This implies that the prefix "neo-" has nothing to do with the original—with that which was authentic; in essence, this movement ought to have been called something else.
This is the primary argument put forward by many contemporary historians of philosophy, who are in complete agreement with you. Indeed, if one applies the criterion of strict fidelity to the original, the term "Neoplatonism" is misleading. One could just as easily call them "Plotinians" or "theurgists."
Nevertheless, the connection to the original doctrine was not entirely lost: it was a relationship akin to the transmission of "genetic material"—material that had, however, undergone a mutation. It was not an arbitrary or entirely different philosophy—and here is why:
1. The architecture of the system remained Platonic
Although they altered the method (by introducing elements of magic and the miraculous), the very structure of their thought remained strictly Platonic.
• The distinction between the sensible world (the realm of matter) and the intelligible world (the realm of forms/ideas) remained the foundation of everything.
• The ultimate goal remained the same: the liberation of the soul from the shackles of the body and its return to its source. Simply put, rather than ascending a staircase by means of reason (as Plato did), they attempted to "soar" upward by using the "elevator" of theurgy.
2. The illusion of "authenticity"
The Neoplatonists themselves did not believe they were offering anything new. They lived in an era (Late Antiquity) when anything old was automatically perceived as true and authoritative, while anything new was viewed with suspicion.
• For their theories to carry authority, they had to be presented as the "correct interpretation" of Plato’s ideas. • Had they been named differently, they would have lost the intellectual legitimacy conferred upon them by the name of a great philosopher.
The prefix "neo-" as a historical tool for differentiation
As previously mentioned, the term "Neoplatonism" itself did not exist during that era; it was introduced by German scholars in the 19th century. Historians faced a need similar to one you might experience yourself: they realized that this system had evolved to such an extent that it could no longer simply be called "Platonism." Rather than coining an entirely new term, however, they added the prefix "neo-" to point back to its original roots. In essence, the prefix "neo-" functions much like a surname: it indicates your lineage, yet it offers no guarantee that you will resemble your great-grandfather—neither in character nor in your actions.
Would you like to explore whether a similar "departure" from the original source has occurred in other "neo-" movements—such as Neo-Marxism or contemporary neoliberalism?
The fight against Newspeak
Moderator: notmartha
Re: The fight against Newspeak
I think you might be slightly misleading people; Plato sought to show others that they were being deceived, and he was certainly not on the side of those in power. In a way, you could be compared to Plato—someone who wants to convey something to people, something previously unknown to them. One must be very careful when it comes to philosophy. Best of luck to you, and thanks again for your hard work.