What do you think?
Rate this book
Summary of The Elements of Theology by Proclus
A concise and professionally-researched summary of Proclus's "The Elements of Theology" .
From Alden Marshall’s Condensed Esoterica series, this complete summary provides a fast and straightforward way to understand and study the main ideas and concepts of the original source text.
About the Original
The Elements of Theology by Proclus (translated by E. R. Dodds) represents an attempt to explain the entire universe from Platonic principles. It is structured as a series of formal propositions and their accompanying proofs. The author posits a hierarchical relationship of all concepts in the universe, with all things emanating away from God, the perfect embodiment of Oneness and Goodness.
Dodds’ translation of the book concludes with a lengthy commentary providing annotations for the source of each argument in other philosophers’ works, the precise meaning and nuance of translation decisions, and how the individual propositions have been carried forward into subsequent works in the Western philosophical and Christian scholarly canons.
Added-value of this * Save time* Understand the key concepts* Expand your knowledge
Note to This is an unofficial summary and analysis of the book and not the original book itself. Alden Marshall and the Condensed Esoterica Collection are wholly responsible for this content and are not associated with the original author in any way. You are encouraged to purchase and read the original text in addition to this summary.
From Alden Marshall’s Condensed Esoterica series, this complete summary provides a fast and straightforward way to understand and study the main ideas and concepts of the original source text.
About the Original
The Elements of Theology by Proclus (translated by E. R. Dodds) represents an attempt to explain the entire universe from Platonic principles. It is structured as a series of formal propositions and their accompanying proofs. The author posits a hierarchical relationship of all concepts in the universe, with all things emanating away from God, the perfect embodiment of Oneness and Goodness.
Dodds’ translation of the book concludes with a lengthy commentary providing annotations for the source of each argument in other philosophers’ works, the precise meaning and nuance of translation decisions, and how the individual propositions have been carried forward into subsequent works in the Western philosophical and Christian scholarly canons.
Added-value of this * Save time* Understand the key concepts* Expand your knowledge
Note to This is an unofficial summary and analysis of the book and not the original book itself. Alden Marshall and the Condensed Esoterica Collection are wholly responsible for this content and are not associated with the original author in any way. You are encouraged to purchase and read the original text in addition to this summary.
142 pages, Paperback
Published December 25, 2020
2 people are currently reading
1 person want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
July 2, 2023
Proclus’ elements of theology is a (very) important text for those who would understand Platonism, particularly the late version of it that is often described as Neoplatonism. But it is not an easy text to read, especially for modern thinkers who share a very different intellectual framework and mindset.
This book makes available a set of propositions, which seemed obvious to Proclus, but they are less obvious to modern thinkers. For example, Proposition 53 tells us that ‘Prior to all things eternal there exists Eternity; and prior to all things temporal, time.’ Is that true? Why would we think that there was an empty eternity existing prior to anything eternal, or an empty time existing prior to anything temporal? Perhaps time comes into existence when something temporal comes into existence (and similarly with eternity). If so, then Proposition 53 would be incorrect. Eternity and Time do not exist prior to the things in them, they should be thought of as existing simultaneously, instead.
Or perhaps proposition 53’s references to a priority is meant to point to a logical or conceptual priority, rather than a durational one. So there is a question about what Proposition 53 means, as well as a question about whether it is correct, or not. Ideally, there should be a footnote flagging up issues like this, and directing readers to where they can pursue the matter further.
The book is an introduction, so it does not want to get bogged down in commentary. Fair enough. But, where there are questions of interpretation, and where there is scope to doubt or dispute the text, then an editor does really need to flag that up and signpost how readers can avoid misunderstanding the issues.
Take another example. Proposition 87 tells us that ‘all that is eternal has being; but not all that has being is eternal.’ A key question prompted by that proposition is whether ‘eternity’ is supposed to be understood as an infinite duration (ie everlasting time) or as a timelessness. Mathematical truths are often thought of as timeless, rather than everlasting, so an understanding of what Proclus means is an important precondition of being able to assess what he claims. Once again, a footnote would be helpful.
There is certainly a place for short, simple summarising books, but doing it well is potentially harder than writing a much longer exhaustive commentary, as the editor has to have an expert knowledge to be able to identify where the reader would benefit from further support, and then indicating where that support is to be found.
In general, this book did not suggest an underlying expertise. Many of its claims seemed arguable but not argued. For example, the very opening of Chapter 1 claimed that ‘Proclus is one of the chief links between ancient and medieval though.’ Is that really true? What about St Augustine, or Plotinus, or philosophers of other flavours such as Seneca, etc. Is Proclus really as often featured in philosophy courses as they are? Or perhaps the editor thought that he should be, even if he isn’t? The opening line of the book asserted an unargued opinion, rather than an evidenced conclusion.
Similarly, we heard that Proclus’ Elements of Theology first arrived in the West in 1268 (Kindle 6%). It is true that an important translation was indeed made available in 1268. But there is a sense in which that claim is also wrong, as excerpts of Proclus circulated long before 1268 in a format called the Liber de Causis, which many medieval philosophers commented on. Once again, this book is oversimplifying by not flagging up that complexity.
Overall, it was a good idea to try making Proclus available in a summary and simplified format, but the book as it stands just seemed to be a little too simplistic. I hope that there is a second edition which adds some editorial support for readers.
This book makes available a set of propositions, which seemed obvious to Proclus, but they are less obvious to modern thinkers. For example, Proposition 53 tells us that ‘Prior to all things eternal there exists Eternity; and prior to all things temporal, time.’ Is that true? Why would we think that there was an empty eternity existing prior to anything eternal, or an empty time existing prior to anything temporal? Perhaps time comes into existence when something temporal comes into existence (and similarly with eternity). If so, then Proposition 53 would be incorrect. Eternity and Time do not exist prior to the things in them, they should be thought of as existing simultaneously, instead.
Or perhaps proposition 53’s references to a priority is meant to point to a logical or conceptual priority, rather than a durational one. So there is a question about what Proposition 53 means, as well as a question about whether it is correct, or not. Ideally, there should be a footnote flagging up issues like this, and directing readers to where they can pursue the matter further.
The book is an introduction, so it does not want to get bogged down in commentary. Fair enough. But, where there are questions of interpretation, and where there is scope to doubt or dispute the text, then an editor does really need to flag that up and signpost how readers can avoid misunderstanding the issues.
Take another example. Proposition 87 tells us that ‘all that is eternal has being; but not all that has being is eternal.’ A key question prompted by that proposition is whether ‘eternity’ is supposed to be understood as an infinite duration (ie everlasting time) or as a timelessness. Mathematical truths are often thought of as timeless, rather than everlasting, so an understanding of what Proclus means is an important precondition of being able to assess what he claims. Once again, a footnote would be helpful.
There is certainly a place for short, simple summarising books, but doing it well is potentially harder than writing a much longer exhaustive commentary, as the editor has to have an expert knowledge to be able to identify where the reader would benefit from further support, and then indicating where that support is to be found.
In general, this book did not suggest an underlying expertise. Many of its claims seemed arguable but not argued. For example, the very opening of Chapter 1 claimed that ‘Proclus is one of the chief links between ancient and medieval though.’ Is that really true? What about St Augustine, or Plotinus, or philosophers of other flavours such as Seneca, etc. Is Proclus really as often featured in philosophy courses as they are? Or perhaps the editor thought that he should be, even if he isn’t? The opening line of the book asserted an unargued opinion, rather than an evidenced conclusion.
Similarly, we heard that Proclus’ Elements of Theology first arrived in the West in 1268 (Kindle 6%). It is true that an important translation was indeed made available in 1268. But there is a sense in which that claim is also wrong, as excerpts of Proclus circulated long before 1268 in a format called the Liber de Causis, which many medieval philosophers commented on. Once again, this book is oversimplifying by not flagging up that complexity.
Overall, it was a good idea to try making Proclus available in a summary and simplified format, but the book as it stands just seemed to be a little too simplistic. I hope that there is a second edition which adds some editorial support for readers.
Displaying 1 of 1 review