diff options
| -rw-r--r-- | plato_time.otx | 559 |
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 |