/lit/ - Literature

ISTP
Plato, although he's a prophet, so Damascius.

>>16362042
Plotinus seems to have the descent of Plato's philosopher-king in mind in the following passage: and having been in [the One's] company and had, so to put it, sufficient converse with it, [the soul must] come and announce, if it could, to another that transcendent union. Perhaps also it was because Minos attained this kind of union that he was said in the story to be the familiar friend of Zeus, and it was in remembering this that he laid down laws in its image, being filled full of law giving by the divine contact. Or, also, [the soul] may think political matters unworthy of it and want to remain always above; this is liable to happen to one who has seen much. Plotinus is describing the ascent of the soul to union with the highest principle, the One, a union that may be followed by an announcing of this union to others, an activity described also as ‘political’ and compared to the activity of a legendary legislator among the Greeks, Minos, who, having been in communion with Zeus, legislates ‘in the image’ of this communion. Plotinus could have read the story of Minos' companionship with Zeus in the Platonic dialogue Minos (319b–320b) or in the opening of Plato's Laws (624a).234 But in these texts, Minos the legislator simply receives instruction from Zeus, whereas, in Plotinus' version, he legislates, makes laws, as ‘images’ of his communion with Zeus. The story of Minos thus appears to be interpreted in the light of the activity of Plato's philosopher-kings, who imitate the divine (Rep. 500c5, 500e3–501b7).

thiccc neoplatonism

>>15855855
only the dispassionate mind can see the faults in each and from this find the faultless, there will be no sad post-nut clarity once you impregnate the woman of your reciprocated love

>>15328596
first of you need to define reality and existance. Otherwise this is sophistry. Claim 1-3 say literally nothing. It is pure tautology. Reality is reality.

About point 4: again what is a "being" and why should non-contingency only "exist" in it. If it is non-contingent it is not dependent on a being. Otherwise it would contradict the very definition of non-cotingent. Point 5 falls automatically flat, there is no logical basis for this conclusion.

>>15270176
>book is in language x
>has entire dialogue in language y

>>15177844
Meant to reply to>>15177763

>>15177730
Both of them are scholarly editions. What do you mean?

absolutes are for idiots
there's an exception to [every] rule