Darwin Meets Socrates

[Belinda]

I wrote:

I don't understand what Nick's favoured paradigm of knowledge is, however he seems to have one. Neither do I know if Nick has calculated based on actual statistical evidence.

Nick replied:

My paradigm of knowledge begins with top down deductive reason as opposed to inductive reason used by those trying to understand the meaning and purpose of our universe from the bottom up. Without this foundation of a God concept similar to the ONE described by Plotinus, I am not able to verify how it devolves into AM or creation through universal laws

Deductive reason is okay as long as you understand your reasoning is that of a mere man. Moreover, deduction is even less reliable when it is unconfirmed by experiences.

Statistical evidence is the way of inductive reason and essential in the world. Efforts to "know thyself" or to have the impartial experience of oneself, is the way of deductive reason which connects us to our source.

However we do have the scientific method to gain statistical evidence but who knows what it means to "know thyself" as opposed to imagining oneself? That is the problem. We don't know how to know beyond the superficial. Imagination gets in the way.

You cannot be connected to your source, because you are only a man and so inferior to the Almighty that any deductions you can make are at best partial and at worst deluded.

[Nick_A]

Belinda

You cannot be connected to your source, because you are only a man and so inferior to the Almighty that any deductions you can make are at best partial and at worst deluded.

We are in the body of God so by definition are connected. Don't forget I begin with God as the ONE described by Plotinus

https://iep.utm.edu/plotinus/

Man is capable of conscious awareness of the ONE through meditation and conscious contemplation. It is the beginning of top down deductive reason as opposed to bottom up inductive reason. Can our minds remain open for the purpose of conscious contemplation rather than fall back into dualistic inductive reason

Can we remain open through conscious attention long enough to remember our connection rather than loosing it to self justifying imagination and idolatry.

"Do you wish to know God? Learn first to know yourself." - Abba Evagrius the Monk.

Man is a mini universe. Deductive reason uses self knowledge for verifiction. If the universe is the body of God serving the Godhead, our bodies must serve the highest part of the human organism. The closer we get to experiencing ourselves, the closer we get to experiencing the purpose of our universe and our purpose within it. How can we do it?

[Belinda]

Belinda

You cannot be connected to your source, because you are only a man and so inferior to the Almighty that any deductions you can make are at best partial and at worst deluded.

We are in the body of God so by definition are connected. Don't forget I begin with God as the ONE described by Plotinus

https://iep.utm.edu/plotinus/

Man is capable of conscious awareness of the ONE through meditation and conscious contemplation. It is the beginning of top down deductive reason as opposed to bottom up inductive reason. Can our minds remain open for the purpose of conscious contemplation rather than fall back into dualistic inductive reason

Can we remain open through conscious attention long enough to remember our connection rather than loosing it to self justifying imagination and idolatry.

"Do you wish to know God? Learn first to know yourself." - Abba Evagrius the Monk.

Man is a mini universe. Deductive reason uses self knowledge for verifiction. If the universe is the body of God serving the Godhead, our bodies must serve the highest part of the human organism. The closer we get to experiencing ourselves, the closer we get to experiencing the purpose of our universe and our purpose within it. How can we do it?

Conscious attention to God is best when He is sought in everyday life in this world.
The human organism has no 'higher' and 'lower' parts. Such an evaluation is subjective , and results in that sort of snobbery that disdains the manual worker.

[Nick_A]

Belinda

You cannot be connected to your source, because you are only a man and so inferior to the Almighty that any deductions you can make are at best partial and at worst deluded.

We are in the body of God so by definition are connected. Don't forget I begin with God as the ONE described by Plotinus

https://iep.utm.edu/plotinus/

Man is capable of conscious awareness of the ONE through meditation and conscious contemplation. It is the beginning of top down deductive reason as opposed to bottom up inductive reason. Can our minds remain open for the purpose of conscious contemplation rather than fall back into dualistic inductive reason

Can we remain open through conscious attention long enough to remember our connection rather than loosing it to self justifying imagination and idolatry.

"Do you wish to know God? Learn first to know yourself." - Abba Evagrius the Monk.

Man is a mini universe. Deductive reason uses self knowledge for verifiction. If the universe is the body of God serving the Godhead, our bodies must serve the highest part of the human organism. The closer we get to experiencing ourselves, the closer we get to experiencing the purpose of our universe and our purpose within it. How can we do it?

Conscious attention to God is best when He is sought in everyday life in this world.
The human organism has no 'higher' and 'lower' parts. Such an evaluation is subjective , and results in that sort of snobbery that disdains the manual worker.

The tripartite soul suggested by Plato asserts that we are not one unified whole but three separate parts.

Plato's three elements of the psyche are

The appetites, which includes all our myriad desires for various pleasures, comforts, physical satisfactions, and bodily ease. There are so many of these appetites that Plato does not bother to enumerate them, but he does note that they can often be in conflict even with each other. This element of the soul is represented by the ugly black horse on the left.

The spirited, or hot-blooded, part, i.e., the part that gets angry when it perceives (for example) an injustice being done. This is the part of us that loves to face and overcome great challenges, the part that can steel itself to adversity, and that loves victory, winning, challenge, and honor. (Note that Plato's use of the term "spirited" here is not the same as "spiritual." He means "spirited" in the same sense that we speak of a high-spirited horse, for example, one with lots of energy and power.) This element of the soul is represented by the noble white horse on the right.

The mind (nous), our conscious awareness, is represented by the charioteer who is guiding (or who at least should be guiding) the horses and chariot. This is the part of us that thinks, analyzes, looks ahead, rationally weighs options, and tries to gauge what is best and truest overall.

The tripartite soul is also represented by the classes of people in Plato's Republic:

Given that people differ, (and are suggested of by Plato as being assignable to one of three citizenship categories), on the basis that, (as he is prepared to suggest), one of three behavioral tendencies - appetite, spirit or reason - tends to prevail in their own individual Souls; Plato suggests that persons in whom appetite prevails should become Artisans and producers, persons in whom spirit prevails should become Auxiliaries and be employed in defending the state against external threats and internal disorders, and persons in whom reason prevails should undergo rigorous selection, followed by very long periods of training, towards better preparing themselves to become philosopher-rulers or Guardians.

Hence Plato's identification of the three classes of persons who will people his Ideal State arises out of what he believes to be the Tripartite nature of the Human Psyche or Soul.

Peopled by three classes of citizens - Artisans, Auxiliaries and Guardians, a state could ideally hope for Justice to prevail where each class of person fulfilled their proper function as producers, defenders and rulers and did not interfere with each others' fulfillment of their individually necessary contributions to the functioning of the state.

Is there a way we can verify the tripartite soul and its relevance without disdaining the manual worker? Can we verify it through statistical evidence or does it require experiential self knowledge in order to experience ourselves as a tripartite soul?

[Belinda]

Nick_A wrote:

I

s there a way we can verify the tripartite soul and its relevance without disdaining the manual worker? Can we verify it through statistical evidence or does it require experiential self knowledge in order to experience ourselves as a tripartite soul?

I believe there is. I think you'd have to rid your language of biased metaphors such as up/down and higher/lower. Metaphysically I think we need to honour the phenomenon as much as we honour the noumenon.
Christologically we need to honour Jesus the man as much as we honour Christ the God.

[Nick_A]

Nick_A wrote:

I

s there a way we can verify the tripartite soul and its relevance without disdaining the manual worker? Can we verify it through statistical evidence or does it require experiential self knowledge in order to experience ourselves as a tripartite soul?

I believe there is. I think you'd have to rid your language of biased metaphors such as up/down and higher/lower. Metaphysically I think we need to honour the phenomenon as much as we honour the noumenon.
Christologically we need to honour Jesus the man as much as we honour Christ the God.

I know this may sound harsh but is just sound philosophy. If we get rid of higher and lower as society is doing now in its rush towards secularism we lose the awakening purpose of philosophy and gradually die inside. From Jacob Needleman's book "The Heart of Philosophy."

Chapter 1

Introduction

Man cannot live without philosophy. This is not a figure of speech but a literal fact that will be demonstrated in this book. There is a yearning in the heart that is nourished only by real philosophy and without this nourishment man dies as surely as if he were deprived of food and air. But this part of the human psyche is not known or honored in our culture. When it does breakthrough to our awareness it is either ignored or treated as something else. It is given wrong names; it is not cared for; it is crushed. And eventually, it may withdraw altogether, never again to appear. When this happens man becomes a thing. No matter what he accomplishes or experiences, no matter what happiness he experiences or what service he performs, he has in fact lost his real possibility. He is dead.

……………………….The function of philosophy in human life is to help Man remember. It has no other task. And anything that calls itself philosophy which does not serve this function is simply not philosophy……………………………….

[Belinda]

Nick_A wrote:

I

s there a way we can verify the tripartite soul and its relevance without disdaining the manual worker? Can we verify it through statistical evidence or does it require experiential self knowledge in order to experience ourselves as a tripartite soul?

I believe there is. I think you'd have to rid your language of biased metaphors such as up/down and higher/lower. Metaphysically I think we need to honour the phenomenon as much as we honour the noumenon.
Christologically we need to honour Jesus the man as much as we honour Christ the God.

I know this may sound harsh but is just sound philosophy. If we get rid of higher and lower as society is doing now in its rush towards secularism we lose the awakening purpose of philosophy and gradually die inside. From Jacob Needleman's book "The Heart of Philosophy."

Chapter 1

Introduction

Man cannot live without philosophy. This is not a figure of speech but a literal fact that will be demonstrated in this book. There is a yearning in the heart that is nourished only by real philosophy and without this nourishment man dies as surely as if he were deprived of food and air. But this part of the human psyche is not known or honored in our culture. When it does breakthrough to our awareness it is either ignored or treated as something else. It is given wrong names; it is not cared for; it is crushed. And eventually, it may withdraw altogether, never again to appear. When this happens man becomes a thing. No matter what he accomplishes or experiences, no matter what happiness he experiences or what service he performs, he has in fact lost his real possibility. He is dead.

……………………….The function of philosophy in human life is to help Man remember. It has no other task. And anything that calls itself philosophy which does not serve this function is simply not philosophy……………………………….

There is nothing in the extract by Needleman about disdaining simple phenomena such as physical exercise, eating, breathing, having sex, giving birth, drinking, and laughing.There is no need to despise the material world because man cannot live by bread alone.

[Nick_A]

Nick_A wrote:

I

I believe there is. I think you'd have to rid your language of biased metaphors such as up/down and higher/lower. Metaphysically I think we need to honour the phenomenon as much as we honour the noumenon.
Christologically we need to honour Jesus the man as much as we honour Christ the God.

I know this may sound harsh but is just sound philosophy. If we get rid of higher and lower as society is doing now in its rush towards secularism we lose the awakening purpose of philosophy and gradually die inside. From Jacob Needleman's book "The Heart of Philosophy."

Chapter 1

Introduction

Man cannot live without philosophy. This is not a figure of speech but a literal fact that will be demonstrated in this book. There is a yearning in the heart that is nourished only by real philosophy and without this nourishment man dies as surely as if he were deprived of food and air. But this part of the human psyche is not known or honored in our culture. When it does breakthrough to our awareness it is either ignored or treated as something else. It is given wrong names; it is not cared for; it is crushed. And eventually, it may withdraw altogether, never again to appear. When this happens man becomes a thing. No matter what he accomplishes or experiences, no matter what happiness he experiences or what service he performs, he has in fact lost his real possibility. He is dead.

……………………….The function of philosophy in human life is to help Man remember. It has no other task. And anything that calls itself philosophy which does not serve this function is simply not philosophy……………………………….

There is nothing in the extract by Needleman about disdaining simple phenomena such as physical exercise, eating, breathing, having sex, giving birth, drinking, and laughing.There is no need to despise the material world because man cannot live by bread alone.

I have been advocating the tripartite soul as the first step in understanding the reality of human being on earth. We are not a unified whole but three parts. Deductive reason begins with this hypothesis which for some reasons have become out of balance. We lack "soul harmony". It would be naive to disdain the appetites when the need is to train them to become part of the balanced whole

This question is real philosophy. A person has to ask themselves if exploring a hypothesis on what Man is or condemning Trump is meaningful philosophy

Achieving this harmony of soul, Plato argues, is a precursor to tackling any other endeavor of life:

“having first attained to self-mastery and beautiful order within himself, and having harmonized these three principles, the notes or intervals of three terms quite literally the lowest, the highest, and the mean, and all others there may be between them, and having linked and bound all three together and made of himself a unit, one man instead of many, self-controlled and in unison, he should then and then only turn to practice if he find aught to do either in the getting of wealth or the tendance of the body or it may be in political action or private business, in all such doings believing and naming the just and honorable action to be that which preserves and helps to produce this condition of soul.”

The foundational nature of gaining mastery over one’s soul, Plato continues,

“is the chief reason why it should be our main concern that each of us, neglecting all other studies, should seek after and study this thing—if in any way he may be able to learn of and discover the man who will give him the ability and the knowledge to distinguish the life that is good from that which is bad, and always and everywhere to choose the best that the conditions allow.”

Why disdain the material world; why not try to understand its purpose, what soul balance is, and why we don't have it? But for that we have to use deductive reason. We have to begin with the tripartite soul and see if it is verified in the material world

[Belinda]

I know this may sound harsh but is just sound philosophy. If we get rid of higher and lower as society is doing now in its rush towards secularism we lose the awakening purpose of philosophy and gradually die inside. From Jacob Needleman's book "The Heart of Philosophy."

There is nothing in the extract by Needleman about disdaining simple phenomena such as physical exercise, eating, breathing, having sex, giving birth, drinking, and laughing.There is no need to despise the material world because man cannot live by bread alone.

I have been advocating the tripartite soul as the first step in understanding the reality of human being on earth. We are not a unified whole but three parts. Deductive reason begins with this hypothesis which for some reasons have become out of balance. We lack "soul harmony". It would be naive to disdain the appetites when the need is to train them to become part of the balanced whole

This question is real philosophy. A person has to ask themselves if exploring a hypothesis on what Man is or condemning Trump is meaningful philosophy

Achieving this harmony of soul, Plato argues, is a precursor to tackling any other endeavor of life:

“having first attained to self-mastery and beautiful order within himself, and having harmonized these three principles, the notes or intervals of three terms quite literally the lowest, the highest, and the mean, and all others there may be between them, and having linked and bound all three together and made of himself a unit, one man instead of many, self-controlled and in unison, he should then and then only turn to practice if he find aught to do either in the getting of wealth or the tendance of the body or it may be in political action or private business, in all such doings believing and naming the just and honorable action to be that which preserves and helps to produce this condition of soul.”

The foundational nature of gaining mastery over one’s soul, Plato continues,

“is the chief reason why it should be our main concern that each of us, neglecting all other studies, should seek after and study this thing—if in any way he may be able to learn of and discover the man who will give him the ability and the knowledge to distinguish the life that is good from that which is bad, and always and everywhere to choose the best that the conditions allow.”

Why disdain the material world; why not try to understand its purpose, what soul balance is, and why we don't have it? But for that we have to use deductive reason. We have to begin with the tripartite soul and see if it is verified in the material world

"The tripartite soul" is not tripartite as if it was three separate entities joined together harmoniously by the grace of God. The tripartite soul is an individual who can view himself and others from different aspects(body, mind, spirit) and who is really all the one entity.

It's true that condemning Trump is not always philosophy. Condemning Trump becomes philosophical when issues of human nature are involved in the condemnation. For instance I might claim Trump and anyone else behaves as he does through no fault of his own origination; that Trump behaves as he does because of cultural norms and because he lacks the education, or parenting , or religion proper to an important leader of men.This is not to make excuses for anyone it's a corollary of determinism.
It would not be philosophy to condemn Trump because he dismantled Obamacare, unless you present a criterion that shows Obamacare as good or not so good or bad. The presence of value criteria indicate a philosophical argument.

The Platonic argument for the sort of tripartite soul that is essentially three separable parts is indeed philosophy, however it's also philosophy to argue against Plato in this regard and argue for the sort of ' soul' that means 'person' as in "The ship was wrecked and only twenty-five souls out of two hundred survived the disaster."
The tripartite soil like it's described in the text you provide is a convenient image that helps us to live better lives. It is not helpful to understand it literally. This is like saying Plato's Cave analogy is a convenient image to help us to understand the nature of truth, however it's not as if Plato really thought there was such cave.

[Nick_A]

There is nothing in the extract by Needleman about disdaining simple phenomena such as physical exercise, eating, breathing, having sex, giving birth, drinking, and laughing.There is no need to despise the material world because man cannot live by bread alone.

I have been advocating the tripartite soul as the first step in understanding the reality of human being on earth. We are not a unified whole but three parts. Deductive reason begins with this hypothesis which for some reasons have become out of balance. We lack "soul harmony". It would be naive to disdain the appetites when the need is to train them to become part of the balanced whole

This question is real philosophy. A person has to ask themselves if exploring a hypothesis on what Man is or condemning Trump is meaningful philosophy

Achieving this harmony of soul, Plato argues, is a precursor to tackling any other endeavor of life:

“having first attained to self-mastery and beautiful order within himself, and having harmonized these three principles, the notes or intervals of three terms quite literally the lowest, the highest, and the mean, and all others there may be between them, and having linked and bound all three together and made of himself a unit, one man instead of many, self-controlled and in unison, he should then and then only turn to practice if he find aught to do either in the getting of wealth or the tendance of the body or it may be in political action or private business, in all such doings believing and naming the just and honorable action to be that which preserves and helps to produce this condition of soul.”

The foundational nature of gaining mastery over one’s soul, Plato continues,

“is the chief reason why it should be our main concern that each of us, neglecting all other studies, should seek after and study this thing—if in any way he may be able to learn of and discover the man who will give him the ability and the knowledge to distinguish the life that is good from that which is bad, and always and everywhere to choose the best that the conditions allow.”

Why disdain the material world; why not try to understand its purpose, what soul balance is, and why we don't have it? But for that we have to use deductive reason. We have to begin with the tripartite soul and see if it is verified in the material world

"The tripartite soul" is not tripartite as if it was three separate entities joined together harmoniously by the grace of God. The tripartite soul is an individual who can view himself and others from different aspects(body, mind, spirit) and who is really all the one entity.

It's true that condemning Trump is not always philosophy. Condemning Trump becomes philosophical when issues of human nature are involved in the condemnation. For instance I might claim Trump and anyone else behaves as he does through no fault of his own origination; that Trump behaves as he does because of cultural norms and because he lacks the education, or parenting , or religion proper to an important leader of men.This is not to make excuses for anyone it's a corollary of determinism.
It would not be philosophy to condemn Trump because he dismantled Obamacare, unless you present a criterion that shows Obamacare as good or not so good or bad. The presence of value criteria indicate a philosophical argument.

The Platonic argument for the sort of tripartite soul that is essentially three separable parts is indeed philosophy, however it's also philosophy to argue against Plato in this regard and argue for the sort of ' soul' that means 'person' as in "The ship was wrecked and only twenty-five souls out of two hundred survived the disaster."
The tripartite soil like it's described in the text you provide is a convenient image that helps us to live better lives. It is not helpful to understand it literally. This is like saying Plato's Cave analogy is a convenient image to help us to understand the nature of truth, however it's not as if Plato really thought there was such cave.

Belinda

"The tripartite soul" is not tripartite as if it was three separate entities joined together harmoniously by the grace of God. The tripartite soul is an individual who can view himself and others from different aspects(body, mind, spirit) and who is really all the one entity.

Now compare with:

https://philosophycourse.info/platosite/3schart.html

Sometimes Plato's division of the psyche into its three main elements can be easily misunderstood. Some who read about it for the first time think it is the same as Freud's division of the psyche into the ego (das Ich), id (das Es), and superego (das Über-Ich), but it isn't the same as Freud's division. Others think it's the same as the old adult-parent-child division, but it's not that either. Nor is it the same as the conscious-subconscious-supraconscious division.

Plato's identification of these three distinct elements of a person's inner life is unique, and can be validated by directly turning inward to one's own experience of the self..........

If this is the first time you've been exposed to these ideas they are not easy. The three parts are not united by God or by conscious intent but by imagination. That is how the human condition is created. We have to verify it internally. A person can experience that they can be thinking one thing, emoting towards another, while sensing something unrelated. When we have this experience we verify that we are a tripartite soul lacking unity.

some have speculated that evolved Man has the quality of consciousness which can unify the three into ONE conscious unified whole capable of receiving from above and giving to below.

[Belinda]

I have been advocating the tripartite soul as the first step in understanding the reality of human being on earth. We are not a unified whole but three parts. Deductive reason begins with this hypothesis which for some reasons have become out of balance. We lack "soul harmony". It would be naive to disdain the appetites when the need is to train them to become part of the balanced whole

This question is real philosophy. A person has to ask themselves if exploring a hypothesis on what Man is or condemning Trump is meaningful philosophy



Why disdain the material world; why not try to understand its purpose, what soul balance is, and why we don't have it? But for that we have to use deductive reason. We have to begin with the tripartite soul and see if it is verified in the material world

"The tripartite soul" is not tripartite as if it was three separate entities joined together harmoniously by the grace of God. The tripartite soul is an individual who can view himself and others from different aspects(body, mind, spirit) and who is really all the one entity.

It's true that condemning Trump is not always philosophy. Condemning Trump becomes philosophical when issues of human nature are involved in the condemnation. For instance I might claim Trump and anyone else behaves as he does through no fault of his own origination; that Trump behaves as he does because of cultural norms and because he lacks the education, or parenting , or religion proper to an important leader of men.This is not to make excuses for anyone it's a corollary of determinism.
It would not be philosophy to condemn Trump because he dismantled Obamacare, unless you present a criterion that shows Obamacare as good or not so good or bad. The presence of value criteria indicate a philosophical argument.

The Platonic argument for the sort of tripartite soul that is essentially three separable parts is indeed philosophy, however it's also philosophy to argue against Plato in this regard and argue for the sort of ' soul' that means 'person' as in "The ship was wrecked and only twenty-five souls out of two hundred survived the disaster."
The tripartite soil like it's described in the text you provide is a convenient image that helps us to live better lives. It is not helpful to understand it literally. This is like saying Plato's Cave analogy is a convenient image to help us to understand the nature of truth, however it's not as if Plato really thought there was such cave.

Belinda

"The tripartite soul" is not tripartite as if it was three separate entities joined together harmoniously by the grace of God. The tripartite soul is an individual who can view himself and others from different aspects(body, mind, spirit) and who is really all the one entity.

Now compare with:

https://philosophycourse.info/platosite/3schart.html

Sometimes Plato's division of the psyche into its three main elements can be easily misunderstood. Some who read about it for the first time think it is the same as Freud's division of the psyche into the ego (das Ich), id (das Es), and superego (das Über-Ich), but it isn't the same as Freud's division. Others think it's the same as the old adult-parent-child division, but it's not that either. Nor is it the same as the conscious-subconscious-supraconscious division.

Plato's identification of these three distinct elements of a person's inner life is unique, and can be validated by directly turning inward to one's own experience of the self..........

If this is the first time you've been exposed to these ideas they are not easy. The three parts are not united by God or by conscious intent but by imagination. That is how the human condition is created. We have to verify it internally. A person can experience that they can be thinking one thing, emoting towards another, while sensing something unrelated. When we have this experience we verify that we are a tripartite soul lacking unity.

some have speculated that evolved Man has the quality of consciousness which can unify the three into ONE conscious unified whole capable of receiving from above and giving to below.

I was mistaken, and this is new to me, except it initially reminds me of Jane Austen's " Sense and Sensibility". Do have a theory about which aspect of the Platonic tripartite soul Mr Trump is ruled by?

[Belinda]

"The tripartite soul" is not tripartite as if it was three separate entities joined together harmoniously by the grace of God. The tripartite soul is an individual who can view himself and others from different aspects(body, mind, spirit) and who is really all the one entity.

It's true that condemning Trump is not always philosophy. Condemning Trump becomes philosophical when issues of human nature are involved in the condemnation. For instance I might claim Trump and anyone else behaves as he does through no fault of his own origination; that Trump behaves as he does because of cultural norms and because he lacks the education, or parenting , or religion proper to an important leader of men.This is not to make excuses for anyone it's a corollary of determinism.
It would not be philosophy to condemn Trump because he dismantled Obamacare, unless you present a criterion that shows Obamacare as good or not so good or bad. The presence of value criteria indicate a philosophical argument.

The Platonic argument for the sort of tripartite soul that is essentially three separable parts is indeed philosophy, however it's also philosophy to argue against Plato in this regard and argue for the sort of ' soul' that means 'person' as in "The ship was wrecked and only twenty-five souls out of two hundred survived the disaster."
The tripartite soil like it's described in the text you provide is a convenient image that helps us to live better lives. It is not helpful to understand it literally. This is like saying Plato's Cave analogy is a convenient image to help us to understand the nature of truth, however it's not as if Plato really thought there was such cave.

Belinda

"The tripartite soul" is not tripartite as if it was three separate entities joined together harmoniously by the grace of God. The tripartite soul is an individual who can view himself and others from different aspects(body, mind, spirit) and who is really all the one entity.

Now compare with:

https://philosophycourse.info/platosite/3schart.html

Sometimes Plato's division of the psyche into its three main elements can be easily misunderstood. Some who read about it for the first time think it is the same as Freud's division of the psyche into the ego (das Ich), id (das Es), and superego (das Über-Ich), but it isn't the same as Freud's division. Others think it's the same as the old adult-parent-child division, but it's not that either. Nor is it the same as the conscious-subconscious-supraconscious division.

Plato's identification of these three distinct elements of a person's inner life is unique, and can be validated by directly turning inward to one's own experience of the self..........

If this is the first time you've been exposed to these ideas they are not easy. The three parts are not united by God or by conscious intent but by imagination. That is how the human condition is created. We have to verify it internally. A person can experience that they can be thinking one thing, emoting towards another, while sensing something unrelated. When we have this experience we verify that we are a tripartite soul lacking unity.

some have speculated that evolved Man has the quality of consciousness which can unify the three into ONE conscious unified whole capable of receiving from above and giving to below.

I was mistaken, and this is new to me, except it initially reminds me of Jane Austen's " Sense and Sensibility". Do you have a theory about which aspect of the Platonic tripartite soul Mr Trump is ruled by?

[Veritas Aequitas]

No one discuss the elements of the article??

Here is what I gathered.
Williams discussed various pro and cons of evolutionary theories with reference to ethics, but he wrote very little that is related to Socrates.

What he finally arrived at is no ethics-proper but the following;

• 1. .. although facts can inform ethical decisions, they cannot entail ultimate ethical principles.
  
  2. For it is certainly possible to frame an ethic consistent with the Darwinian view of the world.
  
  3. Such an ethic might emphasize
  the virtue of being honest and courageous enough to acknowledge unflinchingly
  that there is no objective basis to morality,
  that there is no higher purpose behind our suffering,
  that we are insignificant in a vast and impersonal universe,
  that existence is ultimately without purpose or meaning, and
  that the effects of our actions will ultimately fade away without trace.
  
  4. We would acknowledge all [no ultimate morality, meaning of life] this [the above hopelessness] but struggle on as if life were meaningful
  and strive to make the world a better place anyway,
  without any expectation of ultimate victory, eternal reward, or good karma,
  and indeed for no good reason at all.

While I agree there is some degree of hopelessness and the need to live as if life is meaningful.
Thus we have to examine our existing life so as to make it systematic and manageable [the unexamined life is not worth living - Socrates].
This is a sign of intelligence and wisdom [philosophy]; one purpose of philosophy is the preparation for death -Socrates.

But even for a pseudo-meaning-of-life [not teleological nor divine], we still still need some effective guiding standards which will include standards for morality.
I have justified there are moral facts justified empirically and philosophically; these moral facts can be used as moral standards within the made-up justified meaning-of-life.

[Nick_A]

Belinda

I was mistaken, and this is new to me, except it initially reminds me of Jane Austen's " Sense and Sensibility". Do you have a theory about which aspect of the Platonic tripartite soul Mr Trump is ruled by?

It isn't a matter of being ruled by one part of the tripartite soul but rather an inclination. Some people are inclined to deal with life by reason. (the thinkers) others by emotion (the artists) and others by action. (the doers.) Trump strikes me as a doer. We are all out of balance in this way. The initial goal of education is to regain balance.