Practical Philosophy: The Greco-Roman Moralists

by Luke Timothy Johnson

Length: 12 hrs and 21 mins

It's easy to forget that philosophy means "love of wisdom," not "love of thinking." In addition to philosophy that tells you how to think well, the field also provides guidance on how to live well - solid advice on how to be a good father or friend, or how to grow old gracefully, or to know what true happiness is.

Greek and Roman thinkers such as Marcus Tullius Cicero, Lucius Annaeus Seneca, Marcus Aurelius, Dio Chrysostom, and Plutarch of Chaeronea devoted their lives not to metaphysics and epistemology but to the appreciation and practice of morality and virtue, values, and character. They give us - in plain, straightforward language - rules designed to help us progress as people.

These 24 inspiring lectures introduce you to the sages who, as a group, represent the "missing page" of the history of philosophy. Although their names are sometimes familiar to us, as in the case of Cicero and Plutarch, their philosophy is not. Studying these thinkers offers some surprising ways to think about philosophy.

For example, they believed the heart of philosophy is the question of how to live well as a human being. It is how you act, not what you think, that is most important. Virtue and morality are the keys to living a good life. And philosophers should practice what they preach (although, as you'll discover, the Greco-Roman moral philosophers certainly had flaws).

From Cicero's deep sense of civic duty to Marcus Aurelius's pursuit of wisdom and dedication to the common good, this course offers ample opportunity to hear, in their own words, the philosophers' prescriptions for healthier living.

Genres: Philosophy, Audiobook, History, Nonfiction

13 pages, Audio CD

First published January 1, 2002

About the author

Luke Timothy Johnson is an American New Testament scholar and historian of early Christianity. He is the Robert W. Woodruff Professor of New Testament and Christian Origins at Candler School of Theology and a Senior Fellow at the Center for the Study of Law and Religion at Emory University.

Johnson's research interests encompass the Jewish and Greco-Roman contexts of early Christianity (particularly moral discourse), Luke-Acts, the Pastoral Epistles, and the Epistle of James.

Reviews

[BJ Richardson · Rating 4 out of 5]

I listened to this as one of the great courses series I downloaded from Audible. When it first started out, I thought it was going to be another disappointment like his series on the mystics was. He spent far too long setting up the historical context. But once he moved in to the philosophers themselves, LTJ did a great job pulling me in. He gives a couple lectures each on Cicero and Seneca, three each on Epictetus and Plutarch, and covers many others as well among whom were Marcus Aurelius and Philo. He did an excellent job balancing presenting enough information for you to get a feel of what and how they thought, but not so much that you were laden with unnecessary detail. I've read Aurelius' meditations and Plutarch's lives, but this series has whet my appetite on reading much more from this time period and the men he highlighted. This is exactly what a Great Courses series should be like and LTJ is a much better presenter than many of the others I have listened to. All too often, the professors know their material well, but have the rhetorical flair of Schrodinger's cat.

[LemontreeLime · Rating 3 out of 5]

Had this for years and never listened to it, but finally finished a la Audible. It starts out really slow, took forever to really gain my interest even though the greek and roman philosophers are favorites of mine. By the time he reached Epictetus and Plutarch, he really started to get my attention and now I am debating re-listening to the whole set again. Johnson's talent lies in showing the philosophers in context both in their day and against modern thought. I never would have thought I'd ever want to read Plutarch's morals before hearing this, but I actually think I might now. I was also struck by the thought that this is the material that thousands of schoolboys studied 100-200 years ago as they learned their latin and greek, and how that might have shaped their thought in the end... did constant exposure to the stoics make for a better world? *shrugs* I don't know, but I will be wondering more about that in the future. Overall, once you get into this lecture series, Johnson makes you want to go back and read those old classics.

[Jerzy · Rating 4 out of 5]

I picked this up just to get a frame of reference for Seneca's letters (Listy moralne do Lucyliusza) and Epictetus' manual (The Art of Living: The Classical Manual on Virtue, Happiness and Effectiveness). I had started reading them with no context after getting those books as gifts.

The first few (general) lectures here really did give me a good context for Seneca and pals. They helped me understand the kind of world they lived in; their views of God or Providence; how the Stoics differed from the other main schools of thought on morality; and why they spend so much time not just presenting own ideas but actually defending them and bashing the other schools.

The later lectures on individual philosophers (including Seneca and Epictetus) are more mixed. The lecturer is fine, but I don't feel I'm learning how to be a better person in practice---just learning who said what (which, ironically, Epictetus makes fun of). So I'm finishing this course more out of pseudo-OCD rather than real interest.

The final lecture did tie the course together nicely, reminding us of how much these philosophers' focus on wisdom and living well differs from the usual fare in philosophy before and since. The three-part division of philosophy into physics (what's true about the world/nature?), logic (how do we know what we know?), and ethics (how should we live?) historically tended to stress the first two over the last one, or to treat the last one as a theoretical exercise. The philosophers in this lecture series are often ignored today because they did not found new schools or contribute novel ideas to physics and logic, nor is their use of language particularly interesting as literature---but their actual practical advice is fascinating and often very helpful. The importance that they assign to character and duty is refreshing, pragmatic, and inspiring. So although they say nothing new, the way they say it is still a helpful kick in the pants :)

(They were also nearly unanimous about dissing the Epicureans, though that seems largely based on common misinterpretation of Epicureanism and not always on its actual content... at least based on the little Epicureanism I know from reading The Swerve: How the World Became Modern.)

Anyway. For each lecture, the course booklet lists recommended readings by that philosopher---and I think I'd get a lot more out of it (but also spend a lot more time!) by reading those passages primarily, with this audio course as just a supplemental commentary. Maybe I'll come back to this someday and really dig deep, but that's not why I started listening this time, and I don't have that level of dedication right now :)


Notes to self on what I learned:

Empire was important. Earlier Greek philosophers (Socrates, Plato, Aristotle and their pals?) lived in Greek city-states, where you felt a citizen of your city rather than of the Greek nation, and it was possible (at least for free male citizens) to have a say in how it was governed... So it was indeed practical to philosophize about politics.
But folks in this course lived in the Roman Empire, which had been an authoritarian top-down government for centuries for most of them---so it was taken for granted that philosophizing about politics was useless (and dangerous to your well-being).
Instead, they [at least the Stoics?] focused on changing yourself. It's a weird mix of deep optimism and deep pessimism: You can handle anything life throws at you! But that's NOT saying you can ACCOMPLISH anything---in fact you shouldn't even bother to try changing the culture or government around you. Rather, you can survive, and if you don't then it's OK because death is no big deal. It's very much like the Hitchhiker's Guide cover: Don't Panic. Even if it seems that terrible things are happening---it can't actually be so terrible; nature & the gods would never deal you anything you can't handle.

Also, sounds like only (?) the Stoics and Epicureans held that women had rational minds and could learn/study philosophy as well as men.

I had heard before of Diogenes, the Cynic philosopher who carried a lantern in daylight ("looking for an honest man") and had wicked burns for Alexander the Great ("Can I do anything for you, philosopher?" "Sure, step out of my sunlight!"). But apparently after giving rousing speeches on the importance of virtue above all and trying to get the audience out of their unexamined comfort zone... he'd end the talk by pooping or masturbating in public. Voila, the great minds of Western civilization, ladies and gentlemen! Apparently many of these *moralist* philosophers didn't think highly of *civility* as such.


Early in the course, the lecturer quotes from Isocrates, "To Demonicus". He uses this as an example of sensible, commonplace advice and the kind of themes these moral philosophers tended to cover (but it's not one of the great philosophers trying to argue something new). It illustrates how philosophy was seen as a kind of rigorous training; and how many of the schools encouraged students to memorize succinct maxims and to learn by imitating the examples of good people.

Nay, you must consider that no athlete is so in duty bound to train against his competitors as are you to take thought how you may vie with your father in his ways of life. But it is not possible for the mind to be so disposed unless one is fraught with many noble maxims; for, as it is the nature of the body to be developed by appropriate exercises, it is the nature of the soul to be developed by moral precepts.

But Isocrates and most people of the time were very concerned with reputation, unlike many of the major philosophers in this course, who focused on virtue first and foremost, even if the virtuous thing to do misleadingly gives you a bad reputation.


Some good stuff from Plutarch:
* "Character is habit long continued." The things you do repeatedly, be they virtues or vices, are your character. Nice way to think about it.
* Plutarch wrote about the many possible significant meanings of a lonely letter "E" carved into the wall at Delphi. As the lecturer says, for example: "It might mean the number 5, since it is the 5th letter of the alphabet, and 5 can keep you busy for a long time as to its significance." :P It sounds to me like a great example of apophenia!
* Plutarch interprets the old Greek and Roman polytheistic religions' stories as being allegorical, so that he can finagle a way to draw good moral lessons from what otherwise seems scandalous or immoral if you take it literally. He also wants to be able to educate children on this great cultural trove of stories without them drawing the wrong conclusions. The Jewish thinkers mentioned in earlier lectures felt the same about many Biblical stories. But, in both cases, they don't just drop the institutional religious stuff itself entirely (which Enlightenment thinkers did, arguing that religion is just meant to get us to act morally, so we may as well intrinsically act morally without the middleman). Plutarch and the Jewish thinkers value the rituals and traditions of their religions, refusing to discard them just because they may seem arbitrary now. I feel like our modern world is still addressing such issues today: How do we teach classic literature that contains scenes/language/characters which seem seriously wrong now (like the ruckus about editing the language in Huck Finn)? Or how should we interpret the Bible's anti-homosexuality passages, now that many people no longer see it as sinful? If you take the whole Bible literally, why aren't you going around stoning adulterers etc.? Reminds me of The Year of Living Biblically: One Man's Humble Quest to Follow the Bible as Literally as Possible whose author concluded there's no way to follow Christianity or Judaism fully literally: even the most hard-core self-proclaimed literalists end up just choosing the parts they like.

[David · Rating 4 out of 5]

This series of lectures available as a 12.5-hour audio download “only from Audible”. It’s true: it doesn’t seem to be available now on the website of The Great Courses, the original purveyor.

It listened to this over a series of months while I did other chores, like making vegetable soup. As a result, much of it has not consciously stuck with me, although I retain the hope that somewhere in the deep recesses of my mind, the instructions contained in these lectures on how to live correctly have made an impression.

The lectures series strikes a homey note from the start, noting that the philosophers portrayed therein are not interested in abstract questions of the definitions of concepts or the mechanics of the universe. They are interested more in how people should behave, in this respect, the lecturer says, the Greco-Roman Moralists are more like TV psychologist Dr. Phil McGraw than today’s tenured philosophers at universities.

Some of the lectures were entertaining digressions, like the one on “The Charlatan”, meaning, con men posing as philosophers. Another interesting digression: the impact of Roman moral philosophy on Jewish thought in that same age.

Perhaps I will oversimplify the following, if so please forgive: a major “story line” throughout these lectures is The Stoics vs. The Epicureans. The lecturer has nothing good to say about the Epicureans. One of the criticisms, I believe, is that, if everyone behaved like an Epicurean, society would collapse and the human race would die out. By comparison, the Stoics participate willingly in Roman civic life, voting, debating, teaching, writing history, and so on. In this sense, the debate is not so different from some today: Is the system we operate in worth improving through incremental changes and modest self-improvement (Stoics), or is it so contemptible that the only sane reaction are authority-baiting and taboo-breaking acts of protest (Epicureans)? I found the Stoics more reasonable and worthy of attention, but sometimes (usually while examining the day’s news) I wonder if the Epicureans weren’t completely wrong.

[Aardman · Rating 1 out of 5]

I picked up this audiobook, hoping to learn something about Roman and Hellenic moral philosophy beyond the big names. I wanted to explore topics and questions that an honest philosophical seeker would be interested in like moral formation (How do individuals or societies decide what is moral and what isn't?), moral ambiguities, and at the very least, a comparative look at different systems of morality.

Instead what I heard in this book was a constant and unending self-righteous drone of moral certitude and indoctrination. What the author has undertaken is not philosophy, it's catechism. He is not interested at all in exploring the philosophy of morality, he has already decided what is moral and what isn't and all he wants to do is to tell people what they should believe in. Which is you should believe in God, you should believe in what God says is moral as described by these so-called moral philosophers, and that civilization is doomed to a fate of moral decline and disintegration if you don't. (And per the author, we are actually experiencing it now in the moral turpitude that he laments permeates contemporary society.)

In short this, book is deceptively titled. It is the complete opposite of what the philosophical endeavor is all about. This is not a book that tries to guide you on 'how to think' (critically, of course), it is a book that tells you 'what to think'. One big red flag, for those who don't grasp my point, is not once were the philosophical beliefs of the favored moralists discussed in the book subjected to any substantive criticism. This is a book that trains its readers to become sheep, never casting a healthy critical or skeptical eye on what they read, hear or see.

If these so-called philosophers make up what the author believes to be the 'missing page' in the book of philosophy, then those pages have been rightly torn out. Philosophy is not about somebody deciding exactly what you should think and how you should act, it's about you finding those out for yourself through reading, investigation, contemplation, reflection, and non-indoctrinative discussion with other seekers.

And I won't even get into the great slander heaped on Epicurus and epicureanism that the author indulges in at every opportunity. Hint: epicureanism is not hedonism, but it serves certain people's agenda to make you think they are one and the same. Epicurus actually lived a simple, not even remotely hedonistic, life.

[Brett Williams · Rating 5 out of 5]

The social upheaval of a Republic with hyper-partisan politics, massive income inequity, repeated violence, and mass murders was just about to devolve into a dictatorial Empire when the populous discovered their old ways no longer worked. The people were whipsawed from one extreme fiasco, debacle, outrage to the next. They were desperate for peace, most of all rattled to their psychological core, desperate for peace of mind.

Sound familiar?

It’s not the American Republic at issue here; it’s Rome. But as the professor says, “Clichés are clichés for a reason,” and the first lecture is spent equating the two. Thereafter, Emory professor Luke Timothy Johnson—once a Benedictine monk (with a name like that, he’d have to be)—gives what at times stopped me and the dogs in our tracks to sit in the grass and replay what was said over, and over. Since the Cognitive Revolution (70,000 y.a), we humans really haven’t changed. And that’s why I just kept shaking my head, whispering to the pups, “Haven’t I seen this story before? As in yesterday?”

The philosophers and their philosophy treated here are that of the Greco-Roman moralists, less known than their classic progenitors: Socrates, Plato, Aristotle. This new crew said to heck with theoretical ponderings; we need a philosophy that tames the savagery of humans, and right now. Instead, the Moralists shifted from theory to a kind of practical therapy as “doctors of the soul,” says Johnson. “All to find meaning in an alienating world.” But before he got deep into the Moralists, he provided a survey of the primary schools they still looked to: the Academy, Lyceum, Garden, Stoa, Skeptics, Cynics. The Moralists include the comic bomb thrower, Lucian of Samosata; the simultaneously political and philosophical-though-vain, Cicero; Seneca, who had such influence on the Renaissance; Emperor Marcus Aurelius; Epictetus; Plutarch; and we get an introduction to that great contest between Athens and Jerusalem still alive today.

It’s hard to say enough good about this lecture series. Such a fine example of that other learning pathway via the ears, not the eyes.

[Feng Ouyang · Rating 3 out of 5]

This set of lectures discuss the early Roman philosophers. The lectures are good at putting the discussions in the context. Early Roman philosophers are a bridge between the classical Greek philosophy and Christianity. These philosophers carried on Greek traditions of rationalism, especially the views of Aristotle and Stoicism. But they turned their focus inwards. Instead of forming a grand picture of the world, they ask questions about our moral grounds and ways to cultivate virtue for everyone. Furthermore, they explore the relationship between human and God, within and without the Christian teachings. The details of their thoughts may be unimportant today, as we have far more advanced theories about ethics and human nature. However, it is essential to know the existence of such a period. Otherwise, one may think that Greek philosophy came to an abrupt end when the Roman took over, until being rediscovered after the medieval.

[- Jared - ₪ Book Nerd ₪ · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is certainly one of the better courses in philosophy that I've had the pleasure of listening to from the Great Courses. This course specifically highlights the subject of morality in early classical philosophy. It touches briefly on these early philosophies influence of Judaism and Christianity.

Make no mistake, all these courses tend to miss the mark of coherent completeness unless you've previously studied all the works and writings that they mention but then the course simply becomes supplemental. As always, if you're serious about learning and studying philosophy, you really should consider reading all the major works starting with the classic texts some of which are highly referenced in this lecture series.

[Matthew · Rating 4 out of 5]

This work covers a group of philosophers who often do not gain enough attention - those who in the Greco-Roman world regarded Philosophy as way of life, not merely as an academic discipline. This resonates with me very strongly as it is similar to my own outlook.

I have previously read works of many of the philosophers covered in this course: Cicero, Seneca, Marcus Aurelius, Dio Chrysostom, Philo, and Plutarch. However, not I want to read even more of their works. This was a great (re)introduction for me.

[Henrik Maler · Rating 4 out of 5]

It is an introduction, that means you only get a taste of the sense of what philosophy was originally about and those who forwarded and practiced it, yet you do get a taste, a well-balanced one: not too many details, but comprehensive and simultaneously deep enough to understand who the greco-roman philosophers were and what they were about.

I also like the many citations, particularly since Johnson gave them a passionate voice. He made me laugh many times. One fact stands firm: Epictetus wants others, the Epicureans in particular, to "drop your doctrines man!"

[Mario Russo · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a great course... it en-lit an area of our western moral philosophy that is not given much importance, as professor Luke says, as the monoliths Plato, Aristotle, Socrates...
It was a very pleasing listening, learned quite a bit of new things regarding. Recommended.

[sch · Rating 4 out of 5]

Jun 2020. Great on its own terms, but also an illuminating complement to Johnson’s various lectures on biblical subjects and religious studies. I want to study Musonius Rufus, Epictetus, Plutarch, and Philo of Alexandria. The Loeb editions seem the most natural starting place.

[Michael P. · Rating 5 out of 5]

An excellent introduction to a lot of ancient philosophers, many of them previously unfamiliar.

[Alexandre Pires · Rating 4 out of 5]

Bom curso. Alguns erros na parte de Sêneca, que conheço bem... fico pensando dos outros... Mas interessante e de fácil compreensão.

[Hari · Rating 3 out of 5]

This course is a very simple and overview of some Greco-Roman Moralists. Not very much interesting information here. But I learned some new stories about some of the stoics that I like.

[Enrico · Rating 5 out of 5]

Good introduction into some of the Greco-Roman Moralists. It's more of a who is who and guides you to what you can read next from these philosophers.

[Abdul Alhazred · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good overview of primarily stoics from the greek and roman schools. Infectious enthusiasm on the part of the lecturer.

[Eugenia · Rating 5 out of 5]

A must read.

[Roy Kenagy · Rating 3 out of 5]

This guy really has it in for the Epicurians, who don't even make the cut for being moral... Which leads to much unseemly ax-grinding

[Coyle · Rating 5 out of 5]

LTJ is a great lecturer and has a solid grasp on these various moralists. Though I don't always agree with his conclusions (I do think mixing Platonism with Christianity is religious syncretism, though in good Catholic fashion LTJ argues that it's just a matter of mixing terms), the presenation is clear and the ideas that are sometimes garbled in the sources are straightened out in a way that makes sense to us moderns while still fitting the context. I particularly appreciated his argument that we shouldn't overlook the moral philosophy of these guys just because they're not the same of the same calibur as thinkers as Aristotle, Plato or Augustine. I'm definitely going to work some of this into my Intro to political philosophy lectures...
The lectures cover Plutarch, Epictetus, Seneca, Cicero, and a handful of minor writers.

[Kjn · Rating 3 out of 5]

Pace is a bit too slow and it just dips in a bit. I also have this nagging feeling of bias in certain passages. The value I got from it were a list of more books to read, so that is already something.

In any case, I think I have outgrown the teaching company. It is just lacks the depth.

[George · Rating 4 out of 5]

As an ex-Benedictine monk, Johnson is at his best talking about pagan philosophy as opposed to when he talks about Christianity.

[Auguste · Rating 5 out of 5]

Life changing. The missing page of western philosophy. If I was having my last meal, I'd have Luke Johnson over for dinner.

[Taylor Grayson]

Hated it. Almost nothing remotely "practical" about the philosophy discussed. The appeal of the ancient philosophers escapes me, because they were wrong about almost everything.

[Ricardo · Rating 2 out of 5]

2.5