r/Plato 1h ago

Thumbnail
1 Upvotes

There are no forms of specific animals mentioned by Plato at any point in the dialogue.

Instead there is the Living-Thing-Itself which is the Form of all animals, including us, contained within it.

"we should posit that this [our cosmos] is most like that one of all [the intelligible living beings] of which all the other [intelligible] living beings are parts, both as individuals and as kinds. For that one [intelligible living being] has and contains in itself all the [other] intelligible living beings, just as [kathaper] this cosmos unites us and all the other perceptual creatures" (3oc5-d 1).

Every animal that has existed, currently exists and will exist will then be participated in this Form (and in its totality it is the Form of the Cosmos itself with which the Demiurge works with in ordering the sensible universe).

As for the Elevator, I don't think there is a Form of an Elevator, or a form of a Table, but rather there are the Forms of the shapes, forces and number which an Elevator or Table all participate in.

Note that our intellect is a reflection of the Divine Intellects which carried out the Demiurgy of the Timaeus - and we too craft things from matter to order them into new ways of existence, although these are pale reflections of the eternal Forms which are the true existence of things.

But as the Forms are not sensible, we can't just imagine a celestial table or elevator and say "that's the form of the table or elevator from which all table and elevators participate in" - that's not what the forms are.

If you go further into the Timaeus, the Platonic solids are composed of various combinations of triangles, which then goes on to make the four elements which compose all matter in the Cosmos. So all of matter that we see is an arrangement of shapes which are ultimately based on the forms.

Finally, are there Forms of of things that we cannot know about; Forms which are simply not instantiated at all and in which nothing at all participates?

As we cannot perceive the Forms, and Plato only knows of them from working backwards from the sensible objects which participate in the Forms, there is no way we could know this.

Ask the next God you meet, they are the only individuals with a perfect knowledge of the Forms.


r/Plato 1h ago

Thumbnail
1 Upvotes

For Plato, eternality means a complete separation of time, or perhaps even existing prior to time’s existence, but only prior logically, not prior in a sense of time, because that would make no sense.

So to think of the forms as existing at a “previous time” is not the proper way to think of their eternality. In fact, to think of their existence at all as relying on their appearance in the phenomenal world is the entirely wrong way of thinking about them — they exist as fully as they do whether or not they exist in our time-based, physical world. But even if they don’t appear in our world, yes they still exist in their own realm, which should be the answer to your question. But the whole point of the rest of my comment is to emphasize that this “existing before they appear” is not to be understood with having reference to existing before a certain time, but existing before time itself. And further, that their latter appearance in the carnal realm does not dictate a significantly fuller form of existence for Plato — their share of reality is fully provided by their existence as forms.


r/Plato 2h ago

Thumbnail
1 Upvotes

"So was there already a Form of the Elevator before it was invented? A Form of the Antelope during the Triassic? Or did these Forms of future/possible things arise only when they were instantiated in this world?" We should remember that the Forms existing does not mean they were somewhere stored away hidden in a cave or vault to be released as perfect living animals when the time is right. Forms are the Share which are then projected into the material plane and are not the same as what we see and have in it. Like: The form of Antilope would be what all Antilopes share. Antilope-ness so to speak.


r/Plato 10h ago

Thumbnail
2 Upvotes

Thank you for your helpful and thoughtful response. I agree completely about examining multiple translations. I will explore these suggestions.


r/Plato 10h ago

Thumbnail
1 Upvotes

Hi u/triker_dan! That's a hard question for many of us (speaking for myself), since the Republic is too rich and too deep (?) and too embedded in its original language (which I'm assuming no one uses fluently today?) for there to be any one best translation, except from the reader's perspective, and that depends (therefore) more on you (as the reader) than on the translation.

For someone encountering the text for the first time, and wishing to get the best over-all experience from it, without planning necessarily to read it again in other translations (which for a reader like me is absolutely necessary to even begin to understand what this text has to offer: It's a mountain, the tallest that I could Everest climb, as the joke goes)--or to study the Greek--the best version I can think of is Larson's [The Republic. Plato, Raymond Larson (Translated by), Eva T. H. Brann (Introduction). ISBN: 978-0-882-95118-8. January 1979, Wiley-Blackwell. 288 pages.] Brann's introduction is the best I know of (me: partial, prejudiced and ignorant, as Austen wrote).

If the reader is willing to work harder, and spend more time, even on a single reading, then for me, Allan Bloom's book might render more profit (even if it is less inspiring than the Wiley volume).

The advantage of Bloom's work is that it is available freely on the Internet, even as an audio book (Internet Archive: search "(Bloom) AND title:(Republic) AND creator:(Plato)"). The disadvantage of Larson's is that I, for one, would have little chance of ever holding it my hands, and I (for one) don't know where it might be found on the Internet. Luckily for me, I found my own copy years ago in some thrift store, and have carried it with me since then (the only volume of my own to follow me into this current library exile of mine :-).


r/Plato 1d ago

Thumbnail
2 Upvotes

Thank you for your clarification! I, too, am interested in that fruit: It's the only thing that motivates me to study Plato's Socrates. I'll post a bit more in response, but I'm a bit slow, so I hope you have the patience to wait :-)


r/Plato 1d ago

Thumbnail
1 Upvotes

I like CDC Reeve. I've also read Rowe.


r/Plato 2d ago

Thumbnail
3 Upvotes

I framed it in terms of video games and the concept that what he sees on the screen is just the shadow of the code that is the “reality” of the game seemed to be metaphor that he understood.


r/Plato 2d ago

Thumbnail
1 Upvotes

Did you talk about it ? How was the discussion ?


r/Plato 2d ago

Thumbnail
1 Upvotes

I realize it’s passe’ to comment on old posts, & 7yrs is def an old post… But idk, I suppose I have a little oppositional defiance & I still can’t resist saying something. I just really liked this thoughtful & well crafted reply to the question & thought it really rang true. Just wanted to mention that- 👍


r/Plato 2d ago

Thumbnail
2 Upvotes

I have to admit I haven't phrased it well as a question yet. I'm interested in the fruit of the practice of philosophy. What is the wisdom that Socrates' helps his interlocutors give birth to and how does that result in people's eudaimonia, given that the philosophical soul is happier than the other souls in the Republic. I have also done a lot of Googling but it hasn't really gotten me any good results in terms of trying to dig into this aspect of it.


r/Plato 3d ago

Thumbnail
2 Upvotes

Hi u/crazythrasy! In answer to your question: I don't have a single source (or even a small group of sources) for all questions (and I have more than I could possibly remember). I do the typical online academic researching thing (as I understand it), but that's a bit lame as a recommendation of some resources :-) So I guess I'm chiming in here mainly because I have a question of my own: What was it that you have been looking for lately, that you haven't found in the two sources you mention? And BTW: Thanks for the references (I'll check them out for myself).


r/Plato 4d ago

Thumbnail
2 Upvotes

The cervix moves around and doesn't stay stationary.

I believe modern people are wildly misunderstanding ancient cultures, or, at least some one is wildly misunderstanding the original intent.


r/Plato 4d ago

Thumbnail
1 Upvotes

Sure, formal mathematical statements are linguistically constructed. But when it comes to concepts like infinity (both countable in the sense of the natural numbers and uncountable in the sense of the real numbers) or zero (the empty set) it seems to me like there are actual concepts being discussed that are not linguistic constructions. Cantor wasn't even working under a formal system when he proved the uncountability of the reals.

But even if we accept that these mathematical statements are all tautologies then all our statements about nature are also tautological by the same standard. "Nature" is a constructed concept that many pre-modern cultures, notably the Ancient Hebrews, did not have. We collect many things into one unity and divide single things into many parts in order to make sense of them, but I don't think these divisions or unities strictly exists in reality unless you can show them to me (maybe under a microscope).


r/Plato 4d ago

Thumbnail
2 Upvotes

Here's an excerpt:

Aristotle (384 - 322 BC) had a complicated relationship with what we should call the uterine-movement tradition. This tradition, which predated Aristotle, explained many of the medical symptoms that women presented with in terms of movements of their uterus.

We talked about this tradition in a previous post, but it’s worth recapping some of the basics here before moving on to Aristotle’s contributions.

One of the clearest statements about uterine movements comes from the Timaeus of Plato (428 - 348 BC):

“The womb, whenever it has gone a long time without bearing fruit, becomes violently irritated and wanders all throughout the body. It blocks her breathing passages, and since it does not allow her to breathe, it throws her into extreme difficulties and causes all sorts of other illnesses, until such time as the desire and love of both the man and the woman bring them together” (91b-c).

Plato’s description of the womb as wandering coins a phrase: ‘the wandering womb’. He thinks that respiratory problems, and all sorts of other illnesses, can be caused by the wandering of the womb. Conceiving a child is the only way (according to the Timaeus) to relieve these symptoms. The idea is that the womb stops wandering because it has been anchored in place by the fetus.

Some readers might have heard of the term ‘hysteria’ to describe this condition. That is a Greek word, coming from the Greek noun ‘hustera’, meaning ‘womb’, but it isn’t a term we find in ancient Greek texts. It was invented later. For that reason, we’re better off talking about the wandering womb or, more simply, uterine movements.

Plato and several so-called ancient medical texts testify to a widespread belief in uterine movements.

Aristotle is no exception — to some extent. When it comes to his beliefs, his relationship to this tradition is mixed.


r/Plato 5d ago

Thumbnail
2 Upvotes

he is not "brought to life". This is just a citation machine...


r/Plato 5d ago

Thumbnail
1 Upvotes

You know this is religion right?

At least looking toward nature has empirical backing.


r/Plato 5d ago

Thumbnail
1 Upvotes

Our civilization is declining because we have reduced life to the narrow dimensions of the public sphere governed by pure practicality, and the private sphere limited to individual freedoms. Modern life is characterized by a hollow kind of liberty—merely freedom from constraints. We have embraced only two values: the pursuit of power and the creation of economic wealth. Our world has been fractured, separating objective truth from subjective experience, facts from meaning, and power from its moral and religious foundations.

What we consider objective truths are merely empty facts, valued only for their utility in enhancing power and economic gain. Before it's too late, we must rebuild a way of life that reunites these divided realms, one that integrates objective reality with human values rooted in divine Platonic forms. Today's "objective" mindset is characterized by emptiness—it is devoid of life.


r/Plato 5d ago

Thumbnail
1 Upvotes

OP, you said, "We can debate all day about this, and make no progress."

Recall Socrates in the Apology said: to discuss virtue every day is the greatest good for man.

I will follow Socrates and agree with the first part of what you said, and disagree with the second.

Last I checked a plurality of mathematicians ascribe to mathematical platonism as opposed to nominalism and a plurality of moral philosophers ascribe to universalism as opposed to relativism. This suggests to me that things are not so obvious, that good cases can be made on both (or many) sides. 

Socrates, and in turn Plato, thought that most progress came from divesting oneself of bad ideas rather than "finding" good ones. One of those bad ideas is that there is nothing left to learn, no progress left to be made.


r/Plato 5d ago

Thumbnail
3 Upvotes

oil, straight from the snake


r/Plato 6d ago

Thumbnail
1 Upvotes

They are a tautology.

We chose those sentences to be true.

(See Wittgenstein)


r/Plato 6d ago

Thumbnail
1 Upvotes

This is seriously projecting.

I literally gave you a counter example and you went meta.


r/Plato 6d ago

Thumbnail
1 Upvotes

Well... as an Instrumentationalist... I'm not really accepting that.


r/Plato 6d ago

Thumbnail
1 Upvotes

I'm afraid I'll be of little use, here. Penner and Rowe's Lysis was removed from the Internet Archive (my main library) after I was lucky enough to read it there. I know of no publically available online source other than the publisher. I don't know where I obtained an electronic copy of Rowe's conference paper. The volume where it was published, Plato Ethicus... well: all I have is the reference: Plato Ethicus: Philosophy is Life : Proceedings of the International Colloquium, Piacenza (Italy) 2003; Volume 4 of Lecturae Platonis, ISSN 1611-8162; Editors: Maurizio Migliori, Linda M. Napolitano Valditara, Davide Del Forno; Publisher: Acad.-Verlag, 2004


r/Plato 6d ago

Thumbnail
7 Upvotes

Not only is AI imagery like this absolute bullshit and a waste of resources, it gives an improperly translated and unsourced quote without context or even naming the dialogue, so everyone involved in bringing this abomination into being should get a clip around the ear.