Letters from a Stoic 88 - On Liberal and Vocational Studies

On Liberal and Vocational Studies

The too-long-didn't-read (TLDR) of this letter is Seneca making the point that the study of wisdom and leading a wise life ought to be preeminent.  While the vocational learning may lead us to leading a wise life, it is less important.

Towards the beginning of the letter he writes of liberal and vocational studies:

Such studies are profit-bringing occupations, useful only in so far as they give the mind a preparation and do not engage it permanently. ... they are our apprenticeship, not our real work.

Said differently, the studies which lead to a living (e.g. a career or job) are simply a means to an end.  The end and primary focus ought to be the study of philosophy.

But there is only one really liberal study, – that which gives a man his liberty. It is the study of wisdom, and that is lofty, brave, and great-souled. All other studies are puny and puerile.

...

Certain persons have made up their minds that the point at issue with regard to the liberal studies is whether they make men good ... But which of these paves the way to virtue? ... what is there in all this that rids one of fear, roots out desire, or bridles the passions?

This is the sum-total of the letter.  The rest of it delves into various examples and rifts of the same tune.

Whether you study Homer, Hesiod, Hecuba, Helen, Achilles, Patroclus, Ulysses (Odysseus), music, math, business, real estate, farming, astronomy, medicine, carpentry or physics, nothing is as important is the study of living and dying well - which is philosophy.

In each of the examples above, he contrasts the learning of subjects with the learning of philosophy.  If, you learn something about one of the above subjects and can also apply that lesson to the study and learning of philosophy, perhaps there is use.  But all learning ought to be focused on wise living.

Below are various examples or questions which put the focus of learning on philosophy.

What, in your opinion, I say, would be the point in trying to determine the respective ages of Achilles and Patroclus?  Do you raise the question, "Through what regions did Ulysses stray?" instead of trying to prevent ourselves from going astray at all times?

...

Show me rather, by the example of Ulysses, how I am to love my country, my wife, my father, and how, even after suffering shipwreck, I am to sail toward these ends, honourable as they are.  Why try to discover whether Penelope was a pattern of purity, or whether she had the laugh on her contemporaries? Or whether she suspected that the man in her presence was Ulysses, before she knew it was he? Teach me rather what purity is, and how great a good we have in it, and whether it is situated in the body or in the soul.

And instead of going one by one, contrasting vocational questions with philosophical questions, I'll simply note the questions which philosophy attempts to answer.

[how to] bring my soul into harmony with itself, and let not my purposes be out of tune ... how, in the midst of adversity, I may keep from uttering a doleful note ... how to lay out what is enough for a man to own. ... how useless property is to any man who would find it the greatest misfortune if he should be required to reckon out, by his own wits, the amount of his holdings ...  how to share it with my brother? ...  how to lose [my lands] with a light heart ... how great [the mind] is, or how puny! You know what a straight line is; but how does it benefit you if you do not know what is straight in this life of ours?

...

I await the future in its entirety; and if there is any abatement in its severity, I make the most of it. If the morrow treats me kindly, it is a sort of deception; but it does not deceive me even at that. For just as I know that all things can happen, so I know, too, that they will not happen in every case. I am ready for favourable events in every case, but I am prepared for evil.

Liberal or vocational studies do have value and Seneca notes them.

"do the liberal studies contribute nothing to our welfare?" Very much in other respects, but nothing at all as regards virtue. For even these arts of which I have spoken, though admittedly of a low grade – depending as they do upon handiwork – contribute greatly toward the equipment of life, but nevertheless have nothing to do with virtue. And if you inquire, "Why, then, do we educate our children in the liberal studies?"  it is not because they can bestow virtue, but because they prepare the soul for the reception of virtue. Just as that "primary course,"  as the ancients called it, in grammar, which gave boys their elementary training, does not teach them the liberal arts, but prepares the ground for their early acquisition of these arts, so the liberal arts do not conduct the soul all the way to virtue, but merely set it going in that direction.

In sum, vocational studies and living prepare us to study the virtuous life - a philosophical life.

Philosophy alone delves into the question of the good.

There is but one thing that brings the soul to perfection – the unalterable knowledge of good and evil. But there is no other art which investigates good and evil.

And the good is found in excellence of soul and character.  And what leads to this excellence?  Moral virtues.  He spends some words discussing some important virtues.

Bravery is a scorner of things which inspire fear; it looks down upon, challenges, and crushes the powers of terror and all that would drive our freedom under the yoke.

...

Loyalty is the holiest good in the human heart.

...

Temperance controls our desires; some it hates and routs, others it regulates and restores to a healthy measure, nor does it ever approach our desires for their own sake. Temperance knows that the best measure of the appetites is not what you want to take, but what you ought to take.

Kindliness forbids you to be over-bearing towards your associates, and it forbids you to be grasping.

...

[philosophy teaches] teach simplicity, moderation and self-restraint, thrift and economy, and that kindliness which spares a neighbour's life as if it were one's own and knows that it is not for man to make wasteful use of his fellow-man.

...

Wisdom is a large and spacious thing. It needs plenty of free room. One must learn about things divine and human, the past and the future, the ephemeral and the eternal; and one must learn about Time.

Because there is so much to learn and practice in the art of living well, we ought to minimize the superfluous to be able to focus on the most important and only allow the essential study of vocational arts into our life.

And in order that these manifold and mighty subjects may have free entertainment in your soul, you must remove therefrom all superfluous things. Virtue will not surrender herself to these narrow bounds of ours; a great subject needs wide space in which to move. Let all other things be driven out, and let the breast be emptied to receive virtue.  "But it is a pleasure to be acquainted with many arts." Therefore let us keep only as much of them as is essential.

He opines on the people who desire to chase endless studies of vocational practices.

This desire to know more than is sufficient is a sort of intemperance.  Why? Because this unseemly pursuit of the liberal arts makes men troublesome, wordy, tactless, self-satisfied bores, who fail to learn the essentials just because they have learned the non-essentials.

Our mortal time is limited and everything which we do or study ought to be considered through the lens of limited time.  Therefore, prioritize the important over the unimportant.

Have I so far forgotten that useful saw "Save your time"? Must I know these things? And what may I choose not to know? ...  Apply the measure to the years of your life; they have no room for all these things.

He next takes aim at useless studies under the domain of philosophy.

I have been speaking so far of liberal studies; but think how much superfluous and unpractical matter the philosophers contain! Of their own accord they also have descended to establishing nice divisions of syllables, to determining the true meaning of conjunctions and prepositions; they have been envious of the scholars, envious of the mathematicians. They have taken over into their own art all the superfluities of these other arts; the result is that they know more about careful speaking than about careful living.

He takes so much umbrage with the study of these fluffy topics, he places them in a new category: non-knowledge.

The Pyrrhonean, Megarian, Eretrian, and Academic schools are all engaged in practically the same task; they have introduced a new knowledge, non-knowledge.

Speaking of these various philosophy schools, he wonders if it's better to sit in the dark or to have our eyes gouged out.

It is better, of course, to know useless things than to know nothing. One set of philosophers offers no light by which I may direct my gaze toward the truth; the other digs out my very eyes and leaves me blind. ... The whole universe is then a vain or deceptive shadow. I cannot readily say whether I am more vexed at those who would have it that we know nothing, or with those who would not leave us even this privilege.

Letters from a Stoic 39 - On Noble Aspirations

On Noble Aspirations

Before you were born, people were "working for your benefit."  Have you ever contemplated that idea?  We are born and injected with the philosophy (for better or for worse) of our parents and those who help to raise us.  We have no say in the matter of how they were raised philosophically.  For all we know, their philosophy in which they were raised or came to believe, was misguided and focused on the wrong things.  Some people are fortunate enough to have parents come to a correct understanding of what is good, and subsequently teach their children.  The rest of us simply stumble along and grasp at straws in the dark.

But perhaps the answer to this problem can be found in the writings and ideas of those who have spent a lifetime thinking, discussing and debating this important question.  This is what Seneca means, I think.  If a person's soul becomes "roused" enough to seek for what is the good, then there are opportunities to learn.

Pick up the list of the philosophers; that very act will compel you to wake up, when you see how many men have been working for your benefit. You will desire eagerly to be one of them yourself. For this is the most excellent quality that the noble soul has within itself, that it can be roused to honourable things.

No man of exalted gifts is pleased with that which is low and mean; the vision of great achievement summons him and uplifts him.

...

But happy is the man who has given it this impulse toward better things! He will place himself beyond the jurisdiction of chance; he will wisely control prosperity; he will lessen adversity, and will despise what others hold in admiration.

There is the answer - begin to learn from the philosophers!  Start reading and contemplating their writings.  Talk to others about it.  Write about it; then repeat.  And once you begin to learn, you will also learn to live wisely.

You begin to learn what is important; what belongs to you and what does not.  You will learn what virtue and vice really mean; what has utility and what does not.

This last section of his letter, to me, sounds a bit more Epicurean than Stoic.

Utility measures our needs; but by what standard can you check the superfluous? It is for this reason that men sink themselves in pleasures, and they cannot do without them when once they have become accustomed to them, and for this reason they are most wretched, because they have reached such a pass that what was once superfluous to them has become indispensable. And so they are the slaves of their pleasures instead of enjoying them; they even love their own ills, – and that is the worst ill of all! Then it is that the height of unhappiness is reached, when men are not only attracted, but even pleased, by shameful things, and when there is no longer any room for a cure, now that those things which once were vices have become habits.

 

Letters from a Stoic 38 - On Quiet Conversation

On Quiet Conversation

A short letter with some key points about effectively learning.

The goal: teaching others.

This can be accomplished in a number of ways: a formal lecture or presentation where many can listen but few can engage in dialogue.  Reading & writing letters, which is very asynchronous and takes times.  Then there is one-on-one mentorship and dialogue, or quiet conversation, as the letter is entitled.

Seneca says,

when the aim is to make a man learn, and not merely to make him wish to learn, we must have recourse to the low-toned words of conversation.

And further, he writes,

we do not need many words, but, rather, effective words.

Lastly,

Words should be scattered like seed; no matter how small the seed may be, if it has once found favourable ground, it unfolds its strength and from an insignificant thing spreads to its greatest growth. Reason grows in the same way; it is not large to the outward view, but increases as it does its work.

Letters from a Stoic 33 - On the Futility of Learning Maxims

On the Futility of Learning Maxims

The key ideas of this letter are:

• Stoic philosophy is a whole
• Reading and memorizing is not enough; you must embody the philosophy and teach it
• Truth was never discovered by constant following

A Philosophy in Whole

There are a number of analogies in explaining how logic, physics and ethics are tied together in Stoicism.  While not my favorite, the egg analogy is great in one key aspect: indivisibility.

The garden and body analogies could be divided, where the fence could exist independent of the dirt and fruit.  You could still have a garden without a fence.  But you can't really have an egg, without the shell or without the yolk or without the whites.  All three are required in order for the egg to be called an egg.

Seneca notes that the early founders of Stoicism built the philosophy to be all-encompassing and rich.  It is not a 'chicken-soup-for-the-soul' philosophy.

they did not interest themselves in choice extracts; the whole texture of their work is full of strength.

Nor did the founders and progenitors of Stoicism want to showcase "the good parts" and hide the "bad / embarrassing parts."  There is no bait and switch in Stoic philosophy.  All of it is useful and beneficial for humans.

we have no "show-window goods," nor do we deceive the purchaser in such a way that, if he enters our shop, he will find nothing except that which is displayed in the window. We allow the purchasers themselves to get their samples from anywhere they please.

When the philosophy is all equally good, it is hard to pick out certain aspects of it and focus solely on them.

Look into their wisdom as a whole; study it as a whole. They are working out a plan and weaving together, line upon line, a masterpiece, from which nothing can be taken away without injury to the whole.

Kill the Buddha

At some point, you have to stand on your own two feet.  There is a Buddhist koen which goes, "if you see the Buddha on the road, kill him."  The key idea is to focus on your learning and seeking new paths to wisdom - to be able to think independently.  If you are constantly reliant on Zeno, Cleanthes, Aurelius, Epictetus, Seneca, Hadot, Becker, Irving, Long, Wiegardt, Holiday, Robertson, Gill, Sellers or Pigliucci, then you will never truly learn.  For sure, follow the beaten path.  But how will you know there is not a more efficient path to wisdom?

Shall I not follow in the footsteps of my predecessors? I shall indeed use the old road, but if I find one that makes a shorter cut and is smoother to travel, I shall open the new road. Men who have made these discoveries before us are not our masters, but our guides. Truth lies open for all; it has not yet been monopolized. And there is plenty of it left even for posterity to discover.

For me, this is a challenge.  There is so much wisdom from the ancients and the moderns.  I feel as though for every one book on Stoicism that I finish reading, there are two or three more published!  And then there are times when I write something and think I've hit on a novel idea or see something in a new light or different perspective, only to discover through reading, that the idea has already been shared.

I don't know when it will be (and maybe it's a long, slow process) but at some point I hope to be able to stand on my own philosophical feet.  For now, I feel I'm still a novice.  Therefore, when I read the following passage from Seneca, I can't help but feel a bit of urgency.

disgraceful even for an old man, or one who has sighted old age, to have a note-book knowledge. "This is what Zeno said." But what have you yourself said? "This is the opinion of Cleanthes." But what is your own opinion? How long shall you march under another man's orders? Take command, and utter some word which posterity will remember. Put forth something from your own stock.  For this reason I hold that there is nothing of eminence in all such men as these, who never create anything themselves, but always lurk in the shadow of others, playing the role of interpreters, never daring to put once into practice what they have been so long in learning. They have exercised their memories on other men's material. But it is one thing to remember, another to know.

So, for now, I'm learning as much as I can and figuring out how to put it into practice.  And maybe, some day, I'll have a creative thought which will benefit the world in someway.  But, today, I'll play the part of the prokopton as well as guide to those near me.

Epictetus Discourses 3.25 - To those who fail to achieve what they have proposed for themselves

To those who fail to achieve their purposes

Epictetus reminds us that we will fail in our quest for living a virtuous life and that we can use those failures to our benefit.  Indeed, for "those who are engaged in the greatest of contests shouldn't flinch, but must be prepared also to take blows" (v. 2, p. 211).  What is this contest?  It is a contest "for good fortune and happiness itself" (v. 3, p. 211).

As Bruce Wayne's dad tells Bruce when he falls, "why do we fall Bruce?  So we can learn to pick ourselves up!"  Epictetus similarly teaches, "even if we should falter for a while, no one can prevent us from resuming the fight ... as soon as one has recovered and regained one's strength, and can muster the same zeal as before, one can enter the fight; and if one should fail again, one can enter one again, and if one should carry off the victory one fine day, it will be as if one had never given in" (v. 4, p. 211).

Then he gives a warning.  We must be wary of falling into the bad habit of being content repeating the same mistakes.  "Don't begin, through force of habit, to be glad to repeat the process all over again, so that you end up like a bad athlete" (v. 5, p. 211).

Rather than repeating mistakes, "you ought to have remembered them ... in the same way as slaves remember the blows that they've received, to avoid repeating the same mistakes" (v. 9, p. 212).

Become the victor - the conqueror.  If you make a mistake, review them at the end of each day and think, if you were given the opportunity to live the moment again, what you would do differently.  Commit to changing your thinking and attitude and when presented with the same test again, grasp the victory firmly in your hand!

How We Decide (Lehrer)

Again, I wrote my review of this book on my chess blog since there is so much cross-over.

My review here.

The next review will be of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. I plan to start that book tonight.

The Art of Learning (Waitzkin)

I wrote my review of this book over at my chess blog since there was so much cross-over.

My review here.

I've started reading How We Decide which seems so closely related to Art of Learning.  I suppose that review will also be over at the chess blog.

For Christmas, I hope to get the Millenium Triligoy by Larsson (see my queued up section).  The movie The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo comes out next week - these books intrigue me intensely - so I'm taking a break from my "Western History and Military" bug to delve into these.  Then I'll pick up Hanson again.