Introduction to the Philosophy and Writings of Plato

by Thomas Taylor

This book was converted from its physical edition to the digital format by a community of volunteers. You may find it for free on the web. Purchase of the Kindle edition includes wireless delivery.

Genres: Philosophy, Nonfiction, Classics, Amazon

132 pages, Kindle Edition

First published January 1, 1804

About the author

Librarian Note: There is more than one author with this name in the Goodreads database

Thomas Taylor was an English translator and Neoplatonist, the first to translate into English the complete works of Aristotle and of Plato, as well as the Orphic fragments. He published prolifically for over 50 years.

Reviews

[Erick · Rating 3 out of 5]

I have some ambivalence for Thomas Taylor. I dislike his obsequious Neo-Platonic (i.e. neo-pagan) preaching; it is often grating on the patience and usually not relevant at all. He was, however, a competent translator and, for the most part, interpreter of the Neo-Platonists and the way they interpreted Plato. This introduction is a good example of that tendency of his. I adamantly do draw a distinction between Plato and his Neo-Platonic interpreters. My position on their interpretations of Plato run from improbable to probable; occasionally they present simply a possible interpretation. The idea that the Neo-Platonists were simply following traditional Platonism going back to the early academy doesn't hold a lot of water with me. They were clearly influenced by traditions outside of the academy. They show an acquaintance with Aristotle, the Stoics, the Pythagoreans, and other more obscure traditions like Orphism and Chaldaic mysticism. Indeed Plato was influenced by some of these earlier traditions, but how much is debatable in some cases. The influence of these traditions are usually relegated to a very particular dialogue and not evident over numerous dialogues. There are some exceptions of course: his position on the immortality of the soul, the existence of transcendent ideas/forms, reincarnation, etc. The almost total dependence on idiosyncratic dialogues like the Parmenides for Neo-Platonist thought, I believe is somewhat problematic.

I have no issue with the Neo-Platonists as a whole. They present some profound and thought provoking philosophical ideas, but here Taylor is supposedly introducing Plato's writings, not Proclus' writings. I usually don't comment on other reviews, but I'm not surprised if someone struggled to understand this introduction. One needs to have not only a comprehensive acquaintance with Plato, but also a basic understanding of Proclus. Also, Taylor will use English terms where one has to have enough acquaintance with Greek to know how the English relates to his line of thought in the underlying Greek, i.e. certain Greek terms can be translated using a number of English terms and Taylor will switch terminology that is related in Greek, but isn't usually in English. This will throw the reader if they don't know the underlying Greek terminology. That being said, I would never give a poor review simply for my admitted lack of understanding. I didn't struggle with understanding Taylor's introduction at all because I have read Proclus enough to know that Taylor is pretty much wholly dependent on his interpretation of Plato. One obvious example is that Taylor uses Proclus' terminology when dealing with the cosmic modal hierarchies - and this is a big clue that Taylor isn't simply interpreting Plato's works as they are, but really as a follower of Proclus.

As it stands, this book serves as a guide to Neo-Platonic thought and it's interpretations of Plato. One needs to understand this going into it. I'm just beginning to read Schleiermacher's introductions to Plato's dialogues. Like his contemporary British counterpart, Schleiermacher (with some help from Friedrich Schlegel) has the distinction of being the first to translate the Platonic dialogues into German during the romantic era. It will be nice to get acquainted with his take.

I have to give this book 3 stars. Some of Taylor's griping and preaching makes his writing almost insufferable at times.

[Prakriti · Rating 2 out of 5]

I am not a philosophy student. An innocent conversation with a friend led me to the ‘Justice’ lecture series by Professor Michael Sandel, which compelled me to explore this subject matter in greater depths.

After having read the ‘Apology’ by Plato, I realised I needed to read something that would introduce me to Plato’s philosophy before diving further. But this book is not about that. It is the author’s own take on Platonism. Right off the bat there are some obvious hurdles. The writing style is ornate. It takes a lot of patience to make sense and derive something useful from the text. That patience though is rewarded by some beautiful passages on intellect and rational thinking.

To my surprise, I found the author’s writing more declamatory. It was exasperating to read about his criticism of experimental and modern science. He writes “On the other hand modern mathematicians, through a profound ignorance of this divine truth, and looking to nothing but the wants and conveniences of the animal life of man, as if the gratification of his senses was his only end, have corrupted pure geometry, by mingling with it algebraical calculations, and through eagerness to reduce it as much as possible to practical purposes, have more anxiously sought after conciseness than accuracy, facility than elegance of geometrical demonstration.”
Though, I am a novice at this subject, I am quite sure there are instances in the book where applications of Platonism have been overstated. Here’s one such example: “the principles of the philosophy of Plato are of all others the most friendly to true piety, pure morality, solid learning, and sound government. For as it is scientific in all its parts, and in these parts comprehends all that can be known by man in theology and ethics, and all that is necessary for him to know in physics.”

I may recommend this book to someone looking to explore interpretation of Platonism by different authors across different time periods. But it does not serve as an ‘introduction’ to anything.

[Kristina · Rating 1 out of 5]

This was really hard work and difficult to follow particularly because of the style of writing employed by the author. He writes in a verbose style, lots of superfluous words, overly complex sentence structure.

It's a shame really because I'm sure there are some great thoughts in this book, I just didn't absorb them very well.

[Cidney · Rating 1 out of 5]

Well after wading through this book I came away with three things: everything in life is there by art, nature or power. So now you know.

This must be the third book in a row which I've not liked. I'll have to make a better choice for the next one.

[Tvrtko Balić · Rating 3 out of 5]

Not a bad book, but one that fails as an introduction because of its complexity which may be challenging for newcomers, because of not being interesting enough to read and because the author puts in too much of his own views. You are better off just picking up Plato.

[Beverly Crosson · Rating 1 out of 5]

This book makes no sense to me

[Maan Kawas · Rating 3 out of 5]

I found this book good and informative but not the introduction one may expect to the philosophy of Plato!