I thought i'd share a snippet of something i enjoyed reading. It's a snippet from Chapter 10 titled Philosophy of Religion from Lloyd P. Gerson's book Plotinus. I share this to invite critical discussion about what's talked about, and said in the snippet.

The snippet:

“Little is known of Plotinus’ view of the prevailing civic religion of his time. The best guess is that he felt for it polite indifference bordering on disdain. If Plotinus did indeed have a low opinion of “organized” Roman religion, this would contrast sharply with his personal devotional practices. It is also likely that he viewed with contempt the newest religion of the day, Christianity. His most faithful disciple, Porphyry, certainly did. When I use the term “religion” in reference to Plotinus’ thought, I refer to those activities or practices he endorses as leading to higher virtue and beyond, ultimately to association with Intellect and through it to union with the One. However, I use the term with some hesitation. I recognize the force of the claim that religion has an essentially social or interpersonal element, and this is quite foreign to what Plotinus is recommending.

The central notion of Plotinus’ philosophy of religion is that of return All creation is disposed by nature to return to the source whence it came, in so far as it is able. It is on this basis, first of all, that Plotinus can make a distinction between phenomenal and real desire. Appearances notwithstanding, what all things really desire is to be united or reunited with the source of their being. Second, given that the universe is an ordered hierarchy, the stages of return are fixed. Short-cuts are not allowed. The reason for this is that the ascent or return to the One must involve a refolding of what was unfolded. To attempt a short-cut would then amount to nothing less than a spurious ascent. This is the source of Plotinus’ deep antipathy to any form of Gnosticism. Gnosticism disdains the notion that religion is hard work governed by objective rules. It invites one to practice bogus religion.

There is a more important reason, though, for Plotinus’ insistence on an orderly ascent “from external to internal, from lower to higher.” The ascent does not end with acceptance of conclusions of arguments about the existence of Intellect or the One. The ascent, if it is to be successful, must consist in the construction of an ideal self in the incarnate individual which includes a kind of synonymous image of the true ideal self. One must become the person who naturally acts like that ideal self. So, the ascent must include what can only be called a conversion experience. And this means recapitulating the metaphysical order—One, Intellect, Soul, nature—in reverse. For example, Plotinus does not envision a vicious man as bypassing lower virtue and ascending directly to higher virtue or even to the construction of an ideal self beyond virtue. A conversion from vice is a conversion to what vice is a corruption of, namely, the lower virtues.”