Podcasts about platonist

What a lot of fun I had talking to Zena Hitz about Gulliver's Travels. As well as discussing Swift, slavery, genocide, rationality, Christianity, and science, Zena told me that good philosophy is like a box of cake mix and that a liberal education requires you to be freed of false expertise. I also took Zena on a detour to discuss Iris Murdoch, the Catherine Project, and modern philosophy. TRANSCRIPTHENRY OLIVER: Today I am talking to Zena Hitz. Zena is a tutor at St. John's College. She is a philosopher, the author of Lost in Thought. She runs the Catherine Project. She's famous on Twitter. We don't know how she does it all. Zena, welcome.ZENA HITZ: Thank you, Henry. It's great to be here.OLIVER: And we're talking about Gulliver's Travels because it is 300 years since it was published, and it's a book that you love.HITZ: A book that I've loved for a long time.First Encounter with Gulliver's TravelsOLIVER: So tell me, when did you first read it?HITZ: Well, it was an important moment for me. I was in high school, and I was admitted to a scholarship summer program which offered college courses at different campuses. There were some normal-looking college courses at normal-looking colleges. And then there was this course at St. John's called Science as Literature, Literature as Science. [laughs] It had this description that was just unbelievable. And I thought to myself, “This is the one, obviously the one to go to.”So I went, and we read books that no one in their right mind would assign to high school students now, and maybe not then. The fragments of Parmenides, Plato's Timaeus, selections from Aristotle's Physics, Gulliver's Travels. After reading a number of—preface to Ptolemy's Almagest, geocentric astronomy. And we read Gulliver's Travels after reading selections from Hooke's Micrographia, so the inventor of the microscope, and Galileo's Starry Messenger, which is one of the great first uses of the telescope to discover the nature of the moon and the satellites of Jupiter.So then we read Gulliver's Travels. We also read Emma and Flannery O'Connor and various other things. And one of the faculty who was running it said at one point, “Well, we thought we'd throw a bunch of things together and see what you could do, what you could make of it. We didn't actually have an idea of how these all fit together,” which I think was probably true.At any rate, I think I came to Gulliver's Travels thinking about these scientists who were looking at very large things and very small things, and thinking in general about the follies of human perception, whether that was shown in literature or philosophy or what have you, the ways in which human perception and knowledge don't work very well. And I think Swift is still one of the best people to—Gulliver's Travels is still one of the best books about that because it's in the mode of a travel diary, an eyewitness account.Gulliver is trained as a surgeon, by his own account. He at one point says he was a bit of a projector in his younger days, someone who undertook scientific projects. And he's a terrible observer, the worst imaginable observer, and Swift so brilliantly lets us see through his eyes, lets us see all the things he doesn't see. And I think it's not just about seeing and knowing. It has a very profound, I think, moral and political set of commitments. So it's a very humane book. It's social criticism, but from a point of view of a very deep humanity. So I've always loved the book for these reasons since then.I came back to it more recently because it is part of the curriculum at St. John's. So when I came back to teach there, I began to reread it. The other experience I had was that I wrote a long essay on it when I was an undergraduate. So those are my—I'm not any kind of expert. My knowledge of the historical context of the book is limited. It's not zero, but it's limited. But I have always loved it as an account of human understanding and its failures and the way that might impact how we live and how happy we can be.The Houyhnhnm ProblemOLIVER: Have you changed how you think about it as you've taught it?HITZ: I have not really changed the way I think about it. It gets more—like all of these books, the more you read them, the more comes out of them, the more details come up. Hilarious. The more jokes you get, the more . . .I think the one more recent insight I had was, I hadn't understood the full horror of the Houyhnhnms in the last book until relatively recently. I think that took me some time to really take on. It's one of the cases where Gulliver's misperceptions are a bit harder to see, and I think many readers just assume that Swift is endorsing the praise of the Houyhnhnms in some sense or other.OLIVER: There are some very serious critics in the past who have called them Swift's ideal beings. Which at this point in history seems unthinkable, but it has been a belief among serious readers.HITZ: Yes, yes. And also common among students. Yes, it's absolutely one of the wrongest opinions you could have about anything, I think.OLIVER: Why does Swift allow us to make that mistake? Are we bad readers out of the context, or has he made too good a job of his diversions and concealments and ironies?HITZ: That's a great question, and I'll just take a stab at it. I think that he has hit on a mode of misperception which is very deep to us, and it's something that we're much more guilty of. We could imagine that if we were in a place where everyone was small or everyone was large, we might make mistakes like Gulliver makes. But we all live, I think, in communities that are a bit like the Houyhnhnms. And so we are all very subject to these kinds of deceptions, and I think that's how he gets us.That's not to really excuse the bad readings because, you know, Gulliver does leave the land of the Houyhnhnms with a boat made out of human skin, which should—I think that moment should make you realize, if you haven't yet, that something is very seriously wrong with Gulliver. Gulliver has been kind of destroyed as a person by his travels, and especially by this last trip. But if you pass over that little detail, maybe you think, “Oh, wow, he found some very simple beings.”OLIVER: Well, there's also the great council where they debate the genocide of the Yahoos.HITZ: [laughs] Yes.OLIVER: And it directly contradicts several things Gulliver has come to believe about the Houyhnhnms, about the Yahoos, and about himself. And he's completely unaware of these contradictions and so in awe of the Houyhnhnms that he doesn't quite understand, I think, that he's accounting a genocide.HITZ: That's right. That's right.OLIVER: Even though he uses a phrase from Genesis that's very unmistakable. It's a sort of remarkable moment of—particularly to us, having had the 20th century. I think that's why Swift came back into favor in a way, because people used to say, Swift's unbearable view of human nature . . .This is a great bit in Boswell's Life of Johnson where, when they're traveling through Scotland, they're with a lady, and she says to Johnson, “Is any man naturally good?” And Johnson says, “No, no more than a wolf.” And Boswell says, “Well, sir, what about ladies?” And Johnson says, “God, no, absolutely not.” And this woman says, “Oh my God, this is worse than Swift,” utterly horrific view of human nature.But of course, we can actually say, did he go far enough? [laughter] I mean, Swift clearly understands something very real and deep. The council of genocide is horrifyingly familiar to us. And I think that's much to Swift's credit that he can see that, and to show that Gulliver would blind himself to it. And people still blind themselves to it, right?HITZ: That's right. And I wonder—you would know more about this than me because it is a bit of a historical question, but my understanding is that quite a lot of the savagery, the worst parts of rule over men that we see in Gulliver's Travels are pictures of Ireland in the 17th, 18th centuries. And I wonder if that took some time to reveal itself to the British, and in some ways it's still not really as known as it might be. We think of the colonial project as being something that was directed at India and Africa—OLIVER: Faraway countries.HITZ: —faraway countries where people looked really different. And we're not as familiar with the kinds of things that were done to the cuddly Irish with their nice music, and who we don't think of as being people that you would savagely oppress like that. So I think—OLIVER: So, I think partly the English are not interested in their own history in the way that they are expected to be. And partly the English interest in Irish history has become very focused on the more recent events. And it's very hard to get back past that. And it all becomes very complicated, and it's a sort of different country. So there's some of that, but I think generally we don't want to know what we did, yes.HITZ: Well, and I think in anglophone countries in general, there's going to be a history of something like that. To attribute it to the British is not to say that—I mean, Americans have chattel slavery and the genocide of the natives, and the Australians have their own situation. All of the anglophone countries have something like this on their conscience.I think that obscures the meaning of that final book. I think we don't recognize—and that's really to Swift's credit, to have a social critique that is so real and so deep that you may not even recognize yourself in the picture.Slavery in Gulliver's TravelsOLIVER: Yes. When I read it again—I read it as an undergraduate, but I really was actually more interested in the other parts of Swift's work. And I thought it was brilliant, and then I read it again. And it was more recently that—I didn't understand how I couldn't have seen it, but it's basically a book about slavery, as I come back to it.And in each of the books there is enslavement of a different sort. So, to begin with, Gulliver is the one being kept in a box or kept in a house, or he's chained up by the Lilliputians or Glumdalclitch.HITZ: Right. That's right.OLIVER: She's a very nice sort of master, as it were, [laughter] but he has that box that can be sealed, and the dwarf has him swiping at the wasps. And then the enslavement that the flying island has of the country below is like England and Ireland. And then in the final book, you know, the Houyhnhnms are whipping the Yahoos.HITZ: That's right.OLIVER: The slavery thing gets worse and worse as the book goes on. And one of the things that's clever is that it's funny when Gulliver is enslaved, right? When the wasps are let out and he has to—and Swift sort of does that clever thing where he undermines things by making it a joke at the end. By the book of the Houyhnhnms, there is really very little humor. And the twist at the end is always dark.Gulliver can't see that—he can see that he's a bit like the Yahoos. But he can't see that they've been enslaved in the way that he—the farmer wanted to take him around the kingdom and show him off, and he says, “I couldn't possibly have had children in that condition because I couldn't have it on my conscience that I had begotten a slave, someone born into slavery. I couldn't do that.”HITZ: Right.OLIVER: Then he's in the Houyhnhnms and he can't—it's quite remarkable.HITZ: [laughs] Yes. I don't think it's quite true that in the end there's no humor. I read it with some Catherine Project group a couple of years ago, and one of the readers pointed out that it's not obvious Gulliver isn't leaving his home and sitting out in the ocean and always landing on England every single time; just every time, he lands there.And there's something hilarious about an Englishman that discovers a place where there's all horses, [laughter] and his love of horses overwhelms him, and he becomes persuaded that they're the only rational beings that there are. I mean, that is funny.OLIVER: Yes, I agree. There's a lot of irony and stuff. But I think it's in Lilliput when he describes their manner of writing. And he says they don't write from left to right as we do in England, or from right to left, or up-down like the Chinese, but from one corner to the other, as the ladies do in England. This is very funny, dry humor, and that sort of thing is gone. And the things that surprise you at the end of a sentence or a paragraph are more like, “Oh, and of course I used Yahoo skin to cover the boat.” And you're like, oh my God, this is not a joke anymore.You know, in A Modest Proposal, he makes real humor out of those kind of horrors. And with the Houyhnhnms, I think he actually refuses the joke to make you feel the disgust, in a way.HITZ: Yes, that might be right. That might be right.Swift and PhilosophyOLIVER: What do you think about the idea that the Houyhnhnms are drawn from the Phaedrus and Socrates's idea of the soul with the two horses? And there's the good, rational horse and the vulgar, passionate horse, and the Yahoos are the other horse. You see what I mean?HITZ: Yes, yes.OLIVER: Is Swift showing us the two sides, and Gulliver's mistake is to prefer the one and not the—HITZ: Right, I think I have heard something like this before. I'm a bit skeptical. Swift doesn't strike me as someone who uses philosophy in quite that way. I think he's much more interested in Gulliver's—the Houyhnhnms' self-deception about the kinds of beings they are. They do not say “the thing which is not,” yet Gulliver's master hides from him this conversation about the genocide for quite some time. And maybe we don't know if he tells him quite the whole truth about it. So there's—OLIVER: And he also conceals the fact that the others don't like Gulliver because he's a partial—a reasonable Yahoo, as it were.HITZ: Right. So their self-deception, Gulliver's being taken in by their self-deception, the ways in which they—this is one of the ways that I think it's profound about the nature of slavery. And to cheer us all up, I'll make a Holocaust analogy, as you also did.When I was traveling in Germany some years ago, in one of their Holocaust museums, there was an image from a Nazi-era German newspaper of Jewish people living in complete squalor in the ghetto. And of course, they had forced them into squalor. But somehow they forced them into squalor, and then this reinforces the sense that they're these rat-like beings.And there's something very similar that the Houyhnhnms do to the Yahoos. They force them into this animal state, and then they say, “Oh God, look, these people are disgusting. They just don't know how to act.” That seems to me the kind of level at which Swift is working. He is interested in the nature of a human being, but not in the abstract Platonic sense, I don't think.He strikes me as someone who believes in common sense, common decency, basic freedom, and basic use of reason. And he finds in his time that there's distorting teachings, distorting ways of behavior that have gotten people far off track. To me, that's what it feels like it comes from. It doesn't feel like Plato is in the background to me.OLIVER: Is there an extent to which, though, it's a work of sort of anti-philosophy? As you say, Swift, he likes common sense. He likes ordinary reason, and he likes what he would call the revealed truth of Christianity. So he talks, in his sermons about people, it comes to you from God like a light. It's revealed to you. And he doesn't like this idea that the philosophers can work it all out.And in a way, that's the same sort of mistake that the scientists think they can discover all this stuff, and they go in these crazy ways. And the Houyhnhnms are a bit like that. If you had philosopher-kings, they would end up being perverted examples of rationality because they're ignoring the—so do you think it's anti-philosophy in a way? The book is saying, “No, no, I don't want philosophers”?Criticizing Elite Intellectual CultureHITZ: That's definitely a plausible reading. But it's hard to tell whether it's anti-philosophy or anti a particular style of thinking. It's worth pointing out, in that light, that Gulliver, when he arrives in the land of the Houyhnhnms, before he even meets a horse, he sees a Yahoo who, from what I can tell from the text, is trying to wave at him and say hello, who recognizes him. And he's horrified. He sees him instantly as a monster.So I think immediately upon landing, he sees the Yahoos as monstrous, and that tells me that he must already be off kilter. So he's not just corrupted by the Houyhnhnms; he's been somehow led off track, away from the capacity to recognize fellow human beings before that.And he's come from this—the third book is all about various kinds of inquiry, scientific endeavors, practical endeavors, talking to the greats of the past, necromancy, and various kinds of inquiry into wisdom or things like wisdom. And somehow that's the thing that seems to push him to the point where he can no longer tell what a human being is.OLIVER: One of my favorite parts is when he's with the wizards, and he asks to be shown Homer and Aristotle and all their commentators. And he says that there were vast rooms full of these commentators, endless numbers of them. But Homer and Aristotle didn't recognize any of them because they were all so ashamed of the terrible things they'd said about these great men's works that they kept themselves forever in a different part of the underworld. They couldn't bear the shame of being revealed to having told lies and said second-rate things.It's very, very funny. And I think that's another sort of angle on which the book says, “You're so tempted to make a comment and have an idea and be a philosopher, and you should just accept the revealed truth of what is known. Just stop it. Just stop it.” [laughter]HITZ: Well, I suppose maybe I would also put it this way, that Swift sees the condition of 18th-century Ireland, which is quite poor, very bad. And it's ruled in a savage way by the English, who have a quite flourishing intellectual culture, as it happens, at this time.So I think what he might be is not a critic of philosophy so much as a critic of intellectual culture. Because intellectual culture seems to not only not help with existential concerns like slavery and oppression and savage poverty, but even serves to mask and hide and create illusions behind it.So that's, I guess, how it strikes me, as a book that's hostile to what you'd now call elite intellectual culture. And I don't know how fundamental that critique is, in light of its inability to solve problems for real human beings or to obscure the causes of what's going on with real human beings.OLIVER: I think it's quite fundamental because outside of Gulliver's—I think this comes into Gulliver's Travels, but what he might have said more explicitly elsewhere is, there are people starving in the streets of Dublin. And we've got corrupt politicians and intellectuals saying all these things, but you know, here she is starving. You don't need to work that out. [laughter] There's no question—the reveal—just be a Christian and, like, for goodness' sake . . .HITZ: Yes.OLIVER: And when, for example, he talks to the king of Brobdingnag, and there's that wonderful satire of the English government and everything. And he says, “Those people understood mathematics and poetry and whatever, but I could never drive into their head any sense of the abstract or any of these speculative—they simply didn't know what that was. They didn't know what I was saying.” [laughter]And so in a way, his ideal government is anti-philosophical because it would just look at the human problem in front of it. It wouldn't do speculative science. It wouldn't think of itself as rational, all this Platonic stuff. It would just—she's in rags, she has bare feet, you know?HITZ: Yes, that's right.OLIVER: What do we need a philosopher-king? Like, what are you talking about?HITZ: Exactly.OLIVER: The priest understands this because he's there in the city doing it. And is there something of that in the book, that constant resistance of the cleverness of people who cannot see daily life?HITZ: I think that's absolutely true, and I think it's probably one of the things I love about the book, because I think this somehow gets to something in my own heart. Even though I'm a professional intellectual—I have been my whole life—the distance between the concerns of professional intellectuals and the concerns of living, real people in various parts of the world is very large.And it's even worse when, as it was when I was coming up in grad school, there's a ton of explicit concern and various operations underway to improve life for others, which have zero connection with anything that anyone actually does. So I think the Laputans, which is the beginning of the third book, when Gulliver—OLIVER: The flying island.HITZ: Yes, when Gulliver visits the people on the flying island, who have one eye towards the heavens and one eye pointed inward. And they study music and mathematics, and they live in a giant flying saucer, which has the—OLIVER: And the flappers.HITZ: That's right. [laughter] When someone needs to talk to them, someone flaps their ears so that they pay attention. And their wives all run off with working people because they can't bear to be treated the way they are by men like this. And the flying saucer is not just distant. It also has the power to crush the towns underneath it if it judges them to be rebellious.This image will stick with you for the rest of your life. I mean, it's absolutely perfect, and the perfect image of bad government of a kind when intellectual culture is prized. And it's hinted early on in the book in Lilliput, when the rulers in Lilliput have to do these elaborate dances with ropes.OLIVER: Oh, with the king and the chief minister hold the pole, funny angles, and if you get under it, you get a green ribbon or a red ribbon.HITZ: Exactly. [laughter] And they have these athletic contests of grace and various colored ribbons, and that determine how far you get in the halls of power.OLIVER: Yes. Are you a cabinet minister or a junior minister? Yes, yes.HITZ: Exactly. So there, it's all just a funny joke. But it develops, I think, into the Laputans, people who have kinds of expertise that are actually hostile to them doing any kind of humane governing. So yes, that seems right to me.Christianity in GulliverOLIVER: To what extent is it a Christian book?HITZ: That's an interesting question. I've never found a strong Christian element in it myself. There are satires of religious wars, both in Lilliput, where Lilliput's at war with its neighboring city. Oh, wait a second, there's two different disputes in Lilliput. One is about what side you cut your egg on.OLIVER: There are the Little-Endians and the Big-Endians,HITZ: Right. And then there's also one about heel size. So there's two different kinds of disputes.OLIVER: With the marvelous image that the king is a Short-Heeler. But they think that the heir to the throne might be favorable to the High-Heelers because he has one heel slightly higher than the other, and he walks with a wobbly gait.HITZ: [laughs] That's right. This, again, in Lilliput is just utterly hilarious, outrageous, very silly, obviously a parody of religious wars between different kinds of Christians. But it resurfaces towards the end. It's the Houyhnhnms, where he talks to the Master Horse—OLIVER: And the horse sort of pretends to this great rationality, simply can't understand that men would kill each other over the question of whether flesh is bread or bread is flesh.HITZ: That's right. That's right. That's right. So there's definitely disparaging remarks about religious wars. And as you're talking about it, where along with Swift's praise of common sense, there's a kind of basic Christian morality, which is that the poor and the suffering need attention. That all strikes me as Christian. Apart from that, I'm not sure. If you have a religious take, I'd be interested to hear it.OLIVER: I find it very interesting that Swift had quite strict beliefs. He was not in favor of Catholics. He thought Dissenters should be tolerated, but he wanted the Test Act. He was very particular about all these things. And in his other works, he's quite direct about that. But in this book, he achieves a kind of high ambivalence. And he's not a Little-Ender or a Big-Ender.HITZ: That's right.OLIVER: And he says the religious text on which this is based simply says that you must break the egg at the most convenient end.HITZ: [laughs] That's right.OLIVER: Now, of course, in reality, he's a Little-Ender, and he's very committed to the Reformation, and he thinks it's all terrible that they're not. And it's interesting that someone with such angry, insistent beliefs on the Anglican Church would take this ambivalent position.And he satirizes so much. But the anti-slavery stuff, the description of the Laputans bringing the island down, and then he says, “I've never seen so much want and misery, and there's a wild look in their eyes, and they're wearing rags.” I mean, this is Dublin, right? This is just, along with the slavery, this basic Christian concern for the oppressed, the poor, the suffering.HITZ: Yes, that's right.OLIVER: And so I don't quite know. It's almost like the book is saying, again with this anti-intellectual thing, all these doctrinal disputes and which church this and who believes that. And here we have slaves and poor people and beggars and starving people.HITZ: Right.OLIVER: Christianity should deal with that first. So is the implicit criticism of his fellow Christians, in a way, that they're more interested in these disputes than in the fact that there are enslaved people and suffering people and—you see what I mean?HITZ: Yes, that's right.OLIVER: And Gulliver—the Houyhnhnms are highly rational but not Christian, which is a significant omission. And by the end, are you supposed to wonder if Gulliver actually isn't very much of a Christian? Because he can see this suffering and not respond to it at all.HITZ: Right, when maybe the—is the best person in the book the King of Brobdingnag? Does that seem right? The person with the—at least who says the best things?OLIVER: He says the best things. I think the best person is Glumdalclitch. She shows real charity and real love towards him.HITZ: What about the Houyhnhnm, the one who likes him, who says, “Fare thee well, gentle Yahoo”? It's tear-jerking—OLIVER: Oh, the sorrel nag.HITZ: The sorrel nag. I can literally weep at that moment when she says, “Fare thee well, gentle Yahoo.”OLIVER: That's true. That's true. She and Glumdalclitch are maybe more similar characters. Yes, yes, yes.HITZ: They're similar characters. Okay.OLIVER: And they have that basic, you don't need to call it Christian. You don't need—it doesn't need theology.HITZ: Humane. I would call it humane. Yes.OLIVER: They have that basic love of their fellow. You know, Glumdalclitch doesn't say, “Oh, how amusing this little man is, or how entertaining, or I can make—” She says, “He must be cared for. He looks a bit like me. He must be cared for.”HITZ: Right.OLIVER: And the sorrel nag, again, has the love of the fellow creature.HITZ: That's right. That's right.OLIVER: So I think Swift might be bringing in this, what he thinks of as the revealed truth of Christianity. Like, you shouldn't need telling, you shouldn't need to argue. It's there.HITZ: Right. This is just me making things up, which is what I'm here for. We're podcasting. Yes.OLIVER: Yes, of course. Also, is that not what the philosophers would do? That's what Swift would say.HITZ: But if I was going to make something up, what I would say is something like this: that Swift to me, from the testimony of Gulliver's Travels, which is the book of his I really know the best. I don't know much about the rest of it. He has a level of self-awareness and sophistication. So, he knows that that religious difference is being used as a pretext. He knows that it is obscuring the suffering of these people. So, for the purposes of the book, he says, “Look, if you're a smart person, if you're a smart ruler, if you're an actually humane, intelligent, commonsensical ruler, you know that the fact that they have the wrong religious views is not a reason for them to be enslaved and oppressed and starved.” So that would be my suspicion.And that's why I think, to me, the religion is so light, because it's not really a religious problem. It's actually just a human problem and a political problem that is, how do you run your country so that these subject peoples are allowed to be free and develop themselves and be full human beings? That would be my made-up guess.Students' Views of GulliverOLIVER: What do undergraduates think? What is it that they find interesting in the book, and what do they like or dislike?HITZ: It's been a couple of years. I think they like this idea that—we all think travel is very broadening, a great way to think about the world. You know, you can learn so much about one's fellow human beings. And whatever else is going on in Gulliver's Travels, travel does not necessarily produce enlightenment.So I think they like the attention to the ways in which, even when we are trying to learn, we fail to learn. And the ways in which structures of learning, like traveling or studying science, might actually make you worse and not better, things like that. But it's not a book—I think it's fair to say it's not one of the favorite books of the undergraduates.OLIVER: Okay.HITZ: I think they find it a little bit distant, and I'm not sure why that is.OLIVER: Is it because it sort of looks like a novel, but it's not what we have come to expect a novel to be? And it sort of has that—HITZ: I think that's right.OLIVER: The pre–Jane Austen novel is kind of weird to us now.HITZ: Well, they love Don Quixote.OLIVER: Okay.HITZ: And that is a challenge of a similar kind. It's a novel which doesn't quite read like a novel, and the humor is kind of old. I mean, it's also true—undergraduates, in my experience, in general—I hope they'll forgive me for saying this on a podcast—they're not always good at comedy. They tend to think that serious things must be tragic.OLIVER: You can't get an A by making a joke.HITZ: Well, more that they have a sense that an intellectual life is something serious. It's serious.OLIVER: Oh, yes. Okay. And the syllabus slightly reinforces that, doesn't it?HITZ: Well, it's sort of self-reinforcing because we used to read more Aristophanes. We used to read Rabelais.OLIVER: If you do Shakespeare, it'll be the tragedies.HITZ: No, no, we do Shakespeare comedies.OLIVER: Oh, you do? Okay.HITZ: Yes. We have As You Like It and The Tempest. And do we have more tragedies? Maybe one more tragedy than comedy, but not a terrible imbalance.OLIVER: Well, that's good.HITZ: It's not Shakespeare-type comedy that's—maybe, correct me if I'm wrong, a Shakespeare comedy is something that ends in a marriage, more or less.OLIVER: More or less.HITZ: It's things that are funny—they don't necessarily think that humor is a way of thinking.OLIVER: Do they struggle with irony?HITZ: No, not usually. As long as it's serious irony, Anyway, I'm not sure why. I think I'm making things—I'm going too far out of the grounds for drawing conclusions.Favorite Parts of the BookOLIVER: Sure. Do you have a favorite passage?HITZ: One of my favorites is the part—is it Balnibarbi where they have people who try to speak with objects?OLIVER: Oh, yes, yes, yes.HITZ: And they have to carry around wagons full of things because they never know what you might want to talk about. [laughter] That's so weird. Because I think I spent a lot of time studying with philosophers, there's a bit of—something's on the nose about this.OLIVER: Yes.HITZ: You know, it's like, “No, you've got to say exactly—no, that's too imprecise. You have to say exactly what you mean.” Bernard Williams, the great philosopher, has something complaining about how contemporary philosophers are very controlling of their readers. They don't want anyone to make the slightest mistake about what they mean by a particular word. That's how the people who speak by objects strike me.OLIVER: Do you think that is a problem of contemporary philosophy?HITZ: Oh, sure. Yes, absolutely. Yes. The way Williams puts it is that when you write something, it should be like a cake mix, and the reader should be able to put their own egg and bake the cake themselves.OLIVER: Oh, I see. You mean like a box of mix, yes.HITZ: Yes, yes, exactly. It's like a box of cake mix. Whereas making the cake painstakingly and force-feeding it bite by bite to the reader is not actually an—OLIVER: Telling them how it tastes.HITZ: Telling them how it tastes is not an educational endeavor.OLIVER: When does this become too dominant in philosophy?HITZ: It's a feature of 20th-century analytic philosophy to be very careful with the meanings of words. And it's by no means universal; it's just a natural vice to the territory.Iris MurdochOLIVER: Is this a problem for someone like Iris Murdoch, or is it more the A. J. Ayer type?HITZ: No, it's the A. J. Ayer type, not Iris Murdoch. No, Iris Murdoch is heterodox outside of the—OLIVER: Do you like her philosophy?HITZ: I do, yes.OLIVER: What do you like about it? Platonic?HITZ: Now, see, I came here to talk about Swift. [laughter]OLIVER: I know, but you made such a good point about the satire of philosophers.HITZ: I like her writing for a more general educated audience, her not making assumptions about the philosophical training of her readers, and her use of Plato for sure, which is quite interesting and creative. She sort of ingests Plato and does something with it that I think is very interesting.OLIVER: Is she properly appreciated as a Platonist, or do you think there's more attention to be paid?HITZ: There's probably more attention to be paid, but she gets some attention. She gets some attention. I also don't think it was particularly helpful, these two books that came out a couple of years ago about Murdoch, Foot, Midgley, and Anscombe.OLIVER: Oh, yes, yes, yes. I only read one of those. It was quite good.HITZ: It might be quite good, but those four women are quite different from one another. So it's an example of where attention to identity could obscure as much as it—OLIVER: Well, one of the books was more about the ideas—they were both obviously about the ideas—and one of them was more about the fact that they were together in Oxford. And that they benefited from hanging out, talking, doing different sorts of work, sleeping with each other's husbands, et cetera.HITZ: Yes, all the good stuff.OLIVER: And from the more sociological point of view, it was very interesting to see that, actually, a lot of what Murdoch did was bound up with her friendships and relationships, in that the argument basically is, A. J. Ayer and the others get sent away because of the war. So these four women are actually—they've been banned from this seminar and told they're not allowed.Well, now they can sit around and do what they want to do. And it worked, and they all produced very interesting things. So from that point of view, I think it was—but I agree with you, Elizabeth Anscombe and Iris Murdoch are not the same. [laughter]HITZ: Not even particularly similar. I also feel like I've read enough of Murdoch's novels to have a sense of what the sociological situation was like.OLIVER: You like the novels?HITZ: I do like them, yes.OLIVER: Do you have favorites?HITZ: I can't remember the name of my favorite because I haven't read them for years. It's one of the things I read years ago, the one—I'd remember it if I saw the title. There's an LSD trip at the beginning of it.OLIVER: Oh, The Good Apprentice. I love that book.HITZ: The Good Apprentice, yes. I think that was my favorite. But I never fell in love with it. I just liked it, and I found it interesting, and I found the sociology interesting. Okay, this is what academics at this time period were doing.What to Pair with SwiftOLIVER: We got diverted.HITZ: “We” got diverted. [laughs]OLIVER: We did. If Swift is on a great books syllabus, what is it good to pair him with? If people are reading Swift, on or off a syllabus, do you think there are other—Hooker, you said, which I think would be interesting.HITZ: No, Hooke. It's Hooke.OLIVER: Hooke. Hooke. That's a very good point.HITZ: The guy who wrote Micrographia, who has the enormous picture of the flea.OLIVER: Yes, yes, yes. So that would be good. But any other? Is it worth reading Plato alongside him?HITZ: Well, I like to—he's on the list for something we called Life of the Mind Seminar at Catherine Project, which is our introduction to the life of the mind.OLIVER: And just to tell people, the Catherine Project—this is not a university. Anyone can join a seminar.HITZ: That's right. It's an open online readers community. Consists of small, high-quality conversations, mostly on Zoom, some in person.OLIVER: You could be some kid, an accountant, a dentist, whatever, and you come and do a—you've got a PhD running a seminar, and you get that experience.HITZ: Right. Some of them are peer led, so they're not necessarily PhDs running them. The reading groups are not necessarily run by PhDs. But the core program in which the Life of the Mind Seminar is—either a PhD or an ABD [all but degree] or someone with some academic experience is usually leading that. We have it there, and we have it there with a set of books that are meant to disorient rather than to orient.So one of the difficulties with reading great books with more or less random selections of adults is that people feel uncertain, out of place. And they bring expertise, real or fake, to the table, which makes it very difficult to have a conversation. It's usually fake expertise, for what it's worth.OLIVER: Give us an example of what you mean by fake expertise.HITZ: Well, so someone will have—we'll be, say, reading Hamlet. Someone will have taken a class on Shakespeare in college, and they'll say, “Actually, we're asking this question. But what I learned, my professor told me, is that Hamlet actually symbolizes—he has an Oedipus complex and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, and then this is what this means, and this is what that means.” And then your conversation's over, because you need to focus just on the text that's shared between the—OLIVER: It's not a crossword puzzle.HITZ: Exactly. It's not a crossword puzzle, and it's not something where—or the other—people often, again, they feel a bit on their back feet. So they'll google a bunch of stuff about the author, and they'll start tossing out random facts about the book or about the author, about the context. And again, you don't get really into the meat of the book that way.So, Gulliver's Travels is there to help us think about ways in which we might not be expert in things we're expert. Ways in which we might think we understand something and not understand it. And ways in which people who, with every appearance of seriousness and scientific principle, can just say unbelievably stupid things.So it's a very, very good book for that, where in that sense, it's I think very good for any liberal education program. It's liberating that way. One of the things we need to be liberated from is false expertise.OLIVER: You're talking really about these secondhand opinions that you haven't interrogated and come to understand yourself.HITZ: Exactly. Exactly, exactly, exactly.OLIVER: This is what Mill says. Everything is new to someone, and the real genius is that you find it out.HITZ: Exactly.OLIVER: You don't get taught it. Yes, yes.HITZ: Exactly, exactly. So real learning is things you find for yourself. Anyway, that's what I like it with. As for pairing it, yes, I think it would just depend on what you were—I don't have a clear thought about that. I think it'd be good to pair it with Galileo's Starry Messenger and preface to Hooke's Micrographia.But you could also pair it with Emma. Be quite good, actually, because Emma is also about someone who really doesn't know what they're doing and has no idea. Thinks they know what's going on; they really have no idea what's going on.OLIVER: Yes. Hamlet as well, in fact.HITZ: I guess so. Does he not know what's going on?OLIVER: Who's diverting now? [laughter] Well, there's an interesting question, isn't there, about whether Hamlet has legitimate doubts. So he says, “This ghost could be a demon. I should be careful. I don't know what I'm doing. I'm going to pretend to be mad. I'm going to find out.” Or whether he just doesn't want to see the truth in front of him, and he quote-unquote “delays” because of that. I don't know if you have a view.HITZ: I don't think he's deluded. I think the problem is something different, but I haven't thought enough about it recently to know what his volitional obstacle is. But I don't think he's deluded. I think he sees what's going on, but there's something about acting that doesn't work for him.OLIVER: An internal—HITZ: Something internal. Something internal. In a way, I find the play very hard. I don't know what, for instance, what does that obstacle have to do with Ophelia? What's going on with that? Anyway, he's very mysterious, but I don't—yes, that'd be my sense, is that he's not—OLIVER: Do you buy this idea that he's a nihilist?HITZ: No, although he's definitely faced with something like nihilism. He has to look at it. And of course, the play does end with everyone dead, [laughs] so it's not obvious that he's wrong.Sympathy for GulliverOLIVER: This question hangs over Gulliver as well. Is the problem by the end that he's basically become a nihilist? His response to the Yahoos is to deny meaning, deny the possibility of meaning, to shut himself away.HITZ: He is a true misanthrope. He hates human beings and refuses to interact with them and in that sense, in some way, removes himself from any further mistakes. In another way, the mistake that he's in is so massive that that hardly seems like a consolation. But yes, he's definitely stuck, and he's stuck in a place where who he is—because he's a human being. We have to remember that.So he's in a place of total self-hatred and the hatred of his neighbor, what you'd call from the Christian perspective a total loss of charity. Is that nihilist? I don't know, but it's definitely bad. It's not a good state to be in. Maybe I don't know what you mean by nihilism exactly.OLIVER: Are we supposed to disapprove of him at the end or sympathize with him?HITZ: Disapprove, I think.OLIVER: Yes? You don't feel sorry for him?HITZ: I do a bit.OLIVER: But not much.HITZ: Well, should I?OLIVER: I have come to believe—yes, this is what I've come to feel in subsequent readings, is that Gulliver, as you say, is very mistaken. He thinks he understands things that he does not understand. He has the sort of pretense of rationality, but he lacks any sort of meta rationality to see what his limits are.And he becomes, therefore—he doesn't advocate genocide, and he doesn't take any pleasure in using Yahoo skin, but he's just completely null to it. There's a sort of void there where human feeling ought to be. And it's tragic for him. It's a tragic ending that he is so isolated. And we can't sympathize with him, as it were, but we can feel sort of awful that he's shriveled into this state rather than judging or blame.I think one of the persistent themes of the book is, as I say, this kind of basic love of fellow creature, the Glumdalclitch or the sorrel. And if you take that from the book, you will wish you could bring Gulliver back.HITZ: Right. What you're saying reminds me that there is an interesting parallel in Plato's dialogues that I hadn't thought of before, Plato's Parmenides, which is perhaps the most difficult Plato's dialogue. So it's a conversation between young Socrates and the philosopher Parmenides. The first third of it is relatively clear, some arguments against what people think of as Plato's theory of forms.Then there's an extensive, insane dialectical process where various theses about the connection between being and oneness are both argued for and then refuted, and argued for and then refuted, pages and pages and pages and pages of it. So this seems to be—it's Parmenides and Zeno who are running Socrates through this ringer.And the person at the very beginning of the dialogue who they have to go find, to tell him the story of how Socrates met Parmenides, used to study philosophy. But now he just trains horses. [laughs] One of my teachers pointed this out to me, and I've never been able to get over it, that he spent this time doing philosophy, and he's like, “You know what? I'm going to work with horses for the rest of my life. If I never hear another human voice, that's fine with me.”So I think that is an interesting parallel. And I think it is not really that uncommon to see people who are totally disillusioned with relating to humans, who then relate to animals instead, like they devote themselves to animals.OLIVER: But on that reading, it might be a disillusionment with philosophical humanity. It might be philosophy that's killed Gulliver's human feeling.HITZ: That's right. Well, I think that's one possibility, one very strong possibility. That's why I think the Houyhnhnms come after the Laputans. Going to the furthest reaches of his intellectual interests just destroys his humanity.But it doesn't seem like exhaustion in the same way that whoever, I can't remember his name, the character who relates the Parmenides, where you just think he must be exhausted from having heard more than one conversation like this. [laughter] And just in the stable with the horses eating oats, I mean, it's just delightful. It's just so peaceful, you know?OLIVER: Bucolic, pastoral, yes.HITZ: Yes, exactly. Exactly. Maybe you're right that we should be more sympathetic to someone in that situation.OLIVER: Well, next time you read it, you can tell me if you change your mind.HITZ: All right. I will tell you if I change my mind.OLIVER: Very good. Zena Hitz, thank you very much.HITZ: Thank you very much, Henry Oliver. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.commonreader.co.uk

This week David and Marina of FAME Architecture & Design are joined by Steven Fleming, architect, author, and design educator. The three discussed Steven's background, Platonist & utopian architecture, architects & visionary work, famous architects' commissions and client relationships, issue with architecture teachers, Steven's career journey, books & bikes, mission as a teacher, architecture tutor, teaching high schoolers design thinking, and more.  This episode is supported by Chaos • Programa • Future London Academy SUBSCRIBE  • Apple Podcasts  • YouTube  • Spotify CONNECT  • Website: www.secondstudiopod.com • Office  • Instagram • Facebook  • Call or text questions to 213-222-6950 SUPPORT Leave a review  EPISODE CATEGORIES  •  Interviews: Interviews with industry leaders.  •  Project Companion: Informative talks for clients.    •  Fellow Designer: Tips for designers.  •  After Hours: Casual conversations about everyday life. •  Design Reviews: Reviews of creative projects and buildings. The views, opinions, or beliefs expressed by Sponsee or Sponsee's guests on the Sponsored Podcast Episodes do not reflect the views, opinions, or beliefs of Sponsor.

The Mystical Theology · Περὶ μυστικῆς θεολογίας Written by Saint Dionysius the Areopagite · Διονύσιος ὁ Ἀρεοπαγίτης Translated by Clarence Edwin Rolt (1920 Edition) In his book On the Babylonian Captivity of the Church, Martin Luther said: "I completely disapprove of giving so much credence to this Dionysius, whoever he was, since there is practically no solid learning to be found in him. Take, for instance, the fabrications about the angels in his Celestial Hierarchy (a book much sweated over by people of a curious or superstitious temperament). By what authority or reason, I ask, does he prove any of this? If you read and evaluate this honestly, are not all these things his own dreamlike musings? On the other hand, in his Mystical Theology (so highly praised by some of the most ignorant theologians), he is most dangerous, speaking more like a Platonist than a Christian."    

This is part 5 of the recording of my talk at the Fourteenth Annual Marquette Summer Seminar on Aristotle and the Aristotelian Tradition, "The Significance of Thumos in Platonic and Aristotelian Moral Psychology". An important difference between the Platonist tradition and the Aristotelian is the status accorded to thumos in their respective moral psychologies. In very broad strokes, the Platonic tradition consistently follows and reinterprets Plato's tripartite conception of the soul, maintaining thumos one of three main parts of the soul, distinct from, in between, and interacting a rational part and the appetites. Thumos has a clear scope and proper function in Plato's texts and those of later Platonists. In Aristotle's moral psychology, thumos has a more restricted status, for the most part reinterpreted as one main mode of desire or affectivity (orexis). By contrast to other moral psychologies, e.g. that of the Stoics who treat thumos as just one emotion or passion among others, thumos in Aristotle and the Aristotelian tradition retains a distinctiveness from other, lower forms of affectivity, evidenced by discussions like that of akrasia due to thumos in N.E. 7 or that of thumos as one of the main causes for human actions in Rhet. 1. The status, function, and proper education of thumos remained a matter of contention and reinterpretation through antiquity, evidenced by discussions bearing upon thumos, for example in Plutarch, Galen, Philo, among others. My paper first outlines Plato's treatment of thumos, drawing primarily upon Republic and Timaeus. It then sets out an Aristotelian account of thumos reinterpreted as a main mode of orexis, central to anger (orge), friendship, and other affective states, drawing mainly upon the two Ethics, the Politics, and the Rhetoric. Similarities and continuities between Plato's and Aristotle's positions are stressed, particularly the need to understand, orient, and educate thumos. Both positions are briefly contrasted against other interpretations which do not accord thumos a distinctive status, including Stoic thought. The paper also briefly discusses selected later reinterpretations of and controversies about thumos in the ongoing Platonic and Aristotelian traditions. To support my ongoing work, go to my Patreon site - www.patreon.com/sadler If you'd like to make a direct contribution, you can do so here - www.paypal.me/ReasonIO - or at BuyMeACoffee - www.buymeacoffee.com/A4quYdWoM You can find over 3500 philosophy videos in my main YouTube channel - www.youtube.com/user/gbisadler

This is part 4 of the recording of my talk at the Fourteenth Annual Marquette Summer Seminar on Aristotle and the Aristotelian Tradition, "The Significance of Thumos in Platonic and Aristotelian Moral Psychology". An important difference between the Platonist tradition and the Aristotelian is the status accorded to thumos in their respective moral psychologies. In very broad strokes, the Platonic tradition consistently follows and reinterprets Plato's tripartite conception of the soul, maintaining thumos one of three main parts of the soul, distinct from, in between, and interacting a rational part and the appetites. Thumos has a clear scope and proper function in Plato's texts and those of later Platonists. In Aristotle's moral psychology, thumos has a more restricted status, for the most part reinterpreted as one main mode of desire or affectivity (orexis). By contrast to other moral psychologies, e.g. that of the Stoics who treat thumos as just one emotion or passion among others, thumos in Aristotle and the Aristotelian tradition retains a distinctiveness from other, lower forms of affectivity, evidenced by discussions like that of akrasia due to thumos in N.E. 7 or that of thumos as one of the main causes for human actions in Rhet. 1. The status, function, and proper education of thumos remained a matter of contention and reinterpretation through antiquity, evidenced by discussions bearing upon thumos, for example in Plutarch, Galen, Philo, among others. My paper first outlines Plato's treatment of thumos, drawing primarily upon Republic and Timaeus. It then sets out an Aristotelian account of thumos reinterpreted as a main mode of orexis, central to anger (orge), friendship, and other affective states, drawing mainly upon the two Ethics, the Politics, and the Rhetoric. Similarities and continuities between Plato's and Aristotle's positions are stressed, particularly the need to understand, orient, and educate thumos. Both positions are briefly contrasted against other interpretations which do not accord thumos a distinctive status, including Stoic thought. The paper also briefly discusses selected later reinterpretations of and controversies about thumos in the ongoing Platonic and Aristotelian traditions. To support my ongoing work, go to my Patreon site - www.patreon.com/sadler If you'd like to make a direct contribution, you can do so here - www.paypal.me/ReasonIO - or at BuyMeACoffee - www.buymeacoffee.com/A4quYdWoM You can find over 3500 philosophy videos in my main YouTube channel - www.youtube.com/user/gbisadler

This is part 3 of the recording of my talk at the Fourteenth Annual Marquette Summer Seminar on Aristotle and the Aristotelian Tradition, "The Significance of Thumos in Platonic and Aristotelian Moral Psychology". An important difference between the Platonist tradition and the Aristotelian is the status accorded to thumos in their respective moral psychologies. In very broad strokes, the Platonic tradition consistently follows and reinterprets Plato's tripartite conception of the soul, maintaining thumos one of three main parts of the soul, distinct from, in between, and interacting a rational part and the appetites. Thumos has a clear scope and proper function in Plato's texts and those of later Platonists. In Aristotle's moral psychology, thumos has a more restricted status, for the most part reinterpreted as one main mode of desire or affectivity (orexis). By contrast to other moral psychologies, e.g. that of the Stoics who treat thumos as just one emotion or passion among others, thumos in Aristotle and the Aristotelian tradition retains a distinctiveness from other, lower forms of affectivity, evidenced by discussions like that of akrasia due to thumos in N.E. 7 or that of thumos as one of the main causes for human actions in Rhet. 1. The status, function, and proper education of thumos remained a matter of contention and reinterpretation through antiquity, evidenced by discussions bearing upon thumos, for example in Plutarch, Galen, Philo, among others. My paper first outlines Plato's treatment of thumos, drawing primarily upon Republic and Timaeus. It then sets out an Aristotelian account of thumos reinterpreted as a main mode of orexis, central to anger (orge), friendship, and other affective states, drawing mainly upon the two Ethics, the Politics, and the Rhetoric. Similarities and continuities between Plato's and Aristotle's positions are stressed, particularly the need to understand, orient, and educate thumos. Both positions are briefly contrasted against other interpretations which do not accord thumos a distinctive status, including Stoic thought. The paper also briefly discusses selected later reinterpretations of and controversies about thumos in the ongoing Platonic and Aristotelian traditions. To support my ongoing work, go to my Patreon site - www.patreon.com/sadler If you'd like to make a direct contribution, you can do so here - www.paypal.me/ReasonIO - or at BuyMeACoffee - www.buymeacoffee.com/A4quYdWoM You can find over 3500 philosophy videos in my main YouTube channel - www.youtube.com/user/gbisadler

This is part 2 of the recording of my talk at the Fourteenth Annual Marquette Summer Seminar on Aristotle and the Aristotelian Tradition, "The Significance of Thumos in Platonic and Aristotelian Moral Psychology". An important difference between the Platonist tradition and the Aristotelian is the status accorded to thumos in their respective moral psychologies. In very broad strokes, the Platonic tradition consistently follows and reinterprets Plato's tripartite conception of the soul, maintaining thumos one of three main parts of the soul, distinct from, in between, and interacting a rational part and the appetites. Thumos has a clear scope and proper function in Plato's texts and those of later Platonists. In Aristotle's moral psychology, thumos has a more restricted status, for the most part reinterpreted as one main mode of desire or affectivity (orexis). By contrast to other moral psychologies, e.g. that of the Stoics who treat thumos as just one emotion or passion among others, thumos in Aristotle and the Aristotelian tradition retains a distinctiveness from other, lower forms of affectivity, evidenced by discussions like that of akrasia due to thumos in N.E. 7 or that of thumos as one of the main causes for human actions in Rhet. 1. The status, function, and proper education of thumos remained a matter of contention and reinterpretation through antiquity, evidenced by discussions bearing upon thumos, for example in Plutarch, Galen, Philo, among others. My paper first outlines Plato's treatment of thumos, drawing primarily upon Republic and Timaeus. It then sets out an Aristotelian account of thumos reinterpreted as a main mode of orexis, central to anger (orge), friendship, and other affective states, drawing mainly upon the two Ethics, the Politics, and the Rhetoric. Similarities and continuities between Plato's and Aristotle's positions are stressed, particularly the need to understand, orient, and educate thumos. Both positions are briefly contrasted against other interpretations which do not accord thumos a distinctive status, including Stoic thought. The paper also briefly discusses selected later reinterpretations of and controversies about thumos in the ongoing Platonic and Aristotelian traditions. To support my ongoing work, go to my Patreon site - www.patreon.com/sadler If you'd like to make a direct contribution, you can do so here - www.paypal.me/ReasonIO - or at BuyMeACoffee - www.buymeacoffee.com/A4quYdWoM You can find over 3500 philosophy videos in my main YouTube channel - www.youtube.com/user/gbisadler

This is part 1 of the recording of my talk at the Fourteenth Annual Marquette Summer Seminar on Aristotle and the Aristotelian Tradition, "The Significance of Thumos in Platonic and Aristotelian Moral Psychology". An important difference between the Platonist tradition and the Aristotelian is the status accorded to thumos in their respective moral psychologies. In very broad strokes, the Platonic tradition consistently follows and reinterprets Plato's tripartite conception of the soul, maintaining thumos one of three main parts of the soul, distinct from, in between, and interacting a rational part and the appetites. Thumos has a clear scope and proper function in Plato's texts and those of later Platonists. In Aristotle's moral psychology, thumos has a more restricted status, for the most part reinterpreted as one main mode of desire or affectivity (orexis). By contrast to other moral psychologies, e.g. that of the Stoics who treat thumos as just one emotion or passion among others, thumos in Aristotle and the Aristotelian tradition retains a distinctiveness from other, lower forms of affectivity, evidenced by discussions like that of akrasia due to thumos in N.E. 7 or that of thumos as one of the main causes for human actions in Rhet. 1. The status, function, and proper education of thumos remained a matter of contention and reinterpretation through antiquity, evidenced by discussions bearing upon thumos, for example in Plutarch, Galen, Philo, among others. My paper first outlines Plato's treatment of thumos, drawing primarily upon Republic and Timaeus. It then sets out an Aristotelian account of thumos reinterpreted as a main mode of orexis, central to anger (orge), friendship, and other affective states, drawing mainly upon the two Ethics, the Politics, and the Rhetoric. Similarities and continuities between Plato's and Aristotle's positions are stressed, particularly the need to understand, orient, and educate thumos. Both positions are briefly contrasted against other interpretations which do not accord thumos a distinctive status, including Stoic thought. The paper also briefly discusses selected later reinterpretations of and controversies about thumos in the ongoing Platonic and Aristotelian traditions. To support my ongoing work, go to my Patreon site - www.patreon.com/sadler If you'd like to make a direct contribution, you can do so here - www.paypal.me/ReasonIO - or at BuyMeACoffee - www.buymeacoffee.com/A4quYdWoM You can find over 3500 philosophy videos in my main YouTube channel - www.youtube.com/user/gbisadler

In this conversation, Caleb is joined by Michael Carlino (PhD, The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary) to discuss the relationship between revelational epistemology and Christian Platonism, emphasizing the importance of philosophy serving theology rather than the reverse. Carlino critiques the use of pagan metaphysics in Christian thought, particularly the risks associated with blurring the creator-creature distinction and the implications for understanding sin and salvation. The discussion highlights the necessity of keeping the gospel central in theological discourse and offers practical insights for integrating philosophy within a biblical framework.Resources: Know Scripture, No Need for Platonism: Revelational Epistemology Has Priority Over Remnantal Sophistry by Michael CarlinoHere's a link to a series of helpful essays at Christ Over All on various topics concerning Christian Platonism: Beware of Greeks Bearing Gifts: Plundering Plato without Becoming a Platonist

In this episode, James Myers and Michael Fitzpatrick continue to discuss modern Platonists with an introduction to Alfred North Whitehead (1861-1947), a mathematician who ended up as a professor of philosophy at Harvard University even though he didn't hold a degree in philosophy. Whitehead hadn't formally trained as a philosopher but came to be highly regarded for his mathematically-informed process philosophy that relates the oneness of all things to the continual becoming of many things. Whitehead viewed the universe as an organism of unending interconnections, and mathematics as describing the transformations of the particular connections that shape the physical world. The transformations Whitehead called “process,” and his book Process and Reality is discussed in this introductory episode where we begin to look at the current relevance of Whitehead's thinking and how it connects to the thinking that Plato introduced to the world 2,400 years ago.

Episode: 1519 Learning to acquire knowledge and create it at the same time.  Today, we wonder where knowledge comes from.

This is my relatively short talk given during the 2025 Plato's Academy multidisciplinary conference: The Philosophy and Psychology of Anger, during which I discuss some of the useful insights and practices early Christian thinkers (2nd-5th Century CE) can provide us. These don't require one to be committed to Christianity and can be applied by a wide range of people. I begin with a passage from Pierre Hadot's book Philosophy As A Way Of Life: "[Christians] believed they recognized spiritual exercises, which they had learned through philosophy, in specific scriptural passages . . . The reason why Christian authors paid attention to these particular biblical passages, was that they were already familiar, from other sources, with the spiritual exercises of prosokhē, meditation on death, and examination of the conscience.” What Hadot calls “spiritual exercises” gets called by a variety of other terms by other thinkers. Foucault's "technologies of the self", Nussbaum's "therapeutic arguments", as well as the more general "philosophical practices" many of us reference in our work and study. What we can say about these early Christian thinkers is that many had a philosophical education, had opportunities to engage with pagan philosophical schools, some of which had pretty strong religious stances, with precursor and contemporary Jewish thought, and with a variety of other disciplines like rhetoric, medicine, literature, political theory, law, history, music, etc. There was already a strong interest in issues about anger already raised and debated in ancient philosophy including: vicious anger, can anger have useful role, dangers of indulging or excusing anger, anger and courage or justice, types or levels of anger, divine anger. Early Christian thinkers rely upon or incorporating broadly Platonic psychology, and ethical conceptions drawn from Platonist, Stoic, and Aristotelian schools, but within a framework Christianity provides. The thinkers I reference and discuss in this presentation include: 2nd-4th Century CE: Clement of Alexandria 150 – c. 215 AD, Tertullian 155 – c. 220, Origen 185 – c. 253, Lactantius 250 – c. 325 4th 5th century CE: Basil of Caesarea 330 – 379, Gregory of Nyssa 335, Evagrius Ponticus 345–399 AD, John Chrysostom 347-407, Ambrose 339-397, Jerome 342–347-420, Prudentius 348-413?, John Cassian 360 – 435, Augustine of Hippo 354-430 Some of the key scriptural passages they tend to engage most heavily with include: A number of discussions of anger in Pre-Christian Jewish scriptures, particularly in the Psalms, Proverbs, and Sirach The Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 5, Paul's Letter To Ephesians, and the Letter of James There is a stress on identifying and dealing with vices that involve anger, but also on developing virtues of Patience, Humility, Mercy, and Forgiveness. They also adopt, develop, and discuss a number of useful practices for lessening, understanding, or dealing with anger.

https://cjthex.com/subscribe → subscribe to CJ's mailing list for all things CJ the X https://tinyurl.com/asdi708uo → buy tickets to CJ's show in San Francisco, CA on the 10th OctoberI sat down with CJ the X recently to discuss the creative process, pragmatism, their recent world tour and later in the weird world of dreams. We also talk about the topic that first brought us together many moons ago: Jordan Peterson and CJ's year long deep dive into him that dragged him deeper into the philosophical quest. ⏳Timestamps:00:00 - Introduction01:39 - Reflections on CJ's Intercontinental Speaking Tour05:56 - Wrestling with the need to be right10:27 - Play, fear and the creative process15:27 - Colonised by the algorithm17:47 - Search for Signal19:27 - Exploring the Balance of Routine and Passion23:52 - Flywheel or Passion?26:14 - CJ's journey from chaotic fun to serious philosophy27:33 - CJ done with YouTube?32:28 - CJ's Jordan Peterson video36:28 - James's struggle with intellectual responsibility40:43 - CJ on why passion has to be the guide44:18 - Is CJ a Platonist or a Pragmatism45:55 - CJ on the sacred and the profane47:11 - James on holding knowledge lightly48:39 - The Metaphysical Club49:48 - The strands of pragmatism50:34 - C.S. Peirce51:18 - William James and Peirce's Relationship53:44 - Pragmatism and Jordan Peterson55:55 - What is Pragmatism?57:17 - Pragmatism vs. Postmodernism1:00:48 - Is Western civilisation the peak?1:01:35 - Peterson's Pragmatic Christianity 1:04:19 - The dangers of high status1:05:51 - CJ's lessons learned from speaking tour1:11:28 - CJ's Anti-mimetic attitude1:14:55 - James starting Jungian Masters1:15:38 - James on Dreams1:16:55 - CJ's troubled relationship with the dreamworld1:19:32 - Dreams and creativity1:24:40 - CJ on James's excessive curiosity1:26:18 - CJ's read on James's alien dreams1:27:36 - Connection between dreams and creativity1:30:01 - James wants to study CJ's dreams1:34:44 - Wrapping up1:35:27 - CJ's Guest Recommendations

“Think the event” is central to the philosophy of Alain Badiou, a modern Platonist who has been writing and lecturing in philosophy for over five decades. Badiou said, “Philosophy is the seizure of thought of what breaks with the sleep of thought,” because real truth is found by looking for the exceptions and finding the important connections in time that we have overlooked. Badiou's insight is that you can't see until your eyes have been opened by an “event,” and to his thinking events happen like shockwaves that shake the scales from your eyes and allow you to see something you missed before because you were so invested in one way of looking at the world.In discussing selections from Badiou's writing and lectures from several decades ago, James Myers and Michael Fitzpatrick found many connections between the the polarized politics of today and the philosopher's work and views on political organization and practices of his time. As opposition is increasingly entrenched, Badiou said the key is to base political actions on a truth such as justice that all factions could reasonably support, making the political challengers commensurable to truth rather than existing only to oppose each others' ideas.The three great tasks of philosophy, Badiou says, are “to deal with choice, with distance, and with the exception.” The event is the exception, and philosophy leads us to understand the connections of cause and effect in the exceptions that shape our lives. Thinking the event helps us to distinguish the real from the shadowy projections on the wall of Plato's allegory of the cave, and by opening our eyes to what really happened we regain our agency for change to make something different happen.

We explore five important albums for death metal that embody LGBT -- Loving the Good, the Beautiful, and the True -- through a Platonist lens. Joining the discussion are Brett Stevens of DeathMetal.org and Paul of Condemner (TX).

In this episode of the Great Books Podcast, Deacon Harrison Garlick and Dr. Daniel Shields discuss the significance of Plato's First Alcibiades, particularly in the context of its use at Wyoming Catholic College.They explore the themes of self-knowledge, the relationship between philosophy and politics, and the importance of mentorship in education. The conversation delves into the character of Alcibiades as a reflection of the student experience, the role of spiritedness in the pursuit of wisdom, and the communal nature of the philosophical life. Dr. Shields shares insights from his teaching experience, emphasizing the need for students to recognize their ignorance and the transformative power of philosophy as a way of life.Check out thegreatbookspodcast.com for our reading schedule!Check out our collection of WRITTEN GUIDES!From our guide:First Alcibiades is both the beginning and a summation of Platonic philosophy. The dialogue “held pride of place in later antiquity as the ideal work with which to begin the study of Platonic philosophy.”[1] Its traditional subtitle was "on the nature of man,” and it was said First Alcibiades “contains the whole philosophy of Plato, as in a seed.”[2] The Islamic commentator, Al-Farabi, said that in First Alcibiades “all the Platonic questions are raised as if for the first time.”At the heart of the dialogue is the maxim “know thyself,” which is in turn at the heart of the philosophic life. Plato uses a dialogue between a young Alcibiades, age twenty, and an older Socrates, age forty, to explore the Delphic maxim within the context of a teacher and student.[3] The relationship of the teacher as a lover of the soul of the student gave rise to the term "Platonic love," an intense, but non-sexual love in pursuit of excellence.[4]The dramatic date of the dialogue is approximately 433 BC.[5] The composition date is a complicated question. First Alcibiades is considered by many to be a spurious dialogue or rather a dialogue written later by Platonists and not Plato. The dialogue sometimes has an earlier date around 390s BC and a later date in the 350s BC.[6] Some also hold the dialogue is a composite text with some being written by Plato and some being written by a later Platonist.It should be noted, however, that antiquity held that the dialogue was written by Plato, and the idea that it was not originated recently in nineteenth century German scholarship.[7] For our purposes, we will side with antiquity and default to Plato as the authentic author.Keywords: #Plato #Catholic #FirstAlcibiades #Philosophy #KnowThyself #GreatBooksVisit thegreatbookspodcast.com for more information![1] Plato, Complete Works, ed. John M. Cooper and D. S. Hutchinson (Indianapolis: Hackett...

PLATO IS PHILOSOPHY - and there is no better place to start with Plato than First Alcibiades. Today, we are discussing First Alcibiades with Alec Bianco of the Circe Institute and with the Athenian Stranger. Go check out their X accounts. Visit thegreatbookspodcast.com for our reading schedule.Check out our PATREON for written guides on the great books!We also have a NEW COMMUNITY CHAT on Plato to discuss with other people reading along.First Alcibiades is both the beginning and a summation of Platonic philosophy. The dialogue “held pride of place in later antiquity as the ideal work with which to begin the study of Platonic philosophy.”[1] Its traditional subtitle was "on the nature of man,” and it was said First Alcibiades “contains the whole philosophy of Plato, as in a seed.”[2] The Islamic commentator, Al-Farabi, said that in First Alcibiades “all the Platonic questions are raised as if for the first time.”At the heart of the dialogue is the maxim “know thyself,” which is in turn at the heart of the philosophic life. Plato uses a dialogue between a young Alcibiades, age twenty, and an older Socrates, age forty, to explore the Delphic maxim within the context of a teacher and student.[3] The relationship of the teacher as a lover of the soul of the student gave rise to the term "Platonic love," an intense, but non-sexual love in pursuit of excellence.[4]The dramatic date of the dialogue is approximately 433 BC.[5] The composition date is a complicated question. First Alcibiades is considered by many to be a spurious dialogue or rather a dialogue written later by Platonists and not Plato. The dialogue sometimes has an earlier date around 390s BC and a later date in the 350s BC.[6] Some also hold the dialogue is a composite text with some being written by Plato and some being written by a later Platonist.It should be noted, however, that antiquity held that the dialogue was written by Plato, and the idea that it was not originated recently in nineteenth century German scholarship.[7] For our purposes, we will side with antiquity and default to Plato as the authentic author.CHECK OUT OUR GUIDE TO FIRST ALCIBIADES.CHECK OUT OUR COMMUNITY CHAT ON PLATO.Keywords: Plato, First Alcibiades, Socratic Method, Philosophy, Education, Rhetoric, Classical Education, Moral Formation, Athenian...

This lecture discusses key ideas from the 18th century philosopher and essayist David Hume's essay "The Platonist", found in his Essays Moral, Political, and Literary, the first of his four essays that bear names of members of philosophical schools, about which he tells us: "The intention . . . is not so much to explain accurately the sentiments of the ancient sects of philosophy, as to deliver the sentiments of sects, that naturally form themselves in the world, and entertain different ideas of human life and of happiness. I have given each of them the name of the philosophical sect, to which it bears the greatest affinity." He subtitles The Platonist "the man of contemplation, and philosophical devotion", and the essay both responds to the perspectives of the two previous essays and develops a perspective that transcends them, viewing contemplation of the beauty of the universe and the benevolence of God as most valuable. To support my ongoing work, go to my Patreon site - www.patreon.com/sadler If you'd like to make a direct contribution, you can do so here - www.paypal.me/ReasonIO - or at BuyMeACoffee - www.buymeacoffee.com/A4quYdWoM You can find over 3,500 philosophy videos in my main YouTube channel - www.youtube.com/user/gbisadler You can get Hume's Essays Moral, Political, and Literary here - https://amzn.to/45AmQqs

Ralston College presents a talk by Christopher Snook, Lecturer in the Department of Classics at Dalhousie University, on St. Augustine's great autobiographical text The Confessions. This talk offers a detailed walk through of Books VII and VIII of Augustine's text in light of Augustine's “abiding preoccupation with the nature of the created order.”  Snook explores how Augustine absorbed the  insights of Platonist philosophers like Plotinus and Porphyry but also moved beyond them as he sought a more embodied account of the nature of the human person. Augustine's own conversion stresses the importance of encountering models for life and reveals the centrality of the incarnate Logos to the Christian understandings of self-realization. This lecture was delivered on January 9th, 2025 at Ralston College's Savannah campus during the third term of the MA in the Humanities program. Support Ralston College's mission to revive the conditions of a free and flourishing culture. Authors and Works Mentioned in this Episode: Dante, The Divine Comedy Cicero, Hortensius T.S. Eliot, The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock St. Ambrose Plotinus Porphyry Gaius Marius Victorinus Plato, The Republic Virgil, The Aeneid  Iamblichus Charles Dickens, A Christmas Carol St. Anthony the Great John Scotus Eriugena Anselm of Canterbury Martin Luther Rene Decartes  

Stand Up is a daily podcast that I book,host,edit, post and promote new episodes with brilliant guests every day. Please subscribe now for as little as 5$ and gain access to a community of over 700 awesome, curious, kind, funny, brilliant, generous souls Check out StandUpwithPete.com to learn more GET TICKETS TO PODJAM II In Vegas March 27-30 Confirmed Guests! Professor Eric Segall, Dr Aaron Carroll, Maura Quint, Tim Wise, JL Cauvin, Ophira Eisenberg, Christian Finnegan and More! Katherine Stewart has been covering religious nationalism and the assault on American democracy for over 15 years. Her latest book, The Power Worshippers: Inside the Dangerous Rise of Religious Nationalism, was awarded first place for Excellence in Nonfiction Books by the Religion News Association as well as a Morris D. Forkosch award. Her previous book, The Good News Club: The Christian Right's Stealth Assault on America's Children covered the religious right's efforts to infiltrate and undermine public education. Stewart writes for The New York Times opinion, New Republic and many others, and has appeared on CNN, MSNBC, and NPR. In 2020 The Power Worshippers was acquired by producers Rob Reiner and Michele Reiner, who subsequently based their documentary feature film, God & Country, on the book. Stewart's latest book Money Lies and God is available for preorder today! Inside the Movement to Destroy American Democracy In 2020, just months before the presidential election, acclaimed journalist Katherine Stewart released The Power Worshippers, a brilliantly reported book that acted as a wake-up call to readers: Christian nationalism must be taken seriously as a significant threat to the American republic and our democratic freedoms. The Power Worshippers cemented Stewart as a go-to authority on Christian nationalism and the current threats to American democracy, and inspired the recent documentary God & Country, produced by Rob Reiner. Stewart's explosive follow-up, MONEY, LIES, AND GOD: Inside the Movement to Destroy American Democracy (February 18, 2025) exposes the inner workings of the “engine of unreason” roiling American culture and politics, but aims at a bigger and more challenging target: how did we get to the point where there is an organized political movement within the United States that is working to destroy American Democracy? Furthermore, why have so many Americans turned against democracy? In this deeply researched book, Katherine Stewart takes readers to conferences of conspiracy-mongers, backroom strategy gatherings, and services at extremist houses of worship, and profiles the people who want to tear it all down. She introduces us to reactionary Catholic activists, atheist billionaires, pseudo-Platonist intellectuals, self-appointed apostles of Jesus, disciples of Ayn Rand, women-hating opponents of “the gynocracy,” pronatalists preoccupied with the dearth of white babies, Covid truthers, militia members masquerading as “concerned moms” and battalions of spirit warriors who appear to be inventing a new style of religion even as they set about attacking democracy at its foundations. Along the way, she provides a compelling analysis of the authoritarian reaction in the United States. She demonstrates that the movement relies on several distinct constituencies, with very different and often conflicting agendas. Stewart's reporting and comprehensive political analysis helps reframe the conversation about the moral collapse of conservatism in America and points the way forward toward a democratic future. Join us Thursday's at 8EST for our Weekly Happy Hour Hangout!  Pete on Blue Sky Pete on Threads Pete on Tik Tok Pete on YouTube  Pete on Twitter Pete On Instagram Pete Personal FB page Stand Up with Pete FB page All things Jon Carroll  Follow and Support Pete Coe Buy Ava's Art  Hire DJ Monzyk to build your website or help you with Marketing

St. Anicius Manlius Severius Boethius's book The Consolation of Philosophy, which he wrote in prison while awaiting martyrdom around the year 524, is one of the single most influential works for medieval philosophy and theology. But Boethius also owed much to the pagan philosophy that came before him.  Thomas Ward has just written a commentary on Boethius's dialogue for Word on Fire, entitled After Stoicism: Last Words of the Last Roman Philosopher. Topics discussed include: Boethius's debt to Stoic ethics and how he critiques the Stoic view of happiness The influence of neo-Platonist philosophy on Boethius Questions about the account of deification given by Lady Philosophy - is it more Platonist than Christian? Boethius's brilliant arguments about how God's way of knowing differs from ours Links Thomas Ward, After Stoicism: Last Words of the Last Roman Philosopher https://bookstore.wordonfire.org/products/after-stoicism?srsltid=AfmBOopBRfuMW6DMx_iUEH9u2gjSswySJAZ__JrdTznAIpZ3Ptj9mDMJ Way of the Fathers episode on Boethius https://www.catholicculture.org/commentary/st-boethius-church-father-and-medieval-scholar/ DONATE to make this show possible! http://catholicculture.org/donate/audio SIGN UP for Catholic Culture's newsletter: https://www.catholicculture.org/newsletters

In the first of a short series of synoptic episodes looking at the esoteric in ancient Platonism as a whole, we approach the scale of virtues, the ladder by which the Platonist sage, following in the footsteps of Socrates, was to practice ascent to likeness with the gods, while still engaging in daily life.

Jive Book Review of Theurgy and the Soul by Gregory Shaw, Professor of Religious Studies at Stonehill College. In this work he outlines the philosophy and ritual practise of Iamblichus of Syria (ca. 240 325), whose teachings set the final form of pagan spirituality prior to the Christianization of the Roman Empire. Theurgy literally means "divine action" or "godly work"I describe how this work is useful for modern polythesists including Heathens like myself.

How does one interpret the hidden meaning of a pagan myth? Some wise Platonist pagan authors help us to understand this, since they explained it in plain writing. One such author is Sallust aka Sallustius the neoplatonist, others include Emperor Julian and Plotinus. In this video I look at how Sallust's writing on the gods and the cosmos help us to understand not only myth, but also the meaning of rites and sacrifices and why they are so important for pagans. Originally recorded January 2019.This podcast depends on your support:Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/survivethejiveSubscribeStar: https://www.subscribestar.com/survive-the-jiveTelegram: https://t.me/survivethejive

We discuss how Platonist philosophical teaching played out at Alexandria before Justinian's edict of 529 and in its aftermath. Featuring cameo appearances from the fall of the western Roman empire and Horapollo's Hieroglyphika.

In S4E13 - the ARCANVM S4 finale - I sit down with with philosopher, Platonist, and content creator Eric Orwoll. Eric's work in dialogue with various collaborators has positioned him as an outstanding voice in the study of Platonism. Specifically, his work in reviewing the Iamblichean curriculum of the Platonic dialogues, Proclus' Elements of Theology, and the dissertations and essays of Thomas Taylor on the various aspects of Platonism and Neoplatonism are among what I consider to be the most important influences in my own work. Eric: https://www.youtube.com/@understandingplato1134 https://returntotheland.org For all things Ike be sure to visit: https://ikebaker.com Support Arcanvm on Patreon: https://patreon.com/arcanvm Follow on IG: @a.r.c.a.n.v.m Facebook: https://facebook.com/arcanvvm Contact: arcanvvm@gmail.com --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/arcanvm/support

Send us a textWe start this conversation with returning guest Katherine Stewart, acclaimed author and journalist, who takes us behind the scenes of the Democratic National Convention, where she moderated a groundbreaking interfaith panel that explored the shifting landscape of faith in American politics. The panel featured prominent Congressman Jared Huffman and Congressman Jamie Raskin, two members of the Congressional Freethought Caucus and Professor Khyati Joshi, a scholar and thought leader on the intersecting issues of race, religion and immigration in the United States.The conversation then turned towards the growing movement of evangelicals who are breaking away from traditional conservative alignments and finding common ground with the Democratic Party's focus on the common good and social justice. We then shift to explore the diversity within evangelicalism in America and the influence of the religious right on politics and society. Recent reporting: Anti-Trump evangelical Christians make the case for Harris  Finally, Katherine gives us a bit of a teaser about her new and upcoming book, "Money, Lies, and God: Inside the Movement to Destroy American Democracy" coming out early 2025. In the book, Katherine sheds light on the powerful forces driving the Christian nationalist movement, funded by billionaires with an agenda that extends far beyond religious conviction.In her deeply reported book, Katherine Stewart explores the alarming rise of anti-democratic sentiment in America by immersing readers in the world of conspiracy theorists, extremist churches, and reactionary political movements. She profiles a diverse array of actors—from reactionary Catholic activists to atheist billionaires, and from pseudo-Platonist intellectuals to militia members—who, despite their conflicting agendas, are united in their efforts to undermine democracy. Through her meticulous reporting and analysis, Stewart sheds light on the authoritarian backlash in the U.S., revealing the moral decline of conservatism and offering insights into how democracy can be safeguarded in the future.Her previous book, "The Power Worshippers: Inside the Dangerous Rise of Religious Nationalism" was turned into a Rob Reiner Documentary 'God & Country.' We were fortunate to have spoken with the director Dan Portland about the film, you can watch the interview here: https://youtu.be/qNLH7pzNNW4?si=nOKdnd88gQRKjrHVLinks to both of Katherine's books are below: The Power Worshippers: Inside the Dangerous Rise of Religious Nationalism Money, Lies, and God: Inside the Movement to Destroy American Democracy (Pre-Order) To learn more about our guest, visit her website: https://katherinestewart.me/about/Support the Show.To learn more about the show, contact our hosts, or recommend future guests, click on the links below: Website: https://www.faithfulpoliticspodcast.com/ Faithful Host: Josh@faithfulpoliticspodcast.com Political Host: Will@faithfulpoliticspodcast.com Twitter: @FaithfulPolitik Instagram: faithful_politics Facebook: FaithfulPoliticsPodcast LinkedIn: faithfulpolitics Subscribe to our Substack: https://faithfulpolitics.substack.com/

Continuing with guest Chris Sunami, mostly discussing "The Good or The One," though we start off by completing "The Descent of the Soul" about why there is something rather than nothing, given that materiality is so undesirable compared to The One. Get more at partiallyexaminedlife.com. Visit partiallyexaminedlife.com/support to get ad-free episodes and tons of bonus discussion, including a supporter-exclusive part three coming out this week. Sponsor: Check out the Subtitle podcast at subtitlepod.com. Learn about our new book at partiallyexaminedlife.com/book.

Welcome to Episode 232 of Lucretius Today. This is a podcast dedicated to the poet Lucretius, who wrote "On The Nature of Things," the most complete presentation of Epicurean philosophy left to us from the ancient world. Each week we walk you through the Epicurean texts, and we discuss how Epicurean philosophy can apply to you today. If you find the Epicurean worldview attractive, we invite you to join us in the study of Epicurus at EpicureanFriends.com. Today we are continuing to review the Epicurean sections of Cicero's "On the Nature of The Gods," as presented by the Epicurean spokesman Velleius. Today's Text XII. ... What shall I say of Democritus, who classes our images of objects, and their orbs, in the number of the Gods; as he does that principle through which those images appear and have their influence? He deifies likewise our knowledge and understanding. Is he not involved in a very great error? And because nothing continues always in the same state, he denies that anything is everlasting, does he not thereby entirely destroy the Deity, and make it impossible to form any opinion of him? Diogenes of Apollonia looks upon the air to be a Deity. But what sense can the air have? or what divine form can be attributed to it? It would be tedious to show the uncertainty of Plato's opinion; for, in his Timæus, he denies the propriety of asserting that there is one great father or creator of the world; and, in his book of Laws, he thinks we ought not to make too strict an inquiry into the nature of the Deity. And as for his statement when he asserts that God is a being without any body—what the Greeks call ἀσώματος—it is certainly quite unintelligible how that theory can possibly be true; for such a God must then necessarily be destitute of sense, prudence, and pleasure; all which things are comprehended in our notion of the Gods. He likewise asserts in his Timæus, and in his Laws, that the world, the heavens, the stars, the mind, and those Gods which are delivered down to us from our ancestors, constitute the Deity. These opinions, taken separately, are apparently false; and, together, are directly inconsistent with each other. Xenophon has committed almost the same mistakes, but in fewer words. In those sayings which he has related of Socrates, he introduces him disputing the lawfulness of inquiring into the form of the Deity, and makes him assert the sun and the mind to be Deities: he represents him likewise as affirming the being of one God only, and at another time of many; which are errors of almost the same kind which I before took notice of in Plato.

On selections from the Enneads (270 C.E.), as presented by Elmer O'Brien as the first four essays in The Essential Plotinus: "Beauty," "The Intelligence, Ideas and Being," "The Descent of the Soul," and "The Good or The One." Featuring Mark, Wes, Dylan, Seth, and guest Chris Sunami. Get more at partiallyexaminedlife.com. Visit partiallyexaminedlife.com/support to get ad-free episodes and tons of bonus discussion. If you like our show, check out the Fearvana podcast. Learn about our new book at partiallyexaminedlife.com/book (which Chris edited).

We discuss Proclus' titanic labours in the field of commentary – on many Platonic dialogues, but also on the Chaldæan Oracles, the Homeric poems, and a number of other texts – with Graeme Miles, an acute reader of Platonist philosophy and part of the team translating Proclus' Republic commentary into English. Come for Platonic commentary as spiritual practice, stay for the kosmic-astrological reading of the Myth of Er.

In this episode, Joe and Kyle interview Lenny Gibson, Ph.D.: philosopher, Grof-certified Holotropic Breathwork® facilitator, 20-year professor of transpersonal psychology at Burlington College, and the reason Joe and Kyle met many years ago. He talks about his early LSD experiences and how his interest in the philosophy of Plato and Alfred North Whitehead provided a framework and language for understanding a new mystical world where time and space were abstractions. He believes that while culture sees the benefits of psychedelics in economic terms, the biggest takeaway from non-ordinary states is learning that value is the essence of everything. And as this is being released on Bicycle Day, he discusses Albert Hofmann's discovery and whether or not it's fair to say that Hofmann intentionally had the experience he did on that fateful day. He also discusses: The end of Cartesian thinking and the need for a new understanding of reality that incorporates the insights of quantum mechanics How philosophy has been taught as an intellectual endeavor, and how we need to embrace the practical and conceptual side of life John Dewey and quantitative thinking, William James and pragmatism, and was Aristotle a Platonist? The novelty of the creation of LSD, and how it gave us a path to a mystical experience that wasn't culturally bound and more! For links, head to the show notes page. 

We turn to the final flowering of polytheist Platonist philosophy, centred on Athens (and Alexandria). We review some useful historical data, discuss the history of ‘the Academy' as a notional ‘school' in antiquity, and introduce Plutarch of Athens and Syrianus, teachers of the great Proclus.

This episode provides an overview of Middle Platonism, a revival of Plato's philosophy that emerged in the 1st century BC. We explore key Platonist beliefs like the existence of a Supreme Being and divine Ideas. The episode also discusses Platonism's influence on early Christian thinkers. Episode Overview Platonism declined after Plato's death but revived in the 1st century BC as Middle Platonism Middle Platonists believed in a Supreme Being and divine Ideas that were the source of reality They saw the material world as inferior to the spiritual realm of Ideas This philosophy was seen as a journey of the soul toward union with the divine Platonism influenced early Christian thinkers on issues like Christ's divinity and the body/soul distinction Discussion Questions How can we make sure philosophy does not lead us astray from God's truth revealed in Scripture? What does it mean to have Christ as the beginning and end of our philosophy? How does Christ embody divine truth and grace differently than the Platonists' concept of divine Ideas? What are some ways Platonism's negative view of the material world still influences Christians today? How can we have a biblical view of the material world? Why must Christ alone reign supreme in all our reasoning and thinking? What are practical ways we can ensure this? For other questions and comments, feel free to reach out to Jared at thechurchhistoryproject@gmail.com. For more content, visit the podcast ⁠website ⁠or wherever you find your podcasts. To join The Church History Project Facebook group to engage in more discussion about released episodes and other fascinating nuggets of church history, you can visit the page ⁠here⁠. --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/church-history-project/message

We turn to one of the most difficult, fascinating, and ultimately consequential thinkers of late antiquity, Augustine of Hippo. In this episode we discuss his relationship with Manichæism and Platonist philosophy, and a few of his important philosophical conclusions.

We discuss Marius Victorinus, a fascinating character from the tumultuous Roman scene in the mid fourth century who converted from Platonism to Platonism-plus-Christianity. His life and thought give us a valuable window onto the cultural scene in fourth-century Rome, as well, as some crucial data for the transmission of Platonist ideas into the Latinate middle ages.

We dive into the fascinating life and thought of Synesius of Cyrene, Platonist philosopher and student of Hypatia of Alexandria, and Orthodox bishop of Ptolemaïs. Committed Christian or pagan bishop? We'll see ....

The legendary teletai of Orpheus were not simply "hymns"--they were initiatic poems for meditation and ritual, magical, and ceremonial use, each one addressed to a specific diety or virtue.  In The Magic of the Orphic Hymns, Tamra Lucid and Ronnie Pontiac recapture the magical vitality of the teletai that inspired mystery cults, Western esotericism, art, music and countercultures throughout Western history.  Ronnie joins us in this interview to provide a survey of the historical landscape of origin and evolution of the archetypical myth of Orpheus. Tamra Lucid has produced documentary films including the Emmy nominated End of the Line: The Women of Standing Rock, and is the author of Making the Ordinary Extraordinary.  (See EOTR Podcast episode 208).  She is the former writer and art editor for Newtopia Magazine and her work has appeared in Reality Sandwich.  She and Ronnie are also founding members of the experimental (and riotous) rock band Lucid Nation. Ronnie Pontiac worked for many years as Manly P. Hall's research assistant, screener, and designated substitute lecturer.  Author of American Metaphysical Religion (See EOTR Podcast episode 251), he wrote the biographical introduction to Letters to the Sage:  Selected Correspondence of Thomas Moore Johnson: Volume Two: Alexander Wilder, the Platonist.  He's currently working on several other books, including one on Rosicrucianism, and has written for several esoteric journals, and has produced award winning documentaries.  Check them out at: https://linktr.ee/tamralucid https://linktr.ee/ronniepontiac This podcast is available on your favorite podcast platform, or here:  https://endoftheroad.libsyn.com/episode-270-tamra-lucid-and-ronnie-pontiac-sacred-musicthe-magic-of-the-orphic-mysteries Have a blessed weekend!  

Seriah is joined by writer, researcher, musician, and experiencer Ronnie Pontiac, author of "American Metaphysical Religion: Esoteric and Mystical Traditions of the New World", Topics include Manly P. Hall, "The Platonist" magazine, the influence of Platonism and Neo-Platonism in the American West, Abner Doubleday, esotericism, U.S. religious history, transcendentalism, alchemy, astrology, Rosicrucianism, John Winthrop the elder and younger, John Dee, Puritanism and fear of the wilderness, herbal medicine, The Intelligencers, the College of Light, the Royal Society, Cotton Mather, Hermetic philosophy, Oliver Cromwell, the Cavaliers, Tom Morton, a fascinating trading post, wenching, abuses by the Pilgrims, origins of the slave trade, America's occult history vs Fundamentalist Christian propaganda, hybrid belief systems, Harold Bloom, American Orphism, changes in academia regarding the study of esotericism, Kabbalah, alchemy at Ivy League schools, Catherine L. Albanese, "A Republic of Mind and Spirit", alternative spirituality and the cross-over of beliefs and practices, early Christianity vs the prosperity gospel, the Rosicrucian manifestos of the 1600's, the Holy Roman Empire, Giordano Bruno, universal reformation, the Invisible College, Frances Yates and esoteric history, astronomical events and multiple interpretations thereof, the 30 years war, religious freedom in Bohemia, political and religious intrigues between Catholics and Protestants, phases and changes in American Spiritualism, Edgar Cayce, "The Unobstructed Universe", Stuart and Betty White, Carl Jung, the podcast “Tanis”, the belief system of the obstructed vs unobstructed universe, consciousness and reincarnation, the meaning of life, immortal individualism, entities called the Invisibles, incredible experiences between Betty and Stuart White, the Seer of the Sunbelt Reverend Edward A. Monroe, a talkative Scottish spirit, and much more! This is an exceptional conversation jam-packed with ideas and references!This show is part of the Spreaker Prime Network, if you are interested in advertising on this podcast, contact us at https://www.spreaker.com/show/4656375/advertisement

We are delighted to speak with Frederico Fidler about Sallustius' On the Gods and the World, a short manual of a popular nature outlining how Platonist metaphysics work, how traditional Hellenistic religion is thought to mirror those metaphysical realities, and how esoteric hermeneutics are the key to unlocking the truth in the vast tradition of myth, ritual, and philosophy claimed by Julian, Sallustius, and other late-antique Hellenes. Come for the esoteric myths, stay for the kosmos as esoteric myth.

John Norris was an Anglican priest and philosopher who lived from 1657-1711. He was an Oxford Christian "Platonist" and wrote many works including Reflections upon a Late Essay Concerning the Human Understanding which was a critique of John Locke and An Account of Reason and Faith in Relation to the Mysteries of Christianity which was a response to the deist John Toland. This recording is of his Discourse of the Natural and Moral Union of the Soul with God. If you want to read the text for yourself, you can find it here: https://www.google.com/books/edition/_/MYe-1oxeyBEC?hl=en&gbpv=0 This discourse is read by friend of the podcast Austen Haynes. Thank you for all your work, Austen! Be sure to send us your feedback and questions to thesacramentalists@gmail.com or reach out to us on Twitter @sacramentalists. Be sure to join our Communion of Patreon Saints for only $5 a month.

Seriah is joined by writer, researcher, musician, and experiencer Ronnie Pontiac, author of "American Metaphysical Religion: Esoteric and Mystical Traditions of the New World", Topics include Manly P. Hall, "The Platonist" magazine, the influence of Platonism and Neo-Platonism in the American West, Abner Doubleday, esotericism, U.S. religious history, transcendentalism, alchemy, astrology, Rosicrucianism, John Winthrop the elder and younger, John Dee, Puritanism and fear of the wilderness, herbal medicine, The Intelligencers, the College of Light, the Royal Society, Cotton Mather, Hermetic philosophy, Oliver Cromwell, the Cavaliers, Tom Morton, a fascinating trading post, wenching, abuses by the Pilgrims, origins of the slave trade, America's occult history vs Fundamentalist Christian propaganda, hybrid belief systems, Harold Bloom, American Orphism, changes in academia regarding the study of esotericism, Kabbalah, alchemy at Ivy League schools, Catherine L. Albanese, "A Republic of Mind and Spirit", alternative spirituality and the cross-over of beliefs and practices, early Christianity vs the prosperity gospel, the Rosicrucian manifestos of the 1600's, the Holy Roman Empire, Giordano Bruno, universal reformation, the Invisible College, Frances Yates and esoteric history, astronomical events and multiple interpretations thereof, the 30 years war, religious freedom in Bohemia, political and religious intrigues between Catholics and Protestants, phases and changes in American Spiritualism, Edgar Cayce, "The Unobstructed Universe", Stuart and Betty White, Carl Jung, the podcast “Tanis”, the belief system of the obstructed vs unobstructed universe, consciousness and reincarnation, the meaning of life, immortal individualism, entities called the Invisibles, incredible experiences between Betty and Stuart White, the Seer of the Sunbelt Reverend Edward A. Monroe, a talkative Scottish spirit, and much more! This is an exceptional conversation jam-packed with ideas and references! - Recap by Vincent Treewell of The Weird Part Podcast Outro Music is Lucid Nation with Food Chain Download

In Part II with Father Sergey, we explore the Platonist ‘mystical' themes, esoteric imagery of divine darkness, and the limits of human knowledge in the Cappadocians. Христос воскрес!

Jóhann Jóhannsson was one of contemporary cinema's greatest score composers when he passed away in 2018 at the young age of 48. Last and First Men, his enigmatic directorial debut, was released shortly after in 2020. Based on a novel by the same name by the British science fiction writer Olaf Stapleton, the film offers a sustained meditation on the prospect of extinction, the eventuality of humanity's disappearance from the comos. In this episode, JF and Phil discuss the images and sounds of the film as they flicker and swell against the backdrop of nonbeing that envelops us all. The conversation touches on the idea of beauty, Brutalist architecture, modernism, and futurity. Preorder Pierre-Yves Martel's album Mer bleue (https://pierre-yvesmartel.bandcamp.com/album/mer-bleue). Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/weirdstudies) and gain access to Phil's ongoing podcast on Richard Wagner's Ring Cycle. Listen to volume 1 (https://pierre-yvesmartel.bandcamp.com/album/weird-studies-music-from-the-podcast-vol-1) and volume 2 (https://pierre-yvesmartel.bandcamp.com/album/weird-studies-music-from-the-podcast-vol-2) of the Weird Studies soundtrack by Pierre-Yves Martel (https://www.pymartel.com) Find us on Discord (https://discord.com/invite/Jw22CHfGwp) Get the T-shirt design from Cotton Bureau (https://cottonbureau.com/products/can-o-content#/13435958/tee-men-standard-tee-vintage-black-tri-blend-s)! Get your Weird Studies merchandise (https://www.redbubble.com/people/Weird-Studies/shop?asc=u) (t-shirts, coffee mugs, etc.) Visit the Weird Studies Bookshop (https://bookshop.org/shop/weirdstudies) REFERENCES Jóhann Jóhannsson, Last and First Men (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt8015444/) Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unfrozen_Caveman_Lawyer), SNL character Spomeniks (https://www.spomenikdatabase.org/what-are-spomeniks), Yugoslavian monuments Olaf Stapleton, The Last and First Men (https://bookshop.org/a/18799/9781604443578) Woody Allen, Hannah and Her Sisters (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0091167/) The Last of Us (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3581920/), television show Ray Brassier, [Nihil Unbound: Enlightenment and Extinction](https://books.google.com/books/about/NihilUnbound.html?id=zN7WAAAAMAAJ&source=kpbookdescription)_ Weird Studies, Episode 2 on Garmonbozia (https://www.weirdstudies.com/2) Alexander Solzhenitsyn, Nobel Prize Speech (https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/literature/1970/solzhenitsyn/lecture/) Weird Studies Episode 139 on Art Power (https://www.weirdstudies.com/139) Numenius (https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/numenius/), Platonist philosopher Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari, What is Philosophy? (https://bookshop.org/a/18799/9780231079891) Jia Tolentino, “The Overwhelming Emotion of Hearing Toto's “Africa” (https://www.newyorker.com/culture/rabbit-holes/the-overwhelming-emotion-of-hearing-totos-africa-remixed-to-sound-like-its-playing-in-an-empty-mall) Weird Studies, Episode 110 on “The Glass Bead Game” (https://www.weirdstudies.com/110) D. H. Lawrence, Lady Chatterley's Lover (https://bookshop.org/a/18799/9780141192482)

This is part 6 of the Early Church History class. In the latter half of the second century, two kinds of Christians arose to defend the faith. On the one hand, apologists wrote defenses of Christianity directed at the Roman government. They responded to rumors, arguing that Christians were decent people who should be shown toleration. On the other hand, heresy hunters (or heresiologists) began to combat Christian groups that diverged significantly from apostolic Christianity, such as the Gnostics, Valentinians, and Marcionites. Today we'll briefly overview this fascinating period of Christianity when persuasion not coercion was the means to defeat one's opponents. Listen to this episode on Spotify or Apple Podcasts https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43mIuUVqCK0&list=PLN9jFDsS3QV2lk3B0I7Pa77hfwKJm1SRI&index=6 —— Links —— More Restitutio resources on Christian history More classes here Support Restitutio by donating here Join our Restitutio Facebook Group and follow Sean Finnegan on Twitter @RestitutioSF Leave a voice message via SpeakPipe with questions or comments and we may play them out on the air Intro music: Good Vibes by MBB Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported (CC BY-SA 3.0) Free Download / Stream: Music promoted by Audio Library. Who is Sean Finnegan?  Read his bio here —— Notes —— Apologists (Defenders) of the 2nd C. - Quadratus (130?)- Aristo of Pella (c. 140?)- Aristides (c. 145)- Miltiades (c. 160-180?)- Justin Martyr (d. 165)- Athenagoras (c. 170-180)- Melito of Sardis (c. 170-180?)- Appolinaris of Hierapolis (170-180)- Tatian (d. 180?)- Theophilus of Antioch (c. 180-185)- Epistle of Diognetus (150-225) Quadratus of Athens (130) - addressed book to Hadrian (r. 117-138)- claimed to know people healed by Jesus Epistle of Diognetus (150-225) - author ideas: Hippolytus, Aristides, Pantaenus- common criticisms are that Christians are incestuous b/c we call each other brother and sister, cannibals b/c we eat body and blood of Jesus, atheists b/c we didn't believe in the gods, politically subversive b/c we didn't honor the emperor by offering incense to his statue- Diog. 5.1-17 provides an excellent example of an effective apologist Justin Martyr (100-165) - Stoic -> Peripatetic -> Pythagorean -> Platonist -> Christian- founded a school in Rome- claimed Greek philosophers accessed truth of the Logos, thus Christianity is not a novel religion- Justin addressed his case to the Roman emperor and his sons and the senate and the Roman people (First Apology 1.1-2)- Dialogue with Trypho employed the idea of heresy as defined by a key belief—resurrection (see chapter 80) Heresy Hunters - Justin (140-160)- Irenaeus (180-199)- Tertullian (200-213)- Hippolytus (200-230)- Eusebius (324)- Epiphanius (374-377)- Theodoret (452-453) Standard Arguments - too complicated- trace beliefs to heresiarch- unnatural interpretation of scripture- can't trace beliefs back to the apostles- perverted truth leads to perverted morals- new generations recycle old heresies Irenaeus of Lyons (130-202)- Argued against Valentinus, Marcus, Ptolemaeus, Saturninus, Basilides, Carpocrates, Cerinthus, Ebionites, Nicolaitans, Cerdo, Marcion, Tatian, the Encratites, Orphites, Sethians, Cainites, and others- Against Heresies (aka. The Refutation and Overthrow of Falsely Called Gnosis) intended to equip church leaders to protect their unsuspecting flock from getting tricked into believing any forms of Gnosticism Review - Apologists focused on defending Christianity against outsiders by writing to the Roman authorities and laying out a case for toleration.- Justin Martyr taught that Christianity had continuity with Greek philosophers who also accessed the Logos.- Heresy hunters (heresiologists) defended Christianity against insiders who had differing beliefs from theirs.- Christians fought heresy by using key beliefs they knew their opponents couldn't affirm and by labelling them.- Justin and Irenaeus emphasized resurrection and an ultimate kingdom on earth to exclude those who held varieties of Gnostic beliefs.

Interview starts at 31:40   Ronnie Pontiac joins us for a great chat about his new book published by Inner Traditions "American Metaphysical Religion - Esoteric and Mystical Traditions of the New World" and the lesson know people and aspecs of the 'occult' teachings in the West. Ronnie was Manly P. Hall's research assistant for many years, and has been gathering the info for this Tome for decades.   We chat about unknown names, the new research, stories and synchro's about Manly himself, disorted definitions and meanings for words like occult and lucifer, creating science, pamphlet wars, harmonial philosophy, Theosohpy, the Brotherhood of Luxor, The Platonist, the Red Harlot of LibertyThe church and paganism, teh influence of materialism, and trying to hold paradoxical concepts in your mind at once.   https://www.innertraditions.com/books/american-metaphysical-religion   In the intro we chat about some of our audio books, Magic on the Mountain, and new years resolutions. We talk about some articles on modern alchemists...   See links below for stuff we chatted about during the show and intro:   https://contactatthecabin.com/magick-on-the-mountains/   https://adultbrain.ca/   https://listverse.com/2015/09/24/10-terrifying-us-government-projects-carried-out-on-domestic-soil/   https://www.realclearscience.com/blog/2012/09/modern-day-alchemists-routinely-make-gold.html   https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/alchemy-may-not-been-pseudoscience-we-thought-it-was-180949430/   Help support the show because without your help we can't continue to address these controversial topics. If you value this content with 0 ads, 0 sponsorships, 0 breaks, 0 portals and links to corporate websites, please assist. Many hours of unlimited content for free. Thanks for listening!!   Support the show directly: http://www.grimerica.ca/support https://www.patreon.com/grimerica   http://www.grimericaoutlawed.ca/support www.Rokfin.com/Grimerica   Get your Magic Mushrooms delivered from: Champignon Magique  Mushroom Spores, Spore Syringes, Best Spore Syringes,Grow Mushrooms Spores Lab Buy DMT Canada Other affiliated shows: https://grimericaoutlawed.ca/The newer controversial Grimerica Outlawed Grimerica Show https://www.13questionspodcast.com/ Our New Podcast - 13 Questions   Join the chat / hangout with a bunch of fellow Grimerican's  Https://t.me.grimerica www.grimerica.ca/chats https://discord.gg/qfrHVvP3   1-403-702-6083 Call and leave a voice mail or send us a text   Check out our next trip/conference/meetup - Contact at the Cabin www.contactatthecabin.com   Leave a review on iTunes and/or Stitcher: https://itunes.apple.com/ca/podcast/grimerica-outlawed http://www.stitcher.com/podcast/grimerica-outlawed   Sign up for our newsletter http://www.grimerica.ca/news   SPAM Graham = and send him your synchronicities, feedback, strange experiences and psychedelic trip reports!! graham@grimerica.com   InstaGRAM https://www.instagram.com/the_grimerica_show_podcast/  Tweet Darren https://twitter.com/Grimerica   Connect through other platforms: https://www.reddit.com/r/grimerica/  https://gab.ai/Grimerica    Purchase swag, with partial proceeds donated to the show www.grimerica.ca/swag   Send us a postcard or letter http://www.grimerica.ca/contact/ ART Napolean Duheme's site http://www.lostbreadcomic.com/  MUSIC Felix's Site sirfelix.bandcamp.com

Was C.S. Lewis in any way a Platonist?

Was C.S. Lewis in any way a Platonist?

Was C.S. Lewis in any way a Platonist?

Johannes Kepler fuses Platonist philosophy with a modified version of Copernicus' astronomy.