sdi: Oil painting of the Heliconian Muse whispering inspiration to Hesiod. (Default)
[personal profile] sdi

I was whining a few weeks ago about how trying to build a metaphysical system is stupid, since any given system cannot be powerful enough to prove itself, let alone more powerful systems: that is, metaphysics, being more powerful than physics by definition, can't be apprehended physically. In particular, I expressed frustration with modern commentators who criticized the Neoplatonists for failing to build a system or indeed assuming that's what they were up to. Since those commentators usually pointed to Proclus' Elements of Theology, I wondered whether Proclus himself considered that the goal.

I dug a little ways into the Elements to see for myself, and it seems obvious to me that Proclus was to teach rather than prove. One who wants to prove works bottom-up, from irrefutable axioms rooted in everyday experience; but the one who wants to teach works top-down, from simple to complex. That Proclus has borrowed the form of Euclid's Elements doesn't mean he has borrowed the means; his references to prior propositions seem to me to be an aid to the student, rather than a mathematical demonstration.

I keep getting frustrated with all the mistakes I make in trying to understand Plotinus—perhaps Proclus will be illuminating, when I get there.

Date: 2023-04-08 07:44 am (UTC)
emmanuelg: sock puppet (Default)
From: [personal profile] emmanuelg
Hmm! So, to paraphrase and shamelessly borrow from others--
'The metaphysics that can be put into a metaphysical system is not the real metaphysics,'
And also-- "the teachings of Proclus are meant to train the mind, not to inform it." ;-)

May 2025

S M T W T F S
     1 23
4 5 67 8910
11121314 15 1617
181920 212223 24
25262728293031

Page Summary