Dialectic as Ostension Towards the Transcendent: Language and Mystical Intersubjectivity in Plotinus’ Enneads

Pub Date : 2022-02-02 DOI:10.1163/18725473-bja10016
A. Haig
{"title":"Dialectic as Ostension Towards the Transcendent: Language and Mystical Intersubjectivity in Plotinus’ Enneads","authors":"A. Haig","doi":"10.1163/18725473-bja10016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n The theory of language that underlies Plotinus’ Enneads is considered in relation to his broader metaphysical vision. For Plotinus, language is neither univocal nor equivocal, but is something in-between, incapable of precisely describing reality, but nonetheless not completely useless. Propositional knowledge expressed discursively represents an imperfect shadow of reality which is defective in relation to the pure apprehension of Intellect. Passages in Plotinus which relate language to the sensible world are examined and it is argued that, although it plays a useful role in relating the sensible world to Intellect, discursive reason is nonetheless intrinsically inferior to both as a mode of representation. Plotinus holds that the inadequacy of language is “global” in character; language cannot describe any aspect of reality precisely, from the mundane to the transcendent. Language as a whole is an inferior image or imitation of the world as a whole. Therefore, the flaws in our linguistic representations cannot all be untangled or conceptually unpacked by means of language. There are passages in the Enneads which hint at an underlying semantic holism. Plotinus’ theory implies that apparent verbal contradictions which occur in different contexts might nonetheless still represent the optimal linguistic description of a reality that strictly speaking is ineffable. Therefore, discursive logical deduction is not always reliable, and needs to be subordinated to a vision of Intellect. True philosophical reasoning (dialectic) represents ostension towards the transcendent. Those who are sufficiently liberated to attain to an apprehension of the Forms, thereby come to inhabit the same “higher world”, involving a shared mystical intersubjectivity, which can be expressed linguistically, but only in an approximate manner. Plotinus’ theory presents a potential way out of the nihilistic impasse into which contemporary philosophy has arguably become enmeshed.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-02-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18725473-bja10016","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The theory of language that underlies Plotinus’ Enneads is considered in relation to his broader metaphysical vision. For Plotinus, language is neither univocal nor equivocal, but is something in-between, incapable of precisely describing reality, but nonetheless not completely useless. Propositional knowledge expressed discursively represents an imperfect shadow of reality which is defective in relation to the pure apprehension of Intellect. Passages in Plotinus which relate language to the sensible world are examined and it is argued that, although it plays a useful role in relating the sensible world to Intellect, discursive reason is nonetheless intrinsically inferior to both as a mode of representation. Plotinus holds that the inadequacy of language is “global” in character; language cannot describe any aspect of reality precisely, from the mundane to the transcendent. Language as a whole is an inferior image or imitation of the world as a whole. Therefore, the flaws in our linguistic representations cannot all be untangled or conceptually unpacked by means of language. There are passages in the Enneads which hint at an underlying semantic holism. Plotinus’ theory implies that apparent verbal contradictions which occur in different contexts might nonetheless still represent the optimal linguistic description of a reality that strictly speaking is ineffable. Therefore, discursive logical deduction is not always reliable, and needs to be subordinated to a vision of Intellect. True philosophical reasoning (dialectic) represents ostension towards the transcendent. Those who are sufficiently liberated to attain to an apprehension of the Forms, thereby come to inhabit the same “higher world”, involving a shared mystical intersubjectivity, which can be expressed linguistically, but only in an approximate manner. Plotinus’ theory presents a potential way out of the nihilistic impasse into which contemporary philosophy has arguably become enmeshed.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
作为超越的明示的辩证法:普罗提诺《恩尼德》中的语言与神秘的主体间性
作为普罗提诺《恩尼德斯》基础的语言理论被认为与他更广阔的形而上学视野有关。对普罗提诺来说,语言既不是明确的,也不是模棱两可的,而是介于两者之间的东西,它不能精确地描述现实,但也不是完全无用。以话语方式表达的命题知识代表了现实的一个不完美的影子,它与理智的纯粹理解相比是有缺陷的。我们考察了普罗提诺书中把语言与感性世界联系起来的段落,并认为,尽管它在将感性世界与理智联系起来方面发挥了有用的作用,但作为一种表征模式,话语理性在本质上还是不如两者。普罗提诺认为,语言的不足在性质上是“全球性的”;语言不能精确地描述现实的任何方面,从世俗到超越。语言作为一个整体是世界作为一个整体的低等形象或模仿。因此,我们语言表征中的缺陷不可能全部通过语言来解开或在概念上解开。《恩尼德》中有一些段落暗示了潜在的语义整体论。普罗提诺的理论表明,在不同的语境中出现的明显的语言矛盾可能仍然代表了对严格说来不可言说的现实的最佳语言描述。因此,话语逻辑演绎并不总是可靠的,需要服从于理智的愿景。真正的哲学推理(辩证法)是对超验的明示。那些得到充分解放,以达到对形式的理解的人,从而居住在同一个“更高的世界”,涉及到一个共同的神秘的主体间性,这可以用语言表达,但只能以一种近似的方式。普罗提诺的理论提供了一条走出虚无主义僵局的潜在途径,而当代哲学可以说已经陷入了虚无主义僵局。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1