The second face of esotericism - that which reveals certain truths to certain people in virtue of their nature - suggests that the rediscovery of revelation entails revelatory principles that reason could circumscribe, to the extent that one might alter one’s own nature or could be altered by another. The direct connection to Republic 7 ought to be clear, and what might strike a careful reader about that passage is how Socrates performs on Glaucon an action analogous to the very bondage and thaumaturgy in the allegory of the cave he describes, which Glaucon professes (almost proudly, it seems) himself to see very clearly.
Thanks! Turning the picture of the horse upside down would be as Plato inverting the present state of the polis through a cloud(soul) of dialect. I'm afraid I have to disagree with Strauss, thinking that Aristotle misunderstood Plato. Firstly, if teaching how to read, Plato must read it in the context of the work . Scholars know that Metaphysics is a term later. Introduced by Augustine and not used by Aristotle ( his name was First Philosophy ). Metaphysics means from or after nature /physics. It wasn't until centuries later that the German school of thinkers used it as beyond, where their inflated ego flew over the original work, casting a dark intellectual shadow ( returning to the cave. interpreting the shadows through their eyes ) I think. scholars should use the term Philosophy to represent the authors up to Nietzsche and put brackets around the German School of later thinkers so one is aware of their psychological approach to Philopshy, where their inflated ego has one believing that they are intellectually superior to the works they feast upon.
Perhaps the Pauson story is a reference to the accusation against Socrates’ dialectic: making the weaker argument appear the stronger. (Apology 18bc and 19bc) On the point about discovery as opposed to rediscovery, it seems to me the issue is that throughout history, we have continued to never let go of the need to discover philosophy again. For some reason, we are always drawn back. What does this say about us?
thank you for this video. I think my professor is influenced by Strauss and Benardete. Not sure because she does not like to tell us about contemporary philosophers or secondary literature that she has read.
I'm listening all the way through. I like Benardete and somewhat Strauss... but I do wonder if Plato went wrong in the Meno especially (and also in the Republic and Phaedo). Thanks for the reading. As I'm typing I'm at 21:30. A part of the action in the Republic is Socrates binding Glaucon and forcing him to receive his eikasia of the good at the end of Book 6, esp noticeable in his command "manthane." He turns him and his brother into a docile puppies at that point (from variously dogs of war, hunting hounds, and guard dogs earlier). I've not read the Laws and so have no comment. But the Republic esp is "action packed" and shows what happens in the politeia.
Thank you for this reading. Can we think of the "polis" as something a priori or primordial. Heidegger says, I can not remember where that the polis is the place where history happens.
I don’t understand the claim that Philosophy got lost after Plato? Seneca, Lucretius, Plotinus, Porphyry, Proclus - and what about Justin Martyr, Augustine, and Boethius? I’m sure there were hundreds more.
The claim is that after Plato and Aristotle, the definition of philosophy took on a new meaning other than what Plato and Aristotle intended, while at the same time those authors were interpreted through the newer definition of philosophy. So the "rediscovery" of philosophy consisted in understanding the meaning of philosophy as they understood it. It is worth mentioning that the word "philosophy" itself was in flux at the time of Plato, with various teachers (such as Isocrates) giving incompatible definitions of what philosophy consists of.
For what it's worth, Plotinus also claimed that he rediscovered Plato's original teaching after the academy had been influenced by scepticism in the time of the middle platonists.
![จบจนได้ ! | Black Myth: Wukong #007 [ตอนจบ?]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/DSqvWndF0sw/mqdefault.jpg)
Excellent work Michael. We need more of these readings! Thanks. ..
Yeah I agree, more live close readings. This was the bomb
This was great! As a newcomer to Strauss and Plato, and as one looking to foray into Strauss especially, this was lucid and informative. Thanks!
34:55 for me brought up the Deleuzian concept of "make yourself a body w/out organs".
Great talk and I'm only about half way through. Thanks!
This was very helpful. A great close reading. Many thanks.
The second face of esotericism - that which reveals certain truths to certain people in virtue of their nature - suggests that the rediscovery of revelation entails revelatory principles that reason could circumscribe, to the extent that one might alter one’s own nature or could be altered by another.
The direct connection to Republic 7 ought to be clear, and what might strike a careful reader about that passage is how Socrates performs on Glaucon an action analogous to the very bondage and thaumaturgy in the allegory of the cave he describes, which Glaucon professes (almost proudly, it seems) himself to see very clearly.
Benardete Was one of the all time greats
Thanks! Turning the picture of the horse upside down would be as Plato inverting the present state of the polis through a cloud(soul) of dialect. I'm afraid I have to disagree with Strauss, thinking that Aristotle misunderstood Plato. Firstly, if teaching how to read, Plato must read it in the context of the work . Scholars know that Metaphysics is a term later. Introduced by Augustine and not used by Aristotle ( his name was First Philosophy ). Metaphysics means from or after nature /physics. It wasn't until centuries later that the German school of thinkers used it as beyond, where their inflated ego flew over the original work, casting a dark intellectual shadow ( returning to the cave. interpreting the shadows through their eyes ) I think. scholars
should use the term Philosophy to represent the authors up to Nietzsche and put brackets around the German School of later thinkers so one is aware of their psychological approach to Philopshy, where their inflated ego has one believing that they are intellectually superior to the works they feast upon.
Good work ....keep moving..
Wonderfull. This left me wondering what was so dangerous that esoterism was necessary? Is it nihilism? Forgive my ignorance.
Would be interesting to read in parallel both Heidegger's and Strauss' readings of and commentaries on Plato, Aristotle and the other Greats.
Perhaps the Pauson story is a reference to the accusation against Socrates’ dialectic: making the weaker argument appear the stronger. (Apology 18bc and 19bc)
On the point about discovery as opposed to rediscovery, it seems to me the issue is that throughout history, we have continued to never let go of the need to discover philosophy again. For some reason, we are always drawn back. What does this say about us?
This video was a pleasant break from the soul crushing barrage of car ads and ten second sound bytes robbing the commons of any meaningful discourse
thank you for this video. I think my professor is influenced by Strauss and Benardete. Not sure because she does not like to tell us about contemporary philosophers or secondary literature that she has read.
I'm listening all the way through.
I like Benardete and somewhat Strauss... but I do wonder if Plato went wrong in the Meno especially (and also in the Republic and Phaedo). Thanks for the reading.
As I'm typing I'm at 21:30. A part of the action in the Republic is Socrates binding Glaucon and forcing him to receive his eikasia of the good at the end of Book 6, esp noticeable in his command "manthane." He turns him and his brother into a docile puppies at that point (from variously dogs of war, hunting hounds, and guard dogs earlier). I've not read the Laws and so have no comment. But the Republic esp is "action packed" and shows what happens in the politeia.
What I mean by the polis being primordial is that it is Existentiell/Existenzial.
Thank you for this reading. Can we think of the "polis" as something a priori or primordial. Heidegger says, I can not remember where that the polis is the place where history happens.
Yes, he writes about that in the Parmenides lectures, for instance.
26:09
34:44
I don’t understand the claim that Philosophy got lost after Plato? Seneca, Lucretius, Plotinus, Porphyry, Proclus - and what about Justin Martyr, Augustine, and Boethius? I’m sure there were hundreds more.
The claim is that after Plato and Aristotle, the definition of philosophy took on a new meaning other than what Plato and Aristotle intended, while at the same time those authors were interpreted through the newer definition of philosophy. So the "rediscovery" of philosophy consisted in understanding the meaning of philosophy as they understood it. It is worth mentioning that the word "philosophy" itself was in flux at the time of Plato, with various teachers (such as Isocrates) giving incompatible definitions of what philosophy consists of.
For what it's worth, Plotinus also claimed that he rediscovered Plato's original teaching after the academy had been influenced by scepticism in the time of the middle platonists.
40:12