Why was the classical West so far behind in religious/spiritual development?

[johncmcleod]

I think you are right, AS.

[Bosh]

Originally posted by johncmcleod
I think you are right, AS.

Now that's a sign that something's seriously wrong

[Agathon]

Nothingness is a confusing concept.

Hence Parmenides:

THE WAY OF TRUTH

Fragment 2.

Come now, I shall tell you, heed my story, hearing,
Which paths of inquiry there are alone for thinking;
The one: that that it is and that it cannot not be,
Is the path of persuasion (for it follows truth);
The other: that it is not and must not be,
I indicate to you to be a path utterly unlearnable;
For you may neither know what is not (for that is impossible)
Nor could you point [it] out.

Fragment 3.

… for the same thing exists for thinking and for being.

Fragment 4.

Nevertheless, behold that which is far off, yet firmly present to
Mind; for you cannot cut off being from cleaving to being
[Because it is] neither dispersing itself completely in order,
Nor uniting itself.

Fragment 5.

It’s all the same to me
Whence I begin, for thither I shall return once more.

Fragment 6.

That which is for speaking and thinking must be; for it is possible to be,
But nothing is not; I order you to consider these things.
For I restrain you from that first route of inquiry,
Yet since from that, which mortals knowing nothing
Wander two headed; for helplessness in their
Breasts guides wandering mind; and they are borne along nevertheless, Dumb and blind, amazed, uncritical tribes,
By whom being and not being have been thought the same
And not the same; and the path of all is backward turning

Fragment 7.

For never shall this prevail – that what is not is;
but restrain thought from this path of inquiry
and let not habit force you down this road of much experience,
to wield unseeing eye and ringing ear
and tongue, but judge with reason the much contested refutation
spoken by me.

Edited because dumbass tags aren't compatible with standard text markers.

[Al B. Sure!]

that's fascinating though how greek logic stunted their mysticism and prevented them from coming up with theories about the vacuum (they preferred that there be something, the ether or the pneuma) and that the west only pondered the vacuum because of inquisitive scientists many of whom were attempting to prove the existance of the ether but found only the vacuum (Michelson finally proving it in the late 19th century when he was trying to find the ether)

[johncmcleod]

Now that's a sign that something's seriously wrong

No, it just means that since we both agree on it, it must be right.

[Agathon]

that's fascinating though how greek logic stunted their mysticism and prevented them from coming up with theories about the vacuum (they preferred that there be something, the ether or the pneuma) and that the west only pondered the vacuum because of inquisitive scientists many of whom were attempting to prove the existance of the ether but found only the vacuum (Michelson finally proving it in the late 19th century when he was trying to find the ether)

You mean the void?

[Agathon]

that's fascinating though how greek logic stunted their mysticism

I can't fathom this statement.

The influence of Parmenides idea of The One is the ancestor of the neoplatonic One, union with which is the ultimate object of the mystic (homoiosis theoi = assimilation to god).

Parmenides argument against plurality and for the notion that ordinary opinion and the physical world is an illusion is the basis of most western mysticism.

[Agathon]

Nothingess is a state of non-being, that which is not created. it is akin to hindu and buddhist concepts of nirvana. Meditation is related to zero because meditation was used to achieve a state of non-being (through inaction and seperation from the world)... a state of nothingness... a state of zero... and as the double-meanings of zero indicate, it was a state associated with the divine.

One good result of western philosophy is to expose such statements as these as misuses of language.

I'd go so far as to say that the hunger for eastern religions is wholly motivated by a desire for the exotic, rather than any merits they might have.

Eastern mysticism and religious thought has always seemed rather crude and dull to me.

We in the west have our own tradition, people like Julian of Norwich and Thomas Traherne and countless others. I don't see why we should go off and annoy the Indians and Chinese by letting people like Madonna talk crap about their stuff.

[johncmcleod]

Eastern mysticism and religious thought has always seemed rather crude and dull to me.

We in the west have our own tradition, people like Julian of Norwich and Thomas Traherne and countless others. I don't see why we should go off and annoy the Indians and Chinese by letting people like Madonna talk crap about their stuff.

I have to disagree with you on that one, comrade. I thought that Hinduism was some backwards, paganistic, institutionalized religion that was even worse than Christianity in regards of dogmatic beliefs. But that is because I only knew of the institution and the beliefs of commoners. I read a lot about Hindu philosophy and I like a lot of its ideas better than any religion on the planet.

I'd suggest reading the chapter on Hindus in World Religions by Huston Smith. He does a good job of describing their philosophies.

[Bosh]

Agathon: Can you recommend a good book on late Classical Neo-platonism? The more I read about Christianity (especially Gnostics) and Islam (especially Shi'ites and Sufis) they more I hear about the influence that Neo-platonism had on them, without me having more than basic outline of what Neo-platonic philosophy consists of.

Eastern mysticism and religious thought has always seemed rather crude and dull to me.

Have you read the Chuangtze? Its by far the most interesting bit of eastern philosophy that I've come across, its a more intelligent and developed form of the Tao Tse Tung's philosophy with an linguistic bent.

Also the Moh-tze is worth looking at, not being it is appealing in any way, but because its so damn strange.

[Agathon]

Not really, there aren't many good ones. It's a growth area in ancient philosophy. I've done a bit of work on Plotinus, but I'm hardly an expert.

For a nice reader the best is going to be Neoplatonic Philosophy: Introductory Readings by John Dillon and Lloyd Gerson. It's quite new and I can vouch personally for the quality of the scholarship (these are two of the leading experts on Plotinus).

The best introduction to Plotinus is still Gerson's Plotinus. Either that or the Cambridge Companion to Plotinus.

Dominc O'Meara's introduction to the Enneads is pretty good. It would be an easier read than any of the others.

But go with the Dillon/Gerson. It is on Amazon for about 19 bucks and contains extensive notes.

[Bosh]

Thanks Agathon, will do.

[Agathon]

You're most welcome. It's not often someone is interested in the weird stuff I like.

I declare you an eternal ally in the struggle against the physicalists!!

[Bosh]

Originally posted by Agathon
You're most welcome. It's not often someone is interested in the weird stuff I like.

I declare you an eternal ally in the struggle against the physicalists!!

Well a lot of us history geeks aren't military buffs, we need something to keep us busy

[Agathon]

Well a lot of us history geeks aren't military buffs, we need something to keep us busy

So you've chosen neoplatonism...

By any chance do you like being tied up and whipped by dominant women?