What do you think?
Rate this book
Timaeus
First published in Complete Works, Donald J. Zeyl's masterful translation of Timaeus is presented along with his 75 page introductory essay, which discusses points of contemporary interest in the Timaeus , deals at length with long-standing and current issues of interpretation, and provides a consecutive commentary on the work as a whole. Includes an analytic table of contents and a select bibliography.
196 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 361
421 people are currently reading
4357 people want to read
About the author
Plato
5,219 books8,650 followersPlato (Greek: Πλάτων), born Aristocles (c. 427 – 348 BC), was an ancient Greek philosopher of the Classical period who is considered a foundational thinker in Western philosophy and an innovator of the written dialogue and dialectic forms. He raised problems for what became all the major areas of both theoretical philosophy and practical philosophy, and was the founder of the Platonic Academy, a philosophical school in Athens where Plato taught the doctrines that would later become known as Platonism.
Plato's most famous contribution is the theory of forms (or ideas), which has been interpreted as advancing a solution to what is now known as the problem of universals. He was decisively influenced by the pre-Socratic thinkers Pythagoras, Heraclitus, and Parmenides, although much of what is known about them is derived from Plato himself.
Along with his teacher Socrates, and Aristotle, his student, Plato is a central figure in the history of philosophy. Plato's entire body of work is believed to have survived intact for over 2,400 years—unlike that of nearly all of his contemporaries. Although their popularity has fluctuated, they have consistently been read and studied through the ages. Through Neoplatonism, he also greatly influenced both Christian and Islamic philosophy. In modern times, Alfred North Whitehead famously said: "the safest general characterization of the European philosophical tradition is that it consists of a series of footnotes to Plato."
Plato's most famous contribution is the theory of forms (or ideas), which has been interpreted as advancing a solution to what is now known as the problem of universals. He was decisively influenced by the pre-Socratic thinkers Pythagoras, Heraclitus, and Parmenides, although much of what is known about them is derived from Plato himself.
Along with his teacher Socrates, and Aristotle, his student, Plato is a central figure in the history of philosophy. Plato's entire body of work is believed to have survived intact for over 2,400 years—unlike that of nearly all of his contemporaries. Although their popularity has fluctuated, they have consistently been read and studied through the ages. Through Neoplatonism, he also greatly influenced both Christian and Islamic philosophy. In modern times, Alfred North Whitehead famously said: "the safest general characterization of the European philosophical tradition is that it consists of a series of footnotes to Plato."
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 282 reviews
April 23, 2025
One of the best ancient descriptions of the Kingdom of Atlantis - before its catastrophic submersion - you're likely to find.
The first time I read it was over fifty years ago in my university freshman year.
My brain had been set to simmer by the heady atmosphere of Philosophy 101, and was now resting on the back burner during the long train ride home for Thanksgiving.
I had needed some brain food for Canadian National’s grinding but nonetheless - for a young dreamer like me - strangely soothing train ride up North.
So I’d grabbed Timaeus at the Douglas Library and hurriedly borrowed it.
I’d heard it was somewhat mystical, and I wanted to relive the same type of
Rêverie as Valery’s méditations on seashells had produced in me a week or so earlier!
Well, it started out quaintly enough, but soon devolved into incomprehensible geometrical and mathematical discussions.
But so relaxed was I by being free of course work for the weekend, and the lulling, gentle rhythm of the train, I kept on reading. Lost in space, even though the thread of Socrates’ argument was also lost on me!
Peeking out of the large window too, from time to time, to savour the reds, oranges and yellows of the autumn leaves...
Why do so many literary-minded philosophers love math?
Beats me!
For Plato just made me dream technicolor dreams.
Then, as the text progressed, Socrates went Gnostic - giving us a creation myth that's odd but, and this is the good part, mystical indeed. Like the classic part about men and women originally being one person.
You think spouses have arguments NOW!? Well, back in the old days..!
But I was firmly ensconced in Lala-land during during that train ride, like Prufrock...
We have lingered in the chambers of the sea
With seagirls wreathed in seaweed, red and brown
Till human voices wake us - and we drown!
And wake me up they did!
When I arrived back home, the world of mundane matters once again seized the foreground of my mind and took centre stage, as my parents quizzed me.
Endless questions about new friends, work habits, and professors.
The real world never lets up, does it?
But if I had learned anything from Plato, it was this: inspiration. The inspiration of dreams.
That now seems nearly a lifetime ago. I have changed from being a continuous dreamer to become a Christian humanist.
My dreams have all dreamed themselves out, like a reversible jacket that, suddenly totally aware of itself, has turned itself completely outside in:
And my dreaming life is now very much like my daylight hours! We old folks get to a point where our LIfe Itself becomes an everyday dream...
Around me, the world has utterly changed too. Intelligent dreamers are passé.
Two lifetimes ago T.S. Eliot bemoaned the world’s modern tendency to run on its “metalled rails of appetency.”
NOW those rails and that appetency are digitalized and sacrosanct, enshrined in the constitution.
It’s become a surface world.
When I took the train, that day so many years ago, it was a world of hidden depths, though...
But although my Faith has long been what’s sacrosanct for me, those depths have largely discharged assorted wreckage and useless junk upon the beach of so many of my friends’ old age, in abhorrently cold depression.
A trade-off with faith would have by now yielded peace, joy and what used to be called Wisdom, when the mystery of the deep was exposed as an ersatz truism.
Well, it’s enough.
It’s been a respectably long life in this tinsel world - and I’m ready for the next!
But I am still haunted by old books.
Their magic. Their mystery. Their WONDER.
And you know, by the end of that first long-ago semester I had won the University Prize for first-year English.
And now, with the help of my books, I can finally say I KNOW myself and the world reasonably well.
Which just goes to show you - don’t diss your dreams, kids!
They’ll take you far, if you let them.
But, you know... Plato’s Atlantean complexity is STILL Greek to me, even now:
But the dreams he evoked powered my life strongly enough to lead me to my Journey’s End - safely.
The first time I read it was over fifty years ago in my university freshman year.
My brain had been set to simmer by the heady atmosphere of Philosophy 101, and was now resting on the back burner during the long train ride home for Thanksgiving.
I had needed some brain food for Canadian National’s grinding but nonetheless - for a young dreamer like me - strangely soothing train ride up North.
So I’d grabbed Timaeus at the Douglas Library and hurriedly borrowed it.
I’d heard it was somewhat mystical, and I wanted to relive the same type of
Rêverie as Valery’s méditations on seashells had produced in me a week or so earlier!
Well, it started out quaintly enough, but soon devolved into incomprehensible geometrical and mathematical discussions.
But so relaxed was I by being free of course work for the weekend, and the lulling, gentle rhythm of the train, I kept on reading. Lost in space, even though the thread of Socrates’ argument was also lost on me!
Peeking out of the large window too, from time to time, to savour the reds, oranges and yellows of the autumn leaves...
Why do so many literary-minded philosophers love math?
Beats me!
For Plato just made me dream technicolor dreams.
Then, as the text progressed, Socrates went Gnostic - giving us a creation myth that's odd but, and this is the good part, mystical indeed. Like the classic part about men and women originally being one person.
You think spouses have arguments NOW!? Well, back in the old days..!
But I was firmly ensconced in Lala-land during during that train ride, like Prufrock...
We have lingered in the chambers of the sea
With seagirls wreathed in seaweed, red and brown
Till human voices wake us - and we drown!
And wake me up they did!
When I arrived back home, the world of mundane matters once again seized the foreground of my mind and took centre stage, as my parents quizzed me.
Endless questions about new friends, work habits, and professors.
The real world never lets up, does it?
But if I had learned anything from Plato, it was this: inspiration. The inspiration of dreams.
That now seems nearly a lifetime ago. I have changed from being a continuous dreamer to become a Christian humanist.
My dreams have all dreamed themselves out, like a reversible jacket that, suddenly totally aware of itself, has turned itself completely outside in:
And my dreaming life is now very much like my daylight hours! We old folks get to a point where our LIfe Itself becomes an everyday dream...
Around me, the world has utterly changed too. Intelligent dreamers are passé.
Two lifetimes ago T.S. Eliot bemoaned the world’s modern tendency to run on its “metalled rails of appetency.”
NOW those rails and that appetency are digitalized and sacrosanct, enshrined in the constitution.
It’s become a surface world.
When I took the train, that day so many years ago, it was a world of hidden depths, though...
But although my Faith has long been what’s sacrosanct for me, those depths have largely discharged assorted wreckage and useless junk upon the beach of so many of my friends’ old age, in abhorrently cold depression.
A trade-off with faith would have by now yielded peace, joy and what used to be called Wisdom, when the mystery of the deep was exposed as an ersatz truism.
Well, it’s enough.
It’s been a respectably long life in this tinsel world - and I’m ready for the next!
But I am still haunted by old books.
Their magic. Their mystery. Their WONDER.
And you know, by the end of that first long-ago semester I had won the University Prize for first-year English.
And now, with the help of my books, I can finally say I KNOW myself and the world reasonably well.
Which just goes to show you - don’t diss your dreams, kids!
They’ll take you far, if you let them.
But, you know... Plato’s Atlantean complexity is STILL Greek to me, even now:
But the dreams he evoked powered my life strongly enough to lead me to my Journey’s End - safely.
July 31, 2021
The book opens with a brief dialog between Socrates, Timaeus, Hermocrates, and Critias, which swiftly retrogrades into a long monologue by Timaeus himself, during which time Socrates sits quietly and listens.
Timaeus, from Locri, Italy, is a fictional character and his monologue is in fact Plato's lecture, but the philosophy presented bears a resemblance to the one of Pythagoras.
Plato (c.427-347 BCE) in Timaeus c.360 BCE discusses the origins and principles of cosmology; from the creation of the cosmos to the nature of things and humans physiology, sensory perceptions, and the well-being and maladies of the body and soul.
In Timaeus, Demiurge is the artisan that brings the cosmos from a disorderly state to an orderly harmony. The creator, Demiurge, is good and he builds a cosmos similar to himself. Timaeus' cosmos is beautiful, perfect, and a visible living being, like an organism, that is created on insightful principles in which Demiurge placed the mind into the soul and the soul into the body.
Timaeus believes that only a single spherical universe exists with a round rotating floating Earth at its center. A universe in which the Earth and all the other heavenly bodies are created and immortal and the earthly beings created but mortal.
The elements that constitute matter: water (fluid), air (gas), earth (solid), and fire (plasma) are shaped in various geometrical bodies (Platonic solids) in which the triangles they are composed of are the elementary particles of nature.
Timaeus' cosmos is mechanistic and emerged from mathematical knowledge that is governed by necessity and the divine. A universe in which energy remains constant and the observable moving image of eternal space flows to the pulse of a number that we call time.
Plato's Timaeus reads like a mythical prose poem which was apparently influenced by the “three Pythagorean books” published by Philolaus that Plato bought and Timon of Phlius said: "Well, you too, Plato, were obsessed with the desire to acquire followers; and because of it, for much money, you bought a small book, and from it, you learned to write Timaeus." Fact of fiction, we'll never know, but I like to think that Timaeus is a product of Plato's and Pythagorean philosophy.
Timaeus, from Locri, Italy, is a fictional character and his monologue is in fact Plato's lecture, but the philosophy presented bears a resemblance to the one of Pythagoras.
Plato (c.427-347 BCE) in Timaeus c.360 BCE discusses the origins and principles of cosmology; from the creation of the cosmos to the nature of things and humans physiology, sensory perceptions, and the well-being and maladies of the body and soul.
In Timaeus, Demiurge is the artisan that brings the cosmos from a disorderly state to an orderly harmony. The creator, Demiurge, is good and he builds a cosmos similar to himself. Timaeus' cosmos is beautiful, perfect, and a visible living being, like an organism, that is created on insightful principles in which Demiurge placed the mind into the soul and the soul into the body.
Timaeus believes that only a single spherical universe exists with a round rotating floating Earth at its center. A universe in which the Earth and all the other heavenly bodies are created and immortal and the earthly beings created but mortal.
The elements that constitute matter: water (fluid), air (gas), earth (solid), and fire (plasma) are shaped in various geometrical bodies (Platonic solids) in which the triangles they are composed of are the elementary particles of nature.
Timaeus' cosmos is mechanistic and emerged from mathematical knowledge that is governed by necessity and the divine. A universe in which energy remains constant and the observable moving image of eternal space flows to the pulse of a number that we call time.
Plato's Timaeus reads like a mythical prose poem which was apparently influenced by the “three Pythagorean books” published by Philolaus that Plato bought and Timon of Phlius said: "Well, you too, Plato, were obsessed with the desire to acquire followers; and because of it, for much money, you bought a small book, and from it, you learned to write Timaeus." Fact of fiction, we'll never know, but I like to think that Timaeus is a product of Plato's and Pythagorean philosophy.
July 23, 2019
رسالهٔ تيمائوس، خلاصهايست از جهانبينى افلاطون، كه حاوى بخش ابتدايى اسطورهاى، بخش كوچكى در فلسفه و بخش بزرگى در طبيعيات است. بخش فلسفى مخصوصاً به دليل طرح مباحثى كه بعداً توسط ارسطو تكميل شد و به صورت نظريهٔ معروف صورت و ماده درآمد اهميت دارد. بخش اسطورهای بعدها توسط نوافلاطونیها، گنوسیها و مانویها گسترش یافت و تا مدتها اساس تفکر عرفانی در خاورمیانه، مصر و اروپا را رقم زد.
مكالمه شبى پس از مكالمهٔ جمهور واقع میشود، و اين بار سقراط شنونده است و تيمائوس گوينده و از آفرينش جهان و انسان سخن مىگويد.
١. آفرينش جهان
جهان، از دو بخش تشکیل شده: بخشی محسوس و تغییرپذیر، و بخشی نامحسوس و تغییرناپذیر. آن چه که حقیقت را میسازد بخش تغییرناپذیر است که حاوی صورتهای جاودان همه چیز است.
روزی روزگاری یک «دمیورگوس» یا صانع، خواست از روی آن حقایق نامحسوس و جاودان، جهانی مادی بسازد. برای این مقصود به مادهٔ اوليهای نیاز داشت. اين مادهٔ اوليه بر خلاف تصور عموم، خاك و آب و باد و آتش نيست، چرا كه اولاً خود اين عناصر به يكديگر تبديل مىشوند، پس خود مادهاى مشترک دارند، و ثانياً مادهٔ اوليه بايد عارى از هر صورتى باشد، اما عناصر اربعه صور خاص خود دارند؛ بلكه مادهٔ اوليه، مادهایست بى شكل و قابل پذيرش اشكال مختلف، و چنين مادهٔ بى شكلى تنها با عقل قابل ادراك است نه با حس.
پس «صانع» به سراغ آن مادهٔ مطلقاً بی شکل رفت و به آن صورت جهان بخشيد، که کاملترین صورت ممکن بود: كره. اين كره، که میتوان آن را کرهٔ آسمان نامید، به گرد خويش مىچرخد و چرخش ستارگان و روز و شب را ايجاد مىكند.
٢. آفرينش موجودات
صانع سپس ساكنان جهان را خلق نمود.
نخست خدايان را آفريد: موجوداتى جاودانى به كاملرين شكل ممكن (كره) كه هميشه حركتى ثابت دارند و دستخوش تغيير نمىشوند: ستارگان.
پس از آن كه صانع، خدايان را ساخت، آفرينش انسان را به ايشان محوّل كرد. به اين ترتيب كه جزء روحانى و جاودانى انسان را خود ساخت، و ساختن جزء جسمانى و فانى او را به خدايان سپرد.
سر انسان كه كاملترين عضو و جايگاه جزء روحانى است، باز به صورت كاملترين شكل ممكن (كره) است، و تن در حقيقت مَركَب سر است تا به وسيلهٔ آن حركت كند و نيازهايش را تأمين نمايد.
٣. طبيعيات
بخش پایانی رساله بحث مفصلى است دربارهٔ كيفيت خلق و خصوصيات هر یک از موجودات، به خصوص عناصر اربعه، و اعضاى بدن انسان.
مكالمه شبى پس از مكالمهٔ جمهور واقع میشود، و اين بار سقراط شنونده است و تيمائوس گوينده و از آفرينش جهان و انسان سخن مىگويد.
١. آفرينش جهان
جهان، از دو بخش تشکیل شده: بخشی محسوس و تغییرپذیر، و بخشی نامحسوس و تغییرناپذیر. آن چه که حقیقت را میسازد بخش تغییرناپذیر است که حاوی صورتهای جاودان همه چیز است.
روزی روزگاری یک «دمیورگوس» یا صانع، خواست از روی آن حقایق نامحسوس و جاودان، جهانی مادی بسازد. برای این مقصود به مادهٔ اوليهای نیاز داشت. اين مادهٔ اوليه بر خلاف تصور عموم، خاك و آب و باد و آتش نيست، چرا كه اولاً خود اين عناصر به يكديگر تبديل مىشوند، پس خود مادهاى مشترک دارند، و ثانياً مادهٔ اوليه بايد عارى از هر صورتى باشد، اما عناصر اربعه صور خاص خود دارند؛ بلكه مادهٔ اوليه، مادهایست بى شكل و قابل پذيرش اشكال مختلف، و چنين مادهٔ بى شكلى تنها با عقل قابل ادراك است نه با حس.
پس «صانع» به سراغ آن مادهٔ مطلقاً بی شکل رفت و به آن صورت جهان بخشيد، که کاملترین صورت ممکن بود: كره. اين كره، که میتوان آن را کرهٔ آسمان نامید، به گرد خويش مىچرخد و چرخش ستارگان و روز و شب را ايجاد مىكند.
٢. آفرينش موجودات
صانع سپس ساكنان جهان را خلق نمود.
نخست خدايان را آفريد: موجوداتى جاودانى به كاملرين شكل ممكن (كره) كه هميشه حركتى ثابت دارند و دستخوش تغيير نمىشوند: ستارگان.
پس از آن كه صانع، خدايان را ساخت، آفرينش انسان را به ايشان محوّل كرد. به اين ترتيب كه جزء روحانى و جاودانى انسان را خود ساخت، و ساختن جزء جسمانى و فانى او را به خدايان سپرد.
سر انسان كه كاملترين عضو و جايگاه جزء روحانى است، باز به صورت كاملترين شكل ممكن (كره) است، و تن در حقيقت مَركَب سر است تا به وسيلهٔ آن حركت كند و نيازهايش را تأمين نمايد.
٣. طبيعيات
بخش پایانی رساله بحث مفصلى است دربارهٔ كيفيت خلق و خصوصيات هر یک از موجودات، به خصوص عناصر اربعه، و اعضاى بدن انسان.
October 5, 2015
The sources for the myth of Atlantis are two: Plato's dialogs Timaeus and Critias, primarily the latter. That's it. The rest is much more modern invention.
Cornford's Plato books are usually detailed and excellent, albeit perhaps too detailed and technical for some readers. In this edition he did the translation as well as an introduction and preface, apparently abstracted from his longer Plato's Cosmology. Since the Timaeus is primarily a geometricized cosmology, something pretty alien to modern thinking, the commentary is welcome.
Cornford's Plato books are usually detailed and excellent, albeit perhaps too detailed and technical for some readers. In this edition he did the translation as well as an introduction and preface, apparently abstracted from his longer Plato's Cosmology. Since the Timaeus is primarily a geometricized cosmology, something pretty alien to modern thinking, the commentary is welcome.
December 16, 2018
Socrates and Science
15 December 2018 – Perth
This book is famous for all the wrong reasons, and it basically has something to do with a city that for some reason Jason Moma seems to have a very strong connection to. Yet, while this is generally known as the Atlantis dialogue, in reality it isn’t, that accolade goes to the partner dialogue, the Critias. However, at the start, there is this discussion on this city named Atlantis, and how Critias came to learn of its existence, however, at this stage I’ll leave it with Jason Moma and move on to what this text is actually about.
You could say that this is Plato’s scientific text, namely it is the dialogue where he explores how things work, how the world was created, and why things are the way they are. To say that he is completely and utterly wrong is an understatement in and of itself, but the thing is that we are talking about some guy writing something like two and a half thousand years ago, so we can sort of give him a little bit of slack.
However, the problem I faced is that having read Lucretius, I just simply got this feeling that Plato, well, simply was not a scientist. Sure, when it comes to political and ethical theory, then he certainly excels in that department, but it seems that what he is doing is attempting to cram quite a lot of information, information that is expanded by the works of three people down the track – Ptolemy, Galen, and Lucretius – that the text itself really does seem to be a bit rushed.
Look, when I first read it, I thought it was amazing, and kept on raising the question that if the Greeks were this insightful, why is it that they didn’t develop technology faster than it was actually developed? Well, it seems that the editor does try to answer that question, and no, it has something to do with the idea that a slave society had no need for tools and equipment to make their lives easier. Apparently, in the twilight of the Roman Empire, there were some experiments in developing a rudimentary assembly line, namely for producing bread. No, the suggestion was that there were a lot technologies that we have, such as cast iron and gunpowder among many others, that were simply not available to the Greeks.
Yet what about the scientific method. Well, that wasn’t something that was necessarily developed until the era of Isaac Newton, but that didn’t necessarily mean that Plato, nor the others, weren’t going about inquiring as to the nature of the universe the wrong way. The thing is that what we are seeing here is the beginning of this idea that there are reasons that things happen in this world, and these things aren’t happening because some randy God is throwing a trantrum because he didn’t get his own way. What we are seeing is that people are beginning to observe things, starting to see patterns, and beginning to question the reasons behind these patterns.
However, one thing that does bug me is that I am not entirely sure if this is actually Plato. I’m not saying that Plato didn’t necessarily write this dialogue, but rather my feeling is that Plato is espousing things that no doubt were handed down to him from other sources. There is a suggestion that Timeaus may never have existed, but just because we don’t have any external references to him does not mean that he didn’t exist. I should also note that Critias happens to be Plato’s grandfather, so there is certainly a connection there (as well as there being a connection through Socrates).
In the end though, what the whole dialogue is about is that Plato is continuing to explore this idea of a perfect system of government, a dialogue that started back in the Republic. This is clear from the opening discussion at the beginning. Yet, for some reason, Plato then seems to diverge from this topic and delve into a scientific exploration of the origins of the universe. The editor suggested that Plato is simply laying the groundwork for his discussion on Atlantis in the next dialogue, but honestly, I’m not all that convinced.
15 December 2018 – Perth
This book is famous for all the wrong reasons, and it basically has something to do with a city that for some reason Jason Moma seems to have a very strong connection to. Yet, while this is generally known as the Atlantis dialogue, in reality it isn’t, that accolade goes to the partner dialogue, the Critias. However, at the start, there is this discussion on this city named Atlantis, and how Critias came to learn of its existence, however, at this stage I’ll leave it with Jason Moma and move on to what this text is actually about.
You could say that this is Plato’s scientific text, namely it is the dialogue where he explores how things work, how the world was created, and why things are the way they are. To say that he is completely and utterly wrong is an understatement in and of itself, but the thing is that we are talking about some guy writing something like two and a half thousand years ago, so we can sort of give him a little bit of slack.
However, the problem I faced is that having read Lucretius, I just simply got this feeling that Plato, well, simply was not a scientist. Sure, when it comes to political and ethical theory, then he certainly excels in that department, but it seems that what he is doing is attempting to cram quite a lot of information, information that is expanded by the works of three people down the track – Ptolemy, Galen, and Lucretius – that the text itself really does seem to be a bit rushed.
Look, when I first read it, I thought it was amazing, and kept on raising the question that if the Greeks were this insightful, why is it that they didn’t develop technology faster than it was actually developed? Well, it seems that the editor does try to answer that question, and no, it has something to do with the idea that a slave society had no need for tools and equipment to make their lives easier. Apparently, in the twilight of the Roman Empire, there were some experiments in developing a rudimentary assembly line, namely for producing bread. No, the suggestion was that there were a lot technologies that we have, such as cast iron and gunpowder among many others, that were simply not available to the Greeks.
Yet what about the scientific method. Well, that wasn’t something that was necessarily developed until the era of Isaac Newton, but that didn’t necessarily mean that Plato, nor the others, weren’t going about inquiring as to the nature of the universe the wrong way. The thing is that what we are seeing here is the beginning of this idea that there are reasons that things happen in this world, and these things aren’t happening because some randy God is throwing a trantrum because he didn’t get his own way. What we are seeing is that people are beginning to observe things, starting to see patterns, and beginning to question the reasons behind these patterns.
However, one thing that does bug me is that I am not entirely sure if this is actually Plato. I’m not saying that Plato didn’t necessarily write this dialogue, but rather my feeling is that Plato is espousing things that no doubt were handed down to him from other sources. There is a suggestion that Timeaus may never have existed, but just because we don’t have any external references to him does not mean that he didn’t exist. I should also note that Critias happens to be Plato’s grandfather, so there is certainly a connection there (as well as there being a connection through Socrates).
In the end though, what the whole dialogue is about is that Plato is continuing to explore this idea of a perfect system of government, a dialogue that started back in the Republic. This is clear from the opening discussion at the beginning. Yet, for some reason, Plato then seems to diverge from this topic and delve into a scientific exploration of the origins of the universe. The editor suggested that Plato is simply laying the groundwork for his discussion on Atlantis in the next dialogue, but honestly, I’m not all that convinced.
December 29, 2022
One WILD cosmogenic ride through astronomy, geometry, mechanics, 4-element chemistry, psychology, physiology and what not! Genesis seems relatively tame. A noticeable shift in history of origin of world from reproduction analogies to a craftsman analogy (deliberate creation). Appears to be like baking the cosmos-dodecahedron from cubes (earth), air (octahedron), fire (pyramid), and water (icosahedron) in A Bowl.
Besides craziness and basic disappointments from modern science perspectives, many highlights.
a) Transmigration of soul (the link of soul - motion strengthens connection with 1st law of thermodynamics & reminds more of Buddhist than Western scriptures)
b) first steps toward Kantian metaphysics/ epistemology/ language by distinguishing between World of Being (Platonic forms) and World of Becoming (sensory perceived things), wherein forms exist in themselves.
c) the microcosm and macrocosm parallelism we find again in Christian medieval cosmology
d) the Demiurge as not omnipotent and not equated with the supreme God or pantheon (different from God of Genesis).
The visual perception accounts are UnHiNGeD; if modern science/ psychology were as creative I probably would enjoy my degree more ngl.
Not much cool stuff about the physiology and medicine paragraphs besides wtf okay. Thanks for diagnosing me with seed in marrow overflowing, Plato, delightful.
Besides craziness and basic disappointments from modern science perspectives, many highlights.
a) Transmigration of soul (the link of soul - motion strengthens connection with 1st law of thermodynamics & reminds more of Buddhist than Western scriptures)
b) first steps toward Kantian metaphysics/ epistemology/ language by distinguishing between World of Being (Platonic forms) and World of Becoming (sensory perceived things), wherein forms exist in themselves.
c) the microcosm and macrocosm parallelism we find again in Christian medieval cosmology
d) the Demiurge as not omnipotent and not equated with the supreme God or pantheon (different from God of Genesis).
The visual perception accounts are UnHiNGeD; if modern science/ psychology were as creative I probably would enjoy my degree more ngl.
Not much cool stuff about the physiology and medicine paragraphs besides wtf okay. Thanks for diagnosing me with seed in marrow overflowing, Plato, delightful.
September 13, 2015
Sleep-inducing New Age crap. But maybe Plato was just kidding.
May 28, 2024
Plato's Timaeus is a cornerstone of ancient philosophy, blending metaphysics with proto-scientific inquiry. This dialogue explores the creation of the world, the nature of the Gods, and the human body. Its rich tapestry has inspired thinkers and creators for millennia.
Theories on World Creation and Gods
In Timaeus, Plato presents a detailed account of the cosmos's origin. His method of explaining the cosmos's structure parallels how fiction/fantasy authors create elaborate stories/mythologies and that shows a lot of how for ages he inspired humanity to create with his philosophical and theoretical work.
Human Body and Health
Plato's exploration of the human body blends philosophy with empirical observation. While he gets a lot of facts and research for insights into health and anatomy from Asclepius (and I'm guessing other doctors of his times) reflecting an early attempt to understand human physiology systematically. This mix of speculative thought and practical knowledge shows Plato's commitment to grounding his theories in observable facts (even though wrong at times, but give the guy a break, it was like 300BC at the time).
And while Plato's views on the body were influential, they were limited by the lack of modern scientific knowledge about anatomy, physiology etc. His focus was more on the soul's relationship to the body than on empirical facts about the body itself.
Plato as a Proto-Fantasy Author
Plato's detailed and imaginative account of the world's creation, for me personally, it marks him as a precursor to modern fantasy authors. His method of explaining the genesis and structure of the cosmos is akin to how writers build immersive fictional worlds. I'd read his theories and ideas and think of when I'd read of Tolkien's Middle Earth or Warcraft Lore, or D&D books and even various myths and legends from other civilizations. His influence extends to crafting Gods and establishing cosmological order, which are hallmarks of the fantasy genre.
And finally...
The Atlantis Narrative
The reason this book is known for, even though it has so little to do with and it's only a few pages long of a story.
The Atlantis story, told by Critias in Timaeus, which was told to Solon by Egyptian priests, describes the powerful, utopian island civilization which we all know, the rise and literal fall of Atantis that sinks into the ocean. Depicted as an ideal society with perfect warriors, who attacked every ancient nation, and winning every battle but one, the Greeks, who freed everyone from the Atlanteans, and pretty much saved their kingdom. Atlantis's downfall serves as a moral and philosophical allegory of course.
This narrative lays the groundwork for myths about lost civilizations in literature and pop-culture and even though it is just an allegory lots of ancient philosophers, historians, and even poets throughout the years, took a shot at Atlantis being real and there are even hypothesis that it was based maybe on the Minoan civilization, or based on a little island known as Thera (iirc) near ancient Crete who fell and if I continue I can tell you countless other theories based on Plato's little story from back then up until now told by modern historians and archeologists.
Dialogue and Philosophical Depth
As with the Republic, once again, Plato's skill in crafting dialogues is evident here too. The interplay between characters, logical arguments, and profound philosophical questions showcase his ability to engage readers in deep contemplation. His dialogues are vibrant conversations that illuminate complex ideas about reality, ethics, and human existence.
Timaeus is a testament to Plato's intellectual prowess, blending myth, philosophy, and proto-science into a compelling narrative. While some theories may seem archaic (and of course science proved some of them wrong) the foundational ideas and exploration method remain influential.
Atlantis:
Σ'αυτή, λοιπόν, την νήσο Ατλαντίδα υπήρχε μεγάλη και θαυμαστή βασιλική δύναμη,
που επικρατούσε σε όλο το νησί, καθώς και σε πολλά άλλα νησιά και μέρη της ηπείρου. Επιπλέον, στα δικά μας μέρη, ήταν άρχοντες. Όλη αυτή η δύναμη, συναθροισμένη σε ένα στράτευμα, επιχείρησε κάποτε να υποδουλώσει με ορμή τον δικό σας και τον δικό μας και κάθε τόπο εντός του στομίου.
Τότε, λοιπόν, Σόλωνα, η δύναμη της πόλης σας έγινε εμφανής σε άπαντες τους ανθρώπους, ως προς την αρετή και την ρώμη της, γιατί πρωτοστάτησε ενώπιον όλων με ευψυχία και με όσες πολεμικές τέχνες κατείχε, αρχικά ως ηγεμόνας των Ελλήνων κι έπειτα - εξ ανάγκης απομονωμένη, όταν οι άλλοι αποστάτησαν - φτάνοντας στους έσχατους κινδύνους, νίκησε τους επιδρομείς κι έστησε τρόπαιο, αποτρέποντας την υποδούλωση των μη υπόδουλων και ελευθερώνοντας μεγαλόκαρδα όλους τους άλλους, όσους κατοικούμε εντός των ορίων των Ηρακλείων Στηλών.
Σε κατοπινούς χρόνους, όταν έγιναν φοβεροί σεισμοί και κατακλυσμοί, μέσα σε μία ημέρα και μία νύχτα τρομερή, όλοι οι μαχητές σας χάθηκαν αθρόοι μέσα στη γη και η νήσος Ατλαντίδα αφανίστηκε, παρομοίως βυθισμένη στην θάλασσα. Γι'αυτό και τώρα έγινε απροσπέλαστο και αδιερεύνητο το εκεί πέλαγος, αφού εμποδίζει ο εντελώς βαθύς πηλός, τον οποίο άφησε το νησί καθώς καταποντιζόταν.
Theories on World Creation and Gods
In Timaeus, Plato presents a detailed account of the cosmos's origin. His method of explaining the cosmos's structure parallels how fiction/fantasy authors create elaborate stories/mythologies and that shows a lot of how for ages he inspired humanity to create with his philosophical and theoretical work.
Human Body and Health
Plato's exploration of the human body blends philosophy with empirical observation. While he gets a lot of facts and research for insights into health and anatomy from Asclepius (and I'm guessing other doctors of his times) reflecting an early attempt to understand human physiology systematically. This mix of speculative thought and practical knowledge shows Plato's commitment to grounding his theories in observable facts (even though wrong at times, but give the guy a break, it was like 300BC at the time).
And while Plato's views on the body were influential, they were limited by the lack of modern scientific knowledge about anatomy, physiology etc. His focus was more on the soul's relationship to the body than on empirical facts about the body itself.
Plato as a Proto-Fantasy Author
Plato's detailed and imaginative account of the world's creation, for me personally, it marks him as a precursor to modern fantasy authors. His method of explaining the genesis and structure of the cosmos is akin to how writers build immersive fictional worlds. I'd read his theories and ideas and think of when I'd read of Tolkien's Middle Earth or Warcraft Lore, or D&D books and even various myths and legends from other civilizations. His influence extends to crafting Gods and establishing cosmological order, which are hallmarks of the fantasy genre.
And finally...
The Atlantis Narrative
The reason this book is known for, even though it has so little to do with and it's only a few pages long of a story.
The Atlantis story, told by Critias in Timaeus, which was told to Solon by Egyptian priests, describes the powerful, utopian island civilization which we all know, the rise and literal fall of Atantis that sinks into the ocean. Depicted as an ideal society with perfect warriors, who attacked every ancient nation, and winning every battle but one, the Greeks, who freed everyone from the Atlanteans, and pretty much saved their kingdom. Atlantis's downfall serves as a moral and philosophical allegory of course.
This narrative lays the groundwork for myths about lost civilizations in literature and pop-culture and even though it is just an allegory lots of ancient philosophers, historians, and even poets throughout the years, took a shot at Atlantis being real and there are even hypothesis that it was based maybe on the Minoan civilization, or based on a little island known as Thera (iirc) near ancient Crete who fell and if I continue I can tell you countless other theories based on Plato's little story from back then up until now told by modern historians and archeologists.
Dialogue and Philosophical Depth
As with the Republic, once again, Plato's skill in crafting dialogues is evident here too. The interplay between characters, logical arguments, and profound philosophical questions showcase his ability to engage readers in deep contemplation. His dialogues are vibrant conversations that illuminate complex ideas about reality, ethics, and human existence.
Timaeus is a testament to Plato's intellectual prowess, blending myth, philosophy, and proto-science into a compelling narrative. While some theories may seem archaic (and of course science proved some of them wrong) the foundational ideas and exploration method remain influential.
Atlantis:
Σ'αυτή, λοιπόν, την νήσο Ατλαντίδα υπήρχε μεγάλη και θαυμαστή βασιλική δύναμη,
που επικρατούσε σε όλο το νησί, καθώς και σε πολλά άλλα νησιά και μέρη της ηπείρου. Επιπλέον, στα δικά μας μέρη, ήταν άρχοντες. Όλη αυτή η δύναμη, συναθροισμένη σε ένα στράτευμα, επιχείρησε κάποτε να υποδουλώσει με ορμή τον δικό σας και τον δικό μας και κάθε τόπο εντός του στομίου.
Τότε, λοιπόν, Σόλωνα, η δύναμη της πόλης σας έγινε εμφανής σε άπαντες τους ανθρώπους, ως προς την αρετή και την ρώμη της, γιατί πρωτοστάτησε ενώπιον όλων με ευψυχία και με όσες πολεμικές τέχνες κατείχε, αρχικά ως ηγεμόνας των Ελλήνων κι έπειτα - εξ ανάγκης απομονωμένη, όταν οι άλλοι αποστάτησαν - φτάνοντας στους έσχατους κινδύνους, νίκησε τους επιδρομείς κι έστησε τρόπαιο, αποτρέποντας την υποδούλωση των μη υπόδουλων και ελευθερώνοντας μεγαλόκαρδα όλους τους άλλους, όσους κατοικούμε εντός των ορίων των Ηρακλείων Στηλών.
Σε κατοπινούς χρόνους, όταν έγιναν φοβεροί σεισμοί και κατακλυσμοί, μέσα σε μία ημέρα και μία νύχτα τρομερή, όλοι οι μαχητές σας χάθηκαν αθρόοι μέσα στη γη και η νήσος Ατλαντίδα αφανίστηκε, παρομοίως βυθισμένη στην θάλασσα. Γι'αυτό και τώρα έγινε απροσπέλαστο και αδιερεύνητο το εκεί πέλαγος, αφού εμποδίζει ο εντελώς βαθύς πηλός, τον οποίο άφησε το νησί καθώς καταποντιζόταν.
November 1, 2019
1) Da, Atlantida. Kritija se seća detinjst(a)va. (59)
2) Kosmos je najlepši od svega što je postalo (68), a Tvorac je dobar, sve postoji postoji da bi ličilo njemu samom i kosmos je živo biće obdareno dušom i umom. (70)
3) Noć i dan su stvoreni da bi postojala neka vidljiva mera za odnos sporosti i brzine nebeskih tela. (78)
4) Tvorac zapovedi da se prave živa bića i smeša u peharu dušu svemira. (80)
5) Jedan kosmos ili više kosmosa?
6) Stvori se glava i telo glavi da joj bude olakšica za putovanje – zato je telo dobilo visinu, a izrasla su mu i 4 izdužena i savitljiva uda. (83-84)
7) Oči su vatra koja nema osobinu da gori – unutrašnja vatra ističe kroz oči u gustom i glatkom mlazu, a očna jabučica je zgusnuta da bi sprečila krupnije čestice. (84) Kapci su prirodna zaštita oka – „susprežu silu unutrašnje vatre”. Ukoliko je mirovanje kapaka veliko – nastaje san. (85) San je, dakle, suspregnutost vatre. Sluh postoji da bi se pojmila harmonija unutar kretanja duše, a ritam nam je dat da nas čuva od nedostataka mera i oskudice u ljupkosti svojstvene većini ljudi. (87) [Pogledati obavezno Osnovno načelo Laze Kostića.]
8) Prostor ne podleže propadanju a pruža boravište svemu što postaje (93)
9) Razvijanje dihotomija – hrapavo/glatko, zadovoljstvo/bol. (107) Hrapavo je gorko, glatko je kiselo. (109)
10) U trupu se nalazi smrtni deo duše. (114) Srce predstavlja telesnu stražu (kao opomena za strasti) (114), a pluća su rashladni uređaj srca (115). Slezina je sunđer jetre. (117)
11) Moždina čini koren smrtnog roda, a mozak je deo moždine predodređen da kao oranica primi božje seme. (118)
12) Ono što nas spolja okružuje neprekidno nas razara i razdvaja odašiljući otkinute deliće svaki prema srodnoj vrsti. (126)
13) Bolest je neodgovarajući raspored elemenata. (127) Žuč je uvek vezana za upale. (131) Groznica za višak vatre. (132) I nezajažljivost u ljubavnoj strasti je bolest duše. (133)
14) Niko nije zao ni rđav svojom voljom već čovek postaje takav zbog lošeg telesnog sklopa ili odgoja. (133)
15) Priroda stidnih delova muškaraca je nepokorna – ključa živototvorna težnja za izlivanjem. (138)
16) Krajnje antropocentrična i geocentrična vizija sveta. Životinje su nastale od ljudi koji nisu skloni umnim radom. Budući da su bliži zemlji, bog im je dao i više oslonaca. (139)
2) Kosmos je najlepši od svega što je postalo (68), a Tvorac je dobar, sve postoji postoji da bi ličilo njemu samom i kosmos je živo biće obdareno dušom i umom. (70)
3) Noć i dan su stvoreni da bi postojala neka vidljiva mera za odnos sporosti i brzine nebeskih tela. (78)
4) Tvorac zapovedi da se prave živa bića i smeša u peharu dušu svemira. (80)
5) Jedan kosmos ili više kosmosa?
6) Stvori se glava i telo glavi da joj bude olakšica za putovanje – zato je telo dobilo visinu, a izrasla su mu i 4 izdužena i savitljiva uda. (83-84)
7) Oči su vatra koja nema osobinu da gori – unutrašnja vatra ističe kroz oči u gustom i glatkom mlazu, a očna jabučica je zgusnuta da bi sprečila krupnije čestice. (84) Kapci su prirodna zaštita oka – „susprežu silu unutrašnje vatre”. Ukoliko je mirovanje kapaka veliko – nastaje san. (85) San je, dakle, suspregnutost vatre. Sluh postoji da bi se pojmila harmonija unutar kretanja duše, a ritam nam je dat da nas čuva od nedostataka mera i oskudice u ljupkosti svojstvene većini ljudi. (87) [Pogledati obavezno Osnovno načelo Laze Kostića.]
8) Prostor ne podleže propadanju a pruža boravište svemu što postaje (93)
9) Razvijanje dihotomija – hrapavo/glatko, zadovoljstvo/bol. (107) Hrapavo je gorko, glatko je kiselo. (109)
10) U trupu se nalazi smrtni deo duše. (114) Srce predstavlja telesnu stražu (kao opomena za strasti) (114), a pluća su rashladni uređaj srca (115). Slezina je sunđer jetre. (117)
11) Moždina čini koren smrtnog roda, a mozak je deo moždine predodređen da kao oranica primi božje seme. (118)
12) Ono što nas spolja okružuje neprekidno nas razara i razdvaja odašiljući otkinute deliće svaki prema srodnoj vrsti. (126)
13) Bolest je neodgovarajući raspored elemenata. (127) Žuč je uvek vezana za upale. (131) Groznica za višak vatre. (132) I nezajažljivost u ljubavnoj strasti je bolest duše. (133)
14) Niko nije zao ni rđav svojom voljom već čovek postaje takav zbog lošeg telesnog sklopa ili odgoja. (133)
15) Priroda stidnih delova muškaraca je nepokorna – ključa živototvorna težnja za izlivanjem. (138)
16) Krajnje antropocentrična i geocentrična vizija sveta. Životinje su nastale od ljudi koji nisu skloni umnim radom. Budući da su bliži zemlji, bog im je dao i više oslonaca. (139)
October 26, 2018
A very wide ranging speculation, presented as fact, covering everything from the origin of the universe, to medicine, ethics, prehistory and the physical sciences. Perhaps the most valuable reflections relate to chemistry, encompassing the notion that matter is made up of combinations of more elementary building blocks capable of recombination. Plato's signature argument for creation from eternal templates is given novel and trenchant presentation.
October 30, 2021
Это диалоги о космосе – происхождении звезд, неба, солнца, земли, воздуха, человека, его тела и души. Платон считал, что демиург устроил ум в душе, а душу в теле и что наш космос – есть живое существо, наделенное умом и душой. Современные представления о мироздании сильно отличаются. Но благодаря этому труду, мы можем знать, какие представления были у древних. Это первоисточник для изучения истории мысли.
February 11, 2019
The universe and souls and our bodies and geometry.
January 16, 2026
50% "Wow, this is fascinating. This even sounds like the Trinity!"
50% "What on earth is he talking about."
Read for Anselm House 2026 Fellows cohort.
50% "What on earth is he talking about."
Read for Anselm House 2026 Fellows cohort.
April 28, 2017
This was an intriguing account of, well, EVERYTHING. Plato is certainly a genius in uniting diverse aspects of reality together, yet although it's a dialogue, except for the very beginning, it's pretty much just a monologue from Timaeus recounting to his friends (Socrates and co.) about what a man had told him when he was a boy. The start of Timaeus's account was the highlight for me, because at about the point where the triangles that underlie all existence are introduced (which I tried to draw but just couldn't fit them together properly), as well as the explanation about human physiology (which seemed so far fetched and was very long), it got to be pretty tedious. But still, The Timaeus forms much of the basis of Plotinus's works, and apart from the triangles, isn't that hard to understand.
abandoned
April 24, 2022One might be tempted to read more of this in instances of insomnia, but Plato's understanding of society and humanity is so egregiously faulty that I cannot get through a single sentence without outrage or at least an attempt at mordant humor. File this under What Not to Read. It does make me wonder, though, what one author from today will still be in print and possibly even read 2500 years from now, and how embarrassed would we all be to be represented by that body of work?
Currently reading
October 11, 2021
November 17, 2022
timaeus, it’s ok to stop and take a breath yknow
April 5, 2019
I’ve been working my way through medieval literature and my dad was in Santorini last week so it seemed like a good time to revisit the Timaeus.
Plato begins with a recap of The Republic and has Socrates state that he would like an example of just such an organized state and what it was like when it went to war. But before his companions agree to do that, they decide that they must begin at creation, speculate about that for a bit, work their way to mankind, and from mankind tell the story of how the perfect example of Socrates’ city (which turns out to be ancient, ancient, Athens, of course) goes to war against the evil Atlantis. Why do they need to start at creation?
Then as to wisdom, do you observe how our law from the very first made a study of the whole order of things, extending even to prophecy and medicine which gives health, out of these divine elements deriving what was needful for human life, and adding every sort of knowledge which was akin to them.
From this passage I am guessing that he wants to tie his city from The Republic to greater wisdom than he alone can provide, and the greatest wisdom could only come from a great organizer, the creator. His idea needs to fit in the grand scheme of things and this is the beginning of an attempt to do that.
The companions follow their plan and Timaeus begins a long monologue about creation, but the dialogue ends up collapsing under the weight of it’s subjects. He does somehow manage to cover “the whole order of things”, but in such a short dialogue there was no way for him to do it satisfactorily (ancient science aside). It is interesting to read, though, because knowledge today has become so compartmentalized. Everyone is a specialist and stays in his/her own area. I think it is valuable that Plato reminds us to look at the big picture and see how our ideas (in his case, his ideal city) fit in a comprehensive view.
Plato begins with a recap of The Republic and has Socrates state that he would like an example of just such an organized state and what it was like when it went to war. But before his companions agree to do that, they decide that they must begin at creation, speculate about that for a bit, work their way to mankind, and from mankind tell the story of how the perfect example of Socrates’ city (which turns out to be ancient, ancient, Athens, of course) goes to war against the evil Atlantis. Why do they need to start at creation?
Then as to wisdom, do you observe how our law from the very first made a study of the whole order of things, extending even to prophecy and medicine which gives health, out of these divine elements deriving what was needful for human life, and adding every sort of knowledge which was akin to them.
From this passage I am guessing that he wants to tie his city from The Republic to greater wisdom than he alone can provide, and the greatest wisdom could only come from a great organizer, the creator. His idea needs to fit in the grand scheme of things and this is the beginning of an attempt to do that.
The companions follow their plan and Timaeus begins a long monologue about creation, but the dialogue ends up collapsing under the weight of it’s subjects. He does somehow manage to cover “the whole order of things”, but in such a short dialogue there was no way for him to do it satisfactorily (ancient science aside). It is interesting to read, though, because knowledge today has become so compartmentalized. Everyone is a specialist and stays in his/her own area. I think it is valuable that Plato reminds us to look at the big picture and see how our ideas (in his case, his ideal city) fit in a comprehensive view.
April 20, 2017
The Timaeus is usually considered the platonic dialogue that deals with cosmology. However, although in a cosmological environment, it could be considered as a treatise on human physiology, explained in relation to the cosmos and making continual use of final causes to explain things.
The Timaeus is divided into three parts: the first explains the form and origin of the cosmos (including a proof that the multiverse cannot exist) and uses this information to explain the shape of the human head and the difference between the anterior and the posterior parts of the body.
The second explains the composition of the cosmos with a very curious theory, no doubt of Pythagorean origin, which considers that the basis of everything are two rectangular triangles: one isosceles and one scalene, the result of dividing in two an equilateral triangle. This theory is then used to explain human sensitivity.
The third part is devoted to explaining the various parts of the body, and the respiratory, circulatory and excretory functions, including a theory of health and disease. There is also a theory about prophetic dreams, largely superseded by Aristotle, who in a small treatise gives a surprisingly modern explanation.
Critias is an incomplete dialog where the legend of Atlantis first appeared, although there is a summary at the beginning of Timaeus.
--------------------------------------------------
El Timeo se considera usualmente el diálogo platónico que trata de cosmología. Sin embargo, aunque en un entorno cosmológico, podría considerarse como un tratado de fisiología humana que se explica en relación con el cosmos y haciendo uso continuamente de causas finales para explicar las cosas.
El Timeo se divide en tres partes: en la primera se explica la forma y el origen del cosmos (incluida una demostración de que no puede existir el multiverso), y se hace uso de esta información para explicar la forma de la cabeza humana y la diferencia entre la parte anterior y la posterior del cuerpo.
En la segunda se explica la composición del cosmos con una teoría curiosísima, sin duda de origen pitagórico, que considera que la base de todo son dos triángulos rectángulos: uno isósceles y otro escaleno, resultado de dividir en dos un triángulo equilátero. A continuación se utiliza esta teoría para explicar la sensibilidad humana.
La tercera se dedica a explicar las diversas partes del cuerpo y las funciones respiratoria, circulatoria y excretora, así como una teoría de la salud y de la enfermedad. Hay también una teoría sobre el sueño adivinatorio ampliamente superada por Aristóteles, que en un pequeño tratado da una explicación sorprendentemente moderna.
Critias es un diálogo incompleto en el que apareció por primera vez la leyenda de la Atlántida, aunque hay también un resumen al principio del Timeo.
The Timaeus is divided into three parts: the first explains the form and origin of the cosmos (including a proof that the multiverse cannot exist) and uses this information to explain the shape of the human head and the difference between the anterior and the posterior parts of the body.
The second explains the composition of the cosmos with a very curious theory, no doubt of Pythagorean origin, which considers that the basis of everything are two rectangular triangles: one isosceles and one scalene, the result of dividing in two an equilateral triangle. This theory is then used to explain human sensitivity.
The third part is devoted to explaining the various parts of the body, and the respiratory, circulatory and excretory functions, including a theory of health and disease. There is also a theory about prophetic dreams, largely superseded by Aristotle, who in a small treatise gives a surprisingly modern explanation.
Critias is an incomplete dialog where the legend of Atlantis first appeared, although there is a summary at the beginning of Timaeus.
--------------------------------------------------
El Timeo se considera usualmente el diálogo platónico que trata de cosmología. Sin embargo, aunque en un entorno cosmológico, podría considerarse como un tratado de fisiología humana que se explica en relación con el cosmos y haciendo uso continuamente de causas finales para explicar las cosas.
El Timeo se divide en tres partes: en la primera se explica la forma y el origen del cosmos (incluida una demostración de que no puede existir el multiverso), y se hace uso de esta información para explicar la forma de la cabeza humana y la diferencia entre la parte anterior y la posterior del cuerpo.
En la segunda se explica la composición del cosmos con una teoría curiosísima, sin duda de origen pitagórico, que considera que la base de todo son dos triángulos rectángulos: uno isósceles y otro escaleno, resultado de dividir en dos un triángulo equilátero. A continuación se utiliza esta teoría para explicar la sensibilidad humana.
La tercera se dedica a explicar las diversas partes del cuerpo y las funciones respiratoria, circulatoria y excretora, así como una teoría de la salud y de la enfermedad. Hay también una teoría sobre el sueño adivinatorio ampliamente superada por Aristóteles, que en un pequeño tratado da una explicación sorprendentemente moderna.
Critias es un diálogo incompleto en el que apareció por primera vez la leyenda de la Atlántida, aunque hay también un resumen al principio del Timeo.
April 7, 2019
Probably the most difficult Platonic dialogue I've read; it's not exactly philosophical and it's not exactly a dialogue. Timaeus is about a mathematical / mythical origin tale of the cosmos, and almost all of it went completely over my head.
I decided that I was interested in reading Plotinus, and opened the first Ennead, which began in ruminations on the soul. I hadn't really thought much about souls in a long time - some vague understanding of psychology had made the soul obsolete in my mental vocabulary. To facilitate my understanding of Plotinus' understanding of the soul, I decided to read Aristotle's De Anima. Aristotle is difficult but pleasurable in a pure pedagogical sense; I rarely enjoy the experience of reading him but always feel like I've come away with a lot to think about. Aristotle's grounded proto-scientific account of the soul was interesting, although from what I knew of Plotinus I knew a keen understanding of Greek proto-scientific theories would not strictly be relevant, for he is more mystical.
So I said I'd go back to Plato, try and read some dialogues related to the soul among other things I could expect to appear in Plotinus. Timaeus itself was another roadblock to that ambition. My knowledge of maths is woefully limited as I was taught particularly badly in secondary school, but I know enough about science to know how primitive theories of the four elements are. This dialogue was uniquely challenging because I just didn't know how to read it. I had to take the discussions of geometry and such at face value, while trying to understand the elements of natural science I knew to be outdated within a broader context. This proved to be even more difficult than Aristotle, because I was always mindful of the poetic and literary elements of Plato's style, which on the whole made me wonder just what I was reading, what I was supposed to think.
I think I'll try reading again, because I would like to penetrate the shallow perspective I have of the dialogue, but perhaps first I'll move to something more on familiar ground.
I decided that I was interested in reading Plotinus, and opened the first Ennead, which began in ruminations on the soul. I hadn't really thought much about souls in a long time - some vague understanding of psychology had made the soul obsolete in my mental vocabulary. To facilitate my understanding of Plotinus' understanding of the soul, I decided to read Aristotle's De Anima. Aristotle is difficult but pleasurable in a pure pedagogical sense; I rarely enjoy the experience of reading him but always feel like I've come away with a lot to think about. Aristotle's grounded proto-scientific account of the soul was interesting, although from what I knew of Plotinus I knew a keen understanding of Greek proto-scientific theories would not strictly be relevant, for he is more mystical.
So I said I'd go back to Plato, try and read some dialogues related to the soul among other things I could expect to appear in Plotinus. Timaeus itself was another roadblock to that ambition. My knowledge of maths is woefully limited as I was taught particularly badly in secondary school, but I know enough about science to know how primitive theories of the four elements are. This dialogue was uniquely challenging because I just didn't know how to read it. I had to take the discussions of geometry and such at face value, while trying to understand the elements of natural science I knew to be outdated within a broader context. This proved to be even more difficult than Aristotle, because I was always mindful of the poetic and literary elements of Plato's style, which on the whole made me wonder just what I was reading, what I was supposed to think.
I think I'll try reading again, because I would like to penetrate the shallow perspective I have of the dialogue, but perhaps first I'll move to something more on familiar ground.
July 4, 2021
A fun and sometimes difficult read... a strange book to review. It presents itself as a sort of science textbook, "the story of the universe so far as to the generation of man", Timaeus (the main character) says toward the end. And were I reviewing it as a modern science textbook, I would have to say "uh, LOADS of what this guy says we now think are incorrect, do not read!". However, as a book written in 360 BC by a smart man who had reason, basic observations about the world, and some theology to guide him, it is quite interesting and more than once has remarkable parallels to what modern science does teach us about the world... discussing those parallels could be a whole book in itself, and surely is somewhere. (It's also often quite funny, particularly when Timaeus is dismissing people who think other than he!)
I actually heard the book recommended at a classical Christian schooling conference as "science teachers should read this". Why? For one, Plato's method of reasoning is interesting to follow, even as we (with much better observations now than he had) would not agree with his conclusions. But he does also take the position that the Demiurge and subsidiary gods created the universe to be intelligible, and that it is a "divine" activity of man to study and reflect upon that intelligibility. There is something for Christians to appreciate in his mindset, therefore.
I actually heard the book recommended at a classical Christian schooling conference as "science teachers should read this". Why? For one, Plato's method of reasoning is interesting to follow, even as we (with much better observations now than he had) would not agree with his conclusions. But he does also take the position that the Demiurge and subsidiary gods created the universe to be intelligible, and that it is a "divine" activity of man to study and reflect upon that intelligibility. There is something for Christians to appreciate in his mindset, therefore.
November 14, 2022
يحتاج إلى قراءة ثانية وثالثة... إلى عاشرة لبعض المواضيع بالذات!!
January 4, 2019
Demasiado para una sola lectura, con un gran número de "cosas" entre líneas y el trabajo de diferenciar entre las metáforas y las afirmaciones literales.
Me gustó bastante pero necesito releerlo.
Me gustó bastante pero necesito releerlo.
June 9, 2023
Teleological metaphysics built on mind and necessity. Creation myth, natural philosophy, idealist speculation.
September 10, 2023
My dude was on some serious drugs
Read
January 11, 2025Got to love that zany Ancient Greek biology
June 7, 2021
Jag måste ha haft en annan utgåva, för denna var definitivt inte 100 sidor lång. Snarare dryga 20 sidor mytologisk smörja.
September 2, 2025
"Тимей" Платона - історія про Атлантиду переказана з четвертих уст, що закінчується описом взаємодії космосу з матеріальною душею
Діалог є продовженням "Держави" і відбувається на наступний день.
Суть діалогу - Сократ намагається уявити як би мала виглядати і діяти вимрієна ним ідеальна країна. В цьому йому допомагає Критій згадуючи історію про Атлантиду, а потім естафету перехоплює Тимей і описує ідеальність космосу та зв'язок між Творцем, молодшими богами, елементами, душею, та тілом.
Сократ каже:
"Послухайте, яке почуття викликає в мене наш малюнок державного устрою. Це почуття схоже на те, що відчуваєш, побачивши якихось шляхетних, красивих звірів, зображених на картині, а то й живих, але нерухомих: неодмінно захочеться подивитися, які вони в русі і як вони при боротьбі виявляють ті сили, про які дозволяє здогадуватися будова їх тіл. В точності те ж саме відчуваю я щодо зображеної нами держави: мені було б приємно послухати опис того, як ця держава веде себе в боротьбі з іншими державами, як вона гідним її чином вступає у війну, як у ході війни її громадяни роблять те, що їм личить.
Так ось, Критію і Гермократе, мені ясно, що сам я не впораюся із завданням прочитати належне похвальне слово чоловікам та державі. І в моїй нездатності немає нічого дивного: мені здається, що цього не можуть і поети, чи то давні, чи нові. Не те щоб я хотів образити рід поетів, але ж кожному ясно, що плем'я наслідувачів легше і найкраще відтворюватиме те, до чого кожен з них звик з ранніх років, а те, що лежить за межею звичного, для них ще важче добре відтворити в мові, ніж насправді.
Що стосується роду софістів, я, зрозуміло, завжди вважав його дуже досвідченим у складанні різноманітних промов і в інших прекрасних речах, але через те, що ці софісти звикли мандрувати з міста в місто і ніде не заводять власного будинку, у мене є підозра, що їм не під силу ті справи і слова, які здійснили філософи, і державні люди. Отже, залишається тільки рід людей вашого складу, за природою і вихованням і причетний філософським і державним заняттям.
Ось перед нами Тимей: будучи громадянином держави з такими прекрасними законами, як Локри Італійські, і не поступаючись нікому з тамтешніх уродженців за багатством і родовитістю, він досяг найвищих посад і почестей, які тільки може запропонувати йому місто, але в той же час піднявся, як мені здається, і на саму вершину філософа. Що стосується Критія, то вже про нього всі в Афінах знають, що він не невіглас ні в одному з предметів, які ми обговорюємо. Нарешті, Гермократ, за багатьма достовірними свідченнями, підготовлений до всіх цих міркувань і природою, і вишколом.
Тому і я вчора по зрілому роздумі охоче погодився, послухавши ваше прохання, викласти свої думки про державний устрій, бо знав, що, якщо ви погодитеся продовжувати, ніхто краще за вас цього не зробить; ви так здатні представити паші державу залученою в гідну її війну і діючою за своїми властивостями, як ніхто з людей, що нині живуть. Сказавши все, що від мене вимагалося, я, у свою чергу, звернув до вас ту вимогу, про яку зараз вам нагадую.
Порадившись між собою, ви погодилися віддарити мене словесним частуванням сьогодні; і зараз я, як бачте, приготувався до нього і з нетерпінням на нього чекаю."
Як наслідок, Критій розповідає історію про Атлантиду, почуту від свого діда (теж Критія), коли йому було десять років:
"Я розповім те, що чув як давню оповідь з вуст людини, яка сама була далеко не молода. Так, у ті часи нашому дідові було, за його словами, близько дев'яноста років, а мені – щонайбільше десять."
Сам дід Критія в свою чергу почув цю розповідь від Солона, в той від Єгипетського жреця. Отже, маємо оповідь, що перейшла через четверо уст.
"Солон розповідав, що коли він у своїх мандрівках прибув туди, його прийняли з великою шаною; коли ж він почав розпитувати про давні часи найдосвідченіших серед жерців, йому довелося переконатися, що ні сам він, ні взагалі хтось із еллінів, можна сказати, майже нічого про ці предмети не знає. Одного разу, намірившись перевести розмову на старі перекази, він спробував розповісти їм наші міфи про найдавніші події – про Форонея, шанованого за першу людину, про Ніобу і про те, як Девкаліон та Пірра пережили потоп; у своїй оповіді він намагався вивести родовід їхніх нащадків, і навіть обчислити за кількістю поколінь терміни, минулі з того часу. І тоді вигукнув один із жерців, людина дуже похилого віку:«Ах, Солоне, Солоне! Ви, елліни, вічно залишаєтесь дітьми, і нема серед еллінів старця!» «Чому ти так кажеш?» – спитав Солон. «Всі ви юні розумом, — відповів той, — бо ваші уми не зберігають у собі жодного переказу, який споконвічно переходив з роду в рід, і жодного вчення, що посивіло від часу. Причина ж тому ось яка. Вже були і ще будуть багаторазові та різні випадки смерті людей, і до того ж найстрашніші – через вогонь і воду, а інші, менш значні, через тисячі інших лих. Звідси й поширена у вас оповідь про Фаетона, сина Геліоса, який ніби колись запряг батьківську колісницю, але не зміг направити її по батьківському шляху, а тому спалив все на Землі і сам загинув, спопелений блискавкою. Припустимо, що в цій оповіді є багато від міфу, але в ньому міститься і правда: насправді, тіла, що обертаються небозводом навколо Землі, відхиляються від своїх шляхів, і тому через відомі проміжки часу все на Землі гине від великої пожежі. У такі часи жителі гір і піднесених або сухих місць схильні до гіршого винищення, ніж ті, хто живе біля річок чи моря; тому постійний наш благодійник Ніл рятує нас і від цієї біди, розливаючись. Коли ж боги, творячи над Землею очищення, затоплюють її водами, вціліти можуть волопаси і скотарі в горах, тим часом як мешканці ваших міст зносяться потоками в море,
але в нашій країні вода ні в такий час, ні в якийсь інший не падає на поля зверху, а, навпаки, за своєю природою піднімається знизу. З цієї причини перекази, що зберігаються у нас, найдавніші, хоч і вірно, що у всіх землях, де тому не перешкоджає надмірний холод чи жар, рід людський незмінно існує у більшому чи меншому числі. Яке б славне чи велике діяння чи взагалі чудова подія не відбулося, чи то в нашому краї чи в будь-якій країні, про яку ми отримуємо звістки, все це з давніх-давен змальовується в записах, які ми зберігаємо в наших храмах; тим часом у вас та інших народів щоразу, як тільки встигне виробитись писемність і все інше, що необхідно для міського життя, знову і знову в урочний час з небес скидаються потоки, наче мор, залишаючи з усіх вас лише неписьменних і невчених. І ви знову починаєте все спочатку, наче щойно народилися, нічого не знаючи про те, що відбувалося в давнину в нашій країні чи у вас самих. Взяти хоча б ті ваші родоводи Солоне, які ти щойно викладав, адже вони майже не відрізняються від дитячих казок. Таким чином, ви зберігаєте пам'ять тільки про один потоп, але їх було багато до цього; більше того, ви навіть не знаєте, що найпрекрасніший і найблагородніший рід людей жив колись у вашій країні. Ти сам і все твоє місто походите від тих небагатьох, хто залишився з цього роду, але ви нічого про нього не знаєте, бо їхні нащадки впродовж багатьох поколінь помирали, не залишаючи жодних записів і тому ніби не існували. Тим часом, Солоне, перед найбільшою і руйнівною повінню держава, нині відома під ім'ям Афін, була і у справах військової доблесті першою, і за досконалістю своїх законів стояла вище порівняння; переказ приписує їй такі дії та встановлення, які найпрекрасніше, що нам відомо під небом».
"З великих діянь вашої держави чимало таких, які відомі за нашими записам�� і є предметом захоплення; однак між ними є одне, яке перевищує велич і доблесті всі інші. Адже за свідченням наших записів, держава ваша поклала межу зухвалості незліченних військових сил, що вирушали на завоювання всієї Європи та Азії, шляхом, що тримали від Атлантичного моря. Через море це в ті часи можна було переправитися, бо ще існував острів, що лежав перед протокою, яка називається вашою мовою Геракловими стовпами. Цей острів перевищував своїми розмірами Лівію та Азію, разом взяті, і з нього тодішнім мандрівникам легко було перебратися на інші острови, а з островів – на весь протилежний материк, який охоплював те море, що й справді заслуговує таку назву (адже море по цей бік згаданої протоки є лише затокою з вузьким проходом до нього, тоді як море по той бік протоки є море у власному значенні слова, так само як і навколишня земля воістину і цілком справедливо може бути названа материком). На цьому острові, що іменувався Атлантидою, виникло дивовижне за величиною і могутністю царство, чия влада тяглася на весь острів, на багато інших островів і на частину материка, а крім того, по цей бік протоки вони опанували Лівію аж до Єгипту з Європою до Тиррении."
Але пізніше, коли настав термін для землетрусу та повені, за одну жахливу добу вся ваша військова сила була поглинута землею, що розверзлася; і Атлантида зникла, занурившись у безодню."
Слід за цим переказом, Тимей вирішує оцінити становище такої країни у світі в цілому і не просто оцінити, а навіть дати опис цьому світові. Його створенні та законам.
Він каже:
"Розглянемо ж, як виник цей Всесвіт і ким був той, хто його влаштував. Він був благий, а той, хто благий, ніколи і в жодному ділі не відчуває заздрості.
Будучи відмінним заздрості, він побажав, щоб усі речі стали якомога подібніші до нього самого. Побачити в цьому за розумними чоловіками справжній і найголовніший початок народження і космосу було б, мабуть, найвірогідніше."
В підсумку маємо один із найвпливовіших творів Платона, який став базисом для багатьох майбутніх концепцій. Тут згадується і тероя гуморіа (рідин) , відкривається ідея троїстої душі. Не обійшлося без метемпсихозу де на вершині є життя в тілі чоловіка, нижче - жінки, ще нижче - в тілах тварин.
А завершити хочу описом процесу зору та основної функції для якої, за словами Платона, були створені очі:
"На мою думку, зір - це джерело найбільшої для нас користі; ось і в нинішньому нашому міркуванні ми не змогли б сказати жодного слова про природу Всесвіту, якби ніколи не бачили ні зірок, ні Сонця, ні неба. Оскільки ж день і ніч, круговороти місяців і років, рівнодення та сонцестояння зримі, очі відкрили нам число, дали поняття про час і спонукали досліджувати природу Всесвіту, а з цього виникло те, що називається філософією, тому не буде кращого подарунка смертному роду від богів. Я стверджую, що саме в цьому найвища користь очей. Чи варто оспівувати інші, маловажливі блага? Адже навіть і далека від філософії людина, осліпнувши, починає марно оплакувати втрату зору. Як би там не було, нам слід вважати, що причина, через яку бог винайшов і дарував нам зір, саме ця: щоб ми, спостерігаючи кругообігу розуму в небі, отримали користь для кругообігу нашого мислення, яке схоже на те, небесне, хоча на відміну від його незворушності воно може і схибити; а тому, зрозумівши і засвоївши природну правильність міркувань, ми повинні, наслідуючи бездоганні кругообіги бога, упорядкувати непостійні кругообіги всередині нас."
Діалог є продовженням "Держави" і відбувається на наступний день.
Суть діалогу - Сократ намагається уявити як би мала виглядати і діяти вимрієна ним ідеальна країна. В цьому йому допомагає Критій згадуючи історію про Атлантиду, а потім естафету перехоплює Тимей і описує ідеальність космосу та зв'язок між Творцем, молодшими богами, елементами, душею, та тілом.
Сократ каже:
"Послухайте, яке почуття викликає в мене наш малюнок державного устрою. Це почуття схоже на те, що відчуваєш, побачивши якихось шляхетних, красивих звірів, зображених на картині, а то й живих, але нерухомих: неодмінно захочеться подивитися, які вони в русі і як вони при боротьбі виявляють ті сили, про які дозволяє здогадуватися будова їх тіл. В точності те ж саме відчуваю я щодо зображеної нами держави: мені було б приємно послухати опис того, як ця держава веде себе в боротьбі з іншими державами, як вона гідним її чином вступає у війну, як у ході війни її громадяни роблять те, що їм личить.
Так ось, Критію і Гермократе, мені ясно, що сам я не впораюся із завданням прочитати належне похвальне слово чоловікам та державі. І в моїй нездатності немає нічого дивного: мені здається, що цього не можуть і поети, чи то давні, чи нові. Не те щоб я хотів образити рід поетів, але ж кожному ясно, що плем'я наслідувачів легше і найкраще відтворюватиме те, до чого кожен з них звик з ранніх років, а те, що лежить за межею звичного, для них ще важче добре відтворити в мові, ніж насправді.
Що стосується роду софістів, я, зрозуміло, завжди вважав його дуже досвідченим у складанні різноманітних промов і в інших прекрасних речах, але через те, що ці софісти звикли мандрувати з міста в місто і ніде не заводять власного будинку, у мене є підозра, що їм не під силу ті справи і слова, які здійснили філософи, і державні люди. Отже, залишається тільки рід людей вашого складу, за природою і вихованням і причетний філософським і державним заняттям.
Ось перед нами Тимей: будучи громадянином держави з такими прекрасними законами, як Локри Італійські, і не поступаючись нікому з тамтешніх уродженців за багатством і родовитістю, він досяг найвищих посад і почестей, які тільки може запропонувати йому місто, але в той же час піднявся, як мені здається, і на саму вершину філософа. Що стосується Критія, то вже про нього всі в Афінах знають, що він не невіглас ні в одному з предметів, які ми обговорюємо. Нарешті, Гермократ, за багатьма достовірними свідченнями, підготовлений до всіх цих міркувань і природою, і вишколом.
Тому і я вчора по зрілому роздумі охоче погодився, послухавши ваше прохання, викласти свої думки про державний устрій, бо знав, що, якщо ви погодитеся продовжувати, ніхто краще за вас цього не зробить; ви так здатні представити паші державу залученою в гідну її війну і діючою за своїми властивостями, як ніхто з людей, що нині живуть. Сказавши все, що від мене вимагалося, я, у свою чергу, звернув до вас ту вимогу, про яку зараз вам нагадую.
Порадившись між собою, ви погодилися віддарити мене словесним частуванням сьогодні; і зараз я, як бачте, приготувався до нього і з нетерпінням на нього чекаю."
Як наслідок, Критій розповідає історію про Атлантиду, почуту від свого діда (теж Критія), коли йому було десять років:
"Я розповім те, що чув як давню оповідь з вуст людини, яка сама була далеко не молода. Так, у ті часи нашому дідові було, за його словами, близько дев'яноста років, а мені – щонайбільше десять."
Сам дід Критія в свою чергу почув цю розповідь від Солона, в той від Єгипетського жреця. Отже, маємо оповідь, що перейшла через четверо уст.
"Солон розповідав, що коли він у своїх мандрівках прибув туди, його прийняли з великою шаною; коли ж він почав розпитувати про давні часи найдосвідченіших серед жерців, йому довелося переконатися, що ні сам він, ні взагалі хтось із еллінів, можна сказати, майже нічого про ці предмети не знає. Одного разу, намірившись перевести розмову на старі перекази, він спробував розповісти їм наші міфи про найдавніші події – про Форонея, шанованого за першу людину, про Ніобу і про те, як Девкаліон та Пірра пережили потоп; у своїй оповіді він намагався вивести родовід їхніх нащадків, і навіть обчислити за кількістю поколінь терміни, минулі з того часу. І тоді вигукнув один із жерців, людина дуже похилого віку:«Ах, Солоне, Солоне! Ви, елліни, вічно залишаєтесь дітьми, і нема серед еллінів старця!» «Чому ти так кажеш?» – спитав Солон. «Всі ви юні розумом, — відповів той, — бо ваші уми не зберігають у собі жодного переказу, який споконвічно переходив з роду в рід, і жодного вчення, що посивіло від часу. Причина ж тому ось яка. Вже були і ще будуть багаторазові та різні випадки смерті людей, і до того ж найстрашніші – через вогонь і воду, а інші, менш значні, через тисячі інших лих. Звідси й поширена у вас оповідь про Фаетона, сина Геліоса, який ніби колись запряг батьківську колісницю, але не зміг направити її по батьківському шляху, а тому спалив все на Землі і сам загинув, спопелений блискавкою. Припустимо, що в цій оповіді є багато від міфу, але в ньому міститься і правда: насправді, тіла, що обертаються небозводом навколо Землі, відхиляються від своїх шляхів, і тому через відомі проміжки часу все на Землі гине від великої пожежі. У такі часи жителі гір і піднесених або сухих місць схильні до гіршого винищення, ніж ті, хто живе біля річок чи моря; тому постійний наш благодійник Ніл рятує нас і від цієї біди, розливаючись. Коли ж боги, творячи над Землею очищення, затоплюють її водами, вціліти можуть волопаси і скотарі в горах, тим часом як мешканці ваших міст зносяться потоками в море,
але в нашій країні вода ні в такий час, ні в якийсь інший не падає на поля зверху, а, навпаки, за своєю природою піднімається знизу. З цієї причини перекази, що зберігаються у нас, найдавніші, хоч і вірно, що у всіх землях, де тому не перешкоджає надмірний холод чи жар, рід людський незмінно існує у більшому чи меншому числі. Яке б славне чи велике діяння чи взагалі чудова подія не відбулося, чи то в нашому краї чи в будь-якій країні, про яку ми отримуємо звістки, все це з давніх-давен змальовується в записах, які ми зберігаємо в наших храмах; тим часом у вас та інших народів щоразу, як тільки встигне виробитись писемність і все інше, що необхідно для міського життя, знову і знову в урочний час з небес скидаються потоки, наче мор, залишаючи з усіх вас лише неписьменних і невчених. І ви знову починаєте все спочатку, наче щойно народилися, нічого не знаючи про те, що відбувалося в давнину в нашій країні чи у вас самих. Взяти хоча б ті ваші родоводи Солоне, які ти щойно викладав, адже вони майже не відрізняються від дитячих казок. Таким чином, ви зберігаєте пам'ять тільки про один потоп, але їх було багато до цього; більше того, ви навіть не знаєте, що найпрекрасніший і найблагородніший рід людей жив колись у вашій країні. Ти сам і все твоє місто походите від тих небагатьох, хто залишився з цього роду, але ви нічого про нього не знаєте, бо їхні нащадки впродовж багатьох поколінь помирали, не залишаючи жодних записів і тому ніби не існували. Тим часом, Солоне, перед найбільшою і руйнівною повінню держава, нині відома під ім'ям Афін, була і у справах військової доблесті першою, і за досконалістю своїх законів стояла вище порівняння; переказ приписує їй такі дії та встановлення, які найпрекрасніше, що нам відомо під небом».
"З великих діянь вашої держави чимало таких, які відомі за нашими записам�� і є предметом захоплення; однак між ними є одне, яке перевищує велич і доблесті всі інші. Адже за свідченням наших записів, держава ваша поклала межу зухвалості незліченних військових сил, що вирушали на завоювання всієї Європи та Азії, шляхом, що тримали від Атлантичного моря. Через море це в ті часи можна було переправитися, бо ще існував острів, що лежав перед протокою, яка називається вашою мовою Геракловими стовпами. Цей острів перевищував своїми розмірами Лівію та Азію, разом взяті, і з нього тодішнім мандрівникам легко було перебратися на інші острови, а з островів – на весь протилежний материк, який охоплював те море, що й справді заслуговує таку назву (адже море по цей бік згаданої протоки є лише затокою з вузьким проходом до нього, тоді як море по той бік протоки є море у власному значенні слова, так само як і навколишня земля воістину і цілком справедливо може бути названа материком). На цьому острові, що іменувався Атлантидою, виникло дивовижне за величиною і могутністю царство, чия влада тяглася на весь острів, на багато інших островів і на частину материка, а крім того, по цей бік протоки вони опанували Лівію аж до Єгипту з Європою до Тиррении."
Але пізніше, коли настав термін для землетрусу та повені, за одну жахливу добу вся ваша військова сила була поглинута землею, що розверзлася; і Атлантида зникла, занурившись у безодню."
Слід за цим переказом, Тимей вирішує оцінити становище такої країни у світі в цілому і не просто оцінити, а навіть дати опис цьому світові. Його створенні та законам.
Він каже:
"Розглянемо ж, як виник цей Всесвіт і ким був той, хто його влаштував. Він був благий, а той, хто благий, ніколи і в жодному ділі не відчуває заздрості.
Будучи відмінним заздрості, він побажав, щоб усі речі стали якомога подібніші до нього самого. Побачити в цьому за розумними чоловіками справжній і найголовніший початок народження і космосу було б, мабуть, найвірогідніше."
В підсумку маємо один із найвпливовіших творів Платона, який став базисом для багатьох майбутніх концепцій. Тут згадується і тероя гуморіа (рідин) , відкривається ідея троїстої душі. Не обійшлося без метемпсихозу де на вершині є життя в тілі чоловіка, нижче - жінки, ще нижче - в тілах тварин.
А завершити хочу описом процесу зору та основної функції для якої, за словами Платона, були створені очі:
"На мою думку, зір - це джерело найбільшої для нас користі; ось і в нинішньому нашому міркуванні ми не змогли б сказати жодного слова про природу Всесвіту, якби ніколи не бачили ні зірок, ні Сонця, ні неба. Оскільки ж день і ніч, круговороти місяців і років, рівнодення та сонцестояння зримі, очі відкрили нам число, дали поняття про час і спонукали досліджувати природу Всесвіту, а з цього виникло те, що називається філософією, тому не буде кращого подарунка смертному роду від богів. Я стверджую, що саме в цьому найвища користь очей. Чи варто оспівувати інші, маловажливі блага? Адже навіть і далека від філософії людина, осліпнувши, починає марно оплакувати втрату зору. Як би там не було, нам слід вважати, що причина, через яку бог винайшов і дарував нам зір, саме ця: щоб ми, спостерігаючи кругообігу розуму в небі, отримали користь для кругообігу нашого мислення, яке схоже на те, небесне, хоча на відміну від його незворушності воно може і схибити; а тому, зрозумівши і засвоївши природну правильність міркувань, ми повинні, наслідуючи бездоганні кругообіги бога, упорядкувати непостійні кругообіги всередині нас."
Read
August 24, 2024renacentista
aquí se puede referir toda la cosmovisión antigua al pie de la letra la naturaleza explicada desde las matemáticas hasta el acto de copular INCREÍBLE muy bonita experiencia. es como estar leyendo Cosmos de Neil Degrasse Tyson pero con dioses y some of the randomest shit que te se les ocurrió meter para que tuviera sentido y sonara PRECIOSO.
aquí se puede referir toda la cosmovisión antigua al pie de la letra la naturaleza explicada desde las matemáticas hasta el acto de copular INCREÍBLE muy bonita experiencia. es como estar leyendo Cosmos de Neil Degrasse Tyson pero con dioses y some of the randomest shit que te se les ocurrió meter para que tuviera sentido y sonara PRECIOSO.
November 9, 2018
PERSONS OF THE DIALOGUE: Socrates, Critias, Timaeus, Hermocrates.
Atlantis...
Many great and wonderful deeds are recorded of your state in our histories. But one of them exceeds all the rest in greatness and valour. For these histories tell of a mighty power which unprovoked made an expedition against the whole of Europe and Asia, and to which your city put an end. This power came forth out of the Atlantic Ocean, for in those days the Atlantic was navigable; and there was an island situated in front of the straits which are by you called the Pillars of Heracles; the island was larger than Libya and Asia put together, and was the way to other islands, and from these you might pass to the whole of the opposite continent which surrounded the true ocean; for this sea which is within the Straits of Heracles is only a harbour, having a narrow entrance, but that other is a real sea, and the surrounding land may be most truly called a boundless continent. Now in this island of Atlantis there was a great and wonderful empire which had rule over the whole island and several others, and over parts of the continent, and, furthermore, the men of Atlantis had subjected the parts of Libya within the columns of Heracles as far as Egypt, and of Europe as far as Tyrrhenia. This vast power, gathered into one, endeavoured to subdue at a blow our country and yours and the whole of the region within the straits; and then, Solon, your country shone forth, in the excellence of her virtue and strength, among all mankind. She was pre-eminent in courage and military skill, and was the leader of the Hellenes. And when the rest fell off from her, being compelled to stand alone, after having undergone the very extremity of danger, she defeated and triumphed over the invaders, and preserved from slavery those who were not yet subjugated, and generously liberated all the rest of us who dwell within the pillars. But afterwards there occurred violent earthquakes and floods; and in a single day and night of misfortune all your warlike men in a body sank into the earth, and the island of Atlantis in like manner disappeared in the depths of the sea. For which reason the sea in those parts is impassable and impenetrable, because there is a shoal of mud in the way; and this was caused by the subsidence of the island.
Memories...
Truly, as is often said, the lessons of our childhood make a wonderful impression on our memories; for I am not sure that I could remember all the discourse of yesterday, but I should be much surprised if I forgot any of these things which I have heard very long ago. I listened at the time with childlike interest to the old man's narrative; he was very ready to teach me, and I asked him again and again to repeat his words, so that like an indelible picture they were branded into my mind. As soon as the day broke, I rehearsed them as he spoke them to my companions, that they, as well as myself, might have something to say. And now, Socrates, to make an end of my preface, I am ready to tell you the whole tale. I will give you not only the general heads, but the particulars, as they were told to me.
Miniture Table of Contents...
CRITIAS: Let me proceed to explain to you, Socrates, the order in which we have arranged our entertainment. Our intention is, that Timaeus, who is the most of an astronomer amongst us, and has made the nature of the universe his special study, should speak first, beginning with the generation of the world and going down to the creation of man; next, I am to receive the men whom he has created
Cause...
Now everything that becomes or is created must of necessity be created by some cause, for without a cause nothing can be created. The work of the creator, whenever he looks to the unchangeable and fashions the form and nature of his work after an unchangeable pattern, must necessarily be made fair and perfect; but when he looks to the created only, and uses a created pattern, it is not fair or perfect.
With or Without Beginning?...
Was the heaven then or the world, whether called by this or by any other more appropriate name—assuming the name, I am asking a question which has to be asked at the beginning of an enquiry about anything—was the world, I say, always in existence and without beginning? or created, and had it a beginning? Created, I reply, being visible and tangible and having a body, and therefore sensible; and all sensible things are apprehended by opinion and sense and are in a process of creation and created. Now that which is created must, as we affirm, of necessity be created by a cause.
World of Generation...
Let me tell you then why the creator made this world of generation. He was good, and the good can never have any jealousy of anything. And being free from jealousy, he desired that all things should be as like himself as they could be. This is in the truest sense the origin of creation and of the world, as we shall do well in believing on the testimony of wise men: God desired that all things should be good and nothing bad, so far as this was attainable. Wherefore also finding the whole visible sphere not at rest, but moving in an irregular and disorderly fashion, out of disorder he brought order, considering that this was in every way better than the other. Now the deeds of the best could never be or have been other than the fairest; and the creator, reflecting on the things which are by nature visible, found that no unintelligent creature taken as a whole was fairer than the intelligent taken as a whole; and that intelligence could not be present in anything which was devoid of soul. For which reason, when he was framing the universe, he put intelligence in soul, and soul in body, that he might be the creator of a work which was by nature fairest and best. Wherefore, using the language of probability, we may say that the world became a living creature truly endowed with soul and intelligence by the providence of God.
This being supposed, let us proceed to the next stage: In the likeness of what animal did the Creator make the world?
Only One World and Heaven...
Are we right in saying that there is one world, or that they are many and infinite? There must be one only, if the created copy is to accord with the original. For that which includes all other intelligible creatures cannot have a second or companion; in that case there would be need of another living being which would include both, and of which they would be parts, and the likeness would be more truly said to resemble not them, but that other which included them. In order then that the world might be solitary, like the perfect animal, the creator made not two worlds or an infinite number of them; but there is and ever will be one only-begotten and created heaven.
Tangible Heaven...
If the universal frame had been created a surface only and having no depth, a single mean would have sufficed to bind together itself and the other terms; but now, as the world must be solid, and solid bodies are always compacted not by one mean but by two, God placed water and air in the mean between fire and earth, and made them to have the same proportion so far as was possible (as fire is to air so is air to water, and as air is to water so is water to earth); and thus he bound and put together a visible and tangible heaven. And for these reasons, and out of such elements which are in number four, the body of the world was created, and it was harmonized by proportion, and therefore has the spirit of friendship; and having been reconciled to itself, it was indissoluble by the hand of any other than the framer.
Creation of Perfect World...
Now the creation took up the whole of each of the four elements; for the Creator compounded the world out of all the fire and all the water and all the air and all the earth, leaving no part of any of them nor any power of them outside. His intention was, in the first place, that the animal should be as far as possible a perfect whole and of perfect parts: secondly, that it should be one, leaving no remnants out of which another such world might be created: and also that it should be free from old age and unaffected by disease. Considering that if heat and cold and other powerful forces which unite bodies surround and attack them from without when they are unprepared, they decompose them, and by bringing diseases and old age upon them, make them waste away—for this cause and on these grounds he made the world one whole, having every part entire, and being therefore perfect and not liable to old age and disease. And he gave to the world the figure which was suitable and also natural.
Self-Sufficient Man...
Now to the animal which was to comprehend all animals, that figure was suitable which comprehends within itself all other figures. Wherefore he made the world in the form of a globe, round as from a lathe, having its extremes in every direction equidistant from the centre, the most perfect and the most like itself of all figures; for he considered that the like is infinitely fairer than the unlike. This he finished off, making the surface smooth all round for many reasons; in the first place, because the living being had no need of eyes when there was nothing remaining outside him to be seen; nor of ears when there was nothing to be heard; and there was no surrounding atmosphere to be breathed; nor would there have been any use of organs by the help of which he might receive his food or get rid of what he had already digested, since there was nothing which went from him or came into him: for there was nothing beside him. Of design he was created thus, his own waste providing his own food, and all that he did or suffered taking place in and by himself. For the Creator conceived that a being which was self-sufficient would be far more excellent than one which lacked anything; and, as he had no need to take anything or defend himself against any one, the Creator did not think it necessary to bestow upon him hands: nor had he any need of feet, nor of the whole apparatus of walking; but the movement suited to his spherical form was assigned to him, being of all the seven that which is most appropriate to mind and intelligence; and he was made to move in the same manner and on the same spot, within his own limits revolving in a circle. All the other six motions were taken away from him, and he was made not to partake of their deviations. And as this circular movement required no feet, the universe was created without legs and without feet.
Time & Heaven...
Time, then, and the heaven came into being at the same instant in order that, having been created together, if ever there was to be a dissolution of them, they might be dissolved together. It was framed after the pattern of the eternal nature, that it might resemble this as far as was possible; for the pattern exists from eternity, and the created heaven has been, and is, and will be, in all time. Such was the mind and thought of God in the creation of time. The sun and moon and five other stars, which are called the planets, were created by him in order to distinguish and preserve the numbers of time; and when he had made their several bodies, he placed them in the orbits in which the circle of the other was revolving,—in seven orbits seven stars.
Man...
And having made it, he divided the whole mixture into souls equal in number to the stars, and assigned each soul to a star; and having there placed them as in a chariot, he showed them the nature of the universe, and declared to them the laws of destiny, according to which their first birth would be one and the same for all,—no one should suffer a disadvantage at his hands; they were to be sown in the instruments of time severally adapted to them, and to come forth the most religious of animals; and as human nature was of two kinds, the superior race would hereafter be called man.
Sleep/Eyes...
But when night comes on and the external and kindred fire departs, then the stream of vision is cut off; for going forth to an unlike element it is changed and extinguished, being no longer of one nature with the surrounding atmosphere which is now deprived of fire: and so the eye no longer sees, and we feel disposed to sleep. For when the eyelids, which the gods invented for the preservation of sight, are closed, they keep in the internal fire; and the power of the fire diffuses and equalizes the inward motions; when they are equalized, there is rest, and when the rest is profound, sleep comes over us scarce disturbed by dreams; but where the greater motions still remain, of whatever nature and in whatever locality, they engender corresponding visions in dreams, which are remembered by us when we are awake and in the external world.
Derivation of Philosophy...
But now the sight of day and night, and the months and the revolutions of the years, have created number, and have given us a conception of time, and the power of enquiring about the nature of the universe; and from this source we have derived philosophy, than which no greater good ever was or will be given by the gods to mortal man.
Regeneration/Cycle of Elements...
In the first place, we see that what we just now called water, by condensation, I suppose, becomes stone and earth; and this same element, when melted and dispersed, passes into vapour and air. Air, again, when inflamed, becomes fire; and again fire, when condensed and extinguished, passes once more into the form of air; and once more, air, when collected and condensed, produces cloud and mist; and from these, when still more compressed, comes flowing water, and from water comes earth and stones once more; and thus generation appears to be transmitted from one to the other in a circle. Thus, then, as the several elements never present themselves in the same form, how can any one have the assurance to assert positively that any of them, whatever it may be, is one thing rather than another? No one can. But much the safest plan is to speak of them as follows:—Anything which we see to be continually changing, as, for example, fire, we must not call 'this' or 'that,' but rather say that it is 'of such a nature'; nor let us speak of water as 'this'; but always as 'such'; nor must we imply that there is any stability in any of those things which we indicate by the use of the words 'this' and 'that,' supposing ourselves to signify something thereby; for they are too volatile to be detained in any such expressions as 'this,' or 'that,' or 'relative to this,' or any other mode of speaking which represents them as permanent.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 282 reviews