Customer Reviews

Neoplatonism (Ancient Philosophies)

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

I was looking for a good introduction to the subject of Neoplatonism, and if you are doing the same, this book is well worth the purchase price. Dr. Remes' writing is clear and understandable. The book seems geared for undergraduate reading, with terms well defined, and the progressive development of the school outlined through explication of its various adherents, a handy glossary and well organized bibliography are included. The publisher's description is accurate, and the book should fulfill the needs of most people needing an introduction to Neoplatonism.

Dr. Remes gives a good accounting of cosmology and first principles with a thorough explanation of the three hypostasis, their processions, and the philosophical difficulties involved in an "unfolding" metaphysics. Time and sense are also dealt with, though I thought this was probably the weakest area of the book, and the author perhaps could have revealed more of Plotinus' aesthetic theory, especially his understanding of interior sensing. If you are interested in this aspect of Neoplatonism, I would recommend Plotinus on Body and Beauty: Society, Philosophy, and Religion in Third-Century Rome. Dr. Remes discusses the role of the sage and moral development, the distinction between soul and self, and to my delight, touches on action in the moral life. So, if you seek a good introduction, look no further.

This was a wonderful well written book. Congratulatons to Pauliina Remes. However, I have one major complaint: the fact that she could not resist the urge to leave the book genderly neutral. For example: " The philosophers are unanimous in the fact that when the soul or, perhaps better, the self, forgets its true origin, which is in the higher levels of metaphysics, and looks at the inferior level, at what is unintelligible, SHE becomes ignorant of HER true self (p. 179)" This just totally killed it for me. She could have very well said, "it" and "itself", but like many women writers she couldn't resist. Look... can we please leave all the feminist and political correct stuff out of philosophy? What's wrong with the tradition? Keep it masculine or neutral please. I also notice the increase in the feminine use towards the later end of the book. Anyway, it is a good read, well worth the time energy spend to read it, but the whole "she" and "herself" thing just killed it for me.