endymions_bower: (scribe)
[personal profile] endymions_bower
@cole_tucker: I need to stop letting my mind go all handwavy when discussions about abstract numerals like dyad, hexad etc come up.

@EPButler: It can be hard. The key is recognizing there are original, grounding determinations for numbers. Not all twos are equivalent. I struggled for a long time trying to understand why the intellective order had a heptadic structure. I mean, triads are pretty easy to grasp in their fundamentality, but a number like seven starts to seem as though it must belong to a specific ontology, and not to the system in its elemental sense. And of course modern commentators just treat it all as arbitrary.

But then I realized from reading Proclus closely, that the heptad was the triad with all the relations grounded. So: a triad, with each member doubled because it is discrete, and then a seventh monad for the reciprocal relation of all. This is indeed a speculative expression of the nature of intellective multiplicity as such.

This confirms, by the way, that the intelligible triad is not yet unpacked; it is still really three moments of a unit. There is no "real" triad until the heptad.
(The enneadic development of the triad in the three noetic triads is, of course, only really complete "after" the noeric.)
This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting

January 2025

S M T W T F S
   12 34
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031 

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Feb. 9th, 2026 01:04 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios