thesis ch6

1 files changed, 147 insertions, 412 deletions

diff --git a/plato_time.otx b/plato_time.otx
index e438664..019558d 100644
--- a/plato_time.otx
+++ b/plato_time.otx
@@ -6977,10 +6977,10 @@ unmeaning and everlasting fixture? (249a)}
 \sec Time and Society
 
 While it has not escaped the attention of the 
-scholars whose interest leads them to the Timaeus that its 
+scholars whose interest leads them to the \ul{Timaeus} that its 
 doctrine of Time is inseparable from the doctrine of the 
 eternal model, the purpose or role of Plato's Time image 
-is frequently overlooked. ! Similarly, while it is true that 
+is frequently overlooked.\pnote{4.1} Similarly, while it is true that 
 Plato fashions his image of Time with great care and is 
 conscious throughout his formulation of a desire not to 
 distort the ineffable while yet speaking of it, it seems 
@@ -6989,30 +6989,13 @@ of the introductory remarks in the opening section of the
 Gialogue to this image, and the relation of these remarks 
 to Plato's doctrine of Time. 
 
-
 To rectify this oversight, it is only necessary to 
-
-
-recall the opening passages of the Timaeus where Socrates 
+recall the opening passages of the \ul{Timaeus} where Socrates 
 had agreed to the plans which Timaeus and Critias had made 
 for their talk: Timaeus intends to describe the origin of 
-the Universe and to carry on his account until it had 
-
-reached the time when man made his appearance; thereafter, 
-
-
+the Universe and to carry on his account \e{until} it had 
+reached the \e{time} when man made his appearance; there\e{after,}
 Critias intends to take up the account and to describe 
-
-
-' For example, in his chapter on the doctrine of the 
-
-
-Timaeus, Ross (W.D. Ross, Plato's Theory of Ideas 
-(Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1951).) discusses the role of 
-Time not at all. 
-
-
-
 ancient Athens; both of these accounts are to be given so 
 that Socrates may fulfill his wish to hear an account of a 
 real city, not an imaginary one; not a tale of "some noble 
@@ -7023,76 +7006,50 @@ form" (19c). In this way, Plato gently suggests that the
 power to describe the actual origins of the best society 
 are beyond Socrates, and it must be the task of others to 
 supply it. This is the meaning of the obviously inadequate 
-recapitulation of the doctrines of the Republic, which are 
+recapitulation of the doctrines of the \ul{Republic}, which are 
 mUch too briefly summarized in the opening passages of the 
-Timaeus. There is no need to look for deeper or more arcane 
+\ul{Timaeus}. There is no need to look for deeper or more arcane 
 meanings in Socrates' confession of inability to construct 
 such an account; it is not the absence of opinion on 
-
-
-Socrates part, as it was in the Theatetus. In the Timaeus, 
-
-
+Socrates part, as it was in the \ul{Theatetus}. In the \ul{Timaeus}, 
 Socrates does not say that he is "only" an opinionless 
 midwife who must deliver the philosophical offspring of 
 those pregnant with the truth; on the contrary, he says 
 quite openly that he is not up to the task, and that the 
 power to tell such a story is beyond him. It has been 
 generally agreed among the scholars that the opening 
-passages of the Timaeus "recapitulate" the Republic, © and 
-
-
+passages of the \ul{Timaeus} "recapitulate" the \ul{Republic},\pnote{4.2} and 
 most of those who do not agree on the order of the 
-
-
-2 Gauss, Philosophischer Handkommentar zu_ den 
-Dialogen Platos, p. Le 
-
-
-
 dialogues as they have been described in chapter II agree 
-
-
-that the Timaeus must be later than the Republic for this 
-
-
-interpretative reason. And it has long been agreed that 
-the Republic is the work in which Plato reveals a political 
+that the \ul{Timaeus} must be later than the \ul{Republic} for this 
+interpretative reason.\pnote{4.3} And it has long been agreed that 
+the \ul{Republic} is the work in which Plato reveals a political 
 philosophy, or, as we call it, a philosophy of society. 
-
 But if we take separate conclusions, on which the scholars 
 agree, and, if we attempt to see them in relation to each 
 other, we shall arrive at a simple and yet, to the best of 
 my knowledge, an uncommon conclusion. If (1) 1t is true 
-that the Republic is a dialogue in which Plato has attempted to see the powers of the soul "writ large," that is, 
-
+that the \ul{Republic} is a dialogue in which Plato has attempted
+to see the powers of the soul "writ large," that is, 
 if the Republic is a dialogue in which the state is seen 
-
 as a magnification of the soul; and, together with this, 
-
-4f (2) we see that the Timaeus is a dialogue in which the 
-"alive but motionless," society of the Republic is recapitulated, and, if we add to this (3) the fact that the 
-Timaeus first develops a doctrine of Time before setting 
+if (2) we see that the \ul{Timaeus} is a dialogue in which the 
+"alive but motionless," society of the \ul{Republic} is recapitulated,
+and, if we add to this (3) the fact that the 
+\ul{Timaeus} first develops a doctrine of Time before setting 
 out the details of the best form of society, we may draw a 
 startling conclusion; Plato has made the doctrine of Time 
-the basis of a new Platonic sociology. Where the Republic 
+the basis of a new Platonic sociology. Where the \ul{Republic} 
 describes a State based on the view that only the eternal 
-is real and all else is mere becoming, the Timaeus describes 
+is real and all else is mere becoming, the \ul{Timaeus} describes 
 a society based on the perfection which Time confers on 
-
-
 the discordant motions of a primordial chaos. Plato has 
-
-
-3 Jowett, Ihe Dialogues of Plato, II, pp. 456~7. 
-
-
-
 shifted the basis of his sociology from the eternal to the 
 temporal; no longer is it his view that the realms of 
 eternity and becoming are separated by an unbridgeable 
-chasm; now, in the Timaeus, through the gradual process we 
-described in Chapter II, Plato has arrived at the formulation of a doctrine in which Time is, so to speak, the 
+chasm; now, in the \ul{Timaeus}, through the gradual process we 
+described in Chapter II, Plato has arrived at the formulation
+of a doctrine in which Time is, so to speak, the 
 bridge between these two realms. 
 
 But this image of Time as a bridge falls short of 
@@ -7110,22 +7067,11 @@ and the magnificent beauty of the concrete relations within
 the visible Universe. 
 
 To the best of my knowledge, Bury is the only writer 
-who has seen that the Republic is Plato's first Philosophy 
-of History, and that in the Timaeus Plato modifies this 
-
-
-view. But Bury nevertheless concludes that there has been 
-
-
-4 Bury, "Plato and History," p. 5. 
-
-
-() 
-
-
-
+who has seen that the \ul{Republic} is Plato's \e{first} Philosophy 
+of History, and that in the \ul{Timaeus} Plato modifies this 
+view.\pnote{4.4} But Bury nevertheless concludes that there has been 
 no growth of Plato's doctrine, and that the conclusions of 
-the Timgeus are implicit in the views stated in the Republic, 
+the \ul{Timaeus} are implicit in the views stated in the \ul{Republic}, 
 This seems to stretch the meaning of the term "implicit" 
 beyond reasonable bounds, for, on this basis, we should 
 have to conclude that Plato's movement from an eternal 
@@ -7136,140 +7082,83 @@ eternity and the basis of society in another dialogue is
 Time, and that the one view is "4mplicit" in the other. 
 
 Similarly, it is hard to see the grounds for A.E. 
-
-
-Taylor's assertion that the Timaeus is only an introduction 
-
-
-to the Critias, since, as we said above, such a view would 
-
-
+Taylor's assertion that the \ul{Timaeus} is only an introduction 
+to the \ul{Critias}, since, as we said above, such a view would 
 so linearize Plato's philosophy that we should have to 
-view the Laws as the only source of Plato's mature philosophy. One should not ignore the early works of a genius 
+view the \ul{Laws} as the only source of Plato's mature philosophy.
+One should not ignore the early works of a genius 
 such as Plato when one reads his later works, since this 
 procedure deprives one of the measure of the man and the 
 gradual maturity which he was able to reveal in his late 
 writings. 
 
 It seems to us more reasonable to follow Cornford 
-
-
-into the opinion that the Timaeus was the first of a 
-
-
+into the opinion that the \ul{Timaeus} was the first of a 
 projected trilogy of dialogues, which were to have revealed 
 Plato's reflections concerning the basis of the best 
 possible form of society, after a life-long concern for 
-
-
 this subject. If it is true that Plato's Sicilian adventures 
-
-
 were of such a nature as to discourage and disillusion the 
-
-
-
 great man from his life-long hopes to bring about good 
-government, we should expect to see bitterness and pessimism in the works written after these experiences. But we 
-find no shallow despair in the Seventh Letter or in the 
-
-
-Timaeus; rather we confront a dialogue which is written 
-
-
+government, we should expect to see bitterness and pessimism
+in the works written after these experiences. But we 
+find no shallow despair in the \ul{Seventh Letter} or in the 
+\ul{Timaeus}; rather we confront a dialogue which is written 
 in a style especially designed to appeal to those whose 
-philosophical training was not so arduous nor so disciplined as Plato's own. Plato does not become a disdainful 
-elitist, nor is the Timaeus a children's allegory, 
-
+philosophical training was not so arduous nor so disciplined
+as Plato's own. Plato does not become a disdainful 
+elitist, nor is the \ul{Timaeus} a children's allegory, 
 written by a sour old grandfather, for there is a great 
-deal in it which requires strenuous philosophical reflection and painstaking attention. Yet, even those without 
+deal in it which requires strenuous philosophical reflection
+and painstaking attention. Yet, even those without 
 philosophical training and exacting logical skill can be 
-
-
-moved by the poetry which Plato has made in the Timaeus. 
-
-
+moved by the poetry which Plato has made in the \ul{Timaeus}. 
 It is both a mature philosophy and a beautiful myth which 
 seems to be designed as well for the elite philosopher as 
-for the untutored statesman. | 
+for the untutored statesman.
 
-Thus it seems pointless to criticise the Timaeus as 
+Thus it seems pointless to criticise the \ul{Timaeus} as 
 an uneven dialogue which skips about from the level of 
 thought to the level of myth, and, on the basis of such a 
 criticism, to prefer to look to other dialogues for more 
-philosophical meanings because the style of earlier dialogues 4s more even and their philosophy more exactly 
+philosophical meanings because the style of earlier dialogues 
+is more even and their philosophy more exactly 
 stated. This is not unlike preferring to look in the 
 pantry for the broom only because there is a light in the 
 pantry, when, in fact, the broom is in a darker but more 
+spacious room in the attic. 
 
-
-'spacious room in the attic. 
-
-
-
-
-
-If it is true that the Timaeus was written after 
-
-
+If it is true that the \ul{Timaeus} was written after 
 Plato's later and more mature reflections on the requisites 
 for the best possible society, as we tried to establish in 
-the third chapter, one should not ook to the Republic for 
+the third chapter, one should not ook to the \ul{Republic} for 
 Plato's most mature doctrines of society. And yet those 
 writers who wish to discuss Plato's philosophy of society 
 as a philosophy of history or as a political philosophy 
-seem more drawn to the Republic, and few of them go to 
-the Timaeus as the source of Plato's teaching on this 
-subject." 
+seem more drawn to the \ul{Republic}, and few of them go to 
+the \ul{Timaeus} as the source of Plato's teaching on this 
+subject.\pnote{4.5}
 
 This is not to complain that scholarly inattention 
-
-
-plagues the Timaeus, for the Timaeus has not gone without 
-
-
-@ great deal of comment by writers in almost every century 
+plagues the \ul{Timaeus}, for the \ul{Timaeus} has not gone without 
+a great deal of comment by writers in almost every century 
 in the West. Yet it has not been viewed as the dialogue in 
-which Plato makes his most explicit statements on the basis 
+which Plato makes his most explicit statements on the \e{basis} 
 for the best possible form of society, and no writer in the 
 modern era has seen in it the culmination of Plato's gradual 
 development beyond the doctrine of eternity in the Republic. 
 And yet this seems to be precisely what Plato has done. 
+
 This is not the place to examine and comment in 
 detail on the elements which, according to Plato, would 
-
-
 characterize the best form of society, since these 
-
-
-) Walsh, Plato and the Philosophy of History. See 
-also Barker, Politica ought of Plato and istotle, 
-
-
-Nettleship, Lectures on the Republic of Pilato, 
-Popper, The Open Society and ite Bpentes, and numerous 
-anthologies which present Plato's Republic but seldom if 
-
-
-ever present the Timaeus. 
-
-
-
-
-
-specifications are to be found in part in the Critias and in 
-
-
-great detail in the Laws. It is not our purpose here to 
+specifications are to be found in part in the \ul{Critias} and in 
+great detail in the \ul{Laws}. It is not our purpose here to 
 describe exhaustively Plato's later sociology. The issue 
 here is the role of Plato's image of Time as a basis for 
 his later sociology, insofar as this can be ascertained 
-
-
-by a careful reading of the Timaeus in its chronological 
-
-
-and doctrinal context. The Timaeus seems to be unequivocally 
+by a careful reading of the \ul{Timaeus} in its chronological 
+and doctrinal context. The \ul{Timaeus} seems to be unequivocally 
 clear on this issue, for Plato shows repeatedly in this 
 dialogue that the basis for a sound understanding of his 
 sociology is the role of Time in the nature of the Universe. 
@@ -7280,35 +7169,29 @@ almost the entire work which bears his name. In the first
 half of the dialogue, which discusses the Universe insofar 
 as it is due to the Work of Reason, Plato leads gradually 
 and ineluctably to the basis of the rational perfections 
-which are brought to the Universe by time. In the Republic 
+which are brought to the Universe by time. In the \ul{Republic} 
 the perfections of society derive from a participation of 
-the state in eternal justice; in the Timaeus, society is 
-perfected by ame, which brings order to chaos. 
+the state in eternal justice; in the \ul{Timaeus}, society is 
+perfected by Time, which brings order to chaos. 
 
 The most serious objection to our conclusion is the 
 claim that Plato only speaks of the gradual construction 
-of the Universe as if it were gradually brought into 
+of the Universe \e{as if} it were gradually brought into 
 existence, when his actual meaning remains hidden between 
-the lines. A.E, Taylor adopts this view, when he says that 
-
-
+the lines. A.E. Taylor adopts this view, when he says that 
 Plato believes the Universe is eternal, and therefore it 
-
-
-
-does not actually have a temporal character (Archer-Hind also holds this view). In short, Taylor claims that 
-Plato described the Universe as if it were gradually 
+does not actually have a temporal character (Archer-Hind 
+also holds this view). In short, Taylor claims that 
+Plato described the Universe \e{as if} it were gradually 
 brought into being because it would be easier for Plato's 
-readers to comprehend his meaning in this way.° 
+readers to comprehend his meaning in this way.\pnote{4.6}
 
 Happily, Plato himself seems to upset this view in 
-
-the Timaeus, when he distinguishes quite carefully between 
+the \ul{Timaeus}, when he distinguishes quite carefully between 
 the eternal and the becoming, between a false image and a 
 genuine image, between a mere myth and a genuine myth. If 
-
-
-the Timaeus were only a myth designed to create the appearance of the truth but not to reveal the actual truth, it 
+the \ul{Timaeus} were only a myth designed to create the appearance 
+of the truth but not to reveal the actual truth, it 
 would follow that Plato has cast his whole account of the 
 origin of the Universe into the deceptively simple mold of 
 orderly succession. But the discrepancy between the 
@@ -7316,37 +7199,23 @@ deliberately temporal image which Plato has created and
 the calm stillness of the eternal, which he recurrently 
 describes, seems too wide to support the interpretation 
 that Plato remained an eternalist in the midst of a 
-temporalist account. ¢ 
+temporalist account.\pnote{4.7}
 
 It seems better to view Plato's statements about the 
-
-
 temporality of the Universe as the basis of its perfection, 
-
-
-6 A.E. Taylor, Commentary, pp. 689 ff. 
-
-
-f J.F. Callahan, Four Views of Time in Ancient 
-Philosophy (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1948), 
-r tly says that A.E. Taylor errs here because of his 
-adoption of Aristotle's notion of Time. 
-
-
-
 and to reject the assertion that Plato's Universe is 
 actually eternal even though he says it is temporal. But 
 there is a deeper point, and it is this; to continue to 
 distinguish so sharply between eternity and Time after 
-reading the Timaeus is to miss a major doctrine of the 
-Timaeus, which describes philosophically-mythologically 
+reading the \ul{Timaeus} is to miss a major doctrine of the 
+\ul{Timaeus}, which describes philosophically-mythologically 
 the proportional relation between the realms of eternity and 
 becoming, and to view the role of Time as the mediator 
 between these realms, such that they are no longer as 
-separate as they were described to be in the Republic, but 
+separate as they were described to be in the \ul{Republic}, but 
 are aspects of a proportionally united Universe. The 
 assertion that Plato separates eternity and Time ignores 
-Plato's description of their relation in the Timaeus, where 
+Plato's description of their relation in the \ul{Timaeus}, where 
 Time is said to be the proportional unification of becoming 
 and eternity. By viewing Plato's doctrine of Time as the 
 "mediation" of becoming, one can reach the basis of Plato's 
@@ -7359,14 +7228,8 @@ a static view of the Universe but spoke of it as a gradual
 process, because he was unable to discuss the whole 
 Universe at once, seems to misinterpret the crucial 
 significance of Plato's definition of Time as an image. 
-
 For the Image is the whole Universe, and, furthermore, it 
-
-
-ia deliberately described as a moving image. As we have 
-
-
-
+is deliberately described as a moving image. As we have 
 said repeatedly above, Plato was not unable to describe 
 the whole Universe at once; he did so in an image, and 
 while it is true that he gradually reveals the elements 
@@ -7376,7 +7239,6 @@ short, Plato no longer impales himself on the horns of a
 dilemma by separating eternity and Time; he has transcended 
 such an impasse by describing a Universe which is both 
 hierarchical and processual, yet neither in isolation. 
-
 One may continue to dissect logically Plato's Universe 
 into one part hierarchy and one part process, but it 
 seems to see that it is the dissector and not Plato who s0 
@@ -7391,69 +7253,29 @@ Plato believed the Universe to be eternal but described it
 as if it were temporal, so that Plato could communicate 
 better to the philosophically ill-equipped. 
 
-However, it should be borne in mind that the Timaeus 
-
-
-does not itself contain a new sociology, but presents the 
-
-
-basis for one, for we must look to the Critias and the Laws 
-
-
+However, it should be borne in mind that the \ul{Timaeus} 
+does not itself \e{contain} a new sociology, but presents the 
+\e{basis} for one, for we must look to the \ul{Critias} and the \ul{Laws} 
 for the details of Plato's later view of society. It is our 
 contention here that this later view is unintelligible 
-
-
-oe 
-
-
-
 without a sound interpretation of Plato's moving image 
 of eternity. 
+
 It follows that the entire basis of society and the 
 communal life of man is not to be found completely within 
 those aspects of the Universe which are due to the orderly 
-
-
 perfections which derive from Time. For our analysis has 
-
-
 stopped midway in the monologue of Timaeus; we have 
-
-
 described, up to this point, only the works of reason, and 
 have not presented any discussion of those aspects of the 
 Universe which derive from necessity. Plato has not 
 described the demiurge as absolutely omnipotent, for even 
 the demiurge must attempt to persuade necessity, not force 
-it, to yield to the urgings of Time and order.® 
-The admission that Time itself is not all powerful, 
-
+it, to yield to the urgings of Time and order.\pnote{4.8}
 
+The admission that Time itself is not all powerful, 
 but must confront, so to speak, the cosmological inertia 
-
-
 of necessity, serves to strengthen, not weaken, the 
-
-
-8 There are several aspects of Plato's discussion 
-of Time and Society which bear a marked resemblance to 
-some aspects of the philosophy of Anaximander, but a 
-discription of these similarities and differences would 
-require a lengthy discussion which would take us into 
-the origin of Plato's doctrines, whereas it is only our 
-purpose here to present and examine Plato's doctrine. 
-For example, while it would be instructive to investigate 
-the extent of Plato's indebtedness to Anaximande:''s 
-dark saying about the reparation which things offer in 
-Time for their injustices, (see, for example, John 
-Burnet, Early Greek Philosophy (4th ed.; London: Adam 
-and Charles Black; New York: Tne Macmillan Co., 1930), 
-pp. 52-53.) it would necessitate more comment than 
-we have room to present here. 
-
-
-
 conclusion that Time brings perfection. Whereas it was 
 once possible to say that Plato viewed the eternal as the 
 only source of perfection and viewed the temporal realm 
@@ -7472,62 +7294,45 @@ it regards Time as the paradigm of its style of life, and
 that society will be imperfect insofar as it regards mere 
 becoming as the model for its political flux. And these 
 are exactly the doctrines which Plato develops in the 
-
-
-Critias and the Laws. The Critias, as much as we have of 
-
-
+\ul{Critias} and the \ul{Laws}. The \ul{Critias}, as much as we have of 
 it, describes the "mythical" kingdom of Atlantis, and we 
 have a brief foretaste of this description in the opening 
-
-
-passages of the Timaeus. In the third book of the Laws, we 
-
-
+passages of the \ul{Timaeus}. In the third book of the \ul{Laws}, we 
 have what the moderns would call a philosophy of history, 
 or, in other terms, what could well be described as an 
 incipient philosophical anthropology. The third book of 
-
-the Laws dwells at aveat length on the questions which 
-
+the \ul{Laws} dwells at aveat length on the questions which 
 we are now examining; it is concerned with "immense periods 
-
-
 of Time" and "thousands of cities" which came to be and 
-
-
-
-
 have now disappeared from memory, and puts the question 
 to itself whether there may not be a discernible pattern 
 in the rise and fall of these cities. Or, to see the 
 matter from another point of view, one could point to the 
-tenth book of the Laws where questions about what we 
+tenth book of the \ul{Laws} where questions about what we 
 might call divine providence are raised and discussed, in 
 a context which is explicity temporal. Or again, one could 
 cite quotation after quotation from almost any book of the 
-Laws which would show that Plato was much interested in 
-the relative durations of various things, from constitutions to kingdoms and from mountains to men. 
+\ul{Laws} which would show that Plato was much interested in 
+the relative durations of various things, from constitutions 
+to kingdoms and from mountains to men. 
 
 But these investigations must be left to another 
-time when they can be treated with the exhaustive documentation they deserve. It has been our purpose to spell out 
+time when they can be treated with the exhaustive documentation 
+they deserve. It has been our purpose to spell out 
 in detail the reasons for adopting the view that there is 
 a Platonic philosophy of time and that this philosophy is 
 inseparable from Plato's concern for the best possible 
 society. 
 
 Before the final words are written, however, it 
-seems appropriate to state a few opinions which have emerged during the course of this study. While it would be 
+seems appropriate to state a few opinions which have emerged 
+during the course of this study. While it would be 
 impossible to draw final conclusions about the relevance 
-of Plato's philosophy of time to the intellectual pursuits of the modern world without at the same time presente 
-ing a history of Platonic scholarship for all of the 
+of Plato's philosophy of time to the intellectual pursuits 
+of the modern world without at the same time presenting
+a history of Platonic scholarship for all of the 
 intervening years between Plato's era and our own, it is 
-
-
 possible to state a few opinions which have been reached 
-
-
-
 on this subject, providing caution is advised about the 
 extent to which we may derive philosophical satisfaction 
 from a careful reading of Plato's works. 
@@ -7540,37 +7345,23 @@ our modern view of the open Universe. While it is not
 possible to state that this view of the Greek world as 
 closed is without any foundation, it is not only possible 
 but necessary to confront the closed view with the import 
-of the doctrine of time which we find in the Timaeus. It 
+of the doctrine of time which we find in the \ul{Timaeus}. It 
 is simply incorrect and therefore, unscholarly to repeat 
-
-
-the naive eternalism of the Republic, if the Timaeus is as 
-
-
+the naive eternalism of the \ul{Republic}, if the \ul{Timaeus} is as 
 late a work as it seems to be. One should not continue to 
 separate the eternal from the temporal after one has 
-
-
-studied the Timaeus, and one could say with some accuracy 
-
-
-that the whole import of the Timaeus has been to remove 
+studied the \ul{Timaeus}, and one could say with some accuracy 
+that the whole import of the \ul{Timaeus} has been to remove 
 this intolerable dichotomy by revealing the manner of 
 relation of these two aspects of the Universe. 
-This is not to assert that Plato came in the end to 
 
+This is not to assert that Plato came in the end to 
 a simple monism in which all things are merely becoming. 
 As we have said repeatedly, time perfects becoming. But 
 there is an ineluctable gradualism in the Universe the 
-Timaeus describes which cannot be ignored, and, while 
-
+\ul{Timaeus} describes which cannot be ignored, and, while 
 it is true to say that our modern notion of process is 
-
-
-'richer by far and more concrete than ever a Greek could 
-
-
-
+richer by far and more concrete than ever a Greek could 
 imagine, it is also true to say that there was some 
 degree of openness in the Greek Universe and that it 
 would be false to state simply that it was a closed world. 
@@ -7589,19 +7380,17 @@ an imitation of the Universe.
 If, on the other hand, the Universe is open ard is 
 in some way incomplete and unfinished, it becomes the 
 business of the statesman to model his constitution as far 
-as possible on the pertection of the Universe and thereafter to improvise and invent those measures which seem 
+as possible on the pertection of the Universe and thereafter 
+to improvise and invent those measures which seem 
 best under the circumstances. If such a statesman can 
-be found, he will understand that the sources of imperfection are not solely derived from the failure of the citizens to model themselves on the eternal forms, but might 
+be found, he will understand that the sources of imperfection 
+are not solely derived from the failure of the citizens 
+to model themselves on the eternal forms, but might 
 result from the very incompletion of the statesman's 
 actions. In other words, it follows from a completed world 
 that its citizens must adjust themselves to its patterns; 
 4t follows from an incomplete world that its citizens 
-
-
 play a part in its completion. It does not follow that 
-
-
-
 the citizens of an incomplete world must live ina 
 totalitarian regime where all law emanates from an elite 
 few who claim to have discovered the basis of all law. To 
@@ -7628,22 +7417,17 @@ handles this question in a different way, for it describes
 a world in which there are stages of completion and degrees 
 of openness. Thus for Plato it is possible to claim the 
 best of both possible worlds, for he can assert that there 
-
-
 are eternal models for human political action and that 
-
-
-
 there are necessary innovations and inventions which the 
 statesman must create. To the extent that the human 
 invention resembles the temporal order which the Universe 
 achieves, to that extent is it good. In other language, 
 one can say that the Platonic conception of perfection 
-which appears in the Timaeus is a gradualist notion, such 
+which appears in the \ul{Timaeus} is a gradualist notion, such 
 that a thing is perfect if it is as good as it can be at 
 a given time. Perfection then is a stage concept which 
-refers itself inevitably to a basic pace at which perfec~ 
-tion is achievable. 
+refers itself inevitably to a basic pace at which perfection
+is achievable. 
 
 In this way, one can see that the Platonic Universe 
 is neither simply open nor simply closed, and that he who 
@@ -7651,18 +7435,17 @@ uses the paradigm "open or closed" really uses a spatial
 idea, not a temporal one, and is therefore guilty of a 
 species of philosophical reductionism. The question is not 
 whether the Universe is closed or open but whether there is 
-in the Universe sufficient ground for the gradual attainment of perfection. Even this last statement seems to put 
+in the Universe sufficient ground for the gradual attainment 
+of perfection. Even this last statement seems to put 
 perfection at the end of the process, whereas in fact it is 
 possible to say in the Platonic idiom that a thing is as 
-perfect as it can be while it is proceeding at its proper 
+perfect as it can be \e{while} it is proceeding at its proper 
 pace of attainment. In this way, one does not need to 
-assert that perfection is attainable only in some otherworldly realm, or that only those things which have 
+assert that perfection is attainable only in some otherworldly
+realm, or that only those things which have 
 achieved release from the quagmire of time have entered 
 into eternity. On the contrary, those things which have 
 nothing of time in them but share only in the incessant 
-
-
-
 flux of becoming have no measure of eternity in them 
 precisely because eternity can be brought to becoming only 
 by time. 
@@ -7677,33 +7460,30 @@ eternity. But in Plato's Universe, each person who finds
 his proper pace of achievement may be said to be as eternal 
 as he can be at the moment, or that his perfection consists 
 of the entire process of attainment. It is therefore 
-necessary for the citizens of the Republic to model thenselves entirely upon the eternal forms or be called failures, where the citizens of the realm founded on the philosophy of the Timaeus may be said to posess individuality 
-
-
+necessary for the citizens of the \ul{Republic} to model thenselves
+entirely upon the eternal forms or be called failures,
+where the citizens of the realm founded on the philosophy
+of the \ul{Timaeus} may be said to posess individuality 
 insofar as they attain perfection to the extent that it is 
 possible to attain it at the time. In this way, another of 
 the frequently asserted opinions about the world of the 
 Greeks is found wanting. In conversation with philosophers, 
-'one frequently hears that there were no genuine individuals 
+one frequently hears that there were no genuine individuals 
 in the Greek world, since genuine individuality would 
 scandalize the Greek notion of an ordered and predictable 
-world. We must clarify the statement that there is individuality in the Greek world; a more accurate statement would 
-
-
+world. We must clarify the statement that there is individuality 
+in the Greek world; a more accurate statement would 
 read that there is a genuine basis of individuality in the 
-
-
-
-philosophy which Plato reveals in the Timaeus, but this 
+philosophy which Plato reveals in the \ul{Timaeus}, but this 
 statement must be quickly followed by the statement that 
 there were few Greek individuals. While it is true on the 
 one hand to state that most Greeks felt the Universe to be 
-closed, it is nonetheless true that Plato's Timaeus does 
+closed, it is nonetheless true that Plato's \ul{Timaeus} does 
 not reveal such a Universe. 
 
 This creates something of a problem for the historian 
 who would like to see one ethos in the age which produced 
-both Plato and Aristotle. If the Timaeus reveals the | 
+both Plato and Aristotle. If the \ul{Timaeus} reveals the 
 philosophy herein described, we must separate Plato from 
 his pupil even more widely than is sometimes the practice, 
 for it does seem to be true that Aristotle's Universe is 
@@ -7721,12 +7501,7 @@ philosophy of Plato is superior to the philosophy of
 Aristotle. Such statements do violence to the historical 
 view which regards philosophies as different because they 
 were written by different men in different times with 
-
-
 different needs. Aristotle was not confronted with the 
-
-
-
 same political realities that confronted Plato, and to 
 that extent, at least, we should, expect their political 
 philosophies to differ. However, it remains true that 
@@ -7739,14 +7514,8 @@ questions of historical process and temporal being.
 Viewed in this light, it becomes possible to see 
 the basis of Whitehead's remark that Plato has spawned 
 almost the entire philosophical heritage of the West. 
-
-
-Furthermore, it becomes possible to compare Science in 
-
-
-the Modern jiorld to the Timaeus, since the authors of both 
-
-
+Furthermore, it becomes possible to compare \bt{Science in 
+the Modern World} to the \ul{Timaeus}, since the authors of both 
 works attempted not only to write a history of contemporary 
 science but also to show in their discussions of the 
 scientific theories prevalent in their respective eras 
@@ -7759,15 +7528,10 @@ age, and not only Plato's or even Whitehead's, depends
 unknowlingly on a view of time and derives its basic 
 cognitive orientation from its time-view. 
 
-If 4t 18 true that Plato matured until the last, and 
+If it is true that Plato matured until the last, and 
 that he sought in the end to plumb the awesome mystery of 
 time and eternity, I felt that his search could only 
-
-
 enlighten the attempts of a working sociologist to make 
-
-
-
 some sense out of his own era by viewing it, in the last 
 analysis, as a moving image of eternity. 
 
@@ -7780,36 +7544,26 @@ age of the speaker in several dialogues, sometimes accusing
 the speaker of naivete because of his youth and sometimes 
 praising the venerable age of the speaker and the wisdom 
 which came to him because of his age. For example, in the 
-
-
-Parmenides, Socrates is very young and Parmenides is very 
-
-
+\ul{Parmenides}, Socrates is very young and Parmenides is very 
 old, and Plato implies clearly that the very young do not 
 yet have the requisite insight for profound subjects. This 
-
-
-is again true in the Theatetus wherein Socrates is now 
-
-
-the old and wise man, as opposed to the young and malleable Theatetus. In view of the fact that the Timaeus casts 
+is again true in the \ul{Theatetus} wherein Socrates is now 
+the old and wise man, as opposed to the young and malleable 
+Theatetus. In view of the fact that the \e{Timaeus} casts 
 the whole middle doctrine of individual reminiscence into 
-& more generalized sociological frame of reference, it 
+j more generalized sociological frame of reference, it 
 should be pointed out that Plato has not abandoned his 
 reminiscence theory in the later dialogues: actually, he 
 has fortified it by showing that there is a cosmological 
 basis for the sort of memory which a society must have 
 in order to be as fully societal as it is possible to be. 
-Thus, just as the society develops in time, so the 
-individual citizen develops in time, and in time, the | 
-
 
+Thus, just as the society develops in time, so the 
+individual citizen develops in time, and in time, the 
 citizen not only ages, but he matures and grows wise. It 
-
-
-
 is this very maturity of insight which Plato himself 
-experienced with his own advancing years, and it is therefore unsurprising that we find in the later dialogues a 
+experienced with his own advancing years, and it is therefore 
+unsurprising that we find in the later dialogues a 
 doctrine in to which the perfection of reason is attained 
 by those individuals who have participated more fully in 
 time than those younger philosophers whose maturity is yet 
@@ -7818,7 +7572,8 @@ unreached.
 To put the matter somewhat more technically, Plato 
 has so closely related cosmogenesis and anthropogenesis 
 by reason of their mutual participation in time that it 
-is also possible to relate the ontogenesis of the individual citizen to the same basis in time. While it was always 
+is also possible to relate the ontogenesis of the individual 
+citizen to the same basis in time. While it was always 
 possible to say with Plato that the older man is probably 
 the wiser man, it is possible, after a careful reading of 
 the later dialogues, to assert that the older man ought to 
@@ -7831,16 +7586,11 @@ these processes may be seen as particular manifestations
 of the pertections which Time brings to the Universe. 
 
 Therefore, I assert that a careful reading of the 
-Timaeus in its doctrinal and chronological context leads to 
+\ul{Timaeus} in its doctrinal and chronological context leads to 
 the following conclusions. 
 
 Plato's final formulation of a doctrine of Time was 
-
-
-revealed in his Timaeus. In that work, he tells us that 
-
-
-
+revealed in his \ul{Timaeus}. In that work, he tells us that 
 Time is the basis of society, from which the society 
 derives the perfections of life and mind in motion. Thus 
 it is false to divide eternity and time from each other 
@@ -7848,7 +7598,7 @@ since Time delivers perfections and perfects mere becoming
 s0 that it most resembles the source of perfections. It is 
 g00d to regard Time as a moving image of eternity since 
 this phrase indicates the mediatory role of time. The 
-simple division of eternity versus time is false, since 
+simple division of eternity \e{versus} time is false, since 
 eternity differs most from mere becoming. Time perfects 
 becoming by relating it concretely to eternity. In this 
 way, the things of the Universe may achieve individuality 
@@ -7858,11 +7608,7 @@ fully as possible what they are when they are. Thus, from
 the early formedoctrine of the middle dialogues, Plato has 
 advanced to a new position. It is neither a renunciation of 
 the Form-doctrine nor a simple extension or reapplication 
-
-
-of it. In the Timaeus, the Forms are paradigms and have 
-
-
+of it. In the \ul{Timaeus}, the Forms are paradigms and have 
 reality only to the extent to which the things modelled 
 upon them derive their perfections from them. The earlier 
 Form-doctrine described a number of perfect Forms from 
@@ -7872,21 +7618,10 @@ originative, such that they give of their perfection in a
 process called Time. 
 
 In such a world, society is not a realm removed from 
-
-
-@ penultimate world of silent and unspeaking self posession, 
-
-
-
+a penultimate world of silent and unspeaking self posession, 
 but becomes the way in which eternal perfection discloses 
-
-
 itself, which Plato calls the moving image of eternity. 
 
-
-
-
-
 APPENDIX A