Видео

I think it’s impossible to read Plato without a psychedelic frame of mind. One of the reasons I got so interested in Platonism was because of this weirdness in his writings. The crux of the religious life is how to understand nothingness and Being, and Plato is the one of those axial age thinkers that really brought attention to an experience of a no-thingness that is paradoxically both empty and full. I do wonder if Greece and the Hellenistic tradition had some sort of approach to meditation or some way to experience The Good first hand. Maybe it was the psychedelic eucharists that were taken in cults all around Greece. The parallels between these Platonic Good and the Brahman of the Vedic tradition and the Unborn Deathless of Buddhism are too strikingly similar for there to be a coincidence. Thank you for uploading all of these great videos 🙏🏽

Eros the all beguiling! ❤‍🔥

Philos , Eros, Agape

Agoreuon ek to pythos Αγορεύει έκ του Πίθου. Ακα Πίθων Πυθαγόρας. Πίθος not Πάθος. Κνούφις Πίθωνας. Τhe son😂sun that will overthrow Zeus as Thetis Θ prophesied. Theros-Θέρος the summer.

Sais bright like Ε Δωδεκάεδρον.

This word eros has been completely totally misconstrued misinterpreted in todays IGNORABT socity, Eros has nothihg ZERO to do with **erotic** = SEXXX. Nada, Eros is all about RELATIONSHIP,, as in I can really only associate with feel empathy with/for with thsoe like me, in many things, such as love of animals/nature/earth, love of MY FAV compsers, ravel Debussy, etc etc But NOT Beethoven, If you like Beethoven I know there will be zero eros twixt us. also you have to love Palto, CG Jung, history and the bible if we will have eros twix us. Big egos stay away, Eros means RELATIONSHIP/Consciousness, Most people never ever make eros , as they have huge ego issues, ignorance issues, spiritual issues. People die w/o knowing eros. Most people have never given love not received love their entire UNeros/antieros, fake eros, life long, sad , real sad.

Shining bright like a daimon! ❤🔥💎

'So Dionysus comes back with the decline of Christianity I think you could say ...' (10.53). And you return even more interestingly at 20.01 - 'Anyway, another thing that's fascinating about the play ... ' Dionysus was always part of the Christian ethos - the first miracle story in the fourth gospel has Jesus change water into wine at a wedding in Cana. It pits him as a virtual and even better Dionysus, or, the eternal bridegroom, Christ-Eros. This can be read in terms of a developmental psychology, since it is the first of a series of events, and contrasts with the last, the Transfiguration, which is irrevocably framed in terms of death. These two episodes, the first and the last ('beginning and end', 'the Alpha and the Omega' - language used later of 'the lamb' in The Apocalypse,) very clearly propose Eros and Thanatos as equally the primary structural epicentres of the life of the soul. We might think of this as the elliptical orbit of a planet about its two foci, of which Freud only ever really touched upon the one; pun intended. The same theological postulate underpins the two related miracle stories - those of miraculous feedings, of the 5,000 and later, of the 4,000 - namely that there can be no abiding conflict between appetition-satisfaction and Christian discipleship. Desire and its satisfaction is perhaps the most substantial complement of the New Testament, and the gospels in particular, to the specific orientation of the Tanakh; it is the complement of immanence to transcendence - again, of end to beginning. A beginning without an end is no better than coitus interruptus. (!) Two of the most distinctive features of Christian belief, the incarnation and Eucharist - there's some real 'omophagia' for you, and it would have disgusted observant Jews - dovetail with the same semantic. Nor is this revisioning of Christ as Eros exclusive to John, whose gospel contains the only account of the "Transformation Of Water Into Wine". Luke's is renowned for his portraiture of a convivial and scandalously winebibbing Jesus, who is constantly either going to or coming from a meal scene - his gospel and Acts contains sixteen such episodes. Moreover, there are some very apparent mirrorings of the Lukan Jesus and Dionysus in the last section of his gospel which have been remarked. Here I quote extensively from a work by Katherine Veach Dyer, which dovetails with the thesis I am presenting concerning Luke's gospel. Her presentation of the travel narrative pushes its beginning as far back as Some Women Accompany Jesus; (my apologies since I have no access to a Greek font for the bracketed quotes): Soon afterward he went on through cities and villages, preaching and bringing the good news of the kingdom of God. And the twelve were with him, and also some women who had been healed of evil spirits and infirmities: Mary, called Magdalene, from whom seven demons had gone out, and Joanna, the wife of Chuza, Herod's steward, and Susanna, and many others, who provided for them out of their means. (Luke 8.1-3). She reckons this in conjunction with the final part of the travel narrative in which Jesus heals a blind man and meets Zacchaeus (Luke 18.35-19.20): Luke’s itinerary, which tells of Jesus’ wandering missionary activities during his ministry, opens and closes with scenes that directly evoke Dionysus. The pericope of the ministering women in 8:1-3 and the Jericho Exchange in 18:35-19:10 serve to emphasize Jesus’ similarities to the Greco-Roman god. (Dyer, Katherine, Veach, "Healing Steps": Jesus' Dionysiac Tour In Luke, p 55). Two uniquely Lukan passages-8:1-3 and 18:35-19:10-evoke the wine god, and they serve to bracket the “itinerary” section of the Gospel, a passage in which Jesus mimics Dionysus by acting as a wandering missionary. Luke 8:1-3 portrays Jesus as beginning his missionary journey followed by a group among whom a trio of women is particularly prominent. The itinerary concludes in Luke 18:35-19:10, a detailed encounter between Jesus and Zacchaeus the tax collector which is modeled on the most well-known Dionysus drama, Euripides’s Bacchae. Reading the itinerary in light of these Bacchic bookends moves its traditional starting point from 9:51 to 8:1, and it proposes Euripides’s Bacchae as a source for Luke’s Gospel. (Ibid p 1). Scholars have previously discussed the Dionysiac presence in Acts, which is particularly tied to Euripides’ Bacchae. Otto Weinreich argues that Acts is directly dependent on the text of the Bacchae, and other scholars have highlighted similarities between the two works. Dennis R. MacDonald and Matthews both propose that the character of Lydia as well as Paul’s encounter with the mantic slave girl in Acts 16:11- 40 are inspired by the tragedy. Additionally, Acts 24:16, which says, “it is hard for you to kick against the goads” (pro/v ke/ntra lakti/zein) evokes Bacchae 795, which refers to “a kick against the goads” (pro/v ke/ntra lakti/zoimi). In both texts, the phrase appears in the context of theomachy, as Paul fights Christ and Pentheus fights Dionysus. Acts and the Bacchae also share scenes in which an earthquake shakes a prison and breaks the shackles of a prisoner held unjustly for his religious beliefs. If Luke utilized Dionysiac material in Acts, it is probable that he also did so in his Gospel, but this possibility is heretofore unexplored. (Ibid p 5). Luke’s creation of a Christian apologia using Dionysiac allusions came during a time period in which opinions about “foreign” religions varied. His carefully crafted itinerary plays on common comparisons of Jesus to Dionysus, and it argues that Jesus was superior to Dionysus. (Ibid p 8). ...the Jesus of the Lukan itinerary shares the trait of wandering and healing. In 8:26-39, Jesus crosses into the Decapolis city of Gerasa. He is immediately recognized as “Son of the Most High God” (ui(e tou~ qeou~ u(fi/stou [sic, (u(yi/stou)] by a demon (8:28). He then works a miracle, casting the demons from the man, and departs. Here, Jesus is not only recognized as a healer (8:36), but also feared and rejected (8:37), just as Dionysus is rejected by Pentheus in the Bacchae. Luke’s comparison of Jesus and Dionysus is most striking in his account of the women who accompany the adult Jesus on his travels. These female followers of Jesus share traits-such as an emphasis on trios and rich naming-with Dionysiac maenads. However, the Christian maenads eliminate any potentially objectionable traits of the Dionysiac maenads, trading destruction for provision and wildness for calm. In myth, literature and art, Dionysus is depicted as surrounded by his band of maenads, the women he has driven to divine madness. This topos was unusual in the world of Greco-Roman religion, for divinities typically were accompanied by attendants of the same gender. Maenads were distinctively Dionysiac, and they were an active part of both cult and myth. (Ibid pp 20-21). Another distinctive trait shared by Jesus and Dionysus is that both were said to have died and resurrected. Dionysus Zagreus was the dying and rising god; his myth relates that Hera had the god torn to pieces by the Titans. (Ibid p 24). While the women of 8:1-3 introduce Jesus’ missionary journey and characterize him as a better Dionysus, the Jericho pericope of 18:35-19:10 concludes this journey. And while the women evoke Dionysiac connections through Luke’s use of themes culled from the Bacchae and universal Bacchic themes, the story of Zacchaeus is expressly modeled on the entire course of action of Euripides’ Bacchae. To see the Jericho Exchange as a parallel to the Bacchae, one must begin the story not with Zacchaeus the tax collector in Luke 19:1, but with the unnamed blind beggar outside of the city gates in Luke 18:35. This beginning, in which the god is outside the gates, calls to mind the opening scene of the Bacchae. Dionysus opens the play with the emphatic declaration (h)kw), “I have come.” The god has come to Thebes after bringing his rites from Lydia to Asia. Now, in Greece, he plans to initiate the city. While Dionysus is still outside the Theban walls, Teiresias, the blind seer, and Kadmos, the former king of Thebes, recognize the god and wish to participate in his rites. They even dress up as maenads and prepare to praise him. However, when Dionysus attempts to bring his religion inside the city gates, Pentheus, the young ruler, refuses to allow him to do so. Unable to recognize the god, he sees merely a human- and an annoying, corrupting one at that- and even goes so far as to persecute him and his followers. To punish Pentheus for this impiety, Dionysus dresses him as a woman and lures him to the woodlands with promises ofseeing the maenads participating in their rituals. Once there, an eager Pentheus climbs a tree for a better view. Dionysus then orders the maenads to pay Pentheus back for his irreverence, and they shake him down from the tree and dismember him. (Ibid pp 46-47). Just as Zacchaeus is contrasted with Pentheus as the correct model of acceptance of a divine representative, Jesus is defined over against Dionysus as a better divinity. (Ibid p 54).

Thank you. Encore! (The somewhat disheveled and somewhat 'oblique' bookshelves seem like the perfect background for all, genuine philosophical discourse; and they are no match for your well measured and articulate delivery.)

If scientific rationality vis-a-vis existential dread has reached an impasse, it is because of the inherent limits determined by Its proper, that is innate, or native axiological disposition. Its own self-definition obtains in virtue of truth - that is what it seeks, and arguably, what it finds. Its relation to the good, a primary Platonic concern, has never been clearly articulated; nor has its relation to beauty. It is then certainly possible that we are looking in the wrong place to overcome this impasse; all the more so if modernity accepts the Nietzschean project of reaching a 'beyond' good and evil. (Of course Nietzsche says nothing a propos of the same beyond applied to the other Socratic values: beauty and the good. That is Nietzsche's philosophical funeral.) Are truth and goodness competing claims? And what of the relation 'between' truth and beauty; are their claims incompatible in some degree and/or kind? The answer to both questions is yes and no. Would Plato agree with Iris Murdoch concerning 'the sovereignty of good'?

HI I love all Plato,, I can not stand post Plato thinkers, Platonis esp stands out, = GARBAGE also HATE all Aristotlke CG JUng,, now this is where Plato ends. CG says humanity has no hope as confirmed by the bible. Things are going downhill fast, 2 fastest growing religions The New Nihilisms The New Paganisms Atheism and religion are dying FAST. GOOD RIDDANCE to both cults. Nietzsche was the last philosopher, No others post Nietzsche. Just thought I';d bring in some enlightenment here Good day Paul New Orleans

Thank you! Personally, I would say it as Socrates’ instead of Socrates’s

Like your videos, do you have any interest in making videos about the dialogues in the first tetralogy?

Wow really looking forward to this video! Another fantastic topic

Wow what a great topic and talk! Really enjoyed this, and subscribed! Looking forward to watching your channel grow!

I have watched introduction and episode 1. I feel I have discovered a friend.

A video involving Love!!! I can’t tell you the last time this subject has been mentioned on the internet!!

Thank you very much for this valuable insight on the nature of love. God(s) know we can use it.

Considering that the wife of Socrates was a legendary harridan, odd is it not that he could wax most poetic of all regarding the ecstasy of eros? Perhaps Socrates was delusional when it came to philosophizing about his personal relationship with the so-called fairer sex. Then again, maybe he had something going on the side where his innermost fantasies of love were realized.

A simple and raw look reveals that it is not love that frames behaviors within morality. Behaviors become moral when they are constrained by the use of fear. When people do not fear the consequences of their actions, they can act immorally with great ease. A psychopath or a narcissist cannot overlook their nature.

Not much discussion of male to female relationships as eros has to do with DEPTHS ofa relation,, women as possessed by their animus make it very dif for a man to form a deep relationship with. CG Jung got lucky with Toni Wolf, One in a Million,,,,,,,, man to woman relationship. ,,,CG also had some depth with his 1st wife Emma. Also a deep relationship with ML Von Franz, Not impossible, but rare. This is why the Symposium only magnifies man to man, But has nothing to do with sex. Has to do with PSYCHE. and I've yet to read that Dialogue, I am a Platonist, so I intuit these things.

AS per CG Jung Eros = RELATIONSHIP,, has nothing to do with sex. The greeks did not separate relationship from sex. Sex MIGHT HAVE taken place among 2 people IF and ONLY IF there was eros = relationship. Sex is NOT NOT eros. Relationship is eros. ***ohhh how erotic*** moderns/post mods say, = Ignorance.

This was cool, thanks for sharing!

Cool!

Huzzah! Feisty impulse in action . . . dad joke and all! ❤

One of the challenges, I think, when reading Plato is to understand Plato from the perspective of his own thought rather than through the lens of Christianity. I believe that Nietzsche was unable to do this. To be fair, after many centuries of them being intertwined it is not an easy task. For me, the work that opened the door to Plato as Plato was 'The Consolation of Philosophy' by Boethius. In this work Boethius demonstrates the salvific nature of Platonist Philosophy, how that works, and the broad strokes of its understandings. // As usual, a very thoughtful video. Thanks.

Hey Tali...want to be on a podcast?

Great episode. Thank you and can’t wait for the next ♡

Another truly enlightening video🔥 Made me very keen to dive into James once again with a fresh perspective!

Love this!

Thanks for posting this. It touches on a number of views that have had importance in my own life. I think the key difference between ancient philosophy and modern philosophy is that ancient philosophy thought of philosophy as salvific whereas modern philosophy rejects that kind of focus. I think of Boethius's "Consolation" as a key that opens the salvific nature of philosophy and it is interesting to me that the "Consolation" is still very widely read and continues to be translated into numerous editions. // In some ways I think of Platonism as more closely resembling Dharmic traditions of India (Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism, Shaivism, et al) than it resembles modern philosophy. I say this because in Dharmic traditions, philosophy has a salvific purpose. In addition, Dharmic traditions are 'ways of life' in the sense that Pierre Hadot talks about. At times I even think of the Platonic Dharma as opposed to Platonic Philosophy because the word 'philosophy' has come to mean, in modernity, a type of analysis that is highly constricted and lacks depth due to the academic atmosphere you referred to. // Best wishes.

Super fascinating! I hope I'm not gonna burden you too much with my question, but do you, in addition to Marcel Proust's literary depiction of such a moment of existential ecstasy, have any other recommendations for authors or books I could turn to?

This is great stuff. What you shared on the role of the concept I think also really corresponds to what David Bohm has said about this in his thought as system lectures… And regarding the double existential alienation I immediately had to think of the Lacanian idea of being alienated by language as well… Anyhow, these have been a very thought provoking 12 minutes🙌

Just came across your channel. Skimmed through the vids, amazing ! Gonna watch them all in order now. Amazing that you’re talking about Plato in a way that makes it appealing to a modern audience! Just subscribed. Keep up the good work🔥

Livy: "This it is which is particularly salutary and profitable in the study of history, that you behold instances of every variety of conduct displayed[Pg 4] on a conspicuous monument; that from thence you may select for yourself and for your country that which you may imitate; thence note what is shameful in the undertaking, and shameful in the result, which you may avoid...."

Very thoughtful. Thanks for posting.

Since you mentioned being curious about the usage of the ‘us’ in Genesis, I thought I’d note another interpretation I’ve heard which could be described as a ‘conversation between the trinity.’ I’ve heard this mostly in reference to Psalms 2

As I read through James’ text, I eagerly awaited the lecture on mysticism and loved it, especially his definition of “cosmic consciousness”cited from Bucke. I took Pragmatism as part of my ongoing undergrad education in Philosophy, and was particularly drawn to James :) Thanks again for this great lecture, which was both stimulating and calming to the mind!

I wanted to thank you for the beautiful lecture! I will be listening to more of them.

Wow! I’ve never heard oneness and human consciousness described that way. It was incredibly eye-opening and I thoroughly enjoyed how you explained it. Can’t wait for more :)

Great stuff Tali. Really thought-provoking and a nice break from my usual youtube diet of music and sports videos. I'm usually not on LinkedIn, but I was today and I saw your post! I'll keep watching for new episodes.