Beyond the One: Unraveling Plotinus and Pure Relationality with Robert Gray and Eric Orwoll

In this episode, John Vervaeke, Robert Gray, and Eric Orwell explore the intricacies of Plotinus, Neo-Platonism, and pure relationality. They meticulously analyze James Filler's thought-provoking paper, viewing its ideas through Heidegger's philosophy and the essence of language. The concept of pure relationality and its impact on our understanding of reality is thoroughly examined, highlighting key themes such as the One, sacredness, and ethical dimensions. Diverse perspectives are brought into dialogue, and traditional views are critically assessed, as the guests reconstruct philosophical concepts for the contemporary world. The episode offers both grounding exercises and detailed analysis, taking listeners on a journey through ancient wisdom to discover its relevance in addressing today's challenges.
Eric Orwoll is a Christian Platonist philosopher and the creator of the Understanding Platonism and Aarvoll KZbin channels.
Robert Gray is the creator of The Meditating Philosopher KZbin channel.
Glossary of Terms
Relational Ontology: The philosophical study that posits relations rather than substances as the fundamental constituents of reality.
Neoplatonism: A philosophical system that emphasizes the spiritual and metaphysical aspects of reality, drawing on Plato's ideas.
John Vervaeke:
Website: johnvervaeke.com/
KZbin: / @johnvervaeke
Patreon: / johnvervaeke
X: / vervaeke_john
Facebook: / vervaekejohn
Eric Orwoll
KZbin:
Understanding Plato: / channel
Robert Gray
Email: [e-mail]
YouTUbe: / @themeditatingphilosopher
Join our new Patreon
/ johnvervaeke
The Vervaeke Foundation - vervaekefoundation.org/
Awaken to Meaning - awakentomeaning.com/
John Vervaeke KZbin
Awakening from the Meaning Crisis • Awakening from the Mea...
Books, Articles, and Publications
The One as Pure Relation in Plotinus - Filler, James (2019). International Journal of the Platonic Tradition brill.com/view/journals/jpt/1...
Heidegger, Neoplatonism, and the History of Being: Relation as Ontological Ground - James Filler
www.amazon.com/dp/3031309065
The Cognitive-Theoretic Model of the Universe: A New Kind of Reality Theory - Christopher Langan www.amazon.com/Cognitive-Theo...
Essential Difference: Toward a Metaphysics of Emergence - James Blachowicz www.amazon.com/Essential-Diff...
Quotes
"It reminded me of the attitude towards language in the Platonic dialogues, where Socrates moves into something more poetic, almost verse. There's that shift between prosaic, dialectical investigation and mytho-poetic, dreamlike exposition. That's interesting; I've identified those mythic sections often contain the deepest insights about the nature of reality." - Eric Orwoll [00:07:06]
"It helped to explain how and why those two are non logically one. That gave me a profound aha. Then, the critique of substance in the Aristotelian sense, where the subject predicate nature of logic and language is the same fundamental structure of reality, reality is made up of independently existing things that contain properties or enter into action." - John Vervaeke [00:16:00]
Chapters
[00:00:00] - Introduction and Grounding Exercise
[00:03:20] - Overview of James Filler's Work
[00:08:20] - Theological Poetic Language and Plato's Ontology
[00:12:40] - Hemispheric Approaches to Reasoning
[00:14:07] - John's Personal and Philosophical Reflections on Filler's Work
[00:20:08] - Dissecting Filler's Arguments: Exegesis and Ontological Inquiry
[00:30:20] - Revisiting Relationality and Unity: Ethical and Ontological Nuances
[00:46:00] - Navigating Reality: From Illusion to Sacredness
[00:52:56] - Tradition and Global Spirituality
[01:04:56] - Bridging Metaphysical Necessity and Cognitive Pluralism
[01:15:08] - A Philosophical Inquiry into Forms and Instantiations
[01:23:18] - Final Thoughts and Future Conversations

[@johnvervaeke]

I do not condone racism or antisemitism. I was only aware of Eric’s work on Platonism which is very high calibre. I apologize for my ignorance.

[@ericorwoll]

I don't hate any other races, though I do think race has ethical and metaphysical significance and consider myself an identitarian. If someone thinks that is a bad position to hold I'm more than happy to defend my views. Many people are very ready to write off my position without argument, which is a shame; I'm glad to hear out those that disagree with me.

[@CatastrophicDisease]

@@ericorwoll Pinning your identity on something that’s as nebulous and culturally contrived as “race” is bizarre and pseudoscientific at best; this is especially true given what we know today about genetics, and how genetic population groups often don’t even map onto culturally defined races (and they certainly don’t map onto the corresponding stereotypes). Racism (or race “identitarianism,” whatever you’re calling it these days) is based on grasping at a mirage and pretending it’s a real thing. As for white nationalism in an American context - well, whether you like it or not, non-“white” people like me (or mixed people, like many in my family) are just as American as you, with the same rights and same stake in this country. Non-white people (whether black, Asian, or any other background) have fought and bled for the United States, and continue to do so. I am glad we are at a stage now where the vast majority of our countrymen, including on the political right, have accepted that one’s character, values, abilities, and patriotism are more important than their melanin levels.

[@bpetroff93]

Of course Prof. Vervaeke. Nor can you reasonably be expected to research all the views of your guests. You have nothing to apologize for. Please keep having these conversations.

[@bpetroff93]

@@ericorwoll I don't see how you can make mystical white-identity claims compatible with either Christianity or Platonism, short of doing violence to either. I also think it's an essentially anti-traditional and anti-conservative position for an American to take. That said, if you'd like to have a civil discussion about it - I'm willing to do so.

[@CatastrophicDisease]

@@bpetroff93 You raise a good point about white nationalism being anti-conservative and contrary to our founding values. Racists will often (not without justification) criticize far-left identity politics and DEI as bigoted, but then turn around and embrace the *exact same* (and often worse and more overt) prejudice and bigotry toward people who happen to look different from them.

[@anamorphosis7234]

Eric is very insightful 👏

[@blakeceres]

Eric is a great guest. Incredibly insightful for such a young guy. His channel is great too.

[@ChucksExotics]

I actually learned about Vervaeke through watching Eric, glad to see them finally meet. Great conversation.

[@leibert6320]

Yes pretty much .

[@co3884]

Enjoyable conversation, hope to see more from Eric on your channel in the future 👍

[@Finn959]

😂 never thought I’d see Eric on this channel. A surprise to be sure, but a welcome one.

[@arnar9478]

They've had multiple discussions before

[@jibdee]

Great conversation. I was very impressed by both the guests and Eric in particular.

[@A_Koenig]

Fascinating discussion! Eric is an honest and gifted mind. I would love to see someone dive deeper into the resonance between this reading of Neoplatonism and the Madhyamaka philosophy of Nagarjuna. Listening to the discussion I was constantly reminded of classical Mahayana doctrines like dependent origination and emptiness of self-existence.

[@m0rgentraum]

Awesome discussion. Eric is a great guest. I would love to see him on again!

[@CastleClique]

WOW!!! THANKS SO MUCH FOR HAVING ERIC ON!!! I AM SOOOO HYPE!

[@TheMeditatingPhilosopher]

Thanks, John and Eric for the chance to talk about this! Eric & I have another talk on my channel about this paper, and John and I have a great recent "4P's of Loving" Valentines Day episode many of you might like there as well! 😎🙏 We also have 3 other talks on mostly Platonism and John's relevance realization work on my channel, so just check them out if you enjoyed any of this! (My version of this video even has the full Heidegger interview at the end too, so you can see all of it if you wondered about it. (subtitled too if you don't know German.) I can't wait for John's talk with James Filler and am reading more of the book John energetically held up at the start right now. 😉

[@lp.e4932]

An excellent discussion, and many solid points on procession and identity.. More guests like this

[@vangoghsear8657]

Nice for you to have Eric on. I very misunderstood guy.

[@kz7115]

Robert is so funny “why are you obsessed with it, John?” 😂😂

[@TheMeditatingPhilosopher]

ty, I try 🤓

[@GlobeHackers]

It's beyond incredible to see you philosophizing with John. What a fascinating and brilliant group-genuine seekers. The tubes can facilitate some exciting connections...what fun

[@petergriffintv8315]

Excellent guests 👏

[@HeraldofZeus]

To me, "relationality" sounds like just another term for Logos. If Logos is proportion, i.e. relation (between parts, between parts and wholes, etc.) then it absolutely does have an inherently dynamic nature. I don't think it is a coincidence that whenever Platonism is isolated and removed from its religious context it seems to spawn problems that people then need to find solutions for in order to complete the system of Plato. Hermes is the embodiment of Logos, and his dynamism is self-evident through his travels between realms, as he is the permeating word of Zeus, who unifies all things via this proportion. I agree with Eric in that the kind of ethical implication of the language used by the Platonists should not be seen as arbitrary or transient. The emphasis of the Good is crucial, as it speaks to the supra-intelligent nature inherent in the wonder of the ineffable, whereas "indeterminate relationality" almost seems to trap it in the intellectual sphere and deprive it of the finger pointing upwards.

[@LaymansPursuit]

Baaaahhhh that was getting so interesting at the end. Having an ethical prioritisation of the active over the passive is such a juicy take. I really hope you and Eric revisit this.

[@wanderingpoet9999]

What a truly fascinating philosophical conversation. As regards that tension between yang / yin, active / passive limit / unlimit, identity / openness I would propose the following which combines John and Eric's points: Whilst we are still caught up in temporalility there must be a subtle preponderance of the active principle, constantly in dialogue with its opposite principle, in order for progress to be made. (For Buddhism at least ultimately it is the attribution of fixed identity to the flow of experience that holds us back!) The goal is wisdom, which (whilst it is beyond all dichotomies) is symbolised by the receptive principle (eg female wisdom deities in Buddhism). So we should actively strive to be fully and perfectly receptive!

[@manlikeJoe1010]

Just began Eric Perl's book 'Theophany' recently, so this was a welcome surprise. Thanks John!

[@philalethes216]

Different Eric btw

[@manlikeJoe1010]

@@philalethes216 I'm fully aware of that thanks🙂. The topic of the video just reminded me of Perl and his excellent work in this area.

[@philalethes216]

@@manlikeJoe1010 I know it was just a little joke. Perl is incredible! I recommend his Thinking Being next if you haven't already read it; it's what made the concept of matter in Plotinus finally click for me.

[@mcapello8836]

Fascinating discussion and excellent to see relational ontology not only given its due, but extrapolated through Platonism in these wonderfully convergent ways. It would be nice to someday see this track reconciled with the related work that's been done in anthropology over the last few decades (Latour, Descola, Vivieros de Castro, Eduardo Kohn, etc), particularly with respect to naturalism. I do agree with John that there may be a error in embracing the freedom of relationality only to return too hastily to the propositional boundaries of identity, as emphasized by Eric; it is in interesting that some of the consequences of this mistake are perhaps borne out in the comments.

[@HornedGod66]

Subscribed

[@matthewparlato5626]

Reading that book now!

[@cameronidk2]

TO: Robert Gray..in future presentations if you could do a screen share or pic in pic of the text... at the start so we can absorb it visually as well as verbally.. it may extend the reach and appeal... "wink"

[@notloki3377]

if it is the dynamic tension between yin and yang, you nailed it.

[@oliverjamito9902]

So nice to have eyes to see! For the light of thy body is thy "EYES"! Bur beware for thy eyes are easily can be DECIEVE! What is for the eyes to see? For what ye see triggers thee! Now who are Ye talking too unseen nor seen in front? What is alone? Remember conversation is never alone! Nor being in front unto one another! Yes, look at our shared "i" AM in front of thee. Will not be sitting upon the NEW Table. Without longing for SINCERE conversations =

[@oliverjamito9902]

My pop John i know supposed to wait at the VERY end of my beloved having conversations. Just being around with my own given! Say if "SILENT"!

[@ElijahLogozar]

hey john, do you still enjoy chatting with jacob kishere?

[@justinthillens2853]

How should one best delve into the works of whitehead and goethe?

[@_ARCATEC_]

💓

[@CastleClique]

I find it ironic that people are attacking Eric, but nobody's mentioning the fact Heidegger was a Nazi. Anyways, please don't let the woke mob intimidate you!

[@Jacob011]

13:50 And Iain would say that it is precisely in making the right hemi primary the healthy left-right dynamic emerges - not he other way around. I understand that swallowing something that is so distinctly not egalitarian refuses to settle in a liberal mold western westerners have been saddled with. He repeatedly makes the point that right hemi is superior, so the right-left relationship is that of master and his emissary. They're is a fundamental asymmetry that haven't heard John deal with to this point.

[@projectmalus]

This seems bound with emanation of proportion and emergence of ontology, that of the senses which can be changed by habits, which influences what is proportioned at the interface individually and when predominant as culture, as collectively. If humans are one object as ontology and many different perceptions that can be grouped then this one object ontology has power that goes transjective for a reason which culture masks. Powerful in itself like a spinning top, that glides off the table in the reduction of interaction set possibilities, with this having proportion in itself. A baby balances (when laying on their side) as relatio religio, the balancing of gravity and light as 2^1 with the two as allowing and asserting actions. Held upright, baby proportions by triangulation into objects and relations as 2^2, self in the world. If the series is the object proportioned as to which level is attained thru actions guided by perceptions (or not) then two perimeters of baby and universe balanced in the allowing asserting and not part of the unfolding of knowledge outside symbiosis, where (in the symbiosis, an example is grass-herd-pack) the antagonistic assertions are bound into health and vitality, or coherent, dynamic persistence. Self as a triangle emerges, 3^1, which moves to 3^2 and so on as spinning pyramid or cone, in relation to the Earth and Sun or gravity and light. The problem is not in breaking symbiosis, to afford a front to back brain evolving, by imitating herd and pack by ingesting grass which is circle breaking for humans. It's remaining there in that inappropriate way that re-positions the vertical...past the due date instead of gaining a new interface of perception and returning to avoid increasing stress via the ontology masking and proportion power feedback by increasing levels of production, masked as left-right hemisphere imbalance. More simply and profoundly put, the most vital sense of the nose is masked and it's not the olfactory, but a guide that manages a multiple effect between organs and brain and world. Why is a person having a stuffed nose their entire life, and how is that effect even realized without actually doing the work of cleaning one's "room" guide? Why does the civilization break and lose the knowledge? Simply the reduction into a lower level from 2^3 to 2^2, if the adult has self as 2^1 as wave that embraces a wave in two areas of human only and non-human, as 2^3, and the non-human is removed so drops to 2^2 which is a juvenile state. Instead of having the symbiosis break capability that can go higher as 2^5 as world justice system that includes the non-human as incorporated with human reps, governed thru crypto by AGI, instead of furthering the dark triad territory as powerful yet open and manipulated robots set by people against other people, where the trust of the 2^1 balance is lost.

[@11-AisexualsforGod-11]

Apparently there is no way to draw a perfect 7 pointed star.. A symbol of natures anarchy.. sht spew overflow of the gods

[@11-AisexualsforGod-11]

You cook up spew from the one upon convincing everyone they are smart.. Necromancy

[@devilinlee]

“I’m hesitant to criticize Langley (sic) …as we know intelligence is only weakly predictive of rationality.” 😂😂 Smooth. And hilarious. I’ve never been a fan of Langan. I think he’s a windbag.

[@Eudaemoniac]

If langan is a windbag, what does that make Vervake. At least langan is actually smart

[@devilinlee]

To each their own. You're entitled to your opinion of Langan and Vervaeke, and I mine. John strikes me as genuine and interested in doing good. Langan strikes me as egotistical and pompous, interested in brandishing his IQ. I'm not interested in arguing, I just found John's comment funny. If you find Langan helpful, more power to you, sincerely!

[@Eudaemoniac]

@@devilinlee I don’t really like Langan either but I have some respect for him as a man. Vervaeke strikes me as effete and lacking in any definite conviction or character. He’s like a battered woman who give outward acquiescence without the inner affirmation

[@aaronmichaelseckman]

a way, not an identity, but if suffering is still a liability of one's self, the pointing of the wise is not well taken. The Buddha taught suffering and the end of suffering, not the recognition of an identity.

[@anatolwegner9096]

Who would have guessed that idealism/(neo) platonism plays so well with racism...

[@Appalachian_Bede]

Makes perfect sense, have you not read Plato, Aristotle, and the Neoplatonists?

[@anatolwegner9096]

@@Appalachian_Bede that was kind of the point

[@ChucksExotics]

Just because they has an identity doesn't make them racist. Every other group is allowed to be proud of their ethnicity, culture, and race. Except for us, why is that? I don't see how that's in any way related to hating someone else. I'm very proud to be White and I love Black people with all my heart.

[@CatastrophicDisease]

@@Appalachian_Bede Ah yes, Neoplatonist which included the Egyptian Plotinus and Levantine Iamblichus were clearly supporters of your white nationalist ideals. The cope among racists and their mental gymnastics are really amazing.

[@candaniel]

Boohoo, he used the racism word

[@sudabdjadjgasdajdk3120]

lmao! John research your guests, my dude.

[@vagabondcaleb8915]

?

[@evan7391]

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@bpetroff93]

@@vagabondcaleb8915 Based on some of his videos on his non-Platonism channel and Twitter, Eric Orwoll appears to be some flavor of white-nationalist. I suspect that is what suda is referencing.

[@evan7391]

@@bpetroff93 yup. He is a self-described white identitarian. In fact, that's a part of his homesteading project.

[@gilgamesh2832]

Is that an irony in holding racial identitarianism with talk about The One of Neoplatonism?

[@mcnallyaar]

Am I the only one who finds Mr. Orwoll to be frightening? At what point does his thinking make an effort to refrain from justifying violence and coercion?

[@ChucksExotics]

That doesn't make any sense. What are you talking about?

[@ChristopherNFoster]

Hey, can you give an example? I'm already concerned about the accusations of him pushing racialist ideology.

[@ChucksExotics]

@@ChristopherNFoster Aarvoll has never said anything hateful. These are a bunch of smears. Aarvoll has videos where he talks about how new ethnic groups will form through ethnogenesis, the mixing of different peoples to become new peoples. He's not at all what people are accusing him of.

[@ChristopherNFoster]

@@ChucksExotics Well that's reassuring. So now I'm wondering why John responded so forcefully to the accusation without checking first, then.

[@ChucksExotics]

@@ChristopherNFoster well, if a bunch of people show you posts taken out of context without knowing his actual position on these topics, and they say "he's a well known racist." You want to make sure your reputation isn't destroyed. And to be fair John didn't go full scorched earth and delete the video, and he even said he thought Eric's work on Platonism was very high quality. So basically Vervaeke just covered his behind. Aarvoll for example says that White Americans are a distinct group created through multi ethnic mixing, both mixing of genes and culture. In the same way that African Americans are a mix of different African tribes with different cultures and genes. Both of these are true. And there is nothing supremacist about merely identifying with the group that you for all practical reasons belong to. I am a White person, everyone including people from all over the world look at me and say, "oh that's a white man" but if I or Aarvoll say "yes I am a White man, that is my identity." The everyone attacks us and calls us supremacists for just identifying with what everyone in the world sees us as??!? So bizarre. If White people don't exist then we should not use the term at all anymore. That's the only consistent position for people complaining that Aarvoll is racist for identifying with the group that literally everyone would categorize him as being part of.

[@CatastrophicDisease]

I had looked up the Eric fellow after seeing an earlier video with him on Platonism and being intrigued - turns out the guy is a massive racist. His twitter is full of white nationalist and anti-Semitic drivel. I’m a fan of your work, John, and I hope you’re careful with these types going forward.

[@johnvervaeke]

Yes I have recently found out about this. As you can see it does not come up in the work I have done with him on Platonism but I will definitely take this into account going forward. I do think his arguments in this discussion are well made.

[@CatastrophicDisease]

@@johnvervaeke Thanks for the response, John, I appreciate your integrity as always. I agree his arguments are well-made, which makes the truth of his personal character even more disappointing.

[@LaymansPursuit]

John, please don't let this interrupt your good faith discussions with him. I think that's possible without permitting what you see as the more disagreeable aspects of his beliefs. I believe you were close to affording Eric a breakthrough in his thinking even within this conversation. ​@@johnvervaeke

[@pricklypear6298]

@@CatastrophicDisease The Meaning Crisis has many dark sides one of which is the domicide of certain groups. To put our heads in the sand and pretend this is not an issue is to add gas to the flames. Eric approaches approaches the issue as a honest seeker looking for solutions.

[@CatastrophicDisease]

@@pricklypear6298 White nationalism, an ideology that would strip one’s rights to their own country and home purely based on their skin color and superficial characteristics, is the very definition of domicide. Nothing honest or truthful about it.