The Consolation of Philosophy

by Boethius, Walter John Sedgefield

This carefully crafted ebook: "The Consolation of Philosophy (translated by Walter John Sedgefield)" is formatted for your eReader with a functional and detailed table of contents.

Consolation of Philosophy (Latin: Consolatio Philosophiae) is a philosophical work by Boethius, written around the year 524. It has been described as the single most important and influential work in the West on Medieval and early Renaissance Christianity, and is also the last great Western work of the Classical Period.

Anicius Manlius Severinus Boëthius, commonly called Boethius (c. 480–524 or 525 AD), was a philosopher of the early 6th century. He was born in Rome to an ancient and prominent family which included emperors Petronius Maximus and Olybrius and many consuls. His father, Flavius Manlius Boethius, was consul in 487 after Odoacer deposed the last Western Roman Emperor. Boethius, of the noble Anicia family, entered public life at a young age and was already a senator by the age of 25. Boethius himself was consul in 510 in the kingdom of the Ostrogoths. In 522 he saw his two sons become consuls. Boethius was imprisoned and eventually executed by King Theodoric the Great, who suspected him of conspiring with the Eastern Roman Empire. While jailed, Boethius composed his Consolation of Philosophy, a philosophical treatise on fortune, death, and other issues. The Consolation became one of the most popular and influential works of the Middle Ages.

Genres: Philosophy, Classics, Nonfiction, Religion, Medieval, Theology, Poetry

168 pages, Kindle Edition

First published January 1, 524

About the author

Roman mathematician Anicius Manlius Severinus Boethius, imprisoned on charges of treason, wrote The Consolation of Philosophy , his greatest work, an investigation of destiny and free will, while awaiting his execution.

His ancient and prominent noble family of Anicia included many consuls and Petronius Maximus and Olybrius, emperors. After Odoacer deposed the last western emperor, Flavius Manlius Boethius, his father, served as consul in 487.

Boethius entered public life at a young age and served already as a senator before the age of 25 years in 504. Boethius served as consul in 510 in the kingdom of the Ostrogoths.

In 522, Boethius saw his two sons serve as consuls. Theodoric the Great, king, suspected Boethius of conspiring with the eastern empire eventually. Jailed, Boethius composed his treatise on fortune, death, and other issues. He most popularly influenced the Middle Ages.

People linked Boethius and Rithmomachia, a board game.

Reviews

[هدى يحيى]

هو واحد من أجمل وأشهر الكتب التي تنتمي لأدب السجون

وقد كتبه بوئثيوس في في سجنه بعد أن حكم عليه ملك القوط بالاعدام بتهمة الخيانة العظمى

عُرفت رسالته الخالدة تلك بعزاء الفلسفة أي التعزي بها واتخاذها سلوى وعلاج

فقد بثها تأملاته الفلسفية في لحظاته الأخيرة وشرح كيف أن التأمل الروحاني يروِّض النفس ويجعلها أكثر تقبلًا للمحن والشدائد

تعلم بوئثيوس في سجنه أن يرى الأمور في حجمها الحقيقي وأن يتسامى ليدرك المعني

ترجع أهمية بوئثيوس إلى ترجمته مخطوطات الفلسفة ورسائل أرسطو كما حول برسالته الفلسفة من صيغة نظرية إلى فلسفة يمكنها أن تتعامل مع المشكلات الإنسانية


---------------------
منمنمات العصور الوسطى - بوئثيس


بوئثويس يعلم تلاميذه


بوئثويس في سجنه


لوحة تصوره مع الفلسفة مجسدة على هيئة امرأة

[Trevor · Rating 4 out of 5]

I’ve meant to read this for a very long time, probably since I found out that the title of The Consolations of Philosophy, another book I quite enjoyed, was borrowed from this one. In case you don’t know the background, I’ll be quick. The writer was leading a perfectly satisfactory life (in fact, even better than satisfactory) when one day everything went seriously yuck (in case you need a theme song to understand this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZyAJWh... – you can’t say I don’t try to provide a multi-media experience with these reviews). He was put in gaol after being set up and accused of treason. There would have been, I can only assume, little doubt in his mind how things were likely to turn out, but he spent a year waiting for his trail while expecting to be executed – he was executed, by the way, and as executions go his was a particularly nasty one. While waiting for all this to happen he wrote this little book. Now, if I was waiting to be executed, or thought that was the most likely outcome of the situation I found myself in, I’m not sure this is the sort of book I would have written – and in saying that I think that reflects badly on me, rather than on Boethius. To be fair, Boethius in this book doesn’t start out as the life of the party. At the start of this remarkable little book he is very upset with the way things have turned out – and who could blame him?

But while he is in prison he is visited by an incredibly lovely woman who just so happens to turn out to be the incarnation of philosophy. It is hardly surprising that sex is out of the question and so they chat instead, as one is likely to do when visited by the embodiment of wisdom. It should also come as no surprise that they chat about things that are pretty well at the front and centre of Boethius’ mind. Obviously these are not going to be how well the local team is going in the Christians Vs the Lions competition at the local sports ground (this was 526 AD after all), but rather a fascinating little discussion about the fickleness of fortune leading onto a D&M on why God allows suffering to exist if he is all powerful.

I thought the stuff about the fickleness of fortune at the start of this book was very interesting. I even agreed with much of it – which was essentially a repeat of Plato’s idea from Gorgias that it is better to suffer a wrong than to commit one, mixed in with the Stoic idea that you should be prepared to lose all that you have because one day you are going to anyway. I am someone without a religious faith, but I do believe these are maxims that are as good as any others to live by. I also think that you are more likely to learn something useful from misfortune than from good fortune and that in the long run you are probably likely to end up better off due to your losses than your wins. So I found reading all this a little hard given how much nodding I was doing along the way. Having said that, I would be surprised if I could be quite as rational as Boethius if I was ever confronted with the same or even similar circumstances or quite so stoical.

The second half of the book is about the nature of god and why god allows suffering. And before we start with his answers to this, we need to talk about whether or not Boethius was a Christian. If I had read a newer version of this book there would have been an introduction and I would have had a chance to see what the latest thinking is on this. I had thought, before I started reading, that he probably had to be a Christian. I knew that this little volume was a standard text throughout the Middle Ages and so figured that he had to be a Christian if that was going to be the case. However, there were a few things that he said in this that really made viewing him as a Christian a little problematic.

Firstly, there is a bit early on where he says that in the beginning God ordered the universe. Of course, the Christian God doesn’t order the universe, He creates it out of nothing. It is the pegan Roman and Greek gods who in the beginning give order to the Chaos. Another thing I thought was a bit of a give away was the fact that at no time does Boethius mention Christ. I don’t mean to be rude, but when was the last time you had a conversation with a Christian without Christ being mentioned even once? I know this is a short book, but a Christian couldn’t have written for so long on such a topic without ever mentioning Christ.

The other bit that I think makes it hard to view Boethius as your standard Christian is that he has a very strange idea of freedom of the will and providence. I’m not sure many Christians would agree that our free will is limited due to our inability to understand necessity. My reading of what is said here is that we do not stuff up God’s plan for the future by our random acts of free will (as you might expect us to) by our changing the script along the way and this is because while we think we are acting out of our own discretion we are actually acting according to rules, God’s rules, that always remain beyond our ken. I must admit that I found the latter parts of this book hard work, but mostly because I think the problem of evil and suffering is harder to solve than is done here in what I think is a rather formal and ‘logical’ way. If only suffering could be put aside so easily.

(This was something else that reminded me of Plato’s Gorgias – I've always thought Plato was better at stating the problems with the pointless and almost adolescent nature of asking philosophical questions than in answering them - I felt much the same with how the problems of suffering and freedom were stated here compared to how these problems were resolved)

The second part of the book was the most Platonic part of the book, I felt. The style was much the same as reading a Platonic dialogue and the arguments were more or less straight Plato. That is another reason why the Christian stuff didn’t quite work for me. While we could argue over whether or not Boethius was a Christian, no one could argue about whether he was a Neo-Platonist or not.

Look, this is a fascinating work – any work written by someone waiting to die is going to have a compelling power about it. But one that also shows a way to become reconcilled to fate (and such an awful fate) in such a circumstance is doubly fascinating. Whether you agree or disagree with his conclusions, the mere fact he can form any conclusions at all is enough to be wondered at. That he is so accepting of his fate is breathtaking.

There are lovely little poems throughout this book too. They are dropped into the text and on the theme of what is being discussed in the text at the time. They really add an entirely unexpected level of delight to this work.

And the Consolation of Philosophy? Well, to me it doesn’t lie in the answers he finds, but rather in the act of thinking this through in the first place. Time for a crap comparision with something in my life. Obviously I have never been through anything nearly as horrible as Boethius goes through here, but once I had a very stressful and anxious night thinking about some work that I needed to do and needed to do particularly well, something I was fairly confident I was likely to stuff up quite convincingly. I was so worried thinking about the likely consequences of stuffing up the work I was going to do that I couldn’t sleep. In fact, I could hardly even breathe. After tossing and turning for an hour I finally got up and sat at the dining room table reading TS Eliot’s Portrait of a Lady – definitely not one of Eliot’s easier poems. The intensity of my concentration on the poem, in trying to understand it and trying to follow all of the twists and turns in the imagery meant that it simply wasn’t possible to go on worrying about my problems at work. When I finally went to bed I was able to keep my focus on the poem and its language and even hear Chopin playing somewhere in the back of my mind. I can hardly remember what my work problem was, but that night with Eliot was one I will never forget.

I read this book on my Kindle, a wonderful thing, but poor old Amazon aren’t making the money out of me they probably had hoped. You see, I’ve found manybooks.net and what an amazing place that is. I’ve put so many books onto my Kindle from there that it now has the same problem as my bookcases – lots of books I’m just never going to get the time to read all lined up waiting. Still, as Capitalism teaches us, possession is nine-tenths of the fun and consumption is its own reward.

[Beauregard Bottomley · Rating 5 out of 5]

You ever wonder why God (or the universe) would allow a truly awful human being like Donald Trump to flourish? I do and this book delves into that kind of question with gusto. The author, Boethius, through his dialog with the lady, Philosophy, tells us and much more. There is no cop out with his answers. It's not the standard Christian drivel that we will be rewarded in an infinite after life nothing as easy as that.

Not to take way from the author, but the answer is along the lines that God (or the universe) is the absolute Good. The ultimate good can not know evil. We only can do wrong (vice or evil) when we don't know. A truly wicked person, like Donald Trump, is that way because they do not know and the more wicked they become the less they know about the Good and hence the less they are as a person and their soul suffers for that lack of knowledge and dearth of Good.

It's clear that Boethius is reworking Plato and Aristotle into a coherent philosophy in support of his world view.

He doesn't really stop at just what makes us happy and also delves deeply into our passions, free will, a transcendental God and actually he has Einstein's block universe, where time happens all at once. That means he also reworks the dialog Parmenides with his 'one'. I've just recently read Spinoza's Ethics, and I am currently reading Hegel's Logic, and I would say they both definitely borrowed from this very unique take on the universe from Boethius.

There's a line of reasoning that he often uses. That our intuition, senses and intellect can only intersect within ourselves and that the 'judgement' we make on the particular to the universal can only be made by the individual that is doing the observing and the thing observed can not act alone to understand.

This guy is a really cool thinker. It's a pity that he's not more widely read. Fortune works on us all and never let yourself be too cocky for the fickled finger of fate will point at you sooner or latter.

At its core this book is a self help book (at least the first half). I have no idea why the modern self help writers of today ignore books like this one. The worst most popular book ever written was "The Purpose Driven Life" by Rick Warren. Why can't those kind of authors just save us their pablum and refer us back to book like this one. This author really knocks it out of the ball park. A total non believer in fairy tales and someone who tries to never pretend to know things that he doesn't know (i.e. faith) can still enjoy a book such as this one. (Though I think he bends over too much by defending an All Knowing God with a deterministic universe and free will (i.e. a lack of cause and effect) within humans allowing evil by redefining it as 'not good' like Augustine does.

I like to think truly not good people like Donald Trump are getting there punishment, but Boethius does point out that punishing the wicked really doesn't help us. Too bad.

[robin friedman · Rating 5 out of 5]

A Rare And Varied Consolation

Boethius's "The Consolation of Philosophy" is a rare and unusual philosophical work in that it continues to be read by many people who are not philosophers or students of philosophy. This is witnessed by the many thoughtful reader review the book has received here and elsewhere. The work continues to be read, I think, because Boethius placed his philosophy in the context of his own experience. The book has a personal and immediate tone. Boethius also broadened the book to make his own experience speak to many people of his own and later times. Most readers will find at least some of Boethius's philosophical teachings valuable and persuasive. The book also combines philosophy with a beautiful literary style. Poetry alternates with and supplements philosophy. Philosophy is personified and speaks to Boethius in the form of a beautiful woman. The book is full of allusions to classical Greek and Roman literature.

Boethius (480 -- 524 A.D.) wrote this book near the end of a life that was both active and scholarly. He had occupied a high position in the Roman Empire before he was imprisoned for treason. He wrote the book in prison in the months before he was brutally tortured and killed. At the beginning of the Consolation, Boethius is morose and grieving over the injustice of his imprisonment and impending fate. He feels that his life has been meaningless.

When she enters, the figure of philosophy largely recalls Boethius to himself. The discussion proceeds in layers, moving from the concrete and specific to the abstract. Philosophy tells Boethius that she must take him and his situation as she finds them and move gradually to help Boethius understand himself. As the book proceeds, it becomes more of a teaching by philosophy than a dialogue between philosophy and Boethius. Prose and argument take the place of poetry as the book becomes heavily Neoplatonic and theistic in tone.

I understood best the earlier parts of this short works, largely books I -- III of the five books in which it is divided. Here, with philosophy's guidance, Boethius meditates on what makes life worthwhile. He comes to understand that what he had primarily valued in life -- things such as pleasure, power, money, success -- are evanescent and pass away. They do not produce true happiness because they are not part of what a person is and can be taken away. They are inherently changeable and fickle. In an important passage in Book II, philosophy says (p.31):

"Why then do you mortal men seek after happiness outside yourselves, when it lies within you? You are led astray by error and ignorance. I will briefly show you what complete happiness hinges upon. If I ask you whether there is anything more precious to you than your own self, you will say no. So if you are in possession of yourself you will possess something you would never wish to lose and something Fortune could never take away. In order to see that happiness can't consist in things governed by chance, look at it this way. If happiness is the highest good of rational nature and anything that can be taken away is not the highest good- since it is surpassed by what can't be taken away -- Fortune by her very mutability can't hope to lead to happiness."

Boethius introduces the figure of the wheel of fortune which, apart from the personification of philosophy, is the most striking figure of the book. He was not the first to use this metaphor, but he made it his own. The figure of the wheel and the emphasis of change and suffering in life reminded me of Buddhist teachings which I have been studying for the past several years. Boethius does not take his philosophy this way but instead develops a Neoplatonic vision of the One or of God which culminates in a beautiful poem at the conclusion of Book III section 9 of the Consolation (pp 66-67). In the remaining portions of the Consolation, Boethius seeks for further understanding of happiness and of the good. Philosophy's answer becomes more difficult and theological. If focuses on the claimed non-existence of evil, the difference between eternity and time, and the nature of Providence.

In rereading the book, I thought Boethius convincingly presented what people today would call an existential or experiential situation -- he was imprisoned far from home and awaiting a gruesome death. He learns some highly particular and valuable ways of understanding that help him -- and the reader -- with his condition. As he develops his understanding, Boethius and philosophy adopt a Neoplatonic synthesis of Plato and Aristotle that contemporary readers are likely to reject or not understand. There is a further difficult question whether Boethius's teachings are exclusively Neoplatonic and pagan, or whether they are Christian as well. (Christianity and Jewish-Christian texts go unmentioned in the Consolation.)

Thus, I think the Consolation continues to be read and revered largely because of the situation it develops in its initial pages and because of Boethius's poetically moving teaching of the nature of change, suffering and loss. It is valuable to have the opportunity to see these things. With change in times and perspective, not all readers will agree with or see the necessity for the Neoplatonic (or Jewish-Christian, given one's reading of the work) underpinnings with which Boethius girds his teaching of change and suffering. As I mentioned, it is tempting to see parallels with Buddhism. But it is more likely that modern readers will try to work out Boethius's insights for themselves in a framework which is primarily secular. I thought that much of the early part of the book, for example, could well have been written by Spinoza. The Consolation remains a living book both because of what it says and also because it allows the reader to take Boethius's insights and capture them while moving in somewhat different directions.

Robin Friedman

[Mark Adderley · Rating 5 out of 5]

Why does a good God allow bad things to happen to good people? And why does He allow bad people to get away with doing bad things?

In 524, Anicius Manlius Severinus Boethius was executed, most likely by strangulation, on a charge of treason. Whilst languishing in prison, he wrote a book that was to become one of the most influential philosophical tracts of the next thousand years, The Consolation of Philosophy.

Boethius is himself the narrator of the book. He speculates on being visited, in his plight, by Dame Philosophy, who explains to him patiently why his experiences reflect the existence of a good and benevolent God. The world is not ruled by chaotic forces, reward and punishment are not random--it's just that his limited human perception cannot fully understand the situation.

Philosophy begins by proving by meticulous reasoning that God is not only good, but the source of goodness. People are good in so far as they participate in divine goodness; they are evil in so far as they reject it. To be human is to accept good; to reject it makes one subhuman. The evil therefore only appear to be triumphant in the world. In fact, their own evil is their punishment.

The reason the bad seem to be rewarded is that they are favoured by Fortune, the force that rewards and punishes within the world. It is better, Philosophy argues, to follow Providence, the force that sees to it that God's plan is followed, no matter how men mar it.

Philosophy finishes up by reconciling God's foreknowledge of events with Man's free will. Foreseeing a thing does not necessitate that one has influenced it at all--God's foreknowledge merely enables him to see what will happen. He foresees because, from the perspective of eternity, all events, past, present, and future and simultaneously present to Him.

Understanding these concepts helps with understanding at least Dante Alighieri and Geoffrey Chaucer more fully; but they are also helpful in one's day-to-day life. Why does a benevolent God allow bad things to happen in His world? Boethius' answer is a rational one, an answer which does not depend on revealed truth (i.e., the Bible). It is therefore a satisfactory answer to that question for someone who doesn't believe in revealed truth.

Looking over the other reviews here, it seems that one thing people find negative about it is that it's personal--Boethius wrote it to console himself about the situation he was in. It's important to recall that this doesn't disqualify his ideas. That's really an ad hominem argument, and you should evaluate the quality of his thought independently of the circumstances under which they were written. That having been said, there's a poignancy to the situation that, I think, adds an edge to the philosophy. It's no mere abstraction, but a way of thinking that can really make a difference to folk. In short, if you want to understand the Middle Ages and the world in which you live, The Consolation of Philosophy is a cornerstone text.

[Майя Ставитская · Rating 5 out of 5]

The first book introduces the reader to the narrator and briefly outlines the misfortunes that befell him due to the denunciation of unworthy opponents. Moaning over his ill-fated fate and finding no solace, Boethius receives a visit from a beautiful lady. Don't think badly, this is a personification of Philosophy (and the subsequent long dialogue between them gives a positive answer to the eternal question "is friendship possible between a man and a woman without sexual overtones"). So, Philosophy appears in order to comfort the adept, explaining to him that the main reason for his misfortunes today is that, under a hail of troubles, he allowed himself to forget that he is himself. It was decided to begin the return to oneself and to oneself with homeopathic remedies, gradually moving on to the strongest and increasing the doses when the body affected by mental illness is sufficiently strengthened to accept the medicine..

The second book is devoted to discussions about Fortune, the fickleness of which Boethius complains. How Philosophy proves to him that he should be happy about this circumstance, not upset, because: first of all, he himself, his wife, children and father-in-law (father-in-law, oh yes!) they are alive, well and in decent positions (except for his wife). Secondly, the inner essence of Fortune is that it is a wheel: a rise is inevitably followed by a decline, and a recession will be followed by a new rise. Thirdly, if something was taken away from you, it probably wasn't really necessary, and if you have something good, then the merit is not yours, but the essential dignity of the object.

Book Three marks the transition from softening poultices to more radical remedies. Let's talk about the Good, what it is and why everyone strives for it. By alternately bringing to the fore the temptations to which people are attracted: power, wealth, popularity, Philosophy refutes absolute value, showing a wormhole in each of them, distorted by worldly perception. But it cannot be denied that there is an absolute good and that it is God and is contained in God. Everything that is not Him is deception, false benefits that are mistaken for the true ones, but lead the seeker to destruction. And the true good is in unity, breaking which, a person dies. "Well, what about malicious people," Boethius objects, "they live and don't mind. - They are mistaken, thinking that they are alive, in fact they are dead. I like this turn of the conversation, and it vividly reminded me of my favorite piece from Pelevinsky's "The Hermit and the Sixfinger": - Everything that people do, they do for love. - And how many people live without love. - They are mistaken, thinking that they are living. Viktor Olegovich probably also consoled himself with philosophy.

The fourth book turns to the heavy and dark matters of the external expression of always triumphant virtue and always punished malice, and the concept that an evil person must be pitied, because he himself has already been sufficiently punished. I reread it three times, but I could only perceive it by accepting the a priori nature of afterlife retribution, metempsychosis, or the theory of incarnations. Otherwise, if you use the concept of "here and now" - being healthy and rich is better than being poor and sick, you, if you will, Professor, have come up with something clumsy. It may be clever, but it's painfully incomprehensible.

The fifth book is mostly devoted to foresight and predestination, and then I got lost in the gloomy forest. My little understanding was not enough to comprehend the intricate arguments. He was saved by his inner unshakeable conviction that the world is right and fair in a global sense, no matter how local its manifestations convince the observer otherwise. I think that's the main message of the fifth book.

Одолевшим землю, небо наградой
Нормально, когда философский трактат читает преподаватель, ему для работы нужно. Нор­мально, когда студент (скрипя зубами и скрепя сердце) — ему для учебы. Ненормально, когда я, на сорок девятом году жизни, никакого отношения к философии не имеющая и не само­го большого ума. Однако потребность читать работы философов время от времени настига­ет с неотвратимостью категорического императива, и, не умея противостоять, берусь за то, до чего удается дотянуться: от Платона до Кьеркегора. Наверно потому, что чтение фило­софии особым образом организует мышление, на некоторое время придает аморфному чет­кую структуру. Для интеллекта как профилактический визит к стоматологу для полости рта. Нет, не ужасное сравнение: «Из­вестно ли тебе, – говорит она, – что все сущее дотоле длится и существует, доколе оно едино, но гибнет и разрушается, как только перестает быть единым?» Необходимость содержать в порядке ум для меня залог единства. Есть ли для тебя что-нибудь драгоценнее тебя самого?

А началось с Боэция в 1996 году. Я тогда открыла для себя Андрея Лазарчука, читала подряд и в его «Транквилиуме» эпиграфы к частям романа взяты из «Утешения философией». Не знаю, способствовала ли любовь к автору более пристальному, чем обычно бывает, интересу к эпиграфам или слова Боэция так уж поразили, что совершенно увязла в обаянии писателя, но как-то получилось, что книга уже давно была прочитана и отложена (и перечитывалась после раза два), а те отрывки про «это самое место, которое ты называешь изгнанием», про «есть ли что на свете более ценное для тебя, чем ты сам», про « всякое различие разъединяет, а подобие стремится к подобию» - они впечатались в память, влились, как вода в сосуд, словно всегда там были. И случалось бессонными ночами, когда накатывал ужас перед жизнью (экзистенциальный?), повторять по кругу, как мантру. Убеждаясь, что утешение философией вещь действенная . По крайней мере, для меня.

Прочесть полностью не стремилась. Случая не выпадало и боялась, что непосредственный контакт убьет очарование первой любви. Пока не узнала о новом переводе Шмаракова. А к Роману Львовичу я с большой читательской любовью за «Овидия в изгн��нии» и «Каллиопу», и с куда меньшей за «Жнецов» и «Скворцов» (мои вкусы более тяготеют к мейнстриму, нежели к безупречным стилизациям). Однако написанное им умеет очищать ум от шелухи повседневности. Явился повод прочесть «Утешение философией». Дальше для себя, чтобы не потерять впечатления. Труд состоит из пяти книг, написан в форме платоновского диалога, наподобие «Государства», где роль Сократа отдана Философии, а с обязанностью Главкона задавать наводящие вопросы, горячо соглашаться и время от времени выражать осторожное недоверие, не без изящества справляется сам Бозций. Прозаические фрагменты перемежаются поэтическими вставками, долженствующими еще более укрепить читателя в добродетели, подытожить сказанное и наметить пути дальнейших рассуждений.

Первая книга знакомит читателя с рассказчиком и кратко обрисовывает беды-злосчастия, обрушившиеся на него по вине доноса недостойных противников. Стеная над злосчастной судьбой и не находя утешения, Боэций удостаивается визите прекрасной дамы. Не подумайте худого, это персонификация Философии (а последующий долгий диалог между ними дает положительный ответ на вечный вопрос «возможна ли между мужчиной и женщиной дружба без сексуального подтекста»). Итак, Философия является, дабы утешить адепта, объясняя ему, что главная причина сегодняшних его несчастий в том, что под градом обрушившихся неприятностей, он позволил себе забыть о том, что есть он сам. Возвращение в себя и к себе решено начать с гомеопатических средств, постепенно переходя к сильнейшим и увеличивая дозы, когда пораженный душевной хворью организм достаточно укрепится, чтобы воспринять лекарство..

Книга вторая посвящена рассуждениям о Фортуне, на переменчивость которой Боэций сетует. Как дважды два Философия доказывает ему, что сему обстоятельству следует радоваться, а не огорчаться, потому что: во-первых сам он, его жена, дети и тесть (тесть, о да!) живы, здравствуют и пребывают в приличных должностях (кроме жены). Во-вторых внутренняя сущность Фортуны такова, что она представляет собой колесо: за подъемом неизбежен спад, а за спадом последует новый подъем. В-третьих, если у тебя что-то отнялось, так оно, верно, не очень и нужно было, а если чем хорошим обладаешь, то заслуга в том не твоя, но эссенциальное достоинство предмета.

Книга третья знаменует переход от умягчающих припарок к более радикальным средствам. Поговорим о Благе, что оно есть и отчего все к нему стремятся. Поочередно выдвигая на передний план соблазны, к которым влекутся люди: власть, богатство, популярность, Философия опровергает абсолютную ценность, показывая червоточину в каждом из них, искаженных мирским восприятием. Но нельзя отрицать, что существует абсолютное благо и оно есть Бог и содержится в Боге. Все, что не Он — есть обман, ложные блага, которые принимаются за истинные, но ведут взыскующего к гибели. А подлинное благо в единстве, нарушив которое, человек погибает. - Ну а как же злонравные люди, - возражает Боэций, - живут ведь и в ус не дуют. - Они ошибаются, думая, что живут, на самом деле они мертвы. Кому как, а мне этот поворот разговора нравится и живо напомнил любимый кусочек из пелевинского «Затворника и Шестипалого»: - Все, что люди делают., они делают ради любви. - А как же многие живут без любви. - Они ошибаются, думая, что живут. Виктор Олегович, наверно, тоже утешался философией.

Книга четвертая переходит к тяжелым и темным материям внешнего выражения всегда торжествующей добродетели и всегда наказанного злонравия, и концепции, согласно которой человека злого необходимо жалеть, ибо сам он уже достаточной мерой наказан. Я перечитала трижды, но воспринять смогла лишь приняв априорность загробного воздаяния, метампсихоза или теории инкарнаций. В противном случае, если оперировать понятием «здесь и сейчас» - быть здоровым и богатым лучше, чем бедным и больным, вы, воля ваша, профессор, что-то нескладное придумали. Оно может и умно, но больно непонятно.

Книга пятая посвящена большей частью предвиденью и предопределенности и тут уж я заблудилась в сумрачном лесу. Никак не хватило моего малого разумения на постижение хитросплетенных аргументов. Спасла внутренняя непоколебимая убежденность в том, что мир устроен правильно и справедливо в глобальном смысле, как бы локальные его проявления ни убеждали наблюдателя в обратном. Полагаю, что главный посыл пятой книги в том и заключается.

[booklady · Rating 5 out of 5]

The Consolation of Philosophy is about listening to your inner Voice of Reason ... or do I mean Wisdom? Boethius, the author, personified our conscience by employing a feature familiar to his audience, an imaginary dialogue between self and one’s muse, who in his case was Lady Philosophy. This technique and the ensuing exchange reminded me of similar literary encounters with mythical beings. I could visualize her as Tolkien’s Galadriel appearing (to Frodo) when most needed, bringing astutely applicable advice also of a universal nature for the perspicacious. As reader, may I be that eager eavesdropper!

Where is Reason in an oftentimes unreasonable world? What is the reason for suffering? Extreme poverty? Death? Humanity’s greatest crimes against itself? Is there reason for things as they are? Or do we perhaps fail to listen to our own quiet inner voice...

Regardless of beliefs, most people agree Reason exists as a basic necessity for a good life—however one defines that good. As such The Consolation can be read as allegory, a reminder of so much which we already know and may have forgotten. It is best read under circumstances similar to those under which it was written, i.e., dire straits. Boethius was in prison awaiting trial and ultimately execution for treason when he wrote this his last and greatest work. For me, this brought an especial poignancy to his words. I was listening to a dying man’s counsels to ‘be strong’ and realize the futility of an oppressor’s actions to ultimate well-being. Written as dialogue between two life-long best friends, this advice was profound, as opposed to so much that passes for wisdom or consolation today.

Many excellent reviews* on The Consolation have already been written. Amateur philosopher that I am, there is little I can add to the finer points in this important discussion except to encourage modern readers to be gleaners. Reason is an excellent teacher when we are cooperative listeners.

As a final note, the Librivox production would have been much improved if performed as follows: one reader for each of the characters, Boethius and Lady Philosophy, and a third reader serving as a narrator for the poems at the end of each section.

*Technically speaking, the best of these on GR is written by Mark Adderley here.

><><><><><><><><><><>

Have always wanted to read this and have even started it a few times.* Ha! I even have two different versions of it on my shelves to tempt me--this one and the 2001 translation by Joel C. Relihan. Last night the word 'consolation' in the title looked especially appealing and I checked out Librivox to see if there was an audio version. There is! Unfortunately it's one of those with multiple readers and the quality varies considerably. Even so, this will be an enjoyable Thanksgiving diversion to alternately listen to and read for myself.

*My daughter about to graduate college has even read it and told me I'd love it.

February 18, 2013: Updated for minor errors

[Roy Lotz · Rating 4 out of 5]

“He would have been remarkably in any age; in the age in which he lived, he is utterly amazing.”
—Betrand Russell on Boethius.

First of all, this is a beautiful book. Boethius—himself in a horrible situation—strives to use the extent of his philosophic powers to condole others who are suffering, and to maintain a positive view of humanity and the universe. That the man could have written this while awaiting death shows that he was a true philosopher—I probably would have spent my time in jail writing apologetic letters to Theodoric, begging him to spare me.

As far as philosophy is concerned, Boethius is slightly disappointing. There is virtually nothing in here that is not contained in Plato; and it is argued even less persuasively. Additionally, unlike the great Greek master, Boethius does not put forward counter-arguments against his main points, if only to address them. Although the book is ostensibly a dialogue between himself and Philosophy personified, it mostly takes the form of a monologue of Lady Philosophy. Though, I should say that the philosophy does get quite good near the end, during his investigation of free will and God’s foreknowledge.

What’s more, it often seems like his points are contrived purely for the sake of ‘consolation’ and not for the investigation of the problem. The doctrines contained in this volume are very soothing to someone in distress; but I suspect they will seem a bit smug and bland to most of us in our day-to-day lives.

But this isn’t purely a work of philosophy; it’s also a work of art. The writing is splendid, and the poetry a nice counterpoint to the exposition. Besides, whether his philosophy is compelling or not, it is attractive. Ideas can be beautiful, just as much as colors, timbres, and words; Boethius arranges his ideas into an arrangement as pleasant as anybody’s. If they do not instruct, they will at least console.

[Jan-Maat]

Written by Boethius while under arrest for allegedly plotting against the Ostrogothic King.

Boethius writes out conversations, interspersed with poems, between himself and a personification of Philosophy who encourages him to reject concerns with the world and concentrate on the eternal instead. While cursing his evil fortune, Philosophy appears and upbraids Boethius for abandoning her and devoting himself to worldly concerns instead of learning and Christianity. As the dialogues progress, Boethius comes to accept what has happened to him and turns the focus of his attention on to Philosophy and the eternal instead.

I've heard the view that Boethius was not a Christian, and the nature of the discussions between Boethius and Philosophy are such that they could be Christian or Pagan. I would be surprised if there was much here that either Marcus Aurelius or Saint Augustine could take offence to.

A good part of me wishes that Boethius had remained fixated on his worldly concerns enough to have left us a detailed account of the politics of the Ostrogothic court at least in his initial laments, but the promise of the Kingdom of God proved too much for him!

[Ezgi · Rating 5 out of 5]

525 senesinde öldüğü düşünülen bir adamı okumak istememdeki nedenler şöyleydi:
1- Felsefenin kadın olarak zuhur etmesi (güzel imge)
2- Yazar, haksızlığa uğratılıp idama mahkum edildiğinden gider ayak sağlam bir şeyler keşfetmiş olabilirdi.
3- "Kader / özgür irade problemi" takıntılı bir insan olarak hiçbir dinin ve felsefenin hala çözemediği bu sorunla ilgili bulabileceğim yeni bir şeyler olabilirdi.
4- Daha birkaç sene önceki felsefe derslerinde Boethius'u okumayı kafama koymuştum.

İlk ikisiyle ilgili olarak beklentilerim karşılanmadı. Üçüncü konuya vermeye çalıştığı cevaplar da Hristiyanlık'ta ve Müslümanlık'ta aynen kopyalanmış. Yani batı cephesinde yeni bir şey yok. Fakat burada öngörü ya da Tanrısal görüyü ikiye ayırıyor. O kısım kayda değer. Çünkü daha sonraları Hristiyanlık üzerinden sufizme kadar gelerek din felsefesinde tekrar edilen bir düşünce.

Çiğdem Dürüşken'in mükemmel çevirisi ve emeği beni kitaba 5/5 vermeye zorladı.
Bu kitap okunacaksa içinde "5. kitap" olarak geçen son bölüm için okunmalı. İlk dört bölüm(kitap) daha çok Platon ve Aristoteles tekrarları yaparken 5. kitap Tanrısal öngörü ve özgür irade konusuna yoğunlaşıyor.

Alın size 500'lü senelerde yazılmış güncellik:

"Kralları mutlu kılan güç sona erdiği noktada iktidarsızlık devreye girer ve onları zavallı duruma düşürür. Bu yüzden her zaman krallar, sefillik pastasından büyük bir dilimi yutmak durumundadır. Bulunduğu mevkinin tehlikelerinden haberdar olan ünlü bir tiran, krallık yetkesinden duyduğu korkuyu, bir adamın tepesinde asılı duran kılıcın yaratacağı dehşete benzetmiştir. O halde bir adamın içini kemiren kaygılarını def edemeyen, iğne gibi batan korkularından kurtaramayan bu iktidar da neyin nesi? "

[ladydusk · Rating 5 out of 5]

So good I'm restarting practically immediately.

Second reading even better ... although Book V: phew.

[Clif Hostetler · Rating 3 out of 5]

Boethius was in prison on death-row while writing this book, or at least the 524 AD equivalent of what we today refer to as death-row. As such perhaps it is an appropriate book for persons in quarantine due to COVID-19 to be reading. ;-)

Boethius was writing in Latin, but he was using the reasoning methods of the Ancient Greek philosophers in this work as he explored such questions as "Why does evil exist?" In his case this was a very personal question because he believed himself to be an upstanding person of integrity and was facing execution because of false political charges from individuals for whom he had little respect.

By using what I was taught to be the Socratic method, Boethius in this work carries on a conversation with a female personification of philosophy. She fills the role of a comforter in assuring him that if he trust in the truths of philosophy that he will be able to see his misfortunes as being of little consequence. I actually got the impression that by using the Socratic method he had rationalize the position that evil and misfortune didn't exist. That isn't quite correct, but he does end up feeling sorry for his persecutors because they were not living with a true heart.

Boethius lived at a time in Rome when Christianity was the state religion. Nevertheless with the exception of his reference to God in the singular, his writing sounds more like a Greek philosopher than a Christian theologian. He spends a long time exploring the question of predestination trying to rationalize how humans can have freewill and still have a God who knows the future. I have little interest in this question, and I can't help feeling impatient when thinkers go through circles dealing with it.

The following are some links I found of interest.

This first link is to a modern day English rendition of Chaucer's translation from the Latin. What I found helpful with this was the two dimensional grid at the beginning which summarized the subjects of the various chapters and sections of the book.
https://parabola.org/wp-content/uploa...

This second link is to a very good essay on Boethius, and the section on The Consolation is well done.
https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/w...

[Cindy Rollins · Rating 4 out of 5]

Because I had read so many of the books which were born out of Boethius's thoughts before reading this, I did not find this life-changing, but I am glad that I read it finally. It is good to go back and see where the stream started.

[Warren Fournier · Rating 5 out of 5]

Perhaps more amazing than the content of this book are the circumstances of it's creation. Sitting in prison for what seems like simply pissing off the wrong people, Boethius began talking to himself. Being unable to fathom why this horrible turn of events has happened to him, unable to come to terms with the trauma of having everything taken from him, he reasons with himself in the form of a Platonic dialogue with Lady Philosophy. The end result is a poignant and moving portrait of one man coming to accept his own fate in a seemingly chaotic and meaningless life. His conclusions were to forever influence Christian thought. If you are a student of the works of Aquinas, you will definitely see Boethius in the "Summa Theologica."

But this is not a "Consolation of Theology." It seems strange that Boethius, an early Christian, would not be praying to God instead of holding discourse with an anthropomorphized Philosophy. Yet Boethius was a Neo-Platonist, and so finding meaning behind his tragic circumstances through the lens of philosophy was no doubt near to his heart. His techniques do bring him to the conclusion that there is in fact a Supreme Good that has ordered the universe, and the book concludes with an encouragement to the reader to look to the heavens as indeed there is an all-knowing God looking down on us all.

In the course of five sections, Boethius contemplates such questions as why bad things happen to good people, why evildoers seem to often go unpunished, and why there is free will. His exploration of these persistent questions will likely not convert anyone into a religious zealot, but will not fail to influence your future response to adversity and loss.

Providence, according to Boethius, is the divine reason upon which the universe is ordered, all happening simultaneously for God who is outside space and time, and thus is divine "foresight." Fate is this same reason as observed in the temporal world. Since we have no ability to understand Providence and can only observe Fate, the latter seems chaotic and cruel.

Shortly after completion of this work, Boethius was brutally executed. But could Boethius' imprisonment and execution, though apparently the result of fickle Fortune, be a part of Providence further trying to lead all things to the good? Would Boethius have written "The Consolation" had he not been unjustly detained? Would the world remember the messages within "The Consolation" for centuries had he not been immortalized by his death?

The standard translation from the original Latin is by H. R. James, but I find his choices to be a bit too flowery and insipid, like the weak scent of lilac in a public restroom. For example, when Lady Philosophy first appears, she finds Boethius surrounded by Muses, and she angrily calls them "play-acting wantons" in the James version. Wouldn't "hysterical sluts" have packed more punch?

But regardless of the language you choose to read this book, I think you'll find "The Consolation of Philosophy" to be a short but meaty work that is way ahead of it's time, and thus worth your own time.

[Simon Robs · Rating 4 out of 5]

Another reread of this classic included in my canon of stranded isle books that can be read periodically to good measure of one's own ride on the wheel of fortune. While there's no great claim to its literary landscape and so too its ideas regarding justice and virtue age old, yet never out of style do we ponder the very things now and forever if we still be. Be well, Boethius, see you round.

[Crito · Rating 3 out of 5]

Like if Augustine had taken a few too many dank rips from his neoplatonism bong. I suppose if I were on death row I too would write a self insert fanfic about my waifu.

[Amin Medi · Rating 1 out of 5]

سخن کوتاه: این ترجمه را نخوانید.
این کتاب نمونه خوبی است برای نابودکردن کتاب خوب با ترجمه بد. البته بد توصیف کاملی برای این ترجمه نیست. ترجمه پر از غلط و جملات نامفهوم است، صفحه اول مقدمه هم غلط ترجمه‌ای دارد. در همان صفحه اول کتاب مترجم قرن شش را شانزده ترجمه کرده و کسی هم تعجب نکرده که بوئتیوس چگونه در قرن شانزدهم می‌نوشته، وقتی که در قرن ششم اعدام شده است. ناشر حتی به خودش زحمت نداده کتاب را درست صفحه بندی کند و اصول اولیه ویرایش و نگارش هم رعایت نشده است. حیف اسم آقای ملیکان که گذاشته اند روی جلد این کتاب، حیف این کتاب که با چنین ترجمه و ناشری تباه شده.

[E. G. · Rating 4 out of 5]

Preface and Acknowledgements
Abbreviations
Introduction
Summary of the Treatise
Note on the Text
Select Bibliography
A Chronology of Boethius' Life and Times

--The Consolation of Philosophy

Explanatory Notes
Index and Glossary of Names

[Fatemeh sherafati · Rating 5 out of 5]

از دسته کتاب های حال خوب کن. زمانی که کلمات خاصیت شفابخشی پیدا می کنند. زمانی که به شما قدرت می دن. به شیوه ی دیگه، نه این که نویسنده بگه تو آدم قوی ای هستی، که می گه چیزهایی که اطراف تو هستند ناچیزن. نویسنده خواننده رو با خیر واقعی آشنا می کنه. کمک به پذیرش شکست می کنه. کمک به پذیرش رنج عشق.
توی هر کدوم از دفتر هایی که داره در مورد یک چیز صحبت می کنه و اون رو در غالب مکالمه پیش می بره.
خوندنش رو توصیه می کنم.
نه که بذاریدش ته لیستتون، بذارین جلوی جلو. اگر که حالتون خوب نیست.

[Steven R. Kraaijeveld · Rating 4 out of 5]

I first read Boethius's The Consolation of Philosophy several years ago, before I ended up studying philosophy more formally. I greatly appreciated it back then, and, when I recently felt the urge to revisit it, I decided to try this new translation by David R. Slavitt, figuring that I'd not only reread it, but also re-experience it (which is what a new translation often helps you do). The translation is very contemporary and verging on the informal, which makes it highly readable. I personally lean towards the formal when it comes to works like these, but it wasn't distracting on the whole, excepting perhaps one or two instances where word choice appeared conspicuously removed from what Boethius might have chosen in his time. The verses came across as especially well translated (better, it seems to me, than the translation I previously read).

As for the work itself, I was less impressed by the philosophy of the Consolation this time around, which was probably inevitable. Nevertheless, the beauty of both the poetry and the prose, as well as the immense poignancy of the occasion (a man sentenced to death, most likely wrongfully, seeking solace in philosophy and flights of the mind), was just as—if not more—remarkable this time around.

[Homo Sentimentalis · Rating 3 out of 5]

Jedna kašika stoicizma, jedna kašika Platona; zatim dobro promiješati i sve to začiniti ranohrišćanskom teleologijom. I dobijete Boetija. U najkraćem.

Lista mislilaca koji su, bilo zbog slobodoumnih stavova, bilo zbog etičkih principa, protjerivani, mučeni ili ubijani, prilično je dugačka: Sokratu je glave došao otrov od kukute, na Spinozu je jevrejska zajednica bacila prokletstvo, Anaksagora je zbog optužbe za bezbožništvo protjeran iz Atine (što se u to vrijeme smatralo blažim oblikom smrtne kazne), Đordano Bruno je spaljen na lomači, dok je Seneku Neron primorao na čin samoubistva... U probranoj grupi onih čiji je život okončan na krajnje nepravedan način svoje mjesto zauzima i Boetije – inače poznat i po naknadno prišivenom nadimku Posljednji Rimljanin – koga su, slično kao i Sokrata, lažno optužili na osnovu njegovog političkog aktivizma, zatim ga strpali u tamnicu, i na kraju pogubili na način koji nikada nije utvrđen. Iako ni njegov dotadašnji opus nije beznačajan, zanimljivo je da Boetije baš u takvim okolnostima piše svoje najpoznatije djelo. Tako se još jednom pokazalo da tek onda kada vam oduzmu čitavo ljudsko dostojanstvo i kada ostanete potpuno sami sa svojim bolom, tek tada postanete svjesni snage i utjehe koju samo pisana riječ može da pruži.

Iako se sastoji iz ukupno pet poglavlja, Utjeha filozofije bi se sadržinski prije mogla podijeliti na tri cjeline koje su redom navedene u uvodnoj rečenici ovog prikaza. U njima Boetije vodi fiktivni razgovor sa osobom koja predstavlja personifikaciju mudrosti – nešto slično onome što se nekoliko vijekova ranije može pronaći kod Parmenida. U prvoj polovini knjige ne treba očekivati ništa spektakularno, pogotovo ako ste već upoznati sa djelima drugih antičkih mislilaca. Pod tim na prvom mjestu podrazumijevam podražavanje stoičke filozofije čiji Weltanschauung Boetije pokušava da primjeni na životnu situaciju u kojoj se u tom trenutku nalazio. Na ovom mjestu možda nije zgoreg napomenuti da u latinskom jeziku postoje čak tri različita pojma za naš pojam sreće, od kojih su prva dva vezana za promjenljivi (ovozemaljski) svijet, a treći za onaj duhovni: fortuna (niži oblik prolazne sreće koji Boetije poistovjećuje sa slučajem – kao primjer bi mogli uzeti radost prosječne balkanske četvrtaste glave nakon dobitka na kladionici), felicita (viši oblik prolazne sreće – to bi bila ona vrsta zadovoljstva koju nam donosi recimo zaljubljenost) i beatitudo (najviši oblik sreće – radost filozofske ili epifanijske spoznaje koja donosi smirenje i trajnu duhovnu vedrinu) Osnovni zadatak stoičke filozofije jeste oslobađanje duše od ropske vezanosti za oblike prolazne sreće; ali to za Boetija nije konačan cilj duhovne potrage, nego odskočna daska prema višim oblicima duhovnosti (poput asketizma kod vjernika), s tim što se oni kod njega ne nalaze u Svetom pismu, nego u Platonovom inteligibilnom svijetu.

Posljednjih četrdesetak stranica jesu najfilozofičniji i meni lično najzanimljiviji dio ove knjige, pa ću im iz tog razloga posvetiti posebnu pažnju. U njima Boetije ispituje dvije aporije, naročito važne za hrišćansko poimanje svijeta: prva se odnosi na problem zla – obrađen poprilično šturo pa se na njega neću osvrtati – dok se druga, kojoj je posvetio čitavo poglavlje, bavi pitanjem ljudske slobode. (da ne ponavljam neka svoja razmišljanja u vezi sa ovom temom, koga zanima može pogledati prikaz https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...) Glavno pitanje koje Boetije postavlja glasi: Kako pomiriti božansku promisao sa ljudskom slobodom? Ili prevedeno i malo prošireno – ako slobodna volja postoji i ukoliko bog ne može da predvidi naše postupke, zar to onda ne dovodi u pitanje njegovo savršenstvo? Sa druge strane, prihvatanje teze da slobodna volja ne postoji bi urušilo dobar dio onoga na čemu se temelji hrišćansko naravoučenije, pa bi takva jedna granata razorila ne samo ljudski ponos i dostojanstvo, nego bi mnogo toga načinila besmislenim – savjesnost, moralnu (pa i krivičnu) odgovornost, molitvu, smrtne grijehe, vjerovanje u nagradu i kaznu poslije smrti, itd. Kako, dakle, sačuvati i jednu i drugu stvar, a da odbranom jedne ne bude poništena ona druga? I da li se stvarno u nama nalazi moć odlučivanja ili nam je mit o slobodnoj volji u određenom istorijskom trenutku nametnut? I naravno, šta uopšte znači biti slobodan? Ne vidim značajnije pitanje koje sebi jedno ljudsko biće može da postavi. Ali da se vratimo Boetiju... Ovaj raskol on uspijeva da premosti cijepanjem stvarnosti na transcendentalni i empirijski svijet; drugim riječima – Bog zahvaljujući svojoj vanvremenosti i sveprisutnosti može da providi (to bi bila božanska riječ za predvidi) čovjekove postupke, a da mu istovremeno ostavi potpunu slobodu odlučivanja: U odgovor ću reći da je sami budući događaj, kad se odnosi na božje znanje, nužan, kad se pak posmatra u vlastitoj prirodi, tada je nezavisan od svake prisile (sasvim i apsolutno slobodan)) Ovdje je radi još boljeg razumijevanja važno ukazati na razliku koju Boetije pravi između apsolutne nužnosti (to je ono što MORA da se dogodi – recimo Sunce mora da sija) i uslovne nužnosti (to su stvari koje postaju nužne tek onda kada se dogode – to bi se u nama poznatom svijetu moglo odnositi jedino na ljudske postupke), kao i između proviđenja i usuda (što bi donekle odgovaralo razlici između supstancije i modusa u Spinozinoj filozofiji – Proviđenje je jedinstvena i nepokretna forma događanja (zbivanja) u prirodi, dok je Usud pokretna veza i vremenski sljed onoga što je božja jedinstvenost (Proviđenje) odredila da se vrši (u svijetu)). I sve je ovdje divno i bajno objašnjeno – čak imamo i hepiend – da je prava šteta što je čitava ta argumentacija u osnovi promašena... Nijedan zagovornik indeterminizma uopšte nije u stanju da postulira problem slobode volje na pravi način, a kamoli da ga razradi, već se ljudski razum, njegova duša i sve ono po čemu se čovjek razlikuje od drugih živih bića, sami po sebi uzimaju kao dovoljan razlog i nepobitan dokaz postojanja slobodne volje. Mislim, želim, osjećam; dakle – imam slobodnu volju???!! Čovjek je precijenjena biljka i tačka! Iznervirao sam se, stajem sa prikazom ovdje...

Moram samo još uputiti posebnu pohvalu Marku Višiću koji treba da služi kao primjer temeljnog pristupa pisanju uvodnih studija i komentara. A to se ne odnosi samo na podatke koji su vezani za pisca, njegovu epohu i samo djelo, nego i na hrpu sporednih, ali ništa manje zanimljivih podataka koji se nalaze u komentarima (na posebnu radost nas koji smo sakupljači nepotrebnog znanja), a sviđa mi se i to što su mnogi značajni pojmovi dati i na latinskom jeziku. Sve to kod mene podiže ugođaj čitanja za dobrih 30-50% i ne važi samo za ovu knjigu nego za sva Unireksova izdanja iz ove edicije.

[· · Rating 3 out of 5]

(6 November, 2012)

Confused at how to rate this one.

As a work of late Antiquity literature it is a masterpiece (beautifully translated by Mr. Slavitt) and I am happy to have read it, specially the first three books, which deal with human happiness and how to achieve it. Readers of self-help books (self-help, pffft!) would be better off reading this than the vacuous, laughable books of our time.

As a theological work, it is less than convincing. Books IV and V remind me of Augustine's 'City of God', circular reasoning and specious arguments abound. Too many things are taken for granted or inadequately explained; if God does exist, how are we to know that he would be eternal, or omnipotent? How does 'useful' equate 'good' (certain deontological arguments aside)? How can free will and God's foreknowledge co-exist? Et cetera, et cetera... None of the answers provided are satisfying. The song remains the same, I guess.

Lastly, a minor complaint, why is it (Lady) Philosophy who seeks out Boethius and not Sophia herself?

From 4 stars for the former reason to 2 stars for the latter I have settled on the obvious compromise.

[Julie Davis · Rating 5 out of 5]

I never heard of The Consolation of Philosophy by Boethius until a couple of years ago when a friend mentioned, somewhat diffidently, that she was reading it. She said just enough to intrigue me and the book looked intriguingly short. It went onto my mental "read someday" list and that was as far as I got.

Until now. Corey Olsen's first Mythgard Academy class on The Consolation of Philosophy hit my iTunes feed. I've mentioned the Mythgard classes before, especially those to do with the Lord of the Rings and Dracula. They are really excellent and they are free.

As it turns out The Consolation of Philosophy is not only one of the most influential books through Middle Ages and Renaissance, but strongly influenced J.R.R. Tolkien and C.S. Lewis. Not to mention that the ideas continue to filter through pop culture and can pop up in unlikely places.

Am thoroughly enjoying this initial reading.

FINAL UPDATE
This was an amazing book, made even richer (is that possible?) by Corey Olsen's classes. It is a cogent look at good versus evil, fortune versus innate worth, and the intertwined nature of God's foreknowledge and free will. Thought provoking and inspirational, all without ever going beyond the bounds of philosophical thought and logic.

I will be coming back to this many more times.

[Tori Samar · Rating 5 out of 5]

A remarkable book. I don't see how its significance can be overstated. I loved wrestling with this book so that I could actually understand it. I loved stepping out of my modernity into a medieval mindset (I understand both myself and them better now). I loved following Boethius' spiritual journey, in which he starts with his vision clouded by tears and his head forced to look down at the earth but then with Lady Philosophy's help ends on the mountaintop seeing things as God does. The exile returned to his homeland.

The Ignatius edition had many helpful footnotes, and the translation was very readable. All the literary criticism essays in the back of the book offered something interesting too. I especially enjoyed the last one, which helped me think through one of Lady Philosophy's most eyebrow-raising arguments in Book 3.

[jaz ₍ᐢ. ̫.ᐢ₎ · Rating 4 out of 5]

4.5

in the year 530ad Boethius was wrongly convicted and sentenced to death, this is what he wrote in the days leading up to doomsday. He writes a story of himself meeting a woman who is the physical embodiment of philosophy. Using the dialogue as a way to spiritually guide him to the end of his life, so incredibly interesting to read. I got a lot out of this

[Chad · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is one of those books that, once you have read it, then you are ready to read it. Dense, captivating, challenging, and truly full of consolation. While not written from an explicitly Christian perspective, but rather a philosophical one, I nevertheless heard the good ways of God echoing through these philosophical reflections. This is no surprise, of course, since Boethius was a devout believer. Like so many ancient books, this one is best read multiple times during multiple seasons of life. It will be in my hands often.

[Mark Rizk Farag · Rating 3 out of 5]

I want to start this short and incoherent review with a thought experiment. I want you imagine you have worked all your life to become among the most rich, powerful and influential people in your nation. A politician of great influence who managed not only to achieve greatness, but to bestow it upon your family. You run shoulders with Kings and are a person of great knowledge and acts.

Then one day, this is all suddenly taken from you. You are falsely accused of a crime you did not commit and you go from one of the most powerful people in your nation, to being on death row. Everything you worked for, all your hopes and dreams, your comforts, all gone.

This is the story of Boethius. What do you do in this situation? Indeed many of us would cry, lost hope, despair or descend into madness with the pressure, loss and impending doom.

Boethius on the other hand, wrote a book. This in and of itself is an amazing achievement. And not any old scruffy book either, a book full of the wisdom of the ancient sages that came before him, with poetry and largely in the style of a Socratic dialogue (which is impressive given that he lived in the middle ages!). If that isn't impressive enough, Boethius (along with Augustine) is one of the authors credited with keeping Aristotle and Plato in the public lexicon and discourse in the west during the medieval period and beyond, at a time when much of Philosophy was lost.

The book itself is excellent. Boethius writes as though he is seeking consolation from philosophy (hence the title), who is personified as an extremely wise woman. The best discussions in this book (in my opinion) are those that deal with the so called 'wheel of fortune' (not the game show habibi, the philosophical concept). Boethius provides the metaphor of a wheel - upon which we rise as our fortunes are favourable, only to descend. He also personifies fortune as a fickle women who lulls into a false sense of security only to pull away the rug from under us:

'I know the many disguises of that monster Fortune and the extent to which she seduces with friendship the very people she is trying to cheat, until she overwhelms them with unbearable sadness and grief at the suddenness of her desertion. If you call to mind her character her methods, and the kind of favour she offers, fou will see in her that you did not lose anything of value '

' if after choosing her as the mistress to rule your life you want to draw up a law to Control her coming and going, you will be acting without any justification and your very impatience will only worsen a lot you cannot alter '


Boethius then moves on to discussions surrounding what we should base our lives on, if not fortune and the nature of bad fortune as not necessarily being negative:

' for bad fortune I think, is more use tor a man than good fortune. Good fortune always seems to bring happiness but deceives you with her smiles, whereas bad fortune is always truthful because by her Change, she shows her true fickleness . Good fortune deceives, but bad fortune enlightens. With her display if specious riches, good fortune gives men release through recognition if how fragile a thing happiness is. '

' by her flattery, good fortune lured men away from the lath of true good, but adverse fortune often draws men back to their true good like a shepherdess with her crook. Do you think it is of small account that this harsh and terrible misfortune has revealed those whose hearts ads most loyal to you? She has shown you the friends whose smiles were true smiles, and those whose smiles were false in deserting you. Fortune has taken her friends and left you those who are truly yours had you remained untouched and you thought blessed by by Fortune, you would have been unable to get such knowledge at any price. So you are weeping when you have really found the most precious of all riches - true friends '

BEAUTIFUL and Inspiring words that ring true in our current circumstances.

So if you're still with me, you may be wondering why the book only got three stars. Well, after this particularly strong discussion (somewhat bizarrely for a man with a very short time to live), Boethius provides an exegesis of his broadly Neoplatonist and Aristotlean philosophy, much of which is rather boring and outdated (natural order of things, an explanation of how God can know things in the future without preordaining them, a bizarre section on crime and punishment which argues that criminals want to be punished etc.

For that reason the book falls short, the second half just didn't cut it.

Boethius deserves praise not only for this book, but for the circumstances it was produced in and it's massive consequences. He also ends each chapter with a poem that drives his point home, and which draw heavily on Greek Myth and old Gods.

[Kamakana · Rating 3 out of 5]

171118: reinterpretation/reuse of ancient greek philosophy arguments by imprisoned roman executed in 526, primarily expounded as moral instructions, later used to support christian metaphysics as will develop in medieval centuries. readable layers of translations, poetry rendered prose, some context in plato texts (as translated in 1892?), some commentary/critiques.... probably more interesting if you like medieval philosophy...

[Laura NC · Rating 5 out of 5]

Highly recommend the Ignatius Critical Edition! One of the most beautiful and edifying reads of my life!

[Davis Smith · Rating 5 out of 5]

10/2024:

"What strife breaks the civil bonds of the things of this world? What God would set such incompatible truths loose to struggle with one another? Either could stand alone, but together how can their contradictions be joined? Or is there some way that they can get on that the human mind, enmeshed in flesh, cannot discern? That flame is covered, and in the darkness the world's subtle connections are hidden. And yet we feel the warmth of the love that holds together all that there is in eternal truth that knows what it seeks and has its end in its beginning."

Virtually everyone you're bound to talk to who has read this will speak nothing but the highest words of it. It's hard to overstate how foundational it really is to the entire project of classical education and to the basic assumptions of the Great Tradition. It is something of a literary masterpiece in its baptism of the Socratic dialogue and in its infinite miniature journey toward utmost contemplation (if you're struggling to discern the specifically Christian aspects, the Pauline final section and the references to divine love are what you're looking for). This time I read the David R. Slavitt translation for Harvard UP, which has its idiosyncrasies (how on earth do you get "tried to impose upon them a certain form that in itself is curiously anodyne" from the first line of prose? It's literally just made up) but is overall a very thoughtful and artful translation. V.E. Watts produces a more literal translation for Penguin which might be better as a starter. And it's also worth checking out the public-domain 19th century version of H.R. James, which is antiquated in many ways, but his translations of the poems into rhyming verse are fairly brilliant in the same way that something like Pope's Iliad is: https://www.gutenberg.org/files/14328...


6/2022: This is a key text for understanding the medieval worldview (notice I didn’t say what people want you to think about the medieval worldview) but we do any great book a disservice when we say that its only merit lies in circumstances outside itself, and so we must learn to enjoy it on its own terms as well. The poetry is exceptionally effective (though a bit corny and overdone), the philosophy is transmuted into concise and easily-understood prose, and the ideas fuse biblical, Platonic, and some Aristotelian thoughts into a surprisingly novel blend. Though the lack of overt Christianity has been much commented upon, I think this has been vastly exaggerated. Although Christ is never mentioned, the concept of God, revelation, and natural theology that is outlined here informs an interpretation of classical thought that could never happen before 33 AD, and showcases a remarkably developed understanding of biblical dogma: one that, for all its influence on the medievals, is also deeply connected to the Christian humanism of Erasmus. The last two books are especially effective, and in my opinion explain theodicy and predestination while preserving libertarian free will more convincingly than many Protestant writings. If ever there was a Great Book I would recommend to an inexperienced reader of big ideas, it would be this. It is slim, narrow in focus, and remarkably easy to "get," but it’s also one of those rare and felicitous books that one can live with for a lifetime and never exhaust. The situation of Boethius and his imagined response to it, written in the last month of his life, will always speak to anyone who finds themselves despairing of trials and miseries and pining for divine, eucatastrophic consolation to appear.