Political Philosophy and Ethics discussion

Now available for pre-order:

My name is William Ferraiolo, I am a Philosophy Professor and author, and my new book of essays about Stoicism and Philosophy of Religion is now available from John Hunt Publishing: 👍

Excerpt:
“Since they are not dispensed in tablet or capsule form, Stoic anxiolytics remain available without prescription and exhibit an extraordinarily benign side effect profile. They rarely cause weight gain, sexual dysfunction, or uncontrollable movements of the limbs. Physiological dependence is relatively uncommon – and not especially pernicious. Instead, Stoicism offers rationally grounded, proven psychological techniques for the gradual development of consistent self-mastery and emotional detachment from those elements of the human condition that tend to cause the most pervasive and unsettling forms of fear, anxiety, and avoidable disquiet.”

https://www.amazon.com/Life-Worth-Liv...




Life Worth Living, A
Meditations on God, Death and Stoicism
William Ferraiolo
January 31 2020
Paperback 978-1-78904-304-4

Thank you for your consideration. 🙏
William Ferraiolo

William wrote: "Now available for pre-order:

My name is William Ferraiolo, I am a Philosophy Professor and author, and my new book of essays about Stoicism and Philosophy of Religion is now available from John Hu..."

Although I have a rule that posters are not to create a new substantive topic without consulting with me first, I have no problem with this particular topic or with your mentioning your book. I do, however, have a problem with your evident attempt to market a pharmaceutical product in this forum. Please remove that quote and replace it with something more philosophical from your book or otherwise.

Absent your removing the said quotation, I will delete your post.

Thank you.

Alan E. Johnson
Moderator

Addendum to my preceding post: It now occurs to me that you were speaking tongue-in-cheek, though it difficult to be sure since the quote is taken out of context. On this assumption, I will let the comment stand as is.

That was my impression as well; that it was all just a clever turn of phrase being employed. The sticky wicket was the term 'anxiolytics' which I had to ponder for a while. Is that an actual variety of drug? I sure don't know.

Hello,

My new book comes out on June 1st:

In Slave and Sage William Ferraiolo distills and reanimates the original spirit of Epictetus’ Enchiridion for a 21st century audience, and shows how the lessons Epictetus offered are more relevant than ever to modern life. Much like the original stoics, Ferraiolo's work prides itself on a combination of erudition and accessibility, to teach and counsel every reader.

"This little gem of philosophical insight will help you dig down into the best wisdom of the ancient Stoic philosopher, Epictetus, and see how it can apply powerfully in our lives today. Highly recommended."
Tom Morris, author of The Stoic Art of Living

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/178...

Hi all. I’ve been trying to journal, using the daily stoic journal by holiday and hanselman. I keep getting hung up though. In February, one of the questions was “do I see and assess myself clearly?”
Probably not! How do we even step back to see ourselves clearly, without being too lenient (therefore dishonest) or without judging ourselves to harshly. At least I know better than to ever ask my kids a question like that again! Wow, that was humiliating. How would any of you assess yourselves?

re: Anna's msg #6 this thread

Anna, your deliberation does you credit, and is well-worth considering by any thoughtful person.

Should men turn their gaze 'inward' or 'outward'? The problem is that the horns of this dilemma have shifted; 'inward' and 'outward' mean something different in previous eras than it does now. What to do in today's world?

No less than Socrates emphasized the importance of inner reflection. The "self-examined life" is a familiar Socratic quotation.

But the downside of this is frivolousness; lassitude; narcissism. Daydreaming and reverie do not generate a productive life. I myself do not much admire anyone who spends inordinate time, 'navel-gazing'.

Nor does political ombudsman Charles Krauthammer in the following commencement speech. It's an address which reminds us all of our role in civic, public affairs:

https://www.nationalaffairs.com/stora...

Background on Krauthammer:
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/arc...

Greek statesman Pericles also stressed public duty in citizens. All very sage encouragement for turning 'outward' rather than 'inward'.

But gazing 'outward' today, has flipped inside-out. An "exterior-life" in modern times has become trifling and paltry. Surfing; bingeing; spectating; "social media".

Who today 'gazes outward' in the sense of civic life? Who is engaged and active in public duty?

Socrates and Pericles rarely co-exist anymore. Action and reflection are sublime when complementary. But in life today, there is usually an imbalance.

I don't know what to recommend. Just musing aloud here.

Epictetus’s Complete Works (2022)

I have just learned of a 2022 translation of Epictetus’s Complete Works translated by Robin Waterford. The publisher is the University of Chicago Press. The Kindle edition is only $2.99 (USD). The Amazon link is https://www.amazon.com/Complete-Works....

Thanks. I had not seen it at the $2.99 price, and bought it immediately. I usually enjoy Waterfield’s translations. The public domain Epictetus translations I have found online range from uninspiring to awkward, and my Oxford Worlds Classics volume is missing.

Ian wrote: "Thanks. I had not seen it at the $2.99 price, and bought it immediately. I usually enjoy Waterfield’s translations. The public domain Epictetus translations I have found online range from uninspiri..."

Yes, I could not get much into Epictetus on the basis of earlier translations; my Greek is rather rudimentary, and I am mostly reliant on good English translations. I also bought the Kindle edition and will read it sometime after I finish writing the book on political philosophy that I am currently preparing.

Since I mentioned the Oxford World's Classics Epictetus, translated by Robin Hard, Discourses, Fragments, Handbook, I should point out that the Kindle edition is currently available for $5.99 (and I got it for less using Amazon points).

It should not be confused with Hard's 1995 Everyman revision of the eighteenth-century Elizabeth Carter translation of the "Discourses" (only). I have at one time or another owned both in paperback, and I'm not sure I had that distinction in mind when I mentioned the OWC translation yesterday.

Carter's pioneering translation may also underlie some of the unsatisfactory public domain translations:. Even if it was not too strongly shaped by the Greek original, what was simple and natural in eighteenth-century English may come across stilted, even in less than expert modernization. If I ever look into it, I will try an early edition through the Internet Archive.

Ian wrote: "Since I mentioned the Oxford World's Classics Epictetus, translated by Robin Hard, Discourses, Fragments, Handbook, I should point out that the Kindle edition is currently available..."

Thank you for this information. I have a revision (reviser not identified) of Carter's translation on Kindle, and I read it in part in 2019. I have now downloaded the Kindle edition of the Robin Hard translation that you referenced in the first paragraph of your preceding post and, after rewards credits, it was only $2.26. It is somewhat incredible that this OUP edition and the University of Chicago edition mentioned in my earlier email (Robin Waterford translation) are so inexpensive; usually, such academic books, especially from OUP, are quite expensive.

Oxford Worlds Classics are usually less expensive than other OUP volumes, and they sometimes show up at very low prices for Kindle editions. I periodically do a sort for them using Amazon Advanced Search, looking for temporary bargains.

Ian wrote: "Oxford Worlds Classics are usually less expensive than other OUP volumes, and they sometimes show up at very low prices for Kindle editions. I periodically do a sort for them using Amazon Advanced ..."

Thanks for the tip!

Thank you, Alan for pointing the way to a new translation of the complete works of Epictetus.
I seldom find Kindle satisfactory for the way I prefer to read so I've found a hard copy at an attractive price and ordered it.

Pleased to report that I've found the Waterford edition highly satisfactory.
In addition to translating this compendium of the known teachings of Epictetus, editor Robin Waterfield has provided an extensive and very helpful Introduction. The book offers us an easily accessible education in stoicism, as it was taught by Epictetus, beginning about 93 CE.
The fundamental question his teaching sought to address was:
”How must we live if our lives are to be subjectively fulfilling and objectively worthwhile?”
His answer was ”Get ever closer to yourself, your true self.”
In support of his goal of making that apparently simple statement a reality in the lives of his acolytes (rather than just a philosophic mantra discussed around the dinner table) Epictetus enunciated a set of core principles, intended to prevail over every aspect their daily lives. These principles and their application were summarized in a comparatively concise “Handbook.”
1. Learn to distinguish between what is “up to us” and what is not.
2. Our minds and all aspects of our character belong exclusively to us. They cannot be thwarted by anyone or anything else.
3. Events imposed by others or by fate are neither “good” nor “bad” and cannot contribute to our happiness or misery. Such events are opportunities, not constraints.
4. Each of us has the resources to achieve happiness. It’s “up to us.” We can take control of our own lives.
5. Rationality is our birthright and an inalienable human capacity. We have both the capacity and the obligation to act rationally and with virtue.
6. Virtue (which is the proper functioning of the soul in accord with nature) under the guidance of reason, always fulfills and benefits us, regardless of what others do.
7. If we are virtuous, nothing external can make the slightest difference to our happiness.
Since it is our nature’s tendency to be rational, it is the job of philosophy to help us realize this inborn potential; cure us of attachment to anything that is not conducive to this end. None of this is easy, it requires commitment and hard work. This philosophy must be applied to every aspect of daily life; it must govern our actions, habits and behavior.
For Epictetus, the goal is that the student shall continually strive to become a better person. Not more learned but to live and act in accord with a rational perception and understanding of the real world; to live according to a set of ethical concepts and beliefs. To “know oneself” and become confident in one’s role, beliefs and habits. Epictetus was a stern taskmaster; he had no patience with sophistry and empty rhetoric. He was often blunt and abrasive.

More to come shortly.

Jim wrote: "Pleased to report that I've found the Waterford edition highly satisfactory.
In addition to translating this compendium of the known teachings of Epictetus, editor Robin Waterfield has provided an ..."

Thank you, Jim, for your summary. I am not well read in Stoicism, though I have read selectively over the decades in some of its writings. One thing that has always puzzled me is its position about free will. I have read some (secondary) accounts that the Stoics denied free will or adopted a compatibilist view (which, at least as compatibilism is understood today, is essentially self-contradictory). However, your account and the account at https://www.stoicmentality.com/how-st... appear to be consistent with my own views in my books Free Will and Human Life (free PDF at https://www.academia.edu/108171849/Al...) and Reason and Human Ethics (free PDF at https://www.academia.edu/107899091/Al...).

What I find especially appealing is this:
As advocated by Epictetus, stoicism offers man a pathway to contentment (Discourses 1.1.17) When faced with conditions over which one has no control, the student is instructed to ”Make the best of what is ‘up to us’ and take everything else as it comes.” Complaining about misfortune is not only futile, it distracts man from what he should be doing.
Epictetus tells us to use our own gift of reason to make wise choices. Deal with each situation by examining each impression and deciding whether to respond or not, and how to respond.

And thanks, Alan for your links, especially "How Stoicism Addressed the Concept of Free Will." This viewpoint is appealing because it's not only simple and unequivocal, it's entirely logical. Whether one accepts the existence of fate or not, it's not "up to us" so we cannot change it. What we can decide is how to deal with it.

I'll revisit Epictetus and other Stoics at some time in the not-too-distant future.

Upon further reading in secondary sources, it appears to me that Stoicism has a complicated view of free will. The Stoic view (or at least the views of some Stoic philosophers) seems to be similar, though not identical, to standard compatibilism/soft determinism. As I explain on pages 15, 42-47, 50, 93-96, and 102 of my book Free Will and Human Life, standard compatibilism incoherently violates the principle of (non)contradiction. I will need to read further in the primary sources to figure out exactly what the views of the various Stoic philosophers were on this question. This, however, is a future project. I have some other reading that I must do first.

If some Stoic philosophers teach that “Fate” or “Determinism” rules everything outside of our own mental choices (a view suggested by some secondary sources), this, indeed, would be similar, though not identical, to my own view. Such a view emphasizes the importance of individual mental choices (which I also affirm) but appears to reject the possibility that individual choices and decisions can result in concrete actions that can affect, without being predetermined, one’s own life or the social or political milieu in which one finds himself. This perhaps made sense in an ancient world where individual human beings had little or no agency in a political system dominated by elites such as Roman emperors. But many of us today live in democratic-republican societies in which freedom of speech and nonviolent political action (including, but not limited to, voting) are possible. Cf. my review of Robert Sapoolsky’s book Determinism at https://www.academia.edu/111595070/Cr....

Further thoughts on my reading of Waterford's translation and his Introduction:
Epictetus' sessions with his students appear to have been lively affairs. Epictetus’s interchanges with students, visitors, opposing philosophers (and interlocutors that he conjures up to illustrate a point) are expressed in free-wheeling vernacular; forthright, often humorous, even mocking or rude. For example, I found especially entertaining his interchange with a supposed tyrant — who claims to be ”the most powerful man in the world” and who believes himself to be “”the focus of everyone’s attention”. Epictetus chaffs ”Can’t you see that everyone attends to his own mundane needs and attends to you as he does to his donkey. I mean, who cares for you as a person? Who takes you for a role model?”
It’s hardly surprising that Emperor Domitian exiled all philosophers from Rome, suspecting them (probably with some justification) of having republican sympathies. Epictetus established himself on the coast of Greece and took a dim view of Rome, seeing it as a place of false values and lose morals — very much at odds with his teachings.

Alan wrote ... appears to reject the possibility that individual choices and decisions can result in concrete actions that can affect, without being predetermined, one’s own life or the social or political milieu in which one finds himself
I agree that a viewpoint of fate and our capacity to influence events based on a 1st century world cannot seamlessly apply in our more complex (and global) society. However, the core principle of addressing what is "up to us" remains valid, even while our scope of influence is much broader (and complex).
I find a great deal to applaud in Epictetus’s ideas. Although I recognize that seeking to live by his principles is likely to put one out of step with much of the world that surrounds us, doing so should be very rewarding in terms of peace of mind. One thing I’m sure of: a true stoic who is governed by virtue and reason is almost certain to be an honorable man. That is surely something to aspire for.

Alan, thank you for the link to your review of Sapolski's "Determinism".
As a layman, not a trained philosopher, I'm inclined to take a different (and admittedly oversimplified) view of the matter.
I would liken all of the preconditions, actions and events that we experience to moves in a game of chess; i.e. each successive move changes the subsequent game and influences every move that follows. It's inconceivable to me that fate predetermines the choices each of us makes under unknowable conditions.

Jim,

I have read portions of Epictetus, Seneca, and Marcus Aurelius, though not recently. I plan to read their entire extant writings sometime during the next few years, if time permits.

I basically agree with your second paragraph, though there are many other considerations involved in the analysis of free will. I am currently reading neuroscientist Peter Tse's 2024 book A Neurophilosophy of Libertarian Free Will and will review that book when I am finished reading it.

Alan

On a personal note, the only person I’ve met who might readily have been considered a stoic was my maternal grandfather — although he could never have thought of himself that way. It may be my memories of him and his worldview that render this philosophy so appealing to me.
I wish I had read this in my youth; it would have helped me to face the many “slings and arrows” I faced from a world where I did not fit in.
Thank you, Alan, for a very stimulating discussion on this topic.
I seem to have only touched the tip of the iceberg ...