Sitaram: Ii spent all last night in Pal Talk chat... it was a room which discusses Islam, but run by Egyptian
Coptic Christians but, many were Arabic speakers
Sitaram: Pal Talk is amazing, with quality voice
Tehran_MD: ah wonderful
Sitaram: i spent some time in protestant and catholic chat rooms
Sitaram: oh, and an organization can pay to have a room open 24/7 but, if you dont pay, then your room is only open till the last person leaves it
Sitaram: but then, you must have a number of people as admins, to keep it orderly. So you must find folks in many time zones, because, part of the terms of use is that you will moderate such rooms
Sitaram: so, if you leave it unmoderated, and there is mischief, then, you may lose your privileges
Sitaram: oh, one AMAZING thing about pal talk, they have about 50 rooms just for the Kurds
Sitaram: the kurdish people are using it BIG TIME
Sitaram: I was shocked
Sitaram: i have never noticed a kurdish presence on internet
Sitaram: i am sure they have strong desires for political identity, independence, sovereignty
Tehran_MD: yes, but they wont be happier.if independent as a country.
Sitaram: that is quite understandable, looking at the centuries of their history
Tehran_MD: no natural resources.nothing for improvment
Sitaram: true, independence will not give them happiness, but, they desire it, as a matter of personal dignity, identity; it is only human
Tehran_MD: stupid.
Sitaram: although it is far better to be as Socrates, a "citizen of the world" and globally minded and multicultural and tolerant
Tehran_MD: yes
Sitaram: hmmm.... "the meek shall inherit the earth". Only just now does that phrase hit me with new meaning. It is something from Ingeel (Gospels) only just now does it dawn upon me, that if those meek enough to transcend local nationality, tribal identity and be global, transcultural
Sitaram: that is a kind of meekness. And, lacking such meekness, the world is destroyed in violence
Sitaram: most interesting
Sitaram: that is undoubtedly my great insight for today
Sitaram: there is some other good word for nationalism, but i cant remember, must google
Tehran_MD: oh interesting
Sitaram: i am searching now for synonyms
Sitaram: perhaps i am thinking of chauvenism
Tehran_MD: ah that is a right word for kurds.
Sitaram: yes! chauvinism is extreme and unreasoning partisanship on behalf of a group to which one belongs, especially when the partisanship includes malice and hatred towards a rival group.
Sitaram: one Pakistani psychotherapist on chowk.com (in Canada, in the diaspora) wrote an
article about how people must get beyond tribalism and embrace globalism
Sitaram: The term is derived from Nicolas Chauvin, a semi-mythical soldier under Napoleon Bonaparte
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chauvinism
Tehran_MD: oh interesting really
Sitaram: are you able to access wikipedia in Iran?
Sitaram: wiki is so useful, i do hope it is not blocked
Tehran_MD: yes I am.
Sitaram: ah, wonderful!
Sitaram: as fareed zakaria of newsweek said, Iran has a young, virbrant population, open to the world
Sitaram: the world of ideas
Sitaram: he was host of foreignexchange.tv educational television broadcast
but he was replaced by Daljit Dhaliwaal who is an equally impressive intellectual
Sitaram: i rather imagine foreignexchange.tv is blocked
Sitaram: but perhaps not
Tehran_MD:
Sitaram: here is how i see it.....
Diversification and sectarianism are DEEPLY ingrained in the human psyche,.... and it was originally a
survival advantage for the species so that some would choose rainforest, others tundra, others the
desert, others seafaring
Tehran_MD: yes.different tastes.
Sitaram: so, because of our natural tendency to become diverse
Tehran_MD: that is beautiful isnt it
Sitaram: therefore, should one use weapons of mass destruction to eliminate all opposition, with genocide Sitaram: why, the remaining population would eventually become equally sectarian
Tehran_MD: I remember when I was 15
Tehran_MD: they took me to a
beautiful place .
Tehran_MD: because I was a brilliant
student.won science prize etc
Tehran_MD: and it was a very green
hill in the north of iran;.close to the
sea
Tehran_MD: but the thing is they
obliged us to wear similar clothes
Tehran_MD: I remember how it made
me angry
Tehran_MD: so even in a simple
matter like wearing clothes people
want to differ.,
Sitaram: so, if all the world, tomorrow, were to become say sunni, shia, sufi...
Sitaram: why in 100 years, there would be sectarian difference and more strife and violence
Sitaram: so, we must agree to differ
Sitaram: how interesting!
Sitaram: because, our expression of individuality, is an element of our identity
Sitaram: we validate our own existence, by our individualistic self expression
Sitaram: and, it is the very essence of free will choice
Tehran_MD: yes
Tehran_MD: what book are you
reading these days?
Sitaram: in abraham maslows pyramid
of the hierarchy of needs
Sitaram: i am reading Alexis De Tocqueville, Democracy in America
Sitaram: he toured america around 1840
Sitaram: and wrote very insigtful observations about the form of government
Sitaram: and of course he was french
Sitaram: so, i had a much different
perspective
Tehran_MD:
Tehran_MD: tres bien
Sitaram: the expression "a shot heard round the world" pertains to both
French Revolution and American Revolution
Sitaram: freedom is begotten by violence, unfortunately
Sitaram: when shall we ever separate the wheat from the chaff, and have freedom without violence?
Tehran_MD: really?
Sitaram: well, look at history
Tehran_MD: I dont see any freedom
Sitaram: the French economist Proudhon, wrote "Property is theft"
Sitaram: but, stop and think, how France was in the 16th 17th century
Tehran_MD: ah you told me about it
Sitaram: there was the landed priviliged nobility class
Tehran_MD: so you are interested in politics these days?
Sitaram: and the surfs peasants who had nothing, and could never escape their status
Sitaram: well, in that context, one may easily view property as theft
Sitaram: but, in france or america today, property, ownership is a very different sort of thing
Sitaram: Henry David Thoreau was the very FIRST to use the expression "human rights"
in his essay on "Civil Disobedience"
Sitaram: how interesting, that the term did now arise from some scripture, or from some theologian
but from a secular humanist
Tehran_MD: hey can you recommend to me some books?
Sitaram: i recently made the argument that advances in the modern world may NOT be attributed to Christianity, as many right wing americans would claim...but to secular humanist philosophers, and
the framers of laws and constitutions
Sitaram: well, someone just gave me a book on Lincoln, published by CNN network, for the bicentenial
celebration
Tehran_MD: well am not much interested in politics.
Sitaram: Thomas Pynchons Gravity's Rainbow comes to mind, as a complex example of postmodernism
Sitaram: but, it is , though profound, somewhat risque in places
Sitaram: anything by Milan Kundera,
Tehran_MD: what is it about
Tehran_MD: I read kundra
Sitaram: well, Pynchon's opening line is "A missile rocket came screaming across the sky"
Sitaram: it is about London during the World war II bombings
Sitaram: and, the smoke trail arc of the bomb missiles, is what he calls "Gravity's Rainbow"
Sitaram: now, in the old testament bible, God, in anger, sends a flood to
kill all creatures, except for Noahs ark
Sitaram: and when the flood is over, a rainbow is a sign of God's peace (truce)
Sitaram: that God will never again destroy creatures with a flood
Sitaram: so the great irony of Gravity's Rainbow, is that this is a Rainbow
symbolizing human destruction
Sitaram: now, there is one passage, for example where Pynchon is really
refering to King Leopold of Belgium, and the mistreatment of the Belgian
Congo
Tehran_MD: aha
Sitaram: treating them as slaves and prostitutes
Sitaram: now, pynchon is often obscene... BUT, he uses the obscenity artistically, to make profound points.
For example, there is one passage where a woman, who is a dominatrix, summons a general (or
lieutenant), to come, and be her love slave, and do degrading things
Sitaram: BUT, you see, the woman is symbolic of WARFARE
Tehran_MD: is she?
Sitaram: so, he is writing about how WARFARE, has enslaved human spirit
Sitaram: and, just like a lover, who is drawn to be humiliated
Tehran_MD: why a woman is a symbol of warfare?
Sitaram: the military is drawn to this dominatrix woman WARFARE
aha, BECAUSE, when you understand the male vulnerability for
sexual activity then you have a metaphor
for the human vulnerability for violence, warfare, destruction
Sitaram: so, he likens warfare to a sexual passion
Sitaram: except it is not one which procreates,
Sitaram: it is one which degrades, destroys, humiliates
Sitaram: BUT, we willingly choose to humiliate ourselve, because of our passion/desire
Tehran_MD: I see
Sitaram: and it is so like Abu Graib, and the torture, the waterboarding....
Sitaram: the suspension of habeus corpus....
Tehran_MD: why you call it humiliation/
Sitaram: well, stop and think of the sado masochistic relationship
Sitaram: one person so obsessively desires the other
Sitaram: that they will pay any price to be with the other
Sitaram: now, in Pynchon's scene, the woman commands the man to do
something which is the most extreme form of degradation
Tehran_MD: is it?
Sitaram: and it is very disgusting, BUT pynchon WANTS us to be disgusted by war
Sitaram: well, you will be SHOCKED when i tell you what happens
Sitaram: the technical term is COPRAPHAGIA
Sitaram: phagia = eatiing
Sitaram: copra = excrement
Sitaram: but, you see, warfare IS as disgusting and unnatural as that
Sitaram: pynchon chooses the most repulsive act imaginable to drive
home his point about the evils of our passion for war
Sitaram: it is not at all about normal intercourse
Sitaram: and the army officer is SO EAGER to participate
Sitaram: now, obviously, such a passage is very scandalous, shocking
Sitaram: only if one can see the redeeming social value of the artists message, can one accept such a work
Sitaram: but, most definitely, pynchon is NOT a pornographer... but, a true novelist, and philosopher
who makes a radical social commentary
Sitaram: but, he is a total recluse he lives a few miles from me
in manhattan
Sitaram: but, he has never been photogrphed
Sitaram: except once, in his 20s
Tehran_MD: oh interesting
Sitaram: there are many websites about pynchon and gravitys rainbow
Sitaram: there are people who devote themselves to it, like a hobby, or cult
Sitaram: to analyze it, footnote
Sitaram: pynchon received some kind of pulitzer or nobel.... but he sent a
comedian to accept it in his place he would not appear in
public
Sitaram: and the comedian is someone i used to watch in the 1970s
Tehran_MD: haha
Tehran_MD: cute
Sitaram: who played an eccentric professor
Sitaram: and would appear on the late
night shows, Johnny Carson
Sitaram: the most beautiful novella is
pynchons "The Crying of Lot 49" Sitaram: which may be read in a weekend
Tehran_MD: what is it about?
Sitaram: and, in the first 3 pages, he describes a certain painting, and it is
one of the most beautiful passages of literature i have ever found
Tehran_MD: oh
Tehran_MD: am eager to read it
Tehran_MD: can you find that description online?
Sitaram: i am searching now
Tehran_MD: thank you
Sitaram: it will take some moments
http://www.turingmachine.org/remedios/picture11.html
Sitaram: that is the painting by a woman in mexico city
Sitaram: by Remedios Varo
Sitaram: Bordando el Manto Terrestre / Embroidering Earths Mantle ', 1961
Sitaram: that is what pynchon writes about
Tehran_MD: yes I saw it
Tehran_MD: beautiful.insprinig
Sitaram:
http://www.bookandreader.com/forums/author-discussion/1837-thomas-pynchon-2.html
Sitaram: that is what i wrote
Sitaram: i will email
Tehran_MD: thank you
Sitaram: there, pynchons page on painting is emailed to you
Tehran_MD: thank you so much
Sitaram: so, you must try to read "Crying of Lot 49" novella
Friday, December 26, 2008
Thursday, December 25, 2008
Paltalk Christian Chat Christmas Eve
Sitaram: one problem about the notion of A RELATIONSHIP WITH JESUS, is that in the first 1000 years of Christianity, the concept of the importance of a RELATIONSHIP with Jesus was never mentioned, nor did martin Luther or John Calvin of the reformation speak in terms of a RELATIONSHIP with Jesus
Sitaram: the theology which emphasized RELATIONSHIP with Jesus is only very recent, since early 20th century
Sitaram: rapture is never explicitly mentioned in king james translation...
Sitaram: but, Jesus told one man that he could gain eternal life by observing the commandments
Sitaram: the very first pages of the new testament was an epistle by Paul, around the year 55 A.D., so that means that for the first 20 years, the Christians did NOT have the Gospels, or Epistles, but only the Old Testament
Sitaram: actually Jesus said, you are my FRIEND IF you do as I say... so, that sounds like works to me...
Sitaram: Paul said 'WORK OUT your salvation with fear and trembling", so, if the TV ministers are right, and you just say the magic words, and get eternal security of salvation... then, why would you need to WORK OUT your salvation with fear and trembling
Sitaram: the vision of prophet Ezekiel, the resurrection of the dry bones, suggests that a physical body is necessary in the resurrection
Sitaram: it is stressed that Jesus, after the resurrection, ate fish and honey,.... to stress the fact that Jesus had a physical body
Sitaram: the Jehovah's Witnesses say that there was no physical body, only a spirit
Sitaram: i am just contrasting with regard to physical body in resurrection
Sitaram: vision of Ezekiel, and Jesus eating fish and honey
Sitaram: Peter II epistle says something very interesting "Paul has said some things which are difficult to understand, and those who are weak in mind twist and distort them to their own destruction, as they do many other Biblical passages"
Sitaram: Paul said that he disciplines his flesh, lest, having led others , he should LOSE his own salvation
Sitaram: for example, the KJV correctly translates from Revelation "and TIME SHALL BE NO MORE", BUT the NIV mistranslates the Greek as "and there shall be no more delay"
bobbylips: i like this song
Sitaram: the Greek is Kai Xronos ouketi estai
Sitaram: which can only mean that time is no longer
Sitaram: so, it is just like quantum and relativity
Sitaram: time itself ceases
Sitaram: and, the heavens shall be rolled up like a scroll.... i.e. space ceases
Sitaram: that phrase about "rolled up like a scroll" appears only in one other place, in Isaiah i think
Sitaram: so, it is describing something similar to Stephen Hawking in "A Brief History of Time"
bobbylips: Isaiah 34:4 And all the host of heaven shall be dissolved, and the heavens shall be rolled together as a scroll: and all their host shall fall down, as the leaf falleth off from the vine, and as a falling fig from the fig tree.
Sitaram: so, time and space cease to exist
Sitaram: KJV correctly translates "time shall be no longer"
Sitaram: NIV is incorrect in saying "there shall be no more delay"
Sitaram: which implies that temporality continues
Sitaram: for the first 1000 years of Christianity, the Greek orthodox totally integrated old testament and new testament into one understanding
Sitaram: roman catholic theology is significantly different from greek orthodox, and Luther and Calvin of the reformation are radically diffent innovations
Rambo-55: DIOGR ARE YOU SAVED BY JESUS CHRIST OR ALL THESE DOCTOLOGIES OF THE DIFFERENT DENOMINATIONS.....
Sitaram: that is one sectarian theory
Sitaram: consider charles stanley's doctrine of eternal security of salvation, which is not accepted by all protestant denominations
Sitaram: but is severly criticized
Rambo-55: DIOGR OSAS IS REJECTED BY A LOT OF PEOPLE BUT CHARLES STANLEY IS NOT ONE OF THEM....
Sitaram: and, the calvinist notion of limited atonement is rejected by Baptists and others
Sitaram: so, bottom line, it is naive to speak as if there are not many sectarian differences between denominations, and to claim to be the ONE TRUE sort of Christian, who is beyond sectarianism
Rambo-55: WHO CARE WHAT THEY THINK THE BIBLE IS THE TRUTH NOT THE CALVINIST OR THE BAPTISTS OR ANY OTHER DENIMINATION OR CULT...OK???
Sitaram: i mean, if it makes you feel good (and obviously it makes many feel good) then you can say OH WE ARE TRUE Christians, and saved,.... but, you are not dealing with actual history, or the facts of the many denominations today
Rambo-55: WE ARE NOT SAVED BY HOW GOOD SOMETHING FEELS THAT IS NEW AGE....WE ARE SAVED BY GRACE THRU FAITH IN JESUS CHRIST...ONE WAY....SO YOU PEOPLE TALK AND DREAM ALL YOU WANT THERE IS ONLY ONE WAY TO SALVATION...
Sitaram: why does JEsus tell a parable about people who come to him at the judgment and say "Lord Lord, we worked miracles in your name", and Jesus says, "go away I never knew you"
Sitaram: How can you understand that parable, and the others, who are totally shocked when he says "i was naked and clothed me..." and they even say "when did we do all these things"
Sitaram: surely, the first group who said "Lord Lord", were confessing Jesus in their lives, and believed themselves saved...
Sitaram: why does Jesus describe the way as "straight and narrow, and FEW find it"
Rambo-55: THAT WAS IN THE BEATITUDES THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT AND IT WAS JESUS TELLING THE CHRISTIANS HOW THEY SHOULD SERVE HIM....
Rambo-55: WHY DONT YOU GET A BIBLE AND READ IT??? AND WHAT ARE YOU ANYWAY DIOGR ANYTHING????
Sitaram: well, I cannot imply ignore 2000 years of history and scholarship, and simply go along with your notions...
Sitaram: why does Paul say "work out your salvation with fear and trembling", if salvation is such an easy matter
Sitaram: why does epistle of II Peter say there are some who are weak in mind, and twist and distort scriptures to their own destruction
Sitaram: you see, you cannot deal with my questions intellectually, with scholarship, you can only attack or criticize me on a personal level, which is called AD HOMINEM
Sitaram: so, what do you think of Huckabee,.... is he a Christian, is he saved?
clearkat555: father come and spend time with us your children
Sitaram: i mean, he was an ordained pastor, and then he ran for presidential nomination, and you had a chance to hear him speak
Rambo-55: SEE YOU CANNOT TELL US IF YOU ARE A BORN AGAIN CHRISTIAN EITHER SO WHO ARE YOU TO CONDEMN US SO DIO DO YOU HAVE THE GUTS TO ANS THE ROOM ARE YOU A BORN AGAIN CHRISTIAN...???YOU LOVE TO TRY TO IMPRESS US WITH YOUR IGNORANCE....
Sitaram: so, can you say of ANY OTHER PERSON that you know, that they are saved?
Sitaram: IF you say NO, then I shall ask you how you can be so certain that you are saved
Sitaram: since, during the first 1000 years of Christianity, no one ever spoke in such terms, of "being saved"
clearkat555: born again dio born again
Sitaram: this is all a very recent theology, that began in the mid 19th century
Sitaram: but you see, the problem is, a lot of this is just rhetoric, words, slogans repeated over and over... it is not careful scholarship
Sitaram: well, i thought you were suppose to LOVE your enemies
Rambo-55: BYE DIOGR YOU MUST BE A MUSLIM......ON IGNORE...
Sitaram: so, i am not even your enemy, yet , you are unable to love me
Sitaram: but, you have to WORK OUT your salvation
Sitaram: what i personally believe is not germane
Sitaram: not pertinent
Anne49MI: dodging your question
bobbylips: diogr...work out...i reason out a math problem 2+2=4...same with our salvation...we are to reason it out...know what Christ has done on the cross for us
Rambo-55: WE DONT NEED TO WORK OUT OUR SALVATION IT IS A FREE GIFT OF GOD NOT OF WORKS LEST ANY SHOULD BOAST.....
Sitaram: you must justify your beliefs with reasoned arguments from scripture and history
Sitaram: and i doubt that many people can do that
Sitaram: you are totally missing my point
Sitaram: what i personally do or do not believe is not the issue
Rambo-55: HE DONT HAVE A POINT HE MUST BE A MUSLIM.....
Sitaram: the issue is, can you defend your beliefs without making some personal referance to me
Sitaram: but, all that many people understand is ad hominem attack
bobbylips: certainly d
clearkat555: rambo no one of those educated kind
HumanMaik: High Leveled Secret discution going on here or it is hokus pohus
Sitaram: ok, let me explain more clearly.... let us pretend, that you find a bottle in the ocean, with some difficult questions about your beliefs... and you must write a book, to answer those questions
Sitaram: so, you have no individual to question, as to their personal beliefs, or their morality
bobbylips: i would show you scripture
HumanMaik: no new Bible will be Written .....
Rambo-55: RIGHT ON MILES THIS IS UNCALLED FOR..... DOT HIM AND LET HIM LEARN BY LISTENING HE ISNT HERE TO SERVE THE LORD ANYWAY....
bobbylips: yes clear...two are set up...i'm just waiting to hear the pop
clearkat555: bobby i hate traps but i hate mice more
Sitaram: so, you must take those questions, those problems, and you must write a book, like Martin Luther, or Aquinas, or Augustine.... and future generations must read your book, and be convinced
Sitaram: but, i dont think you can write that book
bobbylips: ...why would i want to write a book...the bible is enough
Sitaram: in otherwords, you must be able to defend your beliefs, which is what Paul had to do in the Roman world
bobbylips: i would just point them in the direction of the scripture
Sitaram: yes, but each of the hundreds of denominations understand those scriptures very differently
Rambo-55: WE DO NOT NEED TO DEFEND THE WORD OF GOD... BUT YOU NEED TO DEFEND YOUR IGNORANCE AND YOU WILL STILL GO TO HELL....
HumanMaik: nonesensence
Sitaram: so, how do you go about loving your enemy
rpmark5: hey sun i got the big boot uugh
clearkat555: the word can stand on its own
bobbylips: by sharing the truth with them
Sitaram: i am not your enemy, yet you seem to hate me simply because i dont agree with everything you say
Sitaram: so, many have ignored me, perhaps
HumanMaik: no need to hate, just neclect your opponents
bobbylips: ...now you are being presumptuous
Sitaram: someone once said to me "i have to LOVE my enemies, but i dont have to LIKE them"
Sitaram: it is like that question "but who is my neighbor"
Sitaram: but, you see, all you understand is how to criticize ME as an individual, which is argumentum ad hominem (against the person)... but you do not have the ability to defend your beliefs on the basis of scripture and history
Sitaram: the theology which emphasized RELATIONSHIP with Jesus is only very recent, since early 20th century
Sitaram: rapture is never explicitly mentioned in king james translation...
Sitaram: but, Jesus told one man that he could gain eternal life by observing the commandments
Sitaram: the very first pages of the new testament was an epistle by Paul, around the year 55 A.D., so that means that for the first 20 years, the Christians did NOT have the Gospels, or Epistles, but only the Old Testament
Sitaram: actually Jesus said, you are my FRIEND IF you do as I say... so, that sounds like works to me...
Sitaram: Paul said 'WORK OUT your salvation with fear and trembling", so, if the TV ministers are right, and you just say the magic words, and get eternal security of salvation... then, why would you need to WORK OUT your salvation with fear and trembling
Sitaram: the vision of prophet Ezekiel, the resurrection of the dry bones, suggests that a physical body is necessary in the resurrection
Sitaram: it is stressed that Jesus, after the resurrection, ate fish and honey,.... to stress the fact that Jesus had a physical body
Sitaram: the Jehovah's Witnesses say that there was no physical body, only a spirit
Sitaram: i am just contrasting with regard to physical body in resurrection
Sitaram: vision of Ezekiel, and Jesus eating fish and honey
Sitaram: Peter II epistle says something very interesting "Paul has said some things which are difficult to understand, and those who are weak in mind twist and distort them to their own destruction, as they do many other Biblical passages"
Sitaram: Paul said that he disciplines his flesh, lest, having led others , he should LOSE his own salvation
Sitaram: for example, the KJV correctly translates from Revelation "and TIME SHALL BE NO MORE", BUT the NIV mistranslates the Greek as "and there shall be no more delay"
bobbylips: i like this song
Sitaram: the Greek is Kai Xronos ouketi estai
Sitaram: which can only mean that time is no longer
Sitaram: so, it is just like quantum and relativity
Sitaram: time itself ceases
Sitaram: and, the heavens shall be rolled up like a scroll.... i.e. space ceases
Sitaram: that phrase about "rolled up like a scroll" appears only in one other place, in Isaiah i think
Sitaram: so, it is describing something similar to Stephen Hawking in "A Brief History of Time"
bobbylips: Isaiah 34:4 And all the host of heaven shall be dissolved, and the heavens shall be rolled together as a scroll: and all their host shall fall down, as the leaf falleth off from the vine, and as a falling fig from the fig tree.
Sitaram: so, time and space cease to exist
Sitaram: KJV correctly translates "time shall be no longer"
Sitaram: NIV is incorrect in saying "there shall be no more delay"
Sitaram: which implies that temporality continues
Sitaram: for the first 1000 years of Christianity, the Greek orthodox totally integrated old testament and new testament into one understanding
Sitaram: roman catholic theology is significantly different from greek orthodox, and Luther and Calvin of the reformation are radically diffent innovations
Rambo-55: DIOGR ARE YOU SAVED BY JESUS CHRIST OR ALL THESE DOCTOLOGIES OF THE DIFFERENT DENOMINATIONS.....
Sitaram: that is one sectarian theory
Sitaram: consider charles stanley's doctrine of eternal security of salvation, which is not accepted by all protestant denominations
Sitaram: but is severly criticized
Rambo-55: DIOGR OSAS IS REJECTED BY A LOT OF PEOPLE BUT CHARLES STANLEY IS NOT ONE OF THEM....
Sitaram: and, the calvinist notion of limited atonement is rejected by Baptists and others
Sitaram: so, bottom line, it is naive to speak as if there are not many sectarian differences between denominations, and to claim to be the ONE TRUE sort of Christian, who is beyond sectarianism
Rambo-55: WHO CARE WHAT THEY THINK THE BIBLE IS THE TRUTH NOT THE CALVINIST OR THE BAPTISTS OR ANY OTHER DENIMINATION OR CULT...OK???
Sitaram: i mean, if it makes you feel good (and obviously it makes many feel good) then you can say OH WE ARE TRUE Christians, and saved,.... but, you are not dealing with actual history, or the facts of the many denominations today
Rambo-55: WE ARE NOT SAVED BY HOW GOOD SOMETHING FEELS THAT IS NEW AGE....WE ARE SAVED BY GRACE THRU FAITH IN JESUS CHRIST...ONE WAY....SO YOU PEOPLE TALK AND DREAM ALL YOU WANT THERE IS ONLY ONE WAY TO SALVATION...
Sitaram: why does JEsus tell a parable about people who come to him at the judgment and say "Lord Lord, we worked miracles in your name", and Jesus says, "go away I never knew you"
Sitaram: How can you understand that parable, and the others, who are totally shocked when he says "i was naked and clothed me..." and they even say "when did we do all these things"
Sitaram: surely, the first group who said "Lord Lord", were confessing Jesus in their lives, and believed themselves saved...
Sitaram: why does Jesus describe the way as "straight and narrow, and FEW find it"
Rambo-55: THAT WAS IN THE BEATITUDES THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT AND IT WAS JESUS TELLING THE CHRISTIANS HOW THEY SHOULD SERVE HIM....
Rambo-55: WHY DONT YOU GET A BIBLE AND READ IT??? AND WHAT ARE YOU ANYWAY DIOGR ANYTHING????
Sitaram: well, I cannot imply ignore 2000 years of history and scholarship, and simply go along with your notions...
Sitaram: why does Paul say "work out your salvation with fear and trembling", if salvation is such an easy matter
Sitaram: why does epistle of II Peter say there are some who are weak in mind, and twist and distort scriptures to their own destruction
Sitaram: you see, you cannot deal with my questions intellectually, with scholarship, you can only attack or criticize me on a personal level, which is called AD HOMINEM
Sitaram: so, what do you think of Huckabee,.... is he a Christian, is he saved?
clearkat555: father come and spend time with us your children
Sitaram: i mean, he was an ordained pastor, and then he ran for presidential nomination, and you had a chance to hear him speak
Rambo-55: SEE YOU CANNOT TELL US IF YOU ARE A BORN AGAIN CHRISTIAN EITHER SO WHO ARE YOU TO CONDEMN US SO DIO DO YOU HAVE THE GUTS TO ANS THE ROOM ARE YOU A BORN AGAIN CHRISTIAN...???YOU LOVE TO TRY TO IMPRESS US WITH YOUR IGNORANCE....
Sitaram: so, can you say of ANY OTHER PERSON that you know, that they are saved?
Sitaram: IF you say NO, then I shall ask you how you can be so certain that you are saved
Sitaram: since, during the first 1000 years of Christianity, no one ever spoke in such terms, of "being saved"
clearkat555: born again dio born again
Sitaram: this is all a very recent theology, that began in the mid 19th century
Sitaram: but you see, the problem is, a lot of this is just rhetoric, words, slogans repeated over and over... it is not careful scholarship
Sitaram: well, i thought you were suppose to LOVE your enemies
Rambo-55: BYE DIOGR YOU MUST BE A MUSLIM......ON IGNORE...
Sitaram: so, i am not even your enemy, yet , you are unable to love me
Sitaram: but, you have to WORK OUT your salvation
Sitaram: what i personally believe is not germane
Sitaram: not pertinent
Anne49MI: dodging your question
bobbylips: diogr...work out...i reason out a math problem 2+2=4...same with our salvation...we are to reason it out...know what Christ has done on the cross for us
Rambo-55: WE DONT NEED TO WORK OUT OUR SALVATION IT IS A FREE GIFT OF GOD NOT OF WORKS LEST ANY SHOULD BOAST.....
Sitaram: you must justify your beliefs with reasoned arguments from scripture and history
Sitaram: and i doubt that many people can do that
Sitaram: you are totally missing my point
Sitaram: what i personally do or do not believe is not the issue
Rambo-55: HE DONT HAVE A POINT HE MUST BE A MUSLIM.....
Sitaram: the issue is, can you defend your beliefs without making some personal referance to me
Sitaram: but, all that many people understand is ad hominem attack
bobbylips: certainly d
clearkat555: rambo no one of those educated kind
HumanMaik: High Leveled Secret discution going on here or it is hokus pohus
Sitaram: ok, let me explain more clearly.... let us pretend, that you find a bottle in the ocean, with some difficult questions about your beliefs... and you must write a book, to answer those questions
Sitaram: so, you have no individual to question, as to their personal beliefs, or their morality
bobbylips: i would show you scripture
HumanMaik: no new Bible will be Written .....
Rambo-55: RIGHT ON MILES THIS IS UNCALLED FOR..... DOT HIM AND LET HIM LEARN BY LISTENING HE ISNT HERE TO SERVE THE LORD ANYWAY....
bobbylips: yes clear...two are set up...i'm just waiting to hear the pop
clearkat555: bobby i hate traps but i hate mice more
Sitaram: so, you must take those questions, those problems, and you must write a book, like Martin Luther, or Aquinas, or Augustine.... and future generations must read your book, and be convinced
Sitaram: but, i dont think you can write that book
bobbylips: ...why would i want to write a book...the bible is enough
Sitaram: in otherwords, you must be able to defend your beliefs, which is what Paul had to do in the Roman world
bobbylips: i would just point them in the direction of the scripture
Sitaram: yes, but each of the hundreds of denominations understand those scriptures very differently
Rambo-55: WE DO NOT NEED TO DEFEND THE WORD OF GOD... BUT YOU NEED TO DEFEND YOUR IGNORANCE AND YOU WILL STILL GO TO HELL....
HumanMaik: nonesensence
Sitaram: so, how do you go about loving your enemy
rpmark5: hey sun i got the big boot uugh
clearkat555: the word can stand on its own
bobbylips: by sharing the truth with them
Sitaram: i am not your enemy, yet you seem to hate me simply because i dont agree with everything you say
Sitaram: so, many have ignored me, perhaps
HumanMaik: no need to hate, just neclect your opponents
bobbylips: ...now you are being presumptuous
Sitaram: someone once said to me "i have to LOVE my enemies, but i dont have to LIKE them"
Sitaram: it is like that question "but who is my neighbor"
Sitaram: but, you see, all you understand is how to criticize ME as an individual, which is argumentum ad hominem (against the person)... but you do not have the ability to defend your beliefs on the basis of scripture and history
Sunday, November 9, 2008
On the Nature of Anarchy
http://www.scribd.com/doc/338338/Edmund-Leach-Political-Systems-of-Highland-Burma-A-Study-of-Kachin-Social-Structure-introduction
For years, I naively assumed that "anarchy" meant the total absence of law, order, government. Then I read that in the Bible, the Prophet Samuel advocate a kind of anarchy when he cautioned regarding the drawbacks of choosing a king, as the other nations had. It struck me that the opening scene of Akira Kurosawa's Seven Samurai described a feudal time of anarchy, where each clan or village was on its own, to secure defense and justice. In these times, the tribal regions and clan justice in places like Afghanistan/Pakistan seem to me to be that sort of anarchy. And the opening testimony of the introduction (above) speaks of negotiating an alliance with another clan. This reminds me of the times of Prophet Mohammad, when someone would seek the protection of a clan, as client, and where blood revenge was a major deterrent to homicide. Am I mistaken in my notions regarding the nature of anarchy?
In a desire to highlight some differences between our culture, and Arab cultures, one journalist remarked that in an a Muslim society, people's very first thought in any situation, would likely be "is it Haram or Halal (forbidden or permitted under Sharia).
I suppose one great touchstone of any society is the degree of stability and also longevity. We should easily be able to point to the most stable and enduring of cultures in history, as well as the most volatile, much as we can rank the elements in chemistry, from most to least stable.
...
I am thinking about Karen Armstrong's "A Short History of Islam." People who lacked a strong tribe or clan, or a strong defense, would forge an alliance with a strong tribe or clan, and become their client.
When the Shah of Iran fell, and the Ayatollah Komeini came to power, one change enacted was to lower the age of marriage for girls from 14 to nine, since this is the age of Aiyesha, when the Prophet Mohammad took her in marriage. I asked an engineer acquaintance in Tehran if he ever saw a nine year old bride. He said that in the cities, one would see brides as young as 13 or 14, but, only amongst the nomads would one see a nine year old bride. It occurs to me that, from ancient times, the exchange of a bride between families was one way to form a strong bond, an alliance, to to achieve a greater degree of political stability. If this is true, then, the ethics of the transaction, the moral justification, is a political consideration, rather than some subjective individual consideration of the bride or her desires, or her capacity to make choices and give informed consent.
...
Imagine, the numerous tribes of native Americans, living for millenia in this form of tribal anarchy, some loosely associated, but most not associated at all. Justice was maintained by custom and oral tradition, and not by the written word, interpreted by some organized body of authority.
...
I see the benefits of the tribal life of the native Americans to be benefits for the species or group as a whole, in a system where the individual's interests are subordinate. The group as a whole remains very hardy, with little need of medical science or antibiotics, but an individual may suffer greatly. In our modern, technological society, the comfort of each individual is maximized at the expense of the robustness of the species as a whole, since we become ever increasingly dependent upon science and medicine to survive and propagate.
...
Let us be fanciful and conjure some hypothetical situation, in ancient history, where the natives of the Americas foresee the coming of the European, and realize that their entire way of life shall be destroyed; and that they shall be enslaved by their invaders. Surely, the North American natives would consider their culture and life style to be far superior to that of the invading Europeans. The natives would most likely see the concept of private property as a perversion; and see monarchy and church as the enemy of natural liberty. Furthermore, let us imagine that the native North Americans possessed some biological weapon, to which they are naturally immune, but which would be utterly lethal to the invading Europeans. Certainly, the natives would feel it their righteous moral duty, both to themselves, and to the plant and animal kingdom under their stewardship, to methodically destroy the races of Europe and Asia, in a mass genocide.
Whenever we see an evil of the magnitude of, say, Hitler and the Nazis, then, we do not find it strange at all that a pastor such as Bonhoeffer (author of The Cost of Discipleship with its concept of Cheap Grace), should attempt an assassination.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cost_of_Discipleship
I see ethics/morality as relative, and not absolute. Many feel a desparate need to cloak duty in absolute terms of some divine scripture, or, in the case of someone like Kant, in axiomatic principles.
But, if we look at the logic of a Nixon or Bush, who sees themselves as heroes, defending the very culture itself against some demonic enemy, then, any injustice, however monstrous, becomes dignified and respectful as a means to an end, in the face of some absolute morality.
Under normal circumstances, we see both suicide and genocide as morally repugnant. In a curious way, suicide is genocide turned inside out. Each tactic has the goal to make the adversary disappear.
When the entire human species, in prehistoric times, is a mere million, then the first mitzvah or commandment becomes "Be fruitful and multiply." Yet, China, faced with demographic
In 70C.E. the Jews, besieged at Masada, saw suicide as the only option, and an acceptable, honorable option, when faced with capture by the Roman forces.
Would the Athenians have hesitated to annihilate the Persians, if they had the technological means?
For years, I naively assumed that "anarchy" meant the total absence of law, order, government. Then I read that in the Bible, the Prophet Samuel advocate a kind of anarchy when he cautioned regarding the drawbacks of choosing a king, as the other nations had. It struck me that the opening scene of Akira Kurosawa's Seven Samurai described a feudal time of anarchy, where each clan or village was on its own, to secure defense and justice. In these times, the tribal regions and clan justice in places like Afghanistan/Pakistan seem to me to be that sort of anarchy. And the opening testimony of the introduction (above) speaks of negotiating an alliance with another clan. This reminds me of the times of Prophet Mohammad, when someone would seek the protection of a clan, as client, and where blood revenge was a major deterrent to homicide. Am I mistaken in my notions regarding the nature of anarchy?
In a desire to highlight some differences between our culture, and Arab cultures, one journalist remarked that in an a Muslim society, people's very first thought in any situation, would likely be "is it Haram or Halal (forbidden or permitted under Sharia).
I suppose one great touchstone of any society is the degree of stability and also longevity. We should easily be able to point to the most stable and enduring of cultures in history, as well as the most volatile, much as we can rank the elements in chemistry, from most to least stable.
...
I am thinking about Karen Armstrong's "A Short History of Islam." People who lacked a strong tribe or clan, or a strong defense, would forge an alliance with a strong tribe or clan, and become their client.
When the Shah of Iran fell, and the Ayatollah Komeini came to power, one change enacted was to lower the age of marriage for girls from 14 to nine, since this is the age of Aiyesha, when the Prophet Mohammad took her in marriage. I asked an engineer acquaintance in Tehran if he ever saw a nine year old bride. He said that in the cities, one would see brides as young as 13 or 14, but, only amongst the nomads would one see a nine year old bride. It occurs to me that, from ancient times, the exchange of a bride between families was one way to form a strong bond, an alliance, to to achieve a greater degree of political stability. If this is true, then, the ethics of the transaction, the moral justification, is a political consideration, rather than some subjective individual consideration of the bride or her desires, or her capacity to make choices and give informed consent.
...
Imagine, the numerous tribes of native Americans, living for millenia in this form of tribal anarchy, some loosely associated, but most not associated at all. Justice was maintained by custom and oral tradition, and not by the written word, interpreted by some organized body of authority.
...
I see the benefits of the tribal life of the native Americans to be benefits for the species or group as a whole, in a system where the individual's interests are subordinate. The group as a whole remains very hardy, with little need of medical science or antibiotics, but an individual may suffer greatly. In our modern, technological society, the comfort of each individual is maximized at the expense of the robustness of the species as a whole, since we become ever increasingly dependent upon science and medicine to survive and propagate.
...
Let us be fanciful and conjure some hypothetical situation, in ancient history, where the natives of the Americas foresee the coming of the European, and realize that their entire way of life shall be destroyed; and that they shall be enslaved by their invaders. Surely, the North American natives would consider their culture and life style to be far superior to that of the invading Europeans. The natives would most likely see the concept of private property as a perversion; and see monarchy and church as the enemy of natural liberty. Furthermore, let us imagine that the native North Americans possessed some biological weapon, to which they are naturally immune, but which would be utterly lethal to the invading Europeans. Certainly, the natives would feel it their righteous moral duty, both to themselves, and to the plant and animal kingdom under their stewardship, to methodically destroy the races of Europe and Asia, in a mass genocide.
Whenever we see an evil of the magnitude of, say, Hitler and the Nazis, then, we do not find it strange at all that a pastor such as Bonhoeffer (author of The Cost of Discipleship with its concept of Cheap Grace), should attempt an assassination.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cost_of_Discipleship
I see ethics/morality as relative, and not absolute. Many feel a desparate need to cloak duty in absolute terms of some divine scripture, or, in the case of someone like Kant, in axiomatic principles.
But, if we look at the logic of a Nixon or Bush, who sees themselves as heroes, defending the very culture itself against some demonic enemy, then, any injustice, however monstrous, becomes dignified and respectful as a means to an end, in the face of some absolute morality.
Under normal circumstances, we see both suicide and genocide as morally repugnant. In a curious way, suicide is genocide turned inside out. Each tactic has the goal to make the adversary disappear.
When the entire human species, in prehistoric times, is a mere million, then the first mitzvah or commandment becomes "Be fruitful and multiply." Yet, China, faced with demographic
In 70C.E. the Jews, besieged at Masada, saw suicide as the only option, and an acceptable, honorable option, when faced with capture by the Roman forces.
Would the Athenians have hesitated to annihilate the Persians, if they had the technological means?
Why Me? Why Not Me?
We so often hear someone afflicted with misfortune exclaim "Why me?" Less frequently, and in a less obvious fashion, people with some great unfulfilled desire will, in so many words, say "Why not me?" Why don't I win the Lotto? The key word in these two questions is obviously "ME". Or is it so obvious? For the majority of people, the significant word is "WHY" and they take the word "me" for granted as a given. What I am trying to get at by mentioning the word "me" is an exploration of the illusion of "self" and the personal which gives rise to the question "why," which underscores the desperate frustration and disappointment of our unfilled desires and expectations.
Let us imagine a beautiful summer day. We gaze at the blue sky and notice a number of white clouds. We see those clouds as "INDIVIDUAL" clouds; that is, we impose upon them in our imagination separate unique identities, we count and number them (which implies separation and individuality) and we may even go further in our imagination and see them shaped as certain animals or objects, thus endowing them with characters and attributes and personalities. If we were to ascend in a plane or balloon then as we approached higher and higher to a particular cloud it would at some point lose its shape and character and uniqueness and, as we entered into it, would become for our perception no longer a white and fluffy shape but a gray, damp fog which would surround us and obscure our vision. Yet, whether we behold from afar or near or within, we are never conscious of the individual water molecules and dust particles which actually comprise the cloud nor of the wind which gives it shape and a life of its own.
Any cloud, whether a cumulus cloud on a summer day, or a nebula of galactic proportions, has a certain overall temperature which we can measure. And yet we know that some of the molecules in that cloud (or even in the air of the room in which we sit) are extremely slow and cold, of a low energy, while others are extremely hot and excited, of a high energy. The temperature of the cloud or our room is a composite of all the molecules. In fact, in a sense, room-temperature itself is an illusion. If we were to centrifuge the air in our room, and concentrate all the low energy molecules, they would be cold enough to freeze and form ice, while a concentration of the high energy molecules would cause steam and be hot enough to burn us. What if each molecule in the air were a personality saying "Why me?" Why am I a cold low energy molecule? Why am I not a high energy molecule? The reality is that each molecule passes at various times through high-energy states and low-energy states.
It is the dollar tickets of millions of unlucky losers that make one lucky winner. We understand objectively that the very nature of a Lotto is that only one in millions can win it, because of the odds and statistics and mathematics inherent in the process, yet we cannot understand why WE PERSONALLY are not that one who is lucky and wins, though we fully realize that in some LOTTO heaven, where EVERYONE wins and hits the jackpot, why the process is rendered meaningless and unfeasible. We can have ONE Bill Gates or Rockefeller per country, per century, but it defies the laws of economics for everyone to be opulently wealthy. The nature of economics and world resources cannot support such a heavenly vision of prosperity. It takes millions of loyal subjects to make one King, one Queen, one Throne. There are no rivers of honey and milk and wine in the real world, only in the imagination and in hallucinations. We understand objectively that life is not possible without the random chances which cause mutations (both beneficial and detrimental) and malfunction and misfortune and illness and death, yet we fail to understand when we ourselves become the victim of that random process of chance. Why was I born blind? Why did I develop cancer? Why did my kidneys stop functioning? Why me?
A beautiful statue such as Michelangelo's Pieta has a character and a personality and a uniqueness all its own and yet for millennia that statue remained "hidden" within a huge block of marble, until Michelangelo's skillful hands chiseled away all the marble which "IS NOT" the statue. When we view the statue in a museum, we are like someone on the ground perceiving the clouds in the "PERSONAL mode". When we think in terms of the huge block of marble concealing the Pieta (and countless other statues) in potentiality, then we are perceiving or conceiving of the Pieta and the marble in the "IMPERSONAL mode".
Each of us is an individual unique character or personality with gifts and shortcomings and a predictable nature of behaviors. But we are also like dust particles and molecules comprising a particular society and culture and nation, whether that is the USA or Iraq or the Australian Bush. Furthermore, like the cloud, we are comprised of a countless myriad of cells, molecules, electrons and quarks and muons which behave as if they are quite unaware of the person which they comprise. In fact molecules are constantly entering and leaving our body so that every 7 years we are not the same person "materially," since so many molecules have been replaced. Often we are unaware of the greater society, nation, culture, world which is comprised of so many and of which we are but an infinitesimal part.
Sometimes we focus in so much upon the "why me" of a loved one's death, or the affliction of a chronic illness which causes blindness or paralysis that we miss the "bigger picture" of life and existence and the universe. We become so focused that we are in a different sense unfocused since we loose sight of so many good things for the sake of a few bad things.
I know of a case of a woman who in old age was afflicted with a stroke and left paralyzed. She literally spent the last year of her life, her every waking moment, constantly screaming "Why, why, die, die!" Life is not heaven and is not of our own making, but sometimes hells are our own creation.
When we view God as personal, then it is only natural that we assume some relationship with God. God becomes our friend and heavenly father whom we look to for all our needs. Or when we are disappointed then the personal God becomes for us a cruel and sadistic prankster who constantly disappoints us and then sits back laughing in amusement. God can even assume a devil's mask of punisher and tormentor, angered by our sins, or possibly simply angered because we did not sufficiently "BELIEVE" in Him or pray in a certain fashion or bow in the correct direction. Perhaps each of us IS God if only in the sense that we impose such roles and natures upon God and give God a certain character and nature and personality. We are a reflection of God and God is a reflection of us. Psalm 19 curiously expresses this phenomenon of Divine Reciprocity.
In order to explore the thoughts of Psalm 19, I shall now quote an extensive passage from
Forgiveness and the Amish - Page 314
==========================
(beginning of excerpt):
Forgiveness" IS the proverbial 'light at the end of the tunnel', at least for the Amish.
It is their hope that by cultivating a forgiving nature in themselves, that they will one day enjoy God's forgiveness.
I think it is Psalm 18 which has a very interesting verse:
"God repaid me in accordance with my righteousness, according to the cleanliness of my hands before His eyes. With the devout You acted devoutly, with the wholehearted man You acted wholeheartedly, with the pure You acted purely, and with the crooked You acted perversely."
God is sort of like a mirror, reflecting back to us what we ourselves are, or have become, through our free will choices.
A mirror reflects. Meditation is often called "reflection". And a "reflex" is an action which we do not even have to think about because it arises from our nature.
If we truly see God as merciful and forgiving towards us, it is only because we see REFLECTED back at us our own merciful and forgiving, patient, long-suffering nature which we have painstakingly cultivated in the sufferings of this fire of adversity which we call life.
One of Socrates' favorite sayings in the Dialogues of Plato is:
"Chalapa ta kala" which means "Beautiful/good/noble things are difficult.
You have touched upon the very essence of what is so difficult about forgiveness of one's enemies.
The ability to forgive, taken to its extreme, to forgive even the most vicious enemy and the most heinous monster of a criminal, reaches almost supernatural proportions. Whatever faults or shortcoming one might see in Christianity as it is practiced by the hundreds upon hundreds of sectarian groups, one must always (as Gandhi did) see the divine aspect of the words of Christ and the Beatitudes of the Sermon on the Mount. When we have more than ample incomes, it is a small thing to give a few dollars to a homeless person, or even thousands of dollars to a charity, which will also provide some sort of tax write-off.
But the widow in the parable (the "widows mite") who had only one small coin (called a "mite," similar to our 'nickel' or 'dime') to her name, and contributed it to the Temple, gave all that she had, and the magnitude of her gesture did not go unrecognized.
Of course, if "forgiveness" is not "your cup of tea," then perhaps Christianity is not for you. But that is why (at least in my mind) there is such a "smorgasbord" of religions set out before us. There are other religions which do not stress forgiveness or "loving ones enemy" (in the interest of political correctness, I shall refrain from naming those religions, but you can figure it out for yourself).
In the Gita, Lord Krsna says that different people worship different things, some worship ghosts, some demons, some ancestors, some demi-Gods, and some say "Vasudeva is all". But God is a good sport (at least in the Gita) and receives all forms of worship, even from those ignorant of His nature. Furthermore, Krsna says "Whatever form they choose to worship, I grant unto them UNWAVERING DEVOTION".
Sometimes we choose to see this unwavering devotion as something else, and call it "pig-headed-ness". But there is some sublime mystical reason why there is evil in the world, and why there are people who worship devils but call them God, and why each of us does whatever we are habitually drawn to do. Everyone is born into this world (I believe again and again) to work out some kind of issues. Some work them out as criminals, prostitutes, and drug addicts. Others work them out as Mother Theresa, Gandhi and the Dali Lama.
(end of excerpt)
==========================
Can we find it within ourselves to forgive ourselves for what we are and what we are not, to forgive God for what God is not, to forgive the Lotto for it's mathematical stinginess and subatomic molecules and life itself for its less than perfect nature? Perfection is only in the imagination.
In Tulsidas' Ramayan, even the Rakshasa demons and Ravanna have their own religion. In the Gospels, Satan quotes the Bible chapter and verse. There is even honor among thieves.
The Jewish people have had great difficulty in reconciling the horror of the Nazi Holocaust with their notion of a good God and his chosen people. Some Jews have abandoned their religious practice and their belief in God out of their anger and bitterness over the Holocaust and its cruel concentration camps. We can cease to believe in the existence of God and yet continue to feel anger and bitterness towards something or someone which we claim does not exist.
Perhaps an ore of silver of gold, if it had consciousness, would view the heat of the refiner's furnace as a torment. In one instructive story from religious tradition, the ore takes on a personality and cries out to the refiner's apprentice saying "Oh, when will this terrible inferno end? (Oh, why me)?" The apprentice answers, "When you soften and melt and become so pure and tranquil and shining that the Master sees His face in your reflection, then and only then will the process of refinement be complete."
Let us imagine a beautiful summer day. We gaze at the blue sky and notice a number of white clouds. We see those clouds as "INDIVIDUAL" clouds; that is, we impose upon them in our imagination separate unique identities, we count and number them (which implies separation and individuality) and we may even go further in our imagination and see them shaped as certain animals or objects, thus endowing them with characters and attributes and personalities. If we were to ascend in a plane or balloon then as we approached higher and higher to a particular cloud it would at some point lose its shape and character and uniqueness and, as we entered into it, would become for our perception no longer a white and fluffy shape but a gray, damp fog which would surround us and obscure our vision. Yet, whether we behold from afar or near or within, we are never conscious of the individual water molecules and dust particles which actually comprise the cloud nor of the wind which gives it shape and a life of its own.
Any cloud, whether a cumulus cloud on a summer day, or a nebula of galactic proportions, has a certain overall temperature which we can measure. And yet we know that some of the molecules in that cloud (or even in the air of the room in which we sit) are extremely slow and cold, of a low energy, while others are extremely hot and excited, of a high energy. The temperature of the cloud or our room is a composite of all the molecules. In fact, in a sense, room-temperature itself is an illusion. If we were to centrifuge the air in our room, and concentrate all the low energy molecules, they would be cold enough to freeze and form ice, while a concentration of the high energy molecules would cause steam and be hot enough to burn us. What if each molecule in the air were a personality saying "Why me?" Why am I a cold low energy molecule? Why am I not a high energy molecule? The reality is that each molecule passes at various times through high-energy states and low-energy states.
It is the dollar tickets of millions of unlucky losers that make one lucky winner. We understand objectively that the very nature of a Lotto is that only one in millions can win it, because of the odds and statistics and mathematics inherent in the process, yet we cannot understand why WE PERSONALLY are not that one who is lucky and wins, though we fully realize that in some LOTTO heaven, where EVERYONE wins and hits the jackpot, why the process is rendered meaningless and unfeasible. We can have ONE Bill Gates or Rockefeller per country, per century, but it defies the laws of economics for everyone to be opulently wealthy. The nature of economics and world resources cannot support such a heavenly vision of prosperity. It takes millions of loyal subjects to make one King, one Queen, one Throne. There are no rivers of honey and milk and wine in the real world, only in the imagination and in hallucinations. We understand objectively that life is not possible without the random chances which cause mutations (both beneficial and detrimental) and malfunction and misfortune and illness and death, yet we fail to understand when we ourselves become the victim of that random process of chance. Why was I born blind? Why did I develop cancer? Why did my kidneys stop functioning? Why me?
A beautiful statue such as Michelangelo's Pieta has a character and a personality and a uniqueness all its own and yet for millennia that statue remained "hidden" within a huge block of marble, until Michelangelo's skillful hands chiseled away all the marble which "IS NOT" the statue. When we view the statue in a museum, we are like someone on the ground perceiving the clouds in the "PERSONAL mode". When we think in terms of the huge block of marble concealing the Pieta (and countless other statues) in potentiality, then we are perceiving or conceiving of the Pieta and the marble in the "IMPERSONAL mode".
Each of us is an individual unique character or personality with gifts and shortcomings and a predictable nature of behaviors. But we are also like dust particles and molecules comprising a particular society and culture and nation, whether that is the USA or Iraq or the Australian Bush. Furthermore, like the cloud, we are comprised of a countless myriad of cells, molecules, electrons and quarks and muons which behave as if they are quite unaware of the person which they comprise. In fact molecules are constantly entering and leaving our body so that every 7 years we are not the same person "materially," since so many molecules have been replaced. Often we are unaware of the greater society, nation, culture, world which is comprised of so many and of which we are but an infinitesimal part.
Sometimes we focus in so much upon the "why me" of a loved one's death, or the affliction of a chronic illness which causes blindness or paralysis that we miss the "bigger picture" of life and existence and the universe. We become so focused that we are in a different sense unfocused since we loose sight of so many good things for the sake of a few bad things.
I know of a case of a woman who in old age was afflicted with a stroke and left paralyzed. She literally spent the last year of her life, her every waking moment, constantly screaming "Why, why, die, die!" Life is not heaven and is not of our own making, but sometimes hells are our own creation.
When we view God as personal, then it is only natural that we assume some relationship with God. God becomes our friend and heavenly father whom we look to for all our needs. Or when we are disappointed then the personal God becomes for us a cruel and sadistic prankster who constantly disappoints us and then sits back laughing in amusement. God can even assume a devil's mask of punisher and tormentor, angered by our sins, or possibly simply angered because we did not sufficiently "BELIEVE" in Him or pray in a certain fashion or bow in the correct direction. Perhaps each of us IS God if only in the sense that we impose such roles and natures upon God and give God a certain character and nature and personality. We are a reflection of God and God is a reflection of us. Psalm 19 curiously expresses this phenomenon of Divine Reciprocity.
In order to explore the thoughts of Psalm 19, I shall now quote an extensive passage from
Forgiveness and the Amish - Page 314
==========================
(beginning of excerpt):
Forgiveness" IS the proverbial 'light at the end of the tunnel', at least for the Amish.
It is their hope that by cultivating a forgiving nature in themselves, that they will one day enjoy God's forgiveness.
I think it is Psalm 18 which has a very interesting verse:
"God repaid me in accordance with my righteousness, according to the cleanliness of my hands before His eyes. With the devout You acted devoutly, with the wholehearted man You acted wholeheartedly, with the pure You acted purely, and with the crooked You acted perversely."
God is sort of like a mirror, reflecting back to us what we ourselves are, or have become, through our free will choices.
A mirror reflects. Meditation is often called "reflection". And a "reflex" is an action which we do not even have to think about because it arises from our nature.
If we truly see God as merciful and forgiving towards us, it is only because we see REFLECTED back at us our own merciful and forgiving, patient, long-suffering nature which we have painstakingly cultivated in the sufferings of this fire of adversity which we call life.
One of Socrates' favorite sayings in the Dialogues of Plato is:
"Chalapa ta kala" which means "Beautiful/good/noble things are difficult.
You have touched upon the very essence of what is so difficult about forgiveness of one's enemies.
The ability to forgive, taken to its extreme, to forgive even the most vicious enemy and the most heinous monster of a criminal, reaches almost supernatural proportions. Whatever faults or shortcoming one might see in Christianity as it is practiced by the hundreds upon hundreds of sectarian groups, one must always (as Gandhi did) see the divine aspect of the words of Christ and the Beatitudes of the Sermon on the Mount. When we have more than ample incomes, it is a small thing to give a few dollars to a homeless person, or even thousands of dollars to a charity, which will also provide some sort of tax write-off.
But the widow in the parable (the "widows mite") who had only one small coin (called a "mite," similar to our 'nickel' or 'dime') to her name, and contributed it to the Temple, gave all that she had, and the magnitude of her gesture did not go unrecognized.
Of course, if "forgiveness" is not "your cup of tea," then perhaps Christianity is not for you. But that is why (at least in my mind) there is such a "smorgasbord" of religions set out before us. There are other religions which do not stress forgiveness or "loving ones enemy" (in the interest of political correctness, I shall refrain from naming those religions, but you can figure it out for yourself).
In the Gita, Lord Krsna says that different people worship different things, some worship ghosts, some demons, some ancestors, some demi-Gods, and some say "Vasudeva is all". But God is a good sport (at least in the Gita) and receives all forms of worship, even from those ignorant of His nature. Furthermore, Krsna says "Whatever form they choose to worship, I grant unto them UNWAVERING DEVOTION".
Sometimes we choose to see this unwavering devotion as something else, and call it "pig-headed-ness". But there is some sublime mystical reason why there is evil in the world, and why there are people who worship devils but call them God, and why each of us does whatever we are habitually drawn to do. Everyone is born into this world (I believe again and again) to work out some kind of issues. Some work them out as criminals, prostitutes, and drug addicts. Others work them out as Mother Theresa, Gandhi and the Dali Lama.
(end of excerpt)
==========================
Can we find it within ourselves to forgive ourselves for what we are and what we are not, to forgive God for what God is not, to forgive the Lotto for it's mathematical stinginess and subatomic molecules and life itself for its less than perfect nature? Perfection is only in the imagination.
In Tulsidas' Ramayan, even the Rakshasa demons and Ravanna have their own religion. In the Gospels, Satan quotes the Bible chapter and verse. There is even honor among thieves.
The Jewish people have had great difficulty in reconciling the horror of the Nazi Holocaust with their notion of a good God and his chosen people. Some Jews have abandoned their religious practice and their belief in God out of their anger and bitterness over the Holocaust and its cruel concentration camps. We can cease to believe in the existence of God and yet continue to feel anger and bitterness towards something or someone which we claim does not exist.
Perhaps an ore of silver of gold, if it had consciousness, would view the heat of the refiner's furnace as a torment. In one instructive story from religious tradition, the ore takes on a personality and cries out to the refiner's apprentice saying "Oh, when will this terrible inferno end? (Oh, why me)?" The apprentice answers, "When you soften and melt and become so pure and tranquil and shining that the Master sees His face in your reflection, then and only then will the process of refinement be complete."
Thursday, October 9, 2008
List of Virtues in Plato's Republic
I spent a few hours in Philosophy Chat forum.
An older crowd (30+) was present.
I mentioned a strange remark I once read, a passing remark, by Kojeve in his "Introduction to the Reading of Hegel's Phenomenology".
Kojeve wrote "... Plato (who believed that virtue can be taught)..."
I deduced, from the tenor of Kojeve's remark, that Kojeve himself did not believe that virtue could be taught.
The question has stayed with me through the years.
I feel that, as I examine my own life, I have "learned" certain virtues that were not natively present within me.
One virtue which has been imposed forcefully from without is neatness or orderliness. I was never neat or orderly by nature, but many different life experiences and acquaintanceships trained me to be neat and orderly to the degree that I now am.
In Philosopohy chat, I offered the example of the Piranha tribe in the Brazilian rain forests. They are the only aboriginals who have vigorously resisted assimilation into European society, and have withdrawn deeper into the rain forests, clinging to their unusual bird-like language, and refusing to use any other language. They have certain virtues or values, learned from their parents, and preserved as a cultural tradition. But they have no words for numbers, except "more" and "less". They have no fixed words for color, and when questioned, explain that color is of no importance ("who cares"). They do not cling to possessions or handicraft, beyond the bare essentials of cooking pots and a few tools. They have absolutely no creation myths. When questioned, they simply say "things have ALWAYS been this way."
Study of the Piranha awakens us to the understanding that certain of our notions, such as number or color, are learned rather than inherent in some a priori fashion.
One day I was walking by a Japanese restaurant, and I saw the owner
in the front devotedly tending to a beautiful little garden which he
had created. I paused to engage him in some conversation and ask his
views on life, the soul, and it's future. His answer was very simple.
He shrugged and said,
"I do not believe that there is anything more than this life, this
moment, these few years, this accidental existence and persona of
coincidence: consciousness by chance, and then it is over. But THAT
very impermanence is why one must make the very most of it while it
lasts. One must seek virtue and perfection, even though it is
transient and goes unnoticed and unrewarded, for without virtue,
excellence, this transience and impermanence has NO value. Perfection
is its own recompense. Beauty needs no adornment."
My favorite line in Milton is where Satan says "Evil, be thou my good."
This devilish aesthetic becomes interesting when examined in the light of
Socrates' proposition that "all by nature desire the good, and no one
willingly chooses what they consider to be not good", along with Plato's
Euthypro problem, "is the good good by fiat simply because it is what God
desires, or does God desire what is good for some inherent quality
residing in goodness (or substitute virtue, morality, holiness, or
righteousness for the word good,if you prefer).
I was a great fan of the cartoon series "Earthworm Jim". In one episode,
through some bizarre radioactive accident, Earthworm Jim spawns an evil
twin. They are about to battle to the death. The evil twin gives a speech
first, boasting essentially the boast of Milton's Satan, that he hates
everything that is good, and likes everything that is not good." So,
Earthworm Jim (who is not always the brightest of worms) reasons, "Well,
winning is good, and losing is bad, and since you like what is bad and hate
what is good, then surely I shall defeat you.) Of course, we know that our
hero, Jim, proceeds to dispatch his evil twin in no time flat.
To read a Platonic dialogue is to watch ideas in motion, not just any motion, but the special motion which takes place when giving birth. Socrates at times describes himself as a mid-wife, helping minds to give birth. There is a wonderful adjective for this role which Socrates plays; maiutic.
Socrates has two different nick-names in the dialogues; sting-ray and gadfly. In ancient Greek, the word for sting-ray is Nar-kay, or Narke, which is the root word for narcotic.
A sting from the tail of the sting-ray causes the body to become numb. Socrates was called narke because of his ability through a series of questions and answers, to numb his opponent into a motionless cul-de-sac, called in Greek "a-poria" which means "no way out."
Now, the gadfly nick-name denoted the very opposite of numbing. The gadfly, through its bites, could sting the lethargic horse of the state into motion. Socrates also stings up those who feel hopeless by "mytho-poiesis" or making a story or parable to give them a feeling of what it shall be like when they finally come to understand.
Someone who presumes to know is smug and complacent and does not seek or inquire. But also, those who have lost hope and given up do not seek or inquire.
Notice how these two opposite qualities of motion and rest are united in the one person of Socrates. We may better appreciate the conflict between motion and rest if we consider that Aristotle speaks of an "unmoved mover" as that one principle which somehow must exist as a source for everything else.
To understand Socrates' narcotic strategy, we must understand his theory of knowledge.
Socrates had a woman named Diotema as a mentor who instructed him in a theory of knowledge which is likened to a ladder of divine ascent, which describes an inductive ascent from love of objects, to sexual love, to love of mathematics, and finally to the love of the EIDOS of justice or beauty.
Socrates states that "God does not love wisdom, because he possesses it." Remember that the word "philo-sophia" means "love of wisdom." If we have something or believe that we possess it, then we do not go in search for it. We are smug and confident that the wisdom is ours. This smugness can be a form of illness, and the medicine to restore us to a state which is suitable for inquiry is refutation through a syllogistic chain of questions and answers which ultimately forces us to admit that we do not really possess true knowledge about a particular matter like justice or happiness.
We may see this theory of knowledge or dialectic illustrated in a well-known Sufi teaching story, made popularized in the many books of Idres Shah.
Nasrudin is a comical, sophomoric (or wise-fool) character. One day, someone sees Nasrudin frantically searching the street outside his house. When asked what has been lost, Nasrudin explains that he has lost his keys. When asked where he lost them, he explains that he lost them in the house. When asked why he is searching in the street for something lost in the house, Nasrudin explains that it is dark inside the house, and there is more light outside in the street.
Abraham Heschel illustrates something of this problem, in volume one of "The Prophets" when he writes (paraphrased) "We must learn to understand what it is that we see, and not merely see only that which we understand." Our compulsion is to search where the light is better, even if that means looking in the wrong place. Abraham Maslow put it differently: "When the only tool you have is a hammer, then every problem tends to become a nail."
Most of what I explain here will be things that I learned at St. John's College in Annapolis in the 1960s. It is worth mentioning that the teachers there prefer to call themselves "tutors" rather than "professors", in honor of this Socratic method, since a "professor" professes to already know the truth, and will convey it to students in a lecture and for a price, much like the rhetorician Gorgias in this dialogue. The term "tutor" better reflects the role of a mid-wife who aids the student during this maiutic process of giving birth.
I would like to focus in quite a bit on this notion of uniting opposites, such as motion and rest.
Socrates and Odysseus share something interesting in common. Homer describes Odysseus bodily build as a paradigm of this uniting of opposites. Odysseus had very short legs, so that when he stood amongst the other Achaians, he was the shortest. But Odysseus had an unusually long trunk such that, when he sat in council, his head was above all the rest, and his words poured forth like a flurry of snow.
Socrates unites outer homeliness with inner beauty.
Rabelais made reference to this quality of Socrates in his Prologue.
Regarding Socrates' homeliness, I am reminded of that verse from Isaiah Ch. 53,2 "He hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, [there is] no beauty that we should desire him."
This harmonizing or balancing of opposites is a very ancient notion. The Greeks called it the golden mean. The Buddha called it the middle way. According to legend, Siddhartha Gautama, the historical Buddha (a term meaning "Awakened One"), had tried every form of philosophy and religion, and was meditating near a river's bank, close to death from fasting. A boat passed by on the river, and Siddhartha could hear the voice of a master musician instructing his disciple as the young student strung an instrument: "Do not leave it loose, or it shall not sound, nor tighten it overmuch lest the string break." Suddenly, Siddhartha realized the wisdom of "the middle way", the mean between extremes.
I realize that I might appear to you to be jumping about a bit with all these topics, but you must remember that when I read the Gorgias, all of these notions are within me at once, as a gestalt, and I perceive the dialogue through this lens of experience.
With regard to the similarity between Socrates and Odysseus, I want to make a certain point about the position of Odysseus' ship in Homer's "Catalog of Ships" in Book II of the Iliad. I am going to use the figures at this url to assist me:
Notice how the 12 ships of Odysseus are in the exact middle of this line-up of ships, as a mean or balance between extremes.
At one extreme of the line-up of ships along the shore is Ajax, who is so massive, that his epithet is bulwark or "wall".
Achilles epithet is "swift-footed".
Achilles and Ajax possess opposite virtues which are difficult to unite or harmonize; Ajax' size, and Achilles' speed.
We see Odysseus as a mean between these two extremes of opposite but necessary virtues.
Once, in Book Eight of the Iliad, we find one verse which clarifies the logic of positioning in the catalog of ships:
Again, in Book 11, we are reminded of this same geometry:
Ajax, who is massive but slower, is placed closest to Troy so that, during an attack, the approaching enemy will first encounter Ajax' massive strength.
Achilles is positioned furtherest from Troy, since his virtue of speed allows him to meet the approaching enemy before anyone else.
Plato stresses this role of Odysseus as a harmonious balance in The Republic
I suppose one might say that the assortment of possible lives for rebirth, spread out before the souls which have drawn lots, resembles the assortment of facts and phenomena in reality, spread out for the mind to choose, or the assortment of careers spread out before students.
But it is not the phenomenon or fact which casts the mind into a certain state, or the career which shapes the student, but rather it is the harmony of the mind, the balance of the student, which conditions the choice of attention and specialization. Hence the task of the Socratic method is not to offer facts upon a platter, or sheet music, but rather to fine tune and harmonize the mind of the student as a process rather than a destination.
It is not the scenery which colors the vision, but rather the harmony or focus of vision which determines the scenery.
What follows may seem a non sequitur, but it is good for the reader to have some insight into the educational philosophy of the college which influenced me; a college which attempts to put into practice the maiutic process harmonization which I describe.
The Motto of St. John's College Motto
Facio liberos ex liberis libris libraque ( I make free men from children by means of books and a balance)
This metaphor of our education as a lens which shapes our vision reminds me of a true story which I entitled "Eighth Grade Existentialism"
When studying Plato, it may be helpful to realize that, in the 20th century, Kurt Godel the mathematician was essentially a Platonist and viewed number as having some independent and mystical existence, along with Einstein, who was a personal friend of Godel. Opposite to the Platonist is the empiricist and positivist, who see number as a human instrument or construction, and a means to an end, rather than an end in itself. Remember that over the entrance to Plato's Lyceum was written "Let no one enter here who has not mastered Euclid's Elements of Geometry".
After this long prelude or prologue, we may begin to look at the Gorgias itself.
Gorgias is an orator and rhetorician. Socrates and his companion arrive late upon the scene, just missing Gorgias' demonstration of expository speaking.
We should keep in mind that one of the charges against Socrates at his trial, in addition to corrupting the youth of Athens, was that he taught people the art of "making the weaker argument defeat the stronger."
I sometimes wonder if our contemporary educational system isn't corrupting the youth by heaping scores of sheet music before the symphony and never attempting to tune the instruments in the orchestra. Society shall prepare and drink its own cup of hemlock for that crime.
An offer is made to have Gorgias repeat his performance for Socrates' benefit, but Socrates convinces Gorgias to enter into a simpler dialogue of brief questions and answers. Socrates gleefully compliments Gorgias on how well he complies with the rules of this simple form of dialogue.
Socrates is leading Gorgias into his dialectic trap. I once saw a cartoon in a magazine depicting a dog, who has laid down a trail of cat food, leading to an open dryer, hiding and gleefully waiting for the cat to step inside the dryer. Once the cat is in, the dog will slam the door shut and rejoice as the cat spins round and round. Once Gorgias agrees to enter Socrates' "laundromat" of syllogisms, then poor Gorgias will find his head spinning like that cat.
For me, the age old struggle between platonists and empiricists arrives at a dizzying plateau once the question is finally asked "is reality digital or analog?" which is related to issues of holism versus reductionism. It will be helpful to read this link as a refresher on holism and reductionism:
Perhaps by now some readers are ready to throw up their hands and shout
Sitaram! Whatever does this enormous mountain of baloney that you have amassed have to do with Plato's dialogue with Gorgias?
I am only beginning to realize one excellent answer to that question just now, after hours of reading and writing. The rhetoricians and sophists, such as Gorgias, quite possibly represent the empiricism and reductionism inchoate, while the socratic method of dialect inquiry represents the holists with their model theory.
I may be quite mistaken in my notion, but it is exciting to thing of the possibilities should such a notion be plausible.
With todays science and technology, we can take images, sound, and even the human genome, and digitize it to a sequence of numbers. If we should find one day that a digitized representation of reality can exactly match reality and be indistinguishable from it, then we may conclude that reality is digital. If, on the other hand, all attempts at digitization are doomed to be mere approximations to the original, or counterfeits, in the sense that the number pi is irrational, then we may conclude that reality and being are analog.
I was struck by all of this when I stumbled one day across a casual remark by Einstein to the effect (paraphrasing) that "no one could ever have arrived inductively at a notion of relativity simply from empirical observations." What Einstein is pointing to involves a branch of mathematics called "model theory". There are numerous axiomatic systems of mathematics (e.g. euclidean, hyperbolic, ellipical and riemmanian geometries) mutually exclusive to one another in how they describe space, and all dwelling in the human imagination much like Plato's "eidei" or ideal forms. One day, someone notices that one of these axiomatic systems resembles observable phenomena. Ptolemy could account for the observed motion of the planets with epicycles, with an accuracy equal to Kepler's system of ellipses. Model theory has to do with the initial phase of stumbling upon a system which seems to match observations, as well as the later phase of asking "is this system actually the way things are (i.e. the noumena)? or is the system only an ad hoc contrivance for measurement?"
The laws of relativity and quantum and thermodynamics in no way lead inductively to the existence and nature of bunny rabbits, and yet the existence of rabbits in no way violates those laws. The laws of statistics do not inductively lead to the rules of poker or blackjack. Such games of chance obey the laws of statistics and probability, yet we would not study statistics in order to learn how to play the games themselves.
The Socratic line of questions and answers, a series of syllogisms and predications, is the tail of the sting-ray. At the end of the tail is a stinger, the numbing and silencing narcotic of "aporia" and refutation.
And now, here is the story:
Long, long ago, a demon sent forth legions of mud-dwelling creatures from the bottom of the sea to capture the scriptures and thus destroy their content. And as the dark waters swallowed the knowledge of prayer, the higher values of life also sank into the depths. People forgot the difference between good and bad and could no longer distinguish between right and wrong. As their power of discrimination faded, acts of charity and other forms of selfless service vanished.
Fear, hunger, sleep, and sex became the motivating forces for all human activities.
Trust disappeared and with it any semblance of loving relationships between men and women. The population soared while the general state of health plummeted. Striving to appease their insatiable desires, humans plundered the natural world-laying waste to forests and valleys, polluting rivers and lakes, and robbing the soil of its vitality. Life was miserable for everyone but the demon and his bottom-dwelling minions.
Seeing how severely nature had been weakened, the demon then decided to finish it off by attacking and conquering the forces of nurturing -the soil, vegetation, water, fire, air, and clouds. The angels, bright beings who are the presiding forces of nature, fled and hid themselves. With the angels gone, the demon demolished natural law and imposed his own rule, ushering in his reign with earthquakes, volcanoes, tornadoes, typhoons, wildfires, droughts, floods, and all manner of epidemics.
Chaos stalked the Earth, and the angels were in hiding, so the saints resolved to intervene. Approaching the Lord, the supreme force of protection and nourishment, they meditated on him with love and faith, asking him to come to their aid. In response the Lord told them, "With a one-pointed and disciplined mind, join forces to gather the divine knowledge once again, and while you fulfill this task I will bring the angels from their hiding place and dwell with them. Come and join
us there."
The Lord went forth and vanquished the demon.
Meanwhile the Saints had again gone into deep prayer, and had
re-discovered divine wisdom. There they asked the Lord's permission to bring the knowledge of the Vedas into practice for the benefit of all creation. In granting their request, the Lord said, "The secret of success lies in sacrifice, and the scriptures tell us how to walk this path. In every aspect of creation there is a continuous ceremony of sacrifice. Leaves decompose and nourish other organisms. It is the same with everything-nothing in creation is meant for itself. There is one sacrifice which is greatest among all sacrifices. Those who perform this sacrifice their personal desires for the sake of the larger welfare. They train and tame their mind and senses - and finally they share this harnessed energy with all living beings. This form of
sacrifice nourishes humankind and every other form of life. Let us now perform this sacrifice." So at the Lord's command all aspects of nature, the angles, their presiding forces, and the saints (the seers of divine wisdom), along with all the heavenly host, took part in this great sacrifice.
The sacrifice lasted for years, and by the time it was completed an astounding transformation was apparent everywhere. People had regained their interest in learning. They began to embrace the higher values in life and to take pleasure in performing acts of charity and selfless service. Their power of discrimination blossomed and the confusion between right and wrong vanished. Fear, hunger, sex, and sleep were no longer the motivating forces behind human activity. Relationships between men and women were now built on trust, and people once again understood the purpose of life. They remembered
how to live in harmony with the natural world, and as they did, the ecosystem came back into balance. Even the demons were
transformed: instead of trying to destroy sacred wisdom, they worked in concert with the angels and other forces of nurturing. And with the natural world once again bursting with vitality, peace and prosperity reigned. Seeing this, the saints and angels prostrated in gratitude at the feet of the Lord: "It is through your grace, O Lord, that we have been empowered and that all living beings have found their rightful place in this creation. The energy emanating from this great sacrifice has brought harmony out of chaos. For this reason we ask you to bless one sacred place of pilgrimage on earth so that it may
always be the most auspicious and powerful place on the Earth. May the energy emitting from this holy land guide humanity through all eternity. May all human endeavor undertaken here be auspicious.
May acts of charity and self-sacrifice performed here bear fruit
without limit."
The Lord readily granted their wish. "Be it so," he said. "From now on this place will also be known as "the field of pure consciousness" and "the lord of all holy places". The concentration of spiritual energy here will purify the way of the soul. By the simple act of coming here, even minds and hearts that are tainted by dreadful crimes over the course
of many lifetimes will be purified. One day's practice done here properly will bear the fruit of a decade of continuous practice
anywhere else. Periodically all the benevolent forces of creation, the energies of all holy places, the saints, and the angels will convene here. And just as darkness vanishes with the sunrise, obstacles to spiritual practices have no power to withstand the brilliance of this conjunction of time and place. Practices undertaken here at this time open the door to all possibilities."
Once during a time of material prosperity the higher virtues again fell into decline, and as a result the manna of holiness almost vanished from this earthly realm. All living beings and all aspects of nature became weak and pale. The angels and saints pleaded with the
Creator to recharge creation with fresh vitality, but were told that the sanctity in life now lay buried and obscured. People of all races and faiths joined forces to find and recover the sanctity. They set out to churn an entire ocean of words and texts, and churn they did, laboring night and day. But to their dismay the first fruit of their labor was not the sanctity they were seeking but a vial of poison so deadly that if it
were unleashed it would scorch all creation. The search could not go on until this menace was removed, yet no one had the capacity or the wisdom to dispose of it except the Lord who appeared and took upon himself all the sin.
This ceremony is known as "the spiritual gathering around the vessel."
When we attempt to procure holiness we must be ready to deal with poison; we can benefit from gathering around the vessel of holiness only when we realize that poison and manna go hand in hand.
Achieving even the noblest goal entails some degree of pain and temptation. And because our natural tendency is to avoid pain, the one who takes it on for the sake of others becomes like God, the most auspicious and benevolent of beings.
(to be continued when I find the list of virtues I collected from Plato's Republic)
============================
Here are some great study questions I found in google:
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS: INTERPRETING AND APPRECIATING THE REPUBLIC
http://luna.cas.usf.edu/~demilio/2211unit2/plato.htm
-Do you accept Socrates’ reasons for shifting the discussion from the examination of individuals to a consideration of the city (p. 165)?
-Critically examine Socrates' explanations of why cities come into existence and how a division of labor arises in society (pp. 165-68).
-Should Socrates accept Glaucon's criticism (p. 169) and abandon the "city of pigs" for the "luxurious city"?
-Do you agree that dogs are lovers of wisdom (p. 173)? Why should the guardians of Socrates' city be "lovers of wisdom"?
-Why does Socrates propose to censor the stories of the poets?
-Compare Socrates' discussion of passages from the Iliad (pp. 176-77) with our own.
-How does Socrates wish the gods to be portrayed? Why?
-What does Socrates mean by a “necessary lie”? Why is it justifiable?
-What is the purpose of the story of the origins of the guardians (pp. 214-17)? Why is it important for the success of Plato’s ideal society?
-Consider the use of stories - like that of the ship of state (p. 286) or the myth of Er (pp. 415-22) in the Republic. What are their lessons? How are they similar to or different from the stories that Socrates condemned earlier in the Republic?
-The Republic concludes with the Myth of Er, a lengthy description of the afterlife and the process of reincarnation, alleged presented by a man who died and came back to life. This is the most elaborate description of an afterlife that we have encountered in the course. How does it contribute to Plato's discussion of morality and justice?
From these study questions alone, we may extract the beginnings of an outline for a storyboard.
Analysis of individual psyche vs state as "the soul written in large letters"
Division of labor and class or caste systems.
Dogs as lovers of wisdom.
City of pigs
Philosopher King
Portrayal of Gods
Noble Lie
Guardians
Ship of State
Myth of Er
+++++++++++
Here is a simply word processing extract of all lines which mention VIRTUE in the download of a translation of Plato's Republic.
I have used: http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/etext98/repub11.txt
*****The Project Gutenberg Etext of The Republic, by Plato*****
Translated by Benjamin Jowett
I REALIZE THESE ARE CRUDE AND UNEDITED EXCERPTS, BUT SUCH USE OF A SEARCH ENGINE IS A POWERFUL TECHNIQUE TO FOCUS IN ON ONE CONCEPT, SUCH AS VIRTUE.
The virtues are based on justice, of which common honesty in
made to admit that justice is a thief, and that the virtues follow the
admit the still greater paradox that injustice is virtue and justice vice.
And is not the end of the soul
and then whether justice is virtue and wisdom, or evil and folly; and then
in an age when the arts and the virtues, like the moral and intellectual
and at first the comparison of the arts and the virtues was not perceived
end; good manners are both an art and a virtue; character is naturally
distinction of Aristotle, that 'virtue is concerned with action, art with
production' (Nic. Eth.), or that 'virtue implies intention and constancy of
an intimation conveyed that virtue is more than art. This is implied in
of virtue as fitness, and of freedom as obedience to law. The mathematical
of an end and a virtue directed towards the end, which again is suggested
guardians make reputation the incentive to virtue. And other advantages
festival, with garlands on their heads, enjoying as the meed of virtue a
virtue and trail behind me the fox of Archilochus. I hear some one saying
angry with others; for he knows also that more than human virtue is needed
ill; or that virtue is self-love or the love of power; or that war is the
'the homage which vice pays to virtue.'
is taken by Socrates to mean all virtue. May we not more
old question (Protag.), 'whether the virtues are one or many,' viz. that
Truth should have a high place among the virtues, for falsehood, as we were
we must first attain the elements or essential forms of the virtues, and
virtue'? But how can excessive care of health be inconsistent with an
ordinary occupation, and yet consistent with that practice of virtue which
imagines that every one is as bad as himself.
Vice may be known of virtue,
but cannot know virtue. This is the sort of medicine and this the sort of
other hand, have a knowledge of vice, but no knowledge of virtue. It may
virtue which gives an insight into vice. And the knowledge of character is
individual is certainly to be found in a life of virtue and goodness. But
the four virtues--wisdom, courage, temperance, justice.
Our second virtue is courage, which we have no difficulty in finding in
Two virtues remain; temperance and justice. More than the preceding
virtues temperance suggests the idea of harmony. Some light is thrown upon
the nature of this virtue by the popular description of a man as 'master of
describing this virtue as a harmony which is diffused through the whole,
but this was justice?
For 'every one having his own' is the great object of government;
residues. Each of the first three virtues corresponds to one of the three
If there be a fourth virtue, that can only be sought for in the relation of
virtues are eliminated, the justice and temperance of the Republic can with
difficulty be distinguished.
Temperance appears to be the virtue of a part
only, and one of three, whereas justice is a universal virtue of the whole
is a more abstract notion than the other virtues, and therefore, from
Plato (Protagoras; Arist. Nic. Ethics), 'Whether the virtues are one or
cardinal virtues (now for the first time brought together in ethical
conception of universal justice, virtue relative to others, but the whole
of virtue relative to the parts. To this universal conception of justice
the virtues of the State and of the individual are the same.
For wisdom is..
part of the soul which has authority and reason. The virtue of temperance
produce good or bad habits. And virtue is the health and beauty and well-
which overhangs the city and look down upon the single form of virtue, and
corresponds to the single form of virtue is that which we have been
a separate virtue or habit. We are tempted also to doubt whether Plato is
in his own nature to the contemplation of the absolute? All the virtues as
health, wealth, strength, rank, and the virtues themselves, when placed
other men), and is the creator of the virtues private as well as public.
of the virtues mention was made of a longer road, which you were satisfied
above the four virtues; and of the virtues too he must not only get an
reality; a man may desire the appearance of virtue, but he will not desire
Like Socrates, we may recapitulate the virtues of the philosopher. In
disguise of virtue or disinterestedness without having them, or veil
conversion; other virtues are almost like bodily habits, and may be
in virtue and wisdom, may bear rule. And the only life which is better
solid, diligent natures, who combine intellectual with moral virtues; not
is the just and good?' or proves that virtue is vice and vice virtue, and
virtue; lovers of money take the place of lovers of honour; misers of
not want remedies; they care only for money, and are as careless of virtue
but harmonizing the passions, and training them in virtue; in the timocracy
honour; this latter virtue, which is hardly to be esteemed a virtue, has
superseded all the rest. In the second stage of decline the virtues have
play, and the virtues and vices are impartially cultivated. But this
State or parts of the soul, the four virtues, the five forms of government.
them in comeliness of life and virtue!
justice as a cube, of virtue as an art of measuring (Prot.), saw no
all the arts and all the virtues, must we not infer that they are under a
forsake justice and virtue for the attractions of poetry, any more than for
And yet the rewards of virtue are greater far than I have described. 'And
hundred years--and the rewards of virtue were in the same proportion. He
afforded noble lessons and examples of virtue and patriotism, to which
chose last. But the virtue which is founded on habit is not sufficient to
enable a man to choose; he must add to virtue knowledge, if he is to act
hundred was an aristocracy of virtue. For once in the history of mankind
if we admit the physical basis, and resolve all virtue into health of body
of the relaxation of morality, but in spite of it, by virtue of a political
be forbidden. Who can weigh virtue, or even fortune against health, or
from the virtues--at least he is always arguing from one to the other. His
attained. When the virtues as yet presented no distinct conception to the
virtue is partly art, and has an outward form as well as an inward
He has long given up the notion that virtue cannot be taught; and he is
disposed to modify the thesis of the Protagoras, that the virtues are one
paradox that the virtues are one, and the kindred notion that all virtue is
moral virtues in the intellectual, and to centre all goodness in the
and virtue and good manners and good taste, that would be the best hope of
ever constitute a state more exalted in virtue, or truer or better than
successor of it, justified by the ancient virtues of the Romans and the
to a man that was once of excellent virtue or of famous glory, not only as
throughout all the world, not in bigness, but in virtue and power. Him
from those other philosophers who define virtue to be a life according to
are immediately applicable to practice, but there is a virtue flowing from
proper virtue of man?
And that human virtue is justice?
And what is your view about them? Would you call one of them virtue and
I suppose that you would call justice virtue and injustice vice?
wisdom and virtue, and justice with the opposite.
that you do not hesitate to rank injustice with wisdom and virtue.
Thrasymachus blushing.
As we were now agreed that justice was virtue and
and virtue, is easily shown to be stronger than injustice, if injustice is
consider whether justice is virtue and wisdom or evil and folly; and when
is not a virtue, nor can I say whether the just man is happy or unhappy.
highest meed of virtue. Some extend their rewards yet further; the
that justice and virtue are honourable, but grievous and toilsome; and that
about virtue and the gods: they say that the gods apportion calamity and
dwelling-place is near. But before virtue the gods have set toil,'
He proceeded: And now when the young hear all this said about virtue and
virtue to be the vestibule and exterior of my house; behind I will trail
is, as you know, sometimes spoken of as the virtue of an individual, and
sometimes as the virtue of a State.
I should prefer only to admit the pure imitator of virtue.
are the twin sisters of goodness and virtue and bear their likeness.
Or any affinity to virtue in general?
a livelihood he should practise virtue?
ourselves: Is the practice of virtue obligatory on the rich man, or can he
practice of virtue.
philosophy, and hence all practising or making trial of virtue in the
of them by himself: but when he gets into the company of men of virtue,
other; for vice cannot know virtue too, but a virtuous nature, educated by
time, will acquire a knowledge both of virtue and vice: the virtuous, and
to them, should be such as will neither impair their virtue as guardians,
And is not a similar method to be pursued about the virtues, which are also
First among the virtues found in the State, wisdom comes into view, and in
virtues has somehow or other been discovered.
The city will be courageous in virtue of a portion of herself which
Two virtues remain to be discovered in the State--first, temperance, and
Yes, I replied; I will; and as far as I can at present see, the virtue of
And so, I said, we may consider three out of the four virtues to have been
Because I think that this is the only virtue which remains in the State
when the other virtues of temperance and courage and wisdom are abstracted;
to compete with the other political virtues, wisdom, temperance, courage.
And the virtue which enters into this competition is justice?
virtue of the same quality which makes the State wise?
individual bear the same relation to all the other virtues?
And surely, I said, we have explained again and again how and by virtue of
Then virtue is the health and beauty and well-being of the soul, and vice
And do not good practices lead to virtue, and evil practices to vice?
and act justly and practise virtue, whether seen or unseen of gods and men,
that he is not to acquire justice and virtue, or to escape from injustice
some tower of speculation, a man may look down and see that virtue is one,
virtue of his sex, but the gifts of nature are alike diffused in both; all
Then let the wives of our guardians strip, for their virtue will be their
virtue, also know the very truth of each thing?
philosopher's virtues, as you will doubtless remember that courage,
In the first place there are their own virtues, their courage, temperance,
having proper nurture, must necessarily grow and mature into all virtue,
type of character which has had no other training in virtue but that which
is supplied by public opinion--I speak, my friend, of human virtue only;
as he can be, into the proportion and likeness of virtue--such a man ruling
justice, temperance, and every civil virtue?
justice and the other virtues?
Yes, I said, there is. And of the virtues too we must behold not the
virtues, we shall be satisfied.
And whereas the other so-called virtues of the soul seem to be akin to
implanted later by habit and exercise, the virtue of wisdom more than
will they rule who are truly rich, not in silver and gold, but in virtue
other virtue, should we not carefully distinguish between the true son and
individual a friend, of one who, being defective in some part of virtue, is
in their own nature, inclined towards virtue and the ancient order of
avaricious nature in him, and is not single-minded towards virtue, having
in a man, and is the only saviour of his virtue throughout life.
fortune the less they think of virtue; for when riches and virtue are
And in proportion as riches and rich men are honoured in the State, virtue
reputation for honesty he coerces his bad passions by an enforced virtue;
yet the true virtue of a unanimous and harmonious soul will flee far away
pauper to the cultivation of virtue.
of wisdom and virtue, may be rightly called unnecessary?
re-admits into the city some part of the exiled virtues, and does not
And as State is to State in virtue and happiness, so is man in relation to
which is under a tyrant, how do they stand as to virtue?
enter, by the criterion of virtue and vice, happiness and misery.
knowledge and mind and all the different kinds of virtue?
Those then who know not wisdom and virtue, and are always busy with
in beauty and virtue?
at their head,
know all the arts and all things human, virtue as well as
are only in the second remove from truth in what you say of virtue, and not
Homer, are only imitators; they copy images of virtue and the like, but the
if mankind are ever to increase in happiness and virtue.
the excitement of poetry, he neglect justice and virtue?
await virtue.
converse she seeks in virtue of her near kindred with the immortal and
How great are the rewards which justice and the other virtues procure to
as man can attain the divine likeness, by the pursuit of virtue?
collectively upon virtue; he should know what the effect of beauty is when
well-ordered State, but his virtue was a matter of habit only, and he had
follow after justice and virtue always.
An older crowd (30+) was present.
I mentioned a strange remark I once read, a passing remark, by Kojeve in his "Introduction to the Reading of Hegel's Phenomenology".
Kojeve wrote "... Plato (who believed that virtue can be taught)..."
I deduced, from the tenor of Kojeve's remark, that Kojeve himself did not believe that virtue could be taught.
The question has stayed with me through the years.
I feel that, as I examine my own life, I have "learned" certain virtues that were not natively present within me.
One virtue which has been imposed forcefully from without is neatness or orderliness. I was never neat or orderly by nature, but many different life experiences and acquaintanceships trained me to be neat and orderly to the degree that I now am.
In Philosopohy chat, I offered the example of the Piranha tribe in the Brazilian rain forests. They are the only aboriginals who have vigorously resisted assimilation into European society, and have withdrawn deeper into the rain forests, clinging to their unusual bird-like language, and refusing to use any other language. They have certain virtues or values, learned from their parents, and preserved as a cultural tradition. But they have no words for numbers, except "more" and "less". They have no fixed words for color, and when questioned, explain that color is of no importance ("who cares"). They do not cling to possessions or handicraft, beyond the bare essentials of cooking pots and a few tools. They have absolutely no creation myths. When questioned, they simply say "things have ALWAYS been this way."
Study of the Piranha awakens us to the understanding that certain of our notions, such as number or color, are learned rather than inherent in some a priori fashion.
One day I was walking by a Japanese restaurant, and I saw the owner
in the front devotedly tending to a beautiful little garden which he
had created. I paused to engage him in some conversation and ask his
views on life, the soul, and it's future. His answer was very simple.
He shrugged and said,
"I do not believe that there is anything more than this life, this
moment, these few years, this accidental existence and persona of
coincidence: consciousness by chance, and then it is over. But THAT
very impermanence is why one must make the very most of it while it
lasts. One must seek virtue and perfection, even though it is
transient and goes unnoticed and unrewarded, for without virtue,
excellence, this transience and impermanence has NO value. Perfection
is its own recompense. Beauty needs no adornment."
My favorite line in Milton is where Satan says "Evil, be thou my good."
This devilish aesthetic becomes interesting when examined in the light of
Socrates' proposition that "all by nature desire the good, and no one
willingly chooses what they consider to be not good", along with Plato's
Euthypro problem, "is the good good by fiat simply because it is what God
desires, or does God desire what is good for some inherent quality
residing in goodness (or substitute virtue, morality, holiness, or
righteousness for the word good,if you prefer).
I was a great fan of the cartoon series "Earthworm Jim". In one episode,
through some bizarre radioactive accident, Earthworm Jim spawns an evil
twin. They are about to battle to the death. The evil twin gives a speech
first, boasting essentially the boast of Milton's Satan, that he hates
everything that is good, and likes everything that is not good." So,
Earthworm Jim (who is not always the brightest of worms) reasons, "Well,
winning is good, and losing is bad, and since you like what is bad and hate
what is good, then surely I shall defeat you.) Of course, we know that our
hero, Jim, proceeds to dispatch his evil twin in no time flat.
To read a Platonic dialogue is to watch ideas in motion, not just any motion, but the special motion which takes place when giving birth. Socrates at times describes himself as a mid-wife, helping minds to give birth. There is a wonderful adjective for this role which Socrates plays; maiutic.
Socrates has two different nick-names in the dialogues; sting-ray and gadfly. In ancient Greek, the word for sting-ray is Nar-kay, or Narke, which is the root word for narcotic.
A sting from the tail of the sting-ray causes the body to become numb. Socrates was called narke because of his ability through a series of questions and answers, to numb his opponent into a motionless cul-de-sac, called in Greek "a-poria" which means "no way out."
Now, the gadfly nick-name denoted the very opposite of numbing. The gadfly, through its bites, could sting the lethargic horse of the state into motion. Socrates also stings up those who feel hopeless by "mytho-poiesis" or making a story or parable to give them a feeling of what it shall be like when they finally come to understand.
Someone who presumes to know is smug and complacent and does not seek or inquire. But also, those who have lost hope and given up do not seek or inquire.
Notice how these two opposite qualities of motion and rest are united in the one person of Socrates. We may better appreciate the conflict between motion and rest if we consider that Aristotle speaks of an "unmoved mover" as that one principle which somehow must exist as a source for everything else.
To understand Socrates' narcotic strategy, we must understand his theory of knowledge.
Socrates had a woman named Diotema as a mentor who instructed him in a theory of knowledge which is likened to a ladder of divine ascent, which describes an inductive ascent from love of objects, to sexual love, to love of mathematics, and finally to the love of the EIDOS of justice or beauty.
Socrates states that "God does not love wisdom, because he possesses it." Remember that the word "philo-sophia" means "love of wisdom." If we have something or believe that we possess it, then we do not go in search for it. We are smug and confident that the wisdom is ours. This smugness can be a form of illness, and the medicine to restore us to a state which is suitable for inquiry is refutation through a syllogistic chain of questions and answers which ultimately forces us to admit that we do not really possess true knowledge about a particular matter like justice or happiness.
We may see this theory of knowledge or dialectic illustrated in a well-known Sufi teaching story, made popularized in the many books of Idres Shah.
Nasrudin is a comical, sophomoric (or wise-fool) character. One day, someone sees Nasrudin frantically searching the street outside his house. When asked what has been lost, Nasrudin explains that he has lost his keys. When asked where he lost them, he explains that he lost them in the house. When asked why he is searching in the street for something lost in the house, Nasrudin explains that it is dark inside the house, and there is more light outside in the street.
Abraham Heschel illustrates something of this problem, in volume one of "The Prophets" when he writes (paraphrased) "We must learn to understand what it is that we see, and not merely see only that which we understand." Our compulsion is to search where the light is better, even if that means looking in the wrong place. Abraham Maslow put it differently: "When the only tool you have is a hammer, then every problem tends to become a nail."
Most of what I explain here will be things that I learned at St. John's College in Annapolis in the 1960s. It is worth mentioning that the teachers there prefer to call themselves "tutors" rather than "professors", in honor of this Socratic method, since a "professor" professes to already know the truth, and will convey it to students in a lecture and for a price, much like the rhetorician Gorgias in this dialogue. The term "tutor" better reflects the role of a mid-wife who aids the student during this maiutic process of giving birth.
I would like to focus in quite a bit on this notion of uniting opposites, such as motion and rest.
Socrates and Odysseus share something interesting in common. Homer describes Odysseus bodily build as a paradigm of this uniting of opposites. Odysseus had very short legs, so that when he stood amongst the other Achaians, he was the shortest. But Odysseus had an unusually long trunk such that, when he sat in council, his head was above all the rest, and his words poured forth like a flurry of snow.
Socrates unites outer homeliness with inner beauty.
Rabelais made reference to this quality of Socrates in his Prologue.
Regarding Socrates' homeliness, I am reminded of that verse from Isaiah Ch. 53,2 "He hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, [there is] no beauty that we should desire him."
This harmonizing or balancing of opposites is a very ancient notion. The Greeks called it the golden mean. The Buddha called it the middle way. According to legend, Siddhartha Gautama, the historical Buddha (a term meaning "Awakened One"), had tried every form of philosophy and religion, and was meditating near a river's bank, close to death from fasting. A boat passed by on the river, and Siddhartha could hear the voice of a master musician instructing his disciple as the young student strung an instrument: "Do not leave it loose, or it shall not sound, nor tighten it overmuch lest the string break." Suddenly, Siddhartha realized the wisdom of "the middle way", the mean between extremes.
I realize that I might appear to you to be jumping about a bit with all these topics, but you must remember that when I read the Gorgias, all of these notions are within me at once, as a gestalt, and I perceive the dialogue through this lens of experience.
With regard to the similarity between Socrates and Odysseus, I want to make a certain point about the position of Odysseus' ship in Homer's "Catalog of Ships" in Book II of the Iliad. I am going to use the figures at this url to assist me:
Notice how the 12 ships of Odysseus are in the exact middle of this line-up of ships, as a mean or balance between extremes.
At one extreme of the line-up of ships along the shore is Ajax, who is so massive, that his epithet is bulwark or "wall".
Achilles epithet is "swift-footed".
Achilles and Ajax possess opposite virtues which are difficult to unite or harmonize; Ajax' size, and Achilles' speed.
We see Odysseus as a mean between these two extremes of opposite but necessary virtues.
Once, in Book Eight of the Iliad, we find one verse which clarifies the logic of positioning in the catalog of ships:
Again, in Book 11, we are reminded of this same geometry:
Ajax, who is massive but slower, is placed closest to Troy so that, during an attack, the approaching enemy will first encounter Ajax' massive strength.
Achilles is positioned furtherest from Troy, since his virtue of speed allows him to meet the approaching enemy before anyone else.
Plato stresses this role of Odysseus as a harmonious balance in The Republic
I suppose one might say that the assortment of possible lives for rebirth, spread out before the souls which have drawn lots, resembles the assortment of facts and phenomena in reality, spread out for the mind to choose, or the assortment of careers spread out before students.
But it is not the phenomenon or fact which casts the mind into a certain state, or the career which shapes the student, but rather it is the harmony of the mind, the balance of the student, which conditions the choice of attention and specialization. Hence the task of the Socratic method is not to offer facts upon a platter, or sheet music, but rather to fine tune and harmonize the mind of the student as a process rather than a destination.
It is not the scenery which colors the vision, but rather the harmony or focus of vision which determines the scenery.
What follows may seem a non sequitur, but it is good for the reader to have some insight into the educational philosophy of the college which influenced me; a college which attempts to put into practice the maiutic process harmonization which I describe.
The Motto of St. John's College Motto
Facio liberos ex liberis libris libraque ( I make free men from children by means of books and a balance)
This metaphor of our education as a lens which shapes our vision reminds me of a true story which I entitled "Eighth Grade Existentialism"
When studying Plato, it may be helpful to realize that, in the 20th century, Kurt Godel the mathematician was essentially a Platonist and viewed number as having some independent and mystical existence, along with Einstein, who was a personal friend of Godel. Opposite to the Platonist is the empiricist and positivist, who see number as a human instrument or construction, and a means to an end, rather than an end in itself. Remember that over the entrance to Plato's Lyceum was written "Let no one enter here who has not mastered Euclid's Elements of Geometry".
After this long prelude or prologue, we may begin to look at the Gorgias itself.
Gorgias is an orator and rhetorician. Socrates and his companion arrive late upon the scene, just missing Gorgias' demonstration of expository speaking.
We should keep in mind that one of the charges against Socrates at his trial, in addition to corrupting the youth of Athens, was that he taught people the art of "making the weaker argument defeat the stronger."
I sometimes wonder if our contemporary educational system isn't corrupting the youth by heaping scores of sheet music before the symphony and never attempting to tune the instruments in the orchestra. Society shall prepare and drink its own cup of hemlock for that crime.
An offer is made to have Gorgias repeat his performance for Socrates' benefit, but Socrates convinces Gorgias to enter into a simpler dialogue of brief questions and answers. Socrates gleefully compliments Gorgias on how well he complies with the rules of this simple form of dialogue.
Socrates is leading Gorgias into his dialectic trap. I once saw a cartoon in a magazine depicting a dog, who has laid down a trail of cat food, leading to an open dryer, hiding and gleefully waiting for the cat to step inside the dryer. Once the cat is in, the dog will slam the door shut and rejoice as the cat spins round and round. Once Gorgias agrees to enter Socrates' "laundromat" of syllogisms, then poor Gorgias will find his head spinning like that cat.
For me, the age old struggle between platonists and empiricists arrives at a dizzying plateau once the question is finally asked "is reality digital or analog?" which is related to issues of holism versus reductionism. It will be helpful to read this link as a refresher on holism and reductionism:
Perhaps by now some readers are ready to throw up their hands and shout
Sitaram! Whatever does this enormous mountain of baloney that you have amassed have to do with Plato's dialogue with Gorgias?
I am only beginning to realize one excellent answer to that question just now, after hours of reading and writing. The rhetoricians and sophists, such as Gorgias, quite possibly represent the empiricism and reductionism inchoate, while the socratic method of dialect inquiry represents the holists with their model theory.
I may be quite mistaken in my notion, but it is exciting to thing of the possibilities should such a notion be plausible.
With todays science and technology, we can take images, sound, and even the human genome, and digitize it to a sequence of numbers. If we should find one day that a digitized representation of reality can exactly match reality and be indistinguishable from it, then we may conclude that reality is digital. If, on the other hand, all attempts at digitization are doomed to be mere approximations to the original, or counterfeits, in the sense that the number pi is irrational, then we may conclude that reality and being are analog.
I was struck by all of this when I stumbled one day across a casual remark by Einstein to the effect (paraphrasing) that "no one could ever have arrived inductively at a notion of relativity simply from empirical observations." What Einstein is pointing to involves a branch of mathematics called "model theory". There are numerous axiomatic systems of mathematics (e.g. euclidean, hyperbolic, ellipical and riemmanian geometries) mutually exclusive to one another in how they describe space, and all dwelling in the human imagination much like Plato's "eidei" or ideal forms. One day, someone notices that one of these axiomatic systems resembles observable phenomena. Ptolemy could account for the observed motion of the planets with epicycles, with an accuracy equal to Kepler's system of ellipses. Model theory has to do with the initial phase of stumbling upon a system which seems to match observations, as well as the later phase of asking "is this system actually the way things are (i.e. the noumena)? or is the system only an ad hoc contrivance for measurement?"
The laws of relativity and quantum and thermodynamics in no way lead inductively to the existence and nature of bunny rabbits, and yet the existence of rabbits in no way violates those laws. The laws of statistics do not inductively lead to the rules of poker or blackjack. Such games of chance obey the laws of statistics and probability, yet we would not study statistics in order to learn how to play the games themselves.
The Socratic line of questions and answers, a series of syllogisms and predications, is the tail of the sting-ray. At the end of the tail is a stinger, the numbing and silencing narcotic of "aporia" and refutation.
And now, here is the story:
Long, long ago, a demon sent forth legions of mud-dwelling creatures from the bottom of the sea to capture the scriptures and thus destroy their content. And as the dark waters swallowed the knowledge of prayer, the higher values of life also sank into the depths. People forgot the difference between good and bad and could no longer distinguish between right and wrong. As their power of discrimination faded, acts of charity and other forms of selfless service vanished.
Fear, hunger, sleep, and sex became the motivating forces for all human activities.
Trust disappeared and with it any semblance of loving relationships between men and women. The population soared while the general state of health plummeted. Striving to appease their insatiable desires, humans plundered the natural world-laying waste to forests and valleys, polluting rivers and lakes, and robbing the soil of its vitality. Life was miserable for everyone but the demon and his bottom-dwelling minions.
Seeing how severely nature had been weakened, the demon then decided to finish it off by attacking and conquering the forces of nurturing -the soil, vegetation, water, fire, air, and clouds. The angels, bright beings who are the presiding forces of nature, fled and hid themselves. With the angels gone, the demon demolished natural law and imposed his own rule, ushering in his reign with earthquakes, volcanoes, tornadoes, typhoons, wildfires, droughts, floods, and all manner of epidemics.
Chaos stalked the Earth, and the angels were in hiding, so the saints resolved to intervene. Approaching the Lord, the supreme force of protection and nourishment, they meditated on him with love and faith, asking him to come to their aid. In response the Lord told them, "With a one-pointed and disciplined mind, join forces to gather the divine knowledge once again, and while you fulfill this task I will bring the angels from their hiding place and dwell with them. Come and join
us there."
The Lord went forth and vanquished the demon.
Meanwhile the Saints had again gone into deep prayer, and had
re-discovered divine wisdom. There they asked the Lord's permission to bring the knowledge of the Vedas into practice for the benefit of all creation. In granting their request, the Lord said, "The secret of success lies in sacrifice, and the scriptures tell us how to walk this path. In every aspect of creation there is a continuous ceremony of sacrifice. Leaves decompose and nourish other organisms. It is the same with everything-nothing in creation is meant for itself. There is one sacrifice which is greatest among all sacrifices. Those who perform this sacrifice their personal desires for the sake of the larger welfare. They train and tame their mind and senses - and finally they share this harnessed energy with all living beings. This form of
sacrifice nourishes humankind and every other form of life. Let us now perform this sacrifice." So at the Lord's command all aspects of nature, the angles, their presiding forces, and the saints (the seers of divine wisdom), along with all the heavenly host, took part in this great sacrifice.
The sacrifice lasted for years, and by the time it was completed an astounding transformation was apparent everywhere. People had regained their interest in learning. They began to embrace the higher values in life and to take pleasure in performing acts of charity and selfless service. Their power of discrimination blossomed and the confusion between right and wrong vanished. Fear, hunger, sex, and sleep were no longer the motivating forces behind human activity. Relationships between men and women were now built on trust, and people once again understood the purpose of life. They remembered
how to live in harmony with the natural world, and as they did, the ecosystem came back into balance. Even the demons were
transformed: instead of trying to destroy sacred wisdom, they worked in concert with the angels and other forces of nurturing. And with the natural world once again bursting with vitality, peace and prosperity reigned. Seeing this, the saints and angels prostrated in gratitude at the feet of the Lord: "It is through your grace, O Lord, that we have been empowered and that all living beings have found their rightful place in this creation. The energy emanating from this great sacrifice has brought harmony out of chaos. For this reason we ask you to bless one sacred place of pilgrimage on earth so that it may
always be the most auspicious and powerful place on the Earth. May the energy emitting from this holy land guide humanity through all eternity. May all human endeavor undertaken here be auspicious.
May acts of charity and self-sacrifice performed here bear fruit
without limit."
The Lord readily granted their wish. "Be it so," he said. "From now on this place will also be known as "the field of pure consciousness" and "the lord of all holy places". The concentration of spiritual energy here will purify the way of the soul. By the simple act of coming here, even minds and hearts that are tainted by dreadful crimes over the course
of many lifetimes will be purified. One day's practice done here properly will bear the fruit of a decade of continuous practice
anywhere else. Periodically all the benevolent forces of creation, the energies of all holy places, the saints, and the angels will convene here. And just as darkness vanishes with the sunrise, obstacles to spiritual practices have no power to withstand the brilliance of this conjunction of time and place. Practices undertaken here at this time open the door to all possibilities."
Once during a time of material prosperity the higher virtues again fell into decline, and as a result the manna of holiness almost vanished from this earthly realm. All living beings and all aspects of nature became weak and pale. The angels and saints pleaded with the
Creator to recharge creation with fresh vitality, but were told that the sanctity in life now lay buried and obscured. People of all races and faiths joined forces to find and recover the sanctity. They set out to churn an entire ocean of words and texts, and churn they did, laboring night and day. But to their dismay the first fruit of their labor was not the sanctity they were seeking but a vial of poison so deadly that if it
were unleashed it would scorch all creation. The search could not go on until this menace was removed, yet no one had the capacity or the wisdom to dispose of it except the Lord who appeared and took upon himself all the sin.
This ceremony is known as "the spiritual gathering around the vessel."
When we attempt to procure holiness we must be ready to deal with poison; we can benefit from gathering around the vessel of holiness only when we realize that poison and manna go hand in hand.
Achieving even the noblest goal entails some degree of pain and temptation. And because our natural tendency is to avoid pain, the one who takes it on for the sake of others becomes like God, the most auspicious and benevolent of beings.
(to be continued when I find the list of virtues I collected from Plato's Republic)
============================
Here are some great study questions I found in google:
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS: INTERPRETING AND APPRECIATING THE REPUBLIC
http://luna.cas.usf.edu/~demilio/2211unit2/plato.htm
-Do you accept Socrates’ reasons for shifting the discussion from the examination of individuals to a consideration of the city (p. 165)?
-Critically examine Socrates' explanations of why cities come into existence and how a division of labor arises in society (pp. 165-68).
-Should Socrates accept Glaucon's criticism (p. 169) and abandon the "city of pigs" for the "luxurious city"?
-Do you agree that dogs are lovers of wisdom (p. 173)? Why should the guardians of Socrates' city be "lovers of wisdom"?
-Why does Socrates propose to censor the stories of the poets?
-Compare Socrates' discussion of passages from the Iliad (pp. 176-77) with our own.
-How does Socrates wish the gods to be portrayed? Why?
-What does Socrates mean by a “necessary lie”? Why is it justifiable?
-What is the purpose of the story of the origins of the guardians (pp. 214-17)? Why is it important for the success of Plato’s ideal society?
-Consider the use of stories - like that of the ship of state (p. 286) or the myth of Er (pp. 415-22) in the Republic. What are their lessons? How are they similar to or different from the stories that Socrates condemned earlier in the Republic?
-The Republic concludes with the Myth of Er, a lengthy description of the afterlife and the process of reincarnation, alleged presented by a man who died and came back to life. This is the most elaborate description of an afterlife that we have encountered in the course. How does it contribute to Plato's discussion of morality and justice?
From these study questions alone, we may extract the beginnings of an outline for a storyboard.
Analysis of individual psyche vs state as "the soul written in large letters"
Division of labor and class or caste systems.
Dogs as lovers of wisdom.
City of pigs
Philosopher King
Portrayal of Gods
Noble Lie
Guardians
Ship of State
Myth of Er
+++++++++++
Here is a simply word processing extract of all lines which mention VIRTUE in the download of a translation of Plato's Republic.
I have used: http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/etext98/repub11.txt
*****The Project Gutenberg Etext of The Republic, by Plato*****
Translated by Benjamin Jowett
I REALIZE THESE ARE CRUDE AND UNEDITED EXCERPTS, BUT SUCH USE OF A SEARCH ENGINE IS A POWERFUL TECHNIQUE TO FOCUS IN ON ONE CONCEPT, SUCH AS VIRTUE.
The virtues are based on justice, of which common honesty in
made to admit that justice is a thief, and that the virtues follow the
admit the still greater paradox that injustice is virtue and justice vice.
And is not the end of the soul
and then whether justice is virtue and wisdom, or evil and folly; and then
in an age when the arts and the virtues, like the moral and intellectual
and at first the comparison of the arts and the virtues was not perceived
end; good manners are both an art and a virtue; character is naturally
distinction of Aristotle, that 'virtue is concerned with action, art with
production' (Nic. Eth.), or that 'virtue implies intention and constancy of
an intimation conveyed that virtue is more than art. This is implied in
of virtue as fitness, and of freedom as obedience to law. The mathematical
of an end and a virtue directed towards the end, which again is suggested
guardians make reputation the incentive to virtue. And other advantages
festival, with garlands on their heads, enjoying as the meed of virtue a
virtue and trail behind me the fox of Archilochus. I hear some one saying
angry with others; for he knows also that more than human virtue is needed
ill; or that virtue is self-love or the love of power; or that war is the
'the homage which vice pays to virtue.'
is taken by Socrates to mean all virtue. May we not more
old question (Protag.), 'whether the virtues are one or many,' viz. that
Truth should have a high place among the virtues, for falsehood, as we were
we must first attain the elements or essential forms of the virtues, and
virtue'? But how can excessive care of health be inconsistent with an
ordinary occupation, and yet consistent with that practice of virtue which
imagines that every one is as bad as himself.
Vice may be known of virtue,
but cannot know virtue. This is the sort of medicine and this the sort of
other hand, have a knowledge of vice, but no knowledge of virtue. It may
virtue which gives an insight into vice. And the knowledge of character is
individual is certainly to be found in a life of virtue and goodness. But
the four virtues--wisdom, courage, temperance, justice.
Our second virtue is courage, which we have no difficulty in finding in
Two virtues remain; temperance and justice. More than the preceding
virtues temperance suggests the idea of harmony. Some light is thrown upon
the nature of this virtue by the popular description of a man as 'master of
describing this virtue as a harmony which is diffused through the whole,
but this was justice?
For 'every one having his own' is the great object of government;
residues. Each of the first three virtues corresponds to one of the three
If there be a fourth virtue, that can only be sought for in the relation of
virtues are eliminated, the justice and temperance of the Republic can with
difficulty be distinguished.
Temperance appears to be the virtue of a part
only, and one of three, whereas justice is a universal virtue of the whole
is a more abstract notion than the other virtues, and therefore, from
Plato (Protagoras; Arist. Nic. Ethics), 'Whether the virtues are one or
cardinal virtues (now for the first time brought together in ethical
conception of universal justice, virtue relative to others, but the whole
of virtue relative to the parts. To this universal conception of justice
the virtues of the State and of the individual are the same.
For wisdom is..
part of the soul which has authority and reason. The virtue of temperance
produce good or bad habits. And virtue is the health and beauty and well-
which overhangs the city and look down upon the single form of virtue, and
corresponds to the single form of virtue is that which we have been
a separate virtue or habit. We are tempted also to doubt whether Plato is
in his own nature to the contemplation of the absolute? All the virtues as
health, wealth, strength, rank, and the virtues themselves, when placed
other men), and is the creator of the virtues private as well as public.
of the virtues mention was made of a longer road, which you were satisfied
above the four virtues; and of the virtues too he must not only get an
reality; a man may desire the appearance of virtue, but he will not desire
Like Socrates, we may recapitulate the virtues of the philosopher. In
disguise of virtue or disinterestedness without having them, or veil
conversion; other virtues are almost like bodily habits, and may be
in virtue and wisdom, may bear rule. And the only life which is better
solid, diligent natures, who combine intellectual with moral virtues; not
is the just and good?' or proves that virtue is vice and vice virtue, and
virtue; lovers of money take the place of lovers of honour; misers of
not want remedies; they care only for money, and are as careless of virtue
but harmonizing the passions, and training them in virtue; in the timocracy
honour; this latter virtue, which is hardly to be esteemed a virtue, has
superseded all the rest. In the second stage of decline the virtues have
play, and the virtues and vices are impartially cultivated. But this
State or parts of the soul, the four virtues, the five forms of government.
them in comeliness of life and virtue!
justice as a cube, of virtue as an art of measuring (Prot.), saw no
all the arts and all the virtues, must we not infer that they are under a
forsake justice and virtue for the attractions of poetry, any more than for
And yet the rewards of virtue are greater far than I have described. 'And
hundred years--and the rewards of virtue were in the same proportion. He
afforded noble lessons and examples of virtue and patriotism, to which
chose last. But the virtue which is founded on habit is not sufficient to
enable a man to choose; he must add to virtue knowledge, if he is to act
hundred was an aristocracy of virtue. For once in the history of mankind
if we admit the physical basis, and resolve all virtue into health of body
of the relaxation of morality, but in spite of it, by virtue of a political
be forbidden. Who can weigh virtue, or even fortune against health, or
from the virtues--at least he is always arguing from one to the other. His
attained. When the virtues as yet presented no distinct conception to the
virtue is partly art, and has an outward form as well as an inward
He has long given up the notion that virtue cannot be taught; and he is
disposed to modify the thesis of the Protagoras, that the virtues are one
paradox that the virtues are one, and the kindred notion that all virtue is
moral virtues in the intellectual, and to centre all goodness in the
and virtue and good manners and good taste, that would be the best hope of
ever constitute a state more exalted in virtue, or truer or better than
successor of it, justified by the ancient virtues of the Romans and the
to a man that was once of excellent virtue or of famous glory, not only as
throughout all the world, not in bigness, but in virtue and power. Him
from those other philosophers who define virtue to be a life according to
are immediately applicable to practice, but there is a virtue flowing from
proper virtue of man?
And that human virtue is justice?
And what is your view about them? Would you call one of them virtue and
I suppose that you would call justice virtue and injustice vice?
wisdom and virtue, and justice with the opposite.
that you do not hesitate to rank injustice with wisdom and virtue.
Thrasymachus blushing.
As we were now agreed that justice was virtue and
and virtue, is easily shown to be stronger than injustice, if injustice is
consider whether justice is virtue and wisdom or evil and folly; and when
is not a virtue, nor can I say whether the just man is happy or unhappy.
highest meed of virtue. Some extend their rewards yet further; the
that justice and virtue are honourable, but grievous and toilsome; and that
about virtue and the gods: they say that the gods apportion calamity and
dwelling-place is near. But before virtue the gods have set toil,'
He proceeded: And now when the young hear all this said about virtue and
virtue to be the vestibule and exterior of my house; behind I will trail
is, as you know, sometimes spoken of as the virtue of an individual, and
sometimes as the virtue of a State.
I should prefer only to admit the pure imitator of virtue.
are the twin sisters of goodness and virtue and bear their likeness.
Or any affinity to virtue in general?
a livelihood he should practise virtue?
ourselves: Is the practice of virtue obligatory on the rich man, or can he
practice of virtue.
philosophy, and hence all practising or making trial of virtue in the
of them by himself: but when he gets into the company of men of virtue,
other; for vice cannot know virtue too, but a virtuous nature, educated by
time, will acquire a knowledge both of virtue and vice: the virtuous, and
to them, should be such as will neither impair their virtue as guardians,
And is not a similar method to be pursued about the virtues, which are also
First among the virtues found in the State, wisdom comes into view, and in
virtues has somehow or other been discovered.
The city will be courageous in virtue of a portion of herself which
Two virtues remain to be discovered in the State--first, temperance, and
Yes, I replied; I will; and as far as I can at present see, the virtue of
And so, I said, we may consider three out of the four virtues to have been
Because I think that this is the only virtue which remains in the State
when the other virtues of temperance and courage and wisdom are abstracted;
to compete with the other political virtues, wisdom, temperance, courage.
And the virtue which enters into this competition is justice?
virtue of the same quality which makes the State wise?
individual bear the same relation to all the other virtues?
And surely, I said, we have explained again and again how and by virtue of
Then virtue is the health and beauty and well-being of the soul, and vice
And do not good practices lead to virtue, and evil practices to vice?
and act justly and practise virtue, whether seen or unseen of gods and men,
that he is not to acquire justice and virtue, or to escape from injustice
some tower of speculation, a man may look down and see that virtue is one,
virtue of his sex, but the gifts of nature are alike diffused in both; all
Then let the wives of our guardians strip, for their virtue will be their
virtue, also know the very truth of each thing?
philosopher's virtues, as you will doubtless remember that courage,
In the first place there are their own virtues, their courage, temperance,
having proper nurture, must necessarily grow and mature into all virtue,
type of character which has had no other training in virtue but that which
is supplied by public opinion--I speak, my friend, of human virtue only;
as he can be, into the proportion and likeness of virtue--such a man ruling
justice, temperance, and every civil virtue?
justice and the other virtues?
Yes, I said, there is. And of the virtues too we must behold not the
virtues, we shall be satisfied.
And whereas the other so-called virtues of the soul seem to be akin to
implanted later by habit and exercise, the virtue of wisdom more than
will they rule who are truly rich, not in silver and gold, but in virtue
other virtue, should we not carefully distinguish between the true son and
individual a friend, of one who, being defective in some part of virtue, is
in their own nature, inclined towards virtue and the ancient order of
avaricious nature in him, and is not single-minded towards virtue, having
in a man, and is the only saviour of his virtue throughout life.
fortune the less they think of virtue; for when riches and virtue are
And in proportion as riches and rich men are honoured in the State, virtue
reputation for honesty he coerces his bad passions by an enforced virtue;
yet the true virtue of a unanimous and harmonious soul will flee far away
pauper to the cultivation of virtue.
of wisdom and virtue, may be rightly called unnecessary?
re-admits into the city some part of the exiled virtues, and does not
And as State is to State in virtue and happiness, so is man in relation to
which is under a tyrant, how do they stand as to virtue?
enter, by the criterion of virtue and vice, happiness and misery.
knowledge and mind and all the different kinds of virtue?
Those then who know not wisdom and virtue, and are always busy with
in beauty and virtue?
at their head,
know all the arts and all things human, virtue as well as
are only in the second remove from truth in what you say of virtue, and not
Homer, are only imitators; they copy images of virtue and the like, but the
if mankind are ever to increase in happiness and virtue.
the excitement of poetry, he neglect justice and virtue?
await virtue.
converse she seeks in virtue of her near kindred with the immortal and
How great are the rewards which justice and the other virtues procure to
as man can attain the divine likeness, by the pursuit of virtue?
collectively upon virtue; he should know what the effect of beauty is when
well-ordered State, but his virtue was a matter of habit only, and he had
follow after justice and virtue always.
Creating a Screenplay for Plato's Republic
I am reposting this from a different thread, because the project strikes me as one with some merit.
The challenge is to film a reading of Plato's Republic, and yet keep it engaging and informative. I am reminded of PBS 12 hour production of "Brideshead Revisited" which seems to include every sentence and scene in the entire novel.
It would be interesting to do an outline and story board. The final book, with Odysseus in the underworld, in the Myth of Er, would be quite sci-fi. And, hey, Plato's works are certainly in public domain.
I wonder if most of the movement of "drama" is "noetic", in the development of concepts and arguments, and would not come through in a film. Which might mean that only costumes and antics would provide entertainment. I wonder if a viewer of such a film could clearly follow the reading. The Republic seems like something one needs to pour over and study. If all this is true, then a two hour video might be either dull, or fatuous in its efforts to avoid dullness. My girlfriend and I took turns reading "The Pooh Perplex" aloud, and it was fun and amusing. We tried the same thing with "Death in Venice" and it didn't work at all. It was too heavy and cerebral. Perhaps if one assembled meaningful notes, commentary, which a narrator reads with shots of paintings or statues to illustrate, and then pan to certain passages where performers narrate the actual dialogue (sort of like a Nova or History Channel documentary), then it might be entertaining and also instructive. Hmm... I wonder what a good producer and director could come uo with for The Republic. Is it proper to say "screenplay" for the production of such a documentary. A story board would be a challenging project. It would be like those cartoon books that illustrate the thought of Sartre, Kant, et al.
I am looking for outlines and synopses to help me create a story board for a movie version of Plato's Republic. This is simply a fun exercise for me, inspired by some Facebook alumni who recall a staged non-stop reading of The Republic, and muse about doing it again, and videotaping it.
Here is a useful synopsis
The movie should allude to the meaning of characters
Polemarchus, which means "leader in battle," and was the name given to the third archon;
Cephalus, meaning "head" as in head of the family; and
Thrasymachus, meaning "schemer."]
Someone like Bernardo Bertolucci would be a good director for our movie version of The Republic
Little Buddha
A crucial move in the development of the argument occurs at this point. Socrates suggests that justice will be easier to recognize and to define in a city-state (POLIS) than in an individual, particularly if we conduct what we in the 20c C.E would come to call a thought experiment. The POLIS is the individual WRIT LARGE. So the argument begins with speculation about the foundation of an ideal POLIS. Initially this will be a small, circumscribed community brought together by the economics of basic material needs. Glaucon in particular finds this vision crude and unsatisfactory: he labels Socrates' idea a "city of pigs." In response, Socrates develops the implications and effects of the introduction of more "creature-comforts" and luxuries, chief among them war. The more luxurious POLIS inevitably is at risk from its neighbors and therefore must raise an army. With luxury and enhanced trade both the threat of war (and the necessity of defense) and the subdivision and specialization of labor inevitably follow. The POLIS requires Guardians (PHYLAKES.) As the argument of the Republic develops, the the role of the Guardians assumes greater and greater significance.
Education (PAIDEIA.) What should children be taught, and when? This in turn leads to a discussion of
Censorship. Are there stories (especially about the gods) that children should not be told.?
The crucial question is:
Who should rule? Those undergoing education must be regularly tested. Only the most devoted should qualify. They must pass all the tests. The Guardian class will eventually be divided into two groups: those who will be trained to rule and their assistants. The nub of the issue is character. Socrates relates the famous myth of the metals. Among human natures there are golden, silver, bronze and iron types. Education & training must identify the golden natures. They will rule. All the Guardians (both the gold and the silver) will be charged with the defense of the POLIS against its enemies, external and internal. There will be a strict conflict of interest provision: Guardians will be prohibited from owning private property, but their needs, not to extend to profligacy or luxury, will be supplied at state expense.
Socrates inventories the
Four Cardinal Virtues:
wisdom, courage, moderation, & justice. Wisdom will be found among the rulers; courage among the guardians; moderation (SOPHROSYNE) in everyone's being content with his own role in the POLIS. Justice (DIAKIOSYNE) is, therefore, the smooth ordering of society that results from everyone fulfilling his own special role and not meddling in the proper functions of others. Injustice, by contrast, consists precisely in such meddling.
justice in the individual will be the harmonious functioning of independent parts, each fulfilling its own appropriate function.
the soul has indeed three parts (reason, spirit, and appetite) that correspond to the three basic classes in the POLIS. Justice in the individual is, therefore, the condition under which each part of the soul fulfills its own special function, governed by reason, with spirit, as reason requires, restraining the passions (appetite.) Injustice in the individual is, by contrast, the state of imbalance and disorder, in which passions and drives rebel against the wise counsel of reason.
Four such ways in which disorder and rebellion can arise in the POLIS and/or the individual.
Gender Differences.
Although men are on average stronger and more capable than women, the skills of political leadership (ruling) are not sex-linked. Thus there will be female Guardians as well as male. All Guardians will have the same responsibilities (including fighting in wars) and must share the same training & education. The traditional family & marriage are obstacles to the education, rearing, and outlook of the Guardians. They must, therefore, be abolished for this class, because they create and foster affection for particular individuals. Unions for the sake of procreation will be temporary and arranged at festivals by subterfuge under carefully guarded conditions that will ensure that the socially most desirable pairings are achieved. For this purpose a rigged balloting system will be engineered by the rulers. Parents will not know their own children. Children will be raised in common. In times of war both women and men will fight, and provisions will be made for the children to witness the fighting from a safe vantage point. Wars between Greek cities must be regarded as civil wars and prosecuted accordingly. Even with barbarians war must be conducted according to what might be called "civilized" rules.
Socrates differentiates most human beings, captivated as they are by changing sights, sounds, and pleasures, from the philosophers, the "lovers of wisdom," who seek the real, unchanging objects of true knowledge.
Imagine a ship on which the crew believes that holding the wheel is true navigating and that consulting the positions of the stars is foolish speculation. As for wickedness,
when a man or woman of great philosophic ability is seduced by power, ambition or gain, the results can indeed be dangerous.
Philosophers must be capable of the most advanced studies, the study of the Good. When asked for an account of the Good, Socrates says he can only point to things most like it. The Good, he says, is to the true world as the sun is to the visible world. This metaphor is immediately followed by another, the Line, which illustrates the upward journey of the philosopher through the ascending scale of reality and knowledge, from passing sensation to the vision of the forms.
Myth of the Cave
The chained prisoners in the dark cave spend their days predicting the order of appearance of shadow images of crude puppets paraded behind them and reflected by the light of a fire at their backs of which they are ignorant on the wall they are forced to face. One of the prisoners eventually escapes his shackles and learns the truth of the shadow theater they observe. Eventually he finds his way out of the cave and, by the light of the sun, sees the "real" world of which their shadowy procession is a pale image, several times removed. Suppose, Socrates now says, that for the sake of his people this visitor from the nether world returns to the cave. His eyes will not readily adjust to his darkened surroundings. He will no longer be adept at predicting what image will appear next. He will have lost his skill at their game. Yet if he dares try to tell his erstwhile fellow prisoners the truth of what he has seen, they will denounce him as mad, and, if he persists, may grow so tired of his tedious tales that they kill him.
Education of a Political Leader:
Mathematics, followed by logic & dialectic, followed by a fifteen year apprenticeship in the practical world of politics (from age 35 to 50.) Only then can the final stages of the education (as the French would say formation) of the philosopher-ruler begin. Book VII ends with a reminder that some of these "philosopher-kings" will be women.
Corruption:
Why the ideal POLIS should suffer decline and erosion at all. The answer, Socrates explains in extremely elevated poetic language, is that whatever is born must die, according to a mathematical principle, which is expressed here as the so-called "Myth of the Platonic number." Complicated astrological calculations will regulate the precise timings of the fertility festivals. Errors in these calculations will result in iron and bronze types mixing with the golden and silver. When this happens the harmony of the ideal city will be compromised. Civil strife (STASIS) will arise from envy and hostility. The rulers, no longer governed by their best natures, seek compromises. They distribute land and private property, and concentrate their own activities on war and defense. Society forms into economic classes: the rich own land and property, the poor become wage-earners and serfs. Emphasis is on honor and martial arts (Socrates seems to have Sparta in mind.) Art " cutlure are neglected and education deteriorates. The rulers now secretly love money, but they cannot admit that they do. In the corresponding individual, the spirited element predominates over the rational.
Greed:
Money is openly prized, desired, and sought after. Wealth is now a sign of honor, and a qualification for high office. The gap between the rich and poor widens. This type of individual must still exercise restraint of the appetites & self-control but for the wrong reasons. By the third and following stage, self-control has disappeared completely. All desires are equal. We have arrived at the stage of democracy. Like the preceding stages in the decline of the POLIS, democracy is inherently unstable. Liberty has turned to licentiousness, and this leads inevitably to tyranny and complete loss of freedom. The people name a champion dictator, and grant him bodyguards. He seizes all power and privilege for himself.
The challenge is to film a reading of Plato's Republic, and yet keep it engaging and informative. I am reminded of PBS 12 hour production of "Brideshead Revisited" which seems to include every sentence and scene in the entire novel.
It would be interesting to do an outline and story board. The final book, with Odysseus in the underworld, in the Myth of Er, would be quite sci-fi. And, hey, Plato's works are certainly in public domain.
I wonder if most of the movement of "drama" is "noetic", in the development of concepts and arguments, and would not come through in a film. Which might mean that only costumes and antics would provide entertainment. I wonder if a viewer of such a film could clearly follow the reading. The Republic seems like something one needs to pour over and study. If all this is true, then a two hour video might be either dull, or fatuous in its efforts to avoid dullness. My girlfriend and I took turns reading "The Pooh Perplex" aloud, and it was fun and amusing. We tried the same thing with "Death in Venice" and it didn't work at all. It was too heavy and cerebral. Perhaps if one assembled meaningful notes, commentary, which a narrator reads with shots of paintings or statues to illustrate, and then pan to certain passages where performers narrate the actual dialogue (sort of like a Nova or History Channel documentary), then it might be entertaining and also instructive. Hmm... I wonder what a good producer and director could come uo with for The Republic. Is it proper to say "screenplay" for the production of such a documentary. A story board would be a challenging project. It would be like those cartoon books that illustrate the thought of Sartre, Kant, et al.
I am looking for outlines and synopses to help me create a story board for a movie version of Plato's Republic. This is simply a fun exercise for me, inspired by some Facebook alumni who recall a staged non-stop reading of The Republic, and muse about doing it again, and videotaping it.
Here is a useful synopsis
The movie should allude to the meaning of characters
Polemarchus, which means "leader in battle," and was the name given to the third archon;
Cephalus, meaning "head" as in head of the family; and
Thrasymachus, meaning "schemer."]
Someone like Bernardo Bertolucci would be a good director for our movie version of The Republic
Little Buddha
A crucial move in the development of the argument occurs at this point. Socrates suggests that justice will be easier to recognize and to define in a city-state (POLIS) than in an individual, particularly if we conduct what we in the 20c C.E would come to call a thought experiment. The POLIS is the individual WRIT LARGE. So the argument begins with speculation about the foundation of an ideal POLIS. Initially this will be a small, circumscribed community brought together by the economics of basic material needs. Glaucon in particular finds this vision crude and unsatisfactory: he labels Socrates' idea a "city of pigs." In response, Socrates develops the implications and effects of the introduction of more "creature-comforts" and luxuries, chief among them war. The more luxurious POLIS inevitably is at risk from its neighbors and therefore must raise an army. With luxury and enhanced trade both the threat of war (and the necessity of defense) and the subdivision and specialization of labor inevitably follow. The POLIS requires Guardians (PHYLAKES.) As the argument of the Republic develops, the the role of the Guardians assumes greater and greater significance.
Education (PAIDEIA.) What should children be taught, and when? This in turn leads to a discussion of
Censorship. Are there stories (especially about the gods) that children should not be told.?
The crucial question is:
Who should rule? Those undergoing education must be regularly tested. Only the most devoted should qualify. They must pass all the tests. The Guardian class will eventually be divided into two groups: those who will be trained to rule and their assistants. The nub of the issue is character. Socrates relates the famous myth of the metals. Among human natures there are golden, silver, bronze and iron types. Education & training must identify the golden natures. They will rule. All the Guardians (both the gold and the silver) will be charged with the defense of the POLIS against its enemies, external and internal. There will be a strict conflict of interest provision: Guardians will be prohibited from owning private property, but their needs, not to extend to profligacy or luxury, will be supplied at state expense.
Socrates inventories the
Four Cardinal Virtues:
wisdom, courage, moderation, & justice. Wisdom will be found among the rulers; courage among the guardians; moderation (SOPHROSYNE) in everyone's being content with his own role in the POLIS. Justice (DIAKIOSYNE) is, therefore, the smooth ordering of society that results from everyone fulfilling his own special role and not meddling in the proper functions of others. Injustice, by contrast, consists precisely in such meddling.
justice in the individual will be the harmonious functioning of independent parts, each fulfilling its own appropriate function.
the soul has indeed three parts (reason, spirit, and appetite) that correspond to the three basic classes in the POLIS. Justice in the individual is, therefore, the condition under which each part of the soul fulfills its own special function, governed by reason, with spirit, as reason requires, restraining the passions (appetite.) Injustice in the individual is, by contrast, the state of imbalance and disorder, in which passions and drives rebel against the wise counsel of reason.
Four such ways in which disorder and rebellion can arise in the POLIS and/or the individual.
Gender Differences.
Although men are on average stronger and more capable than women, the skills of political leadership (ruling) are not sex-linked. Thus there will be female Guardians as well as male. All Guardians will have the same responsibilities (including fighting in wars) and must share the same training & education. The traditional family & marriage are obstacles to the education, rearing, and outlook of the Guardians. They must, therefore, be abolished for this class, because they create and foster affection for particular individuals. Unions for the sake of procreation will be temporary and arranged at festivals by subterfuge under carefully guarded conditions that will ensure that the socially most desirable pairings are achieved. For this purpose a rigged balloting system will be engineered by the rulers. Parents will not know their own children. Children will be raised in common. In times of war both women and men will fight, and provisions will be made for the children to witness the fighting from a safe vantage point. Wars between Greek cities must be regarded as civil wars and prosecuted accordingly. Even with barbarians war must be conducted according to what might be called "civilized" rules.
Socrates differentiates most human beings, captivated as they are by changing sights, sounds, and pleasures, from the philosophers, the "lovers of wisdom," who seek the real, unchanging objects of true knowledge.
Imagine a ship on which the crew believes that holding the wheel is true navigating and that consulting the positions of the stars is foolish speculation. As for wickedness,
when a man or woman of great philosophic ability is seduced by power, ambition or gain, the results can indeed be dangerous.
Philosophers must be capable of the most advanced studies, the study of the Good. When asked for an account of the Good, Socrates says he can only point to things most like it. The Good, he says, is to the true world as the sun is to the visible world. This metaphor is immediately followed by another, the Line, which illustrates the upward journey of the philosopher through the ascending scale of reality and knowledge, from passing sensation to the vision of the forms.
Myth of the Cave
The chained prisoners in the dark cave spend their days predicting the order of appearance of shadow images of crude puppets paraded behind them and reflected by the light of a fire at their backs of which they are ignorant on the wall they are forced to face. One of the prisoners eventually escapes his shackles and learns the truth of the shadow theater they observe. Eventually he finds his way out of the cave and, by the light of the sun, sees the "real" world of which their shadowy procession is a pale image, several times removed. Suppose, Socrates now says, that for the sake of his people this visitor from the nether world returns to the cave. His eyes will not readily adjust to his darkened surroundings. He will no longer be adept at predicting what image will appear next. He will have lost his skill at their game. Yet if he dares try to tell his erstwhile fellow prisoners the truth of what he has seen, they will denounce him as mad, and, if he persists, may grow so tired of his tedious tales that they kill him.
Education of a Political Leader:
Mathematics, followed by logic & dialectic, followed by a fifteen year apprenticeship in the practical world of politics (from age 35 to 50.) Only then can the final stages of the education (as the French would say formation) of the philosopher-ruler begin. Book VII ends with a reminder that some of these "philosopher-kings" will be women.
Corruption:
Why the ideal POLIS should suffer decline and erosion at all. The answer, Socrates explains in extremely elevated poetic language, is that whatever is born must die, according to a mathematical principle, which is expressed here as the so-called "Myth of the Platonic number." Complicated astrological calculations will regulate the precise timings of the fertility festivals. Errors in these calculations will result in iron and bronze types mixing with the golden and silver. When this happens the harmony of the ideal city will be compromised. Civil strife (STASIS) will arise from envy and hostility. The rulers, no longer governed by their best natures, seek compromises. They distribute land and private property, and concentrate their own activities on war and defense. Society forms into economic classes: the rich own land and property, the poor become wage-earners and serfs. Emphasis is on honor and martial arts (Socrates seems to have Sparta in mind.) Art " cutlure are neglected and education deteriorates. The rulers now secretly love money, but they cannot admit that they do. In the corresponding individual, the spirited element predominates over the rational.
Greed:
Money is openly prized, desired, and sought after. Wealth is now a sign of honor, and a qualification for high office. The gap between the rich and poor widens. This type of individual must still exercise restraint of the appetites & self-control but for the wrong reasons. By the third and following stage, self-control has disappeared completely. All desires are equal. We have arrived at the stage of democracy. Like the preceding stages in the decline of the POLIS, democracy is inherently unstable. Liberty has turned to licentiousness, and this leads inevitably to tyranny and complete loss of freedom. The people name a champion dictator, and grant him bodyguards. He seizes all power and privilege for himself.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)