[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 387 KB, 1028x1600, 1614183426882.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18620895 No.18620895 [Reply] [Original]

In the last part of Phaedo, there's a long passage where Socrates describes the Earth "above" and says things like it having beautiful colors, and the people there seeing things purely and more clearly than us, and other such things. What was the point of this description and what does it refer to exactly? I don't get it

>> No.18621200

Please respond

>> No.18621217

>>18621200
friendly bump, hope you get an answer

>> No.18621236

Probably describing the realm of forms, sort of like the analogy of the cave or sun

>> No.18621975
File: 313 KB, 1280x1365, E3rOwn_VkAUEz_-.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18621975

Because I am interested and because I am in a good mood I will read it right now and reply in 1-3 hours.

>> No.18622039

In short, it is a description of the world as it was in creation, during the Golden Age, and which we will ascend to at our death through living the just life. The harmony of the soul with the world and its subterranean realms which are a becoming.
From my notes:
"In the discussion of the soul and the form of the world, descending into hell or ascending into heaven, the image is a world in complete metamorphosis. Here the form is not of a separate world, but acts much like the elements: the strength of figures in transition, where each is undiminished. Opposite to our understanding of time, one sees in Becoming the whole of nature which cannot be worn away; stone which through contact with the elements reveals its primordial qualities, its beauty as it was formed by creation."

>> No.18623367

>>18622039
Thank you anon

>> No.18623428

>>18620895
That's pretty

>> No.18623437

>>18620895
If you're familiar with Buddhism, he's basically describing the first Jhana, or the realm of the Devas (invisible demigods) in the form-world.

>> No.18623449

>>18623437
No he's not

>> No.18623527

>>18623449
Yes. He states that it cannot be seen with the regular eyes we are accustomed to, just like Plato. It requires the use of the Divine Eye.

>> No.18623529

>>18622039
Where's this from?

>> No.18623538

>>18623527
Not everything is about buddhism, and Phaedo has nothing to do with it

>> No.18623557

>>18623538
Of course not, but Phaedo is probably one of the few texts of Plato that are directly related to Buddhism, hence my post.

>> No.18623564

>>18623557
It's not related, you're making surface-level comparisons. Every religious tradition has something about true reality being above conventional reality and not perceived through the same means

>> No.18623585

>>18623564
What Buddhist texts have you read? Not secondary texts by Europeans.
>Every religious tradition has something about true reality being above conventional reality
That's correct, but the parallels are more directly obvious here.

>> No.18623591

>>18623585
The most commonly read suttas mostly in the MN. I'm not interested in buddhism though
>the parallels are more directly obvious here
You're stretching because you want every framework to fit your religion even when it's not applicable. Platonism has nothing to do with buddhism, it's in fact directly opposed to it in many ways

>> No.18623619

>>18623591
>You're stretching because you want every framework to fit your religion
No, that was not what my original post intended. Read it again. Buddhism and Platonism are not the same at all (taken in totality).
> I'm not interested in buddhism though
So why are you trying to argue with me then?

>> No.18623627

>>18623619
>why are you trying to argue with me
Because you made a wrong statement trying to reconcile something that is exclusively buddhist and rejected by all other religions (jhanas and their phenomenonological implications) with the afterlife in platonism

>> No.18623633

he got killed because he went out of the cave

>> No.18623724

>>18623627
>rejected by all other religions
This is wrong though. You clearly don't know what you're talking about (not to mention, just earlier, you conceded this was actually a similarity between religions...) It's argument for the sake of argument with you.

>> No.18623767

>>18623724
>y-you don't know what you're talking about
Nice argument there. Yes, the buddhist stance on phenomenology and the ontology of being are rejected by more or less every single religion aside from a few niche exceptions like advaita.
The similarity as I pointed out was surface-level and meaningless, especially since buddhism doesn't acknowledge the existence of the soul (which is the subject matter of Phaedo; you'd know, had you read it) and could be drawn between any two religious traditions.
I've found that discussing with buddhists was effectively the same as trying to argue with the average atheist though so let's not take it further. I simply wanted to point out your initial mistake in comparing Phaedo's affirmation of the immoral soul's existence in higher realms to the jhanas' dismissal of it as the illusion of so-called skhandas

>> No.18623771

>>18623767
Immortal*

>> No.18624646

>>18623529
From my notes, and a discussion of Forms in relation to Jünger's The Worker.
On warosu

>> No.18626289

>>18623633
What cave?

>> No.18627623

>>18623767
Filtered. Read more

>> No.18627945

>>18623437
Unless you meam to say that they are similar, and that one could connect the two semiotically for entertainment's sake, I simply don't see how (I guess there's always the obscure pseudo-religious field of esoteric universalism). I am genuinely curious here since I studied philosophy and actively engaged with Buddhism at certain periods (sadly, I don't do practice as much these days, only read).

We have no historic proof that would support this claim (Buddhism influencing Plato). He was born circa 427 (sources vary, but it's 420s for sure) and died around 347. Siddhartha Gautama died around 400 BCE and Buddhism started its journey. During Plato's life we have the Early Schools, and some interesting divisions and spread in the subcontinent, but still failry minor. It's not until the Mauryan Empire in 322 BCE (20 years after Plato) that we see a major Buddhist state arise, which eventually covered most of the subcontinent and facilitated further, major spread. Buddhism reaches Afghanistan only in 305 BCE, and this is when we see first contact with the Greeks (Seleucids, 20 years after Alexander's death). Greco-Buddhism is full of interesting history and texts, there is even a Socratic dialogue from this time (Milinda Panha) in which two characters exchange Greek and Buddhist perspectives, really interesting stuff! I just don't see any of those thoughts reaching Plato in his lifetime, that was simply way too early for any sort of contact/osmosis.

>> No.18629323

>>18627945
Basade

>> No.18629345

>>18623767
>aside from a few niche exceptions like advaita
Advaita also rejects the ontology and phenomenology of Buddhism, in fact Shankara wrote some of the most incisive critiques of Buddhist phenomenology and ontology ever written in the medieval era

>> No.18630254

>>18627623
I accept your concession, nihilist