Re: Joy of this, Joy of that

On 14/12/2024 10:57, D wrote:

  On Fri, 13 Dec 2024, rbowman wrote:
 

On Fri, 13 Dec 2024 11:13:50 +0100, D wrote:
>

Zeno? Well, it does sound you made quite an attack on the first book out
of 12!  My least favourite part of that series is the middle ages and
the christian philosophers and theologians. For some reason, very, very
uninteresting to me. But greek, yes, rome, yes, then nothing, up until
the enlightenment, when things start to become interesting again.

>
I'd have to look at the ordering but I think that's where my interest
petered out. I liked the Nominalists. Confirmation bias, I guess. My
natural setting regards Platonic realism as a major wrong turn in thought.
>

 Amen! The nominalists were (are) the Donald Trump of metaphysicists!

Nominalism is a crude form of transcendental idealism in that it clearly separates the term, from the reality it describes.
Which as you say, is not Platonic realism.
The problem with Plato is that his realism was really idealism, in that he regarded the ideas as more fundamental than things.
As I said, Kant really drew everything together to produce the hybrid model in which the world - whether you think of it as material or not - was to be distinguished absolutely from our *conception *of it....
The middle ages were restrictive in terms of Christianity, but Jewish mysticism and philosophy flourished, as did the philosophy and science of the Persians. Before that became subsumed by Islam and vanished.
The study of what people *thought* was real, through the ages, is a fascinating history that isn't really covered by any discipline. Myths and Magics, religions and gods, forces and demiurges. And then to Materialism and  Laws of Nature.
"Maps of consciousness" as Ralph Metzner put it.
--
“Some people like to travel by train because it combines the slowness of a car with the cramped public exposure of 
an airplane.”
Dennis Miller