Daodejing, Laozi
• Ping fa, Sunzi
• De Rerum Natura, Lucretius^
• Outlines of Pyrrhonism, Sextus Empiricus
• Enchiridion of Epictetus, ed. Arrian — 180 Proof
Otherwise we can list all sorts of practises with no criteria as to how they are related to "wisdom". — Metaphysician Undercover
I wouldn't include it among primary sources for material of that era (which was in any case medieval rather than ancient.) — Wayfarer
Succeeding generations of philosophers wrote extensive commentaries on his works, which influenced thinkers as diverse as Aquinas, Spinoza, Leibniz, and Newton. (https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/maimonides/)
Maimonides is a medieval Jewish philosopher with considerable influence on Jewish thought, and on philosophy in general. Maimonides also was an important codifier of Jewish law. His views and writings hold a prominent place in Jewish intellectual history.
His works swiftly caused considerable controversy, especially concerning the relations between reason and revelation. Indeed, scholarly debates continue on Maimonides’ commitments to philosophy and to Judaism as a revealed religion. However, there is no question that his philosophical works have had a profound impact extending beyond Jewish philosophy. For instance, Aquinas and Leibniz are among the non-Jewish philosophers influenced by Maimonides. (https://iep.utm.edu/maimonid/)
And also a polemic seeking to reconcile arcane theological terms with recondite philosophical argument. — Wayfarer
First of all, there are theorists (following in the tradition of Leo Strauss) who view Maimonides as committed to esoteric writing strategies rooted in socio-political considerations—essentially, on such a view, Maimonides will often be seen to have written the exact opposite of what he truly believed. For these theorists, the stated view of Maimonides will almost always be in extreme contrast to his true, unstated view [for a related discussion. Applying this theoretical starting point to the case at hand, the fact that Maimonides seems to embrace creation ex nihilo would suggest to some that he truly believed in Aristotelian eternity, the opposite view ….
Why Plato thought of this apparently fantastic doctrine [of the Forms] is a very difficult question. ... According to an interpretation which I read in certain writers, Plato teaches that there is an idea of everything which is designated by a term which is not a proper name. There is no idea of Socrates. But whenever you find a noun or an adjective, there is surely an idea conforming to that. My favorite example is the third undersecretary of the Garment Workers Union. Even if there exists only one of those, there could exist an indefinite number, and therefore there is is an idea of it. Somehow this sounds like an absolutely absurd doctrine. What is the use of such a duplication?
Strauss has an idiosyncratic, not to say unique, reading of the ancients: he reads them as Machiavellians, or even Nietzscheans. Strauss is a Machiavellian of a peculiar sort, however. Strauss favors the ancients, who agree with Machiavelli in all respects but one: they are atheistic and amoral, like Machiavelli and Nietzsche, but are critical of the moderns for openly admitting these things. The truth, according to Strauss, is that there is no God, no divine or natural support for justice, no human good other than pleasure. Strauss, in a word, is a nihilist ...
It's probably unwise, Fool, to spoon-feed (i.e. "summarize") what you can easily find yourself by searching Google, SEP & wikipedia. That said, and given I'm not wise myself, I'll say only what each book has meant to me:(1) Daodejing, Laozi
(2) Ping fa, Sunzi
(3) De Rerum Natura, Lucretius^
(4) Outlines of Pyrrhonism, Sextus Empiricus
(5) Enchiridion of Epictetus, ed. Arrian
— 180 Proof
Can you please summarize all of these books in one or two sentences? — TheMadFool
(1) Daodejing, Laozi
(2) Ping fa, Sunzi
(3) De Rerum Natura, Lucretius^
(4) Outlines of Pyrrhonism, Sextus Empiricus
(5) Enchiridion of Epictetus, ed. Arrian
— 180 Proof
Can you please summarize all of these books in one or two sentences?
— TheMadFool
It's probably unwise, Fool, to spoon-feed (i.e. "summarize") what you can easily find yourself by searching Google, SEP & wikipedia. That said, and given I'm not wise myself, I'll say only what each book has meant to me:
1. 'to flow with the complementarities of nature'
2. 'high stakes strategic thinking & preparation'
3. 'an immanent way of reducing misery'
4. 'the undecidability of philosophical (& religious) statements'
5. 'exercises in equanimity' — 180 Proof
And also a polemic seeking to reconcile arcane theological terms with recondite philosophical argument.
— Wayfarer
Can you give specific examples? — Fooloso4
However, wisdom is composed not only of knowledge, but also of experience. — Metaphysician Undercover
In Buddhism, we distinguish between spiritual experiences and spiritual realizations. Spiritual experiences are usually more vivid and intense than realizations because they are generally accompanied by physiological and psychological changes. Realizations, on the other hand, may be felt, but the experience is less pronounced. Realization is about acquiring insight. Therefore, while realizations arise out of our spiritual experiences, they are not identical to them. Spiritual realizations are considered vastly more important because they cannot fluctuate. — Traleg Kyabgon Rinpoche
Laozi & Lucretius, I imagine, would take me in their stride easy enough. Can't say that about the others though, or see why that matters one way or the other. — 180 Proof
A series from Princeton Press. Details here https://press.princeton.edu/series/ancient-wisdom-for-modern-readers — Wayfarer
Yes, each of my selections can be characterized better as "a way towards wisdom" (i.e. philosophy) than as "wisdom" itself (i.e. sophistry). — 180 Proof
Only sophists claim to be wise, or to possess "wisdom". — 180 Proof
Well, he certainly argued that. He also argued that transcendant forms are the foundation of reality and that democracy is wrongheaded. He also was a rationalist, as opposed to an empiricist, which can be seen in his claim about wisdom. He was a dualist who believed in an immortal soul. Now some or perhaps none of these beliefs bother you be he seems to have considered his arguments effective on these, including his about wisdom (or was that one a claim). I am not sure he unmasked anyone claiming to have wisdom (a description of his positing which includes the assumption that his argument holds) as being a sophist in the pejorative sense. He certainly had that position. Whether his various arguments and claims hold water is another can of fish and perhaps a claim to his authority might no longer be so strong for many modern people basing their beliefs on science, for example.Socrates in Plato's dialogues unmasks those who claim "wisdom" as not being wise at all — 180 Proof
.[A] too-often neglected feature of the ancient conception on philosophy as a way of life, Hadot argues, was a set of discourses aiming to describe the figure of the Sage. The Sage was the living embodiment of wisdom, “the highest activity human beings can engage in . . . which is linked intimately to the excellence and virtue of the soul” (WAP 220). Across the schools, Socrates himself was agreed to have been perhaps the only living exemplification of such a figure (his avowed agnoia notwithstanding). Pyrrho and Epicurus were also accorded this elevated status in their respective schools, just as Sextius and Cato were deemed sages by Seneca, and Plotinus by Porphyry.
Yet more important than documenting the lives of historical philosophers (although this was another ancient literary genre) was the idea of the Sage as “transcendent norm.” The aim, by picturing such figures, was to give “an idealized description of the specifics of the way of life” that was characteristic of the each of the different schools (WAP 224). The philosophical Sage, in all the ancient discourses, is characterized by a constant inner state of happiness or serenity. This has been achieved through minimizing his bodily and other needs, and thus attaining to the most complete independence (autarcheia) vis-à-vis external things. ...
Aristotle equates the contemplation of the wise man with the self-contemplation of the unmoved mover. Platonic philosophy sees ascent in wisdom as progressive assimilation to the divine (WAP 226-7). Hadot goes as far as to suggest that Plotinus and other ancient philosophers “project” the figure of the God, on the basis of their conception of the figure of the Sage, as a kind of model of human and intellectual perfection” (WAP 227-8). However, Hadot stresses that the divine freedom of the Sage from the concerns of ordinary human beings does not mean the Sage lacks all concern for the things that preoccupy other human beings. Indeed, in a series of remarkable analyses, Hadot argues that this indifference towards external goods (money, fame, property, office . . . ) opens the Sage to a different, elevated state of awareness in which he “never ceases to have the whole present in his mind, never forgets the world, thinks and acts in relation to the cosmos . . . ” — IEP Entry on Pierre Hadot
Plato was clearly concerned not only with the state of his soul, but also with his relation to the universe at the deepest level. Plato’s metaphysics was not intended to produce merely a detached understanding of reality. His motivation in philosophy was in part to achieve a kind of understanding that would connect him (and therefore every human being) to the whole of reality – intelligibly and if possible satisfyingly. ....
The Platonic sense of the world is that its intelligibility and the development of beings to whom it is intelligible are nonaccidental; so our awareness and its expansion as part of the history of life and of our species are part of the natural evolution of the cosmos. Without a religious interpretation, this view does not face the problem of evil, or the problem of whether the whole process is aiming at any result. But it does expand our sense of what a human life is. — Thomas Nagel, Secular Philosophy and the Religious Temperament
So why read those old books? — baker
I would add, though, that these works have the status of classics, because they've retained interest and validity from ancient times. — Wayfarer
No, I want to know what use is there in reading those old books. Don't just brush this off idly, it's not an idle question.So why read those old books?
— baker
As I said before, I posted the link for those interested. There's no penalty for not being interested. — Wayfarer
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.