“Ennead I” by Plotinus

What is Consciousness

One of the things that came to mind when I read Ennead I was Alzheimer disease. I’ve heard some say that advanced Alzheimer disease makes life not worth living, and that people afflicted with this disease have become less than human. Although I strongly rejected this opinion, I did it intuitively and on emotional grounds, but failed to make any strong counter-arguments. Plotinus wrote some of his treatises on consciousness, soul and well-being when he was close to death, perhaps he had struggled with these issues personally and therefore wrote with conviction.

Consciousness, according to Plotinus, is like a mirror, it reflects the state and activity of our mind, but it is not the activity of our mind itself. Our mind remains active even when we are not conscious of it. Even when our brain has suffered damages or diseases, our mind is intact. This is in accord with Plato’s dichotomy between soul and body, mind and matter.

Intelligence transcends mind and matter, and yet it permeates all, because all things partake in its form or its image to various degrees. Our reason, i.e. reflexive thinking, is derived from Intelligence. It possesses the form of Intelligence, but it is not Intelligence itself. To use an analogy, the relationship between reason and Intelligence is rather like that between art and life. The closer reason approaches Intelligence, the better it is.

Aristotle wrote, “It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.” Viewed in the current context, it may be understood that our mind only accepts a thought akin to its own state, and rejects that which is contrary to itself. In other words, our consciousness is reflecting not only our own mind, but also someone else’s, like a theater with more than one actors on stage. What Aristotle calls “educated” is really synthetic, not pure in essence.

Descartes’ statement, “I think, therefore I am”, is not necessarily true. Because “I” may be reflecting other people’s thoughts. and void of intelligence myself, like a mindless parrot or anything capable of echoing.

What is Perception

The Latin root for perception means literally to take in, grasp. The Epicureans and Aristotle argue that sense-perception implies change in the recipient. If there is no change, there is nothing grasped, and no perception.

Plotinus endeavors to reconcile this argument with the Platonic conception of soul as immutable by positing an intermediary, namely, the living being, which is the product of the soul’s formative power upon the body.

“Soul’s power of perception need not be immediate grasping of sense-objects, but rather it must [discern] the impressions produced by sensation on the living being; these are already intelligible entities. So external sensation is the image of this perception of the soul, which is in its essence truer and is a contemplation of forms alone without being affected.”

The sensible objects are images of intelligible forms, which reside in the realm of the soul, therefore the soul “perceives” the sensible objects, not by reaching out and grasping, but by recollecting itself and contemplating the forms within.

What is Beauty

The things in this world are beautiful by participating in form. Beauty of the body is one kind, and beauty of the soul is another and higher. The soul delights in beautiful things, but much more in virtuous souls, because they are kindred to the beauty within itself. It is a competent judge of beauty, because it has the standard of beauty, the intelligible form, within. The way to Beauty is not through the senses, chasing after shadows of images of beauty, like a man who grasps for a beautiful reflection on water and sinks to the bottom. Only the beautiful can see beauty, and only the pure in soul can see Goodness. Absolute Beauty and Absolute Goodness are one and the same for God, from whom come beauty, goodness and all that belong to real beings.

References:

• “The First Ennead” at ebooks@Adelaide

"For Self-Examination/Judge for Yourself" by Søren Kierkegaard

The Craving

“The craving is strong momentarily; if it has its way only momentarily, then from its side there is nothing against making a lifetime promise. But to reverse the situation and say, ‘No–only not today, but tomorrow, the day after tomorrow, etc.’ — that fools the craving, since if there is waiting to do, then the craving loses the craving. If the craving is not granted entrance the moment it announces itself, ahead of every other, if it is told that it cannot be admitted until tomorrow, then the craving understands (even more swiftly than the most ingratiating and ingenious courtier or the wiliest woman understands what is means when this happens to them in the reception room), then the craving understands that it no longer is the one and only — in other words, it is no longer ‘the craving’.”

Becoming Sober

“To become sober is: to come to oneself in self-knowledge and before God as nothing before Him, yet infinitely, unconditionally engaged.”

“To become sober is: to come so close to oneself in ones’ understanding, in one’s knowing, that all one’s understanding becomes action.”

Christ is the Prototype

“This is Christian piety: renouncing everything to serve God alone, to deny oneself in order to serve God alone –and then to have to suffer for it– to do good and then to have to suffer for it. It is this that the prototype expresses.”

Against Humanity

According to Kierkegaard, Jesus and Socrates have something in common: Both were terrible robbers and both were sentenced to death for their robbery.

“What is assaulting a lone traveler on a highway perhaps a half-dozen times compared with his assault upon the whole human race and upon what it means to be a human being! A thief can steal my money; in so doing we are in disagreement, but in another sense we are completely in agreement, because the thief really shares my opinion that money is a great good. A slanderer can steal my honor and reputation, but the slanderer shares my opinion that honor and reputation are a great good, and that is why he robs me of mine. But in a much more cunning way one can rob us, so to speak, of all our money, honor, reputation, etc., steal from our human lives that in which we human beings have our lives. That is indeed what he, the accused, did.

He did not steal the rich man’s money–no, but he took the idea away from the possession of money. “O miserable, despicable mammon,” that is what his life expressed… Neither was he a slanderer who diminished anyone’s honor and reputation–no, but he took the idea away from human honor and reputation. “O miserable fool’s costume,” his life expressed,…

For the kind of robbery he has committed against us all there is only one punishment–the death penalty.”

I suspect Kierkegaard would have convicted them both of “crime against humanity” if the term had been in use in his time. Which is worse, to deprive millions of their lives (and yet in doing so confirm their humanity in a perverse way), or to deny the humanity of all the human race? Jesus condemned humanity by contrasting it with his own blameless life, just as Socrates exposed the worthlessness of commonly accepted ideals by examining them and living an “examined life”. It is not surprising, therefore, that humanity condemned them both to death, acting in self-defense.

“Rhetoric” by Aristotle

An acute observer of human nature, Aristotle gives a comprehensive psychological analysis of human emotions and motives. His diagnosis is humorous at times and chilling at others, entertaining and yet incisive.

Modes of Persuasion

Of the modes of persuasion furnished by the spoken word there are three kinds. The first kind depends on the personal character of the speaker; the second on putting the audience into a certain frame of mind; the third on the proof, or apparent proof, provided by the words of the speech itself.

Persuasion is achieved by the speaker’s personal character when the speech is so spoken as to make us think him credible. We believe good men more fully and more readily than others: this is absolutely true where exact certainty is impossible and opinions are divided. Secondly, persuasion may come through the hearers, when the speech stirs their emotions. Our judgements when we are pleased and friendly are not the same as when we are pained and hostile. … Thirdly, persuasion is effected through the speech itself when we have proved a truth or an apparent truth by means of the persuasive arguments suitable to the case in question.

The duty of rhetoric is to deal with such matters as we deliberate upon without arts or systems to guide us, in the hearing of persons who cannot take in at a glance a complicated argument, or follow a long chain of reasoning. The subjects of our deliberation are such as seem to present us with alternative possibilities.

Dealing with Various Forms of Governments

We must also notice the ends which the various forms of government pursue, since people choose in practice such actions as will lead to the realization of their ends. The end of democracy is freedom; of oligarchy, wealth; of aristocracy, the maintenance of education and national institutions; of tyranny, the protection of the tyrant. It is clear, then, that we must distinguish those particular customs, institutions, and interests which tend to realize the ideal of each constitution.

We should know the moral qualities characteristic of each form of government, for the special moral character of each is bound to provide us with our most effective means of persuasion in dealing with it. We shall learn the qualities of governments in the same way as we learn the qualities of individuals, since they are revealed in their deliberate acts of choice; and these are determined by the end that inspires them.

Style
A good writer can produce a style that is distinguished without being obtrusive, and is at the same time clear, thus satisfying our definition of good oratorical prose. [if a speaker manages well, there will be some thing “foreign” about his speech, while possibly the art may not be detected, and his meaning will be clear.]

Wealth
Wealth as a whole consists in using things rather than in owning them; it is really the activity-that is, the use-of property that constitutes wealth.”

Links:

• “Rhetoric” at Perseus
• “Rhetoric” at ebooks@Adelaide

“The Sickness Unto Death” by Søren Kierkegaard

What is Despair?

“Just as a physician might say there isn’t a single human being who enjoys perfect health, so someone with a proper knowledge of man might say there is not a single human being who does not despair at least a little, in whose innermost being there does not dwell an uneasiness, an unquiet, a discordance, an anxiety in the face of an unknown something, or a something he doesn’t even dare strike up acquaintance with, an anxiety about a possibility in life or an anxiety about himself.”

According to Kierkegaard, there is not a human being who is not in despair. If you’ve never despaired, it’s because you’ve never hoped, and that itself is precisely despair. Despair is the sickness unto death, not of the body but of the spirit.

This is a brilliant treatise on psychology, philosophy and theology. Part I provides insights into 1) the nature of self, which is a synthesis of infinitude and finitude, possibility and necessity; 2) the nature and cause of despair, which is an imbalance between infinitude and finitude, and an unsettling relation to self. Part II expounds the Christian concept of original sin, as despair is sin, the intensification of despair and the resulting torment, “dying you shall die”.

The Self as Spirit

Just as we determine the meaning of a word in the context of the book, so we find the meaning of an individual in the context of the society in which he lives. An individual experiences despair when the fabric of his existence is disrupted or destroyed, e.g., the loss of a loved one, a vocation, or any other object of his pursuit on which his happiness depends.

Kierkegaard uses the example of being deserted by a loved one. Some psychologist might say the despair in that case is limited only to the person’s love life. But Kierkegaard argues that despair is actually and always over oneself, e.g., not wanting to be oneself without the loved one. Seen from that perspective, despair is a pervasive and inherent state.

He goes further and states that an individual is not only a social being, but spirit. The social context is like a garment, and the true self underneath is revealed once the garment is removed. Even when he is securely grounded in society, he is in despair with regard to his relation to spirit, the eternal self, though he may not be conscious of being in despair.

In a sense, there is a deeper, more inherent and consistent context for the individual than society, it is God. An individual is always related to God and accountable before God, who is also the Standard by which the meaning and value of an individual is determined.

Despair or Hope, The Choice is Yours

Would you recommend your friend to see a doctor if he doesn’t look quite right? Of course. But, what if you suspect that your friend has a terminal disease, and all the doctor can do is to give the proper diagnosis without providing any cure?

According to Kierkegaard, despair is a disease that is incurable, though not in the usual sense of the word. There is no cure for it, because the cure comes not from outside but from the individual himself. Paradoxically or ironically, if the individual has the cure, he wouldn’t be or remain in despair in the first place.

Since God, Who is the Hope of mankind and with Whom all things are possible, is always present with the individual, the individual always has a choice to either open to Him in faith and thereby have hope in Him, or reject Him and remain in despair in himself.

Half way through the book, Kierkegaard revealed that he himself was also subject to despair. Yet, for him and for all Christians, there is hope. They may turn to the Physician who can heal all their diseases. The opposite of sin is not virtue, but faith, and God is “the author and finisher of our faith”. ”The self in being itself and in wanting to be itself is transparently grounded in God”.

The Christian Hope

In the Scriptures, the question of despair, indeed, the despair of all mankind, is raised in the Old Testament, and answered in the New Testament:

“How long, LORD?
Will You hide Yourself forever?
Will Your wrath burn like fire?
Remember how short my time is;
For what futility have You created all the children of men?
What man can live and not see death?
Can he deliver his life from the power of the grave?”
Psalm 89:46-48

” For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly,
but because of Him who subjected it in hope;
because the creation itself also will be delivered
from the bondage of corruption
into the glorious liberty of the children of God.”
Romans 8:20-21

God has committed them all to despair, that He might be their Hope. For where despair abounded, grace abounded much more.

The Love and Sorrow of God

“He can humble Himself, take the form of a servant, suffer and die for man, invite all to come unto Him, sacrifice every day of His life and every hour of the day, and sacrifice His life —but the possibility of the offense he cannot take away. Oh, unique work of love! Oh, unfathomable sorrow of love! that God Himself cannot, as in another sense He does not will, cannot will it, but, even if He would, He could not make it impossible that this work of love might not turn out to be for a person exactly the opposite, to be the extremist misery! For the greatest possible human misery, greater even than sin, is to be offended in Christ and remain offended. And Christ cannot, “Love” cannot render this impossible.”

Quotes:

“Ah! and when the hour-glass has run out, the hour-glass of temporality, when the worldly tumult is silenced and the restless or unavailing urgency comes to an end, when all about you is still as it is in eternity — whether you are man or woman, rich or poor, dependent or free, happy or unhappy; whether you bore in your elevation the splendour of the crown or in humble obscurity only the toil and heat of the day; whether your name will be remembered for as long as the world lasts, and so will have been remembered as long as it lasted, or you are without a name and run namelessly with the numberless multitude; whether the glory that surrounded you surpassed all human description, or the severest and most ignominious human judgment was passed on you — eternity asks you and every one of these millions of millions, just one thing: whether you have lived in despair or not, whether so in despair that you did not know that you were in despair, or in such a way that you bore this sickness concealed deep inside you as your gnawing secret, under your heart like the fruit of a sinful love, or in such a way that, a terror to others, you raged in despair. If then, if you have lived in despair, then whatever else you won or lost, for you everything is lost, eternity does not acknowledge you, it never knew you, or, still more dreadful, it knows you as you are known, it manacles you to yourself in despair!”

References:

• “The Sickness Unto Death” Online Book

“Fear and Trembling” by Søren Kierkegaard

Over the Abyss

This book reminded me of a close call I had many years ago. It was on a sunny Saturday. I was cruising on the highway, enjoying the scenery, music playing in the background, and a gentle breeze in my face. All of a sudden, a spider started crawling across the steering wheel. I tried to gently wipe it off, but lost control of the wheel. My car swerved and flew off the edge of the highway! I remember vividly, at the very moment when the car went over the edge, I thought to myself, “Wonder how deep is this abyss I’m falling into.”

Faith, the subject of this book, in a sense to me, is like stepping over the abyss and expecting to fly.

Many people are familiar with the painting by Michelangelo, “The Creation of Adam”, in which the hand of Adam reaching out almost touching the outstretched finger of God. Imagine in your mind’s eye that the right half of the painting is missing, i.e., if God were not in the picture, Adam would be staring and groping into the Abyss.

Contemplating Abraham’s Faith

“By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received the promises offered up his only begotten son, of whom it was said, ‘In Isaac your seed shall be called,’ concluding that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead, from which he also received him in a figurative sense.” Hebrews 11:17-19

I’ve read the biblical story of Abraham in Genesis 22 many times, and memorized the definition of “faith” in Hebrews 11. I thought I understood Abraham, that he was a friend of God and the father of faith, the same faith that I possess, albeit to a much smaller measure.

Kierkegaard showed me how little I knew Abraham and the true nature of faith. Abraham sacrificing his beloved son Isaac to God, is not unlike throwing Isaac into the abyss. Was he a murderer, a madman or a saint? We understand and admire the tragic heroes, who sacrifice their own lives and their loved ones for a higher and just cause. But who would understand Abraham if he killed his own son for no apparent justifiable purpose? How could he even know what he was doing was right when the ethics of society plainly condemned murder?

Abraham Gave Up His All

If Abraham had not loved Isaac, sacrificing Isaac would have been a selfish act. But Isaac was his only son, one born in his old age by the promise of God. He loved Isaac more than his own life. All his passions, hopes and the future of the entire race were bound up in Isaac. To give him up was to give up all.

One can not understand Abraham unless he too has an all-consuming, undying passion in his own life, and is deprived of the object of his passion either of his own volition or by the circumstances.

Abraham Was Damned to Isolation

Kierkegaard proclaims, “Isn’t it true that those who God blesses He damns  in the same breath?” The Scripture confirms, “For what is highly esteemed among men is an abomination in the sight of God”, and vice versa.

Virgin Mary was blessed by God, and yet despised by the people, for she bore the Child miraculously; Abraham was a friend of God, and yet what he intended to do was condemned by society. He could not explain nor justify his apparently unethical action, for he believed the impossible, the absurd, and therefore was isolated from society.

There is no safety net, i.e., the support and sympathy of other people, underneath him as he stepped over the abyss. He could not fall back and take comfort in the strength of the multitude. He believed in God alone, in his own conviction of what God asked of him; He walked and bore his burden alone.

Abraham Was Elevated as an Individual Above Universal

“Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.” Not because of his philanthropic or heroic deeds, but because of his own faith. However, he would have been regarded as demon-possessed if he had killed Isaac. Therein lies the paradox.

Many individuals isolated themselves from and elevated themselves above the Universal, being led stray by demonic passions and pride, some thinking that “he offers God service”, and they perished in the Abyss. Could he have been one of them?

It’s unfathomable what is contained in these three words, “Abraham believed God”. And yet paradoxically, it is also very simple, all he (and any of us) had to do was to take the step, the leap of faith.

Kierkegaard’s Passion

Kierkegaard was known for his keen intellect, and I find his wit and pithy style very refreshing among philosophical writings. He gave a thorough, insightful analysis of Abraham, describing the doubt, the fear, the distress and the agony he must have gone through, and demonstrating how his faith is similar and yet different from all the other historical, mythical and fictional figures we’re familiar with, such as Agamemnon, Socrates, Richard III and Faust.

Halfway through the book, however, it dawned on me that Kierkegaard was not only writing a philosophical or psychological treatise, but a love letter not addressed to the beloved. He could relate to Abraham and understand him in part, because he shared the same passion. He too dedicated himself to the love of God and gave up the love of his life, his fiance Regine. In describing the agonies of Abraham, he was also relating his own struggles with faith and sacrificed love.

Anyone with a spark of passion in his soul would see his own reflection in this book.

Quotes:

“”If there were no eternal consciousness in a man, if at the bottom of everything there were only a wild ferment, a power that twisting in dark passions produced everything great or inconsequential; if an unfathomable, insatiable emptiness lay hid beneath everything, what then would life be but despair? If it were thus, if there were no sacred bond uniting mankind, if one generation rose up after another like the leaves of the forest, if one generation succeeded the other as the songs of birds in the woods, if the human race passed through the world as a ship through the sea or the wind through the desert, a thoughtless and fruitless whim, if an eternal oblivion always lurked angrily for its prey and there were no power strong enough to wrest it from its clutches — how empty and devoid of comfort would life be!”

“For he who loves God without faith reflects on himself, while the person who loves God in faith reflects on God.”

“Faith is a marvel, and yet no human being is excluded from it; for that in which all human life is united is passion, and faith is a passion.”

Links:

• “Fear and Trembling” Online Book

“Memories, Dreams and Reflections” by C. G. Jung

A Fascinating and Unique Autobiography

Jung explores many fields that are both familiar and strange, such as astrology, alchemy, philosophy, psychology and religion. For someone with limited knowledge and experience, Jung is quite understandable, as he conveys his ideas and feelings very well despite the broad scope and  complexities of the subjects. He has a truly synthesizing mind.

It’s a unique autobiography, because, instead of a record of events in Jung’s life, it’s an account mainly of his inner experiences, his dreams, fantasies and reflections. Life is viewed as a process of transformation, namely, transformation of the psyche to achieve “wholeness” or “total consciousness”. Jung also reflects on his relationships and encounters with people who have influenced him, most notably Freud. It’s surprising, however, that he seldom mentions his wife, though he speaks volumes about his parents.

Jung identifies himself strongly with Goethe’s Faust, who gave his soul in exchange for knowledge. He asserts that there are opposites in everything and is particularly obsessed with the dark secrets. The book documents his fascination with corpses and graves, his experiments and experiences with  the unconscious, spirits and multiple personalities. If not for his social support, he would perhaps have gone over the edge like Nietzsche.

Answer Comes From Within

“Inner experiences also set their seal on the outward events that came my way and assumed importance for me in youth or later on. I early arrived at the insight that when no answer comes from within to the problems and complexities of life, they ultimately mean very little. Outward circumstances are no substitute for inner experience. … I can understand myself only in the light of inner happenings. It is these that make up the singularity of my life, and with these my autobiography deals.”

A Diabolical Mixture of the Sublime and the Ridiculous

“From the beginning I had conceived my voluntary confrontation with the unconscious as a scientific experiment which I myself was conducting and in whose outcome I was vitally interested. Today I might equally well say that it was an experiment which was being conducted on me. One of the greatest difficulties for me lay in dealing with my negative feelings. I was voluntarily submitting myself to emotions of which I could not really approve, and I was writing down fantasies which often struck me as nonsense, and toward which I had strong resistances. For as long as we do not understand their meaning, such fantasies are a diabolical mixture of the sublime and the ridiculous. It cost me a great deal to undergo them, but I had been challenged by fate. Only by extreme effort was I finally able to escape from the labyrinth.”

“I was afraid of losing command of myself and becoming a prey to the fantasies and as a psychiatrist I realized only too well what that meant. After prolonged hesitation, however, I saw that there was no other way out. I had to take the chance, had to try to gain power over them; for I realized that if I did not do so, I ran the risk of their gaining power over me. A cogent motive for my making the attempt was the conviction that I could not expect of my patients something I did not dare to do myself. … This idea that I was committing myself to a dangerous enterprise not for myself alone, but also for the sake of my patients helped me over several critical phases.”

The Process of Individuation

“As I worked with my fantasies, I became aware that the unconscious
undergoes or produces change. Only after I had familiarized myself with alchemy did I realize that the unconscious is a process, and that the psyche is transformed or developed by the relationship of the ego to the contents of the unconscious. In individual cases that transformation can be read from dreams and fantasies. In collective life it has left its deposit principally in the various religious systems and their changing symbols. Through the study of these collective transformation processes and through understanding of alchemical symbolism I arrived at the central concept of my psychology: the process of individuation.”

“Man’s Search for Meaning” by Viktor Frankl

“I shall never forget how I was roused one night by the groans of a fellow prisoner, who threw himself about in his sleep, obviously having a horrible nightmare. … I wanted to wake the poor man. Suddenly I drew back the hand which was ready to shake him, … At that moment, I became intensely conscious of the fact that no dream, no matter how horrible, could be as bad as the reality of the camp which surrounded us, and to which I was about to recall him.”

Under the dire circumstances of the concentration camps, Frankl became fully convinced that if life is to have meaning, there must be meaning in death and sufferings also, and that every day, every moment, in every situation, no matter how dreadful and seemingly hopeless, a human being still can live with dignity and meaning, he always has the freedom to choose to be responsible for his life, to love, to experience life in its fullness even through sufferings.

Quotes:

“Ultimately, man should not ask what the meaning of his life is, but rather he must recognize that it is he who is asked. In a word, each man is questioned by life, and he can only answer to life by answering for his own life;”