Autism Project Donations:

Autism Project Donations here - https://www.paypal.com/donate?hosted_button_id=23MBUB4W8AL7E

Tuesday 31 May 2022

Out In The Alleyway

Now here, some of you will start to perform miraculous things. Literally you will attain special powers. Oh you think not?

So sooner or later I guess we had to get here though.

The good question was posed in some recent pages - 'what is this, about Love being the child of Poverty?'

This whole idea underpins everything that is Christianity at its core. There is literally no such thing as 'Christianity' without this entire concept, intact, straight from the actual core meaning of the affair.

Cristina Soto's just-posted, photograph
of the many layers of blue.

The Symposium is far and away the most complex, the most austerely advanced, and the least understood of all of the works of Plato, whether they be the known authentic works, or any whose authorship is contested among scholars.

Even more complex than any of the texts that deal with maths and geometry, is the Symposium.

Because, the structure is one of many dimensions.

The play, virtually, is designed around a sophisticated dinner, attended only by the highest class, most educated, and esteemed of people including a leading Athenian doctor and the historical Athenian general Alcibiades.

The discussion is deemed so important by these leading figures, that they instruct the host to 'send the dancing girls away' for the rest of the evening.

And this mind you, is still a wine drinking party. And in fact this aspect becomes a crucial 'literary device' (let's just leave it at that for the moment) towards the end.

Here begins this whole matter of 'different dimensions;' for on the one hand, the girls are going to distract, but somehow, we are meant to accept that the wine will not affect the procuring of the truth - which is what they were all going after here.

The Christian 'New Testament' leaps ahead over the subject of well, but really, why?

And also, how did it all begin, and not with the Garden of Eden story, but hey, where did all these 'God' things, come from at all? I mean why not, we just have nothing and then 'Big Bang' then soup and then lightning and then amoeba and then slugs and then lizards and then monkeys and then giraffes and finally, Neanderthals, from where we have only gone backwards ever since.

Plaster model and art by Ben Kommets
and 'Lucky-LBT.'
The Praiseworthy One, Socrates.
Or is that a genie?

LOL

But everything in the Symposium is happening on multiple levels all at once...

So, as people with the modern Western Mind, we must see the Goddess 'Ate' (Destruction/Havoc) now, not with our crass and simple-minded, childish 'modern' Western vision, but in a different way.

Ate is Destruction yes, but then she is the daughter of a Goddess (Eris) by parthenogenesis, of Nyx, with whom Zeus then co-operates, to plant her (Eris) deep into the Earth and so that she (Eris, who is 'Envy') would be here to interact with Mankind in a certain way.

Ate has a daughter, who is 'Poverty.' So right away we must 'see' that Envy causes Strife, which causes Destruction which ends up in Poverty.

But this is not the whole of the matter - 'Envy' is an extremely powerful animating daimones, which causes Men even lazy ones, to work to attain something they desire to have; and only after that, is it sometimes (albeit mostly it is) the case that war and strife ensue when the desires are not achieved.

So we have this great big profile story here going on, this systematic chain of connected psychological events.

And so that is how come we have Poverty coming into the scene now; and that is how we must view her - as a crucial element within a whole profile of connected things.

Moving into another 'dimension' then, Poverty is a God: she is a Spirit, meaning not some kind of wisp of fog in a graveyard, but a super powerful Divine thing. Which means - she cannot die, she cannot be overcome by mortal things, and she has Divine Power, that is to say, Divine means to get whatever she wants.

The wine, the food...
...and our own Poverty.

She goes to a feast of wining and dining other Gods, and she well knows her own suffering and lack, and seeing that the God 'Plenty,' or Abundance, or Resource is completely drunk and fallen over asleep at that moment in the back yard, she purposes to lie with him and conceive a child who will then inherit of his father, some wealth, and therewith resolve her own lack; in a way.

So this then, is the God 'Love.'

From His mother He has literally nothing, but He also inherits from her great contrivance, literally the Divine Skill to make something from out of nothing - since, because she herself is a God, she can do anything, but the way she does it, is from without any advantages at all.

And from His father, He literally gets everything.

And then, in the Symposium, we learn something on another level again, namely that some genealogists of the Gods, regard 'Love' as the youngest of the Gods, and then yet, others of them regard Him as literally the Oldest, through some strange and mysterious means.

And they say that prior to His birth, it was the very reason of His not being there beforehand, that the Gods warred and did violence and many horrible things happened, and that after His advent, He subdued all of them permanently, so that none of them who did not bow to Him were permitted to remain in Olympus ever more. And that only those 'among whom there was ever Love only, and no enmity at all' were allowed to remain in the Heaven of the Gods.

But then, without anyone telling us, we must see that He is in fact a direct descendant of Nyx, of whom even Zeus the Leader and Father of Gods and Men was solely afraid and respected completely. And because Nyx is His (Zeus's) own daughter's (Wisdom)'s aunt or grandmother, He also has a somewhat similar relationship to her too (the Goddess 'Wisdom') although she behaves to him as a daughter and is also respectful anyway.

And if He, Love, is a descendant of Nyx, then by the organized structure of Divinity, He is of the oldest strands of the Divine Vine, as it were.

The Genie is out of the bottle!

We are mortals. In the sense of what is truly speaking Eternal, we have nothing, and we die, to be no more, whether personally, or in any other way as a given certainty.

In the Symposium, suddenly at the end, Plato interposes a new device. He brings in the drunken general Alcibiades, dressed like Dionysus, the God of Wine, and just like Dionysus is often to be found, having come back from a street party, where he has been cavorting with lovers.

Now Alcibiades is a completely historical figure, of whom we know a very great deal.

He was the last 'famous' (there may be others, descendants down to this very day, but none are famous) of the Aristocratic family the Alcmaeonidae, among whose ancestors was the old soldier Nestor, who possessed a large drinking vessel, so huge and heavy that none but he was able to lift it and drink it. And Nestor, was a human descendant of Poseidon's affair with a princess of Thessaly, which makes Alcibiades already regarded 'officially' as semi-divine himself. 

Plato is implicating the ancestral Nestorian Drinking Vessel echo (which Greeks would know about, but is not explicit in the text) in Alcibiades' very presence there at all, and his comportment (his attire and his state of drunkeness), with Divinity and specifically with the God Dionysus. He is making Alcibiades into a real life, earthly, physical material presence or 'hint,' of the actual spirit of Dionysus.

And that simply underscores the point that Plato is making, namely, that here in this part of the 'dialogue,' we are to understand that this is now taking things right down to earth, as in, this is now a real-life thing going on for us to see through the story, but, that it implicates the matter of the 'demi-god' nature of certain people and certain things.

Alcibiades is a literary device, that we are to take as representing the God Dionysus Himself.

And then, 'things get messy' you see, because naturally, Alcibiades is quite drunk. By 'messy' we can also say 'they get real.'

So let us also now 'get real.'

We are humans. We live, we come from nothing and Hawking's Big Bang, and we die. And that's it. Back to the nothing that we are.

Hawking has nothing for us. He is nothing himself right now. A few words on some pages, some digital space in some computer chips, some DNA samples stored in labs in Imperial College London.

Now by the way, so as not to be unfair on 'sci-entists' (those creatures who actually know exactly nothing, in fact), in another plane of dimension in the dialogue, we have heard from the Athenian doctor, Eryximachus, on the physician's perspective of 'Love.' And right convincing it is too.

Alcibiades' 'Naval Marque...'

Meanwhile, Alcibiades is telling us now, things about 'the tire rubber hitting the road,' as it were.

Just a little beforehand, Socrates' old nurse maid, Diotima from Mantinea, had been setting forth how it is that a human mortal person, can become immortal...

A mortal, realistically, in the sense of anything really enduring by way of personal consciousness, literally has nothing and cannot be immortal.

And to a certainty, Steven Hawking is fully dead and completely gone. Maybe he reincarnates, but possibly not, and in all events, even if he did -, not so that his ego and his mind, his actual consciousness, knows anything about it. Yet the whole world is fooled by him when he has the stage, given to him by others, whose motives you cannot see.

Say to the carpet: 'Rise!' And it will not. This is reality.

Whereas Diotima, the 'woman who honors,' or who is honored by Deos (it can mean both things), is credited by Socrates in the Symposium, as inspiring the theory, that God is able to raise dead things or inanimate things, or make mortal things eternal beings. And then she goes ahead and says what 'God' actually is. But it is all wrapped up in the ultra-dimensionality of the Symposium, as a structured Platonic 'dialogue.' And Alcibiades disrupts everything at the end.

Capture though, even just the one time, and even but only dimly too, the 'ultra' meaning of the words that are in there, and the carpet rises but only for the person who has grasped the core.




20 comments:

  1. Socrates, that guy who invites you to be his +1 at a dinner party, and then mysteriously disappears just before you reach the place.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In that case, the carpet didn't rise, it was just pulled from under you.

      Delete
  2. To paraphrase The Stones: "I'm not waiting on Diotima / I'm just waiting on a friend..."

    ReplyDelete
  3. 'Truth? My bohyyyyy...' Taps the guy on the face; Jagger in the good movie 'Burnt Orange Heresy.'

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. On the album "Goddess in the Doorway," Mick sings: "God gave me everything I want..."

      All things and everything. Thy will be done, eh? Lol

      Delete
    2. BTW, "The Burnt Orange Heresy" is not easy to find in a free, or even cheap, configuration. It appears to be held with value - as a valuable message?

      I will seek it.

      Delete
  4. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  5. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  6. It's 2022. Read the end parts of the Symposium and tell me, what is going on there, what is Socrates ACTUALLY doing... ...from the point of view of someone living in 2022, and with 2022 widespread pop philosophy/metaphysics understanding? It's not always about reading. At a certain point we are able to put what we read into action; if we know what it is that we read in the first place. You think about how serious this really is - for over 2000 years people have been reading that text and no one yet has 'got it.' They all acclaim it for differing reasons, but... ...tell me what Socrates is actually DOING.

    1 June 2022 at 08:42

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ok so it’s taken a while for me to get my thoughts straight on what I think Socrates is doing in the latter part of Symposium. I don’t have the right words but I hope you get the gist.

      Firstly i was going in circles with my thinking and my sister who is always on her phone showed my a feel good pic and said. “what if we aren’t really going in circles but walking a spiral upwards and it only seems like walking in circles”. This got me thinking about how Socrates (Diotima) had reduced love to its essence having walked through the various perceptions of love, it’s nature, purpose and the pursuit of it. Like walking the ever smaller circles of the spiral. until they pinpointed, not reduced, the essence of love.

      Then what I thought? Then Socrates states his intent to “praise the power and spirit of love according to the measure of my ability now and ever”. He’s leading a guided meditation of focused intent or entraining the brains of his companions. This is a practical matter hence the sending away of the flute girl (the entertainment) and having just enough wine to loosen up. It’s a club meeting! They are going through a practice of stepping through the aspects of love - until they pinpoint the true essence - then like a laser beam they are beholding that beauty with the eye of the mind. Having achieved this they bring forth and become the friend of God (as according to Diotima) and which Plato proves with the arrival of Dionysus (Alcibiades) who brings the plenty of wine.

      Delete
  7. Any English translation you'd recommend?

    ReplyDelete
  8. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Jowett translation. 100% the Benjamin Jowett translation ahead of everyone else. (Not sure why my typing skills went to hell today! LOL) Anyway - School Board Meeting shortly, next Blog article will be prolly later that usual (I've been going nuts here recently anyway).

    ReplyDelete
  10. Reading about Alcibiades and the desecration of the herms. Herms, "ermata," were originally piles of stone or blocks of wood? Did they make them out of myrtle? Oh and hermes is associated with incense, interesting.

    ReplyDelete
  11. The wood thing is a different thing. Although also associated with Hermes. But this is somewhat of a slander against Athena, even though she was almost raped (in the story) by Hermes. The wooden figures intended to convey that certain ('Divinely generated') people were not 'borne' by an Olympian mother then, but had only the Earth as their foster mother, and hence the Earth bore stones, not plants since Athena had a sacred plant of the ground - the Olive. The stones were piles of pebbles, because, each succeeding generation laid one or more round stones on top of those that had been laid there before. These 'pebbles' are in fact a land claim, and the story is similar to the Jewish/Biblical one about Mount Hermon where certain of the angels came down. Interestingly, the words, the story and the names are similar. The rape of Athena is a lie though, because these beings in fact descended on Mount Evuron, same as the Mount Hermon story. 'Hermes' is once again, the same Harlequin story and frankly, it's um, let's just say 'very complicated.' I do not believe that Hermes and Athena 'do not get on.' But it is, complicated...

    ReplyDelete
  12. So there is not the implication of a previous belief in a pile of stones or a block of wood as serving as some sort of connection between mortal and divine worlds?

    So the "desecration of the herms" (removal of the head and the phalus from the statues) shouldn't be read as a "subtle reminder" about the original purpose of the stone blocks?

    ReplyDelete
  13. How long did it take you to get to the phallus aspect to the 'Alcibiades' story? LOL Ten seconds, right? Not even. And have you read the WHOLE of the Symposium then, or just remember 'reading' it maybe at Uni one time over a few beers or a dozen with colleagues... Like I said, over more than two thousand years already, the 'great minds' of the human race, have been caught up on the phallus here... What I really wanted to hear from someone, was Calvin why are you saying 'somewhat' slanderous - either a thing is slanderous or it isn't, so why 'somewhat?' I shall address all of your points in the next - well, I have to now, don't I? Now that you have 'gone there!'

    ReplyDelete
  14. You don't have to if you don't feel like it. I didn't go there, there are photos of hermata online. Square things with a head on top and a penis in the middle. Pretty ridiculous. And it says these things were all over the place in Athens. It's not the penis that I'm caught up on, it's the square block of stone. Or wood? WOOD? Well whatever. Were people using objects like this in some way in the early early days? And did those things' uses become corrupted into "private property markers" and also a kind of nexus for spreading war propaganda at another time? That's where I "was going."

    ReplyDelete
  15. Ah we can "go farther." Hermes, the "herald" of the gods. A stone structure built over time, each little piece placed by a member of the family, like a kind of signature. Like the "herald" on a "coat of arms." A thing to represent the genetic lineage.

    I can imagine the looks on the faces if I had said that sort of thing "at uni."

    But then there's all the talk in the beginning before Socrates/Agathon start playing peculiar word games, where it's basically set down as accepted not controversial background knowledge that the Athenian elites political class where ALL gay pedophiles, and that this was the gateway for entry into participation. Jesus H. Christ, what the fuck?

    ReplyDelete
  16. For the record. My path was "google: plato symposium" -> Geoffrey Steadman's preface -> "google: desecration of the herms" -> "google: hermata wikipedia" -> photos of square pillars of stone with a head on top and genetalia.

    ReplyDelete

Your considered comments are welcome