Thank you. I've read Plotinus but couldn't see why the Renaissance guys became so excited about him - until now. You make it new - and even exciting. If this is "not bad" then I really look forward to the rest.
I wish I would have such a clear and excellent professor like you. Such an amazing introduction to the concept, situating it historically, succintly explaining what is Plotinus all about and then profoundly going to the different perceptions he had on the One. Fantastic
Very good lecture. The idea of the one began to make sense when I heard about the concept of the aether and potentiality. Everything comes from the aether, everything is in it ( unity ). It is the very definition of potential. It is not yet something but it has the potential to become so because it is everything. Scientists of the 1800s thought the aether was neccesary. Funny how science at that time came to the same conclusion as metaphysics. You also made very good points about 2 things 1. The physical world is like a shadow/privation. You have the source ( the good ) and a lack of that source. A shadow is simply a privation of light, cold is a privation of heat. evil is a privation of the good, black is a privation of colours, etc... It could be said that matter is a lack of the forms. Some sort of imperfect image. 2. you said something about " I saw it.. not with my eyes but in my mind ". This implies a different kind of seeing but not with your eyes. It raises the question of who or what is seeing and how. I know it is not a subject people like to talk about but many people experienced unity while being on psychedelics. Some claim to have experienced " death ", getting rid of the ego.
Plotinus was a genius. I never understood mysticism and the talk of God until I encountered psychedelic substances. While it is possible to have a mystical experience by diligently practising meditation, yoga and other breathing techniques, the quickest way is definitely to use a compound like LSD or psilocybin. Once you have had the experience, you will understand why it cannot be talked about, and any attempt to do so tends to sound like vague, metaphysical hippie mumbo jumbo. But there is a good reason for this. During the experience one transcends the subject-object divide (for which it becomes quite clear that it doesn't actually exist but is merely a human concept), meaning there is no difference between anything anymore (most importantly "self" and "other") and EVERYTHING, the whole of reality ("The One", "The Absolute", "The Infinite", "God"...) is DIRECTLY experienced all at the same time. It is a spontaneous recognition, an "Aha-Moment", where all of a sudden the nature of reality becomes perfectly obvious in a very visceral way. I have yet to meet a person who did not immediately recognize that they were encountering The One (fittingly, most people react to the experience by saying things like "Oh my God!" or "Holy Shit!"). It is an experience of infinite love, bliss and beauty and nothing like anything one can experience in ordinary consciousness. Since all language assumes a difference between subject and object, there is no way of explaining the mystical experience with words. Words are by definition restricted to mean a certain thing and not another thing. There can be no definition for The Absolute, because it is the only thing that exists and therefore cannot be defined in relationship to something else. Every definition is itself a part of the whole, but never the whole. That's why in negative theology or the Eastern neti neti method, one tries to convey what The Absolute is not by making statements about what it IS (because all of these statements must necessarily be false), but rather what it is NOT. Whatever definition you give for the Absolute, whatever you imagine it to be is not IT. The One is unlimited and can only be experienced directly and cannot be grasped by the very limited rational human mind. Most people have never had such an experience and would probably deny that something like that even exists, or at least reject it as subjective, unscientific and hallucinatory. This is not the case. Anybody can verify it for themselves by the aforementioned methods if they are curious enough. I can recommend a buckload of literature if anyone is interested in diving deeper into the fascinating topics of mysticism and nonduality.
Really appreciate you posting this lecture. I am sadly unable to find much good material online about Plotinus’ thought, and my philosophy courses begin and end with the enlightenment period. It does not hurt that you are a professor in North Carolina, as I am an NC native as well! Godspeed.
I dont think Psyche is what is inarticulable. It emanates from Nous which is like the essence of articulation. It exists to bridge to the material world. Neoplatonism definitely has huge overlap with Taoism (Tao Te Ching chapter 42 is like literally just the hypostases) but this seems like trying to shoehorn concepts. The hierarchy of Nous and Psyche is central to the metaphysics, and Yin and Yang are metaphysically the same level of fundamental.
Not bad Adam! I've posted a number of commentaries on my channel that may compliment your lecture. Passages below to help affirm your thought at 1:03:30 "The Good is the cause of being and of intelligence, it is a light in respect of the beings that are seen and the Intelligence that sees them... it produces thought by shedding its light on the beings and on Intelligence." VI.7.16. "In short, thought, being the thought of good, is beneath Him, and consequently does not belong to Him. I say: "does not belong to Him," not denying that the Good can be thought (for this, I admit); but because thought could not exist in the Good; otherwise, the Good and that which is beneath it-namely, the thought of Good-would fuse." - VI.7.40.
Definitely a bit too scattered but still a very good lecture. It would be amazing to listen to after you have done it a dozen more times. : ] Very open minded. Noteworthy, its 6 books of 9 treatises each = 54.
I can’t believe these positive reviews. He is enthusiastic and knowledgeable but scattered and unfocused, as he jumped from topic to topic without clarifying. Free association is not the same as teaching. I think you drank too much coffee. If you want to learn Plotinus, check out Pierre Grimes.
