Pagan Portals - Polytheism Quotes

“because each henad is a way of being all the others, no henad could constitute the ‘what’ of the personal without all the henads doing so as well, each in their own way.”
― Steven Dillon, Pagan Portals - Polytheism: A Platonic Approach

“it is more the case that a thing’s self is what a henad looks like through the lens of limitation than that a thing’s self is in some way independently established, albeit intrinsically containing or imitative of a henad.”
― Steven Dillon, Pagan Portals - Polytheism: A Platonic Approach

“For Zeus, all things are participants of Zeuseity, and unique ways of being zeusical. For Odin, all things are participants of Odinity, and unique ways of being odinic. Each God constitutes an exhaustive and complete cosmos wherein she is the ultimate form of Self for each self.”
― Steven Dillon, Pagan Portals - Polytheism: A Platonic Approach

“As Proclus said, “each of the gods is the universe in his own different way,” (On Timaeus, II.308.3-4; 162).”
― Steven Dillon, Pagan Portals - Polytheism: A Platonic Approach

“It is important to emphasize that this is a level of reality rather than an event at some point in time: it is that layer of any thing’s makeup at which it is in the most general sense a mixture or combination of ‘who’ and ‘what’. This emphasis will safeguard us from making two errors. First, we should not think of the grounding provided for by the Gods as a creation: the Gods are not doing anything, strictly speaking, they are simply being. As such, it takes no time for the Gods to constitute things, they are hardly performing an action in the conventional sense of the term here. In this vein, they undergo no change in constituting things as they otherwise would if they transitioned from a state of not doing so to doing so. Second, and on a related note, it is not as if the Gods grounded Nature in some initial state in order to get things going, so to speak, only to then withdraw and allow the machine to run on its own: there could be nothing around to do anything if the Gods were not there providing the ground for it to be itself at every moment in which it is.”
― Steven Dillon, Pagan Portals - Polytheism: A Platonic Approach

“The Gist: Each God is both the subject of whom the other Gods are predicated and a predicate for whom another God is the subject. Qua subject, the God is incommunicable and functions as a ‘who’. But, qua predicate, she is communicable and functions as a ‘what’. The introduction here of ‘what’ represents the most general layer of Nature.”
― Steven Dillon, Pagan Portals - Polytheism: A Platonic Approach

“It may help to give a concrete example. Consider that according to polycentricity it is each God qua herself that is what all the other Gods have in common, rather than some ‘thing’, like a divine nature. That is, it is not divinity which the Gods have in common, but, say, Zeuseity, Odinity, Ganasheity, etc., depending on which God is in the subject position. And this is what it is for a God qua subject to function as a non-complexifying predicate: it is for, say, Zeus to function as Zeuseity. It could be said that no single God is privileged in this position, but it may be better to say that each God is privileged in this position. In Zeus, Odin is zeusical; in Odin, Zeus is odinical, as are all things, or so we shall argue in the next section. For now, we shall be content to conclude that part of what it is to be a henad at all just is to be an utterly unique way of being a multitude of henads, such that polytheism is included in the very notion of being a henad, ineffable or beyond Nature.”
― Steven Dillon, Pagan Portals - Polytheism: A Platonic Approach

“As such, the henads have each other in common by being each other. To be a henad is to be a way of being a multitude of henads; it is to be polycentric.”
― Steven Dillon, Pagan Portals - Polytheism: A Platonic Approach

“Linguistically, subjects are described by predicates. As such, if we were to look at a subject without any predicates whatsoever, it would be indescribable. It is a categorical mistake to try and describe a subject without using predicates: we cannot describe subjects with subjects. The statement “Jack is Jill” does not predicate Jill or Jack. If anything, it identifies the two.”
― Steven Dillon, Pagan Portals - Polytheism: A Platonic Approach

“For one to not be any type of thing is for there to be nothing more to her than herself: were she to have anything added to her that is not just herself, such as properties, features or characteristics, she would be some type of thing; namely, the type of thing that bears those properties, features or characteristics. We shall refer to such a one throughout this work as a ‘henad’ or as being ‘henadic’, so that these terms will refer to one precisely in the respect in which she is a one for whom there is nothing more to her than herself. She is, as it were, purely ‘who’ she is and for that very reason, utterly ineffable.”
― Steven Dillon, Pagan Portals - Polytheism: A Platonic Approach

“Thus, for example, mental or moral properties might be thought to transcend various parts of Nature – such as space or time – but would nevertheless remain parts of Nature themselves because they only obtain or subsist in relation to yet other parts of Nature, such as embodied minds or actions.”
― Steven Dillon, Pagan Portals - Polytheism: A Platonic Approach

“Using science as a guide to what sorts of things count as natural or not, we come to understand that whatever else may be said of Nature it is at least sensible and intelligible, so that according to theism reality is not just sensible and intelligible but also ineffable. However, to be ineffable is for one to be so utterly individual that there is nothing more to her than herself to be described as: she has no properties, features or characteristics that are not just herself. Theism thus amounts to a view on which there is someone who is utterly unique because she is beyond Nature.”
― Steven Dillon, Pagan Portals - Polytheism: A Platonic Approach