I'm very impressed that this speaker is clearly hostile to the doctrines of neopplatonism and yet still portrays them accurately. Thank you, sir, for your integrity!
Indeed. Some of the representation of Christianity is specifically the Catholic representation, whereas the Eastern church would say quite different things, but other than that minor point, it seemed fair.
This is probably the BEST lecture on Neoplatonism on CZcams. The lecturer actually goes into somewhat of a methodology for Neoplatonic mysticism (Theurgy).
3:40 if you say it is a then it is not non a it is excluded 15:00( prev- metaphysics) problem of evil 22:00 how did plotinus know all these about metaphysics 24:00 Ethics 25:30 transition 27:00 fertility ritual -ressurection 31:10 early christian philosophy 37:00 saint paul's emphasis 41:10 three main element to christianity 44:10 question period(hegel ideas trace in pagen plotinus philosophy,problem of evil) 47:30 argument for ecstacy-argument from 6th sense- argument from unanimity
I think for Plotinus strictly speaking matter was not the absence of being but the utter last gasp of being , being trembling on the edge of non-being...
It MUST be pointed out that the teachings of Jesus and that of Paul and the Apostles can be traced to the Old Testament. Every last one of them. They predate Greek philosophy by over a thousand years. The New Testament incorporated certain modern ideas because they were preaching to a (then) modern audience. That’s a pretty typical teaching technique, but it certainly doesn’t mean the ideas were drawn from contemporary thought.
I asked Bard to watch this video and provide a summary of the topics, grouped by most provocative to least, and include a conclusion with suggestions for additional content: The video discusses the following topics in order of increasing provocativeness: The idea that the universe is a simulation. This is a very provocative idea because it suggests that our reality is not what it seems. It also raises the question of who or what is running the simulation. The possibility of time travel. This is another very provocative idea because it could potentially allow us to change the past or the future. It also raises the question of whether or not we should travel back in time, and what the consequences of doing so might be. The existence of aliens. This is a less provocative idea than the previous two, but it is still a topic that is hotly debated. There is no definitive proof that aliens exist, but there is also no definitive proof that they do not. The nature of consciousness. This is a very complex topic that has been debated by philosophers and scientists for centuries. There is no single agreed-upon definition of consciousness, and it is not clear how it arises or what its purpose is. The meaning of life. This is perhaps the most provocative question of all. There is no single answer that will satisfy everyone, and it is a question that each individual must answer for themselves. The video concludes by suggesting that these are just a few of the many provocative topics that are worth exploring. It also encourages viewers to think critically about these topics and to form their own opinions. Here are some additional content suggestions that could be explored in more detail: The ethical implications of time travel. The possibility of alien civilizations that are more advanced than our own. The scientific evidence for consciousness. The different philosophical and religious perspectives on the meaning of life. These are just a few ideas, and there are many other provocative topics that could be explored. I encourage you to do your own research and to form your own opinions on these important issues.
It is the nature of Life, the All in One in All, to function/serve as a diversified unity of infinite potential eternally actualizing as a unified diversity or Uni-verse (unified verses = narrative).
Not terrible, but the idea that Neoplatonism is the bridge between Greek pagan thought and Christianity is a bit simplistic and dated. These lectures (like any) are tinged with the lecturer’s own propaganda. Christianity had already been around almost two centuries by the time Plotinus was born. While his thinking definitely influenced later Christian thinkers, it is also quite possible he was influenced by Judeo-Christian ideas and mythologies already in circulation during his formative years. If there is a philosophic bridge between Pagan Greece and Christianity, more likely candidates are Middle Platonism and Stoicism. Even Skepticism would play a role, especially in early Christian arguments against the pagan idolatry of the day, or in their criticisms of pagan myths. We forget that early Christians were often accused of “atheism” by the State because they refused to venerate the images of the gods or of Caesar.
I somewhat disagree with this. Precisely because of your use of the term "Judeo-Christian Ideas and Mythologies." Peikoff would consider these parts of a philosophical system, but not necessarily a philosophical system, since they lack a focus on epistemology.
Plato was not a pagan, he was the originator of the dualistic rationalization leading logically to the manufacture of the Christian god. Events post-Alexander lead to a war between Rome and the Zealots of Judea which motivated the Flavian Emperors to co-opt the Jewish messiah as war-time propaganda, creating the religion that would be the new form of the Roman Empire that it assumes to this very day: The Roman Catholic Church AND The Eastern Orthodox half of the empire.
Those early Christians were pre-Nicea and even pre-trinity. Post-Nicea almost all Christians venerated Caesar as well as retained their pagan ways. They simply believed Christianity was the best of all philosophies and were now forced by the State to accept it.
As to the discussion on Ecstacy, is this experiential, & if so what is the means? The ancient Buddhists and Hindus have developed such methods of tapping into and merging with the One. Manjushri in the Surangama Sutra recommends the method of listening to certain sounds or mantras. For the Hindus, the foremost mantra enabling us to tap into and merge with the One in a state of Ecstacy is the Mahamritunjaya mantra (at Sacred Sounds Choir). Shown is Anandamayima, supposedly a person who is "Enlightened" (having become unified with the One).
When it comes to Ontology Indian Advaita Vedanta and even original Buddhism is top notch but when it comes to Cosmology the Pythagoreans and Platonists are just too advanced with the numbers and hardcore logic.
Not a good comparison. A person who lacks one physical sense can be convinced of his deficiency by means of the other four physical sense. But the five physical senses can never discern or discover the spiritual sense.
@@stefanburns3797 The "sixth sense". Maybe I am not understanding the term "sixth sense" in the same way; I take it to be the (somewhat) equivalent of what some may call the 5th dimension, which can be the "supernatural".
This is written in the Vedas, which of course is older than the Greek Philosophy. Just shows Humanity from Europe to China communicated as effectively as today , minus the speed of communication.... of course.
God’s word defined what was truth. Not man’s heresy, or teachings. True it took awhile for the dust to settle, but truth won the day because truth stands alone.
Flippant is about right. Outdated? Yes. Shoddy “scholarship” ie Jesus = Mithra? Yup. It’s good on Plotinus but I’m not surprised to see it on the objectivist channel.
I smell the stench of the sting of Calvinism in this. God’s sovereignty is not in question with man’s free will. Evil works come from selfish men. Evil destroying themselves isn’t God’s business. He just turns people over to their evil will and destroy themselves. If you can’t learn by telling you truth then by experience you might learn. All learnings is to point us back to God.
@@cas343 how is Christianity focused towards death? Spending eternity with family and God as head sounds like life eternal. Death to self is hard, and might get you killed in some places. I can only hope to give my life in service to my Master, Father, Teacher. Do I do it for reward, sure, but more than that I do it because what God did for me. I deserved death and eternal punishment. Yet He gave me life. Forgiveness. And if all He asks is for me to do my best and help others in light of what He went through to gain my independence… Yeah I’d give my life without question.
@@randallcrowley4704 there is that special touch of arrogance which you can only get when you grow up right at the end of a functioning society descending into nihilism. Then you still benefit from the easy environment enough to feel superior to the next generation and you can also look down on those former failed values and harvest some more pridefulness.
@@matthiasmuller7677 Christianity never produced a functioning society. In fact its whole purpose is to destroy society and that's exactly what it has done for 2000 years.
@@alphabetpeople2902 if by society you mean either individualism or statist totalitarianism which are really just different sides of the same coin, then I agree.
Very clear presentation of Plotinus, although the smug, sneering style of the presenter and the hooting laughter of his fellow Rayndian atheists in the audience is kind of annoying.
The speaker seems to be filled with hatred for Christianity and he makes some serious blunders at several points. For example, the doctrine of the Trinity WAS NOT taken from the philosophies, but came directly from Christ. Also, in Christianity, evil IS NOT simply everything that is not God. If that were the case, then the entire creation - that is not God - would be evil, all angels, all the Saints, human soul, good works, etc. - non of whom is God - would be evil. Despite this, this blinded individual says that this is basically the Christian view. This is a terrible misrepresentation.
"If that were the case, then the entire creation - that is not God - would be evil, all angels, all the Saints, human soul, good works, etc. - non of whom is God - would be evil." The bible literally says that adam made the world sinful and that it would be destroyed. In revelations earth is destroyed and a new heaven and new earth are made after. Then in Noah's flood god destroys the earth (even the animals) because humans were so sinful.
I'm very impressed that this speaker is clearly hostile to the doctrines of neopplatonism and yet still portrays them accurately. Thank you, sir, for your integrity!
Indeed. Some of the representation of Christianity is specifically the Catholic representation, whereas the Eastern church would say quite different things, but other than that minor point, it seemed fair.
Leonard's a good guy 😊
This is probably the BEST lecture on Neoplatonism on CZcams. The lecturer actually goes into somewhat of a methodology for Neoplatonic mysticism (Theurgy).
This is probably one of the best lectures on Neoplatonism I've ever heard! Thank you!
This is part of a playlist on this channel, of his entire lecture "history of philosophy".
Wow, this is absolutely terrific! Thanks for posting such a fantastic lecture.
The thought of Plotinus finds its completion in the Indian religions.
Thank Rand this is finally on CZcams.
3:40 if you say it is a then it is not non a it is excluded
15:00( prev- metaphysics) problem of evil
22:00 how did plotinus know all these about metaphysics
24:00 Ethics
25:30 transition
27:00 fertility ritual -ressurection
31:10 early christian philosophy
37:00 saint paul's emphasis
41:10 three main element to christianity
44:10 question period(hegel ideas trace in pagen plotinus philosophy,problem of evil)
47:30 argument for ecstacy-argument from 6th sense- argument from unanimity
I think for Plotinus strictly speaking matter was not the absence of being but the utter last gasp of being , being trembling on the edge of non-being...
It MUST be pointed out that the teachings of Jesus and that of Paul and the Apostles can be traced to the Old Testament. Every last one of them. They predate Greek philosophy by over a thousand years.
The New Testament incorporated certain modern ideas because they were preaching to a (then) modern audience. That’s a pretty typical teaching technique, but it certainly doesn’t mean the ideas were drawn from contemporary thought.
I asked Bard to watch this video and provide a summary of the topics, grouped by most provocative to least, and include a conclusion with suggestions for additional content:
The video discusses the following topics in order of increasing provocativeness:
The idea that the universe is a simulation. This is a very provocative idea because it suggests that our reality is not what it seems. It also raises the question of who or what is running the simulation.
The possibility of time travel. This is another very provocative idea because it could potentially allow us to change the past or the future. It also raises the question of whether or not we should travel back in time, and what the consequences of doing so might be.
The existence of aliens. This is a less provocative idea than the previous two, but it is still a topic that is hotly debated. There is no definitive proof that aliens exist, but there is also no definitive proof that they do not.
The nature of consciousness. This is a very complex topic that has been debated by philosophers and scientists for centuries. There is no single agreed-upon definition of consciousness, and it is not clear how it arises or what its purpose is.
The meaning of life. This is perhaps the most provocative question of all. There is no single answer that will satisfy everyone, and it is a question that each individual must answer for themselves.
The video concludes by suggesting that these are just a few of the many provocative topics that are worth exploring. It also encourages viewers to think critically about these topics and to form their own opinions.
Here are some additional content suggestions that could be explored in more detail:
The ethical implications of time travel.
The possibility of alien civilizations that are more advanced than our own.
The scientific evidence for consciousness.
The different philosophical and religious perspectives on the meaning of life.
These are just a few ideas, and there are many other provocative topics that could be explored. I encourage you to do your own research and to form your own opinions on these important issues.
Just brilliant, including the q&a. Illuminating
Wow this is Awesome
It is the nature of Life, the All in One in All, to function/serve as a diversified unity of infinite potential eternally actualizing as a unified diversity or Uni-verse (unified verses = narrative).
Not terrible, but the idea that Neoplatonism is the bridge between Greek pagan thought and Christianity is a bit simplistic and dated. These lectures (like any) are tinged with the lecturer’s own propaganda. Christianity had already been around almost two centuries by the time Plotinus was born. While his thinking definitely influenced later Christian thinkers, it is also quite possible he was influenced by Judeo-Christian ideas and mythologies already in circulation during his formative years. If there is a philosophic bridge between Pagan Greece and Christianity, more likely candidates are Middle Platonism and Stoicism. Even Skepticism would play a role, especially in early Christian arguments against the pagan idolatry of the day, or in their criticisms of pagan myths. We forget that early Christians were often accused of “atheism” by the State because they refused to venerate the images of the gods or of Caesar.
This lecture along with the misconceptions on Stoicism from the previous lectures has made me start to doubt the accuracy of these lectures.
I somewhat disagree with this.
Precisely because of your use of the term "Judeo-Christian Ideas and Mythologies." Peikoff would consider these parts of a philosophical system, but not necessarily a philosophical system, since they lack a focus on epistemology.
Plato was not a pagan, he was the originator of the dualistic rationalization leading logically to the manufacture of the Christian god. Events post-Alexander lead to a war between Rome and the Zealots of Judea which motivated the Flavian Emperors to co-opt the Jewish messiah as war-time propaganda, creating the religion that would be the new form of the Roman Empire that it assumes to this very day: The Roman Catholic Church AND The Eastern Orthodox half of the empire.
Those early Christians were pre-Nicea and even pre-trinity. Post-Nicea almost all Christians venerated Caesar as well as retained their pagan ways. They simply believed Christianity was the best of all philosophies and were now forced by the State to accept it.
As to the discussion on Ecstacy, is this experiential, & if so what is the means? The ancient Buddhists and Hindus have developed such methods of tapping into and merging with the One. Manjushri in the Surangama Sutra recommends the method of listening to certain sounds or mantras. For the Hindus, the foremost mantra enabling us to tap into and merge with the One in a state of Ecstacy is the Mahamritunjaya mantra (at Sacred Sounds Choir). Shown is Anandamayima, supposedly a person who is "Enlightened" (having become unified with the One).
When it comes to Ontology Indian Advaita Vedanta and even original Buddhism is top notch but when it comes to Cosmology the Pythagoreans and Platonists are just too advanced with the numbers and hardcore logic.
Buddha was an Iranian not an Indian. Same goes with the Vedas, the were not written by Indians but the Aryans meaning Iranians.
@@alphabetpeople2902 Most Hindus are Indian now, so it makes sense why he'd say that, even though he's wrong. Just say Hindu.
49:01 Why blind people can't be used as a justification for a 6th sense.
Not a good comparison. A person who lacks one physical sense can be convinced of his deficiency by means of the other four physical sense. But the five physical senses can never discern or discover the spiritual sense.
@@MikeAtnip What do you mean by spiritual sense
@@stefanburns3797 The "sixth sense". Maybe I am not understanding the term "sixth sense" in the same way; I take it to be the (somewhat) equivalent of what some may call the 5th dimension, which can be the "supernatural".
@@MikeAtnip maybe I didn’t understand the original comment haha
This is written in the Vedas, which of course is older than the Greek Philosophy. Just shows Humanity from Europe to China communicated as effectively as today , minus the speed of communication.... of course.
Can someone tell me who is speaking because it sounds a lot like the one that wrote Kingdom of the Cults. Walter Martin. Is this him. ? Anyone know?
It’s Leonard Peikoff
25:30
God’s word defined what was truth. Not man’s heresy, or teachings. True it took awhile for the dust to settle, but truth won the day because truth stands alone.
Neo Platonism came 250 years after Paul how can he say that paul took these ideas from them
And that's why there's thousands of different sects of Christianity and they all say something different...
I bet Plotinus never smoked 60 tabs a day.
@Samael
Ayn Rand......not much of a thinker....more of a nutbag.
A number of statements about Christianity that are inaccurate makes me wonder how accurate the portrayals of the philosophers are.
Which statements about Christianity are inaccurate?
@@LiquidZulu Sorry, it has been 8 months since I watched this and I do not remember the details.
Flippant is about right. Outdated? Yes. Shoddy “scholarship” ie Jesus = Mithra? Yup. It’s good on Plotinus but I’m not surprised to see it on the objectivist channel.
I couldn't get past the first minute. Neo-Platonism was mainly in East Rome. Augustine was mainly influential in Western Rome.
Didn’t Augustine read the works of others who lived far away from him?
I smell the stench of the sting of Calvinism in this. God’s sovereignty is not in question with man’s free will. Evil works come from selfish men. Evil destroying themselves isn’t God’s business. He just turns people over to their evil will and destroy themselves. If you can’t learn by telling you truth then by experience you might learn. All learnings is to point us back to God.
Christianity is evil
@@alphabetpeople2902 Christianity is evil, how so?
@@rosstemple7617 because it's oriented towards death not life.
@@cas343 how is Christianity focused towards death?
Spending eternity with family and God as head sounds like life eternal.
Death to self is hard, and might get you killed in some places.
I can only hope to give my life in service to my Master, Father, Teacher.
Do I do it for reward, sure, but more than that I do it because what God did for me. I deserved death and eternal punishment. Yet He gave me life. Forgiveness. And if all He asks is for me to do my best and help others in light of what He went through to gain my independence…
Yeah I’d give my life without question.
a lot of butthurt Christians in here XD
Despite the foolish boomer-snarkyness this was actually very informative.
Atheist snark
@@randallcrowley4704 there is that special touch of arrogance which you can only get when you grow up right at the end of a functioning society descending into nihilism. Then you still benefit from the easy environment enough to feel superior to the next generation and you can also look down on those former failed values and harvest some more pridefulness.
I agree. I find it odd that they are laughing. You can't seek to understand an idea if you dismiss out of hand.
@@matthiasmuller7677 Christianity never produced a functioning society. In fact its whole purpose is to destroy society and that's exactly what it has done for 2000 years.
@@alphabetpeople2902 if by society you mean either individualism or statist totalitarianism which are really just different sides of the same coin, then I agree.
כל י
Many inaccuracies here.
Site them, refute them. Otherwise what you say is more invalid than that which you claim to be false / inaccurate.
man , Neo Platonism came 250 years after Paul how can u say he took these ideas from them
Middle Platonism > Neoplatonism
Very clear presentation of Plotinus, although the smug, sneering style of the presenter and the hooting laughter of his fellow Rayndian atheists in the audience is kind of annoying.
Sorry but this guy would be more suited as a fairground barker than lecturing
on philosophy . Painful to listen to. As for the actual content......
oof, then, at 26 minutes, he shows his racism, its eastern, foreign, savage, bad. well, there you go.
Well go ask the untouchables in India how great eastern philosophy was.
The speaker seems to be filled with hatred for Christianity and he makes some serious blunders at several points. For example, the doctrine of the Trinity WAS NOT taken from the philosophies, but came directly from Christ. Also, in Christianity, evil IS NOT simply everything that is not God. If that were the case, then the entire creation - that is not God - would be evil, all angels, all the Saints, human soul, good works, etc. - non of whom is God - would be evil. Despite this, this blinded individual says that this is basically the Christian view. This is a terrible misrepresentation.
"If that were the case, then the entire creation - that is not God - would be evil, all angels, all the Saints, human soul, good works, etc. - non of whom is God - would be evil."
The bible literally says that adam made the world sinful and that it would be destroyed. In revelations earth is destroyed and a new heaven and new earth are made after. Then in Noah's flood god destroys the earth (even the animals) because humans were so sinful.