The trouble with the tale of Atlantis as mythology is that it didn’t start out as tales around a campfire that spread from town to town that eventually turned into place that Plato mentioned in Timaeus and Critias. Instead, he created them whole cloth himself, fully realized for the purpose of telling an allegory on the hubris of nations, said tale having those details necessary to get the point across and not much more. What further screws up Atlantis’ use as mythology is the fact that, though others told tales of the place, they:
Waited centuries before doing so, and
Couldn’t even agree with each other as to what is was like, or even where it was.
Beyond that which is told by Plato, are there any common descriptive elements about Atlantis that it’s seekers agree upon?
Now that you have been moderated, and I had my dinner and a bottle of wine, did you ask Cecil why Plato never finished cooking the duck? Any other philosophers can jump in, if Cecil is too busy given out other words of wisdom.
Just got another thought; must have been the wine. Since Czarcasm went and brought back Cecil’s 1997 article too soon, let us take that as authority and position, and let us attack or defend Cecil’s position, at our will. Hopefully I will not be just the One against the Many, as in the Parmenides.
I’m surprised that no one commented on the Atlantis government description, nor of the Ancient, Ancient city of Athens, the opponent and winner of the War.
What are you talking about? I thought we were back to discussing Atlantis as mythology, and now you’re back to Atlantis as reality? Do you have facts to dispute what Cecil wrote in his column?
Civiisations diseappearing is not new or unlikely; there’s a whole area to the East of Britain (which i to the West of Greece caled Doggerland that has been completely under the sea for the last 7,000 years or so but did have people living there before that, and people still find old tools, etc, under the sea there.
Myths gaining traction enough to inspire people to spend money and time searching for them is not unusual, either. Lots of people still do that for Nessie, for example. Atlantis is not at all unusual in this respect.
Atlantis was just a parable in Plato’s Timaeus. Note that the same work includes a story about a son of Apollo. Note also that Atlantis is portrayed as an Egyptian myth, yet Atlantis does not occur in earlier Egyptian references.
I don’t see any bullying. I see an outlandish claim, being made in an evasive manner, without a shred of supporting evidence despite requests for same, coupled with complaints that the rest of us won’t Take The Discussion Seriously.
You appear to be God sent, for the moment; someone dear to me. I will lead on, as someone has my back now.
It’s obvious that this person doesn’t even know his Mythology, let alone the truth Plato has in store for us, the future, expected readers. The Quartz has not been polished, yet. Helios and Apollo, although both gods, and golden, both cannot be the father of Phaethon. Our Father, here, is only one!
Would you treat a myth seriously? But is this just a myth, any myth? That was one of the points on the OP. It’s the majority of the posters that have made a joke of it, not me. Read carefully and the truth will set me free.
I’m going with both. My money is down on Crete or possibly another island civilization in the Med getting wiped and the mythical side growing out of it.
A seeker after truth is someone who, trampling underfoot prejudice, tradition, venerability, universal assent, authority----in a word, everything that overawes the crowd----dares to think for himself, to ascend to the clearest general principles, to examine them, to discuss them, to admit nothing save on the testimony of his own reason and experience. However, although in apparent contradiction to the preceding, we should also take in consideration the old proverb, “don’t be a fool and learn by experience.” Take in consideration what others have handed down to us, but always, subject them to others’ scrutiny, you included. Assessing all these things, take that which you reason to be correct and stand your ground. If it is not the final goal, then march on. Imagination, although most likely to beget a wind-egg, is an assistant to reason, so use it at will, as you may find a treasure. Use your gut feelings just as a “flag,” a signal, and if turns out to be just wind, nothing will come of it, just an innocent and necessary fart; if you happen to be by yourself.
Did Cecil awe you with his statements on Atlantis?
