I ought? I owe it to Whom?

The Great Day of His Wrath by John Martin, circa 1851. Public Domain via Wikimedia.

The Genealogy of Morals by Friedrich Nietzsche

My rating: 3 of 5 stars

The word ought has its origins in the word owe. Whether or not this relationship survives translation I don't know, but why let semantics get in the way of a good idea. Reading Beyond Good and Evil before attempting this follow-up work would be the more logical option. But I doubt one can simply dip one's toe in to Nietzsche anyway - it is a case of diving in head first and trying to make sense of the turmoil. Nietzsche's racism reflects the tone of the times, and there is plenty of conflicting views to support the argument that his sister re-construed his work to fit comfortably with the Nazis. But in the end I felt Nietzsche's racism was as relevant to Nazism as Jack London's. It is interesting that he seems to support women's rights (remembering that J.S. Mill's On the Subjection of Women was published 18 years before), planes the edges off his Orientalism with Buddhism and Brahmanism, and doesn't appear so overjoyed at the "death of God" as Atheist's gleefully point out. Indeed, Nietzsche makes a point of saying that science is a more advanced form of the "ascetic ideal". The back cover of the work sums up Nietzsche's thesis as "culture and morality, rather than being eternal verities, are human-made". This is an oversimplification that reduces the depth of his work. Far be it for me to be an apologist for Nietzsche - the "intellectual" gatekeepers would never let such work be published today - but the brilliance is in its originality. To comprehend the thesis adequately, prior reading of Buddhism, Luther, Brahmanism, Kant, Spinoza, Goethe, Feuerbach, and Schopenhauer would be helpful but is not essential. However, a knowledge of the classics (at least Plato) is important. Nietzsche final words are that "man will wish Nothingness rather than not wish at all". I immediately thought of the maxim "if you fail to plan, you plan to fail". Probably the most useful idea from this work is that one needs to go back to first principles in establishing a philosophy - does or can truth exist? - (and even if we don't care to consciously develop a philosophy, the shepherds of the "herd mentality" will provide one for us without our knowledge or consent), and Nietzsche does so by regularly referring back to "Heracleitus" and Hesiod. I have already picked up the scent of the pre-Socratics and their importance in understanding the human-created chasm between philosophy and religion (and more recently, but less convincingly, between science and religion), and Nietzsche confirms this clue. Rather than the über-power of pre-Enlightenment Christian church and its priesthood driving the herd, Nietzsche foresaw ("forsooth"?) the pluralism of modern asceticism (which annoys me on Facebook, Twitter, and the news media any time I look). Admittedly, he was optimistic about this future, but then he didn't know what "the Internet" would say about him (how I loathe that saying!). So why don't I see the ascetic for what it is and just get off Facebook once again? Well. it's the guilt, you see. But you can't blame me - I didn't create it (Facebook or the guilt).

View all my reviews

What we do in life echoes in eternity, or: There is much to learn from the pre-Socratic philosophers

Héraclite by Johannes Moreelse, c. 1630 (Public Domain vie Wikimedia).

The Fragments of Heraclitus by Heraclitus

My rating: 4 of 5 stars

The introduction to this work is inevitably longer than the fragments themselves. What survives is a mish-mash of various interpretations and I daresay unreliable sources. What strikes me about the pre-Socratics, and Heraclitus specifically, is the melding of religion and reason in a way that the West would not mention when the modern cultural monolith seeks its origins in a part of the world where it is fine to claim mythic philosophical ancestry, yet it is despised when one's pedigree is pure. On the first page of the fragments, Heraclitus mentions the trouble with those who will not learn:

"III. - ...Those who hear and do not understand are like the deaf. Of them the proverb says: "Present, they are absent,"

IV. — Eyes and ears are bad witnesses to men having rude souls.

V. — The majority of people have no understanding of the things with which they daily meet, nor, when instructed, do they have any right knowledge of them, although to themselves they seem to have.

VI. — They understand neither how to hear nor how to speak.

This is not entirely a Western idea, for indeed, Confucius said, “When you see that [students] do something wrong, give them sincere and friendly advice, which may guide them to the right way; if they refuse to accept your advice, then give it up”.

Reading Heraclitus leads me to Pythagoras as my next venture into pre-Socratic philosophy, and also to Hesiod's Theogony. It would seem that there is much to learn from this period of history, and how it echoes down through the ages. 

View all my reviews

Practising Stoic Philosophy

Practising Stoic Philosophy at the Gunning Library. 7th October 2017. Photo by Leslie Bush.

After reading on Trove about the various lectures that have been conducted in Gunning from at least the 1880s, I wondered if there was still an appetite for such lofty pursuits in the Gunning of the 2010s? And after a surprising response via the Gunning Community Facebook group, it seems there is!

During my recent long service leave, I began reading a number of books on Stoicism, and I have embarked on a cover-to-cover reading of the Great Books. As a political scientist, I have always believed that a liberal education is essential to a healthy liberal democracy. Of late, the Great Books have fallen out of favour in our education system, and so too has our faith in our political system.

I have always been inspired by Robert Hutchins' (of the University of Chicago and the person responsible for the Great Books education system which is seeing a revival in the United States) idea of The Great Conversation.  

In the Gunning Library today, librarian Peta Luck made an important observation: Libraries are essential to democracy. And she is right.

So when fifteen people attended the two workshops (on 7th and 10th October) to discuss Practising Stoic Philosophy, it was pleasing to discover that there is so much more to love about Gunning. Many people are interested in the history of their family, their family's military history, or their house, but philosophy? At least three percent of Gunning's population provided the empirical evidence: an emphatic "yes"!

In the lecture, I drew upon some of the ideas I have developed in teaching leadership. My favourite textbook for leadership is by James Clawson, of the University of Virginia, who defines leadership as "the ability to manage energy first in yourself and then in others". Stoic philosophy begins its focus with the individual, too (as does a liberal education), so there are many parallels. 

I also mentioned Stephen Covey's 7 Habits of Highly Effective People, a 1980s classic. Covey said our attention is often divided between our circle of influence (e.g. our families and local communities) and our circle of concern (Donald Trump and Kim Jong-un). If we expend most of our energy in our circle of concern, it will be difficult to bring about any positive changes in our circle of influence (another Stoic-like concept).

Next, we looked at a brief history of Stoicism. I spoke about the idea of education as a transformational experience, where we learn and grow as we are exposed to new ideas, new ways of thinking, and the assumptions and beliefs we have inherited are challenged by our own reasoning. If, of course, we choose to do so. An age-old problem for many people is that, even when the evidence is indisputable, individuals will cling to their prior assumptions and beliefs.

Heraclitus (circa 500BCE), taken from Fragments, noticed that this was a common problem for many (Confucius said, “When you see that [students] do something wrong, give them sincere and friendly advice, which may guide them to the right way; if they refuse to accept your advice, then give it up”). Further, Socrates (circa 399BCE), suggested that "the unexamined life is not worth living" (which appeared in Plato's Apology, but attributed to Socrates, which is disputed, of course). The point is, it is up to the individual. But how does one know?

The Stoics suggested that happiness could be found in the virtuous life. I introduced two approaches to understanding "virtue". Aristotle (circa 350BCE), in his Nicomachean Ethics, outlined the idea of finding the "Golden Mean" in twelve virtues. But a more practical way to assess one's "virtues" is to consider Benjamin Franklin's Autobiography, where he outlines his thirteen virtues and his 13 Week Program for living a virtuous life. This entails keeping a schedule and a diary and self-assessing on a daily basis. More about "journaling" later. I gave this a bash over two 13-week periods and it is quite effective, at least in identifying one's weaknesses in this regard.

Then to a brief history of Stoicism. Stoicism was founded by Zeno of Citium. Only second-hand sources, written years after the event, particularly the work by Diogenes Laertius, The Lives and Opinions of Eminent Philosophers, remain. But the focus of the session was largely on the three Roman Stoics: Seneca, Epictetus, and Marcus Aurelius.

When I teach leadership, it is underpinned by a simple philosophy. Leaders are either born or one can learn to be a leader. The jury is out on whichever is "right". But as I teach leadership, my philosophy, logically, must be that one can learn to be a leader. If I didn't subscribe to this "philosophy", then I couldn't teach leadership. Simple.

The "simple" philosophy that underpins Stoicism is this (from Epictetus):

Some things are in our control and others not. Things in our control are opinion, pursuit, desire, aversion, and, in a word, whatever are our own actions. Things not in our control are body, property, reputation, command, and, in one word, whatever are not our own actions.

But how does that help us? Well, try these. What do you first see?

Duck or rabbit?

Old woman or young woman?

Imagine if you were unable to change your first "opinion" or "impression" or "perception" of what the pictures above represent? There are two possible ways to comprehend what you see. For Marcus Aurelius, "external things are not the problem. It's your assessment of them. Which you can erase right now". Imagine if you were stuck with your first opinion of everything? As they say, "first impressions last".

So Stoics see things in terms of good, bad, or indifferent. Only our actions (which are the only things we can really control) can be good or bad. Everything else is beyond our control. Our response can be good or bad, but one should be "indifferent" to the external event. Not uncaring, not unsympathetic, simply indifferent.

Stoics see the externals as opportunities to practice our virtues. Like with learning; if we are never challenged, we never grow. For Marcus Aurelius: "Choose not to be harmed — and you won't feel harmed. Don't feel harmed — and you haven't been". External things are beyond our control, but we can control how we react.

The best way to do this is to slow down the process of managing our impressions, or interpreting how we perceive external events. Journaling is the best way to do this...

• Marcus Aurelius journaled every morning to prepare for the day ahead. The book Meditations is what survives as his journal. It was never meant to be a book for public viewing as far as we know. 
• Seneca journaled every evening to reflect on the lessons of the day.
• For Ryan Holiday, the young powerhouse who has recently published The Obstacle is the Way, Ego is the Enemy, and The Daily Stoic, journaling is Stoicism. 

The daily process is most important – self-mastery happens over time, not in an instant. Think of how today you probably jumped in the car, backed out of the driveway and drove off to work. All without a single thought about how to drive or what to do - it all happened naturally.

Then think back to the first time you sat behind the wheel of a car. It wasn't simple, it was a long process of learning, step by step, until eventually it became second nature. Journaling facilitates the same process, but it is an intellectual process, rather than physical.

We then looked at a number of Stoic techniques. Rather than go over these in detail, have a look at Ryan Holiday's website The Daily Stoic, where you will find all sorts of techniques and resources.

So the next time someone cuts you off in traffic, control your impressions. It is not good or bad, it is external and beyond your control. So choose to be indifferent. If you get angry and stew about it all day, the Stoics say you choose to do so. Choose different.

-----------------------------------------------------------

I wish to thank Peta and Maree at the Gunning Library for making the seminars possible, Vanessa Mackay for rounding up the troops, the Gunning community for being so interested and supportive, and the talented Leslie Bush who is nothing less than superhuman in her ability to make things happen. The lessons I have learnt will be drawn upon next year when I teach a new subject at the University of Canberra entitled Political Leadership, where I will cover the Stoics as part of political leadership in Ancient Greece and Rome. 

The following books on Stoicism will be available for loan from the Gunning Library in the next couple of weeks:

• Letters from a Stoic - Seneca
• Discourses - Epictetus
• Meditations - Marcus Aurelius

You can also find many classic texts online for free at archive.org. If you want a really quick read that covers the basics of Stoic philosophy, try Epictetus' Enchiridion (The Handbook). Some of the books I had on display at the seminar are shown below. These titles are all available for purchase via The Book Depository. And to top it all off, next week is Stoic Week!

Some useful books. Photos by Vanessa Mackay.