thisisalmostit Mention #ElvisandMJdotcom in al your tweets and keep it trending, the world has to know the truth, spread the message .
Il y a 7 minutes via web
we work very well i think <!-- s:D -->:D<!-- s:D -->
This tweet has just lost me. I have no more faith that "thisisalmostit" knows anything. This is my humble opinion only. I wish people would quit playing games with us. Sorry - I had to say it. You can believe if you want to and prove me wrong if you wish but elvisandmjdotcom has nothing to do with Michael and the hoax.
I just thought exactly the same when I saw he tweeted that. Doesn't mean i want to argue about Elvis theory, but I just see that he's just like one of us, he's reading the forum. So we can no longer think he's feeding us with "news" when he could also take his inspiration from here. <!-- s:roll: -->:roll:<!-- s:roll: -->
Yep, he lost me also. I dont trust his tweets anymore, it will lead to nothing
i'm not so sure if the tweets regarding #elvisandmjdotcom prove anything in terms of 'thisisalmostit' not knowing anything. does he need to? and then knowing what exactly? did anyone actually expect some 'insider knowledge' from this tweeter? as if anyone would publish any details that way? i don't think so. even if anyone on the net knows anything, nobody would jeopardize this adventure and give it away in any fashion. nobody else but mike says 'go', if this whole thing should be working as planned.
fact remains that some of the links were very unusual and also very insightful, much more like others.
fact also remains that none of us knows who this is, if this person has any relation to mike, the hoax or not. even if it's 'just one of us' i don't see anything wrong or bad with it. still an interesting follow.
i'm pretty sure 'thisisalmostit' at least knows about this forum, which only shows that this is a serious place to be, hoaxwise. keep michaeling...
i'm not so sure if the tweets regarding #elvisandmjdotcom prove anything in terms of 'thisisalmostit' not knowing anything. does he need to? and then knowing what exactly? did anyone actually expect some 'insider knowledge' from this tweeter? as if anyone would publish any details that way? i don't think so. even if anyone on the net knows anything, nobody would jeopardize this adventure and give it away in any fashion. nobody else but mike says 'go', if this whole thing should be working as planned.
fact remains that some of the links were very unusual and also very insightful, much more like others.
fact also remains that none of us knows who this is, if this person has any relation to mike, the hoax or not. even if it's 'just one of us' i don't see anything wrong or bad with it. still an interesting follow.
i'm pretty sure 'thisisalmostit' at least knows about this forum, which only shows that this is a serious place to be, hoaxwise. keep michaeling...
<!-- s --><!-- s -->
don't mix up : is the forum important because thisisalmostit read it, or do we give him importance because he seems to follow the forum.
To me, if he had any info else from the forum and believer, he wouldn't tweet what he is told to tweet here...this is the feeling I had reading this tweet. I thought he had a thought of his own that coudl be interesting, but when I read, i just have the feeling he acts like any other believer. Doesn't mean he's not interesting, but just that he's all about mystery around him, never answering people, tweeting weird stuffs for just showing us with this tweet, that he might be no more than a believer like us.
honestly, i don't think it's important if this is 'just another believer'. i find the tweets interesting and if that person decides not to answer anyone, that's his decision. we are also part of creating the mystery around 'thisisalmostit' by discussing the tweets. there wouldn't be no mystery if there wasn't an audience for it as well.
some of the tweets lead to info that wasn't discussed here before, so i don't think that this forum is the source of information. i'd rather think that #elvisandmjdotcom did create some attention in the right places, so i look at it in a positive manner.
i wouldn't take it all too serious, really. i look at these tweets as interesting and informative entertainment.
Sorry but some of you guys are gulible to believe an anonymous person. Ts doesnt no nothing! He's just a believer just like me, and he doesnt know nothing. I don understand why people follow him because he tweets a whole of bounch of cliches
@Tabloidburn, I agree with everything you have said and I really like how you have expressed yourself <!-- s:D -->:D<!-- s:D --> . I don't believe that it is important who is behind this account and where they get their info from. As you say, they have tweeted things that have led to some good research and discussion. This has led to some valuable knowledge and new ideas. There are a lot of things changing in our world, new ways of thinking and new ways of approaching life on many levels. Whoever thisisalmostit is, they are very spiritually and consciously aware and this, for me is far more important than who they are.
Sorry but some of you guys are gulible to believe an anonymous person. Ts doesnt no nothing! He's just a believer just like me, and he doesnt know nothing. I don understand why people follow him because he tweets a whole of bounch of cliches
Sorry but some of you guys are gulible to believe an anonymous person. Ts doesnt no nothing! He's just a believer just like me, and he doesnt know nothing. I don understand why people follow him because he tweets a whole of bounch of cliches
i'm not so sure if the tweets regarding #elvisandmjdotcom prove anything in terms of 'thisisalmostit' not knowing anything. does he need to? and then knowing what exactly? did anyone actually expect some 'insider knowledge' from this tweeter? as if anyone would publish any details that way? i don't think so. even if anyone on the net knows anything, nobody would jeopardize this adventure and give it away in any fashion. nobody else but mike says 'go', if this whole thing should be working as planned.
fact remains that some of the links were very unusual and also very insightful, much more like others.
fact also remains that none of us knows who this is, if this person has any relation to mike, the hoax or not. even if it's 'just one of us' i don't see anything wrong or bad with it. still an interesting follow.
i'm pretty sure 'thisisalmostit' at least knows about this forum, which only shows that this is a serious place to be, hoaxwise. keep michaeling...
<!-- s --><!-- s -->
Sorry - but most of us aren't here for games. And I think you being a mod would need to say what you just did. However, just because someone is unusual and insightful doesn't mean they should be followed or even believed. And, yes, in my opinion, if he's going to play cat and mouse with us he sure as heck had better know something of value. I highly doubt this person is anyone other than someone connected to this site. Like I said before - please prove me wrong if you must and I don't fault anyone for wanting to continue to read the words he/she writes. For me I have more important things to do. Maybe I'll spend my time researching what good causes I can support. I think Michael would be more about that. Yes, I'll still be around. Blessings to you all.
Sorry but some of you guys are gulible to believe an anonymous person. Ts doesnt no nothing! He's just a believer just like me, and he doesnt know nothing. I don understand why people follow him because he tweets a whole of bounch of cliches
thisisalmostit never claimed to be TS.
So who is TS im confused <!-- s --><!-- s -->
TS is here,a members of the forum,true,but he was here since the beginning with an other name S.T.U.D.Y(on the old forum)
He gives us a lot of information on the hoax..he manages http://www.thisisalsoit.cm and he has redirected us on many clues in this hoax..he makes the situation more comprehensible and he is very effective !you should read all the topics about it ..you will be surprised!
Thisisalmostit,on twitter gives us informations too,follow him is very interesting !i think his tweet means something ..i don't think he play with us..i don't know why but i have to say <!-- s:) -->:)<!-- s:) -->
We don't know who are they,yes,but we can't certify they are simple believers like us,we can't certify they are Michael..but they said interested thing until today !
I have been reading people's recent responses about the thisisalmostit tweeter and see many are getting upset now and are not going to believe in the info leading to discovery and clues. I had to go pull my post comment from the DaveDave is a liar thread so I could give this to you all to read and check out the link on the beatles and paul hoax..
Alot of info there in that article to tell us how to find clues.
FROM MY POST ON DaveDave is a liar thread:
There was alot of statements made by Dave and clues given in this interview that kicked off the actual hint that THIS is a "hoax".
One was referencing to Paul Mc Cartney.
After the tweeter came online named thisisalmostit he or she gave a clue tweet about
Did Paul die at 09-11-'66 ?
1:21 PM May 3rd via web
I couldn't help myself... I went back to the article again to re read it, the statement below is from that article when the Paul "hoax" happened, sound familiar?
'Wow, that's an incredible idea!' We realized it would be great fun to have all those clues sitting there undiscovered until people started going nuts looking for them all."
<!-- s --><!-- s --> <!-- s --><!-- s --> <!-- s8-) -->8-)<!-- s8-) -->
"As the Egyptians considered themselves oppressed during the period of the Hyksos rule, the victory accomplished by pharaohs worshiping Amun was seen as a champion of the less fortunate. Consequently, Amun was viewed as upholding the rights of justice for the poor.[1] By aiding those who traveled in his name, he became the Protector of the road. Since he upheld Ma'at (truth, justice, and goodness) ,[1] those who prayed to Amun were required, first, to demonstrate that they were worthy by confessing their sins. Votive stela from the artisans village at Deir el-Medina record:
[Amun] who comes at the voice of the poor in distress, who gives breath to him who is wretched..You are Amun, the Lord of the silent, who comes at the voice of the poor; when I call to you in my distress You come and rescue me...Though the servant was disposed to do evil, the Lord is disposed to forgive. The Lord of Thebes spends not a whole day in anger; His wrath passes in a moment; none remains. His breath comes back to us in mercy..May your ka be kind; may you forgive; It shall not happen again."
There is also Amon in the old testament of the Bible. the name Amon means faithful . He was a governor in the time of Ahab who was charged to keep Micaiah till the king should return from the seige. Another Amon was the 15th King of Judah who succeeded his father Manasseh at the age of 22. He reigned 2 years.
i'm not so sure if the tweets regarding #elvisandmjdotcom prove anything in terms of 'thisisalmostit' not knowing anything. does he need to? and then knowing what exactly? did anyone actually expect some 'insider knowledge' from this tweeter? as if anyone would publish any details that way? i don't think so. even if anyone on the net knows anything, nobody would jeopardize this adventure and give it away in any fashion. nobody else but mike says 'go', if this whole thing should be working as planned.
fact remains that some of the links were very unusual and also very insightful, much more like others.
fact also remains that none of us knows who this is, if this person has any relation to mike, the hoax or not. even if it's 'just one of us' i don't see anything wrong or bad with it. still an interesting follow.
i'm pretty sure 'thisisalmostit' at least knows about this forum, which only shows that this is a serious place to be, hoaxwise. keep michaeling...
<!-- s --><!-- s -->
Sorry - but most of us aren't here for games. And I think you being a mod would need to say what you just did. However, just because someone is unusual and insightful doesn't mean they should be followed or even believed. And, yes, in my opinion, if he's going to play cat and mouse with us he sure as heck had better know something of value. I highly doubt this person is anyone other than someone connected to this site. Like I said before - please prove me wrong if you must and I don't fault anyone for wanting to continue to read the words he/she writes. For me I have more important things to do. Maybe I'll spend my time researching what good causes I can support. I think Michael would be more about that. Yes, I'll still be around. Blessings to you all.
i'm not saying that this is a game or should be regarded as one. 'being a mod' has nothing to do with my opinion. we don't know who this person is and as long as we don't, we shouldn't speculate too much on that but rather look at the info given, which is interesting, entertaining and also very useful. i don't think it's a waste of time but also that there shouldn't be so much emphasis on it being someone who plays around. if one feels that way, it's up to them to ignore that tweeter. peace...
Amun literally meaning "hidden", and although it was considered the creator of all things, there are a few stories about him. Despite the loss of their mythological background, came to be of great importance. During the Middle Kingdom, grew up in Thebes (the modern Luxor) cult Centre Amun, where was associated with the rah-rah Sun God and began to be worshiped as Amun-Rá. Eighth dynasty was later favored by the Royal family, and during the tenth, surpassed in importance all the other gods. During this time, was built for him a magnificent temple at Karnak, which remains to this day.
This article is not an extensive resource, rather it is designed to introduce the reader to the concepts briefly, allowing him to subsequently review Plato's material under new light.
Theory Of Forms, The Immortal World & The Mortal World
To begin we need to Plato's "Theory of Forms". The Form is the un-manifested concept, and any realisation of it is a limited flawed reflection which we perceive with our senses or imagination. Consider the concept of a chair compared to a real or imagined chair. The Chair Form is the ideal theoretical concept of a chair which exists only in a rarefied world of pure philosophy, not in the world of physical senses or imagination. Any manifestation of the Chair Form is limited, a reflection, an illusion in a way. Manifestations change, die, grow etc but the Form exists in a timeless world. In Plato's Cave Allegory the prisoners see shadows projected on the wall by things passing in front of a fire behind them, the world of shadows is the mortal world, reality, truth, exists at a deeper level.
A Form is essentially an immortal truth. It is, if one likes, an individual God, below which mortal life exists as an imperfect reflection. However, Plato does not equate it with God itself. God is that first principle which all Forms have in common and from which they derive. God or "The One" is the source, sometimes Plato describes it as The Good or Beauty. The One is far more abstract than The World of Forms. Indeed it is so remote, so simple, our comprehension of is extremely limited, and Plato concentrates for the most part only on the easy to understand Form / Reflection or Immortal / Mortal division.
The idea that the mortal world is a reflection of heavenly truths is key to mysticism. Also, wisdom is the ability to see past the confusion and divine the higher truth which the mortal world so imperfectly approximates. Akin to the expression "He can not see the forest for the trees", the average man is trapped in a web of illusion caused by his inability to penetrate the imperfect nature of mortal experience. In Christianity we have the line "For now we see through a glass, darkly". Detachment is one of the keys to wisdom because in the infinity of detail it is vital not to allow attachment toward any particular Form reflection to trap one. Detachment separates the wise philosopher from the opinion holder. Attachment is a set of tinted sunglasses, only light of a certain colour is passed, every other point falls on deaf ears, the ego is unchallenged, the individual can not grow, he is a prisoner of his inherited opinion, a robot.
In fact the Theory of Forms is just one take on the most fundamental question of metaphysics: We clearly inhabit two worlds, the material world of sense perception, and an inner world of thoughts and ideas, what is the nature of them? By the sixth century BC the idea of two worlds is so firmly implanted in human consciousness that every major philosopher or prophet of the time, from Buddha to Zarathustra, espoused it. Even modern philosophy begins with an analysis of this duality. Descartes described thinking substance and matter but broke with the mysticism of Plato who claimed the superiority of the Form. Spinoza, Locke, Berkley, Hume, Kant, Schopenhauer, Hegel all worked on the problem.
Neo-Platonist descriptions of the mystical connection between the Immortal and the Mortal world include "As Above, So Below", "As Within, So Without", "The Microcosm & Macrocosm" etc. The idea of a chair and a Chair Form is an interesting learning tool, but our real interest is in psychological concepts. A Chair Form, a Table Form, A Carpet Form also have us thinking about individuality, but in reality The World Of Form is a continuous sea. Neither does the two layer depth make much sense, above and below more accurately describe the relationship. The interconnectedness of The Immortal, psychology, fate and physical form is a vital feature of the connection principle which Plato frequently employs but does not properly justify. Carl Jung's synchronicity is another description of this principle of interconnectedness. Modern biologists analyse a cat by examining its physical properties, but Plato believed one could also consider it in another way entirely, perhaps as a collection of psychological forces, and he might draw conclusions by considering these forces in other contexts, a manner of thinking today regarded as deeply unscientific and speculative. Nevertheless, to some extent this is the essence of mysticism.
The Duality
Part of the brilliance of the discrete looking Theory of Forms is the construction of a clear duality between the Immortal and the Mortal Worlds. This is, in fact, the Yang / Yin or Male / Female or Active / Passive. Many readers will struggle to make the connection initially, and it is too difficult a subject for this quick article. Suffice it to quote from the commentaries of Proclus on the Timaeus: "The divisions of male and female comprehends in itself all the plenitudes of the divine orders...".
The male/female is not simply limited to human nature, it reflects the very structure of heaven and earth. The male-female nature is a microcosm of the relationship between the Immortal and Mortal. So Plato might have also deduced the duality by considering the male female directly, and we see this in his descriptions of men and boys which echoes the male/female (eg Phaedrus dialogue). Nevertheless, the beauty of the Immortal-Mortal relationship is its simplicity, it is far easier to analyse than the politically controversial and close to home Male-Female human nature.
The male is form, the female is reflection. The male is abstract, the female practical. The male is single minded, the female is down to earth and multi tasking. The male is intellectual, the female is sympathetic. The male is idealistic and challenging, the female is nurturing and emotional. The male is power and reason, the female love and connection. Capitalism is male, socialism female. The male is authoritarian, the female democratic.
The moral code of rationalist philosophers depends on their perspective. The Mortal Moral Perspective is the nurturing love of the mother. Justice is equality, utopia, cohesive. We have today's popular Christian morality. The Immortal Moral Perspective is the competitive father who forces his children to take risks and ranks their achievements. There is no equality nor cohesive utopia. Instead one is born the worm and, by challenge pain and brilliance, one ascends into the eagle capable of feeding on worms. Recall the genetic breeding viewpoint expressed in the Republic which is so offensive to modern Christian morality. For modern humanists (who have abandoned religion because God appears inconsistent with their passive feminine Christian morality) Plato & Nietzsche are evil or 'emotionally damaged'. But the passive viewpoint does not withstand reason. Does God care when humans die in a Tsunami any more than we humans care when we stand on a Cockroach?
Out of the Mortal-Immortal Duality we get the concept of the Trinity and the four elements or Quaternity. The Duality was at the heart of early philosophical systems, but today very few understand it.
The Trinity
The immortal-mortal are opposites, that which they have in common is the intermediate spirit, together the three are called a Trinity. Plato's Republic includes some good descriptions of dualities and intermediates but the concept is made most clear in his Symposium and the extract which follows below is taken from this. The most important duality and trinity is Immortal World - Mortal World example which follows.
In Plato's Symposium Socrates asks Diotima above love: "What then is Love?" I asked; "Is he mortal?" "No." "What then?" "As in the former instance, he is neither mortal nor immortal, but in a mean between the two."... "He is a great spirit and like all spirits he is intermediate between the divine and the mortal... Now these spirits or intermediate powers are many and diverse, and one of them is Love...." "What is the use of him to men?" asks Socrates. "That, Socrates," she replied, "I will attempt to unfold..."... "When a man loves the beautiful, what does he desire?" I answered her "That the beautiful may be his." "Still," she said, "the answer suggests a further question: What is given by the possession of beauty?"... "Happiness," I replied" "Yes," she said, "the happy are made happy by the acquisition of good things. Nor is there any need to ask why a man desires happiness; the answer is already final."... This desire is common to all men... "Why, then," she rejoined, "are not all men, Socrates, said to love, but only some them?"... Poets and Musicians are both artists but we give them different names... Likewise the Love we speak of is deeper than the human word... Beginning with lower arts of love Diptoma asks Socrates: "See you not how all animals, birds, as well as beasts, in their desire of procreation, are in agony... but why should animals have these passionate feelings? Can you tell me why?"... She explains this instinct to procreate is an echo of the desire for personal immortality and is the lowest form of the love which intermediates between the mortal and immortal worlds... Then she begins to describe higher forms of love... sexual desire for a specific body, a body being the reflection of the immortal soul.... for many bodies... love of character instead of body, character being a higher reflection of immortality than body... love of family... love of education... love of achievement... fame... virtue... philosophy...
In the rather condensed extract above we see developed the concept of the famous Immortal-Mortal-Love Trinity. Love, which mediates between the Immortal and Mortal, is a force which allows man to behold the Immortal. In Christianity "Divine Love" is given a prominent place and normally associate with the "Holy Spirit" which intermediates between the Mortal and Immortal. So in Christianity we have the father (immortal), the son (mortal) and the holy spirit (love).
However, love, as we normally comprehend the word, is clearly not the full story. There is another component, which we can perhaps label Reason. Man beholds the world of Form by reason and love. Reason is the +ve and love the -ve.
Nevertheless don't think these are the only two intermediates - "Now these spirits or intermediate powers are many and diverse, and one of them is Love".
Plato lists three arguments against democracy: the urge to power (sea captain with a crew of mutineers), the wild animal trainer who slavishly feeds and works with the bestial nature, and the corrupting influence of recognition and adulation (young man in assembly being clapped). This trinity clearly follows the archetypal pattern.
Plato's Republic also describes how humans be divided into three parts: rational, spirited, and appetitive. The rational is that which loves knowledge and truth. The spirited part is that part within our soul seeks honour. The appetitive part is based on our primal urges such as food and sex. The spirited part is arguably intermediate between +ve reason and -ve appetite. The popular modern expression Mind-Body-Spirit is another example of a classic trinity. It's not a carbon copy of Form-Reflection-Love/Reason, but it is following the active-passive-intermediate concept.
In Taoism we have the trinity Heaven-Earth-Man. Man is the intermediate, Yang is Heaven and Yin Earth. It's not as well thought out as Plato's Immortal-Mortal-Spirit but it's exactly the same concept. One of the nice points about Taoism is the continuous change between Yin and Yang and the blended nature of Mortal life, just as music is a blend of notes, an ever changing harmony and discord.
Of course not every 'trio' fits into the trinity. Consider, for example, the concept of 3 Dimensional space. Unlike Newton's three laws, we clearly have three orthogonal concepts which do not fit this model. Nevertheless the Taoists believed essentially everything could be decomposed into Yin and Yang. I guess that space would be Yin and time Yang. However, the single designation of Yin and Yang is confusing, the relationship depends on the intermediate, so Yin and Yang have flavours. We started by deriving a duality from the Theory of Forms and then postulating Intermediates. It aided our understanding, but in reality we can not conceive of opposites except in a certain sense or intermediate. Really truth or wisdom was inherent in our definition developed earlier. If we changed that to causality we have the Immortal as the cause, the Mortal as the effect and we see the active / passive designation more clearly. In this time-space duality the intermediate is clearly not love nor reason, more likely some aspect of causality.
The Quaternity
The Immortal-Mortal Trinity is a duality of abstract and material combined with an intermediate force or spirit. We can further subdivide the opposites according to the flow of intermediate force between them - a sort of secondary application of cause and effect. Thus we have abstract-incoming, abstract-outgoing, material-incoming, material-outgoing. This divides our two world model into four. We have, in corresponding order, Air, Fire, Water, Earth. These are psychological elements, extensions to our Yin/Yang duality. An example of the quaternity is perhaps as follows: Microsoft must have vision, strategy, personality and execution.
An example: Jung speaks of the male anima, which is the feminine inner personality present in the unconscious of the male, and the female animus, which is the masculine in the female. The anima is feminine-introverted water the animus is masculine-extroverted fire. Men can have an uncomfortable shock realising how earth women are, and women a shock realising how air men are. Why are masculine women stubborn? Their active principle lacks detachment. Why are feminine men moody? Their passive principle lacks practicality.
Plato's symposium contains a complex quaternity in the speeches of Phaedrus, Pausanias, Aristophanes and Eryximachus.
In Kant's four fold reason we have Knowing, Willing, Being, Becoming.
Henri Ellenberger, and perhaps Jung, believed the quaternity was a trinity with a forth attribute added, but I strongly disagree. I arrived at my conclusions by following Plato as carefully as possible, distinguishing between the opposites and the intermediate spirit (in the Symposium and Republic where the trinity is most clearly explained). From this concept of, opposites plus the essence that links them, the two step process naturally flows. The only alternative is Wolfgang Pauli's idea of constructing the quaternity from a pair of trinities. But this idea is not so far from mine - I split by the first essence and then split the two end points by another essence, so in a sense I also have two essential trinities.
One good thing about the idea of repeated subdivision, rather than the Pauli description, is that you can easily imagine continuing the subdivision out past the four to eight, sixteen, etc. Each division is made along the same Yin/Yang like rules. Now we have the idea of a primal trinity dividing out into an infinitely complex web according to a perfect chain of logical subdivisions. This is kind of akin to the idea of Plato's form of the Good being the essence from which all other forms are derived. It gives us some conception of The One being the source from which everything branches.
The four can seem a much more useful concept that the three. It has been said “All things do live in the three / But in the four they merry be”. This makes sense because the three describes the living system, but the four describes the practical state of being.
Love & Reason in More Detail
Confucius: By three methods we may learn wisdom: First, by reflection, which is noblest; Second, by imitation, which is easiest; and third by experience, which is the bitterest.
To fully understand this I have to add detail to some of the points made before. I said that between the Mortal and Immortal is the intermediate force which can be subdivided into +ve reason and -ve love. But I was missing a step: Between the Mortal and Immortal is an intermediate I might call Existence which divides into +ve Action and -ve Experience. Action divides (perhaps not immediately) into +ve Reason and -ve Love. Confucius is using the words reflection for reason, imitation for love, and experience makes it a trio if not a normal trinity.
Now I will try to delve into the paths of reason and love in more detail by attempting to divide the intermediate of wisdom according to the quaternity.
Reason-Air: We are talking of an attribute which connects us to God - a characteristic of enlightenment. For this we can examine Plato's descriptions of Socrates in the Symposium and other texts - Socrates is Plato's Christ / Buddha. Socrates is entirely uninterested in wine, sex, wealth etc and lives in purely philosophical world (eg Alcibiades, Symposium). Socrates' thought processes are characterised by such complete detachment that he sees and rejects the limiting nature of all tradition and human values. He is a mystic, but he can not be called religious, at least in the sense of believing in dogma. He is not a rebel who angrily adopts opposite positions, rather he transcends every position and ends in an almost childlike state of no belief. However, it is not a childlike state of non-understanding, he is regarded as the wisest man in Greece. His ability to see the truth, to behold beauty, leaves him in a state of permanent bliss.
Reason-Fire: Socrates does not live a purely contemplative life. Socrates spends a great deal of time in discourse with other people and has developed a system of argument which is designed to impart his detached understanding to others. By argument he reduces the opinions of everyone he meets to absurdity. He is an ugly man physically, although strong and brave, and deeply challenging. He is a teacher, obsessed by his work, whose challenging technique demolishes the ego of his opponents lifting them toward wisdom. Socrates is profoundly idealistic, although for those on the receiving end, attached to cherished belief, he must appear tyrannical. His idealism is detached, he cares little for the present condition or happiness of his subjects, only for their betterment.
Love / Imitation: Although Socrates is the wisest man in Greece he turns to the priestess Diotima to learn of love. "And now, taking my leave of you, I would rehearse a tale of love which I heard from Diotima of Mantineia, a woman wise in this and in many other kinds of knowledge, who in the days of old, when the Athenians offered sacrifice before the coming of the plague, delayed the disease ten years. She was my instructress in the art of love, and I shall repeat to you what she said to me...". Ancient Greece was not known for women's rights, and for Plato to choose a woman to teach Socrates is seminal. Plato does not limit her understanding to love; he makes this much clear here, also in the Republic he argues that women can perform any task, even warfare. Plato's description of Diotima is sadly short and I am still struggling to comprehend the concept. Nevertheless what follows are some ideas:
Love-Water: Diotima, we can be sure, is, as Socrates, similarly uninterested in wine, sex, wealth etc. However, her method of contacting Truth is entirely different. Consider experiencing a bell. Primarily one can see the bell and one can hear the bell. Looking at a beautiful bell brings a sense of contentment, nevertheless hearing the bell brings far more powerful feelings. In a sense, and for want of better words, seeing is primarily logical and hearing primarily experiential. Diotima primarily feels and Socrates primarily reasons. Remember: "First, by reflection, which is noblest; Second, by imitation, which is easiest". Carl Jung described our goal as self realised freedom achieved by integrating the unconscious. Jung believed in the intrinsic divinity of our higher unconscious, it acts akin to a spiritual guide always working toward the individuals evolution. Jung didn't primarily advocate reasoned transcendence as Plato did, he believed one could connect with the enlightening force in another way, a sort of inspired intuitive state. However, to behold truth this way still requires detachment. To properly hear the bell you have to turn off the wind, the birds and the beating of one's own heart.
Love-Earth: The opposite of Socratic Argument is, of course, the nurturing mother. This loving intermediate has a profoundly idealistic creative side as well, but not to challenge or burn, rather to imbue. Diotima, we can be sure, is not ugly and hard like Socrates, but beautiful and soft. She is not strong and warlike, rather gentle and relaxing. I love the line from Jung, which I would quote if I could find it, which describes the mystical contentment brought by the female that makes bearable the life of pain, struggle and unfulfilled ambition endured by the warrior.
What did Socrates have that stood him apart from all humanity. Both exceptional Reason-Air and exceptional Love-Water. Why was Socrates a more famous philosopher than Diotima? Without Reason-Air Love-Water can be lost in a sea. Also, without a Reason-Air she can not communicate her revelations.
By the way this concept of seeing or feeling is a vital one. Out of it we can derive aesthetics. So we have the feelings evoked in the individual as a result of beholding the synchronistic manifestation, or reflection, of underlying psychological essence, or form. Our appreciation depends on how harmonious the underlying form is with our personality, and the intensity with which the message is conveyed by the manifestation. For example, this is what generally drives our appreciation of man made objects and human bodies. We also have another effect on the individual evoked by the seeing facility which picks up on the divine complexity underlying the technical structure of the manifestation. It is hard for me to describe this, but it is a sense of uplifting wonder and clarity. It is why, for example, a close up of a snow flake is beautiful. It is why people are wrong to describe music as an emotional experience - it includes two experiential strands which we might label the emotional and mental. Some music famous for its mental component includes JS Bach's Harpsichord works.
The Pentad
The Pentad is simply the Quaternity plus the trinity. In other words it is no more complex than the distinction between the Trinity and Duality.
A famous example is Kenneth Burke's act, scene; agent, agency; purpose. The act and scene are 'reflections', and agent and agency are 'forms'. Likewise these subdivide again, eg we have incoming agent, outgoing agency. Our purpose is that which binds the whole picture together - here the motivation between our initial division into our reflected effect and forming cause. It gets confusing because the distinction between the first set of subdivisions and the second set looks so similar even though they are actually orthogonal.
Another famous example is the Maslow Pyramid. body, safety; relationships, success; self actualisation.
Here is one I made up:
Our search for God can be divided into: family, friends, fame, achievement, wisdom.
Notice the Pentad can bring the concept of growth to the Quaternity. In this case the trinity is the goal, and the subdivisions are paths.
Comments
Yep, he lost me also. I dont trust his tweets anymore, it will lead to nothing
fact remains that some of the links were very unusual and also very insightful, much more like others.
fact also remains that none of us knows who this is, if this person has any relation to mike, the hoax or not. even if it's 'just one of us' i don't see anything wrong or bad with it. still an interesting follow.
i'm pretty sure 'thisisalmostit' at least knows about this forum, which only shows that this is a serious place to be, hoaxwise. keep michaeling...
<!-- s
don't mix up : is the forum important because thisisalmostit read it, or do we give him importance because he seems to follow the forum.
To me, if he had any info else from the forum and believer, he wouldn't tweet what he is told to tweet here...this is the feeling I had reading this tweet. I thought he had a thought of his own that coudl be interesting, but when I read, i just have the feeling he acts like any other believer. Doesn't mean he's not interesting, but just that he's all about mystery around him, never answering people, tweeting weird stuffs for just showing us with this tweet, that he might be no more than a believer like us.
some of the tweets lead to info that wasn't discussed here before, so i don't think that this forum is the source of information. i'd rather think that #elvisandmjdotcom did create some attention in the right places, so i look at it in a positive manner.
i wouldn't take it all too serious, really. i look at these tweets as interesting and informative entertainment.
<!-- s
*hi-five*
<!-- s
thisisalmostit never claimed to be TS.
Sorry - but most of us aren't here for games. And I think you being a mod would need to say what you just did. However, just because someone is unusual and insightful doesn't mean they should be followed or even believed. And, yes, in my opinion, if he's going to play cat and mouse with us he sure as heck had better know something of value. I highly doubt this person is anyone other than someone connected to this site. Like I said before - please prove me wrong if you must and I don't fault anyone for wanting to continue to read the words he/she writes. For me I have more important things to do. Maybe I'll spend my time researching what good causes I can support. I think Michael would be more about that. Yes, I'll still be around. Blessings to you all.
TS is here,a members of the forum,true,but he was here since the beginning with an other name S.T.U.D.Y(on the old forum)
He gives us a lot of information on the hoax..he manages http://www.thisisalsoit.cm and he has redirected us on many clues in this hoax..he makes the situation more comprehensible and he is very effective !you should read all the topics about it ..you will be surprised!
Thisisalmostit,on twitter gives us informations too,follow him is very interesting !i think his tweet means something ..i don't think he play with us..i don't know why but i have to say <!-- s:) -->:)<!-- s:) -->
We don't know who are they,yes,but we can't certify they are simple believers like us,we can't certify they are Michael..but they said interested thing until today !
just my opinion.. <!-- s:D -->:D<!-- s:D -->
I have been reading people's recent responses about the thisisalmostit tweeter and see many are getting upset now and are not going to believe in the info leading to discovery and clues. I had to go pull my post comment from the DaveDave is a liar thread so I could give this to you all to read and check out the link on the beatles and paul hoax..
Alot of info there in that article to tell us how to find clues.
FROM MY POST ON DaveDave is a liar thread:
There was alot of statements made by Dave and clues given in this interview that kicked off the actual hint that THIS is a "hoax".
One was referencing to Paul Mc Cartney.
After the tweeter came online named thisisalmostit he or she gave a clue tweet about
Did Paul die at 09-11-'66 ?
1:21 PM May 3rd via web
I found this on May 4th, my bad I am late to reveal. OOPS sorry.
<!-- m -->http://www.beatle.net/articles/paulhoax.html<!-- m -->
Have fun reading.
Peace
I couldn't help myself... I went back to the article again to re read it, the statement below is from that article when the Paul "hoax" happened, sound familiar?
'Wow, that's an incredible idea!' We realized it would be great fun to have all those clues sitting there undiscovered until people started going nuts looking for them all."
<!-- s
thisisalmostit : Amon
Il y a 2 minutes via web
here is the link for wikipédia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amun
"As the Egyptians considered themselves oppressed during the period of the Hyksos rule, the victory accomplished by pharaohs worshiping Amun was seen as a champion of the less fortunate. Consequently, Amun was viewed as upholding the rights of justice for the poor.[1] By aiding those who traveled in his name, he became the Protector of the road. Since he upheld Ma'at (truth, justice, and goodness) ,[1] those who prayed to Amun were required, first, to demonstrate that they were worthy by confessing their sins. Votive stela from the artisans village at Deir el-Medina record:
[Amun] who comes at the voice of the poor in distress, who gives breath to him who is wretched..You are Amun, the Lord of the silent, who comes at the voice of the poor; when I call to you in my distress You come and rescue me...Though the servant was disposed to do evil, the Lord is disposed to forgive. The Lord of Thebes spends not a whole day in anger; His wrath passes in a moment; none remains. His breath comes back to us in mercy..May your ka be kind; may you forgive; It shall not happen again."
"Amun represented the essential and hidden.."
Today Michael Kiss posted a pic of Harsaphes.
http://twitter.com/Michaelkiss
I wrote to him:
@Michaelkiss Why the pic of Harsaphes?After the end of the Old Kingdom,Harsaphes was identified with Osiris...any meaning?
This is it: I am decleared to have lost my last screw
i'm not saying that this is a game or should be regarded as one. 'being a mod' has nothing to do with my opinion. we don't know who this person is and as long as we don't, we shouldn't speculate too much on that but rather look at the info given, which is interesting, entertaining and also very useful. i don't think it's a waste of time but also that there shouldn't be so much emphasis on it being someone who plays around. if one feels that way, it's up to them to ignore that tweeter. peace...
<!-- s
Duality stands in the way of unity
I agree..Kind of makes you wonder who this is <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? -->
Some one reading this forum <!-- s
"Funny how nobody's holy books are the same. Everybody's god got a different name. The day that it's over is the end of the game".
Explaining Plato's Duality, Trinity,
Quaternity, Pentad
October 2009, Updated March 2010
This article is not an extensive resource, rather it is designed to introduce the reader to the concepts briefly, allowing him to subsequently review Plato's material under new light.
Theory Of Forms, The Immortal World & The Mortal World
To begin we need to Plato's "Theory of Forms". The Form is the un-manifested concept, and any realisation of it is a limited flawed reflection which we perceive with our senses or imagination. Consider the concept of a chair compared to a real or imagined chair. The Chair Form is the ideal theoretical concept of a chair which exists only in a rarefied world of pure philosophy, not in the world of physical senses or imagination. Any manifestation of the Chair Form is limited, a reflection, an illusion in a way. Manifestations change, die, grow etc but the Form exists in a timeless world. In Plato's Cave Allegory the prisoners see shadows projected on the wall by things passing in front of a fire behind them, the world of shadows is the mortal world, reality, truth, exists at a deeper level.
A Form is essentially an immortal truth. It is, if one likes, an individual God, below which mortal life exists as an imperfect reflection. However, Plato does not equate it with God itself. God is that first principle which all Forms have in common and from which they derive. God or "The One" is the source, sometimes Plato describes it as The Good or Beauty. The One is far more abstract than The World of Forms. Indeed it is so remote, so simple, our comprehension of is extremely limited, and Plato concentrates for the most part only on the easy to understand Form / Reflection or Immortal / Mortal division.
The idea that the mortal world is a reflection of heavenly truths is key to mysticism. Also, wisdom is the ability to see past the confusion and divine the higher truth which the mortal world so imperfectly approximates. Akin to the expression "He can not see the forest for the trees", the average man is trapped in a web of illusion caused by his inability to penetrate the imperfect nature of mortal experience. In Christianity we have the line "For now we see through a glass, darkly". Detachment is one of the keys to wisdom because in the infinity of detail it is vital not to allow attachment toward any particular Form reflection to trap one. Detachment separates the wise philosopher from the opinion holder. Attachment is a set of tinted sunglasses, only light of a certain colour is passed, every other point falls on deaf ears, the ego is unchallenged, the individual can not grow, he is a prisoner of his inherited opinion, a robot.
In fact the Theory of Forms is just one take on the most fundamental question of metaphysics: We clearly inhabit two worlds, the material world of sense perception, and an inner world of thoughts and ideas, what is the nature of them? By the sixth century BC the idea of two worlds is so firmly implanted in human consciousness that every major philosopher or prophet of the time, from Buddha to Zarathustra, espoused it. Even modern philosophy begins with an analysis of this duality. Descartes described thinking substance and matter but broke with the mysticism of Plato who claimed the superiority of the Form. Spinoza, Locke, Berkley, Hume, Kant, Schopenhauer, Hegel all worked on the problem.
Neo-Platonist descriptions of the mystical connection between the Immortal and the Mortal world include "As Above, So Below", "As Within, So Without", "The Microcosm & Macrocosm" etc. The idea of a chair and a Chair Form is an interesting learning tool, but our real interest is in psychological concepts. A Chair Form, a Table Form, A Carpet Form also have us thinking about individuality, but in reality The World Of Form is a continuous sea. Neither does the two layer depth make much sense, above and below more accurately describe the relationship. The interconnectedness of The Immortal, psychology, fate and physical form is a vital feature of the connection principle which Plato frequently employs but does not properly justify. Carl Jung's synchronicity is another description of this principle of interconnectedness. Modern biologists analyse a cat by examining its physical properties, but Plato believed one could also consider it in another way entirely, perhaps as a collection of psychological forces, and he might draw conclusions by considering these forces in other contexts, a manner of thinking today regarded as deeply unscientific and speculative. Nevertheless, to some extent this is the essence of mysticism.
The Duality
Part of the brilliance of the discrete looking Theory of Forms is the construction of a clear duality between the Immortal and the Mortal Worlds. This is, in fact, the Yang / Yin or Male / Female or Active / Passive. Many readers will struggle to make the connection initially, and it is too difficult a subject for this quick article. Suffice it to quote from the commentaries of Proclus on the Timaeus: "The divisions of male and female comprehends in itself all the plenitudes of the divine orders...".
The male/female is not simply limited to human nature, it reflects the very structure of heaven and earth. The male-female nature is a microcosm of the relationship between the Immortal and Mortal. So Plato might have also deduced the duality by considering the male female directly, and we see this in his descriptions of men and boys which echoes the male/female (eg Phaedrus dialogue). Nevertheless, the beauty of the Immortal-Mortal relationship is its simplicity, it is far easier to analyse than the politically controversial and close to home Male-Female human nature.
The male is form, the female is reflection. The male is abstract, the female practical. The male is single minded, the female is down to earth and multi tasking. The male is intellectual, the female is sympathetic. The male is idealistic and challenging, the female is nurturing and emotional. The male is power and reason, the female love and connection. Capitalism is male, socialism female. The male is authoritarian, the female democratic.
The moral code of rationalist philosophers depends on their perspective. The Mortal Moral Perspective is the nurturing love of the mother. Justice is equality, utopia, cohesive. We have today's popular Christian morality. The Immortal Moral Perspective is the competitive father who forces his children to take risks and ranks their achievements. There is no equality nor cohesive utopia. Instead one is born the worm and, by challenge pain and brilliance, one ascends into the eagle capable of feeding on worms. Recall the genetic breeding viewpoint expressed in the Republic which is so offensive to modern Christian morality. For modern humanists (who have abandoned religion because God appears inconsistent with their passive feminine Christian morality) Plato & Nietzsche are evil or 'emotionally damaged'. But the passive viewpoint does not withstand reason. Does God care when humans die in a Tsunami any more than we humans care when we stand on a Cockroach?
Out of the Mortal-Immortal Duality we get the concept of the Trinity and the four elements or Quaternity. The Duality was at the heart of early philosophical systems, but today very few understand it.
The Trinity
The immortal-mortal are opposites, that which they have in common is the intermediate spirit, together the three are called a Trinity. Plato's Republic includes some good descriptions of dualities and intermediates but the concept is made most clear in his Symposium and the extract which follows below is taken from this. The most important duality and trinity is Immortal World - Mortal World example which follows.
In Plato's Symposium Socrates asks Diotima above love: "What then is Love?" I asked; "Is he mortal?" "No." "What then?" "As in the former instance, he is neither mortal nor immortal, but in a mean between the two."... "He is a great spirit and like all spirits he is intermediate between the divine and the mortal... Now these spirits or intermediate powers are many and diverse, and one of them is Love...." "What is the use of him to men?" asks Socrates. "That, Socrates," she replied, "I will attempt to unfold..."... "When a man loves the beautiful, what does he desire?" I answered her "That the beautiful may be his." "Still," she said, "the answer suggests a further question: What is given by the possession of beauty?"... "Happiness," I replied" "Yes," she said, "the happy are made happy by the acquisition of good things. Nor is there any need to ask why a man desires happiness; the answer is already final."... This desire is common to all men... "Why, then," she rejoined, "are not all men, Socrates, said to love, but only some them?"... Poets and Musicians are both artists but we give them different names... Likewise the Love we speak of is deeper than the human word... Beginning with lower arts of love Diptoma asks Socrates: "See you not how all animals, birds, as well as beasts, in their desire of procreation, are in agony... but why should animals have these passionate feelings? Can you tell me why?"... She explains this instinct to procreate is an echo of the desire for personal immortality and is the lowest form of the love which intermediates between the mortal and immortal worlds... Then she begins to describe higher forms of love... sexual desire for a specific body, a body being the reflection of the immortal soul.... for many bodies... love of character instead of body, character being a higher reflection of immortality than body... love of family... love of education... love of achievement... fame... virtue... philosophy...
In the rather condensed extract above we see developed the concept of the famous Immortal-Mortal-Love Trinity. Love, which mediates between the Immortal and Mortal, is a force which allows man to behold the Immortal. In Christianity "Divine Love" is given a prominent place and normally associate with the "Holy Spirit" which intermediates between the Mortal and Immortal. So in Christianity we have the father (immortal), the son (mortal) and the holy spirit (love).
However, love, as we normally comprehend the word, is clearly not the full story. There is another component, which we can perhaps label Reason. Man beholds the world of Form by reason and love. Reason is the +ve and love the -ve.
Nevertheless don't think these are the only two intermediates - "Now these spirits or intermediate powers are many and diverse, and one of them is Love".
Plato lists three arguments against democracy: the urge to power (sea captain with a crew of mutineers), the wild animal trainer who slavishly feeds and works with the bestial nature, and the corrupting influence of recognition and adulation (young man in assembly being clapped). This trinity clearly follows the archetypal pattern.
Plato's Republic also describes how humans be divided into three parts: rational, spirited, and appetitive. The rational is that which loves knowledge and truth. The spirited part is that part within our soul seeks honour. The appetitive part is based on our primal urges such as food and sex. The spirited part is arguably intermediate between +ve reason and -ve appetite. The popular modern expression Mind-Body-Spirit is another example of a classic trinity. It's not a carbon copy of Form-Reflection-Love/Reason, but it is following the active-passive-intermediate concept.
In Taoism we have the trinity Heaven-Earth-Man. Man is the intermediate, Yang is Heaven and Yin Earth. It's not as well thought out as Plato's Immortal-Mortal-Spirit but it's exactly the same concept. One of the nice points about Taoism is the continuous change between Yin and Yang and the blended nature of Mortal life, just as music is a blend of notes, an ever changing harmony and discord.
Of course not every 'trio' fits into the trinity. Consider, for example, the concept of 3 Dimensional space. Unlike Newton's three laws, we clearly have three orthogonal concepts which do not fit this model. Nevertheless the Taoists believed essentially everything could be decomposed into Yin and Yang. I guess that space would be Yin and time Yang. However, the single designation of Yin and Yang is confusing, the relationship depends on the intermediate, so Yin and Yang have flavours. We started by deriving a duality from the Theory of Forms and then postulating Intermediates. It aided our understanding, but in reality we can not conceive of opposites except in a certain sense or intermediate. Really truth or wisdom was inherent in our definition developed earlier. If we changed that to causality we have the Immortal as the cause, the Mortal as the effect and we see the active / passive designation more clearly. In this time-space duality the intermediate is clearly not love nor reason, more likely some aspect of causality.
The Quaternity
The Immortal-Mortal Trinity is a duality of abstract and material combined with an intermediate force or spirit. We can further subdivide the opposites according to the flow of intermediate force between them - a sort of secondary application of cause and effect. Thus we have abstract-incoming, abstract-outgoing, material-incoming, material-outgoing. This divides our two world model into four. We have, in corresponding order, Air, Fire, Water, Earth. These are psychological elements, extensions to our Yin/Yang duality. An example of the quaternity is perhaps as follows: Microsoft must have vision, strategy, personality and execution.
An example: Jung speaks of the male anima, which is the feminine inner personality present in the unconscious of the male, and the female animus, which is the masculine in the female. The anima is feminine-introverted water the animus is masculine-extroverted fire. Men can have an uncomfortable shock realising how earth women are, and women a shock realising how air men are. Why are masculine women stubborn? Their active principle lacks detachment. Why are feminine men moody? Their passive principle lacks practicality.
Plato's symposium contains a complex quaternity in the speeches of Phaedrus, Pausanias, Aristophanes and Eryximachus.
In Kant's four fold reason we have Knowing, Willing, Being, Becoming.
Henri Ellenberger, and perhaps Jung, believed the quaternity was a trinity with a forth attribute added, but I strongly disagree. I arrived at my conclusions by following Plato as carefully as possible, distinguishing between the opposites and the intermediate spirit (in the Symposium and Republic where the trinity is most clearly explained). From this concept of, opposites plus the essence that links them, the two step process naturally flows. The only alternative is Wolfgang Pauli's idea of constructing the quaternity from a pair of trinities. But this idea is not so far from mine - I split by the first essence and then split the two end points by another essence, so in a sense I also have two essential trinities.
One good thing about the idea of repeated subdivision, rather than the Pauli description, is that you can easily imagine continuing the subdivision out past the four to eight, sixteen, etc. Each division is made along the same Yin/Yang like rules. Now we have the idea of a primal trinity dividing out into an infinitely complex web according to a perfect chain of logical subdivisions. This is kind of akin to the idea of Plato's form of the Good being the essence from which all other forms are derived. It gives us some conception of The One being the source from which everything branches.
The four can seem a much more useful concept that the three. It has been said “All things do live in the three / But in the four they merry be”. This makes sense because the three describes the living system, but the four describes the practical state of being.
Love & Reason in More Detail
Confucius: By three methods we may learn wisdom: First, by reflection, which is noblest; Second, by imitation, which is easiest; and third by experience, which is the bitterest.
To fully understand this I have to add detail to some of the points made before. I said that between the Mortal and Immortal is the intermediate force which can be subdivided into +ve reason and -ve love. But I was missing a step: Between the Mortal and Immortal is an intermediate I might call Existence which divides into +ve Action and -ve Experience. Action divides (perhaps not immediately) into +ve Reason and -ve Love. Confucius is using the words reflection for reason, imitation for love, and experience makes it a trio if not a normal trinity.
Now I will try to delve into the paths of reason and love in more detail by attempting to divide the intermediate of wisdom according to the quaternity.
Reason-Air: We are talking of an attribute which connects us to God - a characteristic of enlightenment. For this we can examine Plato's descriptions of Socrates in the Symposium and other texts - Socrates is Plato's Christ / Buddha. Socrates is entirely uninterested in wine, sex, wealth etc and lives in purely philosophical world (eg Alcibiades, Symposium). Socrates' thought processes are characterised by such complete detachment that he sees and rejects the limiting nature of all tradition and human values. He is a mystic, but he can not be called religious, at least in the sense of believing in dogma. He is not a rebel who angrily adopts opposite positions, rather he transcends every position and ends in an almost childlike state of no belief. However, it is not a childlike state of non-understanding, he is regarded as the wisest man in Greece. His ability to see the truth, to behold beauty, leaves him in a state of permanent bliss.
Reason-Fire: Socrates does not live a purely contemplative life. Socrates spends a great deal of time in discourse with other people and has developed a system of argument which is designed to impart his detached understanding to others. By argument he reduces the opinions of everyone he meets to absurdity. He is an ugly man physically, although strong and brave, and deeply challenging. He is a teacher, obsessed by his work, whose challenging technique demolishes the ego of his opponents lifting them toward wisdom. Socrates is profoundly idealistic, although for those on the receiving end, attached to cherished belief, he must appear tyrannical. His idealism is detached, he cares little for the present condition or happiness of his subjects, only for their betterment.
Love / Imitation: Although Socrates is the wisest man in Greece he turns to the priestess Diotima to learn of love. "And now, taking my leave of you, I would rehearse a tale of love which I heard from Diotima of Mantineia, a woman wise in this and in many other kinds of knowledge, who in the days of old, when the Athenians offered sacrifice before the coming of the plague, delayed the disease ten years. She was my instructress in the art of love, and I shall repeat to you what she said to me...". Ancient Greece was not known for women's rights, and for Plato to choose a woman to teach Socrates is seminal. Plato does not limit her understanding to love; he makes this much clear here, also in the Republic he argues that women can perform any task, even warfare. Plato's description of Diotima is sadly short and I am still struggling to comprehend the concept. Nevertheless what follows are some ideas:
Love-Water: Diotima, we can be sure, is, as Socrates, similarly uninterested in wine, sex, wealth etc. However, her method of contacting Truth is entirely different. Consider experiencing a bell. Primarily one can see the bell and one can hear the bell. Looking at a beautiful bell brings a sense of contentment, nevertheless hearing the bell brings far more powerful feelings. In a sense, and for want of better words, seeing is primarily logical and hearing primarily experiential. Diotima primarily feels and Socrates primarily reasons. Remember: "First, by reflection, which is noblest; Second, by imitation, which is easiest". Carl Jung described our goal as self realised freedom achieved by integrating the unconscious. Jung believed in the intrinsic divinity of our higher unconscious, it acts akin to a spiritual guide always working toward the individuals evolution. Jung didn't primarily advocate reasoned transcendence as Plato did, he believed one could connect with the enlightening force in another way, a sort of inspired intuitive state. However, to behold truth this way still requires detachment. To properly hear the bell you have to turn off the wind, the birds and the beating of one's own heart.
Love-Earth: The opposite of Socratic Argument is, of course, the nurturing mother. This loving intermediate has a profoundly idealistic creative side as well, but not to challenge or burn, rather to imbue. Diotima, we can be sure, is not ugly and hard like Socrates, but beautiful and soft. She is not strong and warlike, rather gentle and relaxing. I love the line from Jung, which I would quote if I could find it, which describes the mystical contentment brought by the female that makes bearable the life of pain, struggle and unfulfilled ambition endured by the warrior.
What did Socrates have that stood him apart from all humanity. Both exceptional Reason-Air and exceptional Love-Water. Why was Socrates a more famous philosopher than Diotima? Without Reason-Air Love-Water can be lost in a sea. Also, without a Reason-Air she can not communicate her revelations.
By the way this concept of seeing or feeling is a vital one. Out of it we can derive aesthetics. So we have the feelings evoked in the individual as a result of beholding the synchronistic manifestation, or reflection, of underlying psychological essence, or form. Our appreciation depends on how harmonious the underlying form is with our personality, and the intensity with which the message is conveyed by the manifestation. For example, this is what generally drives our appreciation of man made objects and human bodies. We also have another effect on the individual evoked by the seeing facility which picks up on the divine complexity underlying the technical structure of the manifestation. It is hard for me to describe this, but it is a sense of uplifting wonder and clarity. It is why, for example, a close up of a snow flake is beautiful. It is why people are wrong to describe music as an emotional experience - it includes two experiential strands which we might label the emotional and mental. Some music famous for its mental component includes JS Bach's Harpsichord works.
The Pentad
The Pentad is simply the Quaternity plus the trinity. In other words it is no more complex than the distinction between the Trinity and Duality.
A famous example is Kenneth Burke's act, scene; agent, agency; purpose. The act and scene are 'reflections', and agent and agency are 'forms'. Likewise these subdivide again, eg we have incoming agent, outgoing agency. Our purpose is that which binds the whole picture together - here the motivation between our initial division into our reflected effect and forming cause. It gets confusing because the distinction between the first set of subdivisions and the second set looks so similar even though they are actually orthogonal.
Another famous example is the Maslow Pyramid. body, safety; relationships, success; self actualisation.
Here is one I made up:
Our search for God can be divided into: family, friends, fame, achievement, wisdom.
Notice the Pentad can bring the concept of growth to the Quaternity. In this case the trinity is the goal, and the subdivisions are paths.
<!-- s:ugeek: -->:ugeek:<!-- s:ugeek: -->
Peace