• MysticMonist
    227
    I just finished Seneca's On the Shortness of Life. It is one of my favorite and most influential books I've read. All of the stoic stuff is good, but this short work is just amazing in its delivery.

    "In this mode of life much that is worth
    studying awaits you: the love and practice of the virtues, forgetful-ness of the passions, knowledge of how to live and to die, and deep
    repose." -Chapter 19

    "Believe me, it's the mark of a great man, and
    one rising above human weakness, to allow no part of his time to be skimmed off. Accordingly, such a person's life is extremely long because he's kept available for himself the whole of whatever amount
    of time he had. None of it lay fallow and uncultivated, and none of it was under another's control; for being a most careful guardian of
    his time, he found nothing worth exchanging for it. And so that man had enough time; but those deprived of much of their life by the
    public have necessarily had too little." -Chapter 7

    Seneca's main point is that we don't appreciate that we have short and finite lives and we are wasteful with the time we do have. We keeping saying next year or when the kids grow up or when I retire I'll work on my goals. We end giving away all our time, our greatest reassure, to others leaving no time for "lesuire". By that he doesn't mean relaxing or leisure pursuits but he means pursuit of virtue and search for Truth. In short, philosophy.

    What I appreciate about the stoics is that their ethics and approach to living ones life can be applied independent of their metaphysics or religious context (of Roman paganism). Indeed they heavily influenced many later thinkers including St. Paul. For example, even though I do have faith in a world to come (i.e. some kind of Heaven) and I believe God is the source of morality, I still find the stoics call for action and virtue compelling. Hassidic Judaism rightly says we need to do as many good deeds as we can while in this life, that's our purpose in being in existence. Once we are Heaven it will be too late, earth was the place to follow the commandments.

    I work in a nursing home with many people in various stages of dying. Stoicism gives the strength to face my own end, knowing I lived my life having truly lived by striving for virtue and uncompromising in my search for truth. I've given it all I got and I'm thankful for every new day to keep striving towards that goal.

    Anyone else read Seneca or like the stoics? Recommendations on what to read next?
  • Wayfarer
    22.8k
    A lovely post, and welcome to the Forum. More Stoic readings are definitely on my list, but one book I gave to a dear friend, and which was very well received, was A Guide to the Good Life: The Ancient Art of Stoic Joy, by William B. Irvine. I have also become a reader of Jules Evan's website, Philosophy for Life, which draws on a lot of stoic philosophy. But your post has kindled my enthusiasm for the subject anew.
  • Agustino
    11.2k
    Seneca's main point is that we don't appreciate that we have short and finite lives and we are wasteful with the time we do have. We keeping saying next year or when the kids grow up or when I retire I'll work on my goals. We end giving away all our time, our greatest reassure, to others leaving no time for "lesuire". By that he doesn't mean relaxing or leisure pursuits but he means pursuit of virtue and search for Truth. In short, philosophy.MysticMonist
    I have a big issue with Seneca's point, even though I respect Seneca and the rest of the Stoics and have greatly learned from them. Most of the time in our lives is "wasted" simply because it's not the right time to act. The Chinese have a military proverb which goes like - "the wise man spends his whole life sharpening the blade which he will only draw out one single time". Remember that - the sword will be drawn only one time, and that will make all the difference, and the difference will be very sudden. Until then it takes patience - LOTS of patience.

    This is something that many people who read Seneca today don't understand. We're pushed by our society to act. All the time you have to act. As if it was possible to do what you wanted to regardless of what day it happens to be today. This is utter arrogance and foolishness. Act at the wrong time and you will fail, and not only will you fail, but you may actually put your entire dreams in jeopardy. Seneca died because he acted at the wrong time. Because he tried not to "waste" his time. That's why he was killed. And yet, some want to follow him in his foolishness.

    If Seneca wasn't so impatient, he could've replaced that vermin Nero and ruled the Roman Empire righteously. He could've saved his people of a tyrant. But he failed. If only Seneca had had access to Chinese military wisdom.

    An apple tree bears fruit effortlessly when it is in season. It doesn't have to struggle. It comes most naturally. When it's time to act, you don't have to struggle. It comes most naturally. If you've ever been in a fight, you understand this. When it's really time to act, then you will act, there's no question about it. But if you try to act out of season, if you try to act when it's not your time yet - that will be like the apple tree trying to produce fruit out of season - futile, and even dangerous. When you're out of season, sharpen the sword.

    Lie low, live aimlessly like a peasant at the countryside. Take pleasure in the little merriments that life offers you now. There's nothing more to do in life - until & if you're finally called to act.
  • Agustino
    11.2k
    A Guide to the Good Life: The Ancient Art of Stoic Joy, by William B. IrvineWayfarer
    Several people seem to be recommending this book on TPF and also old PF. I purchased it based on andrewk's recommendation at old PF and was thoroughly disappointed. You're much better off sticking with the actual stoic texts - Aurelius, Seneca and Epictetus. In addition, Nassim Taleb's books, especially Antifragile, aren't a bad addition at all :)
  • Ciceronianus
    3k
    What I appreciate about the stoics is that their ethics and approach to living ones life can be applied independent of their metaphysics or religious context (of Roman paganism). Indeed they heavily influenced many later thinkers including St. Paul. For example, even though I do have faith in a world to come (i.e. some kind of Heaven) and I believe God is the source of morality, I still find the stoics call for action and virtue compelling. Hassidic Judaism rightly says we need to do as many good deeds as we can while in this life, that's our purpose in being in existence. Once we are Heaven it will be too late, earth was the place to follow the commandments.MysticMonist

    As far as Roman paganism is concerned (and it wasn't at all homogeneous in the first century CE), I think that the Stoics, along with most philosophers of antiquity, were skeptical or tolerant of it at best. They were not believers in the various pagan gods, that is to say. Most thought it appropriate to participate in traditional rituals, however, rather than criticize them. The Stoic Deity is pantheistic, sometimes called the "Divine Reason" which is a part of nature, though a vary rarified part of it. As rational beings we have a bit of the deity in us.

    The ancient Stoics' view of the afterlife was that we dissolved or merged into the Deity, our individual being lasting but a short time if at all. Seneca and Epictetus seem to have believed in a more personal God, but as far as I know didn't concern themselves much with the afterlife.

    Seneca wrote very well about Stoicism and other things. But his association with Nero, his cloying tributes to Claudius written while Seneca was exiled by that emperor to Corsica, and the power and wealth he accumulated during Nero's reign have led many to think he was a hypocrite rather than a Stoic.

    I've thought along those lines as well. But to his credit Seneca along with Sextus Afranius Burrus generally ran the empire well during Nero's time as emperor, until Nero took full control after murdering his mother. Seneca seems to have made great efforts to control Nero and teach him morals. And, when he saw Nero no longer liked or trusted him, offered to retire from the imperial court and transfer all his assets to the emperor. He also by all accounts died very well when he was accused of conspiracy against Nero and Nero ordered him to take his own life or have it taken from him. He chose the first option.

    Some books you might consider along with the works of the ancient Stoics, if interest in Stoicsim:

    A New Stoicism by Lawrence Becker
    Stoic Pragmatism by John Lachs
    Stoicism and Emotion by Margaret Graver
    The Inner Citadel by Pierre Hadot
  • Agustino
    11.2k
    I've thought along those lines as well. But to his credit Seneca along with Sextus Afranius Burrus generally ran the empire well during Nero's time as emperor, until Nero took full control after murdering his mother. Seneca seems to have made great efforts to control Nero and teach him morals. And, when he saw Nero no longer liked or trusted him, offered to retire from the imperial court and transfer all his assets to the emperor. He also by all accounts died very well when he was accused of conspiracy against Nero and Nero ordered him to take his own life or have it taken from him. He chose the first option.Ciceronianus the White
    Why did he not outsmart Nero and take the Empire from his incapable hands?! :s Seneca sounds like he wasn't very savvy with regards to this... Instead he preferred to let the crazy one rule and terrorise his people.
  • anonymous66
    626
    Thank you for your post!
    I've been reading Stoic material for a little over a year. I'd recommend Epictetus' Handbook and his Discourses. (<--see links... you can read versions of them both online for free).

    I really like Pierre Hadot. Especially The Inner Citadel, because it's about The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius, but I also liked Philosophy as a Way of LIfe, although not all of it is about Stoicism.

    I've been reading through this online version of Seneca's letters.

    Another interesting book I stumbled on is The Creed of Epictetus- written in 1916.
  • Ciceronianus
    3k
    Why did he not outsmart Nero and take the Empire from his incapable hands?! :s Seneca sounds like he wasn't very savvy with regards to this... Instead he preferred to let the crazy one rule and terrorise his people.Agustino

    I can only speculate, but as his colleague Burris was praetorian prefect and so presumably was aware of what the only substantial military force in the area of Rome felt, it may be that Nero retained the loyalty of the praetorian guard at that time. Or it may be that there was no acceptable replacement handy. For about 80 years before Nero became emperor, the emperors were all members of the Julio-Claudian family--men related by blood, marriage or adoption to Julius Caesar's family, the Julii, and the Claudii. An ancestor of Caesar had married a member of the Claudii family. It may have been feared that chaos would result if Nero was removed.

    And, in fact, there was chaos when Nero finally so infuriated the legions assigned to the provinces (or more importantly their generals) that some rebelled and he was declared a public enemy. He killed himself when cornered. He was the last of the Julio-Claudian dynasty. After his death came "the year of the four emperors" where the legions and their generals fought one another and Galba, Otho and Vitellius were emperor for a matter of weeks or months, and finally Vespasian became emperor and was able to restore order.
  • MysticMonist
    227
    Thanks for all the replies! I'm definitely sticking around now. I mainly posted to help me retain what I read and what I gained from it. I wasn't expecting such good responses and you all are better versed in the stoics than I.

    I ended up with the stoics by going backwards in time. I started with Paul Tillich's the Courage to Be and that made me pick up Spinoza's Ethics which made me pick up the stoics. Tillich was good, but Spinoza and Seneca are amazing.

    I'll definitely read up on some recommendations here. I'm almost finished with Meditations by Marcus Aurelius.

    Anyone know much about Pythagoras and reading his monism? I've read plontinus but am not quite a Neoplatonist.

    Thanks again for the welcome!!
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

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.