[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]

/lit/ - Literature

Search:


View post   

>> No.23890611 [View]
File: 29 KB, 704x470, TheTwo.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
23890611

Is Plotinus more based than is commonly supposed?
>recognized cognitive character of perception and tied it to brain/nerves
>knew that when we perceive something we're not perceiving it as it is but only as represented by the senses
>knew the theoretical knowledge of something is not the same as the thing itself
>knew that individuals are real in their own right, not mere instances of kinds
>defended immortality of the soul against Aristotle and Alexander
>integrated traditional religion into Platonic philosophy
>believed in magic

>> No.23878448 [View]
File: 29 KB, 704x470, TheTwo.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
23878448

Aristotle: Light is the actuality of the transparent in air and is a medium for color
Plotinus: Nope, it's magic. Even if there was no air there you'd see if anything even better because it's all cosmic sympathy. You see because you're part of one cosmos, air has nothing to do with it.

Aristotle: The soul is the actuality of the living body.
Plotinus: Nope, it's magic. Other things pass away but this is an immortal being. Proof: mystical experience + Phaedo.

Aristotle: Fire burns because it is its nature to burn, further investigation could tell us more about the mechanism.
Plotinus: Nope, it's magic. The burning of the fire is an externalization of its ousia that reflects the externalization of the One itself in Intellect. Neither the burning nor any sensible aspect of the fire is the Fire Itself.

Plotinus is basically Aristotle on shrooms.

Navigation
View posts[+24][+48][+96]