Читать книгу The History of Philosophical Ideas and Their Expression in Art - Анна Ивановна Маслякова - Страница 14

The importance of Neoplatonism is that it provided the philosophical framework that dominated Medieval thought until the 11^th-12^th centuries. And it continued to be a powerful instrument after the Reformation, during the Renaissance, the Enlightenment, etc. That is to say, it has been tremendously influential.

Firstly and most importantly, Neoplatonists thought of the Hierarchy of Being with Emanations from the One, the Divine Being, to Nous or Intelligence, Logos, then to the World Soul and, finally, to the Phenomenal World. Moreover, there was an upward movement, parallel to this downward Emanation, known as Epistrophê (conversion, turning back). And inasmuch as everything flows out from and returns to the One, this is the form of monism and pantheism.

To some extent there are also traces of the idea of the Divine Trinity in the Neoplatonic Cosmology. Plotinus says in “The Enneads” – “There exists a Principle which transcends Being; this is The One, whose nature we have sought to establish in so far as such matters lend themselves to proof. Upon The One follows immediately the Principle which is at once Being and the Intellectual-Principle. Third comes the Principle, Soul”. As for the problem of evil, according to Neoplatonism, there is no absolutely bad that has emanated from the One. Primary (natural) evil arises in the process of Emanation (certain levels are lower than the other), while secondary (moral) appears when people insert their affections on things below and follow their appetites rather than reason. In order to ascend to the Good, climb back up the ladder, one should start from contemplating nature so as to see the Order, unity and good in it then contemplate Form within one’s soul, proceed to the contemplation of Nous, the Cosmic Intelligence itself, the Form of all Forms and, finally, achieve the Ecstatic Reunion with the One. In this sense we should mention “The Ecstasy of Saint Teresa” by Gian Lorenzo Bernini.

As far as Beauty is concerned, their approach is quite similar. Plotinus writes that “Beauty addresses itself chiefly to sight; but there is a beauty for the hearing too, as in certain combinations of words and in all kinds of music, for melodies and cadences are beautiful; and minds that lift themselves above the realm of sense to a higher order are aware of beauty in the conduct of life, in actions, in character, in the pursuits of the intellect; and there is the beauty of the virtues”. “Let us, then, go back to the source, and indicate at once the Principle that bestows beauty on material things. Undoubtedly this Principle exists; it is something that is perceived at the first glance, something which the soul names as from an ancient knowledge and, recognizing, welcomes it, enters into unison with it. But let the soul fall in with the Ugly and at once it shrinks within itself, denies the thing, turns away from it, not accordant, resenting it”. “All shapelessness whose kind admits of pattern and form, as long as it remains outside of Reason and Idea, is ugly by that very isolation from the Divine-Thought. And this is the Absolute Ugly: an ugly thing is something that has not been entirely mastered by pattern, that is by Reason, the Matter not yielding at all points and in all respects to Ideal-Form. But where the Ideal-Form has entered, it has grouped and coordinated what from a diversity of parts was to become a unity: it has rallied confusion into co-operation: it has made the sum one harmonious coherence: for the Idea is a unity and what it moulds must come to unity as far as multiplicity may. And on what has thus been compacted to unity, Beauty enthrones itself, giving itself to the parts as to the sum: when it lights on some natural unity, a thing of like parts, then it gives itself to that whole”.

Ambrose, an Archbishop of Milan, introduced Saint Augustine to Neoplatonism and that provided the vehicle for his thinking his way beyond dualism towards a consistent Christian Theism. As we have mentioned before, the Greeks in various ways seem to say that we are ruled by Reason, while St. Augustine thinks that we are not ruled by what we know – we are ruled by what we Love. God illumines the human mind, sheds light on it so as to enable us to see the Form, the nature of things in the world of Particulars. He writes in his “Confessions” – “And what did it profit me, that all the books I could procure of the so-called liberal arts, I, the vile slave of vile affections, read by myself, and understood? And I delighted in them, but knew not whence came all, that therein was true or certain. For I had my back to the light, and my face to the things enlightened; whence my face, with which I discerned the things enlightened, itself was not enlightened”. The difference from Plato is that we do not grasp Forms in their transcendent status, whereas the difference from Aristotle is that we do not abstract Forms from our experience of Particulars.

The main lasting contribution of this early Medieval period is in defining and exploring philosophical issues having to do with the relationship between Religious Faith and Philosophical traditions of Antiquity. The basic distinction is between creation that Emanates from the very being of the Divine and Creation that have been brought into being out of nothing, ex nihilo. Thomas Aquinas, feeling that there is a potential in Aristotle’s “Metaphysics” for being compatible with Christianity, insists that God is not an essence, a form of all forms, but the source of existence. That is to say, it is not form or matter that courses existence (material signata), but God is giving the Actuality of existence to a combination of form and matter which otherwise would be pure potential (material prima).

Among the alternatives to Platonism one should also mention Nominalism and Conceptualism. What Nominalists are saying is that the classic kind of metaphysical explanation for the orderliness of nature and for cosmic justice that goes back to Anaxagoras’ Nous, Heraclitus’ Logos and the developing theory of forms is false. There are no real forms of transcendent or imminent sort, no abstract general ideas, no universal concepts and only Individuals exist (Roscellinus, William of Ockham). Conceptualists, on the contrary, insist that Universal Concepts exist within our minds and that we do think them separately from particulars (Peter Abelard).

There is a question as to whether or not we think of a Piece Art as an abstract object. It seems to me that Masterpieces of Art and Music cannot be viewed as a “collection of particulars” simply because one could compose a fugue according to the rules or press the keys correctly, and yet, the result could be rather disappointing. There must be some Form of Eternal Existence that “illuminates” artists, inspires them so that even their Particular “mistakes” contribute to the Beauty of their work.