Hi Gregory, Finally got back into your sessions after a few I/T bugs. I am 72 years old Registered Disabled Guy with a few screwed up strings from a couple of strokes plus. Philosophy still is my favourite subject & finding you on the Internet was a gift and that's all thanks to you !
It would be interesting, you're right. There are far more lectures, topics, texts, and thinkers than I can easily get to in the near future. Fortunately, I anticipate being at this sort of business for a good long time
Simmias’ worry: Could the soul be a harmony and its elements? If so….When body, elements destroyed, or undone, harmony goes away-no more soul ----------------------- Strings (proper) Instrument -> Harmony Parts/elements Body -> Soul This analogy does NOT work ----------------------- A harmony cannot resist or order around-make something else do what it doesn’t want to do when it comes to the strings. The soul actually directs the body, therefore the soul cannot be a harmony because harmonies don’t direct the things they are harmonies of. A harmony can be more or less of a harmony. Discord is opposite of harmony. A soul cannot be more or less of a soul It’s/You either is/have or don’t have a soul Yes or no A soul can have things in it such as: Virtues & vices Character traits Can virtues & vices be harmonies? -YES Can vices be a discord? - YES Virtues-Harmony Vices-Discord A soul cannot BE a harmony, however a soul can have harmonies and discords WITHIN it. Having vs Being If harmony is what was standing in the way of the soul being immortal, because the conclusion that the soul, while it can contain harmonies and discords, is not a harmony, the soul would then be immortal. The soul directs. A harmony does not direct. The soul is immortal IF the argument is if the soul is a harmony or not-and harmony is not immortal.
Not sure at all what you're asking. Are you proposing these examples to argue against Plato's arguments, which are against the soul being a harmony of parts of the body? It's quite possible for the state of the body to affect the soul without the soul merely being a harmony of the parts of the body, right? Plato is making claims about the second, not about the first
These videos are especially helpful whenever I feel like I need a little push in the right direction while I'm reading Plato, so I thank you for these videos. You are by far the most content rich person on UA-cam with videos on philosophy. I have one question, do you plan to make more videos on Aristotle? Seemingly you have done only two extensive video series' on him (Categories and Ethics) but why not more? The metaphysics videos end at book 1... I think there is apt demand for more Aristotle so if you are planning on making more I would be interested to know. Many thanks
Yeah - the real issue is that I'm producing them for two classes of current Marist students -- Intro and Ethics, and I want to have them out in a timely enough manner for the students to be able to make good use of them. I'm looking forward to getting back to a more measured, even leisurely pace!
Yes, Spring classes had their finals. We're now in the Summer term. Do I reveal exam questions? Do you mean something like: do I put them on a public website?
@@GregoryBSadler Argh... alas, no comfort of certainty. I shall leave my understanding of Socrates/Plato's definition of the soul in the air until I have read and understood more. Thank you Dr. Sadler!
Well, in order to have a less and more, you need to have a is-it-or-not settled, now don't you? And notice that Plato has no problem with saying that the soul can contain harmony, can be more or less harmonious. But it being, at bottom, a harmony. . . that's a different matter, now isn't it?
virtues are properties of the substantial soul, which is indivisible: simple. Against Sartre's transcendence of the ego, or the Buddhist metaphysics of transitory aggregates, the integrity of the soul is ontologically prior, and gives existence to the virtues. But I will stick closely to this text ( and others), and view and review and think and rethink.
why is it that that plato views the soul as strictly a yes or no proposition? if the argument is being made that the soul is a harmony, why can't someone with more virtues be considered as you put it "more of a harmony", more complex, maybe even possessing more soul?
Is it just me, or are the objections to simmias’ soul really shaky? It seems like all of Socrates’ arguments rely on the soul being an actual literal harmony. I feel like if you look at it as the soul being a product and not specifically a harmony, then all the objections fall flat. It seems to me that all Socrates has done is attacked the metaphor, but not the idea it simplifies.
It's you. If you get away from a literal harmony, as Socrates himself does in the text, because it's a "harmony" of the bodily elements, the arguments still hold
Perhaps Descartes was right by not attending mass so much since Pascal died a non believer? How can that even be explained especially since he allegedly found a thorn from the crown of Jesus that healded his sisters ulcer.
conciousness is fundamental and independent of matter. its representation within the material realm is one type of harmony which is a priori to all experience in the 4d natural world.
@@GregoryBSadler of course, this is in line with my own discernment. The philosopher, while it is important to study others, should always seek answers and search for truths beyond which are already known. My thinking is that losing souls is inefficient, and the true creator would operate systems of 100 percent efficiency.
Absurd. The instrument would be the body, the person playing the instrument would be the soul, logically so. The conscious personality would be like a harmony and is consubstantial to the soul and the body. The harmonic conscious personality ends with the body. The soul continues on.
@@GregoryBSadler No it is not. Here is the root word, con- word-forming element meaning "together, with," "being, essence, material" substance (n.) c. 1300, "essential nature, real or essential part," from Old French sustance, substance "goods, possessions; nature, composition" (12c.), from Latin substantia "being, essence, material," from substans, present participle of substare "stand firm, stand or be under, be present," from sub "up to, under" (see sub-) + stare "to stand," from PIE root *sta- "to stand, make or be firm."
@@bobann3566 Yep. A much later term. You're wrong here. Here's some reading for you to think about before trying to argue further medium.com/gregory-b-sadler-ph-d/dont-give-them-time-8e2e7be37907
Hi Gregory, Finally got back into your sessions after a few I/T bugs. I am 72 years old Registered Disabled Guy with a few screwed up strings from a couple of strokes plus. Philosophy still is my favourite subject & finding you on the Internet was a gift and that's all thanks to you !
cranking 'em OUT!! this is an insane pace.
It would be interesting, you're right. There are far more lectures, topics, texts, and thinkers than I can easily get to in the near future.
Fortunately, I anticipate being at this sort of business for a good long time
Glad you enjoy the videos!
Simmias’ worry:
Could the soul be a harmony and its elements?
If so….When body, elements destroyed, or undone, harmony goes away-no more soul
-----------------------
Strings (proper) Instrument -> Harmony
Parts/elements Body -> Soul
This analogy does NOT work
-----------------------
A harmony cannot resist or order around-make something else do what it doesn’t want to do when it comes to the strings.
The soul actually directs the body, therefore the soul cannot be a harmony because harmonies don’t direct the things they are harmonies of.
A harmony can be more or less of a harmony.
Discord is opposite of harmony.
A soul cannot be more or less of a soul
It’s/You either is/have or don’t have a soul
Yes or no
A soul can have things in it such as:
Virtues & vices
Character traits
Can virtues & vices be harmonies? -YES
Can vices be a discord? - YES
Virtues-Harmony
Vices-Discord
A soul cannot BE a harmony, however a soul can have harmonies and discords WITHIN it.
Having vs Being
If harmony is what was standing in the way of the soul being immortal,
because the conclusion that the soul,
while it can contain harmonies and discords,
is not a harmony,
the soul would then be immortal.
The soul directs.
A harmony does not direct.
The soul is immortal IF the argument is if the soul is a harmony or not-and harmony is not immortal.
Not sure at all what you're asking. Are you proposing these examples to argue against Plato's arguments, which are against the soul being a harmony of parts of the body?
It's quite possible for the state of the body to affect the soul without the soul merely being a harmony of the parts of the body, right? Plato is making claims about the second, not about the first
These videos are especially helpful whenever I feel like I need a little push in the right direction while I'm reading Plato, so I thank you for these videos. You are by far the most content rich person on UA-cam with videos on philosophy.
I have one question, do you plan to make more videos on Aristotle? Seemingly you have done only two extensive video series' on him (Categories and Ethics) but why not more? The metaphysics videos end at book 1...
I think there is apt demand for more Aristotle so if you are planning on making more I would be interested to know.
Many thanks
Yeah - the real issue is that I'm producing them for two classes of current Marist students -- Intro and Ethics, and I want to have them out in a timely enough manner for the students to be able to make good use of them.
I'm looking forward to getting back to a more measured, even leisurely pace!
Yes, Spring classes had their finals. We're now in the Summer term.
Do I reveal exam questions? Do you mean something like: do I put them on a public website?
You are so right about how one carries the philosophy of Socrates throughout life,,,, so profound.
new Core Concept video
In the Phaedo and Plato's other works, is the soul akin to what we understand today as the mind?
Depends on who the "we" is. It's not as if there's consensus about what the mind is, except in small and local circles
@@GregoryBSadler Argh... alas, no comfort of certainty. I shall leave my understanding of Socrates/Plato's definition of the soul in the air until I have read and understood more. Thank you Dr. Sadler!
Mind, Nous, Soul all the same thing.
Would you be able to do a talk on the relationships between Platonism and Kabbalah please?
ua-cam.com/video/vkXKtxleGA8/v-deo.html
It would be very interesting if you could lecture an entire semester on Pascal; you commented about this in another video.
too good! thanks so much for the video
Glad you enjoyed it
Did you make a video about Simmias objections ?
Easy enough to search right?
Well, Plato doesn't think everything has a soul. The Stoics, on the other hand, did often speak of the World-Soul
Well, in order to have a less and more, you need to have a is-it-or-not settled, now don't you?
And notice that Plato has no problem with saying that the soul can contain harmony, can be more or less harmonious. But it being, at bottom, a harmony. . . that's a different matter, now isn't it?
thank you for making these videos! ur the best!!
You’re welcome!
virtues are properties of the substantial soul, which is indivisible: simple. Against Sartre's transcendence of the ego, or the Buddhist metaphysics of transitory aggregates, the integrity of the soul is ontologically prior, and gives existence to the virtues. But I will stick closely to this text ( and others), and view and review and think and rethink.
why is it that that plato views the soul as strictly a yes or no proposition? if the argument is being made that the soul is a harmony, why can't someone with more virtues be considered as you put it "more of a harmony", more complex, maybe even possessing more soul?
I opine that soul is an integral part of divine travelling from body to body according to previous deed
Well, it's pretty simple. Pascal didn't die a non-believer.
Have you had finals? Do you reveal any of the questions on your exams?
Is it just me, or are the objections to simmias’ soul really shaky? It seems like all of Socrates’ arguments rely on the soul being an actual literal harmony. I feel like if you look at it as the soul being a product and not specifically a harmony, then all the objections fall flat. It seems to me that all Socrates has done is attacked the metaphor, but not the idea it simplifies.
It's you. If you get away from a literal harmony, as Socrates himself does in the text, because it's a "harmony" of the bodily elements, the arguments still hold
Perhaps Descartes was right by not attending mass so much since Pascal died a non believer? How can that even be explained especially since he allegedly found a thorn from the crown of Jesus that healded his sisters ulcer.
thank you
Here in 2024, philosophy is never old.
At least a good bit of it isn’t
conciousness is fundamental and independent of matter. its representation within the material realm is one type of harmony which is a priori to all experience in the 4d natural world.
Creation in which souls are lost forever is not possible. All souls have paths to enlightenment.
Not according to Plato
@@GregoryBSadler of course, this is in line with my own discernment. The philosopher, while it is important to study others, should always seek answers and search for truths beyond which are already known. My thinking is that losing souls is inefficient, and the true creator would operate systems of 100 percent efficiency.
This efficiency being the only way to have complete unity or totality.
@@jamesarthur2559 Well, make sure to send the creator a memo to that effect. . .
@@GregoryBSadler lol. I'm sure he's much more aware than i
maybe the soul has only virtues and the vices are of the body?
Not for Plato
Au contrair - harmony is a perfect analogy. everthing is vibration from the quantum level to the supramundane
Vibration isn't harmony, to start with. And, pay attention to what sort of "harmony" they're discussing here
Absurd. The instrument would be the body, the person playing the instrument would be the soul, logically so. The conscious personality would be like a harmony and is consubstantial to the soul and the body. The harmonic conscious personality ends with the body. The soul continues on.
The term "consubstantial" is out of place here, and Plato doesn't himself use the term "personality".
@@GregoryBSadler No it is not. Here is the root word, con- word-forming element meaning "together, with," "being, essence, material" substance (n.)
c. 1300, "essential nature, real or essential part," from Old French sustance, substance "goods, possessions; nature, composition" (12c.), from Latin substantia "being, essence, material," from substans, present participle of substare "stand firm, stand or be under, be present," from sub "up to, under" (see sub-) + stare "to stand," from PIE root *sta- "to stand, make or be firm."
@@bobann3566 Yep. A much later term. You're wrong here. Here's some reading for you to think about before trying to argue further medium.com/gregory-b-sadler-ph-d/dont-give-them-time-8e2e7be37907