Quid Est Veritas?



It is possible to define a modern culture of ἀρετή which not only expresses the quintessence of the Hellenic ethos but which also manifests the essence of what may, and correctly should, be termed the Promethean ethos - that is, the refined, reasoned, genuine Western culture [1]. This genuine Western culture - based on the Hellenic ethos and manifest, for example, in the Renaissance and in Natural Philosophy - is quite distinct from the vulgar materialistic plebeian lifestyle and ethos of the modern nation-States of the West, where there is a distinct lack of manners and a somewhat profane disdain for the received tradition of one's ancestors. Instead, there is a concern with vapid "progress", and a desire to "express and enjoy one's self", that is, a lack of dignity and a lack of reasoned judgement.

This culture of ἀρετή is a particular balance - born from πάθει μάθος (from the personal knowing of the error, the unbalance, that is ὕβρις) [2] and from using reasoned judgement (σωφρονεῖν [3] ), and both of which make us aware of the true nature of our φύσις and of Φύσις itself [4] .

This particular balance is re-presented by the archetype (the numinous re-presentation) Δίκα - that is, by what the Hellenistic culture described as the goddess, Judgement. [5] In mortal terms, Δίκα is manifest in us and to us by thoughtful reasoning: by a well-balanced, fair, noble, personal judgement.

Thus the ethos of the culture of ἀρετή is the ethos of λόγος [6] and Φύσις - of ἀλήθεια - and of that culture whose individuals are not only interested in, but who seek to answer in a reasoned way, the question: Τί ἐστιν ἀλήθεια?

This is the culture of those for whom πάθει μάθος possesses a numinous authority:

Ζῆνα δέ τις προφρόνως ἐπινίκια κλάζων
τεύξεται φρενῶν τὸ πᾶν:
ὸν φρονεῖν βροτοὺς ὁδώ-
σαντα, τὸν πάθει μάθος
θέντα κυρίως ἔχειν.

If anyone, from reasoning, exclaims loudly that victory of Zeus,
Then they have acquired an understanding of all these things;
Of he who guided mortals to reason,
Who laid down that this possesses authority:
Learning from adversity.

Aeschylus: Agamemnon,174-183


That is, it is the culture of those who use (1) the learning and knowledge acquired from personal experience, (2) the faculty of reason (and thus logic); and (3) experimental science (the scientific method) - and who prefer these, and defer to these, over and above dogma, ideology, and religious (or sacred) texts [7].

It is also the culture of those who, from the three means of education and knowing enumerated above, possess knowledge concerning, and who thus make a clear distinction between, the sacred (what is numinous) and the profane. Thus do they value, and do not attempt to profane, the numinous, for such a valuing and such a desire to resist such profanation is that noble respectful balance re-presented by Δίκα. A distinction understood, for example, by Sophocles (among many others) - Antigone, for instance, respects the natural balance, the customs and traditions of her own numinous culture, given by the gods; whereas Creon verges towards and finally commits, like Oedipus in Oedipus Tyrannus, the error of ὕβρις and is thus "taught a lesson" (just like Oedipus) by the gods because, as Aeschylus wrote [5],

Δίκα δὲ τοῖς μὲν παθοῦσ-
ιν μαθεῖν ἐπιρρέπει




The Importance of Δίκα


The concern for ἀλήθεια and this knowing or or feeling for the numinous balance re-presented by Δίκα is why, for instance, the music of JS Bach is part of the culture of ἀρετή and why the raucous modern cacophony (mis-named music) produced by some so-called "rock band" is not part of that culture. Because in the music of JS Bach there is a manifestation of, an intimation of, ἁρμονίη and thus a dignified re-presentation (some might say an excellent re-presentation) of the numinous (of the non-mundane) born of a personal πάθει μάθος (and thus personal knowing of the numinous) and providing therefore a numinous balance, while in that raucous modern cacophony there is only a personal (undignified) indulgence, "entertainment" and a re-presentation of mundane (profane) emotion; with no intimation of that supra-personal sacredness (that numinosity) which a Δίκα-given learning from adversity provides, and which personal learning (from adversity and suffering) is almost always found to be manifest in not only a knowing of why ὕβρις is an error but also in a certain personal dignity. In brief, one might with some intimation of correctness write that in the music of JS Bach - as in for example, the plainchant of the Christian Church - there is a certain dignity, something woefully lacking in all such modern types of cacophony, be such a cacophony based on some personal indulgence, or (as in the case of some other modern music played by orchestral instruments) on some abstract theory rather than a personal knowing of, and awareness of, the numinous.

        Similarly, in terms of personal character. The culture of ἀρετή is the culture of those who use the numinous authority of πάθει μάθος as their guide and who, by one or more or all of the three above enumerated means - the praxis of the culture of ἀρετή [8] - seek to answer the question Τί ἐστιν ἀλήθεια?

Here, ἀλήθεια - as the speaker of those particular recorded words may have been trying, in a practical post-Hellenic sort of way, to intimate [9] - is not some kind of abstract, dead, un-living, moralistic, "truth", but rather a revealing, or more correctly perhaps, the process of revealing, which exposes the nature - φύσις - the real character, of a being (a thing) and/or of beings ("things") [10].

Thus, it is not ἀλήθεια as some abstract entity, some ideation, which is saught, but rather a knowing of φύσις which places some being (a thing) and/or some beings ("things") in a correct - that is, a balanced and numinous - relationship with Φύσις.

This questioning, this very seeking, this process, is therefore - as is πάθει μάθος - individual, so that the answer to the question Quid Est Veritas? cannot be found in some text, religiously revealed or otherwise, but rather in discovering how the individual uniquely, individually, from using the praxis of the culture of ἀρετή, acquires a knowing of their own being in relation to Φύσις.


        This very seeking - by the nature of the praxis - is a balanced one, redolent of ἁρμονίη and thus of ἀρετή: of excellence and nobility of individual character, evident in a certain dignity and the possession of manners, both of which attributes (or honourable virtues) are a personal (a mortal) manifestation of the natural balance that Δίκα both re-presents and brings (or can bring) to we mortals, and both of which attributes have their practical genesis in personal honour: in that desire (or that practical code) which intimates (or which makes clear) how one may avoid the error of ὕβρις and maintain one's natural relation to ψυχή [11].

By becoming aware of this natural relation, and by maintaining this healthy relation to ψυχή, we feel, we know, we discover, the numinous. And it is this knowing, this feeling of, this discovery of the numinous - and the honourable desire to not profane what is numinous - which is ἀρετή and which marks the modern, existing if undervalued, culture of ἀρετή and what we, using our praxis, can develope from it.




David Myatt
2455526.131
November 2010 CE



Notes:


[1] By ἀρετή here (as elsewhere in my works) is meant excellence. Commonly - and vulgarly - ἀρετή is mistranslated as "virtue".

By culture here is meant the arts of personal manners, of personal dignity, of civility, and of a received and living (and thus numinous) tradition, and which tradition is both respected and regarded as source of wisdom and knowledge.

For a brief overview of a numinous tradition, and thus a numinous culture, refer to my Numinous Culture, The Acausal, and Living Traditions (which is Part Two of The Classical Foundations of The Numinous Way).

The term Promethean is used to describe the genuine Western ethos for reasons which a reading of Hesiod's Θεογονία should make clear, and of which this is one intimation:

Ἰαπετιονίδη, πάντων πέρι μήδεα εἰδώς,
ὦ πέπον, οὐκ ἄρα πω δολίης ἐπιλήθεο τέχνης .....

αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ δὴ τεῦξε καλὸν κακὸν ἀντ᾽ ἀγαθοῖο.
ἐξάγαγ᾽, ἔνθα περ ἄλλοι ἔσαν θεοὶ ἠδ᾽ ἄνθρωποι,
κόσμῳ ἀγαλλομένην γλαυκώπιδος ὀβριμοπάτρης.
θαῦμα δ᾽ ἔχ᾽ ἀθανάτους τε θεοὺς θνητούς τ᾽ ἀνθρώπους,
ὡς εἶδον δόλον αἰπύν, ἀμήχανον ἀνθρώποισιν.


Hesiod (Theog, 559-560; 585-9)

[2]
 ὕβρις φυτεύει τύραννον:
ὕβρις, εἰ πολλῶν ὑπερπλησθῇ μάταν,
ἃ μὴ ‘πίκαιρα μηδὲ συμφέροντα,
ἀκρότατον εἰσαναβᾶσ᾽
αἶπος ἀπότομον ὤρουσεν εἰς ἀνάγκαν
ἔνθ᾽ οὐ ποδὶ χρησίμῳ
χρῆται.
Insolence [ὕβρις] plants the tyrant:
There is insolence if by a great foolishness
There is a useless over-filling which goes beyond
The proper limits -
It is an ascending to the steepest and utmost heights
And then that hurtling toward that Destiny
Where the useful foot has no use.
Soph. Antig. vv.872ff


[3] σωφρονεῖν ἀρετὴ μεγίστη, καὶ σοφίη ἀληθέα λέγειν καὶ ποιεῖν κατὰ φύσιν ἐπαίοντας. (Heraclitus, Fragmentum B 112)

For a brief analysis of this fragment, refer to my The Balance of Physis – Notes on λόγος and ἀληθέα in Heraclitus, Part One: Fragment 112

[4]  Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι φιλεῖ   (Heraclitus, Fragmentum B 123)

For a brief analysis of this fragment, refer to my Physis, Nature, Concealment, and Natural Change


[5]
Δίκα δὲ τοῖς μὲν παθοῦσ-
ιν μαθεῖν ἐπιρρέπει
The goddess, Judgement, favours someone learning from adversity.

Aeschylus: Agamemnon, 250-251

[6] λόγος here being understand in reference to, for instance:

(a)  ἐν Πριήνηι Βίας ἐγένετο ὁ Τευτάμεω, οὗ πλείων λόγος ἢ τῶν ἄλλων.

Heraclitus, Fragment 39

 In Priene was born someone named and recalled as most worthy – Bias, that son of Teuta."

(b) ἴδμεν ψεύδεα πολλὰ λέγειν ἐτύμοισιν ὁμοῖα,
ἴδμεν δ᾽, εὖτ᾽ ἐθέλωμεν, ἀληθέα γηρύσασθαι
Hesiod (Theog, 27-28)

We have many ways to conceal – to name – certain things
And the skill when we wish to expose their meaning

That is, in reference to denoting (describing, naming) a being (a thing) and beings ("things"). This denoting is an attempt to reveal how what is denoted is connected to, or part of, or manifests, Φύσις, and thus re-presents the true character, the true nature, of what is so denoted, as in for example Bias the son of Teuta being named not only by his name but also as a most worthy person, and which naming describes his true character; a usage of φύσις as in for example:

Αἰγύπτου γὰρ φύσις ἐστὶ τῆς χώρης τοιήδε
Herodotus (2.5.2)
There is thus a manifestation of, or a certain measure of, ἀληθέα.

However, as in Hesiod, this naming, this denoting - λόγος - can also have a tendency to conceal what has become so revealed, so that, as Heraclitus wrote Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι φιλεῖ.

That is, there is a natural tendency for Physis to become concealed after such a revealing - for that is in the nature of our being, as mortals, given our tendency (our natural inclination) to commit the error of ὕβρις.

[7] For a brief discussion of experimental science, refer to The Pathei-Mathos of Experimental Science in my The Classical Foundations of The Numinous Way.

A discussion of the importance of πάθει μάθος over and above religious texts is given in my Religion and The Numinous Way, especially in part one, Exegesis, and The Discovery of Wisdom.

[8]  The three means - the praxis of the culture of ἀρετή - are:  (1) learning and knowledge acquired from personal experience, often via πάθει μάθος, (2) using the faculty of reason (and thus logic); and (3) employing experimental science (the scientific method).

[9] 

λέγει αὐτῷ ὁ Πειλᾶτος Τί ἐστιν ἀλήθεια
Καὶ τοῦτο εἰπὼν πάλιν ἐξῆλθεν πρὸς τοὺς Ἰουδαίους,
καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς Ἐγὼ οὐδεμίαν εὑρίσκω ἐν αὐτῷ αἰτίαν
ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 18:37-38

[10] As intimated above - in footnote [6] - λόγος is part of this process of discovery, this revealing of Φύσις.

[11] ψυχή is now commonly regarded as a synonym for soul, a somewhat vulgar error. Its correct usage is evident in Homer, Aeschylus, Aristotle, etcetera - and implies Life qua being; or more specifically, what makes us and keeps us mortal (alive) - our being, its essence - and which derives from Αἰὼν, or which is a manifestation of the process of Change that is Αἰὼν and which becomes revealed to us (or can become revealed to us) by the the praxis of the culture of ἀρετή (which involves λόγος) and from which we therefore acquire a knowing of our own being in relation to Φύσις.

As I mentioned in a footnote in my The Classical Foundations of The Numinous Way:

We may – with Nietzsche – regard Αἰὼν as manifest, symbolically, in Zeus, or, more specifically and perhaps more correctly, in the Zeus of Aeschylus (Agamemnon, 174-183) who guides mortals to reason, and whose new guidance, whose authority, is expressed in πάθει μάθος .....
It should be noted that for Heidegger... Αἰὼν is manifest in Φύσις and λόγος.


cc David Myatt 2010 CE

This work is covered by the Creative Commons (Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0) License and can be freely copied and distributed, under the terms of that license.