Levels of Reality

Levels of Reality

This essay shall examine the arguments Proclus uses to establish levels of reality and how the arguments determine the nature of the levels of reality.

Before moving to an examination of Proclus's system, some issues concerning Proclus shall be clarified. This essay uses E.R. Dodds's text and translation of the “Elements of Theology.” All arguments of Proclus shall be taken from the above text. There is some controversy about the originality of Proclus as a thinker. He is usually regarded as one who  systematized  late Neoplatonism than an original thinker. This should not concern us here, since the focus is on how coherent his presentation of Neoplatonism is. The “Elements of Theology” is regarded as the most important source for Neoplatonic ideas after the “Enneads” of  Plotinus.

Proclus as a Neoplatonic accepts both the top-down system and the theory of emanation from Plotinus. In the “Elements of Theology”, Proclus starts at the top: the Neoplatonic One. He does this by examining the concept of unity. That every manifold of parts must in some way participate in unity. (Prop.1) For of it does not have unity; it would consist in an infinity of parts. Therefore it would be unknowable. The reason it would be unknowable, is because for the ancients there must be a unity of mind and its objects. The Form of an object and the Form in the mind are identical. The mind apprehends the Form of an object directly, not as a representation. This in  doctrine of course can be traced back to Aristotle. Proclus always wants to avoid infinite regress, because infinite regress in unknowable. All unities consist in parts except the One. It is by participating in the One that gives an object or entity is unity. (Prop.64) For a thing to even exist it must have some participation in the One. (Prop.70) All manifold are both one and not one. (Prop. 2) This means the participated manifold has unity as an affect. Since a manifold is a combination of  parts it is unified or participate, in unity, but it has some character other than unity. So it is not One as well as One. This is a lot of complicated logic to explain that every object we know consists of parts, but acts as a unity. A simple example should help explain: A car consists in a combination of parts, but all these parts work together to make a car, a vehicle to transport people. This is a unity of affect.

Proclus then argues that there is only one true unity; the Neoplatonic One. The One emanates all levels of reality. By the time of Proclus, Neoplatonism had added more intermediate entities to Plotinus's original three emanations. Below the One which is the only self-caused entity there are the henads. The henads are the pagan gods. In props. 70-72, Proclus explains how the levels of reality came to be. The higher cause (closer to the One) is always more efficacious in effects. In other words, the One is more powerful than the henads, and the henads are more powerful than individual souls, etc. This means there is an order of succession in participation.

As was said before Proclus always wants to avoid infinite regress , so there must be end-points of highest and lowest in his system. The end-point for the highest is the One; the end-point for the lowest is matter. The One is the only self caused entity and therefore must be a monad. For if the one had parts  it would be caused by something other than itself (prop.21). In his doctrine of the cause of matter, Proclus departs from Plotinus. Plotinus held that matter was an emanation of the realm of souls. Proclus posits a system of overlapping causes, which is going to cause a counter diction in his system, to be examined later. To make matter the end-point for the bottom, Proclus asserts that matter has a single cause. Remember that complex things are a composite of causes. So in order to make matter simple it has only one cause: the One. (props. 58-59) That which is more composite has a greater number of causes. As was said before objects are made of parts, and all the parts have different causes. So for the matter to be simple it can have but one cause. The only cause that reaches throughout the system of overlapping causes is the One. So matter is caused by the One alone. This means the middle levels have  the most sophistication, since the greatest number of causes are active. In other words the realm of human souls is the most sophisticated level, because it has the most causes. The highest and the lowest are both simple or monadic; thereby Proclus avoids infinite regress.

Now let us turn to the counter diction in Proclus's system. The last line of the “Elements of Theology” is, “Therefore every particular soul descends entire.” Proclus has adopted Iamblichus's doctrine of descended souls. That there is a barrier or a wall between the divine emanations which participate directly in the One and the realm of human souls and matter. Our everyday world of matter does not participate directly in the divine emanations of the One. It is only by the grace of gods (henads) that a human can climb into the higher realms. There should be no problem seeing the counter diction- how can matter, the most descended of entities,  be caused directly by the One. Proclus could try to get around this objection by asserting that matter is a reflection of the One alone, but he did not. If he had done that it would cause lots of problems for the rest of his overlapping system of causes.

Of course it was not logic that toppled the top down system. The Neoplatonists were some of the subtlest logicians that ever lived. It was direct observation and evidence that brought down the top down system. By showing that things evolved from the bottom up instead of devolving them from the top down. That entities develop from plurality into higher levels of sophistication, instead of devolving from a higher unity to a lower plurality. Darwin killed the top down system.

It is ironic that in the present age that we again find ourselves in a cosmos of different levels of reality. Modern science posits three levels of reality: the sub atomic, the level that life develops in our world, and the level of the galaxy. Of course these levels are not divided by closeness to the One, but by size. Still there are similarities to Neoplatonism. It seems that  the middle level (the level of life) is the level of greatest sophistication. The objection could be raised here that I have an anthropomorphic bias, which is true. It is a bias however, which is built into the cosmos. Humans are the only entities trying to understand the cosmos, so of course it must be approached form a human point of view. I know this is an assumption, but until it is proven wrong, I am going to assume it is true. The question now becomes why did life evolve on the level that it did. Why are we not living things standing on electrons? Why are we not living things the size of a galaxy? The question why living things did not evolve in the sub atomic level is an easy one. Erwin Schrodinger answers this question in his magnificent book “What is Life.” Life needs steady laws to develop. The sub atomic level is too chaotic to support life. Living things need a realm of predictable or regular events to survive. Living things are bits of matter that seem to be in open revolt against their own dissolution. A living organism does this in two ways; by trying to prevent its own dissolution and by propitiating other living things. Living things try to prevent their own dissolution by avoiding danger and taking in nutrition to replenish and rebuild their bodies. Living things propitiate more living things by reproduction.

In a realm such as the sub atomic this would be impossible. A living thing  needs a regularity to events for these actions to be accomplished. This of course implies that living things are more free than non-living things. The fact that they are trying to prevent their own dissolution means they are going against the usual causal sequence. This should lead us to the key of why living things are not the size of a galaxy. Things the size of galaxies have the opposite problem of the sub atomic realm. It is too hard to change events on the galactic level. Living things must be able to change existing states of affairs to bring about favorable states affairs for their continued existence. It would take an incredible amount of energy to change or alter states of affairs on the galactic level, life could not start there. As we know form modern science living things evolve from the bottom up; form simpler to more complex entities. For an entity to be able to change affairs at a galactic level would take incredible power and sophistication must evolve from entities that re simpler.

To conclude, I would like to offer a defense for studying past systems of metaphysics. To begin with even if past systems got a lot wrong there is still much to learn from them. An example from Proclus would be that for a manifold of parts to be considered a unity, it must have a unity of affect or function. The study of past systems should also instill in us a sense of humility. The Neoplatonists were some of the greatest minds of their age and some of the subtlest logicians of any age; yet they got it wrong. It is certain a metaphysician of the future shall marvel at how much we are getting wrong. The most important reason for studying past systems of metaphysics is a cooperative enterprise. Not just a cooperative enterprise that we should know what present metaphysicians are working on, but cooperative through time. We should regard figures like Proclus, Plotinus, and Iamblichus as colleagues in this enterprise. If they went down a dead end, it means we have to go down the same dead end. The Neoplatonists left us a rich legacy to build on; hopefully we can leave future metaphysicians as rich a legacy. All metaphysicians no matter when they live are involved in the same project; to try to gain some bits of that elusive and evolutionary concept known as truth.