(Image: From the Wikipedia page: Tesseract - Created by Jason Hise with Maya and Macromedia Fireworks. A 3D projection of an 8-cell performing a simple rotation about a plane which bisects the figure from front-left to back-right and top to bottom. Wikimedia Commons)
It's been said that religion is the cause of wars in our shared world. As far as I can see, there are some people who have religious beliefs and can still live and let others live; there are many others who can't rest until their beliefs become universal, and won't stop at anything until this is possible. So, maybe religion isn't the real cause of wars, but it's the way some people need to make everything fit a perfect order, an idealistic view of the way things should be, if only everything and everyone were completely controllable, and complexities could be eradicated, or reduced to elegant, symmetrical, perfect simplicity. Perhaps the question, then, should be: Why do some people need reality to prove itself to be perfect, to the point of intolerance? It's not as if the world will crumble if it doesn't reflect our perfect vision of the way the world ought to be; the sun still rises and sets each day, and changes occur whether we like it or not. It's as if we expect the world we see to be a mirror, a reflection of ourselves and our minds, not something that exists outside of ourselves. Maybe perfectionism is a form of narcissism, and certain personalities are more drawn to a religion that appears to be something other than monistic but in fact is. Monism can take on many faces, and I believe the math religion, or sacred geometry, which can be considered a fringe theory under the New Age umbrella, is one of those paths.
Is Plato Code a doorway to another The Secret, Blavatsky's root race theory or Glenn Beckish conspiracies? I'm not sure, but I think it can be for some people. My searches for clues as to what the Plato Code might mean have led me where I did not want to go, like this site promoting Darwinism, which, is not the same thing as Darwin's theory of evolution, but, better known today as social darwinism, theories related to Nazism. Here's an excerpt from the article: "Darwinian evolution becomes a veneer of adaptation that depends on pre-existing and universal harmonic laws intrinsic to Nature.", from which point, the discussion turns to - you guessed it - Pythagoras' 3:2 ratio and harmonic patterns in the human body! Why do we have five fingers on each hand? Why, it must have something to do with the pentatonic scale, since they both have to do with the number five...it's a universal harmonic law! I don't think it's an important question, and honestly, I find references to the proportions of the human body as some kind of map to find proof of universal truth grotesque. Even seemingly innocuous talks of chakras and correlating color frequencies lead to "harmonically guided social evolution" and how "harmonic patterns truly are the grand scientific musical template for all coherent systems in Nature, repeated over and over in all things, especially life – yet,they remain completely ignored and written off as happenstance by modern evolutionary theory." Weren't there reasons why modern science writes off 19th century darwinism as pseudoscience? Many people were killed for mystical beliefs such as these, and we should not forget.
I think it's cool that Dr. Jay Kennedy found a pattern in Plato's works which could be seen as allegorical, but beyond creative writing, I don't see why we need to read into the patterns to find some new revelation. I found countless references related to Plato, Pythagoras, Fibonacci code, A440Hz, A432, UFOs, pyramids, etc., but in the end, it's back to "harmony" in symmetry (which is why neoclassical aesthetics always featured symmetry in architecture, and called asymmetrical modern art "degenerate"), how the "goal" of evolution is to find "harmonious" things and, following that logic, to discard the rest. Their idea of natural selection is not natural - it's idealistic and controlled, like how, in the classical world of music, they tell musicians how to feel music; you don't get to - they tell you what to feel and you follow rules. Respected institutions tell you how the composers felt when they wrote the pieces, and you follow their interpretation of those original feelings as their vessel. While classical training yields excellent technical skills, and while there is such thing as what we call harmony in music, what actually is harmonious is subjective (and a propagandist-photographer like Leni Riefenstahl could tell you how images can be manipulated to fit, or not fit, so-called standards of ideal beauty, to discriminate against groups of people with, just like music snobs write off pop music as garbage - it's universal!). These are ideas that lead to discrimination through our perceptions of aesthetics, not natural science.
The article seems to indicate that world peace can come if we can reintroduce Pythagorean musica universalis and sacred geometry as respectable, noble science. What an ideal New Age it would be, to have everything in Order! But this can be a dangerous form of futurism, a zeitgeist of the past. We need to remember that Plato is known today as a philosopher of science, not a mathematician, musician nor scientist. Plato's school of thought is called Idealism, and Idealism is a form of monism.
From Definition of Monism (wordiq.com):
Monism in religion
For some, monism may also have religious/spiritual implications. Recognizing this, some inveigh against the 'dangers of monism,' asserting that in order to resolve all things to a single substrate, one dissolves God in the process.
Others say that the "single substrate" is God. Theological arguments can be made for this within Christianity, for example the Roman Catholic doctrine of "divine simplicity", as well as in many other religions (Hinduism and Judaism in particular).
Historically, monism has been promoted in spiritual terms on several occasions, notably by Ernst Haeckel. To the dismay of some modern observers, Haeckel's various ideas often had components of social darwinism and scientific racism.
"Even the smartest and best-educated people happily accept the contradictory belief that space is both curved (Einstein) AND an empty void." The Suppression of Ancient Harmonic Science - by Richard Merrick, Tokenrock.com
"Although the basic idea is intuitively simple to visualize, solving Einstein's equations is not, and even today nearly a century after first being written down they have only been solved in a limited number of cases. The simplest is when there is no energy momentum, in which case there is no curvature, the universe is flat. There are also solutions in which space-time contains no matter and yet is not flat. Whereas this runs counter to the naive philosophies of previous centuries, in general relativity this can occur due to the fact that signals propagate at the finite speed of light, c, rather than instantaneously. If something happens that causes the distribution of energy suddenly change, such as a supernova explosion or a star collapsing to form a black hole, the gravitational waves will radiate outwards at the speed of light. Gravitational fields are themselves full of energy that spread onwards. If the original material source of the gravitational wave is removed, the wave can continue to spread. So one could imagine the region of the universe devoid of matter but whose space-time is rippling with gravitational waves. So much for the emptiness of the void!" -- The Void by F. E. Close
"Although Aristotle himself had more pluralistic tendencies than monistic ones, but his followers in Mediaeval philosophy had turned his tenets into a static monistic system. In contrast, the actual history of dynamic monism starts with Hegel which even won the Catholic Church around the end of 19th century." Marxist Thought & Monism - ghandchi.com
Here are related links, if you're interested in how circular thinking exists not only in the religious world but in the scientific as well:
"The classic philosophical treatment of the problem of induction was given by the Scottish philosopher David Hume. Hume highlighted the fact that our everyday functioning depends on drawing uncertain conclusions from our relatively limited experiences rather than on deductively valid arguments. For example, we believe that bread will nourish us because it has done so in the past, despite no guarantee that it will do so. However, Hume argued that it is impossible to justify inductive reasoning. Inductive reasoning certainly cannot be justified deductively, and so our only option is to justify it inductively. However, to justify induction inductively is circular. Therefore, it is impossible to justify induction." -- Problem of induction
The Inductive (Scientific) Method
The difference between deductive reasoning and inductive reasoning is important to understand (also see scientific method), to understand how they are used to prove or disprove metaphysical theories.
Science Historian Cracks the 'Plato Code' - Pink Manhattan July 01, 2010
Plato Code: Just Intonation and Fibonacci Code? - Pink Manhattan July 02, 2010
Plato Code, Pythagorean 729 and Vincenzo Galilei - Pink Manhattan July 06, 2010
Added on November 26, 2010: Prince Charles Explores 'Mysterious Unity' Of The Universe In New Book - Pink Manhattan