To these four Plato adds a fifth cause—the pattern which he himself calls the "idea"; for it is this that the artist gazed upon when he created the work which he had decided to carry out. Now it makes no difference whether he has his pattern outside himself, that he may direct his glance to it, or within himself, conceived and placed there by himself.
God has within himself these patterns of all things, and his mind comprehends the harmonies and the measures of the whole totality of things which are to be carried out; he is filled with these shapes which Plato calls the "ideas"—imperishable, unchangeable, not subject to decay. And therefore, though men die, humanity itself, or the idea of man, according to which man is molded, lasts on, and though men toil and perish, it suffers no change.
Accordingly, there are five causes, as Plato says: the material, the agent, the make-up, the model, and the end in view. Last comes the result of all these. Just as in the case of the statue—to go back to the figure with which we began—the material is the bronze, the agent is the artist, the make-up is the form which is adapted to the material, the model is the pattern imitated by the agent, the end in view is the purpose in the maker's mind, and, finally, the result of all these is the statue itself.
The Universe also, in Plato's opinion, possesses all these elements. The agent is God; the source, matter; the form, the shape and the arrangement of the visible world. The pattern is doubtless the model according to which God has made this great and most beautiful creation. The purpose is his object in so doing.
Do you ask what God's purpose is? It is goodness. Plato, at any rate, says: "What was God's reason for creating the world? God is good, and no good person is grudging of anything that is good. Therefore, God made it the best world possible."
Hand down your opinion, then, O judge; state who seems to you to say what is truest, and not who says what is absolutely true. For to do that is as far beyond our ken as truth itself.
God has within himself these patterns of all things, and his mind comprehends the harmonies and the measures of the whole totality of things which are to be carried out; he is filled with these shapes which Plato calls the "ideas"—imperishable, unchangeable, not subject to decay. And therefore, though men die, humanity itself, or the idea of man, according to which man is molded, lasts on, and though men toil and perish, it suffers no change.
Accordingly, there are five causes, as Plato says: the material, the agent, the make-up, the model, and the end in view. Last comes the result of all these. Just as in the case of the statue—to go back to the figure with which we began—the material is the bronze, the agent is the artist, the make-up is the form which is adapted to the material, the model is the pattern imitated by the agent, the end in view is the purpose in the maker's mind, and, finally, the result of all these is the statue itself.
The Universe also, in Plato's opinion, possesses all these elements. The agent is God; the source, matter; the form, the shape and the arrangement of the visible world. The pattern is doubtless the model according to which God has made this great and most beautiful creation. The purpose is his object in so doing.
Do you ask what God's purpose is? It is goodness. Plato, at any rate, says: "What was God's reason for creating the world? God is good, and no good person is grudging of anything that is good. Therefore, God made it the best world possible."
Hand down your opinion, then, O judge; state who seems to you to say what is truest, and not who says what is absolutely true. For to do that is as far beyond our ken as truth itself.
—from Seneca, Moral Letters 65
To the modern student of philosophy, it may seem odd how Seneca is “overlaying” Plato upon Aristotle, and speaking of Plato’s “Ideas” or “Forms” as being a sort of fifth cause. I am grateful, however, that Seneca is seeking a model for the whole, and not merely unrelated sets of compartmentalized theories. It is better to ask whether these arguments can somehow work together, instead of merely isolating them from one another.
I will resist the temptation to ramble on about Plato’s whole system, so at the risk of speaking too vaguely or hastily, the point here is that we should consider if the identity or form of any particular thing is really just an imperfect duplicate of a universal ideal. This throws a fifth component into our causality toolbox.
When I look at many dogs, for example, all of them will have different qualities, each one lacking in something present in the other, and yet all of them also share in a common essence, which remains constant and unchanging. The lesser proceeds out of the greater.
The relative instances might thus be said to participate in, and receive their being from, an absolute standard. It is what the artist ponders, and seeks to replicate, when he produces his work, just as it is what God himself conceives, and effects into existence, when he brings order to the entire material world. The “Idea” is like a model, or a blueprint, or an archetype, through which creation takes place.
Though I am probably ruminating far too wildly here, I find it interesting how Seneca employs the Platonic “Idea” as a way to bind all agency into the Divine Mind, and to connect or bridge the efficient cause to the final cause. He wishes to see the causes united, not torn asunder.
If there is a universal concept that joins all particulars together, then such a concept must exist within an intellect, and if all things must be reduced to a first cause, then the perfect awareness of God is the benchmark by which they must be judged. The buck stops here!
Furthermore, the final cause, the purpose or end, is then expressed by the intention of the efficient cause, the original agent, and so the beginning and the end are two sides of the same coin. It took some study of philosophy for me to understand what was meant by the Divine being the alpha and the omega. What comes around, goes around!
When we ask why God bothered to make anything at all, since he is already, by definition, the perfection of being, we too easily forget that the good of the creature is the plan of the Creator. It reminds me of how any act of love is an act of self-giving, and that is a comforting thought.
Finally, I am rightly put in my place when Seneca affirms how our human knowledge is not meant to be total or all-encompassing, and why we are made to slowly increase in our degree of certainty, not to demand instant enlightenment.
As I grow older, I see more and more value in a sort of practical doubt, not the excessive skepticism of the Pyrrhonians, which denies any truth altogether, but rather the patience and caution of the Academics, which humbly recognizes the limits of our perceptions.
To the modern student of philosophy, it may seem odd how Seneca is “overlaying” Plato upon Aristotle, and speaking of Plato’s “Ideas” or “Forms” as being a sort of fifth cause. I am grateful, however, that Seneca is seeking a model for the whole, and not merely unrelated sets of compartmentalized theories. It is better to ask whether these arguments can somehow work together, instead of merely isolating them from one another.
I will resist the temptation to ramble on about Plato’s whole system, so at the risk of speaking too vaguely or hastily, the point here is that we should consider if the identity or form of any particular thing is really just an imperfect duplicate of a universal ideal. This throws a fifth component into our causality toolbox.
When I look at many dogs, for example, all of them will have different qualities, each one lacking in something present in the other, and yet all of them also share in a common essence, which remains constant and unchanging. The lesser proceeds out of the greater.
The relative instances might thus be said to participate in, and receive their being from, an absolute standard. It is what the artist ponders, and seeks to replicate, when he produces his work, just as it is what God himself conceives, and effects into existence, when he brings order to the entire material world. The “Idea” is like a model, or a blueprint, or an archetype, through which creation takes place.
Though I am probably ruminating far too wildly here, I find it interesting how Seneca employs the Platonic “Idea” as a way to bind all agency into the Divine Mind, and to connect or bridge the efficient cause to the final cause. He wishes to see the causes united, not torn asunder.
If there is a universal concept that joins all particulars together, then such a concept must exist within an intellect, and if all things must be reduced to a first cause, then the perfect awareness of God is the benchmark by which they must be judged. The buck stops here!
Furthermore, the final cause, the purpose or end, is then expressed by the intention of the efficient cause, the original agent, and so the beginning and the end are two sides of the same coin. It took some study of philosophy for me to understand what was meant by the Divine being the alpha and the omega. What comes around, goes around!
When we ask why God bothered to make anything at all, since he is already, by definition, the perfection of being, we too easily forget that the good of the creature is the plan of the Creator. It reminds me of how any act of love is an act of self-giving, and that is a comforting thought.
Finally, I am rightly put in my place when Seneca affirms how our human knowledge is not meant to be total or all-encompassing, and why we are made to slowly increase in our degree of certainty, not to demand instant enlightenment.
As I grow older, I see more and more value in a sort of practical doubt, not the excessive skepticism of the Pyrrhonians, which denies any truth altogether, but rather the patience and caution of the Academics, which humbly recognizes the limits of our perceptions.
—Reflection written in 7/2013
No comments:
Post a Comment