Talk:Monad (philosophy)

message: "Pythagorean and Platonic philosophers like Plotinus and Porphyry condemned Gnosticism (see Neoplatonism and Gnosticism) for their treatment of the monad or one." Really? There's no source for this and, moreover, the sentence is idiotically vague. What was their treatment on the monad? And were they treating the monad poorly or the idea of it? Did they get rid of the monad at a garage sale?  Or did they just have a different idea of it different from Pythagorus? It is an annoyingly stupid sentence. Gingermint (talk) 00:04, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I recall reading description (paraphrases, quotations) from such sources and means their philosophiizing about monad: yes, they (should be neopythagorean & neoplatonic philosophers) had different cosmology than Gnostics.--dchmelik☀️🕉︎☉🦉🐝🐍☤☆(talk 11:22, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  What's This Supposed to Mean? 

message: quote "according to the Pythagoreans, [monad] was a term for Divinity or the first being, or the totality of all beings" - is this correct - ie the association of the "monad" with "god" in the eyes of the pythagoreans? As far as I know the "monad" was the 'first thing' - but not necessarily god.
eg in the book 
*"The true intellectual system of the universe: wherein all the reason and philosophy of atheism is confuted, and its impossibility demonstrated : with a treatise concerning eternal and immutable morality, Volume 2  Ralph Cudworth, Johann Lorenz Mosheim, 1845, p.10 google books 
- it states that some others considered the monad to be god - which suggests the connection was infered not explicit - are the people mentioned considered to be "pythagoreans"? - is this a more modern or greek interpretation? What does pythagrorus actualy say etc etc.Imgaril (talk) 05:13, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: That's according to Hippolytus: "And so he proclaimed that the Deity is a monad; and carefully acquainting himself with the nature of number..." (http://christianbookshelf.org/hippolytus/the_refutation_of_all_heresies/chapter_ii_pythagoras_his_cosmogony_rules.htm) If this a correct description of what the Pythagoreans though I know not. Rune X2 (talk) 20:58, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Most Pythagoras' work was lost except as quoted by others (in Pythagorean Golden Verses, Complete Pythagoras, Pythagorean Sourcebook, etc.) which I've read but don't recall right now, but sounds accurate as 'totality of all beings' (which I only recall from modern Pythagoreans) though in the case of 'deity' could mean goddess or god or generic divine spirit.  In the case of Hermetism (or as copied into 1800s Theosophy, which was interesting for its time but made some mistakes) it may have also been totality as Monad and any being as a monad, but I'm not sure...--dchmelik☀️🕉︎☉🦉🐝🐍☤☆(talk 11:17, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Accuracy - possible factual error

message: This article had been fleshed out very nicely and much improved. Then the old inferior version was restored. I don't understand, but maybe someone had a good reason. No talk contribution to explain, though. James Council (talk) 22:28, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The version I reverted was terribly written (see WP:RS/AC and WP:UNDUE) and possibly in violation of WP:SYNTH. It also lacked full citations (see Template:Incomplete short citation). If portions of the proposed version are to be restored, the editor will have to completely rewrite them first. --Omnipaedista (talk) 00:25, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Pretty harsh, but on re-reading I concede your points (largely). However, I am a rank beginner at this compared to you. This was a class project tied to the APS Wikipedia Initiative. I now have a new class to start on this project. Would you be willing to help if one of the groups chooses to fix the article you reverted? James Council (talk) 00:01, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: My comments are in good faith. An article should be as accurate and as useful to its readers as possible. I am willing to help if my help is needed. --Omnipaedista (talk) 09:20, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Reverted article

message: The article says "there are infinite monads" but surely it means "there are infinitely many monads"?  I hope someone with expertise will fix this if it's an error.  Zaslav (talk) 00:24, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "infinite monads" error?