What do you think?
Rate this book
韦委渭伪喂慰蟼: 萎 螤蔚蟻委 蠁蠉蟽蔚蠅蟼
螣 "韦委渭伪喂慰蟼" 蔚渭蠁伪谓委味蔚蟿伪喂 蠅蟼 蟽蠀谓苇蠂蔚喂伪 魏伪蟿维 魏维蟺慰喂慰 蟿蟻蠈蟺慰 蟿畏蟼 "螤慰位喂蟿蔚委伪蟼" 蟿慰蠀 螤位维蟿蝇谓伪. 螣 危蠅魏蟻维蟿畏蟼 伪谓慰委纬蔚喂 蟿畏 蟽蠀味萎蟿畏蟽畏 渭蔚 伪谓伪蠁慰蟻维 蟽蟿伪 尾伪蟽喂魏维 蟽畏渭蔚委伪 蟺慰蠀 蔚尉苇胃蔚蟽蔚 蟽蟿畏谓 委未喂伪 蟽蠀谓蟿蟻慰蠁喂维 蟺蟻慰蟽蠋蟺蠅谓 蟿畏谓 蟺蟻慰畏纬慰蠉渭蔚谓畏 畏渭苇蟻伪 (173路-19b) 魏伪喂 畏 伪谓伪魏蔚蠁伪位伪委蠅蟽畏 蟺慰蠀 纬委谓蔚蟿伪喂 蟽蠀渭蟺委蟺蟿蔚喂 伪蟺慰位蠉蟿蠅蟼 渭蔚 蟿伪 蟺蔚蟻喂蔚蠂蠈渭蔚谓伪 蟿蠅谓 蟺蟻蠋蟿蠅谓 蟺苇谓蟿蔚 尾喂尾位委蠅谓 蟿畏蟼 "螤慰位喂蟿蔚委伪蟼".
韦慰 苇蟻纬慰 蠂蠅蟻委味蔚蟿伪喂 蟽蔚 蟿蟻委伪 蔚蠀未喂维魏蟻喂蟿伪 渭苇蟻畏: 伪) 蟿畏谓 蔚喂蟽伪纬蠅纬喂魏萎 伪谓伪魏蔚蠁伪位伪委蠅蟽畏 蟿蠅谓 蟺蔚蟻喂蔚蠂慰渭苇谓蠅谓 蟿蠅谓 蟺蟻蠋蟿蠅谓 蟺苇谓蟿蔚 尾喂尾位委蠅谓 蟿畏蟼 "螤慰位喂蟿蔚委伪蟼" (17a-19b) 伪蟺蠈 蟿慰谓 危蠅魏蟻维蟿畏 渭蔚 苇魏蠁蟻伪蟽畏 蟿畏蟼 苇谓蟿慰谓畏蟼 蔚蟺喂胃蠀渭委伪蟼 蠀位慰蟺慰委畏蟽畏蟼 蟿畏蟼 胃蔚蠅蟻委伪蟼 蟽蔚 蟽蠀纬魏蔚魏蟻喂渭苇谓伪 蔚蟺喂蟿蔚蠉纬渭伪蟿伪 (19b-20c)路 尾) 蟿畏谓 伪蠁萎纬畏蟽畏 蟿慰蠀 螝蟻喂蟿委伪 渭蔚 蟿畏 蠁畏渭慰位慰纬慰蠉渭蔚谓畏 伪谓蟿委蟽蟿伪蟽畏 魏伪喂 谓委魏畏 蟿畏蟼 螒胃萎谓伪蟼 魏伪蟿维 蟿蠅谓 尾伪蟽喂位苇蠅谓 蟿畏蟼 螒蟿位伪谓蟿委未伪蟼 (20c-26d)路 魏伪喂 纬) 蟿畏谓 魏慰蟽渭慰位慰纬喂魏萎 慰渭喂位委伪 蟿慰蠀 韦委渭伪喂慰蠀 蠂蠅蟻委蟼 蟺伪蟻蔚渭尾慰位苇蟼 蟺蟻慰蟽蠋蟺蠅谓 蟿慰蠀 伪魏蟻慰伪蟿畏蟻委慰蠀 蟿慰蠀 蔚魏蟿蠈蟼 伪蟺蠈 魏维蟺慰喂蔚蟼 蟽蟺慰蟻伪未喂魏苇蟼 蟺伪蟻蔚渭尾慰位苇蟼 蟿慰蠀 危蠅魏蟻维蟿畏 渭蔚 位蠈纬喂伪 蟽蠀纬魏伪蟿维胃蔚蟽畏蟼 (27c-92-c).
螤巍螣螞螣螕螣危 螝惟螡危韦. 螙螚韦巍螣违
螤巍螣螞螣螕螜螝螣 危螚螠螘螜惟螠螒
螘螜危螒螕惟螕螜螝螒 危韦螣螡 "韦螜螠螒螜螣" 韦螣违 螤螞螒韦惟螡螒
螣喂 喂未喂慰蟿蠀蟺委蔚蟼 魏伪喂 蟿伪 蟺蟻蠈蟽蠅蟺伪 蟿慰蠀 苇蟻纬慰蠀
螣 蠂蟻蠈谓慰蟼 蟽蠀纬纬蟻伪蠁萎蟼 魏伪喂 慰 未蟻伪渭伪蟿喂魏蠈蟼 蠂蟻蠈谓慰蟼
蟿慰蠀 苇蟻纬慰蠀
螣喂 伪蟻蠂伪委蔚蟼 蔚位位畏谓喂魏苇蟼 蟺畏纬苇蟼 纬喂伪 蟿慰谓 "韦委渭伪喂慰"
蟿慰蠀 螤位维蟿蝇谓伪
螒谓伪纬魏伪委慰 蟽蠂蠈位喂慰 纬喂伪 蟿畏谓 蟺蟻慰蟽维蟻蟿畏蟽畏 蟿蟻喂蠋谓
魏蔚喂渭苇谓蠅谓 蟽蟿慰谓 蟺位伪蟿蠅谓喂魏蠈 "韦委渭伪喂慰"
螤伪蟻蔚渭尾慰位萎 蟿慰蠀 魏蔚喂渭苇谓慰蠀 蟿慰蠀 蟺位伪蟿蠅谓喂魏慰蠉
"螝蚁喂蟿委伪"
螤伪蟻苇谓胃蔚蟿慰蟼 蟽蠂慰位喂伪蟽渭蠈蟼 纬喂伪 蟿畏谓 螒蟿位伪谓蟿委未伪
螚 未慰渭萎 蟿慰蠀 蟺位伪蟿蠅谓喂魏慰蠉 "韦委渭伪喂慰蠀", 蔚蠀蟻蔚委伪
蟺蔚蟻委位畏蠄畏 蟿慰蠀 苇蟻纬慰蠀
螣 "韦螜螠螒螜螣危" 蟿慰蠀 螤位维蟿蝇谓伪 (魏蔚委渭蔚谓慰-渭蔚蟿维-
危蠂蠈位喂伪 蟽蟿慰谓 "韦委渭伪喂慰" 蟿慰蠀 螤位维蟿蝇谓伪
韦螒 螘螤螜螠螘韦巍螒 韦螣违 螘巍螕螣违
韦慰 "螤蔚蟻委 蠄蠀蠂维蟼 魏慰蟽渭蠋 魏伪喂 蟺蔚蟻委 蠁蠉蟽喂慰蟼" 未蠅蟻喂魏蠈 魏蔚委渭蔚谓慰
螠蔚蟿伪纬蟻伪蠁萎 蟿慰蠀 未蠅蟻喂魏慰蠉 魏蔚喂渭苇谓慰蠀 蟽蟿畏谓 伪蟿蟿喂魏萎 未喂维位蔚魏蟿慰. 韦慰 渭蔚蟿伪纬蟻伪渭渭苇谓慰 魏蔚委渭蔚谓慰 魏伪喂 畏 渭蔚蟿维蠁蟻伪蟽畏 蟿慰蠀
韦慰 "螤蔚蟻委 螤位维蟿蝇谓慰蟼" 魏蔚蠁维位伪喂慰 蟿慰蠀 苇蟻纬慰蠀 蟿慰蠀 螖喂慰纬苇谓畏 螞伪苇蟻蟿喂慰蠀 "桅喂位慰蟽蠈蠁蠅谓 尾委蠅谓 魏伪 未慰纬渭维蟿蠅谓 蟽蠀谓伪纬蠅纬萎". 螠蔚蟿维蠁蟻伪蟽畏 魏伪喂 蟽蠂慰位喂伪蟽渭蠈蟼 蟿慰蠀
韦慰 "蟺蟻慰慰委渭喂慰" 蟿蠅谓 蟽蠂慰位委蠅谓 蟿慰蠀 螤蟻蠈魏位慰蠀 螖喂伪未蠈蠂慰蠀 "螘喂蟼 蟿慰谓 韦委渭伪喂慰谓 蟿慰蠀 螤位维蟿蝇谓慰蟼" (魏蔚委渭蔚谓慰 - 渭蔚蟿维蠁蟻伪蟽畏)
螣喂 "谓蔚慰位慰纬喂蟽渭慰委" 蟿慰蠀 蟺位伪蟿蠅谓喂魏慰蠉 "韦委渭伪喂慰蠀"
螣 "蔚喂魏蠋蟼 位蠈纬慰蟼" 魏伪喂 慰 "蔚喂魏蠋蟼 渭蠉胃慰蟼"
螚 苇谓谓慰喂伪 蟿慰蠀 螖畏渭喂慰蠀蟻纬慰蠉 魏伪喂 蟿慰 苇蟻纬慰 蟿畏蟼
未畏渭喂慰蠀蚁纬委伪蟼
韦伪 伪委蟿喂伪 魏伪喂 蟿伪 蟽蠀谓伪委蟿喂伪 蟽蟿畏 未畏渭喂慰蠀蟻纬委伪
蟿慰蠀 魏蠈蟽渭慰蠀
螚 螒谓维纬魏畏 魏伪喂 畏 违蟺慰未慰蠂萎 萎 慰 围蠋蟻慰蟼 魏伪喂 畏
位蔚喂蟿慰蠀蟻纬委伪 蟿慰蠀蟼 蟽蟿慰谓 "韦委渭伪喂慰"
螚 慰谓蟿慰位慰纬委伪 蟿慰蠀 蟺位伪蟿蠅谓喂魏慰蠉 "韦委渭伪喂慰蠀"
韦慰 苇蟻纬慰 蠂蠅蟻委味蔚蟿伪喂 蟽蔚 蟿蟻委伪 蔚蠀未喂维魏蟻喂蟿伪 渭苇蟻畏: 伪) 蟿畏谓 蔚喂蟽伪纬蠅纬喂魏萎 伪谓伪魏蔚蠁伪位伪委蠅蟽畏 蟿蠅谓 蟺蔚蟻喂蔚蠂慰渭苇谓蠅谓 蟿蠅谓 蟺蟻蠋蟿蠅谓 蟺苇谓蟿蔚 尾喂尾位委蠅谓 蟿畏蟼 "螤慰位喂蟿蔚委伪蟼" (17a-19b) 伪蟺蠈 蟿慰谓 危蠅魏蟻维蟿畏 渭蔚 苇魏蠁蟻伪蟽畏 蟿畏蟼 苇谓蟿慰谓畏蟼 蔚蟺喂胃蠀渭委伪蟼 蠀位慰蟺慰委畏蟽畏蟼 蟿畏蟼 胃蔚蠅蟻委伪蟼 蟽蔚 蟽蠀纬魏蔚魏蟻喂渭苇谓伪 蔚蟺喂蟿蔚蠉纬渭伪蟿伪 (19b-20c)路 尾) 蟿畏谓 伪蠁萎纬畏蟽畏 蟿慰蠀 螝蟻喂蟿委伪 渭蔚 蟿畏 蠁畏渭慰位慰纬慰蠉渭蔚谓畏 伪谓蟿委蟽蟿伪蟽畏 魏伪喂 谓委魏畏 蟿畏蟼 螒胃萎谓伪蟼 魏伪蟿维 蟿蠅谓 尾伪蟽喂位苇蠅谓 蟿畏蟼 螒蟿位伪谓蟿委未伪蟼 (20c-26d)路 魏伪喂 纬) 蟿畏谓 魏慰蟽渭慰位慰纬喂魏萎 慰渭喂位委伪 蟿慰蠀 韦委渭伪喂慰蠀 蠂蠅蟻委蟼 蟺伪蟻蔚渭尾慰位苇蟼 蟺蟻慰蟽蠋蟺蠅谓 蟿慰蠀 伪魏蟻慰伪蟿畏蟻委慰蠀 蟿慰蠀 蔚魏蟿蠈蟼 伪蟺蠈 魏维蟺慰喂蔚蟼 蟽蟺慰蟻伪未喂魏苇蟼 蟺伪蟻蔚渭尾慰位苇蟼 蟿慰蠀 危蠅魏蟻维蟿畏 渭蔚 位蠈纬喂伪 蟽蠀纬魏伪蟿维胃蔚蟽畏蟼 (27c-92-c).
螤巍螣螞螣螕螣危 螝惟螡危韦. 螙螚韦巍螣违
螤巍螣螞螣螕螜螝螣 危螚螠螘螜惟螠螒
螘螜危螒螕惟螕螜螝螒 危韦螣螡 "韦螜螠螒螜螣" 韦螣违 螤螞螒韦惟螡螒
螣喂 喂未喂慰蟿蠀蟺委蔚蟼 魏伪喂 蟿伪 蟺蟻蠈蟽蠅蟺伪 蟿慰蠀 苇蟻纬慰蠀
螣 蠂蟻蠈谓慰蟼 蟽蠀纬纬蟻伪蠁萎蟼 魏伪喂 慰 未蟻伪渭伪蟿喂魏蠈蟼 蠂蟻蠈谓慰蟼
蟿慰蠀 苇蟻纬慰蠀
螣喂 伪蟻蠂伪委蔚蟼 蔚位位畏谓喂魏苇蟼 蟺畏纬苇蟼 纬喂伪 蟿慰谓 "韦委渭伪喂慰"
蟿慰蠀 螤位维蟿蝇谓伪
螒谓伪纬魏伪委慰 蟽蠂蠈位喂慰 纬喂伪 蟿畏谓 蟺蟻慰蟽维蟻蟿畏蟽畏 蟿蟻喂蠋谓
魏蔚喂渭苇谓蠅谓 蟽蟿慰谓 蟺位伪蟿蠅谓喂魏蠈 "韦委渭伪喂慰"
螤伪蟻蔚渭尾慰位萎 蟿慰蠀 魏蔚喂渭苇谓慰蠀 蟿慰蠀 蟺位伪蟿蠅谓喂魏慰蠉
"螝蚁喂蟿委伪"
螤伪蟻苇谓胃蔚蟿慰蟼 蟽蠂慰位喂伪蟽渭蠈蟼 纬喂伪 蟿畏谓 螒蟿位伪谓蟿委未伪
螚 未慰渭萎 蟿慰蠀 蟺位伪蟿蠅谓喂魏慰蠉 "韦委渭伪喂慰蠀", 蔚蠀蟻蔚委伪
蟺蔚蟻委位畏蠄畏 蟿慰蠀 苇蟻纬慰蠀
螣 "韦螜螠螒螜螣危" 蟿慰蠀 螤位维蟿蝇谓伪 (魏蔚委渭蔚谓慰-渭蔚蟿维-
危蠂蠈位喂伪 蟽蟿慰谓 "韦委渭伪喂慰" 蟿慰蠀 螤位维蟿蝇谓伪
韦螒 螘螤螜螠螘韦巍螒 韦螣违 螘巍螕螣违
韦慰 "螤蔚蟻委 蠄蠀蠂维蟼 魏慰蟽渭蠋 魏伪喂 蟺蔚蟻委 蠁蠉蟽喂慰蟼" 未蠅蟻喂魏蠈 魏蔚委渭蔚谓慰
螠蔚蟿伪纬蟻伪蠁萎 蟿慰蠀 未蠅蟻喂魏慰蠉 魏蔚喂渭苇谓慰蠀 蟽蟿畏谓 伪蟿蟿喂魏萎 未喂维位蔚魏蟿慰. 韦慰 渭蔚蟿伪纬蟻伪渭渭苇谓慰 魏蔚委渭蔚谓慰 魏伪喂 畏 渭蔚蟿维蠁蟻伪蟽畏 蟿慰蠀
韦慰 "螤蔚蟻委 螤位维蟿蝇谓慰蟼" 魏蔚蠁维位伪喂慰 蟿慰蠀 苇蟻纬慰蠀 蟿慰蠀 螖喂慰纬苇谓畏 螞伪苇蟻蟿喂慰蠀 "桅喂位慰蟽蠈蠁蠅谓 尾委蠅谓 魏伪 未慰纬渭维蟿蠅谓 蟽蠀谓伪纬蠅纬萎". 螠蔚蟿维蠁蟻伪蟽畏 魏伪喂 蟽蠂慰位喂伪蟽渭蠈蟼 蟿慰蠀
韦慰 "蟺蟻慰慰委渭喂慰" 蟿蠅谓 蟽蠂慰位委蠅谓 蟿慰蠀 螤蟻蠈魏位慰蠀 螖喂伪未蠈蠂慰蠀 "螘喂蟼 蟿慰谓 韦委渭伪喂慰谓 蟿慰蠀 螤位维蟿蝇谓慰蟼" (魏蔚委渭蔚谓慰 - 渭蔚蟿维蠁蟻伪蟽畏)
螣喂 "谓蔚慰位慰纬喂蟽渭慰委" 蟿慰蠀 蟺位伪蟿蠅谓喂魏慰蠉 "韦委渭伪喂慰蠀"
螣 "蔚喂魏蠋蟼 位蠈纬慰蟼" 魏伪喂 慰 "蔚喂魏蠋蟼 渭蠉胃慰蟼"
螚 苇谓谓慰喂伪 蟿慰蠀 螖畏渭喂慰蠀蟻纬慰蠉 魏伪喂 蟿慰 苇蟻纬慰 蟿畏蟼
未畏渭喂慰蠀蚁纬委伪蟼
韦伪 伪委蟿喂伪 魏伪喂 蟿伪 蟽蠀谓伪委蟿喂伪 蟽蟿畏 未畏渭喂慰蠀蟻纬委伪
蟿慰蠀 魏蠈蟽渭慰蠀
螚 螒谓维纬魏畏 魏伪喂 畏 违蟺慰未慰蠂萎 萎 慰 围蠋蟻慰蟼 魏伪喂 畏
位蔚喂蟿慰蠀蟻纬委伪 蟿慰蠀蟼 蟽蟿慰谓 "韦委渭伪喂慰"
螚 慰谓蟿慰位慰纬委伪 蟿慰蠀 蟺位伪蟿蠅谓喂魏慰蠉 "韦委渭伪喂慰蠀"
784 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 361
396 people are currently reading
4,052 people want to read
About the author
Plato
4,289听books8,173听followersPlato (Greek: 螤位维蟿蝇谓), born Aristocles (c.鈥�427 鈥� 348 BC), was an ancient Greek philosopher of the Classical period who is considered a foundational thinker in Western philosophy and an innovator of the written dialogue and dialectic forms. He raised problems for what became all the major areas of both theoretical philosophy and practical philosophy, and was the founder of the Platonic Academy, a philosophical school in Athens where Plato taught the doctrines that would later become known as Platonism.
Plato's most famous contribution is the theory of forms (or ideas), which has been interpreted as advancing a solution to what is now known as the problem of universals. He was decisively influenced by the pre-Socratic thinkers Pythagoras, Heraclitus, and Parmenides, although much of what is known about them is derived from Plato himself.
Along with his teacher Socrates, and Aristotle, his student, Plato is a central figure in the history of philosophy. Plato's entire body of work is believed to have survived intact for over 2,400 years鈥攗nlike that of nearly all of his contemporaries. Although their popularity has fluctuated, they have consistently been read and studied through the ages. Through Neoplatonism, he also greatly influenced both Christian and Islamic philosophy. In modern times, Alfred North Whitehead famously said: "the safest general characterization of the European philosophical tradition is that it consists of a series of footnotes to Plato."
Plato's most famous contribution is the theory of forms (or ideas), which has been interpreted as advancing a solution to what is now known as the problem of universals. He was decisively influenced by the pre-Socratic thinkers Pythagoras, Heraclitus, and Parmenides, although much of what is known about them is derived from Plato himself.
Along with his teacher Socrates, and Aristotle, his student, Plato is a central figure in the history of philosophy. Plato's entire body of work is believed to have survived intact for over 2,400 years鈥攗nlike that of nearly all of his contemporaries. Although their popularity has fluctuated, they have consistently been read and studied through the ages. Through Neoplatonism, he also greatly influenced both Christian and Islamic philosophy. In modern times, Alfred North Whitehead famously said: "the safest general characterization of the European philosophical tradition is that it consists of a series of footnotes to Plato."
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 256 reviews
April 23, 2025
One of the best ancient descriptions of the Kingdom of Atlantis - before its catastrophic submersion - you're likely to find.
The first time I read it was over fifty years ago in my university freshman year.
My brain had been set to simmer by the heady atmosphere of Philosophy 101, and was now resting on the back burner during the long train ride home for Thanksgiving.
I had needed some brain food for Canadian National鈥檚 grinding but nonetheless - for a young dreamer like me - strangely soothing train ride up North.
So I鈥檇 grabbed Timaeus at the Douglas Library and hurriedly borrowed it.
I鈥檇 heard it was somewhat mystical, and I wanted to relive the same type of
R锚verie as Valery鈥檚 m茅ditations on seashells had produced in me a week or so earlier!
Well, it started out quaintly enough, but soon devolved into incomprehensible geometrical and mathematical discussions.
But so relaxed was I by being free of course work for the weekend, and the lulling, gentle rhythm of the train, I kept on reading. Lost in space, even though the thread of Socrates鈥� argument was also lost on me!
Peeking out of the large window too, from time to time, to savour the reds, oranges and yellows of the autumn leaves...
Why do so many literary-minded philosophers love math?
Beats me!
For Plato just made me dream technicolor dreams.
Then, as the text progressed, Socrates went Gnostic - giving us a creation myth that's odd but, and this is the good part, mystical indeed. Like the classic part about men and women originally being one person.
You think spouses have arguments NOW!? Well, back in the old days..!
But I was firmly ensconced in Lala-land during during that train ride, like Prufrock...
We have lingered in the chambers of the sea
With seagirls wreathed in seaweed, red and brown
Till human voices wake us - and we drown!
And wake me up they did!
When I arrived back home, the world of mundane matters once again seized the foreground of my mind and took centre stage, as my parents quizzed me.
Endless questions about new friends, work habits, and professors.
The real world never lets up, does it?
But if I had learned anything from Plato, it was this: inspiration. The inspiration of dreams.
That now seems nearly a lifetime ago. I have changed from being a continuous dreamer to become a Christian humanist.
My dreams have all dreamed themselves out, like a reversible jacket that, suddenly totally aware of itself, has turned itself completely outside in:
And my dreaming life is now very much like my daylight hours! We old folks get to a point where our LIfe Itself becomes an everyday dream...
Around me, the world has utterly changed too. Intelligent dreamers are pass茅.
Two lifetimes ago T.S. Eliot bemoaned the world鈥檚 modern tendency to run on its 鈥渕etalled rails of appetency.鈥�
NOW those rails and that appetency are digitalized and sacrosanct, enshrined in the constitution.
It鈥檚 become a surface world.
When I took the train, that day so many years ago, it was a world of hidden depths, though...
But although my Faith has long been what鈥檚 sacrosanct for me, those depths have largely discharged assorted wreckage and useless junk upon the beach of so many of my friends鈥� old age, in abhorrently cold depression.
A trade-off with faith would have by now yielded peace, joy and what used to be called Wisdom, when the mystery of the deep was exposed as an ersatz truism.
Well, it鈥檚 enough.
It鈥檚 been a respectably long life in this tinsel world - and I鈥檓 ready for the next!
But I am still haunted by old books.
Their magic. Their mystery. Their WONDER.
And you know, by the end of that first long-ago semester I had won the University Prize for first-year English.
And now, with the help of my books, I can finally say I KNOW myself and the world reasonably well.
Which just goes to show you - don鈥檛 diss your dreams, kids!
They鈥檒l take you far, if you let them.
But, you know... Plato鈥檚 Atlantean complexity is STILL Greek to me, even now:
But the dreams he evoked powered my life strongly enough to lead me to my Journey鈥檚 End - safely.
The first time I read it was over fifty years ago in my university freshman year.
My brain had been set to simmer by the heady atmosphere of Philosophy 101, and was now resting on the back burner during the long train ride home for Thanksgiving.
I had needed some brain food for Canadian National鈥檚 grinding but nonetheless - for a young dreamer like me - strangely soothing train ride up North.
So I鈥檇 grabbed Timaeus at the Douglas Library and hurriedly borrowed it.
I鈥檇 heard it was somewhat mystical, and I wanted to relive the same type of
R锚verie as Valery鈥檚 m茅ditations on seashells had produced in me a week or so earlier!
Well, it started out quaintly enough, but soon devolved into incomprehensible geometrical and mathematical discussions.
But so relaxed was I by being free of course work for the weekend, and the lulling, gentle rhythm of the train, I kept on reading. Lost in space, even though the thread of Socrates鈥� argument was also lost on me!
Peeking out of the large window too, from time to time, to savour the reds, oranges and yellows of the autumn leaves...
Why do so many literary-minded philosophers love math?
Beats me!
For Plato just made me dream technicolor dreams.
Then, as the text progressed, Socrates went Gnostic - giving us a creation myth that's odd but, and this is the good part, mystical indeed. Like the classic part about men and women originally being one person.
You think spouses have arguments NOW!? Well, back in the old days..!
But I was firmly ensconced in Lala-land during during that train ride, like Prufrock...
We have lingered in the chambers of the sea
With seagirls wreathed in seaweed, red and brown
Till human voices wake us - and we drown!
And wake me up they did!
When I arrived back home, the world of mundane matters once again seized the foreground of my mind and took centre stage, as my parents quizzed me.
Endless questions about new friends, work habits, and professors.
The real world never lets up, does it?
But if I had learned anything from Plato, it was this: inspiration. The inspiration of dreams.
That now seems nearly a lifetime ago. I have changed from being a continuous dreamer to become a Christian humanist.
My dreams have all dreamed themselves out, like a reversible jacket that, suddenly totally aware of itself, has turned itself completely outside in:
And my dreaming life is now very much like my daylight hours! We old folks get to a point where our LIfe Itself becomes an everyday dream...
Around me, the world has utterly changed too. Intelligent dreamers are pass茅.
Two lifetimes ago T.S. Eliot bemoaned the world鈥檚 modern tendency to run on its 鈥渕etalled rails of appetency.鈥�
NOW those rails and that appetency are digitalized and sacrosanct, enshrined in the constitution.
It鈥檚 become a surface world.
When I took the train, that day so many years ago, it was a world of hidden depths, though...
But although my Faith has long been what鈥檚 sacrosanct for me, those depths have largely discharged assorted wreckage and useless junk upon the beach of so many of my friends鈥� old age, in abhorrently cold depression.
A trade-off with faith would have by now yielded peace, joy and what used to be called Wisdom, when the mystery of the deep was exposed as an ersatz truism.
Well, it鈥檚 enough.
It鈥檚 been a respectably long life in this tinsel world - and I鈥檓 ready for the next!
But I am still haunted by old books.
Their magic. Their mystery. Their WONDER.
And you know, by the end of that first long-ago semester I had won the University Prize for first-year English.
And now, with the help of my books, I can finally say I KNOW myself and the world reasonably well.
Which just goes to show you - don鈥檛 diss your dreams, kids!
They鈥檒l take you far, if you let them.
But, you know... Plato鈥檚 Atlantean complexity is STILL Greek to me, even now:
But the dreams he evoked powered my life strongly enough to lead me to my Journey鈥檚 End - safely.
July 31, 2021
The book opens with a brief dialog between Socrates, Timaeus, Hermocrates, and Critias, which swiftly retrogrades into a long monologue by Timaeus himself, during which time Socrates sits quietly and listens.
Timaeus, from Locri, Italy, is a fictional character and his monologue is in fact Plato's lecture, but the philosophy presented bears a resemblance to the one of Pythagoras.
Plato (c.427-347 BCE) in Timaeus c.360 BCE discusses the origins and principles of cosmology; from the creation of the cosmos to the nature of things and humans physiology, sensory perceptions, and the well-being and maladies of the body and soul.
In Timaeus, Demiurge is the artisan that brings the cosmos from a disorderly state to an orderly harmony. The creator, Demiurge, is good and he builds a cosmos similar to himself. Timaeus' cosmos is beautiful, perfect, and a visible living being, like an organism, that is created on insightful principles in which Demiurge placed the mind into the soul and the soul into the body.
Timaeus believes that only a single spherical universe exists with a round rotating floating Earth at its center. A universe in which the Earth and all the other heavenly bodies are created and immortal and the earthly beings created but mortal.
The elements that constitute matter: water (fluid), air (gas), earth (solid), and fire (plasma) are shaped in various geometrical bodies (Platonic solids) in which the triangles they are composed of are the elementary particles of nature.
Timaeus' cosmos is mechanistic and emerged from mathematical knowledge that is governed by necessity and the divine. A universe in which energy remains constant and the observable moving image of eternal space flows to the pulse of a number that we call time.
Plato's Timaeus reads like a mythical prose poem which was apparently influenced by the 鈥渢hree Pythagorean books鈥� published by Philolaus that Plato bought and Timon of Phlius said: "Well, you too, Plato, were obsessed with the desire to acquire followers; and because of it, for much money, you bought a small book, and from it, you learned to write Timaeus." Fact of fiction, we'll never know, but I like to think that Timaeus is a product of Plato's and Pythagorean philosophy.
Timaeus, from Locri, Italy, is a fictional character and his monologue is in fact Plato's lecture, but the philosophy presented bears a resemblance to the one of Pythagoras.
Plato (c.427-347 BCE) in Timaeus c.360 BCE discusses the origins and principles of cosmology; from the creation of the cosmos to the nature of things and humans physiology, sensory perceptions, and the well-being and maladies of the body and soul.
In Timaeus, Demiurge is the artisan that brings the cosmos from a disorderly state to an orderly harmony. The creator, Demiurge, is good and he builds a cosmos similar to himself. Timaeus' cosmos is beautiful, perfect, and a visible living being, like an organism, that is created on insightful principles in which Demiurge placed the mind into the soul and the soul into the body.
Timaeus believes that only a single spherical universe exists with a round rotating floating Earth at its center. A universe in which the Earth and all the other heavenly bodies are created and immortal and the earthly beings created but mortal.
The elements that constitute matter: water (fluid), air (gas), earth (solid), and fire (plasma) are shaped in various geometrical bodies (Platonic solids) in which the triangles they are composed of are the elementary particles of nature.
Timaeus' cosmos is mechanistic and emerged from mathematical knowledge that is governed by necessity and the divine. A universe in which energy remains constant and the observable moving image of eternal space flows to the pulse of a number that we call time.
Plato's Timaeus reads like a mythical prose poem which was apparently influenced by the 鈥渢hree Pythagorean books鈥� published by Philolaus that Plato bought and Timon of Phlius said: "Well, you too, Plato, were obsessed with the desire to acquire followers; and because of it, for much money, you bought a small book, and from it, you learned to write Timaeus." Fact of fiction, we'll never know, but I like to think that Timaeus is a product of Plato's and Pythagorean philosophy.
July 23, 2019
乇爻丕賱賴贁 鬲賷賲丕卅賵爻貙 禺賱丕氐賴鈥屫з娯池� 丕夭 噩賴丕賳鈥屫ㄙ娰嗁� 丕賮賱丕胤賵賳貙 賰賴 丨丕賵賶 亘禺卮 丕亘鬲丿丕賷賶 丕爻胤賵乇賴鈥屫з壺� 亘禺卮 賰賵趩賰賶 丿乇 賮賱爻賮賴 賵 亘禺卮 亘夭乇诏賶 丿乇 胤亘賷毓賷丕鬲 丕爻鬲. 亘禺卮 賮賱爻賮賶 賲禺氐賵氐丕賸 亘賴 丿賱賷賱 胤乇丨 賲亘丕丨孬賶 賰賴 亘毓丿丕賸 鬲賵爻胤 丕乇爻胤賵 鬲賰賲賷賱 卮丿 賵 亘賴 氐賵乇鬲 賳馗乇賷賴贁 賲毓乇賵賮 氐賵乇鬲 賵 賲丕丿賴 丿乇丌賲丿 丕賴賲賷鬲 丿丕乇丿. 亘禺卮 丕爻胤賵乇賴鈥屫й� 亘毓丿賴丕 鬲賵爻胤 賳賵丕賮賱丕胤賵賳蹖鈥屬囏ж� 诏賳賵爻蹖鈥屬囏� 賵 賲丕賳賵蹖鈥屬囏� 诏爻鬲乇卮 蹖丕賮鬲 賵 鬲丕 賲丿鬲鈥屬囏� 丕爻丕爻 鬲賮讴乇 毓乇賮丕賳蹖 丿乇 禺丕賵乇賲蹖丕賳賴貙 賲氐乇 賵 丕乇賵倬丕 乇丕 乇賯賲 夭丿.
賲賰丕賱賲賴 卮亘賶 倬爻 丕夭 賲賰丕賱賲賴贁 賵丕賯毓 賲蹖鈥屫促堌� 賵 丕賷賳 亘丕乇 爻賯乇丕胤 卮賳賵賳丿賴 丕爻鬲 賵 鬲賷賲丕卅賵爻 诏賵賷賳丿賴 賵 丕夭 丌賮乇賷賳卮 噩賴丕賳 賵 丕賳爻丕賳 爻禺賳 賲賶鈥屭堎娯�.
佟. 丌賮乇賷賳卮 噩賴丕賳
噩賴丕賳貙 丕夭 丿賵 亘禺卮 鬲卮讴蹖賱 卮丿賴: 亘禺卮蹖 賲丨爻賵爻 賵 鬲睾蹖蹖乇倬匕蹖乇貙 賵 亘禺卮蹖 賳丕賲丨爻賵爻 賵 鬲睾蹖蹖乇賳丕倬匕蹖乇. 丌賳 趩賴 讴賴 丨賯蹖賯鬲 乇丕 賲蹖鈥屫池ж藏� 亘禺卮 鬲睾蹖蹖乇賳丕倬匕蹖乇 丕爻鬲 讴賴 丨丕賵蹖 氐賵乇鬲鈥屬囏й� 噩丕賵丿丕賳 賴賲賴 趩蹖夭 丕爻鬲.
乇賵夭蹖 乇賵夭诏丕乇蹖 蹖讴 芦丿賲蹖賵乇诏賵爻禄 蹖丕 氐丕賳毓貙 禺賵丕爻鬲 丕夭 乇賵蹖 丌賳 丨賯丕蹖賯 賳丕賲丨爻賵爻 賵 噩丕賵丿丕賳貙 噩賴丕賳蹖 賲丕丿蹖 亘爻丕夭丿. 亘乇丕蹖 丕蹖賳 賲賯氐賵丿 亘賴 賲丕丿賴贁 丕賵賱賷賴鈥屫й� 賳蹖丕夭 丿丕卮鬲. 丕賷賳 賲丕丿賴贁 丕賵賱賷賴 亘乇 禺賱丕賮 鬲氐賵乇 毓賲賵賲貙 禺丕賰 賵 丌亘 賵 亘丕丿 賵 丌鬲卮 賳賷爻鬲貙 趩乇丕 賰賴 丕賵賱丕賸 禺賵丿 丕賷賳 毓賳丕氐乇 亘賴 賷賰丿賷诏乇 鬲亘丿賷賱 賲賶鈥屫促堎嗀� 倬爻 禺賵丿 賲丕丿賴鈥屫з� 賲卮鬲乇讴 丿丕乇賳丿貙 賵 孬丕賳賷丕賸 賲丕丿賴贁 丕賵賱賷賴 亘丕賷丿 毓丕乇賶 丕夭 賴乇 氐賵乇鬲賶 亘丕卮丿貙 丕賲丕 毓賳丕氐乇 丕乇亘毓賴 氐賵乇 禺丕氐 禺賵丿 丿丕乇賳丿貨 亘賱賰賴 賲丕丿賴贁 丕賵賱賷賴貙 賲丕丿賴鈥屫й屫池� 亘賶 卮賰賱 賵 賯丕亘賱 倬匕賷乇卮 丕卮賰丕賱 賲禺鬲賱賮貙 賵 趩賳賷賳 賲丕丿賴贁 亘賶 卮賰賱賶 鬲賳賴丕 亘丕 毓賯賱 賯丕亘賱 丕丿乇丕賰 丕爻鬲 賳賴 亘丕 丨爻.
倬爻 芦氐丕賳毓禄 亘賴 爻乇丕睾 丌賳 賲丕丿賴贁 賲胤賱賯丕賸 亘蹖 卮讴賱 乇賮鬲 賵 亘賴 丌賳 氐賵乇鬲 噩賴丕賳 亘禺卮賷丿貙 讴賴 讴丕賲賱鈥屫臂屬� 氐賵乇鬲 賲賲讴賳 亘賵丿: 賰乇賴. 丕賷賳 賰乇賴貙 讴賴 賲蹖鈥屫堌з� 丌賳 乇丕 讴乇賴贁 丌爻賲丕賳 賳丕賲蹖丿貙 亘賴 诏乇丿 禺賵賷卮 賲賶鈥屭嗀必� 賵 趩乇禺卮 爻鬲丕乇诏丕賳 賵 乇賵夭 賵 卮亘 乇丕 丕賷噩丕丿 賲賶鈥屬冑嗀�.
佗. 丌賮乇賷賳卮 賲賵噩賵丿丕鬲
氐丕賳毓 爻倬爻 爻丕賰賳丕賳 噩賴丕賳 乇丕 禺賱賯 賳賲賵丿.
賳禺爻鬲 禺丿丕賷丕賳 乇丕 丌賮乇賷丿: 賲賵噩賵丿丕鬲賶 噩丕賵丿丕賳賶 亘賴 賰丕賲賱鈥屫辟娰� 卮賰賱 賲賲賰賳 (賰乇賴) 賰賴 賴賲賷卮賴 丨乇賰鬲賶 孬丕亘鬲 丿丕乇賳丿 賵 丿爻鬲禺賵卮 鬲睾賷賷乇 賳賲賶鈥屫促堎嗀�: 爻鬲丕乇诏丕賳.
倬爻 丕夭 丌賳 賰賴 氐丕賳毓貙 禺丿丕賷丕賳 乇丕 爻丕禺鬲貙 丌賮乇賷賳卮 丕賳爻丕賳 乇丕 亘賴 丕賷卮丕賳 賲丨賵賾賱 賰乇丿. 亘賴 丕賷賳 鬲乇鬲賷亘 賰賴 噩夭亍 乇賵丨丕賳賶 賵 噩丕賵丿丕賳賶 丕賳爻丕賳 乇丕 禺賵丿 爻丕禺鬲貙 賵 爻丕禺鬲賳 噩夭亍 噩爻賲丕賳賶 賵 賮丕賳賶 丕賵 乇丕 亘賴 禺丿丕賷丕賳 爻倬乇丿.
爻乇 丕賳爻丕賳 賰賴 賰丕賲賱鈥屫辟娰� 毓囟賵 賵 噩丕賷诏丕賴 噩夭亍 乇賵丨丕賳賶 丕爻鬲貙 亘丕夭 亘賴 氐賵乇鬲 賰丕賲賱鈥屫辟娰� 卮賰賱 賲賲賰賳 (賰乇賴) 丕爻鬲貙 賵 鬲賳 丿乇 丨賯賷賯鬲 賲賻乇賰賻亘 爻乇 丕爻鬲 鬲丕 亘賴 賵爻賷賱賴贁 丌賳 丨乇賰鬲 賰賳丿 賵 賳賷丕夭賴丕賷卮 乇丕 鬲兀賲賷賳 賳賲丕賷丿.
伲. 胤亘賷毓賷丕鬲
亘禺卮 倬丕蹖丕賳蹖 乇爻丕賱賴 亘丨孬 賲賮氐賱賶 丕爻鬲 丿乇亘丕乇賴贁 賰賷賮賷鬲 禺賱賯 賵 禺氐賵氐賷丕鬲 賴乇 蹖讴 丕夭 賲賵噩賵丿丕鬲貙 亘賴 禺氐賵氐 毓賳丕氐乇 丕乇亘毓賴貙 賵 丕毓囟丕賶 亘丿賳 丕賳爻丕賳.
賲賰丕賱賲賴 卮亘賶 倬爻 丕夭 賲賰丕賱賲賴贁 賵丕賯毓 賲蹖鈥屫促堌� 賵 丕賷賳 亘丕乇 爻賯乇丕胤 卮賳賵賳丿賴 丕爻鬲 賵 鬲賷賲丕卅賵爻 诏賵賷賳丿賴 賵 丕夭 丌賮乇賷賳卮 噩賴丕賳 賵 丕賳爻丕賳 爻禺賳 賲賶鈥屭堎娯�.
佟. 丌賮乇賷賳卮 噩賴丕賳
噩賴丕賳貙 丕夭 丿賵 亘禺卮 鬲卮讴蹖賱 卮丿賴: 亘禺卮蹖 賲丨爻賵爻 賵 鬲睾蹖蹖乇倬匕蹖乇貙 賵 亘禺卮蹖 賳丕賲丨爻賵爻 賵 鬲睾蹖蹖乇賳丕倬匕蹖乇. 丌賳 趩賴 讴賴 丨賯蹖賯鬲 乇丕 賲蹖鈥屫池ж藏� 亘禺卮 鬲睾蹖蹖乇賳丕倬匕蹖乇 丕爻鬲 讴賴 丨丕賵蹖 氐賵乇鬲鈥屬囏й� 噩丕賵丿丕賳 賴賲賴 趩蹖夭 丕爻鬲.
乇賵夭蹖 乇賵夭诏丕乇蹖 蹖讴 芦丿賲蹖賵乇诏賵爻禄 蹖丕 氐丕賳毓貙 禺賵丕爻鬲 丕夭 乇賵蹖 丌賳 丨賯丕蹖賯 賳丕賲丨爻賵爻 賵 噩丕賵丿丕賳貙 噩賴丕賳蹖 賲丕丿蹖 亘爻丕夭丿. 亘乇丕蹖 丕蹖賳 賲賯氐賵丿 亘賴 賲丕丿賴贁 丕賵賱賷賴鈥屫й� 賳蹖丕夭 丿丕卮鬲. 丕賷賳 賲丕丿賴贁 丕賵賱賷賴 亘乇 禺賱丕賮 鬲氐賵乇 毓賲賵賲貙 禺丕賰 賵 丌亘 賵 亘丕丿 賵 丌鬲卮 賳賷爻鬲貙 趩乇丕 賰賴 丕賵賱丕賸 禺賵丿 丕賷賳 毓賳丕氐乇 亘賴 賷賰丿賷诏乇 鬲亘丿賷賱 賲賶鈥屫促堎嗀� 倬爻 禺賵丿 賲丕丿賴鈥屫з� 賲卮鬲乇讴 丿丕乇賳丿貙 賵 孬丕賳賷丕賸 賲丕丿賴贁 丕賵賱賷賴 亘丕賷丿 毓丕乇賶 丕夭 賴乇 氐賵乇鬲賶 亘丕卮丿貙 丕賲丕 毓賳丕氐乇 丕乇亘毓賴 氐賵乇 禺丕氐 禺賵丿 丿丕乇賳丿貨 亘賱賰賴 賲丕丿賴贁 丕賵賱賷賴貙 賲丕丿賴鈥屫й屫池� 亘賶 卮賰賱 賵 賯丕亘賱 倬匕賷乇卮 丕卮賰丕賱 賲禺鬲賱賮貙 賵 趩賳賷賳 賲丕丿賴贁 亘賶 卮賰賱賶 鬲賳賴丕 亘丕 毓賯賱 賯丕亘賱 丕丿乇丕賰 丕爻鬲 賳賴 亘丕 丨爻.
倬爻 芦氐丕賳毓禄 亘賴 爻乇丕睾 丌賳 賲丕丿賴贁 賲胤賱賯丕賸 亘蹖 卮讴賱 乇賮鬲 賵 亘賴 丌賳 氐賵乇鬲 噩賴丕賳 亘禺卮賷丿貙 讴賴 讴丕賲賱鈥屫臂屬� 氐賵乇鬲 賲賲讴賳 亘賵丿: 賰乇賴. 丕賷賳 賰乇賴貙 讴賴 賲蹖鈥屫堌з� 丌賳 乇丕 讴乇賴贁 丌爻賲丕賳 賳丕賲蹖丿貙 亘賴 诏乇丿 禺賵賷卮 賲賶鈥屭嗀必� 賵 趩乇禺卮 爻鬲丕乇诏丕賳 賵 乇賵夭 賵 卮亘 乇丕 丕賷噩丕丿 賲賶鈥屬冑嗀�.
佗. 丌賮乇賷賳卮 賲賵噩賵丿丕鬲
氐丕賳毓 爻倬爻 爻丕賰賳丕賳 噩賴丕賳 乇丕 禺賱賯 賳賲賵丿.
賳禺爻鬲 禺丿丕賷丕賳 乇丕 丌賮乇賷丿: 賲賵噩賵丿丕鬲賶 噩丕賵丿丕賳賶 亘賴 賰丕賲賱鈥屫辟娰� 卮賰賱 賲賲賰賳 (賰乇賴) 賰賴 賴賲賷卮賴 丨乇賰鬲賶 孬丕亘鬲 丿丕乇賳丿 賵 丿爻鬲禺賵卮 鬲睾賷賷乇 賳賲賶鈥屫促堎嗀�: 爻鬲丕乇诏丕賳.
倬爻 丕夭 丌賳 賰賴 氐丕賳毓貙 禺丿丕賷丕賳 乇丕 爻丕禺鬲貙 丌賮乇賷賳卮 丕賳爻丕賳 乇丕 亘賴 丕賷卮丕賳 賲丨賵賾賱 賰乇丿. 亘賴 丕賷賳 鬲乇鬲賷亘 賰賴 噩夭亍 乇賵丨丕賳賶 賵 噩丕賵丿丕賳賶 丕賳爻丕賳 乇丕 禺賵丿 爻丕禺鬲貙 賵 爻丕禺鬲賳 噩夭亍 噩爻賲丕賳賶 賵 賮丕賳賶 丕賵 乇丕 亘賴 禺丿丕賷丕賳 爻倬乇丿.
爻乇 丕賳爻丕賳 賰賴 賰丕賲賱鈥屫辟娰� 毓囟賵 賵 噩丕賷诏丕賴 噩夭亍 乇賵丨丕賳賶 丕爻鬲貙 亘丕夭 亘賴 氐賵乇鬲 賰丕賲賱鈥屫辟娰� 卮賰賱 賲賲賰賳 (賰乇賴) 丕爻鬲貙 賵 鬲賳 丿乇 丨賯賷賯鬲 賲賻乇賰賻亘 爻乇 丕爻鬲 鬲丕 亘賴 賵爻賷賱賴贁 丌賳 丨乇賰鬲 賰賳丿 賵 賳賷丕夭賴丕賷卮 乇丕 鬲兀賲賷賳 賳賲丕賷丿.
伲. 胤亘賷毓賷丕鬲
亘禺卮 倬丕蹖丕賳蹖 乇爻丕賱賴 亘丨孬 賲賮氐賱賶 丕爻鬲 丿乇亘丕乇賴贁 賰賷賮賷鬲 禺賱賯 賵 禺氐賵氐賷丕鬲 賴乇 蹖讴 丕夭 賲賵噩賵丿丕鬲貙 亘賴 禺氐賵氐 毓賳丕氐乇 丕乇亘毓賴貙 賵 丕毓囟丕賶 亘丿賳 丕賳爻丕賳.
October 5, 2015
The sources for the myth of Atlantis are two: Plato's dialogs Timaeus and Critias, primarily the latter. That's it. The rest is much more modern invention.
Cornford's Plato books are usually detailed and excellent, albeit perhaps too detailed and technical for some readers. In this edition he did the translation as well as an introduction and preface, apparently abstracted from his longer Plato's Cosmology. Since the Timaeus is primarily a geometricized cosmology, something pretty alien to modern thinking, the commentary is welcome.
Cornford's Plato books are usually detailed and excellent, albeit perhaps too detailed and technical for some readers. In this edition he did the translation as well as an introduction and preface, apparently abstracted from his longer Plato's Cosmology. Since the Timaeus is primarily a geometricized cosmology, something pretty alien to modern thinking, the commentary is welcome.
December 16, 2018
Socrates and Science
15 December 2018 鈥� Perth
This book is famous for all the wrong reasons, and it basically has something to do with a city that for some reason Jason Moma seems to have a very strong connection to. Yet, while this is generally known as the Atlantis dialogue, in reality it isn鈥檛, that accolade goes to the partner dialogue, the Critias. However, at the start, there is this discussion on this city named Atlantis, and how Critias came to learn of its existence, however, at this stage I鈥檒l leave it with Jason Moma and move on to what this text is actually about.
You could say that this is Plato鈥檚 scientific text, namely it is the dialogue where he explores how things work, how the world was created, and why things are the way they are. To say that he is completely and utterly wrong is an understatement in and of itself, but the thing is that we are talking about some guy writing something like two and a half thousand years ago, so we can sort of give him a little bit of slack.
However, the problem I faced is that having read , I just simply got this feeling that Plato, well, simply was not a scientist. Sure, when it comes to political and ethical theory, then he certainly excels in that department, but it seems that what he is doing is attempting to cram quite a lot of information, information that is expanded by the works of three people down the track 鈥� , , and Lucretius 鈥� that the text itself really does seem to be a bit rushed.
Look, when I first read it, I thought it was amazing, and kept on raising the question that if the Greeks were this insightful, why is it that they didn鈥檛 develop technology faster than it was actually developed? Well, it seems that the editor does try to answer that question, and no, it has something to do with the idea that a slave society had no need for tools and equipment to make their lives easier. Apparently, in the twilight of the Roman Empire, there were some experiments in developing a rudimentary assembly line, namely for producing bread. No, the suggestion was that there were a lot technologies that we have, such as cast iron and gunpowder among many others, that were simply not available to the Greeks.
Yet what about the scientific method. Well, that wasn鈥檛 something that was necessarily developed until the era of Isaac Newton, but that didn鈥檛 necessarily mean that Plato, nor the others, weren鈥檛 going about inquiring as to the nature of the universe the wrong way. The thing is that what we are seeing here is the beginning of this idea that there are reasons that things happen in this world, and these things aren鈥檛 happening because some randy God is throwing a trantrum because he didn鈥檛 get his own way. What we are seeing is that people are beginning to observe things, starting to see patterns, and beginning to question the reasons behind these patterns.
However, one thing that does bug me is that I am not entirely sure if this is actually Plato. I鈥檓 not saying that Plato didn鈥檛 necessarily write this dialogue, but rather my feeling is that Plato is espousing things that no doubt were handed down to him from other sources. There is a suggestion that Timeaus may never have existed, but just because we don鈥檛 have any external references to him does not mean that he didn鈥檛 exist. I should also note that Critias happens to be Plato鈥檚 grandfather, so there is certainly a connection there (as well as there being a connection through Socrates).
In the end though, what the whole dialogue is about is that Plato is continuing to explore this idea of a perfect system of government, a dialogue that started back in the Republic. This is clear from the opening discussion at the beginning. Yet, for some reason, Plato then seems to diverge from this topic and delve into a scientific exploration of the origins of the universe. The editor suggested that Plato is simply laying the groundwork for his discussion on Atlantis in the next dialogue, but honestly, I鈥檓 not all that convinced.
15 December 2018 鈥� Perth
This book is famous for all the wrong reasons, and it basically has something to do with a city that for some reason Jason Moma seems to have a very strong connection to. Yet, while this is generally known as the Atlantis dialogue, in reality it isn鈥檛, that accolade goes to the partner dialogue, the Critias. However, at the start, there is this discussion on this city named Atlantis, and how Critias came to learn of its existence, however, at this stage I鈥檒l leave it with Jason Moma and move on to what this text is actually about.
You could say that this is Plato鈥檚 scientific text, namely it is the dialogue where he explores how things work, how the world was created, and why things are the way they are. To say that he is completely and utterly wrong is an understatement in and of itself, but the thing is that we are talking about some guy writing something like two and a half thousand years ago, so we can sort of give him a little bit of slack.
However, the problem I faced is that having read , I just simply got this feeling that Plato, well, simply was not a scientist. Sure, when it comes to political and ethical theory, then he certainly excels in that department, but it seems that what he is doing is attempting to cram quite a lot of information, information that is expanded by the works of three people down the track 鈥� , , and Lucretius 鈥� that the text itself really does seem to be a bit rushed.
Look, when I first read it, I thought it was amazing, and kept on raising the question that if the Greeks were this insightful, why is it that they didn鈥檛 develop technology faster than it was actually developed? Well, it seems that the editor does try to answer that question, and no, it has something to do with the idea that a slave society had no need for tools and equipment to make their lives easier. Apparently, in the twilight of the Roman Empire, there were some experiments in developing a rudimentary assembly line, namely for producing bread. No, the suggestion was that there were a lot technologies that we have, such as cast iron and gunpowder among many others, that were simply not available to the Greeks.
Yet what about the scientific method. Well, that wasn鈥檛 something that was necessarily developed until the era of Isaac Newton, but that didn鈥檛 necessarily mean that Plato, nor the others, weren鈥檛 going about inquiring as to the nature of the universe the wrong way. The thing is that what we are seeing here is the beginning of this idea that there are reasons that things happen in this world, and these things aren鈥檛 happening because some randy God is throwing a trantrum because he didn鈥檛 get his own way. What we are seeing is that people are beginning to observe things, starting to see patterns, and beginning to question the reasons behind these patterns.
However, one thing that does bug me is that I am not entirely sure if this is actually Plato. I鈥檓 not saying that Plato didn鈥檛 necessarily write this dialogue, but rather my feeling is that Plato is espousing things that no doubt were handed down to him from other sources. There is a suggestion that Timeaus may never have existed, but just because we don鈥檛 have any external references to him does not mean that he didn鈥檛 exist. I should also note that Critias happens to be Plato鈥檚 grandfather, so there is certainly a connection there (as well as there being a connection through Socrates).
In the end though, what the whole dialogue is about is that Plato is continuing to explore this idea of a perfect system of government, a dialogue that started back in the Republic. This is clear from the opening discussion at the beginning. Yet, for some reason, Plato then seems to diverge from this topic and delve into a scientific exploration of the origins of the universe. The editor suggested that Plato is simply laying the groundwork for his discussion on Atlantis in the next dialogue, but honestly, I鈥檓 not all that convinced.
December 29, 2022
One WILD cosmogenic ride through astronomy, geometry, mechanics, 4-element chemistry, psychology, physiology and what not! Genesis seems relatively tame. A noticeable shift in history of origin of world from reproduction analogies to a craftsman analogy (deliberate creation). Appears to be like baking the cosmos-dodecahedron from cubes (earth), air (octahedron), fire (pyramid), and water (icosahedron) in A Bowl.
Besides craziness and basic disappointments from modern science perspectives, many highlights.
a) Transmigration of soul (the link of soul - motion strengthens connection with 1st law of thermodynamics & reminds more of Buddhist than Western scriptures)
b) first steps toward Kantian metaphysics/ epistemology/ language by distinguishing between World of Being (Platonic forms) and World of Becoming (sensory perceived things), wherein forms exist in themselves.
c) the microcosm and macrocosm parallelism we find again in Christian medieval cosmology
d) the Demiurge as not omnipotent and not equated with the supreme God or pantheon (different from God of Genesis).
The visual perception accounts are UnHiNGeD; if modern science/ psychology were as creative I probably would enjoy my degree more ngl.
Not much cool stuff about the physiology and medicine paragraphs besides wtf okay. Thanks for diagnosing me with seed in marrow overflowing, Plato, delightful.
Besides craziness and basic disappointments from modern science perspectives, many highlights.
a) Transmigration of soul (the link of soul - motion strengthens connection with 1st law of thermodynamics & reminds more of Buddhist than Western scriptures)
b) first steps toward Kantian metaphysics/ epistemology/ language by distinguishing between World of Being (Platonic forms) and World of Becoming (sensory perceived things), wherein forms exist in themselves.
c) the microcosm and macrocosm parallelism we find again in Christian medieval cosmology
d) the Demiurge as not omnipotent and not equated with the supreme God or pantheon (different from God of Genesis).
The visual perception accounts are UnHiNGeD; if modern science/ psychology were as creative I probably would enjoy my degree more ngl.
Not much cool stuff about the physiology and medicine paragraphs besides wtf okay. Thanks for diagnosing me with seed in marrow overflowing, Plato, delightful.
May 28, 2024
Plato's Timaeus is a cornerstone of ancient philosophy, blending metaphysics with proto-scientific inquiry. This dialogue explores the creation of the world, the nature of the Gods, and the human body. Its rich tapestry has inspired thinkers and creators for millennia.
Theories on World Creation and Gods
In Timaeus, Plato presents a detailed account of the cosmos's origin. His method of explaining the cosmos's structure parallels how fiction/fantasy authors create elaborate stories/mythologies and that shows a lot of how for ages he inspired humanity to create with his philosophical and theoretical work.
Human Body and Health
Plato's exploration of the human body blends philosophy with empirical observation. While he gets a lot of facts and research for insights into health and anatomy from Asclepius (and I'm guessing other doctors of his times) reflecting an early attempt to understand human physiology systematically. This mix of speculative thought and practical knowledge shows Plato's commitment to grounding his theories in observable facts (even though wrong at times, but give the guy a break, it was like 300BC at the time).
And while Plato's views on the body were influential, they were limited by the lack of modern scientific knowledge about anatomy, physiology etc. His focus was more on the soul's relationship to the body than on empirical facts about the body itself.
Plato as a Proto-Fantasy Author
Plato's detailed and imaginative account of the world's creation, for me personally, it marks him as a precursor to modern fantasy authors. His method of explaining the genesis and structure of the cosmos is akin to how writers build immersive fictional worlds. I'd read his theories and ideas and think of when I'd read of Tolkien's Middle Earth or Warcraft Lore, or D&D books and even various myths and legends from other civilizations. His influence extends to crafting Gods and establishing cosmological order, which are hallmarks of the fantasy genre.
And finally...
The Atlantis Narrative
The reason this book is known for, even though it has so little to do with and it's only a few pages long of a story.
The Atlantis story, told by Critias in Timaeus, which was told to Solon by Egyptian priests, describes the powerful, utopian island civilization which we all know, the rise and literal fall of Atantis that sinks into the ocean. Depicted as an ideal society with perfect warriors, who attacked every ancient nation, and winning every battle but one, the Greeks, who freed everyone from the Atlanteans, and pretty much saved their kingdom. Atlantis's downfall serves as a moral and philosophical allegory of course.
This narrative lays the groundwork for myths about lost civilizations in literature and pop-culture and even though it is just an allegory lots of ancient philosophers, historians, and even poets throughout the years, took a shot at Atlantis being real and there are even hypothesis that it was based maybe on the Minoan civilization, or based on a little island known as Thera (iirc) near ancient Crete who fell and if I continue I can tell you countless other theories based on Plato's little story from back then up until now told by modern historians and archeologists.
Dialogue and Philosophical Depth
As with the Republic, once again, Plato's skill in crafting dialogues is evident here too. The interplay between characters, logical arguments, and profound philosophical questions showcase his ability to engage readers in deep contemplation. His dialogues are vibrant conversations that illuminate complex ideas about reality, ethics, and human existence.
Timaeus is a testament to Plato's intellectual prowess, blending myth, philosophy, and proto-science into a compelling narrative. While some theories may seem archaic (and of course science proved some of them wrong) the foundational ideas and exploration method remain influential.
Atlantis:
危'伪蠀蟿萎, 位慰喂蟺蠈谓, 蟿畏谓 谓萎蟽慰 螒蟿位伪谓蟿委未伪 蠀蟺萎蟻蠂蔚 渭蔚纬维位畏 魏伪喂 胃伪蠀渭伪蟽蟿萎 尾伪蟽喂位喂魏萎 未蠉谓伪渭畏,
蟺慰蠀 蔚蟺喂魏蟻伪蟿慰蠉蟽蔚 蟽蔚 蠈位慰 蟿慰 谓畏蟽委, 魏伪胃蠋蟼 魏伪喂 蟽蔚 蟺慰位位维 维位位伪 谓畏蟽喂维 魏伪喂 渭苇蟻畏 蟿畏蟼 畏蟺蔚委蟻慰蠀. 螘蟺喂蟺位苇慰谓, 蟽蟿伪 未喂魏维 渭伪蟼 渭苇蟻畏, 萎蟿伪谓 维蟻蠂慰谓蟿蔚蟼. 螌位畏 伪蠀蟿萎 畏 未蠉谓伪渭畏, 蟽蠀谓伪胃蟻慰喂蟽渭苇谓畏 蟽蔚 苇谓伪 蟽蟿蟻维蟿蔚蠀渭伪, 蔚蟺喂蠂蔚委蟻畏蟽蔚 魏维蟺慰蟿蔚 谓伪 蠀蟺慰未慰蠀位蠋蟽蔚喂 渭蔚 慰蟻渭萎 蟿慰谓 未喂魏蠈 蟽伪蟼 魏伪喂 蟿慰谓 未喂魏蠈 渭伪蟼 魏伪喂 魏维胃蔚 蟿蠈蟺慰 蔚谓蟿蠈蟼 蟿慰蠀 蟽蟿慰渭委慰蠀.
韦蠈蟿蔚, 位慰喂蟺蠈谓, 危蠈位蠅谓伪, 畏 未蠉谓伪渭畏 蟿畏蟼 蟺蠈位畏蟼 蟽伪蟼 苇纬喂谓蔚 蔚渭蠁伪谓萎蟼 蟽蔚 维蟺伪谓蟿蔚蟼 蟿慰蠀蟼 伪谓胃蟻蠋蟺慰蠀蟼, 蠅蟼 蟺蟻慰蟼 蟿畏谓 伪蟻蔚蟿萎 魏伪喂 蟿畏谓 蟻蠋渭畏 蟿畏蟼, 纬喂伪蟿委 蟺蟻蠅蟿慰蟽蟿维蟿畏蟽蔚 蔚谓蠋蟺喂慰谓 蠈位蠅谓 渭蔚 蔚蠀蠄蠀蠂委伪 魏伪喂 渭蔚 蠈蟽蔚蟼 蟺慰位蔚渭喂魏苇蟼 蟿苇蠂谓蔚蟼 魏伪蟿蔚委蠂蔚, 伪蟻蠂喂魏维 蠅蟼 畏纬蔚渭蠈谓伪蟼 蟿蠅谓 螘位位萎谓蠅谓 魏喂 苇蟺蔚喂蟿伪 - 蔚尉 伪谓维纬魏畏蟼 伪蟺慰渭慰谓蠅渭苇谓畏, 蠈蟿伪谓 慰喂 维位位慰喂 伪蟺慰蟽蟿维蟿畏蟽伪谓 - 蠁蟿维谓慰谓蟿伪蟼 蟽蟿慰蠀蟼 苇蟽蠂伪蟿慰蠀蟼 魏喂谓未蠉谓慰蠀蟼, 谓委魏畏蟽蔚 蟿慰蠀蟼 蔚蟺喂未蟻慰渭蔚委蟼 魏喂 苇蟽蟿畏蟽蔚 蟿蟻蠈蟺伪喂慰, 伪蟺慰蟿蟻苇蟺慰谓蟿伪蟼 蟿畏谓 蠀蟺慰未慰蠉位蠅蟽畏 蟿蠅谓 渭畏 蠀蟺蠈未慰蠀位蠅谓 魏伪喂 蔚位蔚蠀胃蔚蟻蠋谓慰谓蟿伪蟼 渭蔚纬伪位蠈魏伪蟻未伪 蠈位慰蠀蟼 蟿慰蠀蟼 维位位慰蠀蟼, 蠈蟽慰蠀蟼 魏伪蟿慰喂魏慰蠉渭蔚 蔚谓蟿蠈蟼 蟿蠅谓 慰蟻委蠅谓 蟿蠅谓 螚蟻伪魏位蔚委蠅谓 危蟿畏位蠋谓.
危蔚 魏伪蟿慰蟺喂谓慰蠉蟼 蠂蟻蠈谓慰蠀蟼, 蠈蟿伪谓 苇纬喂谓伪谓 蠁慰尾蔚蟻慰委 蟽蔚喂蟽渭慰委 魏伪喂 魏伪蟿伪魏位蠀蟽渭慰委, 渭苇蟽伪 蟽蔚 渭委伪 畏渭苇蟻伪 魏伪喂 渭委伪 谓蠉蠂蟿伪 蟿蟻慰渭蔚蟻萎, 蠈位慰喂 慰喂 渭伪蠂畏蟿苇蟼 蟽伪蟼 蠂维胃畏魏伪谓 伪胃蟻蠈慰喂 渭苇蟽伪 蟽蟿畏 纬畏 魏伪喂 畏 谓萎蟽慰蟼 螒蟿位伪谓蟿委未伪 伪蠁伪谓委蟽蟿畏魏蔚, 蟺伪蟻慰渭慰委蠅蟼 尾蠀胃喂蟽渭苇谓畏 蟽蟿畏谓 胃维位伪蟽蟽伪. 螕喂'伪蠀蟿蠈 魏伪喂 蟿蠋蟻伪 苇纬喂谓蔚 伪蟺蟻慰蟽蟺苇位伪蟽蟿慰 魏伪喂 伪未喂蔚蟻蔚蠉谓畏蟿慰 蟿慰 蔚魏蔚委 蟺苇位伪纬慰蟼, 伪蠁慰蠉 蔚渭蟺慰未委味蔚喂 慰 蔚谓蟿蔚位蠋蟼 尾伪胃蠉蟼 蟺畏位蠈蟼, 蟿慰谓 慰蟺慰委慰 维蠁畏蟽蔚 蟿慰 谓畏蟽委 魏伪胃蠋蟼 魏伪蟿伪蟺慰谓蟿喂味蠈蟿伪谓.
Theories on World Creation and Gods
In Timaeus, Plato presents a detailed account of the cosmos's origin. His method of explaining the cosmos's structure parallels how fiction/fantasy authors create elaborate stories/mythologies and that shows a lot of how for ages he inspired humanity to create with his philosophical and theoretical work.
Human Body and Health
Plato's exploration of the human body blends philosophy with empirical observation. While he gets a lot of facts and research for insights into health and anatomy from Asclepius (and I'm guessing other doctors of his times) reflecting an early attempt to understand human physiology systematically. This mix of speculative thought and practical knowledge shows Plato's commitment to grounding his theories in observable facts (even though wrong at times, but give the guy a break, it was like 300BC at the time).
And while Plato's views on the body were influential, they were limited by the lack of modern scientific knowledge about anatomy, physiology etc. His focus was more on the soul's relationship to the body than on empirical facts about the body itself.
Plato as a Proto-Fantasy Author
Plato's detailed and imaginative account of the world's creation, for me personally, it marks him as a precursor to modern fantasy authors. His method of explaining the genesis and structure of the cosmos is akin to how writers build immersive fictional worlds. I'd read his theories and ideas and think of when I'd read of Tolkien's Middle Earth or Warcraft Lore, or D&D books and even various myths and legends from other civilizations. His influence extends to crafting Gods and establishing cosmological order, which are hallmarks of the fantasy genre.
And finally...
The Atlantis Narrative
The reason this book is known for, even though it has so little to do with and it's only a few pages long of a story.
The Atlantis story, told by Critias in Timaeus, which was told to Solon by Egyptian priests, describes the powerful, utopian island civilization which we all know, the rise and literal fall of Atantis that sinks into the ocean. Depicted as an ideal society with perfect warriors, who attacked every ancient nation, and winning every battle but one, the Greeks, who freed everyone from the Atlanteans, and pretty much saved their kingdom. Atlantis's downfall serves as a moral and philosophical allegory of course.
This narrative lays the groundwork for myths about lost civilizations in literature and pop-culture and even though it is just an allegory lots of ancient philosophers, historians, and even poets throughout the years, took a shot at Atlantis being real and there are even hypothesis that it was based maybe on the Minoan civilization, or based on a little island known as Thera (iirc) near ancient Crete who fell and if I continue I can tell you countless other theories based on Plato's little story from back then up until now told by modern historians and archeologists.
Dialogue and Philosophical Depth
As with the Republic, once again, Plato's skill in crafting dialogues is evident here too. The interplay between characters, logical arguments, and profound philosophical questions showcase his ability to engage readers in deep contemplation. His dialogues are vibrant conversations that illuminate complex ideas about reality, ethics, and human existence.
Timaeus is a testament to Plato's intellectual prowess, blending myth, philosophy, and proto-science into a compelling narrative. While some theories may seem archaic (and of course science proved some of them wrong) the foundational ideas and exploration method remain influential.
Atlantis:
危'伪蠀蟿萎, 位慰喂蟺蠈谓, 蟿畏谓 谓萎蟽慰 螒蟿位伪谓蟿委未伪 蠀蟺萎蟻蠂蔚 渭蔚纬维位畏 魏伪喂 胃伪蠀渭伪蟽蟿萎 尾伪蟽喂位喂魏萎 未蠉谓伪渭畏,
蟺慰蠀 蔚蟺喂魏蟻伪蟿慰蠉蟽蔚 蟽蔚 蠈位慰 蟿慰 谓畏蟽委, 魏伪胃蠋蟼 魏伪喂 蟽蔚 蟺慰位位维 维位位伪 谓畏蟽喂维 魏伪喂 渭苇蟻畏 蟿畏蟼 畏蟺蔚委蟻慰蠀. 螘蟺喂蟺位苇慰谓, 蟽蟿伪 未喂魏维 渭伪蟼 渭苇蟻畏, 萎蟿伪谓 维蟻蠂慰谓蟿蔚蟼. 螌位畏 伪蠀蟿萎 畏 未蠉谓伪渭畏, 蟽蠀谓伪胃蟻慰喂蟽渭苇谓畏 蟽蔚 苇谓伪 蟽蟿蟻维蟿蔚蠀渭伪, 蔚蟺喂蠂蔚委蟻畏蟽蔚 魏维蟺慰蟿蔚 谓伪 蠀蟺慰未慰蠀位蠋蟽蔚喂 渭蔚 慰蟻渭萎 蟿慰谓 未喂魏蠈 蟽伪蟼 魏伪喂 蟿慰谓 未喂魏蠈 渭伪蟼 魏伪喂 魏维胃蔚 蟿蠈蟺慰 蔚谓蟿蠈蟼 蟿慰蠀 蟽蟿慰渭委慰蠀.
韦蠈蟿蔚, 位慰喂蟺蠈谓, 危蠈位蠅谓伪, 畏 未蠉谓伪渭畏 蟿畏蟼 蟺蠈位畏蟼 蟽伪蟼 苇纬喂谓蔚 蔚渭蠁伪谓萎蟼 蟽蔚 维蟺伪谓蟿蔚蟼 蟿慰蠀蟼 伪谓胃蟻蠋蟺慰蠀蟼, 蠅蟼 蟺蟻慰蟼 蟿畏谓 伪蟻蔚蟿萎 魏伪喂 蟿畏谓 蟻蠋渭畏 蟿畏蟼, 纬喂伪蟿委 蟺蟻蠅蟿慰蟽蟿维蟿畏蟽蔚 蔚谓蠋蟺喂慰谓 蠈位蠅谓 渭蔚 蔚蠀蠄蠀蠂委伪 魏伪喂 渭蔚 蠈蟽蔚蟼 蟺慰位蔚渭喂魏苇蟼 蟿苇蠂谓蔚蟼 魏伪蟿蔚委蠂蔚, 伪蟻蠂喂魏维 蠅蟼 畏纬蔚渭蠈谓伪蟼 蟿蠅谓 螘位位萎谓蠅谓 魏喂 苇蟺蔚喂蟿伪 - 蔚尉 伪谓维纬魏畏蟼 伪蟺慰渭慰谓蠅渭苇谓畏, 蠈蟿伪谓 慰喂 维位位慰喂 伪蟺慰蟽蟿维蟿畏蟽伪谓 - 蠁蟿维谓慰谓蟿伪蟼 蟽蟿慰蠀蟼 苇蟽蠂伪蟿慰蠀蟼 魏喂谓未蠉谓慰蠀蟼, 谓委魏畏蟽蔚 蟿慰蠀蟼 蔚蟺喂未蟻慰渭蔚委蟼 魏喂 苇蟽蟿畏蟽蔚 蟿蟻蠈蟺伪喂慰, 伪蟺慰蟿蟻苇蟺慰谓蟿伪蟼 蟿畏谓 蠀蟺慰未慰蠉位蠅蟽畏 蟿蠅谓 渭畏 蠀蟺蠈未慰蠀位蠅谓 魏伪喂 蔚位蔚蠀胃蔚蟻蠋谓慰谓蟿伪蟼 渭蔚纬伪位蠈魏伪蟻未伪 蠈位慰蠀蟼 蟿慰蠀蟼 维位位慰蠀蟼, 蠈蟽慰蠀蟼 魏伪蟿慰喂魏慰蠉渭蔚 蔚谓蟿蠈蟼 蟿蠅谓 慰蟻委蠅谓 蟿蠅谓 螚蟻伪魏位蔚委蠅谓 危蟿畏位蠋谓.
危蔚 魏伪蟿慰蟺喂谓慰蠉蟼 蠂蟻蠈谓慰蠀蟼, 蠈蟿伪谓 苇纬喂谓伪谓 蠁慰尾蔚蟻慰委 蟽蔚喂蟽渭慰委 魏伪喂 魏伪蟿伪魏位蠀蟽渭慰委, 渭苇蟽伪 蟽蔚 渭委伪 畏渭苇蟻伪 魏伪喂 渭委伪 谓蠉蠂蟿伪 蟿蟻慰渭蔚蟻萎, 蠈位慰喂 慰喂 渭伪蠂畏蟿苇蟼 蟽伪蟼 蠂维胃畏魏伪谓 伪胃蟻蠈慰喂 渭苇蟽伪 蟽蟿畏 纬畏 魏伪喂 畏 谓萎蟽慰蟼 螒蟿位伪谓蟿委未伪 伪蠁伪谓委蟽蟿畏魏蔚, 蟺伪蟻慰渭慰委蠅蟼 尾蠀胃喂蟽渭苇谓畏 蟽蟿畏谓 胃维位伪蟽蟽伪. 螕喂'伪蠀蟿蠈 魏伪喂 蟿蠋蟻伪 苇纬喂谓蔚 伪蟺蟻慰蟽蟺苇位伪蟽蟿慰 魏伪喂 伪未喂蔚蟻蔚蠉谓畏蟿慰 蟿慰 蔚魏蔚委 蟺苇位伪纬慰蟼, 伪蠁慰蠉 蔚渭蟺慰未委味蔚喂 慰 蔚谓蟿蔚位蠋蟼 尾伪胃蠉蟼 蟺畏位蠈蟼, 蟿慰谓 慰蟺慰委慰 维蠁畏蟽蔚 蟿慰 谓畏蟽委 魏伪胃蠋蟼 魏伪蟿伪蟺慰谓蟿喂味蠈蟿伪谓.
November 1, 2019
1) Da, Atlantida. Kritija se se膰a detinjst(a)va. (59)
2) Kosmos je najlep拧i od svega 拧to je postalo (68), a Tvorac je dobar, sve postoji postoji da bi li膷ilo njemu samom i kosmos je 啪ivo bi膰e obdareno du拧om i umom. (70)
3) No膰 i dan su stvoreni da bi postojala neka vidljiva mera za odnos sporosti i brzine nebeskih tela. (78)
4) Tvorac zapovedi da se prave 啪iva bi膰a i sme拧a u peharu du拧u svemira. (80)
5) Jedan kosmos ili vi拧e kosmosa?
6) Stvori se glava i telo glavi da joj bude olak拧ica za putovanje 鈥� zato je telo dobilo visinu, a izrasla su mu i 4 izdu啪ena i savitljiva uda. (83-84)
7) O膷i su vatra koja nema osobinu da gori 鈥� unutra拧nja vatra isti膷e kroz o膷i u gustom i glatkom mlazu, a o膷na jabu膷ica je zgusnuta da bi spre膷ila krupnije 膷estice. (84) Kapci su prirodna za拧tita oka 鈥� 鈥瀞uspre啪u silu unutra拧nje vatre鈥�. Ukoliko je mirovanje kapaka veliko 鈥� nastaje san. (85) San je, dakle, suspregnutost vatre. Sluh postoji da bi se pojmila harmonija unutar kretanja du拧e, a ritam nam je dat da nas 膷uva od nedostataka mera i oskudice u ljupkosti svojstvene ve膰ini ljudi. (87) [Pogledati obavezno Osnovno na膷elo Laze Kosti膰a.]
8) Prostor ne podle啪e propadanju a pru啪a boravi拧te svemu 拧to postaje (93)
9) Razvijanje dihotomija 鈥� hrapavo/glatko, zadovoljstvo/bol. (107) Hrapavo je gorko, glatko je kiselo. (109)
10) U trupu se nalazi smrtni deo du拧e. (114) Srce predstavlja telesnu stra啪u (kao opomena za strasti) (114), a plu膰a su rashladni ure膽aj srca (115). Slezina je sun膽er jetre. (117)
11) Mo啪dina 膷ini koren smrtnog roda, a mozak je deo mo啪dine predodre膽en da kao oranica primi bo啪je seme. (118)
12) Ono 拧to nas spolja okru啪uje neprekidno nas razara i razdvaja oda拧ilju膰i otkinute deli膰e svaki prema srodnoj vrsti. (126)
13) Bolest je neodgovaraju膰i raspored elemenata. (127) 沤u膷 je uvek vezana za upale. (131) Groznica za vi拧ak vatre. (132) I nezaja啪ljivost u ljubavnoj strasti je bolest du拧e. (133)
14) Niko nije zao ni r膽av svojom voljom ve膰 膷ovek postaje takav zbog lo拧eg telesnog sklopa ili odgoja. (133)
15) Priroda stidnih delova mu拧karaca je nepokorna 鈥� klju膷a 啪ivototvorna te啪nja za izlivanjem. (138)
16) Krajnje antropocentri膷na i geocentri膷na vizija sveta. 沤ivotinje su nastale od ljudi koji nisu skloni umnim radom. Budu膰i da su bli啪i zemlji, bog im je dao i vi拧e oslonaca. (139)
2) Kosmos je najlep拧i od svega 拧to je postalo (68), a Tvorac je dobar, sve postoji postoji da bi li膷ilo njemu samom i kosmos je 啪ivo bi膰e obdareno du拧om i umom. (70)
3) No膰 i dan su stvoreni da bi postojala neka vidljiva mera za odnos sporosti i brzine nebeskih tela. (78)
4) Tvorac zapovedi da se prave 啪iva bi膰a i sme拧a u peharu du拧u svemira. (80)
5) Jedan kosmos ili vi拧e kosmosa?
6) Stvori se glava i telo glavi da joj bude olak拧ica za putovanje 鈥� zato je telo dobilo visinu, a izrasla su mu i 4 izdu啪ena i savitljiva uda. (83-84)
7) O膷i su vatra koja nema osobinu da gori 鈥� unutra拧nja vatra isti膷e kroz o膷i u gustom i glatkom mlazu, a o膷na jabu膷ica je zgusnuta da bi spre膷ila krupnije 膷estice. (84) Kapci su prirodna za拧tita oka 鈥� 鈥瀞uspre啪u silu unutra拧nje vatre鈥�. Ukoliko je mirovanje kapaka veliko 鈥� nastaje san. (85) San je, dakle, suspregnutost vatre. Sluh postoji da bi se pojmila harmonija unutar kretanja du拧e, a ritam nam je dat da nas 膷uva od nedostataka mera i oskudice u ljupkosti svojstvene ve膰ini ljudi. (87) [Pogledati obavezno Osnovno na膷elo Laze Kosti膰a.]
8) Prostor ne podle啪e propadanju a pru啪a boravi拧te svemu 拧to postaje (93)
9) Razvijanje dihotomija 鈥� hrapavo/glatko, zadovoljstvo/bol. (107) Hrapavo je gorko, glatko je kiselo. (109)
10) U trupu se nalazi smrtni deo du拧e. (114) Srce predstavlja telesnu stra啪u (kao opomena za strasti) (114), a plu膰a su rashladni ure膽aj srca (115). Slezina je sun膽er jetre. (117)
11) Mo啪dina 膷ini koren smrtnog roda, a mozak je deo mo啪dine predodre膽en da kao oranica primi bo啪je seme. (118)
12) Ono 拧to nas spolja okru啪uje neprekidno nas razara i razdvaja oda拧ilju膰i otkinute deli膰e svaki prema srodnoj vrsti. (126)
13) Bolest je neodgovaraju膰i raspored elemenata. (127) 沤u膷 je uvek vezana za upale. (131) Groznica za vi拧ak vatre. (132) I nezaja啪ljivost u ljubavnoj strasti je bolest du拧e. (133)
14) Niko nije zao ni r膽av svojom voljom ve膰 膷ovek postaje takav zbog lo拧eg telesnog sklopa ili odgoja. (133)
15) Priroda stidnih delova mu拧karaca je nepokorna 鈥� klju膷a 啪ivototvorna te啪nja za izlivanjem. (138)
16) Krajnje antropocentri膷na i geocentri膷na vizija sveta. 沤ivotinje su nastale od ljudi koji nisu skloni umnim radom. Budu膰i da su bli啪i zemlji, bog im je dao i vi拧e oslonaca. (139)
October 26, 2018
A very wide ranging speculation, presented as fact, covering everything from the origin of the universe, to medicine, ethics, prehistory and the physical sciences. Perhaps the most valuable reflections relate to chemistry, encompassing the notion that matter is made up of combinations of more elementary building blocks capable of recombination. Plato's signature argument for creation from eternal templates is given novel and trenchant presentation.
October 30, 2021
协褌芯 写懈邪谢芯谐懈 芯 泻芯褋屑芯褋械 鈥� 锌褉芯懈褋褏芯卸写械薪懈懈 蟹胁械蟹写, 薪械斜邪, 褋芯谢薪褑邪, 蟹械屑谢懈, 胁芯蟹写褍褏邪, 褔械谢芯胁械泻邪, 械谐芯 褌械谢邪 懈 写褍褕懈. 袩谢邪褌芯薪 褋褔懈褌邪谢, 褔褌芯 写械屑懈褍褉谐 褍褋褌褉芯懈谢 褍屑 胁 写褍褕械, 邪 写褍褕褍 胁 褌械谢械 懈 褔褌芯 薪邪褕 泻芯褋屑芯褋 鈥� 械褋褌褜 卸懈胁芯械 褋褍褖械褋褌胁芯, 薪邪写械谢械薪薪芯械 褍屑芯屑 懈 写褍褕芯泄. 小芯胁褉械屑械薪薪褘械 锌褉械写褋褌邪胁谢械薪懈褟 芯 屑懈褉芯蟹写邪薪懈懈 褋懈谢褜薪芯 芯褌谢懈褔邪褞褌褋褟. 袧芯 斜谢邪谐芯写邪褉褟 褝褌芯屑褍 褌褉褍写褍, 屑褘 屑芯卸械屑 蟹薪邪褌褜, 泻邪泻懈械 锌褉械写褋褌邪胁谢械薪懈褟 斜褘谢懈 褍 写褉械胁薪懈褏. 协褌芯 锌械褉胁芯懈褋褌芯褔薪懈泻 写谢褟 懈蟹褍褔械薪懈褟 懈褋褌芯褉懈懈 屑褘褋谢懈.
September 13, 2015
Sleep-inducing New Age crap. But maybe Plato was just kidding.
February 11, 2019
The universe and souls and our bodies and geometry.
Read
November 1, 2015禺賵卮丕 丿乇爻蹖 讴賴 乇賮乇賳爻卮 鬲賵 亘丕卮蹖.
April 28, 2017
This was an intriguing account of, well, EVERYTHING. Plato is certainly a genius in uniting diverse aspects of reality together, yet although it's a dialogue, except for the very beginning, it's pretty much just a monologue from Timaeus recounting to his friends (Socrates and co.) about what a man had told him when he was a boy. The start of Timaeus's account was the highlight for me, because at about the point where the triangles that underlie all existence are introduced (which I tried to draw but just couldn't fit them together properly), as well as the explanation about human physiology (which seemed so far fetched and was very long), it got to be pretty tedious. But still, The Timaeus forms much of the basis of Plotinus's works, and apart from the triangles, isn't that hard to understand.
Currently reading
October 11, 2021
November 17, 2022
timaeus, it鈥檚 ok to stop and take a breath yknow
April 5, 2019
I鈥檝e been working my way through medieval literature and my dad was in Santorini last week so it seemed like a good time to revisit the Timaeus.
Plato begins with a recap of The Republic and has Socrates state that he would like an example of just such an organized state and what it was like when it went to war. But before his companions agree to do that, they decide that they must begin at creation, speculate about that for a bit, work their way to mankind, and from mankind tell the story of how the perfect example of Socrates鈥� city (which turns out to be ancient, ancient, Athens, of course) goes to war against the evil Atlantis. Why do they need to start at creation?
Then as to wisdom, do you observe how our law from the very first made a study of the whole order of things, extending even to prophecy and medicine which gives health, out of these divine elements deriving what was needful for human life, and adding every sort of knowledge which was akin to them.
From this passage I am guessing that he wants to tie his city from The Republic to greater wisdom than he alone can provide, and the greatest wisdom could only come from a great organizer, the creator. His idea needs to fit in the grand scheme of things and this is the beginning of an attempt to do that.
The companions follow their plan and Timaeus begins a long monologue about creation, but the dialogue ends up collapsing under the weight of it鈥檚 subjects. He does somehow manage to cover 鈥渢he whole order of things鈥�, but in such a short dialogue there was no way for him to do it satisfactorily (ancient science aside). It is interesting to read, though, because knowledge today has become so compartmentalized. Everyone is a specialist and stays in his/her own area. I think it is valuable that Plato reminds us to look at the big picture and see how our ideas (in his case, his ideal city) fit in a comprehensive view.
Plato begins with a recap of The Republic and has Socrates state that he would like an example of just such an organized state and what it was like when it went to war. But before his companions agree to do that, they decide that they must begin at creation, speculate about that for a bit, work their way to mankind, and from mankind tell the story of how the perfect example of Socrates鈥� city (which turns out to be ancient, ancient, Athens, of course) goes to war against the evil Atlantis. Why do they need to start at creation?
Then as to wisdom, do you observe how our law from the very first made a study of the whole order of things, extending even to prophecy and medicine which gives health, out of these divine elements deriving what was needful for human life, and adding every sort of knowledge which was akin to them.
From this passage I am guessing that he wants to tie his city from The Republic to greater wisdom than he alone can provide, and the greatest wisdom could only come from a great organizer, the creator. His idea needs to fit in the grand scheme of things and this is the beginning of an attempt to do that.
The companions follow their plan and Timaeus begins a long monologue about creation, but the dialogue ends up collapsing under the weight of it鈥檚 subjects. He does somehow manage to cover 鈥渢he whole order of things鈥�, but in such a short dialogue there was no way for him to do it satisfactorily (ancient science aside). It is interesting to read, though, because knowledge today has become so compartmentalized. Everyone is a specialist and stays in his/her own area. I think it is valuable that Plato reminds us to look at the big picture and see how our ideas (in his case, his ideal city) fit in a comprehensive view.
Shelved as 'abandoned'
April 24, 2022One might be tempted to read more of this in instances of insomnia, but Plato's understanding of society and humanity is so egregiously faulty that I cannot get through a single sentence without outrage or at least an attempt at mordant humor. File this under What Not to Read. It does make me wonder, though, what one author from today will still be in print and possibly even read 2500 years from now, and how embarrassed would we all be to be represented by that body of work?
April 20, 2017
The Timaeus is usually considered the platonic dialogue that deals with cosmology. However, although in a cosmological environment, it could be considered as a treatise on human physiology, explained in relation to the cosmos and making continual use of final causes to explain things.
The Timaeus is divided into three parts: the first explains the form and origin of the cosmos (including a proof that the multiverse cannot exist) and uses this information to explain the shape of the human head and the difference between the anterior and the posterior parts of the body.
The second explains the composition of the cosmos with a very curious theory, no doubt of Pythagorean origin, which considers that the basis of everything are two rectangular triangles: one isosceles and one scalene, the result of dividing in two an equilateral triangle. This theory is then used to explain human sensitivity.
The third part is devoted to explaining the various parts of the body, and the respiratory, circulatory and excretory functions, including a theory of health and disease. There is also a theory about prophetic dreams, largely superseded by Aristotle, who in a small treatise gives a surprisingly modern explanation.
Critias is an incomplete dialog where the legend of Atlantis first appeared, although there is a summary at the beginning of Timaeus.
--------------------------------------------------
El Timeo se considera usualmente el di谩logo plat贸nico que trata de cosmolog铆a. Sin embargo, aunque en un entorno cosmol贸gico, podr铆a considerarse como un tratado de fisiolog铆a humana que se explica en relaci贸n con el cosmos y haciendo uso continuamente de causas finales para explicar las cosas.
El Timeo se divide en tres partes: en la primera se explica la forma y el origen del cosmos (incluida una demostraci贸n de que no puede existir el multiverso), y se hace uso de esta informaci贸n para explicar la forma de la cabeza humana y la diferencia entre la parte anterior y la posterior del cuerpo.
En la segunda se explica la composici贸n del cosmos con una teor铆a curios铆sima, sin duda de origen pitag贸rico, que considera que la base de todo son dos tri谩ngulos rect谩ngulos: uno is贸sceles y otro escaleno, resultado de dividir en dos un tri谩ngulo equil谩tero. A continuaci贸n se utiliza esta teor铆a para explicar la sensibilidad humana.
La tercera se dedica a explicar las diversas partes del cuerpo y las funciones respiratoria, circulatoria y excretora, as铆 como una teor铆a de la salud y de la enfermedad. Hay tambi茅n una teor铆a sobre el sue帽o adivinatorio ampliamente superada por Arist贸teles, que en un peque帽o tratado da una explicaci贸n sorprendentemente moderna.
Critias es un di谩logo incompleto en el que apareci贸 por primera vez la leyenda de la Atl谩ntida, aunque hay tambi茅n un resumen al principio del Timeo.
The Timaeus is divided into three parts: the first explains the form and origin of the cosmos (including a proof that the multiverse cannot exist) and uses this information to explain the shape of the human head and the difference between the anterior and the posterior parts of the body.
The second explains the composition of the cosmos with a very curious theory, no doubt of Pythagorean origin, which considers that the basis of everything are two rectangular triangles: one isosceles and one scalene, the result of dividing in two an equilateral triangle. This theory is then used to explain human sensitivity.
The third part is devoted to explaining the various parts of the body, and the respiratory, circulatory and excretory functions, including a theory of health and disease. There is also a theory about prophetic dreams, largely superseded by Aristotle, who in a small treatise gives a surprisingly modern explanation.
Critias is an incomplete dialog where the legend of Atlantis first appeared, although there is a summary at the beginning of Timaeus.
--------------------------------------------------
El Timeo se considera usualmente el di谩logo plat贸nico que trata de cosmolog铆a. Sin embargo, aunque en un entorno cosmol贸gico, podr铆a considerarse como un tratado de fisiolog铆a humana que se explica en relaci贸n con el cosmos y haciendo uso continuamente de causas finales para explicar las cosas.
El Timeo se divide en tres partes: en la primera se explica la forma y el origen del cosmos (incluida una demostraci贸n de que no puede existir el multiverso), y se hace uso de esta informaci贸n para explicar la forma de la cabeza humana y la diferencia entre la parte anterior y la posterior del cuerpo.
En la segunda se explica la composici贸n del cosmos con una teor铆a curios铆sima, sin duda de origen pitag贸rico, que considera que la base de todo son dos tri谩ngulos rect谩ngulos: uno is贸sceles y otro escaleno, resultado de dividir en dos un tri谩ngulo equil谩tero. A continuaci贸n se utiliza esta teor铆a para explicar la sensibilidad humana.
La tercera se dedica a explicar las diversas partes del cuerpo y las funciones respiratoria, circulatoria y excretora, as铆 como una teor铆a de la salud y de la enfermedad. Hay tambi茅n una teor铆a sobre el sue帽o adivinatorio ampliamente superada por Arist贸teles, que en un peque帽o tratado da una explicaci贸n sorprendentemente moderna.
Critias es un di谩logo incompleto en el que apareci贸 por primera vez la leyenda de la Atl谩ntida, aunque hay tambi茅n un resumen al principio del Timeo.
July 4, 2021
A fun and sometimes difficult read... a strange book to review. It presents itself as a sort of science textbook, "the story of the universe so far as to the generation of man", Timaeus (the main character) says toward the end. And were I reviewing it as a modern science textbook, I would have to say "uh, LOADS of what this guy says we now think are incorrect, do not read!". However, as a book written in 360 BC by a smart man who had reason, basic observations about the world, and some theology to guide him, it is quite interesting and more than once has remarkable parallels to what modern science does teach us about the world... discussing those parallels could be a whole book in itself, and surely is somewhere. (It's also often quite funny, particularly when Timaeus is dismissing people who think other than he!)
I actually heard the book recommended at a classical Christian schooling conference as "science teachers should read this". Why? For one, Plato's method of reasoning is interesting to follow, even as we (with much better observations now than he had) would not agree with his conclusions. But he does also take the position that the Demiurge and subsidiary gods created the universe to be intelligible, and that it is a "divine" activity of man to study and reflect upon that intelligibility. There is something for Christians to appreciate in his mindset, therefore.
I actually heard the book recommended at a classical Christian schooling conference as "science teachers should read this". Why? For one, Plato's method of reasoning is interesting to follow, even as we (with much better observations now than he had) would not agree with his conclusions. But he does also take the position that the Demiurge and subsidiary gods created the universe to be intelligible, and that it is a "divine" activity of man to study and reflect upon that intelligibility. There is something for Christians to appreciate in his mindset, therefore.
November 14, 2022
賷丨鬲丕噩 廿賱賶 賯乇丕亍丞 孬丕賳賷丞 賵孬丕賱孬丞... 廿賱賶 毓丕卮乇丞 賱亘毓囟 丕賱賲賵丕囟賷毓 亘丕賱匕丕鬲!!
January 4, 2019
Demasiado para una sola lectura, con un gran n煤mero de "cosas" entre l铆neas y el trabajo de diferenciar entre las met谩foras y las afirmaciones literales.
Me gust贸 bastante pero necesito releerlo.
Me gust贸 bastante pero necesito releerlo.
June 9, 2023
Teleological metaphysics built on mind and necessity. Creation myth, natural philosophy, idealist speculation.
September 10, 2023
My dude was on some serious drugs
Read
January 11, 2025Got to love that zany Ancient Greek biology
June 7, 2021
Jag m氓ste ha haft en annan utg氓va, f枚r denna var definitivt inte 100 sidor l氓ng. Snarare dryga 20 sidor mytologisk sm枚rja.
Read
August 24, 2024renacentista
aqu铆 se puede referir toda la cosmovisi贸n antigua al pie de la letra la naturaleza explicada desde las matem谩ticas hasta el acto de copular INCRE脥BLE muy bonita experiencia. es como estar leyendo Cosmos de Neil Degrasse Tyson pero con dioses y some of the randomest shit que te se les ocurri贸 meter para que tuviera sentido y sonara PRECIOSO.
aqu铆 se puede referir toda la cosmovisi贸n antigua al pie de la letra la naturaleza explicada desde las matem谩ticas hasta el acto de copular INCRE脥BLE muy bonita experiencia. es como estar leyendo Cosmos de Neil Degrasse Tyson pero con dioses y some of the randomest shit que te se les ocurri贸 meter para que tuviera sentido y sonara PRECIOSO.
November 9, 2018
PERSONS OF THE DIALOGUE: Socrates, Critias, Timaeus, Hermocrates.
Atlantis...
Many great and wonderful deeds are recorded of your state in our histories. But one of them exceeds all the rest in greatness and valour. For these histories tell of a mighty power which unprovoked made an expedition against the whole of Europe and Asia, and to which your city put an end. This power came forth out of the Atlantic Ocean, for in those days the Atlantic was navigable; and there was an island situated in front of the straits which are by you called the Pillars of Heracles; the island was larger than Libya and Asia put together, and was the way to other islands, and from these you might pass to the whole of the opposite continent which surrounded the true ocean; for this sea which is within the Straits of Heracles is only a harbour, having a narrow entrance, but that other is a real sea, and the surrounding land may be most truly called a boundless continent. Now in this island of Atlantis there was a great and wonderful empire which had rule over the whole island and several others, and over parts of the continent, and, furthermore, the men of Atlantis had subjected the parts of Libya within the columns of Heracles as far as Egypt, and of Europe as far as Tyrrhenia. This vast power, gathered into one, endeavoured to subdue at a blow our country and yours and the whole of the region within the straits; and then, Solon, your country shone forth, in the excellence of her virtue and strength, among all mankind. She was pre-eminent in courage and military skill, and was the leader of the Hellenes. And when the rest fell off from her, being compelled to stand alone, after having undergone the very extremity of danger, she defeated and triumphed over the invaders, and preserved from slavery those who were not yet subjugated, and generously liberated all the rest of us who dwell within the pillars. But afterwards there occurred violent earthquakes and floods; and in a single day and night of misfortune all your warlike men in a body sank into the earth, and the island of Atlantis in like manner disappeared in the depths of the sea. For which reason the sea in those parts is impassable and impenetrable, because there is a shoal of mud in the way; and this was caused by the subsidence of the island.
Memories...
Truly, as is often said, the lessons of our childhood make a wonderful impression on our memories; for I am not sure that I could remember all the discourse of yesterday, but I should be much surprised if I forgot any of these things which I have heard very long ago. I listened at the time with childlike interest to the old man's narrative; he was very ready to teach me, and I asked him again and again to repeat his words, so that like an indelible picture they were branded into my mind. As soon as the day broke, I rehearsed them as he spoke them to my companions, that they, as well as myself, might have something to say. And now, Socrates, to make an end of my preface, I am ready to tell you the whole tale. I will give you not only the general heads, but the particulars, as they were told to me.
Miniture Table of Contents...
CRITIAS: Let me proceed to explain to you, Socrates, the order in which we have arranged our entertainment. Our intention is, that Timaeus, who is the most of an astronomer amongst us, and has made the nature of the universe his special study, should speak first, beginning with the generation of the world and going down to the creation of man; next, I am to receive the men whom he has created
Cause...
Now everything that becomes or is created must of necessity be created by some cause, for without a cause nothing can be created. The work of the creator, whenever he looks to the unchangeable and fashions the form and nature of his work after an unchangeable pattern, must necessarily be made fair and perfect; but when he looks to the created only, and uses a created pattern, it is not fair or perfect.
With or Without Beginning?...
Was the heaven then or the world, whether called by this or by any other more appropriate name鈥攁ssuming the name, I am asking a question which has to be asked at the beginning of an enquiry about anything鈥攚as the world, I say, always in existence and without beginning? or created, and had it a beginning? Created, I reply, being visible and tangible and having a body, and therefore sensible; and all sensible things are apprehended by opinion and sense and are in a process of creation and created. Now that which is created must, as we affirm, of necessity be created by a cause.
World of Generation...
Let me tell you then why the creator made this world of generation. He was good, and the good can never have any jealousy of anything. And being free from jealousy, he desired that all things should be as like himself as they could be. This is in the truest sense the origin of creation and of the world, as we shall do well in believing on the testimony of wise men: God desired that all things should be good and nothing bad, so far as this was attainable. Wherefore also finding the whole visible sphere not at rest, but moving in an irregular and disorderly fashion, out of disorder he brought order, considering that this was in every way better than the other. Now the deeds of the best could never be or have been other than the fairest; and the creator, reflecting on the things which are by nature visible, found that no unintelligent creature taken as a whole was fairer than the intelligent taken as a whole; and that intelligence could not be present in anything which was devoid of soul. For which reason, when he was framing the universe, he put intelligence in soul, and soul in body, that he might be the creator of a work which was by nature fairest and best. Wherefore, using the language of probability, we may say that the world became a living creature truly endowed with soul and intelligence by the providence of God.
This being supposed, let us proceed to the next stage: In the likeness of what animal did the Creator make the world?
Only One World and Heaven...
Are we right in saying that there is one world, or that they are many and infinite? There must be one only, if the created copy is to accord with the original. For that which includes all other intelligible creatures cannot have a second or companion; in that case there would be need of another living being which would include both, and of which they would be parts, and the likeness would be more truly said to resemble not them, but that other which included them. In order then that the world might be solitary, like the perfect animal, the creator made not two worlds or an infinite number of them; but there is and ever will be one only-begotten and created heaven.
Tangible Heaven...
If the universal frame had been created a surface only and having no depth, a single mean would have sufficed to bind together itself and the other terms; but now, as the world must be solid, and solid bodies are always compacted not by one mean but by two, God placed water and air in the mean between fire and earth, and made them to have the same proportion so far as was possible (as fire is to air so is air to water, and as air is to water so is water to earth); and thus he bound and put together a visible and tangible heaven. And for these reasons, and out of such elements which are in number four, the body of the world was created, and it was harmonized by proportion, and therefore has the spirit of friendship; and having been reconciled to itself, it was indissoluble by the hand of any other than the framer.
Creation of Perfect World...
Now the creation took up the whole of each of the four elements; for the Creator compounded the world out of all the fire and all the water and all the air and all the earth, leaving no part of any of them nor any power of them outside. His intention was, in the first place, that the animal should be as far as possible a perfect whole and of perfect parts: secondly, that it should be one, leaving no remnants out of which another such world might be created: and also that it should be free from old age and unaffected by disease. Considering that if heat and cold and other powerful forces which unite bodies surround and attack them from without when they are unprepared, they decompose them, and by bringing diseases and old age upon them, make them waste away鈥攆or this cause and on these grounds he made the world one whole, having every part entire, and being therefore perfect and not liable to old age and disease. And he gave to the world the figure which was suitable and also natural.
Self-Sufficient Man...
Now to the animal which was to comprehend all animals, that figure was suitable which comprehends within itself all other figures. Wherefore he made the world in the form of a globe, round as from a lathe, having its extremes in every direction equidistant from the centre, the most perfect and the most like itself of all figures; for he considered that the like is infinitely fairer than the unlike. This he finished off, making the surface smooth all round for many reasons; in the first place, because the living being had no need of eyes when there was nothing remaining outside him to be seen; nor of ears when there was nothing to be heard; and there was no surrounding atmosphere to be breathed; nor would there have been any use of organs by the help of which he might receive his food or get rid of what he had already digested, since there was nothing which went from him or came into him: for there was nothing beside him. Of design he was created thus, his own waste providing his own food, and all that he did or suffered taking place in and by himself. For the Creator conceived that a being which was self-sufficient would be far more excellent than one which lacked anything; and, as he had no need to take anything or defend himself against any one, the Creator did not think it necessary to bestow upon him hands: nor had he any need of feet, nor of the whole apparatus of walking; but the movement suited to his spherical form was assigned to him, being of all the seven that which is most appropriate to mind and intelligence; and he was made to move in the same manner and on the same spot, within his own limits revolving in a circle. All the other six motions were taken away from him, and he was made not to partake of their deviations. And as this circular movement required no feet, the universe was created without legs and without feet.
Time & Heaven...
Time, then, and the heaven came into being at the same instant in order that, having been created together, if ever there was to be a dissolution of them, they might be dissolved together. It was framed after the pattern of the eternal nature, that it might resemble this as far as was possible; for the pattern exists from eternity, and the created heaven has been, and is, and will be, in all time. Such was the mind and thought of God in the creation of time. The sun and moon and five other stars, which are called the planets, were created by him in order to distinguish and preserve the numbers of time; and when he had made their several bodies, he placed them in the orbits in which the circle of the other was revolving,鈥攊n seven orbits seven stars.
Man...
And having made it, he divided the whole mixture into souls equal in number to the stars, and assigned each soul to a star; and having there placed them as in a chariot, he showed them the nature of the universe, and declared to them the laws of destiny, according to which their first birth would be one and the same for all,鈥攏o one should suffer a disadvantage at his hands; they were to be sown in the instruments of time severally adapted to them, and to come forth the most religious of animals; and as human nature was of two kinds, the superior race would hereafter be called man.
Sleep/Eyes...
But when night comes on and the external and kindred fire departs, then the stream of vision is cut off; for going forth to an unlike element it is changed and extinguished, being no longer of one nature with the surrounding atmosphere which is now deprived of fire: and so the eye no longer sees, and we feel disposed to sleep. For when the eyelids, which the gods invented for the preservation of sight, are closed, they keep in the internal fire; and the power of the fire diffuses and equalizes the inward motions; when they are equalized, there is rest, and when the rest is profound, sleep comes over us scarce disturbed by dreams; but where the greater motions still remain, of whatever nature and in whatever locality, they engender corresponding visions in dreams, which are remembered by us when we are awake and in the external world.
Derivation of Philosophy...
But now the sight of day and night, and the months and the revolutions of the years, have created number, and have given us a conception of time, and the power of enquiring about the nature of the universe; and from this source we have derived philosophy, than which no greater good ever was or will be given by the gods to mortal man.
Regeneration/Cycle of Elements...
In the first place, we see that what we just now called water, by condensation, I suppose, becomes stone and earth; and this same element, when melted and dispersed, passes into vapour and air. Air, again, when inflamed, becomes fire; and again fire, when condensed and extinguished, passes once more into the form of air; and once more, air, when collected and condensed, produces cloud and mist; and from these, when still more compressed, comes flowing water, and from water comes earth and stones once more; and thus generation appears to be transmitted from one to the other in a circle. Thus, then, as the several elements never present themselves in the same form, how can any one have the assurance to assert positively that any of them, whatever it may be, is one thing rather than another? No one can. But much the safest plan is to speak of them as follows:鈥擜nything which we see to be continually changing, as, for example, fire, we must not call 'this' or 'that,' but rather say that it is 'of such a nature'; nor let us speak of water as 'this'; but always as 'such'; nor must we imply that there is any stability in any of those things which we indicate by the use of the words 'this' and 'that,' supposing ourselves to signify something thereby; for they are too volatile to be detained in any such expressions as 'this,' or 'that,' or 'relative to this,' or any other mode of speaking which represents them as permanent.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
December 20, 2018
鈥淎nd so far as it is at all possible for a man to become thoroughly mortal, he cannot help but fully succeed in this, seeing that he has cultivated his mortality all along. On the other hand, if a man has seriously devoted himself to the love of learning and to true wisdom, if he has exercised these aspects of himself above all, then there is absolutely no way that his thoughts can fail to be immortal and divine, should truth come within his grasp.鈥�
*
On Plato:
Well it started out sort of interesting where the demiurge creates everything who is this single, perfect immortal being and so exerts perfect will and reason. But even that is really just caught up in Timaeus' astronomical leanings which, to me, are Plato's harmony by another name. Harmony is even mentioned explicitly at the end so I don't think I'm wrong in that. Then after that it devolves into a mathematical reasoning of the physical world and living beings and I'm sure there's some interesting stuff about the early development of biological thought but it was a bit lost on me. I'm curious as to the overlap with Hippocrates. And I also detected some influence on Lucretius? Maybe?
Overall this was a pretty boring dialogue. Although it did have its moments, it had little for me to grab onto and run with. Like so many dialogues that have really memorable passages, the Timaeus also fell victim to being merely about the demiurge and it's actually got a lot more to it. Just not a lot more that I can say much about.
On Donald J Zeyl:
I don't want to call him completely incompetent, but I found his footnotes asinine and his intro and explanations woefully inadequate. Sure, they gave a decent overview of past scholarship but they had absolutely no life or interpretative vigor to them. And to my sensibilities, they were way off the mark. He's perfectly happy to say Plato is advancing such and such a doctrine and even in this 鈥渓ate鈥� dialogue I find that to be, at worst, patently false, at best, grievously errant-a product of calcified, uncritical Platonic scholarship. It's disappointing really, because normally Hackett has great Plato translations and commentaries, but for a more obscure dialogue like the Timaeus, I guess I shouldn't be so surprised.
To temper my disgust a bit, he does hit the main points. But I had to stop reading his footnotes to appreciate the dialogue and I had to skip around the commentary to retain my sanity which I hardly ever do.
Random other stuff:
Zeyl makes a huge point about the Greek verb gigonen and to be and coming to be and translations thereof. None of it is clear or helpful. To use another person's words 鈥渢hat's extremely cryptic and not at all helpful.鈥� Hmph.
One of the first big things is whether the creation story is literal or metaphorical. Ugh this is just exactly the sort of obsolete thing I'm talking about. But hey it's what all the big guys have talked about so it must be THE THING to talk about.
An interesting thing Zeyl seems not to realize the importance of: that the entire passage is called a 鈥渓ikely account.鈥� There's even a fun bit of reasoning Timaeus does that says hey well we don't have the absolute truth so we must accept the likeliest thing; here's what I think is the likeliest! Zeyl uses a bunch of big words to make it seem like this is just Plato doing lip service to the limits of the various disciplines he's combining to give an account of reality. But this brings up another really terrible aspect of Zeyl. He continuously refers to all of the arguments, all of Timaeus' arguments in his speech as Plato's. Sigh. Mistake number one buddy. Mouthpiece Shmouthpiece, let alone some wayward astronomer.
And actually now that I'm remember there is the cool story at the beginning about Atlantis and Egypt and Solon that has an odd touch of Euhemerism to it, if I can use that term not too anachronistically here.
There's also a neat bit about color that goes through what combinations of colors make other colors. Ancient colors, cool!
I really did like Timaeus' bit about likely accounts: 鈥渨hat being is to becoming, truth is to convincingness.鈥�
It's funny that this whole speech about the creation of the universe and such is supposed to be the introduction to a speech about talking about how cities will act in competition with others. Timaeus makes a stray comment like we don't have enough time to address x important topic, as is so often the case and I wonder whether that might pertain to his whole speech-that's it's a digression that suits him and not really the topic at hand. 鈥淧erhaps later on we could at our leisure give this subject the exposition it deserves.鈥� But the comment is about more PLANETS that the ASTRONOMER doesn't want to go on about.
鈥淎nd what is more, we also say things like these: that what has come to be is what has come to be, that what is coming to be is what is coming to be, and also that what will come to be is what will come to be, and that what is not is what is not. None of these expressions of ours is accurate. But I don't suppose this is a good time right now to be too meticulous about these matters.鈥�
I suppose I got bogged down in the bulky end of Timaeus speech where he's just describing things and there's not really much to say about it.
Zeyl: 鈥淚t is a cardinal doctrine of Plato's metaphysics that nothing in the world of sense experience retains its character permanently.鈥� I hate this man SO MUCH.
Okay I'm not gonna lie I skipped over a lot of his serious engagement with the math and science of Timaeus otherworldly ramblings. I'm sure there is something to be gained by taking it seriously. But I just couldn't take this man seriously who continuously insisted on saying that Timaeus is spouting the honest-to-Zeus truth about what Plato's metaphysics is. So since I abhor this guy and his interpretation so much I'll just go ahead and reveal my secret: I don't believe that Plato EVER advances a positive metaphysics in any of his dialogues. Of course he had one and yes it was probably some form of realism like what he talks about in his dialogues. But I insist that it is an entirely vain enterprise to try to deduce Plato's metaphysics is from the dialogues-they are merely theories to be contemplated and made use of.
Well, my last crazy thought is that most of Plato's dialogues are trying to make someone look stupid and that person here is obviously Timaeus. Without Socrates as a dominant interlocutor its hard to know exactly in what way Timaeus is being stupid, but I have some theories and it's half mooning over astronomy and half being an expert medical man of science.
It's apparent enough that I don't buy any of this dialogue being a treatise on Plato's metpahysic, but since I held that opinion before I read the dialogue and even that sometimes isn't enough I would like to clearly state: After having read the Timaeus, I am not convinced that it indicates anything solid about Plato's metaphysics.
I guess I'm gonna have to read the Critias to see if that connects any of the dots here (as it's part of the alleged trilogy with the hypothesized and nonexistent Hermocrates).
Oh and of course, the last shoutout is to Judeo-Christian theology which plundered this dialogue for all sorts of fun theology that I'm not even going to approach except to mention it here with a flippant final flourish of fireworks flare! After all, in Raphael's School of Athens, is not Plato pointing upwards to the heavens (Heaven) and holding his best dialogue the Timaeus (Italian: Timeo) which features the number one deity, the demiurge (God)??!!
By Zeus, what have I done?!
*
On Plato:
Well it started out sort of interesting where the demiurge creates everything who is this single, perfect immortal being and so exerts perfect will and reason. But even that is really just caught up in Timaeus' astronomical leanings which, to me, are Plato's harmony by another name. Harmony is even mentioned explicitly at the end so I don't think I'm wrong in that. Then after that it devolves into a mathematical reasoning of the physical world and living beings and I'm sure there's some interesting stuff about the early development of biological thought but it was a bit lost on me. I'm curious as to the overlap with Hippocrates. And I also detected some influence on Lucretius? Maybe?
Overall this was a pretty boring dialogue. Although it did have its moments, it had little for me to grab onto and run with. Like so many dialogues that have really memorable passages, the Timaeus also fell victim to being merely about the demiurge and it's actually got a lot more to it. Just not a lot more that I can say much about.
On Donald J Zeyl:
I don't want to call him completely incompetent, but I found his footnotes asinine and his intro and explanations woefully inadequate. Sure, they gave a decent overview of past scholarship but they had absolutely no life or interpretative vigor to them. And to my sensibilities, they were way off the mark. He's perfectly happy to say Plato is advancing such and such a doctrine and even in this 鈥渓ate鈥� dialogue I find that to be, at worst, patently false, at best, grievously errant-a product of calcified, uncritical Platonic scholarship. It's disappointing really, because normally Hackett has great Plato translations and commentaries, but for a more obscure dialogue like the Timaeus, I guess I shouldn't be so surprised.
To temper my disgust a bit, he does hit the main points. But I had to stop reading his footnotes to appreciate the dialogue and I had to skip around the commentary to retain my sanity which I hardly ever do.
Random other stuff:
Zeyl makes a huge point about the Greek verb gigonen and to be and coming to be and translations thereof. None of it is clear or helpful. To use another person's words 鈥渢hat's extremely cryptic and not at all helpful.鈥� Hmph.
One of the first big things is whether the creation story is literal or metaphorical. Ugh this is just exactly the sort of obsolete thing I'm talking about. But hey it's what all the big guys have talked about so it must be THE THING to talk about.
An interesting thing Zeyl seems not to realize the importance of: that the entire passage is called a 鈥渓ikely account.鈥� There's even a fun bit of reasoning Timaeus does that says hey well we don't have the absolute truth so we must accept the likeliest thing; here's what I think is the likeliest! Zeyl uses a bunch of big words to make it seem like this is just Plato doing lip service to the limits of the various disciplines he's combining to give an account of reality. But this brings up another really terrible aspect of Zeyl. He continuously refers to all of the arguments, all of Timaeus' arguments in his speech as Plato's. Sigh. Mistake number one buddy. Mouthpiece Shmouthpiece, let alone some wayward astronomer.
And actually now that I'm remember there is the cool story at the beginning about Atlantis and Egypt and Solon that has an odd touch of Euhemerism to it, if I can use that term not too anachronistically here.
There's also a neat bit about color that goes through what combinations of colors make other colors. Ancient colors, cool!
I really did like Timaeus' bit about likely accounts: 鈥渨hat being is to becoming, truth is to convincingness.鈥�
It's funny that this whole speech about the creation of the universe and such is supposed to be the introduction to a speech about talking about how cities will act in competition with others. Timaeus makes a stray comment like we don't have enough time to address x important topic, as is so often the case and I wonder whether that might pertain to his whole speech-that's it's a digression that suits him and not really the topic at hand. 鈥淧erhaps later on we could at our leisure give this subject the exposition it deserves.鈥� But the comment is about more PLANETS that the ASTRONOMER doesn't want to go on about.
鈥淎nd what is more, we also say things like these: that what has come to be is what has come to be, that what is coming to be is what is coming to be, and also that what will come to be is what will come to be, and that what is not is what is not. None of these expressions of ours is accurate. But I don't suppose this is a good time right now to be too meticulous about these matters.鈥�
I suppose I got bogged down in the bulky end of Timaeus speech where he's just describing things and there's not really much to say about it.
Zeyl: 鈥淚t is a cardinal doctrine of Plato's metaphysics that nothing in the world of sense experience retains its character permanently.鈥� I hate this man SO MUCH.
Okay I'm not gonna lie I skipped over a lot of his serious engagement with the math and science of Timaeus otherworldly ramblings. I'm sure there is something to be gained by taking it seriously. But I just couldn't take this man seriously who continuously insisted on saying that Timaeus is spouting the honest-to-Zeus truth about what Plato's metaphysics is. So since I abhor this guy and his interpretation so much I'll just go ahead and reveal my secret: I don't believe that Plato EVER advances a positive metaphysics in any of his dialogues. Of course he had one and yes it was probably some form of realism like what he talks about in his dialogues. But I insist that it is an entirely vain enterprise to try to deduce Plato's metaphysics is from the dialogues-they are merely theories to be contemplated and made use of.
Well, my last crazy thought is that most of Plato's dialogues are trying to make someone look stupid and that person here is obviously Timaeus. Without Socrates as a dominant interlocutor its hard to know exactly in what way Timaeus is being stupid, but I have some theories and it's half mooning over astronomy and half being an expert medical man of science.
It's apparent enough that I don't buy any of this dialogue being a treatise on Plato's metpahysic, but since I held that opinion before I read the dialogue and even that sometimes isn't enough I would like to clearly state: After having read the Timaeus, I am not convinced that it indicates anything solid about Plato's metaphysics.
I guess I'm gonna have to read the Critias to see if that connects any of the dots here (as it's part of the alleged trilogy with the hypothesized and nonexistent Hermocrates).
Oh and of course, the last shoutout is to Judeo-Christian theology which plundered this dialogue for all sorts of fun theology that I'm not even going to approach except to mention it here with a flippant final flourish of fireworks flare! After all, in Raphael's School of Athens, is not Plato pointing upwards to the heavens (Heaven) and holding his best dialogue the Timaeus (Italian: Timeo) which features the number one deity, the demiurge (God)??!!
By Zeus, what have I done?!
April 15, 2024
While rating this a 4, I'm thinking, who am I to rate Plato's work a 4? I absolutely loved the first 30 pages and the last 5 pages; if I reread this, I will probably just read those sections. Pages 40-60 I found rather difficult to read, mostly because the science is rather antiquated (he tries to explain how the senses work, why the body experiences sickness or disease, causes for certain properties, etc.), and he comes across as sexist, explaining that men who lived cowardly or unjustly will reincarnate into women.
The rest of the dialogue is fascinating. It resumes where the Republic culminated, and Timaeus attempts to unravel the most likely account for the origin of the universe. Since nothing can move of its own accord but relies on a mover, something must have created the universe, and since it is good and beautiful, it must be replicated on a perfect, eternal model. A god took being, sameness, and difference and made only one universe, planets, stars, and souls--I find the idea that our souls are made of the same substance of the celestial rather lovely. When the planets were created, so were number and time (time being an imperfect imitation of eternity); moreover, when the planets began their revolutions, music/harmony came into existence, and our souls, being made of similar substances, participate in the harmony of the spheres. Some of the creation passages have many similarities to the Genesis account, for example,"The god wanted everything to be good...brought it from a state of disorder to one of order."
Many famous Plantonic ideas are found here, from Atlantis, Plato's five solids (tetrahedron, octahedron, icosahedron, cube, and dodecahedron), and the four elements (fire, water, air, and earth). The soul as being divided into three parts, which C. S. Lewis examines in his "Men Without Chests," is further analyzed here, having also been discussed in The Republic: the mind, the most divine part of the soul; the chest, that pertaining to spiritedness and character; and lastly, the appetite. Divided thus, happiness depends on maintaining a rightly ordered chest and a mind devoted to learning, all the while embracing both his immortality and mortality. If the appetite is fed over the mind, the soul will grow "dull, stupid, forgetful, ignorant."
Timaeus says that all that is good is beautiful, and what is beautiful is proportionate; therefore, one's soul and body ought to be proportionate, balanced, and harmonized, meaning that one should develop not only the mind but also the body.
The rest of the dialogue is fascinating. It resumes where the Republic culminated, and Timaeus attempts to unravel the most likely account for the origin of the universe. Since nothing can move of its own accord but relies on a mover, something must have created the universe, and since it is good and beautiful, it must be replicated on a perfect, eternal model. A god took being, sameness, and difference and made only one universe, planets, stars, and souls--I find the idea that our souls are made of the same substance of the celestial rather lovely. When the planets were created, so were number and time (time being an imperfect imitation of eternity); moreover, when the planets began their revolutions, music/harmony came into existence, and our souls, being made of similar substances, participate in the harmony of the spheres. Some of the creation passages have many similarities to the Genesis account, for example,"The god wanted everything to be good...brought it from a state of disorder to one of order."
Many famous Plantonic ideas are found here, from Atlantis, Plato's five solids (tetrahedron, octahedron, icosahedron, cube, and dodecahedron), and the four elements (fire, water, air, and earth). The soul as being divided into three parts, which C. S. Lewis examines in his "Men Without Chests," is further analyzed here, having also been discussed in The Republic: the mind, the most divine part of the soul; the chest, that pertaining to spiritedness and character; and lastly, the appetite. Divided thus, happiness depends on maintaining a rightly ordered chest and a mind devoted to learning, all the while embracing both his immortality and mortality. If the appetite is fed over the mind, the soul will grow "dull, stupid, forgetful, ignorant."
Timaeus says that all that is good is beautiful, and what is beautiful is proportionate; therefore, one's soul and body ought to be proportionate, balanced, and harmonized, meaning that one should develop not only the mind but also the body.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 256 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.