32 replies to this topic

[Proclus]

Recently a somewhat forgotten scientific invention hypothesis on Plato's Atlantis written by Prof. Gunnar Rudberg was dug out and brought into the English language for the first time. It still can keep up with current invention hypotheses ... or maybe even more: It casts light on some aspects current invention hypotheses seem to neglect (why?! oohoouuuhooohuaahuaahuaa!).

Maybe it's even closer to the core of Plato's idea with Atlantis than all the rest?

But jugde for yourself:

Syracuse was the place where Plato tried to approach his ideal state in reality - and failed. Indeed, Syracuse shares many similarities with Plato's Atlantis: Like Atlantis, it was situated on a large and fertile island in the west, a city of abundant wealth and power. As in Atlantis, the ruler's castle and magnificent temples were gathered on a small island. As in Atlantis, there were several harbors, quarries and many walls encircling the city. And like Atlantis, Syracuse waged war with Athens.

... there is even a sea straits near to Syracuse ... west of Egypt ...

But what sounds like a hot trail to decipher the enigma of Plato's Atlantis lay forgotten for a long time: As early as 1917, far ahead of his time, Gunnar Rudberg wrote this most coherent scientific analysis. The world did not, however, take notice of a Swedish text. Translated now for the first time, Rudberg's thesis is still a very good read on Plato's Atlantis, presenting not only one of the most credible solutions for Plato's Atlantis, but also offering an introduction to Atlantis research in general.

Sounds not bad, does it? An invention hypothesis, but quite another caliber than the ones out of thin air ...
... I would be interested in your opinions!
Discussion is opened ...

Edited by Proclus, 02 January 2013 - 09:13 PM.

[Hilander]

Sounds like they are trying to sell a book, which might be entertaining but there are so many theories about the location of Atlantis, a place we don't know for sure even existed, it boggles the mind.

Edited by Hilander, 02 January 2013 - 09:10 PM.

[Proclus]

Hilander, on 02 January 2013 - 09:08 PM, said:

There are so many theories about the location of Atlantis, a place we don't know for sure even existed, it boggles the mind.

Stop!
This is no existence hypothesis, but an invention hypothesis!
Stop!

Edited by Proclus, 02 January 2013 - 09:12 PM.

[Kasey2601]

What's the difference?

[Proclus]

Lady Kasey, on 02 January 2013 - 09:27 PM, said:

What's the difference?

*sigh*

Some say, Plato invented Atlantis = it does not exist (but there could be one or more model(s) for it), and
some say, Plato himself thought Atlantis to be real (although it cannot exactly have been real as described).

Hope I could help ...

[cormac mac airt]

Lady Kasey, on 02 January 2013 - 09:27 PM, said:

What's the difference?

The first one is a fact and the second is just one of many attempts to show what may have inspired Plato to writer about Atlantis. An inspiration for a story does not make said story a fact although, apparently, there are some who don't know the difference.

cormac

[Proclus]

cormac mac airt, on 02 January 2013 - 09:35 PM, said:

The first one is a fact and the second is just one of many attempts to show what may have inspired Plato to writer about Atlantis. An inspiration for a story does not make said story a fact although, apparently, there are some who don't know the difference.

After we clarified this ... *thank-you* ... *sigh* ... you could be so kind and spend a few words on the proposed idea?
Here, the inspiration is connected with Plato's own biography!

[cormac mac airt]

I'm not really interested in what may have inspired Plato to write about a place that never existed. I'm more interested in the reality of the situation. And where Atlantis is concerned, there is no reality.

cormac

[Proclus]

cormac mac airt, on 02 January 2013 - 09:56 PM, said:

I'm not really interested in what may have inspired Plato to write about a place that never existed. I'm more interested in the reality of the situation. And where Atlantis is concerned, there is no reality.

I don't want to be too direct, but your behaviour shows strange features. You browse all the threads only to tell everybody that it is even not worth to spend a single initial thought on the idea, whether Atlantis could be real in this or that way or not. And when I present an invention hypothesis which should be to your pleasure your only comment is: Not interested because the case is clear without spending any thought on it.

Gives me the impression of some sort of fanaticism. Sorry.
And it's a pity: You really could fight better for your cause.

(@Webmaster: Sorry for the open words but once I had to say this)

[the L]

Hardly that Sicily can be model because one simple thing. When Plato was called in Sicily, Sicily was most fearful power on Med.sea . It was time of Dionysius. Plato hated Sicily. He was banned from it as I remember.

Also, even if Alcibaldes was in charge of Sicilian expedition they would probably loose. Calvary vs infantry.(?-as I remembered) Plato was c.10 year boy when heard about defeat on Sicily.

Atlantis is power which loose war and later destroyed by Zeus.
Sicily was power which won war and later reach their zenith.

Edited by the L, 02 January 2013 - 11:25 PM.

[Proclus]

the L, on 02 January 2013 - 10:39 PM, said:

Hardly that Sicily can be model because one simple thing. When Plato was called in Sicily, Sicily was most fearful power on Med.sea . It was time of Dionysius. Plato hated Sicily. He was banned from it as I remember.

Also, even Alcibaldes were in charge of Sicilian expedition they would probably loose. Plato was 10 year boy when heard about defeat on Sicily.

Atlantis is power which loose war and later destroyed by Zeus.
Sicily was power which won war and later reach their zenith.

Yes, these historical outline is correct.
But Plato was on Sicily many decades later in order to educate the tyrant to become a philosopher king.
And this failed and Syracuse experienced its downfall.
It is the question whether Plato wrote the dialogues while in Sicily or after it?

[the L]

Plato in his work "State" describe man who change himself into wolf.  Thats interesting imo. Tyrant? Greed, power?

Anyway, Plato was called in Syracuse. Plato state was Utopian state. But artists were not allowed in it because they bring new idea and revolution. Philosophers must rule the state. soldiers guard it and workers work.
Plato 367 came as future teacher of Dionysius younger and in 360. But failed both times.
Plato was selled as slave.


Im sure Plato hated Sicily.
And Sicily ment to Greeks as America to Europeans. New world.
I dont know where he wrote it. But I dont think it was on Sicily.

One more thing. For Greeks, balsphemy was done on Sicily. Tyrant called celts as dogs of war. Im not gonna say that Celts were barbarians but Greeks seen them that way.

Also Sicily made deal with Illyrians and help Illyrians to won over Greeks.

So Sicily defently isnt place we looking for in any sense, imo.

Edited by the L, 02 January 2013 - 11:23 PM.

[cormac mac airt]

Proclus, on 02 January 2013 - 10:29 PM, said:

I don't want to be too direct, but your behaviour shows strange features. You browse all the threads only to tell everybody that it is even not worth to spend a single initial thought on the idea, whether Atlantis could be real in this or that way or not. And when I present an invention hypothesis which should be to your pleasure your only comment is: Not interested because the case is clear without spending any thought on it.

Gives me the impression of some sort of fanaticism. Sorry.
And it's a pity: You really could fight better for your cause.

(@Webmaster: Sorry for the open words but once I had to say this)

I'm interested in actual ancient history. Not some made up fantasy place that makes one feel all warm and fuzzy inside. Your mis-named "invention" hypothesis isn't any kind of invention, it's inspiration and that's all it is. I see no real purpose in trying to validate a fantasy. Apparently you do.

As to how much time I've spent looking into the geologic, archaeologic, chronologic, technologic and genetic areas of science in order to research even the remote chance for Atlantis having been a real location, I've put way more time into it than you obviously have. And yet, nothing is supported by scientific evidence. Which is the only evidence that matters.

cormac

[Proclus]

cormac mac airt, on 02 January 2013 - 11:30 PM, said:

I'm interested in actual ancient history. Not some made up fantasy place that makes one feel all warm and fuzzy inside. Your mis-named "invention" hypothesis isn't any kind of invention, it's inspiration and that's all it is. I see no real purpose in trying to validate a fantasy. Apparently you do.

As to how much time I've spent looking into the geologic, archaeologic, chronologic, technologic and genetic areas of science in order to research even the remote chance for Atlantis having been a real location, I've put way more time into it than you obviously have. And yet, nothing is supported by scientific evidence. Which is the only evidence that matters.

Hope you are aware that you are very very alone with your believe that there was no inspiration at all for inventing Atlantis (if invented at all)? The last scientist I know who thought like that was Ulrich von Wilamowitz-Möllendorff in 1920. How much time did you spend, you said? I assume it took you 5 minutes to read of 9000 years and the Atlantic Ocean, then you made a very short-circuited conclusion (just another 30 seconds), and then you were done. Because "facts" is all which counts.

Did you ever care studying some philosophy of science? You obviously don't know that there are no "facts" at all in this world when it comes to the nitty-gritty. All is guessing to a certain degree of likelihood, never with 100% likelihood. Think of the wisdom of Socrates: I know that I know nothing. This is not a joke and no irony.

And Plato actually was in Syracuse, this is "fact" ... but maybe not for you?

[Proclus]

the L, on 02 January 2013 - 10:51 PM, said:

Plato 367 came as future teacher of Dionysius younger and in 360. But failed both times.
Plato was selled as slave.

You confuse things a bit: Plato was sold as slave by Dionysius I and later tried to educate Dionysius II.

Look: The Atlantis dialogues show some didactic intention: Two states fighting with each other, a good one and a bad one. Isn't this a good message to be taught to Dionysius II? I would not be so sure whether Syracuse is "definetely" not the place we are looking for ...