Platonist disagreement and descent

Use in the book

V.13.1 openly chooses sides. Ficino prefers Dionysius the Areopagite, Origen and Augustine, whom he calls outstanding Platonists, in attributing the soul’s making to God alone, over the angelic production attributed to Plotinus, Proclus and some others. This is his construction of a philosophical lineage, not a modern survey verifying every ancient text.

V.13.18 reports a related account of derivative animation: immediate production through the Idea of life gives rational soul stable life, while life mediated through soul is by its own nature mutable. The reported ethereal vehicle may nevertheless be continuously animated, unlike the perishable elemental body. The qualification “in itself” concerns the dependent life’s natural mode rather than the permanence of rational soul’s essence.

V.14.8 lists proponents and opponents of irrational immortality. V.14.9 then explains the stronger claim by reference to Egyptian and Pythagorean descent theories: minds fallen into reason and sensation; human souls fallen wholly into sensation and generation in beasts; the same souls fallen into generation alone in plants. Reascent remains possible within that reported theory.

Ficino ends “let them see to these things; let us pursue our purpose.” That is a real reservation, not a decorative transition. One cannot cite the threefold descent as his unqualified account of human reincarnation, or infer that his present proof establishes all plant souls’ immortality.

Places to read

1. V.13.1Ficino expressly prefers one account of the soul’s creator over another.
2. V.13.18Idea, mediated life, ethereal vehicle and elemental body are distinguished in a reported account.
3. V.14.8, V.14.9Disagreement about irrational souls leads to an attributed descent theory and explicit distancing.

Translation in this edition

Proculus is this edition’s Latin form for Proclus. “Appear to have intimated” preserves videntur in the named descent attribution. The final sed haec ipsi viderint should accompany any summary of that doctrine.

Aegyptii / Pythagorei

Aegyptii / Pythagorei. Printed forms: Aegyptios; Pythagoreosque.

Egyptians and Pythagoreans as the traditions behind the reported lower-soul permanence doctrine. The author describes an inherited explanatory scheme without making it the conclusion of his own present proof. References: V.14.9. See Platonist disagreement and descent.

apparere / videri / placere

apparere / videri / placere. Printed forms: apparet; arbitrantur; existimant; placet; putant; videatur; videntur; videtur.

To appear, seem, be held or be judged, marking different degrees of assertion or reported opinion. Ficino's attribution of heavenly persistence, irrational immortality and descent theories must retain these evidential qualifications. References: V.4.1, V.4.3, V.4.9, V.10.1, V.11.8, V.13.1, V.13.18, V.14.8, V.14.9. See Platonist disagreement and descent.

caducus

caducus. Printed forms: caduca; caduco.

Perishable or liable to fall away. Soul governs passing things, while a perishable elemental body differs from the reported perpetual ethereal vehicle. References: V.12.13, V.13.18. See Platonist disagreement and descent.

delabi / prolabi

delabi / prolabi. Printed forms: delapsas; lapsas; prolapsas.

To fall down or descend into a lower exercise of life. The reported doctrine distinguishes descent into reason/sense, sense/generation, and generation alone; Ficino sets it aside. References: V.14.9. See Platonist disagreement and descent.

Dionysius / Origenes / Augustinus

Dionysius / Origenes / Augustinus. Printed forms: Aurelium Augustinum; Dionysium Areopagitam; Origenem.

The named authorities Ficino prefers for the soul's creation by God alone. Their designation as excellent Platonists is Ficino's own philosophical alignment, not a claim of agreement in every doctrine. References: V.13.1. See Platonist disagreement and descent.

Empedocles / Timaeus Locrus

Empedocles / Timaeus Locrus. Printed forms: Empedocles; Timaeus Locrus.

Named figures who seem, in Ficino's report, to intimate the descent and possible return of souls. The qualification videntur and the concluding reservation prevent an unqualified endorsement. References: V.14.9. See Platonist disagreement and descent.

ipsi viderint

ipsi viderint. Printed forms: haec ipsi viderint.

Let those thinkers answer for these matters, a distancing formula. Ficino ends the descent report and resumes his own purpose, so the report must not be silently turned into his settled teaching. References: V.14.9. See Platonist disagreement and descent.

Plotinus / Proculus

Plotinus / Proculus. Printed forms: Plotinus; Proculus.

Plotinus and Proclus as Ficino's reported Platonist interlocutors. He attributes angelic production to them here, while later naming differences over irrational soul; the particular thesis determines the alignment. References: V.13.1, V.14.8. See Platonist disagreement and descent.

Porphyrius

Porphyrius. Printed forms: Porphyrius.

Porphyry, named with Proclus and others as denying irrational soul's immortality. The contrast concerns lower soul, not denial of the rational immortality Ficino is presently defending. References: V.14.8. See Platonist disagreement and descent.

sempiternus

sempiternus. Printed forms: sempiterna; sempiternae; sempiternam; sempiternas; sempiterno.

Everlasting, used of life or duration without end. Its application to a soul can allow a beginning, and its application to an ethereal vehicle is within reported Platonist doctrine. References: V.12.15, V.13.18, V.14.9, V.15.3. See Platonist disagreement and descent.

speculum sempiternum

speculum sempiternum. Printed forms: speculo sempiterno.

An everlasting mirror, the analogy for continuous life-impression upon the ethereal vehicle. The image distinguishes an enduring recipient's animation from that of the perishable elemental body. References: V.13.18. See Platonist disagreement and descent.

vehiculum aethereum

vehiculum aethereum. Printed forms: aethereo; aethereum corpus; vehiculo.

An ethereal vehicle or body, reported as the rational soul's enduring immediate bodily associate. Its animation is distinguished from intermittent life in a composite elemental body; the report is qualified as Platonic opinion. References: V.13.18. See Platonist disagreement and descent.

Xenocrates / Speusippus / Numenius

Xenocrates / Speusippus / Numenius. Printed forms: Numenius; Speusippus; Xenocrates.

Thinkers named with Plotinus as affirming irrational soul's immortality in Ficino's report. Their placement concerns this specific question; it does not establish unanimity on the soul's origin or every Platonist doctrine. References: V.14.8. See Platonist disagreement and descent.

Dionysius the Areopagite and Origen (authorities and interlocutors)

Dionysius the Areopagite and Origen. With Augustine, these Christian authorities support Ficino’s preference for direct divine production of soul over the angelic production attributed to Plotinus and Proclus. Origen also appears in a separately reserved report about descent; the two contexts require separate treatment. References: V.13.1, V.14.9. See Divine production and the third essence; Platonist disagreement and descent.

Empedocles and Timaeus of Locri (authorities and interlocutors)

Empedocles and Timaeus of Locri. They appear with Origen and Plotinus in the reported descent account from which Ficino maintains a reservation. Their presence does not make every consequence of that account Ficino’s own settled teaching. References: V.14.9. See Platonist disagreement and descent.

Plotinus (authorities and interlocutors)

Plotinus. The volume reports angelic production, lower-soul immortality and descent in passages where Ficino’s own endorsement varies. Other passages use Plotinus on vegetative power, active perception or a tentative analysis of being. Attribution and assent are not interchangeable. References: V.13.1, V.14.8, V.14.9, VI.10.1, VII.6.3, VIII.4.12. See Divine production and the third essence; Platonist disagreement and descent; Seminal power, fish eggs and the tree; Sensation as attentive activity; Analysis, mangling, and fictive construction.

Porphyry (authorities and interlocutors)

Porphyry. Porphyry is placed against the immortality of irrational life, alongside Proclus, in one reported dispute. His use with Plotinus concerning vegetative power’s independence from bodily quantity does not by itself contradict that position: the properties being tested differ. References: V.14.8, VI.10.1. See Platonist disagreement and descent; Seminal power, fish eggs and the tree.

Proclus (authorities and interlocutors)

Proclus. Ficino reports Proclus in several settings, including angelic soul-production, the dispute over irrational immortality and a tentative analysis of being. VIII.15.2 explicitly leaves the stronger thesis of essential self-production to Proclus; VIII.15.3 retains formal self-causation rather than efficient self-creation. References: V.13.1, V.14.8, VIII.4.12, VIII.15.2, VIII.15.3. See Divine production and the third essence; Platonist disagreement and descent; Analysis, mangling, and fictive construction; Self-causation: formal cause and efficient cause; First Cause, principal causes and causal dependence.

Xenocrates, Speusippus and Numenius (authorities and interlocutors)

Xenocrates, Speusippus and Numenius. With Plotinus, they are reported on the side of immortality for irrational souls; Porphyry, Proclus and others are placed on the other side. Ficino’s rational-soul scope prevents this report from being read as his undifferentiated assertion about every form of animal life. References: V.14.8. See Platonist disagreement and descent; Rational soul and irrational life.