Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

610Re: Plotinus, "On Beauty" (1.6 [1])

Expand Messages
  • jensav55
    Apr 13, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In neoplatonism@yahoogroups.com, "mrnkogan" <achoufri@p...> wrote:
      >
      > I understand that "theoremata" are not Forms. What I do not
      > understand
      > is:
      > (1) How Plotinus could possibly consider some kind of "theoremata"
      > to
      > be "not dominated by shape" (which is his definition of ugliness).
      > What
      > does it mean for a "theorema" to be "dominated by shape"?

      But Plotinus does not refer to 'ugly' theoremata at I. 6. 1. 44ff,
      only to 'bad' ones. The difference is made clear by his statement at
      I. 6. 1. 46 that "there can be concord and agreement between bad ideas
      [theoremata]."

      > (2) What about the second part of my question (concerning the soul)?
      > In
      > particular, how should we take Plotinus' statement that ugliness
      > comes
      > to the soul through its "receiving a FORM (eidos) other than its
      own"?
      >

      'Other than its own' in the sense that it is incompatible with the
      soul's optimal functioning, albeit perhaps a form in its own right.
      Hence, for example, some patterns of behavior which might be
      appropriate for some other kind of animal do not befit a human.

      Edward Butler
    • Show all 9 messages in this topic