Creative Writing

Creative Writing

I am a thrill seeker and am always in the lookout for great trails and peaks that offer breathtaking views. Traveling is a passion and I am grateful to have wandered for so long and meet some amazing people along the way.

How does it work?
  • Creative Writing
    Published a day ago
    Numenius of Apamea

    Numenius of Apamea

    Apamean Numenius was a Greek philosopher who lived at Apamea in Syria and Rome, and flourished in the latter half of the second century AD. He has been a forerunner of the Neopythagoreans and Neoplatonists. Origen, Theodoret, and Eusebius in particular have survived commentaries and fragments of his apparently very different writings, from which we can derive the nature of his Platonist-Pythagorean philosophy and its relation to Plato's doctrines. Numenius was a Neopythagorean, but his intention was to follow Plato's teachings to Pythagoras, while at the same time showing that they were not in contradiction with the Brahmins, Jews, Magi and Egyptians dogmas and myths. His intention was to return to Plato's philosophy of his original truth, the real Pythagorean and mediator between Socrates and Pythagoras, purified from the doctrines of Aristotelian and Stoic, and purified from the unsatisfactory and corrupted theories he claimed to have found even in Speusippus and Xenocrates, leading to the influence of Arcesilaus and Carneades 'bottleneck George Karamanolis of the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy wrote, "Numenius 'work fragments leave little question that he based exclusively on Plato's texts in the development of his own collection of ideas. Ancient testimonies, however, are split between those who identify him as a Platonist philosopher and those who consider him a Pythagorean. This is, Numenius recognised both Pythagoras and Plato as the two sources one should follow in philosophy, but he saw Plato's authority as superior to that of Pythagoras, which he considered to be the root of all true philosophy, including Plato's own. It is just that Plato wrote for Numenius so many philosophical works, while Pythagoras 'views were initially expressed just orally. His books On the Positive seemed to have been of a better kind; in them he had shown minutely, contrary above all to the Stoics, that existence could not be found in the elements because they are in a constant state of alteration and change, nor in matter because it is uncertain, conflicting, null and in itself not an object of our knowledge; and that existence, on the contrary, is an object of o But because the first god who dwells in himself and is undisturbed in his work can not be creative, he felt that we must assume a second god who keeps matter together, directs his energies towards it and towards intelligible essences, and imparts his spirit to all creatures; his mind is guided towards the first god in whom he sees the thoughts according to which he arranges the u harmoniously Regarding the relationship between the third and second god, as well as the way they are to be created as one, there can be no explanation from the fragments that have come to us. Numenius tried to demonstrate that the Jewish people had chosen to list a portion of the logos among the early ones, and that Moses had a strong understanding of Plato's first sense, as both identified God with being. This may be due to influences from the Jewish-Alexandrian philosopher. According to Proclus, his plays had been highly regarded by the Neoplatonists, and the author of Plotinus Amelius is said to have written nearly two commentary books on them. Contrary to Judeo-Christian religious teachings such as Orpheus and Plato Numenius, the human body believed it was a supernatural prison. Numenius had shown gnostic tendencies to view matter as being coeval with God, according to Professor Michael Wagner.
  • Creative Writing
    Published a day ago
    Celsus

    Celsus

    Celsus was a second-century Greek philosopher and one of the early critics of early Christianity, and very well known. He is remembered in Contra Celsum for his literary work on The False Doctrine, a refutation which Origen of Alexandria wrote in 248 and which only survives in quotes from it and not in its entirety. The oldest known systematic critique of Christianity relies on The Real Doctrine. It was written between 175-177, shortly after Justin Martyr's death, and may have been a reaction to the work which he completed and left behind. Celsus wrote his book, On The Real Doctrine. The book was condemned by the Christian church and suppressed in 448 AD by decree of Valentinian III and Theodosius II, together with the fifteen books of Porphyry condemning Christians, The Doctrine of Oracles, and there are no full copies, but it can be collected from Origen's thorough account of it in his eight-volume refutation, which thoroughly quotes Celsus. The work of Origen survived, and with it continued the work of Celsus. Celsus claims to have been interested in ancient Egyptian literature, and he appeared to learn about Jewish Hellenistic logos-theology, all of which indicate that the True Doctrine was composed in Alexandria. Celsus had written at a time when persecution of Christians was taking place. Origen states Celsus was an Epicurian born under the Hadrian King. Celsus states that there is an old religion that has existed from the beginning, and that it was also practised by the wisest nations and cities and wise men. He left out of those he calls Jews and Moses, and then condemns Moses for abusing the ancient faith, the goatherds and shepherds who preceded Moses as their leader were deluded by wretched deceptions under the assumption that the ancient faith was tainted. Nevertheless, the harshest condemnation of Celsus was intended for Christians who 'wall up and split away from the majority of humanity. Origen presented his rebuttal in 248. Always copying, sometimes paraphrasing, always literally referencing, Origen reproduces and responds to the claims of Celsus. Because accuracy became key to his rebuttal to The True Doctrine, most historians believe that Origen is accurate. Celsus is acquainted with Jewish heritage storey. Conceding that Christians are not without success in company, Celsus wants them to be decent men, to obey their own values, but to serve the emperors and support their fellow human beings to protect the kingdom. This is an immediate and compelling call for reconciliation and shared prosperity on behalf of all. Many of Celsus 'bitterest grievances were about the Christians' inability to conform with civil law, and their disrespect for local traditions and ancient faiths. The Christians viewed these as idolatrous and guided by evil spirits, while polytheists like Celsus saw them as the actions of the Daemons, or agents of the lord that governed humanity on his behalf to keep him from contaminating mortality. Celsus accuses the Christians of feeding off division and disunity, accusing them of converting the vulgar and ignorant while refusing to answer the wise. As for their opinions on their holy mission and special holiness, Celsus responds by deriding their insignificance, comparing them to a swarm of flies, or ants creeping out of their nest, or frogs having a symposium round a pool, or worms in conventicle in a corner of the sea. It's uncertain how many Christians were at the time of Celsus. The Christian scriptures and doctrines were well taught to Celsus, though he shared some gnostic beliefs that the churches disowned with them. He carried out his critique, along with some Jewish protests, from the shifting forum of his own complex Middle Platonism.
  • Creative Writing
    Published a day ago
    Maximus of Ephesus

    Maximus of Ephesus

    Maximus of Ephesus was a scholar of the Neoplatonists. He is said to have come from a rich background, and had considerable power over the emperor Julian, whom Aedesius commended. He pandered to the love of sorcery and theurgy of the queen, and achieved a high place at court through judicious management of the omens. His overbearing manner made him many enemies and he was put to death by Valens, after being imprisoned following Julian's death. Maximus of Ephesus was a scholar of the Neoplatonists. He is said to have come from a wealthy heritage, and to have great influence over the emperor Julian, commended by Aedesius. Eunapius is the most detailed record of Maximus 'history in his Lives of the Sophists but Ammianus Marcellinus, Emperor Julian, and Libanius all relate to him. Christian writers speak about him as well but in rather negative terms. Raised in the early 4th century, Maximus was. Ammianus Marcellinus is the name for Ephesus town of Maximus. This is contested by some scholars[1] but it is clear that he came from West Asia Minor. His forebears were rich. Maximus had a nephew, Claudianus, who had also been a scholar. Emperor Julian Magister appointed the man epistolarum graecarum, nicknamed Nymphidianus. Ammonius Hermiae believed that Maximus was a student of the Neoplatonist "Hierius" From around 335–350 Maximus was an Aedesius student at Pergamon. While he was there, Maximus learned along with Chrysanthius, Eusebius of Myndus, and Priscus. Many Neoplatonists practised theurgy, and there is evidence that Maximus successfully broke a love-spell put upon the philosopher Sosipatra by one of her relatives. In around 350 Maximus left Pergamon to work as a philosophy teacher at Ephesus. Evidently Christians have engaged in his instruction: a Christian called Sisinnius, who later became a Novatian bishop in Constantinople, is believed to have been educated with Maximus. The late Emperor Julian went to Pergamon in 351, to study with Aedesius. Once there, Eusebius warned Julian against engaging in Maximus 'magic arts, but his suggestion had the opposite impact and Julian went to Ephesus between May 351 and April 352 to continue his study with Maximus. In November 355 Julian was called Caesar, and he remained in communication with Maximus. In 361, Julian sent Priscus and Maximus to Constantinople as Emperor. The two Philosophers accepted the invitation. Maximus did not create detrimental omens to discourage himself, but he is said to have clarified that the gods 'favours may be manipulated. Since then, all Neoplatonists have remained true to the emperor, who used them as religious-philosophical advisors and host for conversation. Eunapius notes that Maximus and Priscus had no official power but also writes that Maximus was arrogantly inept and used his influential status to privately enrich himself. In the summer of 362 Maximus went to Antioch with Julian, and then in March 363 on the Persian campaign. He held a brief religious debate with Maximus and Priscus until the emperor died on 26 June 363 as a result of a fighting incident. Under Emperor Jovian Maximus continued to gain imperial favour but after Jovian's death his enemies came after him. In spring 364 he was accused by the new emperors Valentinian I and Valens of having a long illness. This claim could not be confirmed, and was dropped. But his numerous opponents have not relented; in 365/366 he was again imprisoned and convicted of unlawful enrichment. A major sentence was imposed, and he was returned to "Asia" in his homeland to pay the penalty-presumably. He had been punished, so he was unable to apologise. Eunapius reported that Maximus was attempting to kill himself, because he couldn't take the pain anymore, so his wife gave him some poison. His friend drank the poison anyway, but Maximus did not drink it afterward. The Prisoner was later aided by the Arab proconsul, Clearchus, a supporter of the old faith. Clearchus provided for the liberation of the poet, and regained all of his riches which he had lost. Maximus began studying philosophy again, and even tried to return to Constantinople.
  • Creative Writing
    Published a day ago
    Iamblichus

    Iamblichus

    Iamblichus was a Syrian Neoplatonist, Arab-born philosopher. He determined what path to take later on in Neoplatonic philosophy. He was also the biographer of Pythagoras, the Greek mystic, mathematician and philosopher. His Protrepticus, aside from Iamblichus 'own philosophical contribution, is important for the study of the Sophists, owing to its preservation of about ten pages by an apparently unknown Sophist known as the Iamblichi Anonymus. Iamblichus was the representative of the Syrian Neoplatonism, though his influence ranged across much of the ancient world. His life experiences and theological beliefs aren't well known, but from his recent writings, the main tenets of his convictions can be extended. According to the Suda, he was born at Chalcis in Syria and his biographer Eunapius. He was the son of a wealthy and noble family, and is said to have been the descendant of several Emesa Arab Royal dynasty priest-kings. He studied first under Laodicean Anatolius and then under Porphyry, the pupil of Plotinus, the founder of Neoplatonism. He disagreed with Porphyry on the nature of theurgy; Iamblichus responds to Porphyry's criticisms of theurgy in a book credited to him, De Mysteriis Aegyptiorum. Around 304 he returned to Syria to found his own school at Apamea, a town renowned for its Neoplatonic philosophers. Here he developed a system to study Plato and Aristotle, and wrote remarks on the two that survive only in fragments. Pythagoras had become Iamblichus's main presence today. He is known to have written the Pythagorean Collection of Philosophy, which contained quotes in ten volumes from numerous ancient philosophers. Only the first 4 volumes survive, and the fourth fragments. Scholars observed that in early 4th Century Iamblichus 'exhortation to philosophy was written. On Apamea. It has been said that Iamblichus is a man with immense culture and substantial intelligence. He has always been noted for his self-denial and advocacy. There were lots of students crowding around him and he stayed with them in close friendship. According to Fabricius he died during the reign of Constantine, some time before 333. Just a few of the books survived at Iamblichus. For our interpretation of his system we are largely indebted to the scraps of writings that Stobaeus and others hold. His writings of his predecessors, especially Proclus, as well as his remaining five books and parts of his excellent work on Pythagorean philosophy still reveal much of Iamblichus 'system. Besides these, Proclus appears to have ascribed the authorship of Theurgia, the popular treatise, or On the Egyptian Mysteries. Nevertheless, Iamblichus's differences in style in this book and other works and in some doctrinal points have caused some to question that Iamblichus was the true author. Even the treatise definitely came from his university, and it represents a turning point in the evolution of philosophy where Iamblichus stood in his determined attempt to give the polytheistic cultic practises of the day a metaphysical interpretation. Neoplatonism as a speculative theory had obtained its greatest development from Plotinus. The developments made by Lamblichus included the extensive elaboration of its hierarchical categories, the more systematic use of the definition of the Pythagorean number and, under the influence of Oriental structures, a new metaphysical understanding of what Neoplatonism had previously found to be notional. In comparison to Plotinus, who originated from Platonic tradition and asserted an undescended soul, Iamblichus reaffirmed the presence of the spirit in matter, saying that it was as pure as the rest of the world. In the basis Lamblichus is most likely venerated. In general Iamblichus was seen among those persecuting his philosophy. Iamblichus was accredited by his contemporaries as possessing magical powers. The Roman emperor Julian, not satisfied with the more humble eulogy of Eunapius that he was merely inferior to Porphyry in nature, found Iamblichus more than second to Plato and said that he would give all of Lydia's gold for one of Iamblichus 'epistles. The name Iamblichus was rarely mentioned during the resurgence of interest in his philosophy in the 15th and 16th centuries without the epithet "holy" or "most holy."
  • Creative Writing
    Published a day ago
    Hippias

    Hippias

    Elis 'Hippias was a contemporary Greek sophist, and Socrates. He tended to be considered an authority on all subjects, with a characteristic confidence of the later sophists, and lectured on literature, grammar, history, politics, mathematics, and much more. Most of our knowledge about him derives from Plato who describes him as vain and greedy. Hippias was born in Elis in the mid-fifth century BC, and was thus a younger contemporary of Protagoras and Socrates. He had been born at least as late as Socrates. He was an adherent of Hegesidamus. Because of his skill and knowledge his fellow men took advantage of his experience in foreign relations and in a diplomatic mission to Sparta. Yet in another way he was like the other sophists of the time: he travelled through various towns and regions of Greece for the purpose of teaching and public speaking. The two dialogues with Plato, the major in Hippias and the minor in Hippias describe him as arrogant and selfish. The Hippias Major is fascinated with the topic of the beautiful, and intentionally brings in a nonsensical light Hippias 'perception and hope. The minor Hippias tackles our shortfall of intellect, characterising Hippias as overly superficial. Hippias was a man of very thorough intellect and not only engaged in literary, philosophical, and political science, but he was also well versed in poetry, composition, mathematics, painting, and sculpture, and he claimed some practical skill in the ordinary arts of life, for he used to boast of having something on his body that he had not made himself with his own hands, such as his seal-r's. On the other hand, his expertise still remains superficial, he does not go into the particulars of any particular art or science, and is content with those generalities that allowed him to speak about something without any thorough information. Combined with cynicism, this modesty is the main factor that triggered Plato's intense condemnation of Hippias, since the sophist had a rather common reputation and hence had a major influence on upper-class children's education. Sometimes, the Hippias quadratrix is considered a mathematical observation ascribed to Hippias. His true skill seems to have consisted of making grand show speeches; and Plato declared arrogantly that he would go to Olympia, and there, before the Greeks assembled, he gave an oration on any subject that could be brought to him. Philostratus, in truth, speaks of several such orations given at Olympia, which created great sensation. As Hippias delivered these speeches and there was no trial going down to earth. Plato appears to have written epic poetry, tragedies, dithyrambs, and various tales, as well as work on grammar, structure, rhythm, harmony, and many other topics. He seems to have been especially fond of choosing antiquarian and supernatural subjects for his series discourses. Athenaeus quotes the otherwise unknown title Synagogue from a dissertation by Hippias. An epigram of his is preserved at Pausanias. Hippias is credited with the natural law principle which has its roots. Initially this dream started in 5th century B.C. According to Hippias, natural law as absolute has never been to be superseded. Hippias found natural law to be a common structure where citizens work without premeditation. In nations, he considered the elite isolated from each other and regarded each other as such. Of this cause, they should consider each other and view each other as a collective state culture. Cynicism and Stoicism later articulated Ses ideas as the basis for the turn of Roman law into laws. In comparison to common law, Hippias talked of self-sufficiency as a moral principle. He pursued this idea in his lectures as he gained knowledge on various subjects so as never to be outdone or question his integrity.
  • Creative Writing
    Published a day ago
    Melissus of Samos

    Melissus of Samos

    Melissus of Samos was the third and last member of the old Eleatic philosophy school which included also Zeno and Parmenides. Nothing about his life is known except that he was captain of the Samian Fleet during the Samian War. Melissus 'contribution to philosophy was a treatise of systematic statements which would support the philosophy of Eleatics. Unlike Parmenides he argued that nature is ungenerated, indestructible, indivisible, eternal and motionless. He also wanted to prove that reality is boundless and endlessly extending in all directions; and since life is infinite, thus, it must be one. There is not much information left over on the future of Melissus. He may have been born about 500 BC; there is no known date of his death. The least that's known about him is only gleaned from a short passage of Plutarch's history of Pericles. He was commander of the Samian fleet in the Samian War, which defeated Pericles and the Athenian forces in 440 BC. Plutarch insists Aristotle claims Melissus also defeated Pericles in an earlier battle. In his Life of Themistocles, Plutarch denies Stesimbrotus 'claim that Themistocles holds Melissus in high regard, stating that he confuses both Themistocles and Pericles. Melissus was reputed to be 'pupil' of Parmenides, and mentor of Leucippus, but with a fair degree of cynicism one may make such reasons. Most of what remains of Melissus 'philosophical treatise, On Existence, has been preserved by Simplicius in his observations on Aristotle's Mechanics and On The Universe, and some summaries of his philosophy have been carried down to us. We will look at a number of the remaining bits in Diels-Kranz. By comparison to Parmenides, Melissus composed his treatise by prose, not verse, thereby making it easier to read than his teacher's. As Parmenides, he notes that Everything is one, ungenerated, indestructible, indivisible, eternal, motionless and the same. Melissus 'philosophy varies in two ways from that of Parmenides: Parmenides claims that Existence is finite, while Melissus claims that it is completely unlimited; and for Parmenides, Existence existed in a transient Current, while for Melissus Being it is permanent. McKirahan claims Parmenides indicates that Being is limited spatially, but this is a matter of contention. Melissus says it is also immortal, as One has not come to be, nor is He subject to death. Although fragment 1 is simply a summary of Parmenides 'claims against being and perishing, fragment 2 gives Melissus a excuse. Melissus 'argument is double, describing The One's spatial dimension much like a timeline: acknowledging the presence of the present moment, maintaining that The One has lived eternally in the past, and must live indefinitely in the future. Melissus assumes that The Creator is eternal. Fragments 7 and 8 appear to suggest that Melissus speaks in terms of spatial infinity, while Simplicius explicitly refutes fragment 3, which first makes this argument: "But by 'magnitude' it does not mean what is spatially extended." There is no doubt that Simplicius has at his disposal much of the Melissus 'treatise, as well as other remarks and observations that have not survived to this day. In either case Melissus 'rationale for this claim is unclear, and it could not have been upheld by us. Alternatively, he could wish that this assertion stem from the statements of fragments 1 and 2 either directly or indirectly. In the former example it is "grossly fallacious" as McKirahan states that the argument is based on a now-lost description of the relationship between time and space. In the latter case, the distribution of spatial as well as temporal attributes to the "beginning" and "end" of fragment 2 makes Melissus vulnerable to error charges. In this way, Melissus differs from Parmenides although some say that the difference is not as important as it may seem. The opinion of Parmenides is that there's only one moment, although Melissus argues for an unlimited number of moments. The presence of a changeless, motionless, everlasting current is an argumentable position; however, it is a much more complicated stance to justify the reality of a changeless, motionless, endless sequence of moments.