From Goodreads
I can't say that I enjoyed this book more than The Circling Song because there isn't much to enjoy about this book. It's not bad in the sense that it is poorly written. In fact there are passages that are exceptionally well written.
"Now I had learnt that honour required large sums of money to protect it, but that large sums of money could not be obtained without losing one's honour"
"I am speaking the truth. And truth is savage and dangerous".
"I only arrived at the savage, primitive truths of life after years of struggle. For it is only very rarely that people can arrive at the simple, but awesome and powerful truths of life after one no longer fears death. For death and truth are similar in that they both require a great courage if one wishes to face them".
It's beautiful writing, and like The Circling Song the story echoes itself and with each echo one sees more of the savage truth being unveiled. Having read the other book I was more prepared for thsi one, but it's still not a fun read. It reminds me a bit of the movie Dogville, especially with all the rape and the power structures between men and women ending in a reversal by the end. Like Dogville too, it's a good piece of work that I don't see me picking up again any time in the near future.
In some ways Firdaus is a bit of a stoic saint, suffering, but rising above the suffering. Her outlook on life as suffering and suffering as the path to truth have the feel of Stoicism about it. However, she has to have a final, explosive act of passion to move from the dissociative state to the state of enlightenment that doesn't quite fit the mold. But then again, Marcus Aurelius killed more than a single pimp. Firdaus is a character that is hard to empathize with, but she was made so by the male dominated society that was both the setting and the impetus for her abuse. I don't want to make light of anybody's suffering, but this book details a much more graphic and horrific situation than what more contemporary and Western feminist writers are having to deal with at the moment. It's probably wrong of me to look at the world with a sliding scale approach to oppression, but it's hard not to read something like this book and compare it to the railings against mansplaining or the fight over whether women athletes should be paid as much as their male counterparts. I'm sure some of this comes from a bit of a chauvinist way of thinking; but, it feels as though it is rooted in reality and common sense.
A comparison between this and Aristophane's Lysistrata would be an interesting endeavor.
Showing posts with label Marcus Aurelius. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Marcus Aurelius. Show all posts
Thursday, September 26, 2019
Tuesday, September 24, 2019
Stoicism
The History of Western Philosophy
Bertrand Russell
Chapter XXVIII Stoicism
Zeno, the founder of Stoicism was a materialist who combined Cynicism with Heraclitus. Later, Stoicism took on a bit of Platonism and eventually materialism died out.
Stoicism is the least Greek form of philosophy with the earliest Stoics coming from Syria and the later ones being primarily Roman.
Zeno was primarily concerned with virtue and ethics. Everything else was important only in how it pertained to virtue.
Zeno denied the existence of chance. Zeno believed in a determinism that was rigid, but set up by a beneficent creator through natural laws.
"In the life of an individual man, virtue is the sole good; such things as health, happiness,
possessions, are of no account. Since virtue resides in the will, everything really good or bad in a
man's life depends only upon himself. He may become poor, but what of it? He can still be virtuous. A tyrant may put him in prison, but he can still persevere in living in harmony with Nature. He may be sentenced to death, but he can die nobly, like Socrates" (Russell, 254-55).
There is a coldness to Stoicism as not only bad passions are condemned, but all passions.
"The Stoic is not virtuous in order to do good, but does good in order to
be virtuous" (Russell, 256).
"Kant--who resembles them--says that you must be kind to your brother, not because you are fond of him, but because the moral law enjoins kindness; I doubt, however, whether, in private life, he lived down to this precept" (Russell, 256).
Gradually stoicism incorporated other elements and became Platonic in nature under Panaetius (who in turn influenced Cicero). Under Posidonius (circa 135 - 51 BC) the Platonic element was stronger in Stoicism then in the Skeptical theories present at the Academy.
The three Roman Stoics: Seneca, Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius were much more important historically than philosophically.
Seneca turned out to be the tutor of Nero and was forced to commit suicide in A.D. 65. His dying legacy of a virtuous life remained important to his followers and to later Christians.
Epictetus, a slave who flourished between 60 and 100 AD was originally a slave and then served as a minister for the emperors until Domitian banished all philosophers.
Marcus Aurelius (A.D. 121 - 180) was an emperor. His Meditations were a personal journal of Stoic virtue.
Stoicism is a philosophy of a tired age, not a hopeful one. Stoicism suited both Marcus Aurelius and Epictetus because it was a philosophy of survival.
"If we understand that virtue is the only true good, we shall see that no real evil can befall us" (Russell, 263).
"Every man is an actor in a play, in which God has assigned the parts; it is our duty to perform our part worthily, whatever it may be" (Russell, 264).
Aurelius taught that life in harmony with the universe is what was good and one should act accordingly.
Aurelius taught that all men were brothers and that we are to love them even when they do wrong because they only do wrong out of ignorance.
Although Stoics were mostly concerned with ethics, they made great strides in the theory of knowledge as well.
The theory of knowledge avoided Plato's distrust of the perceptions. They concluded that while the perceptions might not be certain, they are probable on the whole and worthy of trust.
The Stoics also believed in innate ideas and principles.
The Stoic notion of the equality of man and the doctrine of natural law, when backed by the weight of Christianity saw the end of despotism in the 17th century.
Bertrand Russell
Chapter XXVIII Stoicism
Zeno, the founder of Stoicism was a materialist who combined Cynicism with Heraclitus. Later, Stoicism took on a bit of Platonism and eventually materialism died out.
Stoicism is the least Greek form of philosophy with the earliest Stoics coming from Syria and the later ones being primarily Roman.
Zeno was primarily concerned with virtue and ethics. Everything else was important only in how it pertained to virtue.
Zeno denied the existence of chance. Zeno believed in a determinism that was rigid, but set up by a beneficent creator through natural laws.
"In the life of an individual man, virtue is the sole good; such things as health, happiness,
possessions, are of no account. Since virtue resides in the will, everything really good or bad in a
man's life depends only upon himself. He may become poor, but what of it? He can still be virtuous. A tyrant may put him in prison, but he can still persevere in living in harmony with Nature. He may be sentenced to death, but he can die nobly, like Socrates" (Russell, 254-55).
There is a coldness to Stoicism as not only bad passions are condemned, but all passions.
"The Stoic is not virtuous in order to do good, but does good in order to
be virtuous" (Russell, 256).
"Kant--who resembles them--says that you must be kind to your brother, not because you are fond of him, but because the moral law enjoins kindness; I doubt, however, whether, in private life, he lived down to this precept" (Russell, 256).
Gradually stoicism incorporated other elements and became Platonic in nature under Panaetius (who in turn influenced Cicero). Under Posidonius (circa 135 - 51 BC) the Platonic element was stronger in Stoicism then in the Skeptical theories present at the Academy.
The three Roman Stoics: Seneca, Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius were much more important historically than philosophically.
Seneca turned out to be the tutor of Nero and was forced to commit suicide in A.D. 65. His dying legacy of a virtuous life remained important to his followers and to later Christians.
Epictetus, a slave who flourished between 60 and 100 AD was originally a slave and then served as a minister for the emperors until Domitian banished all philosophers.
Marcus Aurelius (A.D. 121 - 180) was an emperor. His Meditations were a personal journal of Stoic virtue.
Stoicism is a philosophy of a tired age, not a hopeful one. Stoicism suited both Marcus Aurelius and Epictetus because it was a philosophy of survival.
"If we understand that virtue is the only true good, we shall see that no real evil can befall us" (Russell, 263).
"Every man is an actor in a play, in which God has assigned the parts; it is our duty to perform our part worthily, whatever it may be" (Russell, 264).
Aurelius taught that life in harmony with the universe is what was good and one should act accordingly.
Aurelius taught that all men were brothers and that we are to love them even when they do wrong because they only do wrong out of ignorance.
Although Stoics were mostly concerned with ethics, they made great strides in the theory of knowledge as well.
The theory of knowledge avoided Plato's distrust of the perceptions. They concluded that while the perceptions might not be certain, they are probable on the whole and worthy of trust.
The Stoics also believed in innate ideas and principles.
The Stoic notion of the equality of man and the doctrine of natural law, when backed by the weight of Christianity saw the end of despotism in the 17th century.
Monday, February 18, 2008
Notes on Tolstoy, Introduction to Amiel's Journal (1893)
(Originally Written February 18, 2008 in the Journal)
Part III Introduction to Amiel's Journal (1893)
"A writer is precious and necessary for us only to the extent to which he reveals to us the inner labor of his soul... not the architectural structure in which usually, and I think perhaps always, distorting it, he packs his thoughts and feelings" (Maude, 14).
Amiel's undistinguished teaching career and his works poured into ready made molds (his lecture, treatises, and poems) are dead. But, his journal, which is formless is full of life, wisdom, instruction, and consolation will remain one of the best books ever written like other accidental works left to us by Marcus Aurelius, Pascal and Epictetus.
Pascal states there are three types of people:
1. Those who have found God and serve Him
2. Those who have not found him and are seeking him
3. Those who have not found him and are not seeking him
Tolstoy believes that this second category does not exist because those who are seeking and suffering have found God already. He states that Amiel's journal is a lifelong exposé of seeking God.
The power of Amiel's journal is it never ceases to be a search. He does not end at a truth; it is merely a search for it.
Part III Introduction to Amiel's Journal (1893)
"A writer is precious and necessary for us only to the extent to which he reveals to us the inner labor of his soul... not the architectural structure in which usually, and I think perhaps always, distorting it, he packs his thoughts and feelings" (Maude, 14).
Amiel's undistinguished teaching career and his works poured into ready made molds (his lecture, treatises, and poems) are dead. But, his journal, which is formless is full of life, wisdom, instruction, and consolation will remain one of the best books ever written like other accidental works left to us by Marcus Aurelius, Pascal and Epictetus.
Pascal states there are three types of people:
1. Those who have found God and serve Him
2. Those who have not found him and are seeking him
3. Those who have not found him and are not seeking him
Tolstoy believes that this second category does not exist because those who are seeking and suffering have found God already. He states that Amiel's journal is a lifelong exposé of seeking God.
The power of Amiel's journal is it never ceases to be a search. He does not end at a truth; it is merely a search for it.
Thursday, November 9, 2006
The Mystery Cults and the Roman Empire
(Originally written November 9, 2006 in Book 11)
The Medieval Mind
2nd Edition
W.T. Jones
Chapter 1 - The New Religious Orientation
"Secularism was perhaps the most pervasive characteristic of the classical mind" (Jones, 1).
The Classical mind focused on the questions of finding man's well-being in this world.
The Middle Ages shifted from self-reliance in this world to a focus on other-worldly interests.
Theology took the region as king of science, succeeding ethics and politics.
Science took a backseat as the view of man shifted from being self-sufficient to a diminished being.
Man's relationship to the supreme good of the supreme being became the focal point of twelve centuries.
Marcus Aurelius can be viewed as a turning point or a paradigm shift in thought.
Stoicism, otherworldliness, deprecation of this life, religious fervor, sense of sin, and notion of universal society can trace its roots to Aurelius. Aurelius can trace them too, but he marked a shift in the emphasis of these things.
The Mystery Cults
The new spirit of the age first emerged in full effect with the many Mystery Cults.
The Great Mother
Worship of the Great Mother was worship of the goddess Cybele.
It began as a fertility cult. Attis, lover of Cybele died and so Cybele mourned. This introduced death into the world. Attis was brought back to life and Cybele rejoiced. This brought the green back to earth.
Worshippers of Cybele fasted and flagellated themselves to mourn Attis' death every spring.
Another ritual to come out of this cult was the "taurobolium". This evolved into the religion of redemption. The "taurobolium" was performed by sacrificing a bull. A person would stand in a pit and the bull would be sacrificed above and the blood would run down on him. The ritual involved soaking one's self in blood and drinking it to purge himself of sins. A person was "reborn into eternity".
Isis and Osiris
This cult involved death and resurrection of a god, Osiris.
Osiris guaranteed salvation of the devout.
The frenzy of the Great Mother cult was noticeably absent from the Isis and Osiris cult. It was much more restrained involving only an idol and veil, no blood drinking or blood baptism.
Mithra
Mithraism was concerned with a savior god and worship for the reward of eternal life.
Mithraism was more sophisticated and involved a complex theology based on dualistic metaphysics.
The cult denied the Greek notion that the universe was explicable on a simple scientific notion.
Mithraism held that two principles are at work in the world:
1) Good = order
2) Evil = disorder
Each of these was not an actual force but a supernatural power. The world was a battleground for these two powers and man ought to side with the good as loyal soldiers.
Souls came to earth from heaven, but were imprisoned in bodies while on earth, if the soul was continent, loyal and devout it would return to heaven to be united with god.
If it does not return because it was bad it will suffer in hell for all eternity with demons.
Mithra was both judge and savior. He judged man's merits and demerits post-death. In the good outweighed the bad, he gave eternal life. If not, well...
The struggle of good and evil was eternal.
Mithra was associated with the Sun. His rituals were tied to solar events.
He was worshipped three times a day: dawn, noon and sunset. The seventh day of the week was very special and sacred. The big holiday in Mithraism was December 25, when he was reborn after the winter solstice.
Reception of the cults at Rome
The cults received mixed receptions in Rome. The Republican days saw them outlawed while the Empire days saw them heralded.
The Great Mother cult was credited for the turn around in the Punic wars, but her worship was limited by the Senate.
The worship of Isis was likewise limited by the Senate in 59, 58, 53, and 48 B.C. Her altar was decreed to be destroyed in 21 B.C. and the religion outlawed.
Despite sensational decrees and severe persecution the sect remained strong in the public and emperors even worshipped the Great Mother at later times.
Mithraism came to Rome via Persia but met little success for 100+ years. It then exploded under the Antonines and was picked up by the soldiers. It subsequently spread across the empire.
The initial resistance to the cult was due to the Roman conservatism of old. The ancient Roman religion was cold and the upper class had all but abandoned it by the time of Julius Caesar.
The Senate opposed the cults because of acceptance of them by the populace would disrupt the social order.
The cults exploded in popularity during the 3rd century AD due to the weak leadership of emperors post-Marcus Aurelius.
Diocletian radically altered the Empire in the late 3rd century and restored authority.
Politics, economics, literature and art experienced death in the 3rd century AD. The mood was despondent.
Diocletian's alterations caused an enormous but effective, bureaucracy. The Emperor now could control every inch of the Empire. People lost the sense of control of their own destiny.
The Medieval Mind
2nd Edition
W.T. Jones
Chapter 1 - The New Religious Orientation
"Secularism was perhaps the most pervasive characteristic of the classical mind" (Jones, 1).
The Classical mind focused on the questions of finding man's well-being in this world.
The Middle Ages shifted from self-reliance in this world to a focus on other-worldly interests.
Theology took the region as king of science, succeeding ethics and politics.
Science took a backseat as the view of man shifted from being self-sufficient to a diminished being.
Man's relationship to the supreme good of the supreme being became the focal point of twelve centuries.
Marcus Aurelius can be viewed as a turning point or a paradigm shift in thought.
Stoicism, otherworldliness, deprecation of this life, religious fervor, sense of sin, and notion of universal society can trace its roots to Aurelius. Aurelius can trace them too, but he marked a shift in the emphasis of these things.
The Mystery Cults
The new spirit of the age first emerged in full effect with the many Mystery Cults.
The Great Mother
Worship of the Great Mother was worship of the goddess Cybele.
It began as a fertility cult. Attis, lover of Cybele died and so Cybele mourned. This introduced death into the world. Attis was brought back to life and Cybele rejoiced. This brought the green back to earth.
Worshippers of Cybele fasted and flagellated themselves to mourn Attis' death every spring.
Another ritual to come out of this cult was the "taurobolium". This evolved into the religion of redemption. The "taurobolium" was performed by sacrificing a bull. A person would stand in a pit and the bull would be sacrificed above and the blood would run down on him. The ritual involved soaking one's self in blood and drinking it to purge himself of sins. A person was "reborn into eternity".
Isis and Osiris
This cult involved death and resurrection of a god, Osiris.
Osiris guaranteed salvation of the devout.
The frenzy of the Great Mother cult was noticeably absent from the Isis and Osiris cult. It was much more restrained involving only an idol and veil, no blood drinking or blood baptism.
Mithra
Mithraism was concerned with a savior god and worship for the reward of eternal life.
Mithraism was more sophisticated and involved a complex theology based on dualistic metaphysics.
The cult denied the Greek notion that the universe was explicable on a simple scientific notion.
Mithraism held that two principles are at work in the world:
1) Good = order
2) Evil = disorder
Each of these was not an actual force but a supernatural power. The world was a battleground for these two powers and man ought to side with the good as loyal soldiers.
Souls came to earth from heaven, but were imprisoned in bodies while on earth, if the soul was continent, loyal and devout it would return to heaven to be united with god.
If it does not return because it was bad it will suffer in hell for all eternity with demons.
Mithra was both judge and savior. He judged man's merits and demerits post-death. In the good outweighed the bad, he gave eternal life. If not, well...
The struggle of good and evil was eternal.
Mithra was associated with the Sun. His rituals were tied to solar events.
He was worshipped three times a day: dawn, noon and sunset. The seventh day of the week was very special and sacred. The big holiday in Mithraism was December 25, when he was reborn after the winter solstice.
Reception of the cults at Rome
The cults received mixed receptions in Rome. The Republican days saw them outlawed while the Empire days saw them heralded.
The Great Mother cult was credited for the turn around in the Punic wars, but her worship was limited by the Senate.
The worship of Isis was likewise limited by the Senate in 59, 58, 53, and 48 B.C. Her altar was decreed to be destroyed in 21 B.C. and the religion outlawed.
Despite sensational decrees and severe persecution the sect remained strong in the public and emperors even worshipped the Great Mother at later times.
Mithraism came to Rome via Persia but met little success for 100+ years. It then exploded under the Antonines and was picked up by the soldiers. It subsequently spread across the empire.
The initial resistance to the cult was due to the Roman conservatism of old. The ancient Roman religion was cold and the upper class had all but abandoned it by the time of Julius Caesar.
The Senate opposed the cults because of acceptance of them by the populace would disrupt the social order.
The cults exploded in popularity during the 3rd century AD due to the weak leadership of emperors post-Marcus Aurelius.
Diocletian radically altered the Empire in the late 3rd century and restored authority.
Politics, economics, literature and art experienced death in the 3rd century AD. The mood was despondent.
Diocletian's alterations caused an enormous but effective, bureaucracy. The Emperor now could control every inch of the Empire. People lost the sense of control of their own destiny.
Book Notes - Marcus Aurelius
(Originally written November 9, 2006 in Book 11)
Marcus Aurelius
Marcus Aurelius (121-180 AD) was a nobleman adopted into the Emperor line by Emperor Hadrian.
Aurelius became Emperor in 161. Despite being a peaceful man his reign was plagued with war with barbarians in the frontier and quelling revolutions.
He instituted a host of social and political reforms.
"His reign and that of Antoninus Pius were, according to Gibbon, 'possibly the only period of history in which the happiness of a great people was the sole object of government'" (Jones, 341).
Aurelius' son and heir, Commodus was incompetent and violent. He marks the beginning of the fall of the Empire.
Aurelius marks the end of an epoch.
Aurelius' Meditations were not intended for instruction, but for his own personal use.
They were random reflections of his doubts and indecisions and faith in philosophy.
While Aurelius does not provide an encompassing philosophical view he does show how deeply Stoicism had penetrated Roman thought.
Conception of Nature
Nature, for Aurelius, was a cosmos that persisted is a Heraclitean flux. Change was orderly and regular. The universe was rational and intelligent. The universe was one living Being. It possessed a single soul.
Man was a portion of this rational cosmos. His reason was how he participated in the rationality of the universe.
Emphasis on Social Duties
Aurelius' temperament and outgoing nature caused him to interpret Stoicism differently than Epictetus.
Aurelius' mantra of that all men as fellow creatures led him to a number of social and political duties.
Plato's and Aristotle's view of man as both rational and civic was used by Aurelius, but Aurelius added the concept of obligation to it.
Aurelius lived in a time when the culture was tired and discouraged. Since their was no real hope, the appeal of Aurelius' brand of Stoicism was to "stiffen the back and endure until the end" (Jones, 343).
Aurelius was wont to say that we are to welcome dear as inevitable, but he thought it was wrong to commit suicide.
The Stoics maintained the notion of moderation. Aurelius was the last to hold this notion for a long time.
Stoicism as an Operative Ideal in Roman Life
The world of the Romans was dying with Aurelius' death. The old Greek schools were to begin to decay.
Law
The law was instituted with new changes due to the change in Roman society. The old ways were finished and the freeing of tons of slaves caused a new law to be needed.
Charity
Humanizing became prevalent in this age.
Charity became commonplace in Roman society.
Jus Naturale
Juris prudence was introduced to the notion of natural law because of Stoicism's influence.
Natural law demanded that everyone be under one law, not just citizens.
Marcus Aurelius
Marcus Aurelius (121-180 AD) was a nobleman adopted into the Emperor line by Emperor Hadrian.
Aurelius became Emperor in 161. Despite being a peaceful man his reign was plagued with war with barbarians in the frontier and quelling revolutions.
He instituted a host of social and political reforms.
"His reign and that of Antoninus Pius were, according to Gibbon, 'possibly the only period of history in which the happiness of a great people was the sole object of government'" (Jones, 341).
Aurelius' son and heir, Commodus was incompetent and violent. He marks the beginning of the fall of the Empire.
Aurelius marks the end of an epoch.
Aurelius' Meditations were not intended for instruction, but for his own personal use.
They were random reflections of his doubts and indecisions and faith in philosophy.
While Aurelius does not provide an encompassing philosophical view he does show how deeply Stoicism had penetrated Roman thought.
Conception of Nature
Nature, for Aurelius, was a cosmos that persisted is a Heraclitean flux. Change was orderly and regular. The universe was rational and intelligent. The universe was one living Being. It possessed a single soul.
Man was a portion of this rational cosmos. His reason was how he participated in the rationality of the universe.
Emphasis on Social Duties
Aurelius' temperament and outgoing nature caused him to interpret Stoicism differently than Epictetus.
Aurelius' mantra of that all men as fellow creatures led him to a number of social and political duties.
Plato's and Aristotle's view of man as both rational and civic was used by Aurelius, but Aurelius added the concept of obligation to it.
Aurelius lived in a time when the culture was tired and discouraged. Since their was no real hope, the appeal of Aurelius' brand of Stoicism was to "stiffen the back and endure until the end" (Jones, 343).
Aurelius was wont to say that we are to welcome dear as inevitable, but he thought it was wrong to commit suicide.
The Stoics maintained the notion of moderation. Aurelius was the last to hold this notion for a long time.
Stoicism as an Operative Ideal in Roman Life
The world of the Romans was dying with Aurelius' death. The old Greek schools were to begin to decay.
Law
The law was instituted with new changes due to the change in Roman society. The old ways were finished and the freeing of tons of slaves caused a new law to be needed.
Charity
Humanizing became prevalent in this age.
Charity became commonplace in Roman society.
Jus Naturale
Juris prudence was introduced to the notion of natural law because of Stoicism's influence.
Natural law demanded that everyone be under one law, not just citizens.
Saturday, July 15, 2006
The Stoics
(Originally written July 15, 2006 in Book 4)
The History of Western Philosophy
Bertrand Russell
Chapter 28 - Stoicism
Stoicism was founded by Zeno, a contemporary of Epicurus, but the doctrine evolved much more gradually than Epicureanism. Zeno's Stoicism was a fusion of Cynicism and Heraclitus. By the time of Marcus Aurelius (a stoic), it had morphed into a system with Platonic and anti-materialistic elements.
Stoicism was less Greek than any other Greek philosophy. The earliest Stoics were mostly Syrian, the later were mostly Roman.
Zeno was a Phoenician from Cyprus, born in the second half of the 4th century BC.
Stoicism of Zeno formed around Cynicism but adopted some of the Academy's views and looked at Socrates as a saint.
Virtue was ultimately important to Zeno. Metaphysical subtleties were of no use for him.
Zeno did not doubt the senses because he thought that was useless and absurd. Zeno denied chance and nature was determined by strict natural laws.
He believed that everything was cyclical.
God was the soul of the sensible world.
All things possessed some bits of God, the Divine Fire.
Nature was one integrated system of many individual parts.
Free will produced virtue when one acted in accordance with nature.
Physical things were of no merit when concerned to virtue. Virtue can be found in all men, regardless of their physical surroundings.
Not just bad passions are condemned by the Stoic; all passions are.
Sympathy for death was bad. Friendship is of no account. Politics are useful, but unimportant. Nothing matters except virtue.
Zeno condemned the building of temples because there is no virtue in buildings.
He believed in astrology and divination.
Cleanthes of Asso immediately carried on the Stoic torch. He is known for 2 main things:
1) Condemning Aristarchus of Samos for promulgating a heliocentric belief.
2) The "Hymn to Zeus'.
Chrysippus (280-207 BC) followed Cleanthes and systematized Stoicism.
He believed that if a thing was to exist, the opposite necessarily exists. Thus, since good exists, evil necessarily exists.
He held logic to be fundamental.
He held an empirical theory of knowledge based on perception.
Post-Chrysippus, stoicism was altered by two men, Panaetius and Posidonius.
Panaetius introduced a lot of Platonic elements into Stoicism. He abandoned all materialism.
Panaetius befriended Scipio and influenced Cicero. Posidonius taught and further influenced Cicero.
Cicero brought Stoicism to the Romans.
Posidonius was a Syrian Greek and escaped the anarchy of Syria upon the collapse of Seleucid Empire. He moved to Athens.
He traveled extensively in Western Europe, North Africa and saw the heads on pikes on the Barbaric Spanish coast.
He was scientific, an extraordinary astronomer, and a historian of note.
He further combined Stoicism and Platonic elements.
By the way, a cover up of the Mary Magdelene by the Catholic Church is appalling. Obviously she was Jesus' husband. Just look at the Gnostic Gospels for the truth! (sarcasm obviously)
Posidonius believed the soul did not perish with the body (as most Stoics did) but rose into the air. The more virtuous a soul, the higher it rose. Extremely sinful souls were reincarnated.
Te most virtuous souls floated among the stars and helped out the living; thus, his belief in astrology.
Posidonius may have laid the foundation for Gnosticism.
The Copernican theory, not Christianity, finally doomed his philosophy.
The three most important Stoics (historically, not philosophically) were Romans:
1) Seneca - a preacher
2) Epictetus - a slave
3) Marcus Aurelius - an emperor.
Seneca lived from 3 BC - AD 65. He was a politician in Rome, though of Spanish origin. He was banished by the Emperor Claudius but was later recalled to tutor the future Roman Emperor, Nero.
Seneca amassed riches by usury in Roman Britain.
He was accused of treason by Nero and permitted to commit suicide.
He died in a Stoically virtuous way leaving 'the example of a virtuous life to his grieving family'.
Some Church Fathers considered him a Christian. St. Jerome believed he correspond with St. Paul.
Epictetus (AD 60 - 100) was born a slave. He was lame (probably from cruel punishment). He was banished along with all other philosophers by Emperor Domitian.
Marcus Aurelius (AD 121-180) became emperor in 161. He devoted himself to be a Stoic Emperor.
He persecuted Christians (Russell contends as a political necessity) for not bowing to the State religion.
His life and ring were married by horrors: wars, an immoral wife (accused), earthquakes, rebellion, pestilence, etc.
Stoic beliefs proved reasonably consistent, in that virtue is not dependent on outside circumstances. As emperor, Marcus Aurelius and the slave Epictetus held nearly identical philosophical views.
The Stoic ethic fit the hopeless age in which Aurelius lived.
"If we understand that virtue is the only true good, we shall see that no real evil can befall us" (Russell, 263).
All men are sons of God but doomed to death. Stoics go out to death without 'whining' or 'groaning'.
A Stoic is one who is sick yet happy, in trouble yet happy, dying yet happy...
Epictetus hold that one should love his enemies.
"Every man is an actor in a play, in which God has assigned the parts; it is our duty to perform our part worthily, whatever it may be" (Russell, 264).
Marcus Aurelius held that since life is fragile, virtue must always be asserted.
He regards the universe as a closely knit whole and as one living being, one substance, and one soul [pantheism?].
Despite his status as Emperor and the preeminence of the Roman people, he held all men to be brothers.
Stoic ethics and theology contradict on one point. The universe is wholly deterministic, yet man has free will. Then man can do neither harm nor good to another, but the virtuous good will is the sole good.
The Stoics held that these contradictions were of necessity because it was impossible for all men to live up to their rigorous standards. They offered lower standards to those who could not live up to the high ones.
Kant's ethical standards are similar to the Stoics (according to Russell, but I don't see the correlation).
While Stoics concerned themselves mainly in Ethics they advanced progress in two main areas:
1) Theory of knowledge
2) Doctrine of natural law and natural rights
The Stoic theory of knowledge accepted perception in the face of Platonic theory.
King Ptolemy invited a Stoic by the name of Sphaerus to dinner and to embarrass him he gave Sphaerus a wax pomegranate to eat. The king laughed and pointed out the obvious deceptive nature of the senses. Sphaerus fired back that he had felt no certainty of it being real, but figured it unlikely that anything inedible would be served at a royal meal, thus shaming the king.
The Stoic theory of knowledge also included innate ideas and principles.
The History of Western Philosophy
Bertrand Russell
Chapter 28 - Stoicism
Stoicism was founded by Zeno, a contemporary of Epicurus, but the doctrine evolved much more gradually than Epicureanism. Zeno's Stoicism was a fusion of Cynicism and Heraclitus. By the time of Marcus Aurelius (a stoic), it had morphed into a system with Platonic and anti-materialistic elements.
Stoicism was less Greek than any other Greek philosophy. The earliest Stoics were mostly Syrian, the later were mostly Roman.
Zeno was a Phoenician from Cyprus, born in the second half of the 4th century BC.
Stoicism of Zeno formed around Cynicism but adopted some of the Academy's views and looked at Socrates as a saint.
Virtue was ultimately important to Zeno. Metaphysical subtleties were of no use for him.
Zeno did not doubt the senses because he thought that was useless and absurd. Zeno denied chance and nature was determined by strict natural laws.
He believed that everything was cyclical.
God was the soul of the sensible world.
All things possessed some bits of God, the Divine Fire.
Nature was one integrated system of many individual parts.
Free will produced virtue when one acted in accordance with nature.
Physical things were of no merit when concerned to virtue. Virtue can be found in all men, regardless of their physical surroundings.
Not just bad passions are condemned by the Stoic; all passions are.
Sympathy for death was bad. Friendship is of no account. Politics are useful, but unimportant. Nothing matters except virtue.
Zeno condemned the building of temples because there is no virtue in buildings.
He believed in astrology and divination.
Cleanthes of Asso immediately carried on the Stoic torch. He is known for 2 main things:
1) Condemning Aristarchus of Samos for promulgating a heliocentric belief.
2) The "Hymn to Zeus'.
Chrysippus (280-207 BC) followed Cleanthes and systematized Stoicism.
He believed that if a thing was to exist, the opposite necessarily exists. Thus, since good exists, evil necessarily exists.
He held logic to be fundamental.
He held an empirical theory of knowledge based on perception.
Post-Chrysippus, stoicism was altered by two men, Panaetius and Posidonius.
Panaetius introduced a lot of Platonic elements into Stoicism. He abandoned all materialism.
Panaetius befriended Scipio and influenced Cicero. Posidonius taught and further influenced Cicero.
Cicero brought Stoicism to the Romans.
Posidonius was a Syrian Greek and escaped the anarchy of Syria upon the collapse of Seleucid Empire. He moved to Athens.
He traveled extensively in Western Europe, North Africa and saw the heads on pikes on the Barbaric Spanish coast.
He was scientific, an extraordinary astronomer, and a historian of note.
He further combined Stoicism and Platonic elements.
By the way, a cover up of the Mary Magdelene by the Catholic Church is appalling. Obviously she was Jesus' husband. Just look at the Gnostic Gospels for the truth! (sarcasm obviously)
Posidonius believed the soul did not perish with the body (as most Stoics did) but rose into the air. The more virtuous a soul, the higher it rose. Extremely sinful souls were reincarnated.
Te most virtuous souls floated among the stars and helped out the living; thus, his belief in astrology.
Posidonius may have laid the foundation for Gnosticism.
The Copernican theory, not Christianity, finally doomed his philosophy.
The three most important Stoics (historically, not philosophically) were Romans:
1) Seneca - a preacher
2) Epictetus - a slave
3) Marcus Aurelius - an emperor.
Seneca lived from 3 BC - AD 65. He was a politician in Rome, though of Spanish origin. He was banished by the Emperor Claudius but was later recalled to tutor the future Roman Emperor, Nero.
Seneca amassed riches by usury in Roman Britain.
He was accused of treason by Nero and permitted to commit suicide.
He died in a Stoically virtuous way leaving 'the example of a virtuous life to his grieving family'.
Some Church Fathers considered him a Christian. St. Jerome believed he correspond with St. Paul.
Epictetus (AD 60 - 100) was born a slave. He was lame (probably from cruel punishment). He was banished along with all other philosophers by Emperor Domitian.
Marcus Aurelius (AD 121-180) became emperor in 161. He devoted himself to be a Stoic Emperor.
He persecuted Christians (Russell contends as a political necessity) for not bowing to the State religion.
His life and ring were married by horrors: wars, an immoral wife (accused), earthquakes, rebellion, pestilence, etc.
Stoic beliefs proved reasonably consistent, in that virtue is not dependent on outside circumstances. As emperor, Marcus Aurelius and the slave Epictetus held nearly identical philosophical views.
The Stoic ethic fit the hopeless age in which Aurelius lived.
"If we understand that virtue is the only true good, we shall see that no real evil can befall us" (Russell, 263).
All men are sons of God but doomed to death. Stoics go out to death without 'whining' or 'groaning'.
A Stoic is one who is sick yet happy, in trouble yet happy, dying yet happy...
Epictetus hold that one should love his enemies.
"Every man is an actor in a play, in which God has assigned the parts; it is our duty to perform our part worthily, whatever it may be" (Russell, 264).
Marcus Aurelius held that since life is fragile, virtue must always be asserted.
He regards the universe as a closely knit whole and as one living being, one substance, and one soul [pantheism?].
Despite his status as Emperor and the preeminence of the Roman people, he held all men to be brothers.
Stoic ethics and theology contradict on one point. The universe is wholly deterministic, yet man has free will. Then man can do neither harm nor good to another, but the virtuous good will is the sole good.
The Stoics held that these contradictions were of necessity because it was impossible for all men to live up to their rigorous standards. They offered lower standards to those who could not live up to the high ones.
Kant's ethical standards are similar to the Stoics (according to Russell, but I don't see the correlation).
While Stoics concerned themselves mainly in Ethics they advanced progress in two main areas:
1) Theory of knowledge
2) Doctrine of natural law and natural rights
The Stoic theory of knowledge accepted perception in the face of Platonic theory.
King Ptolemy invited a Stoic by the name of Sphaerus to dinner and to embarrass him he gave Sphaerus a wax pomegranate to eat. The king laughed and pointed out the obvious deceptive nature of the senses. Sphaerus fired back that he had felt no certainty of it being real, but figured it unlikely that anything inedible would be served at a royal meal, thus shaming the king.
The Stoic theory of knowledge also included innate ideas and principles.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)