The Mystery of "Logo-Centric"

For myself this mystery all began in the exchange of Idea's between Plato to Aristotle

                   One has to understand the tradition of Socrates was speech, thus no writing, yet Direct exchange from;                                                                                                     teacher to student

                    ♥  Plato did write, yet wrote of Socrates direct teaching,staying true to Socrates


                      Aristotle being Plato's student, was taught from directly from Plato, yet after Plato's death, did not stay true to Plato's                                                                               Teachings / and Forms and 

Plato (/ˈpleɪtoʊ/;[a][1] Greek: Πλάτων[a] Plátōn, pronounced [plá.tɔːn] in Classical Attic; 428/427 or 424/423[b] – 348/347 BC)


According to Plato, Socrates postulated a world of ideal Forms, which he admitted were impossible to know. Nevertheless, he formulated a very specific description of that world, which did not match his metaphysical principles. Corresponding to the world of Forms is our world, that of the shadows, an imitation of the real one

--------------------------------------------------------------------After Plato-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Aristotle applied the term to refer to "reasoned discourse"[5] or "the argument" in the field of rhetoric

The Gospel of John identifies the Logos, through which all things are made, as divine (theos),[8] and further identifies Jesus Christ as the incarnate Logos.

The Organon (Greek: Ὄργανον, meaning "instrument, tool, organ") is the standard collection of Aristotle's six works on logic. The name Organon was given by Aristotle's followers, the Peripatetics.

Andronicus of Rhodes (Ancient Greek: Ἀνδρόνικος ὁ Ῥόδιος, translit. Andrónikos ho Rhódios; Latin: Andronicus Rhodius;  60 BC) was a Greek philosopher from Rhodes who was also the scholarch (head) of the Peripatetic school. He is most famous for publishing a new edition of the works of Aristotle that forms the basis of the texts that survive today

The Peripatetic school was a school of philosophy in Ancient Greece. Its teachings derived from its founder, Aristotle (384–322 BC), and peripatetic is an adjective ascribed to his followers.

The school dates from around 335 BC when Aristotle began teaching in the Lyceum. It was an informal institution whose members conducted philosophical and scientific inquiries. After the middle of the 3rd century BC, the school fell into a decline, and it was not until the Roman era that there was a revival. Later members of the school concentrated on preserving and commenting on Aristotle's works rather than extending them; it died out in the 3rd century.

The study of Aristotle's works continued by scholars who were called Peripatetics through Late Antiquity, the Middle Ages, and the Renaissance. After the fall of the Western Roman Empire, the works of the Peripatetic school were lost to the Latin West, but in the East they were rediscovered and incorporated into early Islamic philosophy, which would play a fundamental role in the revival of Aristotelian philosophy in Europe through the Middle Ages and the Renaissance.


By listening to Leo's video, thus understanding "Where Jacques Derrida was going with his thought ", one can better understand where I am taking my thought on Logos


The writing of Heraclitus (c.535 – c. 475 BC) was the first place where the word logos was given special attention in ancient Greek philosophy,[17] although Heraclitus seems to use the word with a meaning not significantly different from the way in which it was used in ordinary Greek of his time.[18] For Heraclitus, logos provided the link between rational discourse and the world's rational structure.

He was of distinguished parentage. Little is known about his early life and education, but he regarded himself as self-taught and a pioneer of wisdom. From the lonely life he led, and still more from the apparently riddled[3] and allegedly paradoxical[4] nature of his philosophy and his stress upon the needless unconsciousness of humankind,[5] he was called "The Obscure" and the "Weeping Philosopher". 

Heraclitus was famous for his insistence on ever-present change as being the fundamental essence of the universe, as stated in the famous saying, "No man ever steps in the same river twice"

Heraclitus' position was complemented by his stark commitment to a unity of opposites in the world, stating that "the path up and down are one and the same"

This is commonly considered to be one of the first digressions into the philosophical concept of becoming, and has been contrasted with Parmenides statement that "what is-is" as one of the first digressions into the philosophical concept of being


The Way of Truth[edit]

Parmenides. Detail from The School of Athens by Raphael.

The section known as "the way of truth" discusses that which is real and contrasts with the argument in the section called "the way of opinion," which discusses that which is illusory. Under the "way of truth," Parmenides stated that there are two ways of inquiry: that it is, on the one side, and that it is not.[23] on the other side. He said that the latter argument is never feasible because there is no thing that can not be: "For never shall this prevail, that things that are not are." 

Interpretations of Parmenides

The traditional interpretation of Parmenides' work is that he argued that the every-day perception of reality of the physical world (as described in doxa) is mistaken

Parmenides had a large influence on Plato, who not only named a dialogue, Parmenides, after him, but always wrote about him with veneration.[15]


To Heraclitus, a perceived object is a harmony between two fundamental units of change, a waxing and a waning. He typically uses the ordinary word "to become" (gignesthai or ginesthai, present tense or aorist tense of the verb, with the root sense of "being born"), which led to his being characterized as the philosopher of becoming rather than of being. He recognizes the fundamental changing of objects with the flow of time.

Plato argues against Heraclitus as follows:[69]

How can that be a real thing which is never in the same state? ... for at the moment that the observer approaches, then they become other ... so that you cannot get any further in knowing their nature or state .... but if that which knows and that which is known exist ever ... then I do not think they can resemble a process or flux …

This limitation is considered a fundamental limitation of reality by Plato and in part underpins his differentiation between imperfect experience from more perfect Forms. The fact that this is no limitation for Heraclitus motivates Plato's condemnation.--                                 One of Plato's mistakes or history has mistaken?-me,  personally this doesn't make sense, as Plato clearly states Forms as; Thus, the theory of matter and form (today's hylomorphism) was born. Starting with at least Plato and possibly germinal in some of the presocratics the forms were considered as being "in" something else, which Plato called nature (physis

                                                          This is where in Part the Mystery shows face            


                  This logos holds always but humans always prove unable to never understand it, both before hearing it and when they have first heard it. For though all things come to be in accordance with this logos, humans are like the inexperienced when they experience such words and deeds as I set out, distinguishing each in accordance with its nature and saying how it is. But other people fail to notice what they do when awake, just as they forget 

what they do while asleep

                For this reason it is necessary to follow what is common. But although the logos is common, most people live as if they had their own private understanding

                Listening not to me but to the logos it is wise to agree that all things are one.

Greek philosopher, and a native of the city of Ephesus,[2] then part of the Persian Empire.


The world soul (Greek: ψυχὴ κόσμου psuchè kósmou, Latin: anima mundi) is, according to several systems of thought, an intrinsic connection between all living things on the planet, which relates to our world in much the same way as the soul is connected to the human body. Plato adhered to this idea and it was an important component of most Neoplatonic systems:

Philo of Alexandria

Philo (c.20 BC – c. 50 AD), a Hellenized Jew, used the term Logos to mean an intermediary divine being or demiurge.[7] Philo followed the Platonic distinction between imperfect matter and perfect Form, and therefore intermediary beings were necessary to bridge the enormous gap between God and the material world.[33] The Logos was the highest of these intermediary beings, and was called by Philo "the first-born of God".[33] Philo also wrote that "the Logos of the living God is the bond of everything, holding all things together and binding all the parts, and prevents them from being dissolved and separated".[34]

Plato's Theory of Forms was located within the Logos, but the Logos also acted on behalf of God in the physical world.[33] In particular, the Angel of the Lord in the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament) was identified with the Logos by Philo, who also said that the Logos was God's instrument in the creation of the Universe

At this Time One sees; Heraclitus was born 535 bc,  Heraclitus of Ephesus (/ˌhɛrəˈklaɪtəs/;[1] Greek: Ἡράκλειτος ὁ Ἐφέσιος Hērákleitos ho Ephésios; c. 535 – c. 475 BC) was a pre-Socratic

The later Stoics understood it as "the account which governs everything,"[37] and Hippolytus, in the 3rd century CE, identified it as meaning the Christian Word of God.

To be continued;