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

Re: [neoplatonism] Neoplatonism book reviews

Expand Messages
  • Michael Paris
    Indeed there are, few as we may be. In sufficient numbers, apparently, to keep books of Brian Hines, Pierre Hadot, John Deck, et. al. in print. There s nothing
    Message 1 of 11 , Oct 31, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      Indeed there are, few as we may be. In sufficient numbers, apparently,
      to keep books of Brian Hines, Pierre Hadot, John Deck, et. al. in print.

      There's nothing quite like Neoplatonism. My first encounter was like an
      electric shock.



      Best wishes,

      Michael Paris


      Bruce MacLennan wrote:

      Hi Les,

      On Oct 27, 2009, at 5:54 AM, leslie greenhill wrote:

      > Did Neoplatonism only exist in the past or are there a few people
      > around now who actively continue and develop the tradition?

      Yes, there are some of us who pursue it in our own (perhaps divergent)
      ways.

      Hugieia!
      Bruce MacLennan
    • John Uebersax
      A while back I tried to compile a list of Platonists in the Italian Renaissance, beginning with Marsilio Ficino s Florentine circle. It didn t take long
      Message 2 of 11 , Nov 1, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        A while back I tried to compile a list of Platonists in the Italian Renaissance, beginning with Marsilio Ficino's Florentine circle. It didn't take long before the list expanded to an unmanageable level. There were Platonists all over the place, beyond counting. And this was probably true in other historical periods as well. We know about the famous figures. But they were just the tip of the iceberg. We like to think it's the famous figures who define the history of philosophy. That's one view. An alternative is that it's the zeitgeist that evolves, and that the famous figures are markers, indicators of the zeitgeist -- or maybe catalysts -- but not the same as the zeitgeist itself. It's arguably the greater numbers of students and scholars quietly studying Platonism on their own that are the defining element.

        John Uebersax
      • leslie greenhill
        John   Would you place Leonardo da Vinci in that circle?  I have made a study of his version of Vitruvian Man and certain aspects of his notebooks.  I have
        Message 3 of 11 , Nov 1, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          John
           
          Would you place Leonardo da Vinci in that circle?  I have made a study of his version of Vitruvian Man and certain aspects of his notebooks.  I have a strong view that he had Platonic and Pythagorean leanings.  And in my hometown, Melbourne, like a few new world cities, our early architecture (via Freemasonry) has been extensively influenced by Platonic and Pythagorean ideas.  A preliminary examination of one of our most significant structures suggests that key aspects of Plato's design for Atlantis has been ingeniously incorporated.  
           
          Les
           
          P.O. Box 314
          Mentone, Victoria 3194 Australia
          Email: neoplatonist2000@...

          --- On Sun, 1/11/09, John Uebersax <john.uebersax@...> wrote:


          From: John Uebersax <john.uebersax@...>
          Subject: Re: [neoplatonism] Neoplatonism book reviews
          To: neoplatonism@yahoogroups.com
          Received: Sunday, 1 November, 2009, 6:03 PM


           



          A while back I tried to compile a list of Platonists in the Italian Renaissance, beginning with Marsilio Ficino's Florentine circle. It didn't take long before the list expanded to an unmanageable level. There were Platonists all over the place, beyond counting. And this was probably true in other historical periods as well. We know about the famous figures. But they were just the tip of the iceberg. We like to think it's the famous figures who define the history of philosophy. That's one view. An alternative is that it's the zeitgeist that evolves, and that the famous figures are markers, indicators of the zeitgeist -- or maybe catalysts -- but not the same as the zeitgeist itself. It's arguably the greater numbers of students and scholars quietly studying Platonism on their own that are the defining element.

          John Uebersax

















          __________________________________________________________________________________
          Get more done like never before with Yahoo!7 Mail.
          Learn more: http://au.overview.mail.yahoo.com/
        • John Uebersax
          Les, I looked into possible direct connection between da Vinci and Ficino s Platonic circle, but don t recall what I concluded (though this would be an easy
          Message 4 of 11 , Nov 2, 2009
          • 0 Attachment
            Les,

            I looked into possible direct connection between da Vinci and Ficino's Platonic circle, but don't recall what I concluded (though this would be an easy question for anybody who had any expertise in the subject). Certainly da Vinci was not far removed, in any case; he knew Botticelli, and Lorenzo de Medici was his patron for many years (both in Ficino's circle), and owned at least one of Ficino's books.

            Ficino was by no means the first or only Florentine intellectual stimulating interest in Plato, Pythagoras and Hermeticism, so its hard to imagine Leonardo not having ample opportunity to explore such subjects.

            John
          • leslie greenhill
            Certainly.  I am especially interested in Leonardo s relationships with Donato Bramante and, in particular, with Cesar Cesariano, who also published a
            Message 5 of 11 , Nov 2, 2009
            • 0 Attachment
              Certainly.  I am especially interested in Leonardo's relationships with Donato Bramante and, in particular, with Cesar Cesariano, who also published a version of Vitruvius's "The Ten Books on Architecture" in 1521.  If I ever get anywhere with my work, Cesariano, may well turn out to be one of the most significant Platonic/Pythagorean characters in history.  From some findings I have made, he seems to have a profound understanding of the "mysteries".
               
              Les

              P.O. Box 314
              Mentone, Victoria 3194 Australia
              Email: neoplatonist2000@...

              --- On Tue, 3/11/09, John Uebersax <john.uebersax@...> wrote:


              From: John Uebersax <john.uebersax@...>
              Subject: Re: [neoplatonism] Neoplatonism book reviews
              To: neoplatonism@yahoogroups.com
              Received: Tuesday, 3 November, 2009, 2:07 AM


               



              Les,

              I looked into possible direct connection between da Vinci and Ficino's Platonic circle, but don't recall what I concluded (though this would be an easy question for anybody who had any expertise in the subject). Certainly da Vinci was not far removed, in any case; he knew Botticelli, and Lorenzo de Medici was his patron for many years (both in Ficino's circle), and owned at least one of Ficino's books.

              Ficino was by no means the first or only Florentine intellectual stimulating interest in Plato, Pythagoras and Hermeticism, so its hard to imagine Leonardo not having ample opportunity to explore such subjects.

              John















              Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com

              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.