Plato's Republic - Part Two (62)

good evening we're gonna continue what we were doing from last week and we're successful it should confound you as it has me to parts of the Republic one part deals with the conditions that must be established before the quest of true philosophy can begin that's what we did last week and I'm going to go back over it to pull some things out of it so I can create the kind of a problem that I think Plato is doing when he's designing and developed the Republic now subject tonight was the Republic the rising of the soul into the region of mind and that's what we have to try to show that's really what the Republic is all about not about designing an ideal state because the state is not ideal that he generates as himself soon so what kind of a work therefore are we dealing with so that we can focus on it and play with it tonight it is a work that assumes that you're interested in and have a curiosity about the transformative powers that bring about an integration and establish the conditions for vision that's what he's doing in Plato's Republic there are two sets of problems the old one many problem and the other is between belief and knowing I'd like to get into this problem of belief now and kind of in doing that go back over what we did before and as we go I'll highlight a couple of things as we go to have a little fun the primary challenge of the Republic is to try to grasp the nature of justice and injustice so last week we talked about justice temperance bravery and wisdom I'd like to go back over it now to focus on a few things in the Republic he is on a particular interesting quest the way he describes it is what are we seeking for injustice but a power and a power which can produce such men as those men that can go from Hades to heaven as he calls it or rising of the mind into the realm of being now as he talks about justice just to review it this is the primary idea of justice is to do one's own business in oneself and the whole point therefore is what kind of business is it that you must do in yourself he says there are three parts of man right the desires spirited part in the rational part he said what one must do is bring these three parts and bind them together and he uses this expression to make oneself a one out of many then he says what you have to do is you have to believe remember what we said about belief you have to believe and named as just and beautiful dealings whatever practice preserves this condition and works along with it right now that means there is a beautiful picture of the soul as you can despite the rational part the spirited part and of course the desires now whatever whatever practice preserves this condition of making a oneness out of these three so that they are not at odds one with the other whatever practice that does that and preserves that condition of oneness that's justice that's justice see that's and what do you get for it you get a power that produces a power what this produces a power this is very similar and Buddhism when one unifies the mind a power is generated out of that unification of the mind and that's called jury ki same idea same I do now temperance he describes as whatever the ruler which is the rational part and the two ruled the spirited part on the desires whenever the ruler and the two ruled are of one mind of one mind and agree and one mind and agree that the reasoning part ought to rule when that takes place in your psyche that's temperance that's what temperance is it's a resolvement when the struggle is over when the struggle is over between these three and the struggle therefore is over in the sense of a victory when the rational therefore can then be an ally with the spirited and together they can work with the desires to achieve a oneness that condition see that condition of the state of the soul it's a condition it's a condition of the soul that's what he calls suffer Sunnah or temperance let me address direct your attention again to a couple of word return injustice it's a certain power it's a power when the three parts are bound together make oneself one out of many I had one out of many and then you have to believe a name is just and beautiful dealings whatever practice preserves this condition and works along with it this presupposes that the internal warfare between these three has been settled because this suggests that whenever the ruler and the true ruled are one one one all right then the reasoning watch rule that is temperance a condition of the soul bravely remember what we said about bravery remember that's a very curious idea bravery it's difficult to hold on to this and we need it all right what is bravery again notice look here see it's the same language so practice and preserves practice and preserves right here again a whatever preserves it's a practice again that preserves through pleasure and pain desire and fear reasons teachings excuse me there should be reasons teachings I goofed right reasons teachings as to what is really dangerous or not and what is really dangerous or not in the Republic is established by the law and the law givers that's established by the law givers well to read the Republic it's a very interesting work in the way in which it's structured you have to now go back into the Republic this is the fourth book and you have to reason and say to yourself now for this to make sense there must have been some discussion in some earlier part of the work that talks about lawgivers and the need to establish certain kinds of laws and the laws they must be establishing must be so clearly dealing with the question of what is dangerous and what is not because unless you can identify in the preceding section this section doesn't make any difference I mean it doesn't make any it's not significant because notice what it's saying so you have to preserve your pleasure and pain desire and fear what reason reasons teachings as to what is really dangerous or not unless you know what the lawgivers established that what is really dangerous and established a law in order to make sure that man can understand that and include it within himself this doesn't make any sense so what we need to know there is something therefore that is extremely dangerous it's really dangerous its reasons teachings now reason has reason a certain reasoning has brought us to a certain conclusion our reasoning has brought us to a conclusion but conclusion must take the expression of law it must deal with what is considered the most dangerous thing of all and unless we can establish that we won't be able to deal with the bravery of now it still is a preserving preserving preserving so we need to know all right what is the most dangerous thing because it turns out and the way in which Plato talks about it it is a lie that's what's dangerous it's alive what he means by a lie is very interesting what's most dangerous is to possess a lie to have a lie to possess a lie to have a false idea to be ignorant about something that is most essential these are all the same these are all the same to be ignorant about something and to believe that thing that you're ignorant about is true about something most important that's something both the gods and men would most hate it's a false idea therefore if you have it and possess it you possess a lie about something most important and therefore he's going to call that collectively a lie let's see what he calls it see what is truly a lie is hated by both gods and men well what does that see what is truly alive is hated by the gods and men to be false in the most vital part of one's being the soul and about the most vital of all things that's what it is to have a lie within your soul so let us put it in here right let us say there is a lie in here and we have to discover more about it and contrariwise see if we can take that on put out what he would regard as true now notice in the sole to be false and to be ignorant about what is real that's a lawyer so whatever you think is real try it whatever you think is real whatever it is if you agree with what he thinks is Allah it's Israel then you have something about the nature of what is real which he would regard is true if however contrary wise you have a different view of what's real and his then he would say you're harboring in your soul a lie about what is real what does he mean by what is real well and but the end of book 2 in Republic Plato talks about the the falsehoods that are in society and he says the worst of all most dangerous the word becomes important the most dangerous lie is about the nature of God and what is God's so this is what he's saying now the most dangerous idea you can have therefore is a false conception of about God and what is God's so therefore he evolves these ideas that the end of book to God is the cause only of the good time must be perfect in a perfect condition no change and what is God's is everywhere in a perfect state God is two things the highest excellence highest beauty no deception possible well then look earth there's something then that is perfect no change changeless and whatever is God's is in a perfect state and beauty excellence no deception these words taken together take him together Express exactly what he's describing here but we can put it in other terms from the work we've done previously what is God's see what is God's is everywhere in a perfect state this is God's it's in a perfect state right God is the cause only of the good therefore this must be good not the good but must be good right causes only the good excuse me now what is this that's good perfect shameless beauty and and and excellence that is the definition of Antos being that's being which we discussed remember in the symposium in a startling vivid fantastic vision of beauty itself this is called also the perfection of beauty remember the steps leading to a vision of beauty it culminates in a vision of reality right he touches reality that's reality so therefore this is what's real therefore if you have that idea here there it is we'll put it in we'll put it in now what do you have to do with it well let's go back that's the aim capital B mm-hmm capital B no oh there it is brave thank you there it is whoo let's let it put on under the page okay good now we go back to bravery okay therefore a person who has this idea in their soul and to have that in their mind and they preserve that idea through all right now this this person now goes through four states pleasure pain pleasure and pain desires fears this is what he goes through there foe will put him in action I'm always good at action and drawing pictures the other soul goes through right therefore as you experience all pleasures any pain whatsoever all desires in all fears what's the goal right you have to keep in your mind what is really dangerous or not therefore if you have this idea in your mind then you have an idea of what is not dangerous all other ideas therefore our dangerous therefore if you can go through notice this is not aid avoidance this is not a system of avoidance he's not saying avoid pleasure in pain he's not saying avoid desires and fears he's saying as you go through life and face these what idea must you keep in your mind this idea of what is real and what is being because being unreal at the same words now if you can do that then notice then you would then is it not likely have to keep the three aspects of yourself as a oneness because you wouldn't want to allow the desires to run free and unrestrained by this because you want you want to experience these things with this idea in mind therefore to move through those four different states in that kind of state in your soul that is being brave during that time we can assume if temperance is there then the reason is in charge reason is in charge because it's holding on to what is real would you not agree that there are certain times if you face fears and pains you may have a certain view about the nature of reality which is that it's frightening and may be evil and may be harmful and all of these other things heesang good heavens that's the most dangerous view you can have because if you have that idea then this experience of pain and fear then generates suffering that's what generates suffering that's right because part when you have when you when you find yourself in a situation that is fearful and in pain if you then think that whatever is the cause of your pain and your fears is evil demonic in any way negative therefore it's going to heighten the experiences if not and pain transforms into suffering when we go to a dentist sometimes or some kind of medical help you may end up experiencing greater pains than you would normally in many situations but if you were to think at the middle of that whatever the processer going through with your dentist if you believe the dentist is really doing that because he's really in disguised and it's really a sadist and he just loves drilling teeth and he loves putting you through pain what happens to your pain it magnifies and therefore that produces suffering that produces suffering so Plato is saying look here I haven't you have to deal with this problem we have to cut through it we have to go through it we have to sidestep it in a way to sidestep it is that you have an idea about the nature of what is real within your own soul now this is really saying is it not if we keep the language we had a moment ago that mean what is God and what is what is gods God and what is gods is perfect that means therefore does it not that this must be God's right well in metaphysics being is the is the overflow of the one it is the first creation it is the first creation therefore it is God's the first creation and in theology of course being also is the logos right that's the logos and the logos of course as you know is another word for the first creation or the logos is the first creation first son of God logos it's not a gun first creation alright I just wanted to put that in for a moment so we can push now look here notice in this that this is a practice this is a practice it's something you're doing you don't know that you don't know that this is true there's a boy you're accepting a believes putting into your soul that's a point and that's why it's insufficient and that's why he then moves into book seven to then take this belief now transform it into the formative task of moving from belief to knowing how can you know that this is true and that's where he's going now and that's what this is this is a yoga this is a practice now we're moving from this kind of yoga classically to a Gyana yoga this is a gana yoga where we're going now that's a wisdom yoga quite true all right now ah let me hit a couple of things which are fun before I leave them I put in a couple of quotes I like from the Republic this presupposes this presupposes that someone knows that this is to one's advantage to have this idea in your mind through all of those four states pleasure pain desire and fear so he has this statement it's possible for this to be the case because it had in itself a knowledge of what was to the advantage of each this presupposes then that the law giver the law giver has in himself the knowledge of what is to the advantage of each part of the soul and for each man and this therefore covers both I'd like to deal with this last one the idea of a lie the lie in words as an imitation of the state of the soul all right then then having this in your soul and expressing it and assuming this is true assuming believing this is true brings about there for a change this change therefore allows then for through the logos through words a corresponding change in the state of the soul now now want to get into the Republic book seven beginning of book seven it says looker newzik in gymnastics what we've discussed about before he says that's an education by habit it doesn't reach into the mind therefore we'll leave that and assume that our Guardians have already mastered music and gymnastics and therefore ready now to make the ascent into real being for the ascent into real being is true philosophy all of these are quotes from the Republic right the ascent into real being is true philosophy intiatives that's true philosophy and therefore the goal therefore the philosopher is he must seek to learn the studies that have the power to about that kind of knowing not again remember we use the idea of power previously it's primarily a power now there are many studies now that introduced in book seven arithmetic geometry solid geometry astronomy music or harmony and dialectic but now throughout the republic if you go through it just do one thing and then you can follow this whole discussion as he talks about arithmetic as he talks about geometry and solid which he doesn't study astronomy harmony and the dialectic you can go through each one of these subjects and you can see with how much care he describes the popular way of understanding these subjects or as he calls it the way the many understand it and the way he understands that sometimes he calls this the higher part or the philosophical so he's going to now describe the philosophical heart he's now going to study these formal studies he's going to talk about them in the popular way and this is the way they're taught in the schools today so you won't have any trouble understanding that right and now we want to get into the higher part of each one of these arithmetic he said you know no one uses arithmetic rightly because if you do you see the proper study of arithmetic is the kind of study that invites thought now here's the wonderful thing about this this is going to be our first step in Constitution right remember I said we're going to get little country through images he says you know the study of number the study of arithmetic must be and must have one major goal it must invite thought a certain kind of thought oh look earth let me show you something it might invite fun if I have two fingers and I say they're both equally a finger you won't object to that I'm sure if I said hey I got three fingers it's not well let me take these three fingers it's easier with these three because they have used them before and they know all about what we're going to be talking about right now look there each is equally a finger and when I talk about these we can say which one is taller than the other can we not bigger than the other in respect to height which one is small it doesn't cause us any concern does it but now what happens can we still say this is the taller therefore all comparative judgments all comparative judgments based upon Sense experience generates always perception perceptions are a certain interesting kind when the perception show two opposites equally I look here what it's really agree this is small this is smaller than this and this is taller than this so I can talk about the same thing being both taller and taller and smaller can I not I can talk about this being the smallest therefore whenever I'm making comparative judgments and sense experience I can go back and forth and talk about them in one way and then when I compare them in another way I can attribute to them other things can I wait can I not that's the nature of comparative judgments so if I have two things one that is light one is heavy and then I bring two other things that are lighter and heavier than those two and I can talk about the middle ones being light heavy and heavy light and I know that's confusing right so he's a it's for these kinds of things that thought must be called in to decide what the what the perceptions are saying now let me add to it now but if some contradiction is always seen coincidentally with it so it appears to be no more one than its opposite then we'll need a judge to decide what we're talking about right the soul must be compelled to make an inquiry to try to discover what sense is being made by the statements that are uttered now as an example would you not agree of two professions we can say a soldier and a philosopher are indeed different are they not sir yeah let me make sure yeah if we've got three people in a row agree to anything it's an eternal truth right okay right let's watch now okay here we go all right now we're still on this curious statement and he gives an example of what he means and this is the one with the soldier and the philosophy says for a soldier must learn numbers in order to marshal as truth and a philosopher because he must rise out of the region of generation and they hold of essence so our soldier and philosopher are one but it fell that's their one that's stiff they're totally different according to that example why would they be one no we do not agree when we have a question like this it's best to call upon a volunteer thank you I mean a soldier and philosopher in respect to one is doing one thing and another is doing another and they are different and since they both are different in doing different things than why would Plato's say therefore our soldier and philosopher is one how can two differences functioning differently end up being one now sense perception certainly would see that as different sense perception would see that well what are we gonna do that's obviously wrong and you always agree with that done he's obviously wrong in this case well tell us why when you don't have they don't even need the Republic I don't mind it oh sure yeah oh definitely now what might be the single purpose but both the soldier and the philosopher may have respect I think you're quite right can we add to it come on come react to it from we used before the truth yeah louder and show wood oh good oh you mean they nothing they both need justice oh yeah and bravery and temperance Oh in that respect what are they doing in respect to themselves are they each making out of themselves or one oh if that's the case now we have a curious problem to see because if he's involved in a discipline a practice of running becoming one that's certainly the Guardian as well as the philosopher would go through the same quest he both would need brave bravery would they not remember what we said a moment ago that both need temperance in terms of what he's describing his temperance and they both need justice do they not again in terms of the way in which we just described it and if they both are pursuing that and on the same level would they not then become out of it would would not each become a one out of many might be not because if they mastered the things we just described a moment ago going through the same process would they not let's quickly look out they'd both be interested in certain power the power where they can bring the three parts of the soul together bound together so they make themselves or one out of many they could be interested in practicing preserving that condition of the soul would you not agree they would then in terms of those they'd have to then master themselves and make sure that the ruler within themselves his reason and that would be route that would then be as it were ruling the two other parts and wouldn't therefore the idea of preserving through pleasure pain and desire and fear what we call bravery would not be essential to them both if they're both going therefore through the same process even though it appears from the external view from our perceptions that they're different in terms of the mind they become a oneness within a each and therefore Socrates can say so our soldier and philosophy is one now here everything the soldiers Hitler would not give their soldiers wouldn't get into justice temperance and Brady they might have a little difficulty staying in the service but to some degree partner this is a soldier then some people might argue that they were they were people in uniform but they weren't functioning in the end the sense of the art of military science i prosecute a mass murderer I'm saying that the prosecutor a mass murderer if they were to do their jobs correctly they would need the bravery and everything they would have to make one out of them slope so they would be identical yes a mass murder no would you say then the mass murderer then would have in their in their mind their sense of bravery yeah they'd look upon the world as perfect as the nature of reality is perfect and excellent yeah and that's part of their yoga I know they're going through the pain and pleasure it's my thing I have to matter murder I mean I don't take it person if you go back to the bravery where a benefit wasn't yeah it it was the core I'm going through the pain and pleasure etc with the temperance gently quite right that's why the image of yoga doesn't fit because if you think of yoga do you think of yoga as a particular practice that has a beginning and end someone does it for a certain period of time yep this is not this is continuous in life through all pleasures through all pains threw all fears through all desires so in that respect through their whole life they're practicing this and if they did and turned out to be one of those serial killers we would say good heavens sir we'll have to probe your mind is because it may be that you don't have an ID the nature of being as being perfect there might be something beneath it all that you're really hold to be true when you're looking and seeking for revenge and things of that nature just trying to know where were you what happened people should be afraid of that secret this is what makes this interesting because that's why in our society the worst thing in the world is to put men to death for their crimes you want to bring them before I bar of justice perhaps not a courtroom and try to enquire what is it that led you to do that tap the roots of their behavior try to find out what influenced them what made them what they were then we can learn from them and propose then if we did that we would discover that deep at the most fundamental level of their own thinking they was there was right there in the nature of their soul a false belief about the nature of reality so that's why we should for my sake you know I would say don't throw away anybody all men a the capability of reason should be allowed an opportunity to see themselves but also pull out of morality for a moment now liquor each one of these people then is becoming a one now I'd like to have a little dialogue between the soldier and the philosopher it goes like this sorry hey what are you doing sitting around oh yeah yeah what are you doing going around bottling oh yeah yeah while you do your thing and I'm doing mine but are we not trying to do something together and also each one of us is trying to do something to ourselves that has become most interestingly oh one out of many would you not agree they would both then have to say yes in terms of this dialogue good now suppose one of them and I don't know which one would raise this question suppose one of them would turn to the other and say you know I too have been pursuing this idea of one while and I do believe it's meaningful and I've done it for a long while and I can see its advantages but you know what I'm not sure I know what the one is in itself the other might say what do you mean you don't know what one is itself I mean it certainly have been becoming a one trying to become a one out of many haven't you oh yeah trying to become a one out of nine oh you have been doing bravery you have been going through these different states oh yes I've been doing that well in that respect you've been trying have you not to become a oneness oh yeah well while I'm becoming that I'm not sure I know what that is that I have become well then the two of them I'd say well then it's time to find a third to explore this question because the thing they want to know is this question what after all is the one itself that's the fundamental question of the Republic see they both been gone they've both gone through a process of wanting they both try to go through these practices and these disciplines and then they try to maintain it preserve it they're both becoming a one exhibiting a oneness but now they may then turn around and say this thing that we have become or are becoming what would it be just to know what the one is in itself apart from the fact that I'm in some sense becoming now for Plato he says this question this question after all what is the one in its own is one of the studies which lead and divert the soul towards the contemplation of real being that's what it does that's what it does that's what that's what that's what the study of arithmetic leads to the contemplation of real being by asking what after all is the nature of the one in itself what is one it's all this becomes an object of contemplation that's what he calls it all right this is one of the studies which lead and divert the soul towards the contemplation of real being this allows the practitioner to rise up from the world of becoming to lay hold of real being I know what is it - it's a practice it's practicing to make it easier to make easier the change the change from the world to becoming to real being and truth that's what it is it's to make it easier to make that transition from the everyday world in our views of the world into the realm of real being and truth that's the study of arithmetic now if that's the case what do you think geometry is going to look like good thing we can turn the next page no let me talk about what appears to be something else for a few minutes and I'll be successful in that okay good the higher part the higher part of a certain study makes it easy to see the idea of the good now the idea of the good I remember their symposium the steps leading to a vision of beauty itself to have that vision of beauty itself to see the nature of reality as Beauty itself or the perfection of beauty that's the way he describes it in the symposium that is called idea of the good that is what this is the idea of the good now this word is a Greek word idea see it hasn't even been translated what this word literally means is when we use the word idea we consider it to be a thought a concept a construct but the word means to behold to behold so to behold the good is to experience the good that's called perfection of doing therefore to behold the good is the idea of the good that's an experience that's the object of experience that's what this is an experience when translators leave this with it should really be a capital I if they want to keep that word idea because see watch the language it makes it easier see it's right there to see to see the idea of the good for it compels the sural so to turn towards that reason in which is the happiest and most fortunate part of real being and which the soul must must by all means see so the higher part of this study the higher part of the study as being as being practiced properly only on one standard so that compels the soul to contemplate being its proper you have to contemplate becoming it's not proper now what is this higher what is the study we've just described that is what he calls geometry that's we close Jones now he also talks about the popular use of the word arithmetic and the popular use of the word geometry but when he understands it philosophically that's the Quay that's the way he describes it in the Republic notice it's not different it is not essentially different from arithmetic what was the goal of arithmetic goal of arithmetic remember by me two contemplation of real being what's geometry to make it easier to see the idea of the good and to see it right that's an experience to see it it compels a soul to turn around towards that region which is most happy as the most fortunate part of real being that's exactly the way it's just it's also described in the symposium all of these by the way are quotes from the Republic so if it compels the soul to contemplate things proper it to contemplate becoming it is not what does he call that geometry therefore it looks like these two are quite similar aren't they they may be different phases of the same study curious isn't it well astronomy everyone knows what astronomy is that business is about is it saying that if we stop living in the here and now I move from being to becoming that's right if you use geometry to disturb to study the physical universe then you're studying it too in order to contemplate becoming that's becoming it every day world it is it is not thoughtful that's right if you if you turn it to where it's it to if you apply geometry into the world to becoming it does not proper because you want it to be real that's wrong now what's astronomy well it's obviously going to be similar or different than what you consider to be astronomers noticed wages right hey you know what the way we pursued problems in astronomy is exactly the way we do in geometry well how do you pursue problems in geometry the way we just described it well say now we're studying the difficulties the problems the problems you encounter in the pursuit of your contemplation of real being see those are problems we will pursue problems in astronomy and geometry astronomy most where we must come up as high as problems whereas discover which numbers are concordant which not and the whole goal then is to bring that about but to bring that about we must bring that about them now I would like to bring you to the study of music or harmony and I didn't put that down but I will find a good quote for you now I in my haste to write it up there this evening I skipped it actually I included part of it but I'd like to get your I'll give you the whole section so you can see how strange it seems when we read it the way he describes him and now he's talking about harmony and he talked about how foolish people are who just applied their ear to the tunes and and tune instruments she said that's not anything to do with harmony I mean those whom we propose to question about harmonics now they do just the same as people engaged in astronomy what are the people engaged in astronomy do the same as those who are engaged in geometry well that's not surprising they search for numbers in the Conchords which are heard do they do not come up as high as problem so discover which numbers are concordant in which or not so if we can just very simply say and harmonics and the study of harmony we will pursue harmony in the same way in which we we studied astronomy how do we study astronomy the same way in which we studied geometry how do we study geometry the same way we were studying arithmetic now in yoga classical yoga there is a very important term called the samyama and they talk about contemplation meditation concentration these are different stages or going up concentration meditation and contemplation and Patanjali says they're the same there are different stages of the same thing they're just different stages of the same thing salmon Sanskrit means to take together so when you take Yama is studies so when you take together all of the studies of yoga you take them together you're doing one thing in various ways that is to say you're doing one thing that goes through different stages would you not agree we have the same thing here that the same thing here we have one pursuit which is the most meaningful question what is it after all that the nature were the one in itself and that's explored contentedly on the level of geometry astronomy harmony and now the dialectic it's just like a dialectic don't part me the most important thing you have to do now before you get as a dielectric you must see that the community and kinship between these studies one two three four right and the way they are related to one another that's exactly what we were just doing now he enters into the realm of the dialectic and he says dialectic is the name given to this progress of thought through these difference these are different progress of thought through these are and to grasped by thought alone the real nature of the good itself now I know this is pretty curious stuff but ah you've been through so much you can take this one too so good the idea of the good all right we're going to call this what we did before perfection of beauty my real being nature of reality you didn't miss it at all have made the Republic see all of these studies and by the studies I only mean arithmetic geometry saw the geometry astronomy and harmony all right they have as their primary goal seeing this that's their goal which of course is the most fortunate under the most important task a most most profound part of man's experience to reach and experience this most fully and the symposium he says when one's contemplating beauty and itself that's when one recognizes that the life is worth the meaning of life and this is the meaning of all existence to contemplate the nature of beauty itself but Malachor now put it back into theology the language of theology that we use when were in book to God what belongs to God or what is God's now in the bhagavad-gita as an example the highest vision of ishvara is this there's nothing beyond this this is the culminating vision now it's the another name for the god of time no Krishna personifies the highest range of reason and understanding and Nikita okay going back into this now look here this is the goal for rithmetic geometry solid geometry astronomy harmony and if one gets this one reaches this experience one reaches that experience when might think one has reached the ultimate for which there is nothing beyond that's where the dialectic and Plato begins because the dialectic is a rigorous use of reason and that's all it is a rigorous use of reason to make the distinction between the two and the way the distinction is made between the two is only on just one single idea this is the one in itself I should say the one itself so therefore the dialectic then proceeds to examine the step by step to try to show that there must be in in terms of this and inherent many nests you naughty a very profound unity but not a true one the task of the dialectic is to make that distinction clear therefore freeing this person from thinking that this is the ultimate thing possible to conceive and therefore the highest and therefore it takes them out of religion into philosophy this then becomes in Christian theology sometimes called the diya negativo right that about what you can say nothing this is the visions possible I'll be holding the nature of God and a splendid blissful state but that is not God all right but what is gods that is being or the nature of ultimate reality that's the purpose therefore of Plato's Republic because he says that in book seven he says you know what's going on now and this is I would love to know what's behind this remark what's going on now he says we will certainly not tolerate in our republic I think oh no it always says oh no we won't do that and thank goodness Socrates goes on to say what it is he won't tolerate anybody won't tolerate is that they are men who experience this and try to stay in that state believing they've reached the Isles of the Blessed and there's nothing beyond having spent a lot of guys sitting around doing that well I think guys includes women because in the Republic that there's no difference between the minimum and other than the difference is only in strength since women can be philosophers genders all right um the first part they're good and then other side the perfection of beauty the idea of the good real be that's the language of metaphysics right both are yes yeah and then the second part is the language of theology right we've got a God on the left-hand side what he's gods on the right now this is the language of the elementary yeah that's the language of the other right employment and nestlings you metaphysics what's the language for cosmology if you were going to continue through well the the most difficult which is really book six seven and latinas deals with this whole question of how do you how can you understand this birth now you can talk about it as a birth you can talk about in many metaphors but essentially how do you do that well let's see now whether i can reflect back on it in terms of your question the problem of cosmology is to assume that this is the this is the idea in the mind of god that's the logos the idea that my god and when God creates the universe he focuses on this idea when he then generates the universe therefore the universe is a copy of the model which is the mind of God and the difference is that this is in time this is an eternity therefore this has a beginning middle and end right or particular universes from this eternal therefore is of the earth this is also eternity in metaphysics but to answer your question the idea in the mind of God was the basis of a creation of the universe and the of the overflowing the outpouring of that creative energy to generate the universe is nothing other than making manifest what lay potential in the mind of God or manifesto am I wrong but in order well that's seen our getting in into the metaphysical side of the secret to talk about the mind of God already is making a distinction between God and mind and something in the mind and something in the God right so metaphysically we can't say that theologically we can say that because that's the language we can talk about but in terms of metaphysics such as Platonists and Plato certainly plutinos makes it easier he says the nature of the good nature they're good in a very very interesting statement see you can't say anything about the good Kenya and the highest-level metaphysically it's a dear negative it's not about what you can say nothing so therefore he says out of out of a pure nothing existent well this emerged that's also Buddhism China's okay and figure it at language in figurative language and metaphysics they talk about it terms of if you can do those Oh we we don't see light we infer the existence of light because it is reflected off surfaces right light is invisible so the light eye light itself has a source and this is its source the source stands to the good as the light stands to the perfection of beauty and the idea the good or the nature of Anto so reality if you like images well maybe I can get two for one do they answer your question did he do the push with another step I don't know oh their discussion their discussion of different food their ever they never achieve their purpose because they they are it seems as though they're there they're locked into they're locked into a duality that denies the one considering considering this discussion it seems like a discussion that the philosopher of the soldier would have that we the one the one it is is being discussed as as as a multiplicity and then the discussion of the one is a multiplicity is the one itself has no predicate mmm there's no prints I mean you can't say anything about it if they do you've deviated from the idea of the one itself so it can't be a multiplicity this can be said to be a multiplicity version making distinctions within it at some point at some point I think that's the point that you want to make him at some point that's true hmm that's true which only the dialectic can do see this is not an experience that the one is not an experience it's not an object of experience it's not an experience or if it were an experience it would have a beginning middle and end you could then in some way contrast it with other things it's not possible to contrast it with anything else I think we went over but I think we see the fundamental dialectic on the one itself the dialectic formally goes through twelve positive steps or procedures and twelve negative right so when you're talking about the one in respect to itself and everything you can say about it you can say therefore a set of things that are true about it you can also say there's certain things you cannot say about it that are false and then there's certain things you can say that might be said to be both true and false true in one way and false in another then you can talk about the one that you just described and the way it can be said to relate to other things or others and when you do that which is what we were doing with the idea of cosmology and things like that again you can say things that are true things that are false things that are both true and false all right now you can talk also about the idea of the one and respect to how the others relate to the idea of the one and all the ways in which it can be related among the others and you can say three things about it that it's true that it's false both true and false and then you can also now talk about how all of these others then relate to the one and you can say something true/false and both true and false right so that's 12 categories that you can work through this is called the positive side of the dialectic and for each of these then you can also deny what must follow if you were cert that the one is not if the one is not if you say the one is not then there's certain things you can say about it and equally well it follows the same structure going on the other side so there 24 categories in a dialectic on any subject especially on the idea of the one so when you're talking about the one in itself the fundamental distinction upon which all the rest must follow is if you really mean a one to be a one whatever you say about it you cannot assert about it that and it is in any way of many if you can't say in any way that it is a many then you're dealing with the one in itself so that therefore would you not agree you can't say then that it's a whole because the whole has parts so it can't be a whole it can't be a part because a part is a part of a whole you can't say that it has any beginning middle or end for those would be its respective distinctions right you can't therefore say that it is in anything all right Tempe in anything or let's put it first it can't be then be asserted that it's in motion nor can it be said to be in rest if it's in motion then there must be someplace it is in someplace that it can go to and that's already in many notes it can't be at rest for is that it is at rest there must be some place for it to be over a period of time and therefore it presupposes are many in his three ways then you can see how it is the same as whether or not you can say it's the same as anything or you can say whether it's other than or you can then explore whether it's the same as another or other than another and by using the same kind of approach if you say it's the same as something else that presuppose there is something else upon which you're going to compare it right that's the muddiness can say it's other than anything but the same reason because that presuppose there must be another which you can contrast it that gets you out of one itself it talks about relationships with other things therefore in the same way say then that it's other than another because there it isn't contrast able and another because that would presuppose am any news right so in the same way you can say it's in itself you can't say it's in itself because if it were in itself then there would be certain points upon which it must correspond if it's in itself part of it must be surrounding itself a note in some way and must be touched in certain ways upon it and that would be a main enos so it can't be in itself it can't be for itself right it can't be by itself right by the same relationships therefore given this then it can't be in time forward in time either the present past or future would presuppose something in which it is in we denied that therefore it can't have any form remember we said it had no beginning middle or end and anything that has a form is made up of either straight lines and curves and therefore it has no form if it has no form or shape and it can't be perceived it can't be made an opinion of it you can well if it were by itself right let's try it then you must then consider must or not that there must be something other than itself so it can be by itself well does by itself presuppose that it must be that it must be in a place where there's nothing other well okay would you agree you can use this language to mean that yeah okay so just that we can take that out and let's use your idea of what by itself yeah okay oh by the way you called in it if you don't want to do that do you oh wait if you want to call it if it has a name then there's something different between it and its name no no no it's not that's the other part that's a no no you want to say the one is not then obviously another okay then it's back to being a many for you but we've said did we not begin with that our dialectic is going to be based upon one premise that it we're not going to make any statements that imply or suggest main yeah okay yeah but would you agree if I if we use the word by itself and respect to this then we can say it's not by itself okay if if something if something is is by itself does that suggest there can be some place in which it can be by itself spatial yeah right so that we couldn't use that idea yeah well everything money if it's everything would you agree that's going to be a many nice everything everything is a one that's true then there is a plurality of many ones yes that's true and they are many of them by itself don't become ok since it has no beginning middle around it it cannot be asserted that it has any outward boundary and it's unlimited in that respect but that's still distinguishing it from other things when you call it an inn it's also neuter yeah yeah so they can't do that that's right and therefore in the end you can't even call it the one because that's suggestion there's something there that you give a name to and they're different so then the name drops out to the countess you can assert of it existence one change 72nd and go back to the biggest danger is this stage good and you mix it up with the one oh yeah you just sure that's right my turn you make Nina go - yeah good for you that's right yes I didn't mean to cut the short but yes quite right that would be a danger how can one really the idea of a simultaneous whole to the process of the dialectic well it simultaneous hole is another word for eternity eternity eternity as a a trinity is the name for the idea the mighty God all right because if you were to see that means that the idea of might of God must be a simultaneous whole much contained in itself all the possible manifestations that are capable of its development and no but it itself it itself it must contain them as a whole simultaneous whole no change therefore that's also the idea of eternity which is between following the service pieces somebody sent me an e-mail a set of sayings that children with me this whole discussion reminds me of this one that just popped into my mind listen vacuums are nothing we'd like to mention them so that they know we know they're there that's very good that's very good good that's very good I like that I didn't notice the solid geometry and I'll tell you why it's important to me if we knock out the solid geometry then we end up with seven and we bring back the music and gymnastics we have preconditions which goes with the seven chakras with the seven levels in which raise them and all the other seven levels of initiation so does he really emphasized I saw that geometry as opposed to normal which is the age of seven is no solid geometry Plato insists is something worth studying but he says that students have such an egoistic view that and it's difficulty in finding proper teachers for it and the difficulty is that you can't persuade students to take such an up true subject and therefore he can offer it as and in the Republican it's got a great line though if you don't mind I like it apartment this study relays of course to queueing increase under forms lighting yep quite so he says but it seems that both problems have not yet been solved for two reasons I said because no city seekers from more things are now the secrets are to conceded to obey Him they got risk problem someone so he suggests there is a very important study but they can't find the teachers and it's difficult to get students who can master it so we were thinking of putting it on the email wanted solid geometry she replied was republic the need the need exists eighth chakra which is there but bad yeah could you do it with solid on the tree and the time they use that as a basis for the study none of my change the question was is the solid geometry explored in the tummy I see yeah well the nice thing about your question is since he doesn't specify the nature of the study I could agree or disagree and I have no basis for saying play-doh might intend one over the other yes the five regular solids in the end of the time is representative total universe taken as a whole no there's it's nine o'clock yeah and I don't want to work on the dodecahedron and a nice akka Adrian yeah well I think I can get you a simple copy of it I can urge you to do it and I can sit and watch you do it and that would make me feel much better than a five-way to do it for you okay thank you you

Channel: PostNothingness

Views: 1,201

Keywords: Philosophy

Id: x1Pf0c1Pw_A

Length: 87min 18sec (5238 seconds)

Published: Sat Jan 24 2015