2062Re: Iamblichus 'eye of wisdom' alleged reference
- May 9, 2008--- In email@example.com, "vaeringjar" <vaeringjar@...>
> > In any case, this this article describes some interesting views
> the pineal gland inslightest
> > antiquity and late antiquity:
> > Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
> > "Descartes and the Pineal Gland"
> > http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pineal-gland/
> > Hope this helps.
> > John Uebersax
> > Brussels
> > http://satyagraha.wordpress.com
> Somehow I made it this far in life without ever having the
> notion of even where the pineal gland is, and now thanks to yourhow
> pointing out this fascinating article at the Stanford site I see
> important it once was considered. Thanks. I really liked this bitin
> "In a treatise called On the difference between spirit and soul,
> Qusta ibn Luqa (864-923) combined Nemesius' ventricular
> doctrine with Galen's account of a worm-like part of the brain that2,
> controls the flow of animal spirit between the middle and posterior
> ventricles. He wrote that people who want to remember look upwards
> because this raises the worm-like particle, opens the passage, and
> enables the retrieval of memories from the posterior ventricle.
> People who want to think, on the other hand, look down because this
> lowers the particle, closes the passage, and protects the spirit in
> the middle ventricle from being disturbed by memories stored in the
> posterior ventricle (Constantinus Africanus 1536, p. 310) (Figure
> Figure 3). Qusta's treatise was very influential in thirteenth-the
> century scholastic Europe (Wilcox 1985)."
> Especially curious is the looking up and looking down!
> There is also an interesting little code about Madame Blavatsky and
> the pineal gland as a vestigial Third Eye, the sad denouement of
> pinealis philosophica, I suppose. Now of course it would be a greatevidence
> irony if in the future some evolutionary scientist turned up
> that the pineal was actually somehow crucial in the development ofCorrection on the Blavatsky - read please "coda".
> consciousness or some such.
> The comments there about Descartes being a Platonist rather eluded
> me. I didn't get a chance to follow up on those in detail, but how
> was Descartes a Platonist, I wonder? I should know already, but I
> haven't read anything about him in over 20 years.
> Dennis Clark
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>