>>3 Well the transcendence vs immanence thing is not so much in things being out-of/in human control, but rather on the where "being" comes from. This is, does it come from something absolutely outside ourselves (transcendence), or something to which we belong to and it belongs to us (immanence). In immanence there is a shared "being" between all things, in transcendence "being" is given to things from somewhere else, and being is not shared between the things themselves, but in between things and their creator, or their source of being.
Also I don't understand why you say:
why do Western philosophers have such a stick up their ass when it comes to Platonism?
There are plenty of "western" philosophers who have a positive evaluation of Plato, several who are "neutral" on Plato, an others who will be completely against Plato. I guess you meant "continental" philosophers?
Well the transcendence vs immanence thing is not so much in things being out-of/in human control, but rather on the where "being" comes from. This is, does it come from something absolutely outside ourselves (transcendence), or something to which we belong to and it belongs to us (immanence). In immanence there is a shared "being" between all things, in transcendence "being" is given to things from somewhere else, and being is not shared between the things themselves, but in between things and their creator, or their source of being.
Also I don't understand why you say:
There are plenty of "western" philosophers who have a positive evaluation of Plato, several who are "neutral" on Plato, an others who will be completely against Plato. I guess you meant "continental" philosophers?