Quo vadis?

Shawn

In Latin, Quo vadis, means, 'Where are you going?'

It was and still is used in religious context to ask a person if they have grown distant from God or if they need guidance.

However, I am interested in how does one view this Latin phrase in modern day society? I feel as though it is more relevant than it was some two millennia ago. We seem to be endlessly entertained by various distractions and indulge an ever greater amount of time seeking pleasure or entertainment due to the mundane lives we live.

But, that's not really what I wanted to ask, or at least is part of it. I wanted to ask, that doesn't philosophy stand as the primary subject to ask this question? Doesn't philosophy seem rudderless to you? Perhaps that is just the very nature of philosophy. However, don't long time academics ever grow dreary of the lack of goal or task or end or telos that philosophy ought to have? Shouldn't philosophers at least strive to have a real world impact on society or the world at hand? If not, then what then? There doesn't seem to be much hope to entertain a proposition or thought if it doesn't change your life for the better. In other words doesn't philosophy itself become a distraction from the simple elements of life that render the above Latin saying as irrelevant? I'm speaking of having a job, family, and being a good citizen.

Now, I understand that most philosophers on this forum are mainly hobbyists, and can simply say that philosophy to them is simply a hobby or fun distraction, comparatively to watching Netflix, TV, or some other such mundane activity/thing. It would be somewhat idiotic for me to ask this question to a professor of philosophy, who teaches or has a job and likely family, and considers him or herself a good citizen.

So, where does that leave us? Should we just renounce philosophy, or further engage in it to become professionals in the field of philosophy. Is it only me that feels in a (comfortable) indeterminate state. I mean, if I'm happy or satisfied, then shouldn't I tell anyone asking me "Quo Vadis" to bugger off, because I have nowhere else I would want to be?

unenlightened

Shouldn't philosophers at least strive to have a real world impact on society or the world at hand? If not, then what then? There doesn't seem to be much hope to entertain a proposition or thought if it doesn't change your life for the better. — Posty McPostface

Peter asks Jesus, "Quō vādis?" He replies, "Rōmam eō iterum crucifīgī ("I am going to Rome to be crucified again").

Wiki

One might think that the going, or the crucifixion, would have little impact - especially the second time around. but the point of the fable is that Peter is going nowhere; he is running away, not towards anything. One might say that the question - not a proposition - or the answer - an action, not a proposition - changes Peter's life. He turns around and heads for his own crucifixion. Is that a change for the better?

There is a world of difference between entertaining a proposition, and taking a stand, that consists of putting one's life on the line. And doing so whether or not (because one cannot know) it will have an impact.

But when you ask here, you cannot expect an answer that is not a proposition, because talk is all there is here. We meet, not on the road, but in the tavern, where one can tell any story about where one has been or where one is going. Still, you might hear something believable, you might change your life and head for Rome as a result, or you might already be going there, and in that sense, even a thought expressed is already an action, and can have an impact. It is at least a baby step in one direction or the other.

It is the fashion to proclaim that there is nowhere to go, and think this is deep philosophy, but this is because there is a fashion for running away.

Ciceronianus

It's odd that Peter and Jesus speak to each other in Latin. When in Rome, I suppose.

0 thru 9

It's odd that Peter and Jesus speak to each other in Latin. When in Rome, I suppose. — Ciceronianus the White

I theorize that they used Latin to speak secretly in a code not understood by others nearby. (Kind of similar to parents speaking pig-Latin in front of their children.) I think the Apostles spoke Greek when they wanted to sound scholarly and deep. And of course, they reserved Ye King’s English for the most especial of occasions. I have not yet found any support for this theory however... :chin:

Ciceronianus

↪0 thru 9

Well, the Gospels were written in Greek. Bad Greek, according to ancient commentators I know of, but I have no idea whether that's the case. Paul used Greek as well. I suspect Paul's use of Greek whether good or bad was unsuccessful, judging from his rather petulant words about confounding the wisdom of the wise. Paul would debate pagans now and then, and may not have done all that well.

Rank Amateur

↪Ciceronianus the White

you going anywhere with this ?

Ciceronianus

↪Rank Amateur

Ego quo ibo?

In philosophy, to understand myself; to understand the rest of the world, and others, as well as possible; to do the best I can with what is in my power and take the rest as it happens; to do no harm; to be happy and make others happy when I'm able to do so.

And, of course, to be square and obey the law of the pack.

Shawn

It is the fashion to proclaim that there is nowhere to go, and think this is deep philosophy, but this is because there is a fashion for running away — unenlightened

What do you mean by this? Running away from what exactly?

unenlightened

↪Posty McPostface

Paul is running from persecution. People these days run from commitment, from vulnerability, from suffering, and justify it with moral relativism. 'Quo vadis?' is a moral question - whatever your life is worth, that is worth your life. But even to mention it sounds like madness and fanaticism.

Shawn

'Quo vadis?' is a moral question — unenlightened

Interesting take on this question. But, essentially I think you are right. So, was Jesus in the right again to ask Paul to go back to Rome and face crucifixion?

Shawn

Would you say that people prefer moral relativism and with it nihilism than be responsible for anyone or anything? Why is that?

unenlightened

So, was Jesus in the right again to ask Paul to go back to Rome and face crucifixion? — Posty McPostface

Well he didn't, as I heard it. He said he was going himself. Demonstration, not argument.

"Take a load off Fanny
Take a load for free
Take a load off Fanny
And (and) (and) you put the load right on me."

Would you say that people prefer moral relativism and with it nihilism than be responsible for anyone or anything? Why is that? — Posty McPostface

I don't know how to answer that. Why would I suffer when I can make another suffer instead? Empathy? Love?

Shawn

I don't know how to answer that. Why would I suffer when I can make another suffer instead? Empathy? Love? — unenlightened

Why not? Aren't you making an over-generalization here?

unenlightened

↪Posty McPostface

Well if you equate ignorance with over-generalisation...?

Shawn

↪unenlightened

Perhaps, but I digress.

BC

Ego quo ibo? — Ciceronianus the White

Google translated this first as "there" then "What am I going" then "whither shall I go?

"Mymemory" translated.net gave "whither shall I go?" first off.

Google Translate is a good thing, but since it is an algorithm, it knoweth not what it doth.

BC

how does one view this Latin phrase in modern day society? — Posty McPostface

Moderns are no more possessed of reliable existential compasses than the ancients were. Google Maps and GPS systems don't help us at the most essential level. The ancients found themselves in varying degrees grounded on dry land or lost at sea as much as we do.

It is our "Human Condition". Animals with brains more suited to their needs do not wonder "quo vado?" or "quo vadis?". Our brains, greatly exceeding the requirements of ordinary everyday life, see fit to ask distracting, useless, and, often as not, unanswerable questions -- like, "What is the meaning of life?" or "What are you doing with your existence?"

Happy are they who ask not "Quo vado?" but who say "Hic sum!" and are done with it.

Ut cum grano salis...

TheMadFool

Quo vadis — Posty McPostface

So inquisitive. The mark of a true philosopher. Finally I meet you. Quo Vadis? I follow.

Ciceronianus

↪Bitter Crank

But for the Latin I memorized as an altar boy, I generally fake it using the bits and pieces I can remember, and hope I use the appropriate tenses, declensions, etc. Well, there's lawyer-latin in there somewhere as well. I usually remember most of those phrases. Sometimes I'll check with one of the translators.

BC

But for the Latin I memorized as an altar boy — Ciceronianus the White

Catholic altar boys have that advantage in the classics. Methodists never had altar boys and they never did use Latin. Consequently, I had to learn it from scratch, and a scratch on the surface is about as far as I got.

You might like "Lingua Latina Multi Pluribus Occasionibus" -- Latin For Even More Occasions. You will finally know how to tell people you put goat cheese on it -- in Latin. You will learn how to talk Valley Girl in Latin. or Ask for directions to the vomitorium. And more!

Rank Amateur

↪Bitter Crank But for the Latin I memorized as an altar boy — Ciceronianus the White

Ad Deum qui lætíficat iuventútem meam.

Ciceronianus

Ad Deum qui lætíficat iuventútem meam. — Rank Amateur

The God of my youth, certainly, but not joy as I knelt on stone or marble reciting those words early in the morning.

Ciceronianus

↪Bitter Crank

There's some good stuff on the internet as well. But most of all, I'm fond of this, Romanes eunt domus

Rank Amateur

My memory has become selective with age - just have fond memories left - Still prefer the tridentine mass

Ciceronianus

↪Rank Amateur

And so do I, when compared with the banal, colorless, uninspiring ceremony that replaced it.

Shawn

And so do I, when compared with the banal, colorless, uninspiring ceremony that replaced it. — Ciceronianus the White

So, the Roman Catholic Church has lost it's mojo or what? :lol:

Ciceronianus

So, the Roman Catholic Church has lost it's mojo or what? :lol: — Posty McPostface

Oh yes, yes indeed. It's mojo was in its long history and its mystery, all encompassed in a most impressive, sometimes chilling, sometimes serene, sometimes beautiful ritual which could enchant the eyes and ears, even the nose when incense was used. Death, salvation and resurrection not merely enacted but taking place miraculously before the faithful each time, the divine brought to earth once more. It retained much of the drama associated with the pagan mysteries from which it borrowed. Now it's rather like attending a rotary lunch.

Rank Amateur

↪Ciceronianus the White

Agree, still mostly attend Novus Ordo in my parish, with the family. But try to make it to Latin Mass often. It is making quite a comeback with younger people as well. I think we have lost quite a bit post V2 - Not that V2 itself was poor, but the implementation swung too far IMO. Seems the pendulum is swinging back some - even with a very modern Pope.

Quo vadis?

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Categories

More Discussions