"Partaking Of The Intelligible" : Plato's Timaeus & Unwritten Doctrine

Metaphysics & Epistemology
381

His identity is not given. Timaeus calls him the “poet and father” of all that comes to be. (28c)

It is one of the many likely stories (ton eikota mython) he tells:

So then, Socrates, if, in saying many things on many topics concerning gods and the birth of the all, we prove to be incapable of rendering speeches that are always and in all respects in agreement with themselves and drawn with precision, don’t be surprised. But if we provide likelihoods inferior to none, we should be well-pleased with them, remembering that I who speak as well as you my judges have a human nature, so that it’s fitting for us to be receptive to the likely story about these things and not search further for anything beyond it. (29c-d).

We are human beings, capable of telling likely stories, but incapable of discerning the truth of such things. In line with the dialogues theme of what is best, Timaeus proposes it is best to accept likely stories and not search for what is beyond the limits of our understanding.

It is essential to Socratic philosophy to be aware of our human limits. Traditionally, the poets tell the stories. The question raised in the Republic, of which the discussion in the Timaeus is a continuation of, is what are the best stories for the city that is to be the best city?

1 Like
382

Great explanation, thank you.

I understand the presocratic Greek philosophers were only concerned with the questions on how the world is made and what it is made from.
Hence they claimed, the world is made of water, fire, air etc.

Then Socrates came long, and started asking “how humans should live?”

And it was a revolutionary chapter of philosophy, which brought the trend on talking about how one should live and what is good life.

Then Plato came along, and started asking about what is mind. He said, the material world is not real. The real world is the world of idea and forms.

Here I understand, the world of idea and forms belonging to our minds. Hence whatever is said in Plato, I tend to read them as things in mind, rather than in the material world.

In that sense, to me the chaos Demiurge oranganised into the rational world is chaos in our minds, not in the external world or some outer space. We observe the chaos in our rooms, sheds and workshops, and realise that it is time to do some serious organising on them separating them into different categories and store them neatly, so they can be accessed any time when needed.

Demiurge could be actually us, you or me organising the mess in the garden shed, workshop or spare room with all the old books or tools lying everywhere. The newly organised rational world is thee neatly arranged and cleared rooms, sheds and workshops. To me that is all I perceive as the world. Outside that is unknown to me, and I don’t really care.

I always try to organise these things in the rooms, sheds and workshops. Hence Timaeus resonated with my situation and reasoning on the ideas and concepts.

The receptacle is my perception, which receives the external world data, and thinking through for the answers and solutions to the problems at hand - nursing and regenerating into the new ideas and concepts.

Too far fetched and remote from the original Plato or Timaeus, but it works for me. But I am still interested in what other folks thinks about them, and how they interpret them in their readings.

383

Anaxagoras pointed to the importance of nous (Mind), which set things in motion and separated one thing from another. (fragments 6 and 7)

In the Phaedo Socrates says:

One day I heard someone reading, as he said, from a book of Anaxagoras, and saying that it is Mind that directs and is the cause of everything. I was delighted with this cause and it seemed to me good, in a way, that Mind should be the cause of all. I thought that if this were so, the directing Mind would direct everything and arrange each thing in the way that was best. If then one wished to know the cause of each thing, why it comes to be or perishes or exists, one had to find what was the best way for it to be, or to be acted upon, or to act. On these premises then it befitted a man to investigate only, about this and other things, what is best.” (97b-d)

Socrates was disappointed by what he found in Anaxagoras, for he did not find any explanation for why it is best that things be as they are. He then launched his “second sailing” to find the cause. Rather than look at things themselves he turns to argument and what seems best in accounts (logoi).

I am going to try to show you the kind of cause with which I have concerned myself. I turn back to those oft-mentioned things and proceed from them. I assume the existence of a Beautiful, itself by itself, of a Good and a Great and all the rest.

He sets out the forms as assumptions to guide his inquiry. They are his ordering principle. The question arises as to the relation between Mind ordering all things and the ordering of things by Socrates’ mind.

[quote=“Corvus, post:382, topic:1022”]
Demiurge could be actually us, you or me organising the mess …[/quote]

This much seems clear. Plato is the poet, father, and craftsman of Timaeus, who is the poet, father, and craftsman of the Demiurge. The question is the extent to which the world we see around us is organized by us rather than inherent?

2 Likes
384

I appreciate the informative response !

I’m interested in ideas or forms. To me the “hidden” doctrine is fascinating as something like the more earnest presentation of this theory. Plato did not always use puppets like Socrates and Parmenides, it seems. He just discussed his theory directly. The fragments recorded by others are suggestive of a highly sophisticated approach that reminds me of Derrida. And yet Derrida and others tend to set up Plato as a foil.

Am I certain that Plato intended what I read in these fragments ? No. But I see it as a strong reading that’s worth sharing. I grant that my approach is relatively reckless.

385

Well, yes. Some of us would like to find a deep thesis in Plato, linking him to Heraclitus and Heidegger and so on. Of course Plato is a great dramatic writer. His work is rich enough for a plurality of approaches.

386

Aristotle described it that way. There is no hint in his descriptions as to how Plato used Socrates as a character. But Aristotle makes use of Plato doing that when it suits his purposes.

There is a gap here.

1 Like
387

Would you mind sharing what you find most fascinating about Plato ?

Even if you can’t justify it, what is your hunch ?

Or, if you are inclined, what are your general philosophical views ?

388

Isn’t soul what Socrates believed in? He thought soul will survive after bodily death, and migrate into another world, which made him decide to take the poison from the court, instead of being pardoned and exile to some islands and live rest of his life peace and quiet?

How is mind different from soul here? Is mind a part of soul? Or soul a part of mind? Or are they the same thing in Socrates?

The hedge was there as overgrown and untidy chaotic state before me. It grew up even taller now. In the summer, it grows fiercely, if left alone, that looks even more untidy and chaos.

I get the hedge trimmer, and cut the hedges over the weekend. After that, the hedge looks neat and clean, well ordered. Plato and Timaeus are no longer in this world with us, but I am still here acting as Demiurge. The real Demiurge could be in the world of forms. I could be just his shadow.

But not just me, Feuerbach tells us that God is just human. If a human can do what God does i.e. organising the chaotic world (cutting grass and hedges, and sorting out tools and books), then the human is God. Why try to search and prove God in the some outer space or cold corner of the unknown universe with no possibility of life? Isn’t it act of dishonesty and futility?

If God exists, it must here in the world where folks live and die. And folks who do things and make the world different and better, they are Gods.

God is not some old bloke with long white beard robes around his shoulder sitting in the middle of the temples all day and night, and get bows and respects listening to other folks prayers and their begging wishes. I think that is what Feuerbach was saying.

Anyhow above metaphorical analogy resonates with my experience and what I read on Plato and Timaeus. The possibility of resonating with my own experience makes Plato interesting read.

389

What keeps me involved is the tension between production and nature throughout the Dialogues. The examined life requires a continuing discourse.

The elusiveness of Plato as a speaker in a narrative he is a part of stands in contrast to the definitions sought after by Aristotle.

390

This is what he told his friends in the Phaedo. Whether he believed the story is another question. I don’t think he did. He tells the story in order to persuade away their “childish fears” (77e)

The hedge may be overgrown, but it grows according to its nature. If it is an arborvitae it will not grow to become a boxwood. If you take a cutting and root it it will grow into another arborvitae shrub. That is its inherent order.

391

There is a difference between the text itself and one’s approach to it. “Seek and you will find”. If what you would like to find in Plato is a deep thesis then what you find may be the reflection of your desire.

1 Like
392

To me the text is the unity of the open plurality of its readings. We can’t help prejudicially projecting. We only bother with the text through a hope of finding something good, however indeterminate.

Even if we explicitly try to proceed without projection, this too affects how the signs signify. Some thinkers ( and I agree ) suggest that we foreground our own prejudices, rather than suppress them.

393

The difference between a text and a Rorschach test is that in a well written text we can find more or less support for an interpretation of it.

If we are to learn what the text has to teach us the prejudices we bring to it can be checked and overcome. This challenging is, is in my opinion, one of the primary reasons to read great works of philosophy.

1 Like