Plato’s Divided Line

How to display Plato’s Divided Line? Instead of a continuous line going from low to high as it is usually shown, I’ve shown it as two continuous crossed lines, a fourfold or double dual. Eikasia (imagining) and Pistis (belief) together are Doxa, the phenomenal. Dianoia (understanding) and Noesis (knowledge) together are Episteme, the intelligible. Doxa should indeed be horizontal, corresponding to the phenomenal of Richard McKeon’s Aspects of Knowing, and the subjective or content of other double duals. I believe Eikasia should come before Pistis, as the substance and form of content in Hjelmslev’s Net. Considering the vertical axis, Episteme as Dianoia and Noesis should surely be there for Plato, corresponding to McKeon’s ontic. But how do Dianoia and Noesis relate?

By the measure of the Aspects of Knowing or the Archic Matrix, Dianoia could be considered the method/knowledge and Noesis the reality/knowable of Plato’s Divided Line. Thus Dianoia should be above Noesis, as method/knowledge is above reality/knowable. Yet by other measures, that of the Here and Now or Hjelmslev’s Net, Noesis should be above and Dianoia below. Noesis is the form to the substance of Dianoia. Dianoia can also be thought of as meroscopic, reducing all to number and quantity, and Noesis can be thought of as holoscopic, combining all thing into the hierarchy of forms that culminate in that ultimate form, “The Good”.

The difficulty may be because the lower position, here Noesis, serves both as the position of the real in some fourfolds, as well as the position of earth and matter in others. This is a bias that I would like to avoid, but a resolution will need to come later.

References:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analogy_of_the_Divided_Line

[*6.158-*6.165, *6.186]

<>

Tags: , , ,

2 Responses to “Plato’s Divided Line”

  1. Plato Redux | Equivalent eXchange Says:

    […] Plato’s Divided Line, which was mentioned in The Republic and consists of four parts, the threesome of The Beautiful, […]

  2. The Matrix of Four, the Philosophy of the Duality of Polarity | Equivalent eXchange Says:

    […] “The Exclusion of Four” is the title for Chapter 5. In this chapter, Smith returns to mathematical reasonings for his matrix of four. He also argues that the consideration of dualities of polarity is richer and more informative than merely thinking about polarities or opposites. Often triplets of things leave out a fourth that should be included. In some cultures the word death is a homonym for the word for four, giving rise to tetraphobia. The set of Three Monkeys (See No Evil, Hear No Evil, Speak No Evil) should include a fourth, Fear or Do No Evil. Does the common triple of mental, physical, and spiritual have a missing quarter-part of “natural”? Other matrices of four or four-folds described and expounded on come from classical philosophy: the Allegory of the Cave and the Divided Line. […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.


%d bloggers like this: