2. All change is a passing from potentiality to actuality
3. No potentiality can actualize itself
4. Therefore, the must be an actuality that actualizes everything, that passes from potentiality to actuality.
5. An infinite regress of actualizers is impossible.
6. The first actuality actualizes everything by final causality
7. There are 47 or 55 of these pure actualities
8. Ultimately, there is only on heaven and one God.
The God of Plato and Aristotle was not the theistic God. It took much refinement to move the cosmological argument to a theistic proof.
Plotinus, a neo-platonist had a cosmological argument
1. Many beings exist.
2. All multiplicity is based on prior unity
3. There must be an absolute unity that is the basis for all multiplicity.
4. This absolute union cannot be a being
5. Therefore, there is an absolute unity (the One) beyond being which is the source of all being and multiplicity.
Plotinus' God was different from the Christian God in a number of aspects
1. Plotinus' God created ex deo (out of himself), not ex nihilo
2. Plotinus' God was beyond all being and positive description
3. It possessed no perfections or characteristics in intel.
Augustine's Argument from Truth
Augustine retooled the Platonic and neo-platonic argument this way:
1. There are timeless and immutable truths
- Absolute doubt is impossible (we know we are doubting)
- We know that we exist
2. Immutable truth cannot be caused
- by sensible things
- by finite minds
3. Therefore, there must be a timeless and immutable mind causing these immutable truths.
Augustine held that God causes truth in every person's mind. Thus, whenever a person affirms truth, he implicitly affirms the Truth (God).
Anselm's Three Cosmological Type arguments
While Anselm is most famous for his ontological argument his earlier work, The Monologian, offered three a posteriori proofs for God's existence
Arg. 1
1. Good things exist
2. Their goodness is derived either from many different goodnesses or from one goodness.
3. It cannot be derived from many goodnesses, for then there would be no way to compare goodnesses and all things would be equally and unequally good (which is absurd), but as a matter of fact some things are better than others.
4. Therefore, all things derive their goodness through one good.
5. This one good is the supreme good, since:
- it is the good through which all other goods derive their goodness
- it is good through itself alone
2nd Form
1) Some beings are more nearly perfect than others
2) Things annoy be more nearly perfect unless there is a wholly perfect.
3) Therefore, there must be a most perfect being.
3rd Form:
1) Something exists (the denial of this is contradictory)
2) Whatever exists, exists either through something or through nothing.
3) Something cannot exist through nothing.
4) This something through which something exists is either one or many.
5) If many, then they are either mutually dependent or all dependent on one for their existence.
6) They cannot be mutually dependent for their existence, for something cannot exist through a being on which it confers existence.
7) Therefore, there must be one being through which all other beings exist
8) This one being must exist through itself
9) Whatever exists through itself, exists in the highest degree of all.
10) Therefore, there exists a supremely perfect Being that exists in the highest degree of all.
Anselm's theistic proof combined at least three elements:
1) The efficient causality of Plato's Timaeus argument
2) The identification of God with the Good of Plato's Republic
3) The Hebrew-Christian concept of God as the cause of the very being of everything
8. Cosmological Argument
The teleological, moral and ontological argument for the existence of God must borrow from the cosmological argument to be valid.
Even if the cosmological argument fails (an thus all theistic proofs fail) belief in God may still be credible, but it will not be philosophically demonstrable.
Plato is credited with the first cosmological argument or etiological argument (argument from a cause).
Plato's Argument for a World Soul
1. Things move
2. Whatever moves, is moved by another or is self-moved
3. Self-movers (souls) are prior to non-self movers, for the antecedent is logically prior to the consequent.
4. Self-movers must be eternal or else there would be no motion.
5. There is motion
6. There must be at least two self-movers:
- good - accounts for regular motion
- evil - accounts for irregular motion
7. Therefore, there is a supreme soul (God) who is the self-mover of the good in the universe.
Aristotle's unmoved mover
1. Things do change
2. All change is a passing from potentiality to actuality
3. No potentiality can actualize itself
4. Therefore, the must be an actuality that actualizes everything, that passes from potentiality to actuality.
5. An infinite regress of actualizers is impossible.
6. The first actuality actualizes everything by final causality
7. There are 47 or 55 of these pure actualities
8. Ultimately, there is only on heaven and one God.
The God of Plato and Aristotle was not the theistic God. It took much refinement to move the cosmological argument to a theistic proof.
Plotinus, a neo-platonist had a cosmological argument
1. Many beings exist.
2. All multiplicity is based on prior unity
3. There must be an absolute unity that is the basis for all multiplicity.
4. This absolute union cannot be a being
5. Therefore, there is an absolute unity (the One) beyond being which is the source of all being and multiplicity.
Plotinus' God was different from the Christian God in a number of aspects
1. Plotinus' God created ex deo (out of himself), not ex nihilo
2. Plotinus' God was beyond all being and positive description
3. It possessed no perfections or characteristics in intel.
Augustine's Argument from Truth
Augustine retooled the Platonic and neo-platonic argument this way:
1. There are timeless and immutable truths
- Absolute doubt is impossible (we know we are doubting)
- We know that we exist
2. Immutable truth cannot be caused
- by sensible things
- by finite minds
3. Therefore, there must be a timeless and immutable mind causing these immutable truths.
Augustine held that God causes truth in every person's mind. Thus, whenever a person affirms truth, he implicitly affirms the Truth (God).
Anselm's Three Cosmological Type arguments
While Anselm is most famous for his ontological argument his earlier work, The Monologian, offered three a posteriori proofs for God's existence
Arg. 1
1. Good things exist
2. Their goodness is derived either from many different goodnesses or from one goodness.
3. It cannot be derived from many goodnesses, for then there would be no way to compare goodnesses and all things would be equally and unequally good (which is absurd), but as a matter of fact some things are better than others.
4. Therefore, all things derive their goodness through one good.
5. This one good is the supreme good, since:
- it is the good through which all other goods derive their goodness
- it is good through itself alone
2nd Form
1) Some beings are more nearly perfect than others
2) Things annoy be more nearly perfect unless there is a wholly perfect.
3) Therefore, there must be a most perfect being.
3rd Form:
1) Something exists (the denial of this is contradictory)
2) Whatever exists, exists either through something or through nothing.
3) Something cannot exist through nothing.
4) This something through which something exists is either one or many.
5) If many, then they are either mutually dependent or all dependent on one for their existence.
6) They cannot be mutually dependent for their existence, for something cannot exist through a being on which it confers existence.
7) Therefore, there must be one being through which all other beings exist
8) This one being must exist through itself
9) Whatever exists through itself, exists in the highest degree of all.
10) Therefore, there exists a supremely perfect Being that exists in the highest degree of all.
Anselm's theistic proof combined at least three elements:
1) The efficient causality of Plato's Timaeus argument
2) The identification of God with the Good of Plato's Republic
3) The Hebrew-Christian concept of God as the cause of the very being of everything
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
The Dimensions of Religious Experience (A)
(Originally written February 27, 2007 in Book 13)
Philosophy of Religion
Norman Geisler and Winfried Corduan
Part 3 The Dimensions of Religious Experience
Through commitment to the ultimate Transcendent Other a person is able to transcend himself.
Religious transcendence has been backward, upward, outward, forward, inward, downward and in a circle.
Transcending Toward the Beginning
Transcending backward to the Origin of religious aspirations has been a characteristic feature of the primitive religious experience.
Eliade's Myth of Origins:
By ritually repeating the original act of the gods one can recall the original time of the act.
Eliade holds that "religion is the paradigmatic solution for every existential crisis not only because it can be indefinitely repeated, but also because it is believed to have a transcendent origin; thus enabling a human being to transcend personal situations and finally gain access to the world of spirit" (42).
The limitations of transcending backward
Eliade describes a retrospective kind of religious transcendence.
Transcending toward the Highest
Plato's cave is an example of transcending upwards.
Plotinus believed that all things proceed from the One and all things return to it.
The further one is from the One the less reality it possess. To purify one's self of evil (non-reality) one must transcend up to the One.
Transcendence for Plotinus was not retrospective, but vertical towards unity.
Plotinus saw transcendence as natural, not supernatural. Neo-Platonic Christians have difficulty with reconciling natural transcendence with divine grace.
Philosophy of Religion
Norman Geisler and Winfried Corduan
Part 3 The Dimensions of Religious Experience
Through commitment to the ultimate Transcendent Other a person is able to transcend himself.
Religious transcendence has been backward, upward, outward, forward, inward, downward and in a circle.
Transcending Toward the Beginning
Transcending backward to the Origin of religious aspirations has been a characteristic feature of the primitive religious experience.
Eliade's Myth of Origins:
By ritually repeating the original act of the gods one can recall the original time of the act.
Eliade holds that "religion is the paradigmatic solution for every existential crisis not only because it can be indefinitely repeated, but also because it is believed to have a transcendent origin; thus enabling a human being to transcend personal situations and finally gain access to the world of spirit" (42).
The limitations of transcending backward
Eliade describes a retrospective kind of religious transcendence.
Transcending toward the Highest
Plato's cave is an example of transcending upwards.
Plotinus believed that all things proceed from the One and all things return to it.
The further one is from the One the less reality it possess. To purify one's self of evil (non-reality) one must transcend up to the One.
Transcendence for Plotinus was not retrospective, but vertical towards unity.
Plotinus saw transcendence as natural, not supernatural. Neo-Platonic Christians have difficulty with reconciling natural transcendence with divine grace.
Sunday, November 12, 2006
Plotinus continued...
(Originally written November 12, 2006 in Book 11)
Plotinus continued...
The Nature of Reality
The One, the Absolute is a power, a force, an energy.
The One is the cause of all being, of all existence.
Types of existence have varying degrees of reality, depending on their distance from the One.
Nous is closest to the One. Then soul comes from Nous. The Soul creates the sensible or phenomenal world.
A problem with Plotinus' account of Being and existence coming from a succession of creations shows the difficulties of basing a philosophy on mystical experience.
Plotinus' version of a causal One seems to break his rule of giving the One attributes.
A problem with Plotinus' account of being and existence coming from a succession of creations shows the difficulties of basing a philosophy on mystical experience.
Plotinus' version of a causal One seems to break his rule of giving the One attributes.
Another problem with Plotinus' account of reality is that he holds the One as an indivisible unity and yet nous is somehow taken out of it in the creation process.
Plotinus would have replied to these problems is that the theory is not flawed only the terminology is flawed. How can one truly express a mystical experience of truth?
The Way of Ascent
The universe is a double movement: one away from and one towards god.
There are two ways for man to return to god:
1) The long way: reincarnation process like Plato and Pythagoras believed
2) A mystical experience when man and god become a union
The first way happens by man living virtuously. The second way happens without man's help. Man can only prepare himself for the mystical experience when man and god become a union.
Preparation was purifying the soul through a meditation process.
The via negativa is the path many mystics have taken.
Plotinus continued...
The Nature of Reality
The One, the Absolute is a power, a force, an energy.
The One is the cause of all being, of all existence.
Types of existence have varying degrees of reality, depending on their distance from the One.
Nous is closest to the One. Then soul comes from Nous. The Soul creates the sensible or phenomenal world.
A problem with Plotinus' account of Being and existence coming from a succession of creations shows the difficulties of basing a philosophy on mystical experience.
Plotinus' version of a causal One seems to break his rule of giving the One attributes.
A problem with Plotinus' account of being and existence coming from a succession of creations shows the difficulties of basing a philosophy on mystical experience.
Plotinus' version of a causal One seems to break his rule of giving the One attributes.
Another problem with Plotinus' account of reality is that he holds the One as an indivisible unity and yet nous is somehow taken out of it in the creation process.
Plotinus would have replied to these problems is that the theory is not flawed only the terminology is flawed. How can one truly express a mystical experience of truth?
The Way of Ascent
The universe is a double movement: one away from and one towards god.
There are two ways for man to return to god:
1) The long way: reincarnation process like Plato and Pythagoras believed
2) A mystical experience when man and god become a union
The first way happens by man living virtuously. The second way happens without man's help. Man can only prepare himself for the mystical experience when man and god become a union.
Preparation was purifying the soul through a meditation process.
The via negativa is the path many mystics have taken.
Saturday, November 11, 2006
Neoplatonism & Plotinus
(Originally written November 11, 2006 in Book 11)
Neoplatonism
The religious tone already prevalent in Stoicism emerged even stronger in Neoplatonism.
Neoplatonism was overtly religious, yet it remained philosophical by focusing still on epistemology and metaphysics (something the cults neglected).
Neoplatonism developed a philosophy of religion that would have a long history in Western culture.
Neoplatonism became Plato's chief influence over the history of western philosophy.
The two chief aspects of Platonism that appealed to Neoplatonism were:
1) Its transcendence
2) anti-rationalism - insistence on belief that the most important truths cannot be communicated by conceptual means.
The Academic Skeptics had gravitated towards Plato's anti-rationalism as well, but the Academics focused on probability of truth and to take a pragmatic stance. They are satisfied if something works and unconcerned with the truth of that something.
The 3rd century was not satisfied by pragmatism. The people of that time sought certitude and truth in the Mystery Cults and in faith in Jesus Christ.
The Neoplatonists focused on the anti-rational element of arriving at truth via suprarational methods.
The central problem of Neoplatonism was to find a true knowledge and to achieve a transcendence.
Neoplatonism shared this problem and goal with the Eastern Mystery Cults.
Plotinus
Little is known of the origin Neoplatonism or the life of Plotinus.
Plotinus lived around 204-270 AD.
Plotinus was so uninterested in things of this life that he was almost ashamed of being in the body.
He grew up in Alexandria where the West and the East began to fuse.
He was trained int he classical schools of philosophy.
Plotinus traveled to Persia to learn more about the East and then went to Rome.
He taught and began to write around age 50. After his death his works were edited by Porphyry.
Plotinus' version of Platonism
Neoplatonism placed an emphasis on getting into a right relation with a suprarational reality.
Plotinus held that reality was beyond being and beyond knowledge.
The One transcended knowledge and intellect. The One is truth. The One cannot be grasped by knowledge, but it can be grasped by some other means.
The One is transcendent. It is independent. It is omnipresent.
Plotinus followed Plato in use of the dialectic, but the dialectic was not a systematic thought process for Plotinus, it was a mystic vision where truth was discovered all at once.
Paradoxically, Plotinus used rational arguments to support an anti-rationalist position.
Reality cannot be attributed any specific properties or attributes.
The thought is limited, but the reality is unlimited. Thus a limited cannot know an unlimited.
Rational thought can tell us what the Ultimate Reality is not, but cannot tell us anything about what it is.
Plotinus' Mysticism
Mysticism played a central role in Plotinus' philosophy. It was the basis for everything.
There are numerous problems with mysticism being a basis for philosophy.
1) Mystic experiences are private and incommunicable
2) It is too exclusive
3) Mystical experiences are incompatible with the fact that a philosophical theory must be articulable.
Neoplatonism
The religious tone already prevalent in Stoicism emerged even stronger in Neoplatonism.
Neoplatonism was overtly religious, yet it remained philosophical by focusing still on epistemology and metaphysics (something the cults neglected).
Neoplatonism developed a philosophy of religion that would have a long history in Western culture.
Neoplatonism became Plato's chief influence over the history of western philosophy.
The two chief aspects of Platonism that appealed to Neoplatonism were:
1) Its transcendence
2) anti-rationalism - insistence on belief that the most important truths cannot be communicated by conceptual means.
The Academic Skeptics had gravitated towards Plato's anti-rationalism as well, but the Academics focused on probability of truth and to take a pragmatic stance. They are satisfied if something works and unconcerned with the truth of that something.
The 3rd century was not satisfied by pragmatism. The people of that time sought certitude and truth in the Mystery Cults and in faith in Jesus Christ.
The Neoplatonists focused on the anti-rational element of arriving at truth via suprarational methods.
The central problem of Neoplatonism was to find a true knowledge and to achieve a transcendence.
Neoplatonism shared this problem and goal with the Eastern Mystery Cults.
Plotinus
Little is known of the origin Neoplatonism or the life of Plotinus.
Plotinus lived around 204-270 AD.
Plotinus was so uninterested in things of this life that he was almost ashamed of being in the body.
He grew up in Alexandria where the West and the East began to fuse.
He was trained int he classical schools of philosophy.
Plotinus traveled to Persia to learn more about the East and then went to Rome.
He taught and began to write around age 50. After his death his works were edited by Porphyry.
Plotinus' version of Platonism
Neoplatonism placed an emphasis on getting into a right relation with a suprarational reality.
Plotinus held that reality was beyond being and beyond knowledge.
The One transcended knowledge and intellect. The One is truth. The One cannot be grasped by knowledge, but it can be grasped by some other means.
The One is transcendent. It is independent. It is omnipresent.
Plotinus followed Plato in use of the dialectic, but the dialectic was not a systematic thought process for Plotinus, it was a mystic vision where truth was discovered all at once.
Paradoxically, Plotinus used rational arguments to support an anti-rationalist position.
Reality cannot be attributed any specific properties or attributes.
The thought is limited, but the reality is unlimited. Thus a limited cannot know an unlimited.
Rational thought can tell us what the Ultimate Reality is not, but cannot tell us anything about what it is.
Plotinus' Mysticism
Mysticism played a central role in Plotinus' philosophy. It was the basis for everything.
There are numerous problems with mysticism being a basis for philosophy.
1) Mystic experiences are private and incommunicable
2) It is too exclusive
3) Mystical experiences are incompatible with the fact that a philosophical theory must be articulable.
Saturday, July 22, 2006
St. Augustine's Philosophy and Theology
(Originally written July 22, 2006 in Book 5)
The History of Western Philosophy
Bertrand Russell
Chapter IV - St. Augustine's Philosophy and Theology
To escape the madness of metaphysics and thoroughly infuriate myself by reading an attack on one of the greatest men in human history. Russell will only focus on what he considers important in Augustine:
1. Augustine's pure philosophy, especially his theory of time
2. Augustine's philosophy of history (developed in City of God)
3. Augustine's theory of salvation, against Pelagius
Pure Philosophy
Augustine is not preoccupied with pure philosophy, mostly he concerns himself with theology. But he shows immense talent in philosophy when he does.
Augustine was the first philosopher (of many) to speculate with a necessity of matching speculation and Scriptures.
Origen (an earlier Christian philosopher) differed from Augustine in that Origen kept Christianity and Platonism separate while Augustine grated Platonism into Christianity.
The most purely philosophical book is the 11th book of Confessions. Most contemporary Confessions end at Book 10 because that is where the biographical part ends.
Augustine remarks that the Genesis of account of creation (ex nihilo, out of nothing) was completely foreign to Greek thought. Greeks believed God formed preexisting matter. Christianity and Judaism holds God created matter, then simultaneously formed it. The Greek view of creation has reappeared since the dawn of Christianity and has led to pantheism.
Augustine asks if God created the world ex nihilo then why didn't he do it sooner? Augustine states that there was no sooner before creation because time was created at the same point as all creation.
God is eternal; He is timeless. In God there is no past or future, only eternal present.
"God's eternity is exempt from the relation of time; all time is present to Him at once" (Russell, 353).
When Augustine refers to time he has an intriguing relativistic theory. Time can only be measured as it is passing. The past and future is not really 'is', only the present really is. But there really is a past and future.
Augustine says that the past or future is considered at the present through memory or expectation.
He states that there are three times:
1. A present of things past (memory)
2. A present of things present (sight)
3. A present of things future (expectation)
He confesses to God that he is perplexed by time and asks for enlightenment. Without fully understanding time, see does believe that is subjective.
Time is in the human mind and time exists only because created beings exist.
Augustine's theory of time seems to anticipate at least three things;
1) Kant's theory of subjective time
2) Descartes' cogito
3) Descartes' reply to Gassendi's ambulo ergo sum.
"As a philosopher, therefore, Augustine deserves a high place" (Russell, 355).
The City of God
When Rome was sacked by the Goths in 410 the Roman pagans attributed the defeat to the abandonment of the ancient religions. The City of God was an answer to this accusation.
"Like some other very great books, it composes itself in the memory of those who have read it, into something better than at first appears in rereading" (Russell, 355).
Russell holds that the book contains "a great deal that hardly anyone at present day can accept" (Russell, 355).
Russell does hold that it remains inspirational today and can be restated in non-theological terms.
Linehan - Thus destroying the meaning and value of the book.
In the book Augustine states that worse things then the sacking of Rome occurred prior to the Christian age. He also said that Christianity kept the sacking from being as brutal as it could have been (the Goths were Christians).
He says that not all sins are punished on earth, thus the Last Judgment.
All that Christians endured virtuously would lead to their edification eventually.
Temporal losses for Christians does not cause loss of anything of value for them.
Nothing can interfere with the resurrection of the body.
Virginity lost through rape doesn't diminish chastity. Chastity is a virtue of the mind. Virginity and chastity can be lost even without the physical act. It can be lost in the mind.
Suicide is condemned by Augustine. Even if one commits suicide to avoid the loss of virginity it is still a sin. Apparently Lucretia (a woman in Rome) committed suicide for this reason.
He says that rape, if enjoyed, becomes sinful for the woman.
He condemns the pagan gods. He claims that it would be better to worship a virtuous man than a heathen god.
Christians have a constant sanctuary in the pilgrim City of God.
In this world, the city of earth and the city of heaven are intermingled.
Augustine holds Greek philosophers as partially right.
He holds that the philosophers could not overthrow the pagan gods because their moral instructions were weak due to the wickedness of their gods.
Augustine believed the heathen gods existed, but were devils.
He held astrology as to be both wicked and false. He proves this through the fortunes of twins who have the identical zodiac sign.
God has foreknowledge of man's sins, but God's foreknowledge does not cause man's sins.
Virtuosity does not bring unhappiness; even if Christians are unfortunate, they still can be happy.
Augustine holds Plato in higher regards than any other philosopher. Augustine credits Plato with a number of things:
1) Plato's belief that God was Spirit, not material.
2) Plato's belief that perception is not the source of truth.
3) Platonic logic and ethics are closest to Christianity
Augustine aslo credits Plotinus as being the best comprehender of Plato. Plotinus lived slightly before Augustine.
Augustine considered Aristotle lower than Plato, but better than all the others.
He condemned both Plato and Aristotle for believing that all the gods were good. He condemned the Stoics for condemning all passions because Christian passions can lead to virtue.
He held that Plutonists were right about God, wrong about gods and wrong in denying the Incarnation.
Augustine holds the Platonic view that the sensible world is inferior to the super-sensible world.
He believed that Knowledge of God comes only through Christ. Certain things can be learned through reason, but religious knowledge must come through Scriptures.
Time and space prior to creation should not be considered because it is pointless.
Everything blessed is eternal, but everything eternal is not blessed (hell and satan).
He denounces Origen's view of souls being put into bodies as punishment.
He believed the world was created in 6 days because 6 is a perfect number (i.e. equal to the sum of its factors).
He believed that there are good and bad angels, but bad angels do not have an essence contrary to God.
"God's enemies are not so by nature, but by will. The vicious will has no efficient cause, but only a deficient one; it is not an effect, but a defect" (Russell, 359).
He held the the world was less than 6,000 years old and history is not cyclical.
Sin caused death. If there were no sin there would be no death. Sin caused both physical and eternal death. Eternal death is damnation.
Bodies in heaven will be spiritual, but not spirits. They will be weightless. Men will have male bodies; women will have female ones. People who die in infancy will have adult bodies.
Adam's sin brought eternal death to all mankind; God's grace freed them from it.
Augustine contributes sin to the mind, contrary to flesh as Platonism and Manichaeism holds.
Sex in marriage is not sinful, provided procreation is the reason for it. Married men are virtuous if they love without lust. Sex, even in marriage is associated with shame because of Adam's sin. Lust is shameful because it is independent from the will. Sexual intercourse can occur without lust. "The need of lust in sexual intercourse is a punishment for Adam's sin, but for which sex might have been divorced from pleasure" (Russell, 360).
Asceticism dislikes sex because of its independence of the will. Virtue demands a complete control of the will over the body. This control does not suffice to make sex possible.
He denounced skepticism.
He held that virtue is inextricably connected with Christianity. Pagan virtue is too marred by the heathen gods to be true virtue.
He believes in predestination. All men deserve damnation, so any receiving salvation is merciful. The rest perish justly.
The influential part of the book is that the State can only be part of the City of God if it submits to the Church in all religious matters. The theocratic implications of Augustine's theory lasted until the Reformation.
Russell states that Marx used Augustine in socialism:
YHWH = Dialectical Materialism
The Messiah = Marx
The Elect = The Proletariat
The Church = The Communist Party
The Second Coming = The Revolution
Hell = Punishment of the Capitalists
The Millennium = The Communist Commonwealth
The Pelagian Controversy
Pelagius was a Welshman and less fanatical than most of his contemporaries. He believed in free-will and questioned the doctrine of Original Sin. He believed that virtue occurs through man's own moral effort.
Augustine convinced Catholic Christianity to hold Pelagius as a heretic.
Augustine argued men were incapable of free-will after the Fall and that virtue was only acquired through God's grace. Augustine held that damnation proved God's justice and salvation proved His mercy. Both proved God's goodness.
Augustine's views were adopted by Calvin and had their root in Paul (especially in Romans).
"A great deal of what is most ferocious in the medieval Church is traceable to his sense of universal guilt" (Russell, 365).
The History of Western Philosophy
Bertrand Russell
Chapter IV - St. Augustine's Philosophy and Theology
To escape the madness of metaphysics and thoroughly infuriate myself by reading an attack on one of the greatest men in human history. Russell will only focus on what he considers important in Augustine:
1. Augustine's pure philosophy, especially his theory of time
2. Augustine's philosophy of history (developed in City of God)
3. Augustine's theory of salvation, against Pelagius
Pure Philosophy
Augustine is not preoccupied with pure philosophy, mostly he concerns himself with theology. But he shows immense talent in philosophy when he does.
Augustine was the first philosopher (of many) to speculate with a necessity of matching speculation and Scriptures.
Origen (an earlier Christian philosopher) differed from Augustine in that Origen kept Christianity and Platonism separate while Augustine grated Platonism into Christianity.
The most purely philosophical book is the 11th book of Confessions. Most contemporary Confessions end at Book 10 because that is where the biographical part ends.
Augustine remarks that the Genesis of account of creation (ex nihilo, out of nothing) was completely foreign to Greek thought. Greeks believed God formed preexisting matter. Christianity and Judaism holds God created matter, then simultaneously formed it. The Greek view of creation has reappeared since the dawn of Christianity and has led to pantheism.
Augustine asks if God created the world ex nihilo then why didn't he do it sooner? Augustine states that there was no sooner before creation because time was created at the same point as all creation.
God is eternal; He is timeless. In God there is no past or future, only eternal present.
"God's eternity is exempt from the relation of time; all time is present to Him at once" (Russell, 353).
When Augustine refers to time he has an intriguing relativistic theory. Time can only be measured as it is passing. The past and future is not really 'is', only the present really is. But there really is a past and future.
Augustine says that the past or future is considered at the present through memory or expectation.
He states that there are three times:
1. A present of things past (memory)
2. A present of things present (sight)
3. A present of things future (expectation)
He confesses to God that he is perplexed by time and asks for enlightenment. Without fully understanding time, see does believe that is subjective.
Time is in the human mind and time exists only because created beings exist.
Augustine's theory of time seems to anticipate at least three things;
1) Kant's theory of subjective time
2) Descartes' cogito
3) Descartes' reply to Gassendi's ambulo ergo sum.
"As a philosopher, therefore, Augustine deserves a high place" (Russell, 355).
The City of God
When Rome was sacked by the Goths in 410 the Roman pagans attributed the defeat to the abandonment of the ancient religions. The City of God was an answer to this accusation.
"Like some other very great books, it composes itself in the memory of those who have read it, into something better than at first appears in rereading" (Russell, 355).
Russell holds that the book contains "a great deal that hardly anyone at present day can accept" (Russell, 355).
Russell does hold that it remains inspirational today and can be restated in non-theological terms.
Linehan - Thus destroying the meaning and value of the book.
In the book Augustine states that worse things then the sacking of Rome occurred prior to the Christian age. He also said that Christianity kept the sacking from being as brutal as it could have been (the Goths were Christians).
He says that not all sins are punished on earth, thus the Last Judgment.
All that Christians endured virtuously would lead to their edification eventually.
Temporal losses for Christians does not cause loss of anything of value for them.
Nothing can interfere with the resurrection of the body.
Virginity lost through rape doesn't diminish chastity. Chastity is a virtue of the mind. Virginity and chastity can be lost even without the physical act. It can be lost in the mind.
Suicide is condemned by Augustine. Even if one commits suicide to avoid the loss of virginity it is still a sin. Apparently Lucretia (a woman in Rome) committed suicide for this reason.
He says that rape, if enjoyed, becomes sinful for the woman.
He condemns the pagan gods. He claims that it would be better to worship a virtuous man than a heathen god.
Christians have a constant sanctuary in the pilgrim City of God.
In this world, the city of earth and the city of heaven are intermingled.
Augustine holds Greek philosophers as partially right.
He holds that the philosophers could not overthrow the pagan gods because their moral instructions were weak due to the wickedness of their gods.
Augustine believed the heathen gods existed, but were devils.
He held astrology as to be both wicked and false. He proves this through the fortunes of twins who have the identical zodiac sign.
God has foreknowledge of man's sins, but God's foreknowledge does not cause man's sins.
Virtuosity does not bring unhappiness; even if Christians are unfortunate, they still can be happy.
Augustine holds Plato in higher regards than any other philosopher. Augustine credits Plato with a number of things:
1) Plato's belief that God was Spirit, not material.
2) Plato's belief that perception is not the source of truth.
3) Platonic logic and ethics are closest to Christianity
Augustine aslo credits Plotinus as being the best comprehender of Plato. Plotinus lived slightly before Augustine.
Augustine considered Aristotle lower than Plato, but better than all the others.
He condemned both Plato and Aristotle for believing that all the gods were good. He condemned the Stoics for condemning all passions because Christian passions can lead to virtue.
He held that Plutonists were right about God, wrong about gods and wrong in denying the Incarnation.
Augustine holds the Platonic view that the sensible world is inferior to the super-sensible world.
He believed that Knowledge of God comes only through Christ. Certain things can be learned through reason, but religious knowledge must come through Scriptures.
Time and space prior to creation should not be considered because it is pointless.
Everything blessed is eternal, but everything eternal is not blessed (hell and satan).
He denounces Origen's view of souls being put into bodies as punishment.
He believed the world was created in 6 days because 6 is a perfect number (i.e. equal to the sum of its factors).
He believed that there are good and bad angels, but bad angels do not have an essence contrary to God.
"God's enemies are not so by nature, but by will. The vicious will has no efficient cause, but only a deficient one; it is not an effect, but a defect" (Russell, 359).
He held the the world was less than 6,000 years old and history is not cyclical.
Sin caused death. If there were no sin there would be no death. Sin caused both physical and eternal death. Eternal death is damnation.
Bodies in heaven will be spiritual, but not spirits. They will be weightless. Men will have male bodies; women will have female ones. People who die in infancy will have adult bodies.
Adam's sin brought eternal death to all mankind; God's grace freed them from it.
Augustine contributes sin to the mind, contrary to flesh as Platonism and Manichaeism holds.
Sex in marriage is not sinful, provided procreation is the reason for it. Married men are virtuous if they love without lust. Sex, even in marriage is associated with shame because of Adam's sin. Lust is shameful because it is independent from the will. Sexual intercourse can occur without lust. "The need of lust in sexual intercourse is a punishment for Adam's sin, but for which sex might have been divorced from pleasure" (Russell, 360).
Asceticism dislikes sex because of its independence of the will. Virtue demands a complete control of the will over the body. This control does not suffice to make sex possible.
He denounced skepticism.
He held that virtue is inextricably connected with Christianity. Pagan virtue is too marred by the heathen gods to be true virtue.
He believes in predestination. All men deserve damnation, so any receiving salvation is merciful. The rest perish justly.
The influential part of the book is that the State can only be part of the City of God if it submits to the Church in all religious matters. The theocratic implications of Augustine's theory lasted until the Reformation.
Russell states that Marx used Augustine in socialism:
YHWH = Dialectical Materialism
The Messiah = Marx
The Elect = The Proletariat
The Church = The Communist Party
The Second Coming = The Revolution
Hell = Punishment of the Capitalists
The Millennium = The Communist Commonwealth
The Pelagian Controversy
Pelagius was a Welshman and less fanatical than most of his contemporaries. He believed in free-will and questioned the doctrine of Original Sin. He believed that virtue occurs through man's own moral effort.
Augustine convinced Catholic Christianity to hold Pelagius as a heretic.
Augustine argued men were incapable of free-will after the Fall and that virtue was only acquired through God's grace. Augustine held that damnation proved God's justice and salvation proved His mercy. Both proved God's goodness.
Augustine's views were adopted by Calvin and had their root in Paul (especially in Romans).
"A great deal of what is most ferocious in the medieval Church is traceable to his sense of universal guilt" (Russell, 365).
Sunday, July 16, 2006
Christianity during the first four centuries
(Originally written July 16, 2006 in Book 5)
The History of Western Philosophy
Bertrand Russell
Chapter II - Christianity during the first four centuries
Christianity began as reformed Judaism.
Russell states that St. James and St. Peter wanted it to remain this, but St. Paul changed all that.
Gnosticism played the halfway between Pagan philosophy and Christianity by honoring Christ, but not the Jewish elements of Christianity. Later on Manichaeism played the same role. Manichaeism combined Christian and Zoroastrian elements. It believed evil was only in matter and good was only in spirit. It condemned the eating of meat and all sex.
Gnostics and Manichaeans flourished until the government became fully Christian.
Gnostic views (Docetic Gnosticism) passed over into orthodox Islam.
Christians became hostile to Jews early on. Jewish theology was simple. Christian theology became complex as it was hellenized. Christian theologians attempted to synthesize Greek thought and the Scriptures. It happened haphazardly until Origen.
Origen (185-254 AD) lived in Alexandria. Like his contemporary Plotinus, he was a puppy of Ammonius Saccas (the considered founder of Neoplatonism).
Origen stated nothing is fully incorporeal except God: Father, Son and Holy Ghost.
He believed the stars to contain souls and that the sun was capable of sin.
He believed in soul and nous like Plotinus did.
He believed that all souls were created initially at creation and entered bodies later in time. Ultimately all souls were destined to become nous and wholly submissive to Christ. Even the Devil will eventually submit to Christ.
In spite of being considered a Church Father, Origen was condemned for four heresies:
1) The Platonic view of souls being preexistent
2) The human nature of Christ, as well as the Divine nature existed prior to the Incarnation
3) At the resurrection man's bodies will be transformed into purely ethereal bodies
4) All men and even demons and Satan will eventually be saved.
Origen defended Christianity in two ways:
1) He stated that by using reason one necessarily comes to the conclusions spelled out in the Gospels.
2) The prophecies being fulfilled and the miracles being worked by Christ proved he is obviously God.
The Church government developed gradually over the years. Then it exploded as Christianity was legalized by Constantine the Great.
The bishops gained power through wealth prior to Constantine. Then when Christianity was legalized bishops were given administrative and judicial power by the State.
Russell's underhanded attack on Christianity compares Christian 'intolerance' to the "advantages of intolerance in propaganda" used by Hitler (Russell, 330).
Inconsistency? Russell calls the Jews stubborn to Greek influence, yet credits the Greeks with teaching the Jews resurrection of the spirit.
Christian morality was legendary before Constantine. "Their sexual ethics had a strictness that was rare in antiquity" (Russell, 332). This helped Christianity spread.
Constantine used the Christian underground hierarchy to stabilize the Empire. In doing so it spread Christianity. Constantine demanded unity in Christianity, hence the Nicea ecumenical council and the Nicene Creed.
Orthodox Christianity fought against heresies, like Arianism for a longtime.
Athanasius (297-373) was the champion of Orthodox Christianity.
The History of Western Philosophy
Bertrand Russell
Chapter II - Christianity during the first four centuries
Christianity began as reformed Judaism.
Russell states that St. James and St. Peter wanted it to remain this, but St. Paul changed all that.
Gnosticism played the halfway between Pagan philosophy and Christianity by honoring Christ, but not the Jewish elements of Christianity. Later on Manichaeism played the same role. Manichaeism combined Christian and Zoroastrian elements. It believed evil was only in matter and good was only in spirit. It condemned the eating of meat and all sex.
Gnostics and Manichaeans flourished until the government became fully Christian.
Gnostic views (Docetic Gnosticism) passed over into orthodox Islam.
Christians became hostile to Jews early on. Jewish theology was simple. Christian theology became complex as it was hellenized. Christian theologians attempted to synthesize Greek thought and the Scriptures. It happened haphazardly until Origen.
Origen (185-254 AD) lived in Alexandria. Like his contemporary Plotinus, he was a puppy of Ammonius Saccas (the considered founder of Neoplatonism).
Origen stated nothing is fully incorporeal except God: Father, Son and Holy Ghost.
He believed the stars to contain souls and that the sun was capable of sin.
He believed in soul and nous like Plotinus did.
He believed that all souls were created initially at creation and entered bodies later in time. Ultimately all souls were destined to become nous and wholly submissive to Christ. Even the Devil will eventually submit to Christ.
In spite of being considered a Church Father, Origen was condemned for four heresies:
1) The Platonic view of souls being preexistent
2) The human nature of Christ, as well as the Divine nature existed prior to the Incarnation
3) At the resurrection man's bodies will be transformed into purely ethereal bodies
4) All men and even demons and Satan will eventually be saved.
Origen defended Christianity in two ways:
1) He stated that by using reason one necessarily comes to the conclusions spelled out in the Gospels.
2) The prophecies being fulfilled and the miracles being worked by Christ proved he is obviously God.
The Church government developed gradually over the years. Then it exploded as Christianity was legalized by Constantine the Great.
The bishops gained power through wealth prior to Constantine. Then when Christianity was legalized bishops were given administrative and judicial power by the State.
Russell's underhanded attack on Christianity compares Christian 'intolerance' to the "advantages of intolerance in propaganda" used by Hitler (Russell, 330).
Inconsistency? Russell calls the Jews stubborn to Greek influence, yet credits the Greeks with teaching the Jews resurrection of the spirit.
Christian morality was legendary before Constantine. "Their sexual ethics had a strictness that was rare in antiquity" (Russell, 332). This helped Christianity spread.
Constantine used the Christian underground hierarchy to stabilize the Empire. In doing so it spread Christianity. Constantine demanded unity in Christianity, hence the Nicea ecumenical council and the Nicene Creed.
Orthodox Christianity fought against heresies, like Arianism for a longtime.
Athanasius (297-373) was the champion of Orthodox Christianity.
Plotinus
(Originally Written July 16, 2006 in Book 4)
The History of Western Philosophy
Bertrand Russell
Chapter 30 - Plotinus
Plotinus (204-270 A.D.) founded Neoplatonism and was the last great philosopher of antiquity.
He lived during one of the most unstable periods of the Roman Empire. After he died the Empire was stabilized by the efforts of Diocletian and Constantine the Great.
He turned from the perpetual strife of the physical world and his philosophy was based on an other-worldly religious tone.
He believed in an eternal world of ideas as his heaven.
Christians adapted much of Plotinus' work into their theology.
Augustine believed that if Plotinus had lived later and changed a few words and phrases he would have been a Christian.
Dean Inge states that Aquinas "is nearer to Plotinus than to the real Aristotle" (Russell, 285).
Plotinus is pivotal to the influence of Middle Ages' Christianity and Catholic theology.
Russell's Caveat: Christianity has undergone many changes. It cannot be viewed as a homogenous system:
1) Synoptic Gospels are innocent of metaphysics.
2) American Christianity (modern) is akin to primitive Christianity.
Platonism is alien to modern American Christianity as American Christianity is much more concerned with life on earth and social progress. Platonic Christianity focuses on transcendental hope in a hopeless everyday world. It is not a dogmatic change, but a shift in emphasis. Without understanding this change, no one will understand the Christianity of the past.
In addition to his historical importance, Plotinus is the best representative of an important type of theory. A philosophical system can be judged on various criteria:
1) The first and most obvious is its truth
2) Beauty
3) Well expressed as how men will act in certain situations
Plotinus was a 'melancholy optimist'.
Plotinus is the best representation of a metaphysical theory born out of a resolve in the face of horrible physical circumstances.
"Among the men who have been unhappy in a mundane sense, but resolutely determined to find a higher happiness in the world of theory, Plotinus holds a very high place" (Russell, 286).
Plotinus clarified Plato's teachings. His arguments against materialism are good and his theory of the relation of soul and body is clearer than Plato or Aristotle.
His moral purity is impressive (like Spinoza's).
He explains things as clearly, consistently and simply as he can.
"Whatever one may think of him as a theoretical philosopher, it is impossible not to love him as a man" (Russell, 286).
Linehan - I hope that one day I will be thought of in a similar manner. Above all philosophy, humanity is by far more important. Theory cannot substitute for a man or woman.
Plotinus' life is known through the writings of Porphyry (a semite whose real name is Malchus).
He discovered patio-temporal appearance as being important.
Plotinus was born in Egypt, studied in Alexandria and studied under Ammonius Saccos (considered to be a founder of Neoplatonism).
He didn't write until he was 49, but then wrote voluminously. Porphyry edited his works. Porphyry was more Pythagorean than Plotinus and thus Neoplatonism became more supernatural than it would have if Plotinus' ideas had not been edited.
Plotinus treated the ancient philosophers with reverence, except for the atomists. He condemns the Stoics for their materialism and the Epicureans for every part of their philosophy. The influence of Parmenides is felt at a number of points.
The Plato in Plotinus' works is much better behaved then the Plato of real life.
The metaphysical of Plotinus begins with a holy trinity:
1) The One (supreme)
2) Spirit *Nous (intermediate)
3) Soul (lowest)
Unlike Christianity's Holy Trinity, the three are not equals.
The One is transcendent of all things. it is indefinable. "In regard to the One there is more truth in silence than in any words whatever" (Russell, 288).
The Spirit is what Plotinus calls 'nous'. Nous is normally translated as mind, but it does not suit here because it lacks the spiritual, religious intention that it had in the Greek language. Nous is the image of the One. Men understand this (as best they can) when they strip the body and self-will from their minds and reflect on the Nous.
Man reflects on the nous by cutting away everything else. Then reflection on the nous we see the light that shines on it and that light is shone by and is the One. Thus reflection on the Nous is reflection on the One itself.
Plotinus often experience ecstasy as an out of body experience.
The soul is inferior to the nous. But the soul is the author of all living things. It made the whole visible world.
Plotinus rejected the Gnostic view that the world (sensible) was evil, instead believing that it was merely less good than the intellectual world.
He rejected the Gnostic view of all things being evil other than man's soul. His arguments were later adopted by the theologian Origen.
He believed in reincarnation for the sake of justice. For example, if you killed your mother you would come back as a woman and be killed by your son.
Sin had to be punished, but it was punished naturally.
If sin is purged in life, eventually the soul and nous would become one, but still two.
Plotinus rejected Aristotle's claim that the soul is the form of the body. He also rejected the Stoic view as the soul being material in nature.
The soul entered the physical realm because it wished to create (replicate) something it saw in the nous. Since they are replications they are not as perfect, but genuinely still good.
The soul lives in union with other souls in the nous, but when it severs itself to create bodies it runs into trouble because it is now in contact with something lower than itself, a body. The soul unwittingly becomes chained to the body.
The physical world is a copy of the eternal world and the best that it could be.
Like Christians, Plotinus has trouble with creation happening without demanding something was lacking in the Creator which caused him to create.
Plotinus believed sin to be a consequence of free will.
He champions free will and without invalidating astrology, set bounds for it.
Plotinus' subjectivism (reflection via introspection) helped to stall outward inspection and ended scientific advancement for centuries.
As I come to the end of another book I can truly state that my philosophical progress is apparent to myself. I say this without meaning to appear arrogant but it is obvious to me. I am starting to make connections I previously did not make. Critical thought and questions are coming more rapidly.
I feel more comprehension of material. I don't have to reread passages to understand them as often. I am really starting to form concrete theories and opinions in my mind. I am enjoying myself more and more.
I don't have much more to say other than that I am excited to continue Russell's book. This notebook ended exactly as Book One of the History of Western Philosophy ended. That was nice. It will continue in notebook 5, page 1 with Book Two - "Catholic Philosophy".
Book 4 02/01/06 - 07/16/06
Chris Linehan
The History of Western Philosophy
Bertrand Russell
Chapter 30 - Plotinus
Plotinus (204-270 A.D.) founded Neoplatonism and was the last great philosopher of antiquity.
He lived during one of the most unstable periods of the Roman Empire. After he died the Empire was stabilized by the efforts of Diocletian and Constantine the Great.
He turned from the perpetual strife of the physical world and his philosophy was based on an other-worldly religious tone.
He believed in an eternal world of ideas as his heaven.
Christians adapted much of Plotinus' work into their theology.
Augustine believed that if Plotinus had lived later and changed a few words and phrases he would have been a Christian.
Dean Inge states that Aquinas "is nearer to Plotinus than to the real Aristotle" (Russell, 285).
Plotinus is pivotal to the influence of Middle Ages' Christianity and Catholic theology.
Russell's Caveat: Christianity has undergone many changes. It cannot be viewed as a homogenous system:
1) Synoptic Gospels are innocent of metaphysics.
2) American Christianity (modern) is akin to primitive Christianity.
Platonism is alien to modern American Christianity as American Christianity is much more concerned with life on earth and social progress. Platonic Christianity focuses on transcendental hope in a hopeless everyday world. It is not a dogmatic change, but a shift in emphasis. Without understanding this change, no one will understand the Christianity of the past.
In addition to his historical importance, Plotinus is the best representative of an important type of theory. A philosophical system can be judged on various criteria:
1) The first and most obvious is its truth
2) Beauty
3) Well expressed as how men will act in certain situations
Plotinus was a 'melancholy optimist'.
Plotinus is the best representation of a metaphysical theory born out of a resolve in the face of horrible physical circumstances.
"Among the men who have been unhappy in a mundane sense, but resolutely determined to find a higher happiness in the world of theory, Plotinus holds a very high place" (Russell, 286).
Plotinus clarified Plato's teachings. His arguments against materialism are good and his theory of the relation of soul and body is clearer than Plato or Aristotle.
His moral purity is impressive (like Spinoza's).
He explains things as clearly, consistently and simply as he can.
"Whatever one may think of him as a theoretical philosopher, it is impossible not to love him as a man" (Russell, 286).
Linehan - I hope that one day I will be thought of in a similar manner. Above all philosophy, humanity is by far more important. Theory cannot substitute for a man or woman.
Plotinus' life is known through the writings of Porphyry (a semite whose real name is Malchus).
He discovered patio-temporal appearance as being important.
Plotinus was born in Egypt, studied in Alexandria and studied under Ammonius Saccos (considered to be a founder of Neoplatonism).
He didn't write until he was 49, but then wrote voluminously. Porphyry edited his works. Porphyry was more Pythagorean than Plotinus and thus Neoplatonism became more supernatural than it would have if Plotinus' ideas had not been edited.
Plotinus treated the ancient philosophers with reverence, except for the atomists. He condemns the Stoics for their materialism and the Epicureans for every part of their philosophy. The influence of Parmenides is felt at a number of points.
The Plato in Plotinus' works is much better behaved then the Plato of real life.
The metaphysical of Plotinus begins with a holy trinity:
1) The One (supreme)
2) Spirit *Nous (intermediate)
3) Soul (lowest)
Unlike Christianity's Holy Trinity, the three are not equals.
The One is transcendent of all things. it is indefinable. "In regard to the One there is more truth in silence than in any words whatever" (Russell, 288).
The Spirit is what Plotinus calls 'nous'. Nous is normally translated as mind, but it does not suit here because it lacks the spiritual, religious intention that it had in the Greek language. Nous is the image of the One. Men understand this (as best they can) when they strip the body and self-will from their minds and reflect on the Nous.
Man reflects on the nous by cutting away everything else. Then reflection on the nous we see the light that shines on it and that light is shone by and is the One. Thus reflection on the Nous is reflection on the One itself.
Plotinus often experience ecstasy as an out of body experience.
The soul is inferior to the nous. But the soul is the author of all living things. It made the whole visible world.
Plotinus rejected the Gnostic view that the world (sensible) was evil, instead believing that it was merely less good than the intellectual world.
He rejected the Gnostic view of all things being evil other than man's soul. His arguments were later adopted by the theologian Origen.
He believed in reincarnation for the sake of justice. For example, if you killed your mother you would come back as a woman and be killed by your son.
Sin had to be punished, but it was punished naturally.
If sin is purged in life, eventually the soul and nous would become one, but still two.
Plotinus rejected Aristotle's claim that the soul is the form of the body. He also rejected the Stoic view as the soul being material in nature.
The soul entered the physical realm because it wished to create (replicate) something it saw in the nous. Since they are replications they are not as perfect, but genuinely still good.
The soul lives in union with other souls in the nous, but when it severs itself to create bodies it runs into trouble because it is now in contact with something lower than itself, a body. The soul unwittingly becomes chained to the body.
The physical world is a copy of the eternal world and the best that it could be.
Like Christians, Plotinus has trouble with creation happening without demanding something was lacking in the Creator which caused him to create.
Plotinus believed sin to be a consequence of free will.
He champions free will and without invalidating astrology, set bounds for it.
Plotinus' subjectivism (reflection via introspection) helped to stall outward inspection and ended scientific advancement for centuries.
As I come to the end of another book I can truly state that my philosophical progress is apparent to myself. I say this without meaning to appear arrogant but it is obvious to me. I am starting to make connections I previously did not make. Critical thought and questions are coming more rapidly.
I feel more comprehension of material. I don't have to reread passages to understand them as often. I am really starting to form concrete theories and opinions in my mind. I am enjoying myself more and more.
I don't have much more to say other than that I am excited to continue Russell's book. This notebook ended exactly as Book One of the History of Western Philosophy ended. That was nice. It will continue in notebook 5, page 1 with Book Two - "Catholic Philosophy".
Book 4 02/01/06 - 07/16/06
Chris Linehan
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)