Відео

How did I not see this video, it would have made things 1000x easier! Your video is way more clearer and understandable even has the parts I wasn't sure about, thx a bunch!

It's wild that the lawless part perfectly described some of the intense dreams(4 to 8 a night)(I have been writing them down and contemplating them and trying to do as the Grimes did, but not a master yet) I've been having and that this is all coming to me at this time as well as other things from Plato both IRL, dreams and from online sources are jumping out now an revealing themselves, in such a benefiting way. I guess I'll have to listen even better to what they are saying to me.

Something I'm starting to see is the interconnectedness of the king, to the democracy to the tyrant, that a king and a tyrant both rule their subjects with absolute authority but so to does the democracy in that it is a king(kratos/power/authority) turned to dust(pieces/many/capital) and the demos(people/desires/wingless drones) being subject to the whims of that authority when enough pieces are gathered together (Become a king again both in spirit and body of the state) and is defended by those that have capital(defender) that moves the necessary desires(freedom) democracy but under the tyrant it is changed to Liberty(for one over all the others) and under the king would be counsel of a court.

Thank you for your videos. In my studies, the reason why Plato places "belief" with material objects is a metaphor for his critique of "materialism" in that the premise that material objects or the physical plane is all there is in reality cannot give one truth or knowledge. This is seen in the animal kingdom that perceives without thinking. We can feel the sensation of perception but we cannot never know what real basis it has (it could be a subjective hallucination) and this was actually discovered by David Hume, the most infamous materialist (skeptic/empiricist) of the modern age who deconstructed his own position that the senses cannot lead to truth. That physical reality has a true and real basis requires going upward with the dialectic to the Metaphysical Absolute. The Absolute is what gives objective reality to the Relative. There is always a problem when making metaphors or diagrams such as the divided line because there is always both correct and incorrect contexts of interpretation, as all metaphors and correspondences have both difference and similarity and the metaphor is designed to present only similarity. The incorrect context is to obviously claim the physical world isn't real and is only of belief. But this would destroy Plato's entire agenda, which is towards Wisdom and how we act in the physical world. Thus, there are facts in physical reality because the Absolute is Truth and so we must see the correspondence of the Above and below rather than take the "divided line" too literally. We become wise by integrating the knowledge of the Absolute with the knowledge in the relative (the facts of physical reality, our particular circumstance, condition, etc.)

So what was Ion's art as he never answers the questions at all, and because he doesn't really know what the doctor knows or the charioteer, so he doesn't really understand what Homer is really saying either, and as far as I can tell he just memorized the book, so he knows what was said but doesn't understand what it is nor what is really said by it. So he is most ignorant of the thing he says he is the best at🤣.

Lycaon King from the story, people said the guy was bad and to see this Zeus came down, and during the day Lycaon acted fine but during that night he murdered a child of his family and then served the meat to Zeus, but Zeus knew and then brought the roof down on him and blasted his 50 sons with lightning, then Lycaon went running out screaming and howling and was turned into a wolf. My take is this Lycaon acted human but inside was already a wolf(stinging bee) like his name which means wolf, but his desires were so bad that he preyed not just on people(sheep) but his own family and Zeus purged the place of them. I think the transformation is vices and the animal part being tyrant leading him being like last week that even the animals become bad.

I've been very slowly making my way through Waterfield's (OWC) translation, and now I'm exactly where you guys are in the text. It was difficult to get past Plato's use of the word Democracy as a pejorative synonym for hedonistic, undisciplined "freedom." The way his version of Democracy chooses leaders is by random lot drawing.The modern use of political democratic theory is much more aligned with Socrates' own method of public dialoguing *(deliberative* democracy) between "virtuous" experts and popular opinions. Also, the oligarchic type of person/society in modern day are often the ones framing ultimate values in terms of "freedom" in the marketplace. Freedom of exchange leads to buying and selling of property for profit, which results in a transfer of authority. Plato is notoriously critical of any notion that one can simply transfer Arete/ Virtues or even knowledge. But, by and large, I was convinced of Plato's descriptions of psychological processes of one behaviour leading to another dialectically. They aren't exact in all cases. For example, the way wives react to their husband’s low social status depends upon the individuals involved, but as a 'type', it could be true. Edit: Also, I think Socrates mentions that there are tendencies in individual people which can drag others with them. This eventually effects the larger society. The Waterfield translation calls this Chapter 11: Warped Minds, Warped Societies.

I have been trying to study a book called "Enthusiastic Mathematics" by Bernie Lewin. He's talking about the difference between Pythagorean mystical mathematics and traditional "counting" mathematics and especially - predicate calculus. The primary aspect is the idea of "distinction". And he uses the term "account" in a way that seems the same as in 208d. Anyway - in 208d the 3rd attempt to define what knowledge is - seems close to what Lewin is talking about. The self-referential notion of distinction versus the "something common to other things" which fells like a reference to predicate calculus. If you are familiar with Lewin's book - I would love to hear your commentary. If not - I humbly suggest you may be in for a treat. Thanks for your videos - I enjoy the way you present.

Thank you ❤

This seems like the problem I keep running into,piece to part difference, part to part difference then parts to whole to difference, then whole to whole like the wagon or the name, it like missing something, but I'm not sure what that even is, as it always leads back to piece to to part, as the whole being, being a piece of itself. Like letters or a half word being less than a letter but more than a word(Or a number that is greater then 2 but still less than 3, and sits in the middle being neither of them) , and that reminds me of Parmenides when he talks of one term being removed if there is 2 terms there really is three terms and one is hidden. Exciting and yet frustrating .

R/unintentional ASMR brought me here, and im not disappointed.

Do you appreciate Strauss?

Thanks

Any kind of platonism is incomplete without a polytheistic perspective

Just reread this one and it is so poetic and beautiful. I think my favorite part is when Simmias and Cebes express their doubts and everyone is shaken by these new arguments, to the point where Echrecrates interrupts Phaedo's narration to express his own dismay at this turn in the story. There's just so many levels at work in this one.

Amazing explanation, I look forward to checking out your book!

It's been 5 years since my last read straight through with the Grube translation. This time, I tried the Waterfield (OWC) translation. I like it, but it's split into 14 chapters rather than 10 books, so the stephanus numbers are the only way to track. I decided to do a very close reading, taking quick notes for every unit to track the flow. I'm behind all of you (now at 421e). It never ceases to amaze me how many people miss the way Socrates points out how the commodification of labour interferes with the virtues of craftsmen in a way that allows the power and purpose of money to be separate from the Virtue of the craft. Accumulation of money (as an end) leads to oligarchy and self-serving power over others. He also points out that both affluence and poverty can interfere with craft virtues. The development of the Guardians is a response to the driving force of expanding market desires into the territory of others. This leads to in-group/out-group conflict, which echoes the ethical framework of Thrasymachus, *which Socrates already rejected.*

This video is not part of the playlist.

I like watching this, but can the socialist tone it down with his political messaging? This was written 2000 years before marxism or modern views on gender (which are wrong btw). He is totally unable to read with an actual open mind and has to project his beliefs onto Plato/Socrates. Most philosophers throughout history have had these views. You can disagree, but don't lie to yourself and make up a story about how actually Plato was just ''speaking to people in his time''. Show evidence for this or just accept that you disagree with Plato.

If you had judgments of your other selves would that be like having the the rich at the top being in power but if non are judged then it's like a democracy and a free for all?

Excellent video, thank you. I recommend people reading Synesius' On Dreams in conjunction with the Republic, especially with respect to the cave analogy and Socrates' approach to going to sleep at 571d5.

This talk about "friendship" makes me feel similarly to when my mother refers to my same-sex fiance and domestic partner of 11 years as my "friend." I don't know any Greek so I can't really comment on what the translation actually says but it feels like someone is trying to keep gay people out of history.

When i was a kid, we had a Madonna album where she sings the line "The unexamined life is not worth living" in one track. I'll never be able to hear this famous saying without hearing it being sung by Madonna in my head 😂

Thanks again🙏🏽 1:05:24 This part reads so very parallel to the book of Job, where Yahweh and Satan are speculating (like the stock market) on the virtuous and vicious nature of Job. Job's story arch even traverses down the civilizational spectrum from Airistocratic down to Tyrannical. Gratitude and Praise, Mindy and Gents.

Thanks again for a wonderful, insightful video. Using lack of knowledge of good as a basis for evil, I believe, can also showcase what evil is on a cosmic scale: Disconnection from the Gods themselves, who are all-knowing and lacking in no such knowledge.

what are the best Translations of Plato, Aristotle, Plutarch, Proclus and Porphyry's works.

Extraordinary 😊

Where does this interpretation of the Stranger/Visitor as an unreliable speaker come from? I don't have a critical book that references this dialogue in this way. If so, I was definitely waylaid by this dialogue because it's so similar to other dialogues. When Socrates himself is breaking down things into smaller and smaller categories, I often roll my eyes, because we simply don't view them the same in modern times. So it's hard to distinguish a false narrator in one of these dialogues. But I am a novice and this is my first pass through these dialogues. Thanks for your videos! This one was definitely an eye opener that this is even possible in Plato's works. I wasn't expecting it. It sounds from this like we have to be careful how we define the sophist when referencing this particular book. And whether we can trust his definition of the two kinds of mimicry or appearance-making that appears in the last pages of the book. I am using John M Cooper's translation from the Collected Works.

This is one of my favorite dialogues. It seems fun and playful on the surface but there is profound depth to the discussion, especially in the back half. I think Socrates leads Lysis so very close to platonic metaphysics. The problem would have been resolved if Lysis had said that the Good is loved for its own sake, not because of the presence of evil. But he could not find that answer (even after the 'ultimate friend' sequence!) By seeing good only as a curative to evil, it's usefulness becomes dependent on evil, which is not the right way of looking at things. I found Socrates' musings about what would happen if evil disappeared to be very interesting, and applicable to Plato's conception of the afterlife. There are different ideas about this in different dialogues. But in Lysis at least, they conclude that there could still be bodies, desires, and passions, even in the absence of evil, but they would not be harmful. I also liked the bit where he talks about the self-sufficiency of the good man. It's really just an aside here, but it's a concept with a lot of staying power. Later platonists and other writers have come up with similar thoughts.

Hi--Jed had a good question that I think I may be able to answer, at least answer the mechanical part of it. At roughly minute 58 above, he was wondering about the dynamic between the father of a timocrat and his son. Mindy had importantly mentioned that lack of music was the first part of the degeneration process from aristocratic man to timocratic man. Socrates actually answered this question in other parts of The Republic by breaking music down into two components (I've simplified it here just to keep things brief.) One part of music is the listening part or the playing part, having the experience hearing it. The other part is the learning portion, the academic or rational part, for example the part where the novice learns notes, gets an instrument, learns such things as duration of notes, harmonies, etc. etc.--the gradual dynamics of opening memory, muscle skills, cooperation with the teacher, etc. This second learning part is sort of the inward portion of music--and has its own distinct charm or charms (ask Mindy about this). The first part of music is the charm of hearing the music as an exposition, a performed piece. This is the outward stroke of music. The father described around :58 likes music, but as I see it prefers just the outward stroke of music, the listening part rather than the learning part. Now we all know that music tends to stimulate (or sooth at times) the spirited parts within us. Music manipulates our insides. But if the child never learns the inward stroke of music, he is only receiving a portion of charms, skewed, disproportional, a partial reality. He may just observe his father and come to think that is enough--to just listen. If the father's preference is just the outward portion of music, then he will probably convey that lesser proportion to his children. And so begins the deterioration of the aristocratic nature between and among the generations, simply by ignoring a vital portion of holistic music teaching that keeps the Guardians pure, keeps then whole. The invisible logos at work, methodically working for ever larger quantities of comprehension and charm. We can see its opposite in these modern times, especially where so many people listen to music but fail to balance and harmonize the inward and outward aspects of music to restore greater wholes. In fact, nowadays it is very typical, often just due to the busyness of life and the push by creators and business types to just emphasize the outer, more passive part of music for money--and not developing a citizen's greater Good.

I'm starting to see that what I call reading people, I can tell what they are thinking or even feeling to greater degree, even guess what they were doing and will do, which I thought was manipulation is just reading states of mind. Useful for debates when you can hear/feel/know, Plotinus was able to do the same from my reading of the Enneads. So far the Republic has told me more about myself by showing me a mirror of water and having me reflecting on it's surface. I love the read along and the banter.

As for states of mind, I have found that my daydreams are honor loving, so it might be hiding the money loving part, but noticing the change from one to the other has been a bit hard, as it really done take you for a ride without you being able to resist it, and you love those ideas like offspring.

If the ruling class is beliefs about the Self government, to introduce factions against them would if strong enough deteriorate the other as they would be at war with each other and no longer a unity of agreement about truth of Self. By force, by persuasion, by the passing of time. dissolving what was believed. 1:02 and when he slipped and talked about philosophy that was him barring bad children out of season.

Thanks Mindy, this was very intersting. Have you read Shaw's "Hellenic Tantra?" I'd be interested in hearing your review.

Hi Mindy! I don't know where else to reach you, since you did not accept my message request on Insta and can't find any e-mail adress. I am currently studying pol.sci in my country - Norway, and taking the course 'Political thinking throughout time' (pol. phil in the US perhaps?). The professor is definitely preaching the academic and common understanding of Sokrates/Plato's teachings, which I - like you - see very differently. And in a possible exam on the topic, I would've loved to argue the view you are presenting here. But suspect it will be a difficult task with such a limited scope as in a home exam. Would love to hear from you how you would tackle such a task. And would appreciate it a lot if you could back to me somehow. Best reagards Anoop

Great supplement to my own reading. Thank you!

Hi Mindy--Bk 8 in The Republic is one of my favorites because it explains so much of modern politics and democracy. I almost always shape my Platonic thinking around the small and the large. In Bk 8 I primarily look at individual human psychology (small), the social structure of the city-state (large), and the tensions between them. I think Socrates created a social structure where, among the gold-ruling caste, parents never really knew their offspring because he saw how quickly such rulers could degenerate. What I mean by this can easily be seen in our American education system: Democratic minded parents always seem to think very highly of their own children and want the best for them. They tend to favor their own and in that process end up caring a little less for others. A perfect example of that was the in the news a few years back where a mother went to jail for bribing an employee at an Ivy League college in order to get her child in without passing all the entrance requirements. I could offer numerous other examples of similar type behaviors. Socrates saw this sort of degeneration of the ruling class as very important to prevent--at the highest level. Socrates, I suspect, was attempting to enliven and secure a sort of objective meritocracy among the rulers, free of biases and favoritism. And eliminating individual parents, having children raised collectively among the best instead, was his ideal method. He was trying to keep upwardly directed consciousness as pure as possible. He didn't want children tainted by more bounded thinking if possible, especially during their more formative years. Now in democracy, with its leaders often taken from those rich among the intermingled masses, we often see a great deal of subjective meritocracy, lots of nepotism, selfishness, and manipulation of money to sway things in less than ideal directions. One can see in such processes a sort of lesser consciousness among democratic man. To my mind, in Bk 8-9 Socrates traces individual psychology from its ideal to lesser points, and coincidentally outlines the degeneration of the city-state emerging from those varying types of individuals. All of which is a gradual deterioration of consciousness. In a very real sense, he ironically displays the antithesis of Dialectic--displaying folks who are becoming more bounded in a smaller consciousness. No?

Speaking on the difference between holiness and the virtues: perhaps the distinction lies in how these are obtained or practiced. You work to be virtuous but holiness is a quality that is bestowed upon certain people, things, and actions. Although why some things and not others I can't answer.

U da Best

This one really reminds me of "The enemy of my enemy is my friend", then the Enemy(sickness) and it's enemy(Doctor) with the friend(healthfulness). It sounds like an art that benefits because the friend is (healthfulness) and good friend I would imagine .

If the adopted family gave right opinion, unless the person confirmed for themselves, it is true, then anyone could come by and tell them anything and it would be just as good as right opinion, this sounds like the souls coming from heaven and picking the wrong lot because they lack the experience of living. The good one would not even allow for the belief that the adopted family had was true to the fullest and always be testing it. 37:00 As for what Jed said, I did the same and became an atheist did the debates, but now I can't call myself any of these (Theist, Atheist, Agnostic, gnostic)there seems to always s be One higher and If they say the paint is wet, and must touch it to be sure, I don't think there is a wall, so no need to check or to debate, as the One idea of Self is above and beyond. And I get the real play, it seems when I talk to other (family)(can't have fun when working, or it's not work) they don't, so I like to use the prayer Socrates gives "Let me have no more gold than, what a poor man needs to survive" and they ask why I would want that.

So like a pig in the mud, we are wholly unaware of the beliefs we use as the base of assumption, as if a pig could see that it is in a pen living the good life but, and most would stop there, as it would lead from one hypotheses to hypotheses to question the pen and the ones who put it up, and if the reason was good and to benefit benefit. I think the virile, if any has been taken by it, knows it drives and overtakes at once it catches beauty but that might be a shadow of the good, being stuck at the level of bodies.

Excellent and informative video. Thank you :)

This sounds a lot like mindfulness of breathing.

Proclus loses me immediately within the first 5 propositions, which is a shame because I want to learn. But dismissing the concept of an ‘infinite of infinites’ out of hand as an impossibility bothers me deeply, because you can indeed have an infinity of infinites. We could define infinite as the form which has the anti-identity property (anything multiplied or added to it results in infinity) and then carry on from their. Does proclus resolve this or does he just define me as a heretic and carry on his platonic way?

You held that pose for a long time

Thank you for the videos you put out. You always do a great job and i really appreciate the time and effort you put into the channel.

Thanks for linking Platonist and meditative practice. This is what was missing from my academic studies; it's great to see meditation presented as an essential aspect of the Platonist Path.

Oh so that explains the things that has been happening to me, The memories, The daydreams, The fantasies, The negative thoughts and feeling. I have been trying to write things down, but I have to catch myself going to sleep when they come up. While I don't like the word "discipline" but love the words from the read alone in the republic as Exercise, This feels like making a katana from iron sand ,a poor quality source with lots of impurities in the metal, that then Heated with pine charcoal and pounded into flat sheets, making it easy to see the impurities, and then folding heating and folded again allowing the removal the slag that comes to the surface and purifying the metal to be usable, while adding carbon to strengthen it. The spot I have been letting my minds eye focus on was from a dream, in the dream I was meditating and had this lifting tickling feeling below my stomach and I started floating off the floor, and levitating, and when I lost focus I would lose height and come down. I have a floor desk, so I spend 80% of my time in a cross legged position, with chin in left hand and elbow on left thigh and right hand in a fist on my right hip like if a sword was there. This has been very informative!