Memoirs of Hadrian, Marguerite Yourcenar
Various bits by Judith Shklar, particularly the Liberalism of Fear.
Works of Love, Soren Kierkegaard.

I didn't intend it to be so but they are oddly related. — Valentinus

How so ?

Essay on Philosophical Method" - R.G. Collingwood, underway...[now finished] — Pantagruel

The last chapter, on philosophy as literature, really is world class and worth reading on its own. — Pantagruel

I noticed your reference to it here:
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/7179/opposing-perspectives-of-truth

It has good reviews, including your own. Might be tempted...

Yeah. Really hoping for a damning, turning moment in this campaign; a special which nobody can ignore.
But I think the bastards are on their guard...
Look at how and what they hide. :rage:

I think the future of philosophy at the academic level will be towards greater polarization, with departments dividing along ideological lines. — Hanover

Why would you think so ? I don't have inside knowledge of what is happening in academia. However, there is a sense that philosophy is not seen as valuable. If anything I would think the future will bring the opposite to what you suggest. Philosophy departments are having to fight to survive. Example:

http://dailynous.com/2018/12/19/philosophy-hull-threatened-heads-39-uk-philosophy-departments-object/

I see no reason to think academia will be immune from the same political direction as society in general. — Hanover

Yes, even academia as a little intellectual bubble in an ivory tower will be affected by political and economic changes. Any benefits or value of education in society is under constant review. Philosophy is no exception.

The comments here assume a continued leftward march (overturning the vestiges of patriarchy, proclaiming capitalism harmful), yet I expect backlash from what we wish to assume are neutral fact finding bodies. — Hanover

I don't think that is a correct interpretation of the comments. Where do you see this ?

I expect there will be CNN universities and FoxNews universities (so to speak), or departments at least. I, for one, think that'd be a good thing. — Hanover

Well, you never can tell what the future will bring. Surprises around every corner...

I think truth derives only through a truly adversarial process. Seeking intellectual agreement is the path to stupidity. — Hanover

What kind of a 'truth' would that be ?
And how 'true' is an 'adversarial process' - what and who are you thinking about as part of this process ?
Stupidity is part and parcel of humanity. No need for a specific path, intellectual or otherwise.

But, what I, personally, would really like to see happen, would be a revival in feminist ethics, which has, for the most part, existed on the outskirts of philosophy. — Wallows

I don't know enough about 'feminist ethics' or its history to comment on any 'revival'.
I have never been comfortable with the word 'feminist'. What does it mean to be a feminist ?
What comes to mind when you think of a male, female or another as being 'feminist' ?

Should probably read this for some light on the subject ?
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/feminism-moralpsych/

who are you voting for Amityville? — Evil

Amity-Ville not say.

people will seek out self-help and personal development in the guise of a mixture of philosophy and psychology. — Wallows

Yes. And not only that. Personal development comes in all shapes and sizes.
Just posted through my door: HF Holidays brochure with Special Interest breaks.
Get the grey matter working...let creative juices flow...learn and improve skills.
Includes exploring nature, mind and body, music, dance, art, bridge...

Mind and body: tai chi and walking, pilates, yoga and walking.

Of philosophy itself barely a mention...apart from 'Words by the Water' - a glittering line up of thinkers, writers and commentators share ideas on history, philosophy, politics and comedy.

And yet, if philosophers were keen to promote their subject, why could it not be an exciting part of a European Discovery tour ? Italy would be the place I would start.
Food for Thought - the Spaghetti Monster a speciality :cool:

Buon appetito !

Trump pre-election visit. Johnson worried.

Boris Johnson pleaded with Trump not to wade into British politics in an interview on LBC: “It’s best when you have close friends and allies like the US and the UK … for neither side to be involved in each other’s election campaigns.” — Guardian

Hah. Well now, a Trumpian intervention didn't seem to concern Johnson much when it came to his supporting Brexit, now did it ?

Trump arrives in London next week for a two-day Nato summit which will see him greeted on Tuesday evening by doctors, nurses and other NHS workers leading a protest of tens of thousands outside Buckingham Palace.

The protesters – aiming to highlight potential risks to the NHS in a future US-UK trade deal – will march from Trafalgar Square up the Mall, and gather at Canada Gate when Trump and other Nato leaders meet the Queen at a 6pm drinks reception.

It will mark the formal beginning of a short summit that has been in the diary for 18 months, but has ended up occurring at the closing stages of an election campaign, prompting jitters in No 10 – and making for Labour’s best hope of a comeback. — Guardian

Watch this space...

The Future of Philosophy

Where do you see the field of philosophy headed towards? — Wallows

We might consider the distinction between what the future holds for the 'field of philosophy' in academic settings and how the general population might derive benefit from it.
This includes thinking of the function and aims of philosophy; theoretical and practical.

I haven't looked closely at this before but others have. A few sources I quickly scanned through and don't have time to discuss right now:

https://www.bu.edu/wcp/Papers/Cont/ContJung.htm

http://dailynous.com/2015/03/26/the-distant-future-of-philosophy/

https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-33717-3_5

Congratulations to all chosen OPs :smile:
Also to team who made this happen. Well done, guys !
Looking forward to the discussions between you and Massimo Pigliucci.

I just noticed that Philosophy Day has passed - Thurs 21st November.
https://philosophydayatccny.wordpress.com
...and wondered what the Prof's input had been.
Not got there yet, but found this:

https://massimopigliucci.wordpress.com/author/mpigliucci/

Massimo links to several articles he has come across recently which he thinks worth considering.
One here which might put the cat among the pigeons:

I wish I’d never been born: the rise of the anti-natalists. * (Guardian) — Massimo Pigliucci

Now, this is interesting - when I used the quote function, it didn't include his throwaway opinion:

* [ I still think this is more than a bit silly, but whatever.]

Hmmm...
Next question...how would he more fully respond to this apparently growing philosophical view ?
Or would he think it not worth it ?

What's wrong with a bit of wallamity? :hearts:

You mean like this @Wallows ?
How can I not give you credit for all the inspiration, huh ?
They should join our questions and make us as One :wink:
Wallamity ! Yeah :smile:

Live, Look and Learn:

Maximize Your Potential: The Stoic Life in Accordance with Nature

https://dailystoic.com/stoicism-nature/

I guess people don’t ask this one much because people generally don’t like to have themselves associated with an idea/view that is considered ridiculous by their peers. — I like sushi

Yes well. I think it would be great to have a few miscellaneous,fun questions.
Like, is it true what @Wallows said about Massimo liking ducks, a lot :cool:
Go Wallows ! :up:

Follow-up - if so, do you dialogue or dance with the ducks ? As per Eva Meijer, a Dutch philosopher, novelist, visual artist and singer-songwriter, who talks to Fagan the horse.

What does Stoicism have to say about animals, do they have a soul ? What about their rights ?

While the ancient Greeks saw humans as part of a greater whole with other animals, Christianity and the Enlightenment set people apart from mere beasts. Descartes believed animals had no soul. In recent decades, however, the list of things that “only humans are capable of” has become steadily shorter. Thinking, empathy, expressing emotions, grammar, generalised reciprocity (doing something for someone unknown, or without expectation of a return favour) – science is beginning to show that other animals can do it all. Understanding how animals communicate can unlock these insights.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2019/nov/13/of-course-animals-speak-eva-meijer-on-how-to-communicate-with-our-fellow-beasts

The issue of communication actually links in to my earlier comments to @Wallows questions.
Re your book 'How to Be a Stoic':

I read in an interview * that Massimo talked of Epictetus as 'playing the role of his personal 'daimon'. This reminded me of Socrates' 'daemonion' who kept him on the right track. This seems to be spiritual if not divine in nature.
It would be interesting to ask just how Massimo has his Conversations with Epictetus ? Is it 'spiritual' in that Epictetus is seen as some kind of 'God' - or is it by a close, analytical reading of the Discourses.

* https://dailystoic.com/massimo-pigliucci-interview/

How does anyone communicate effectively with a dead person via a book ?
Given the different translations/ interpretations, what advice would you give forum participants who might wish to read Epictetus, individually or as a group ?
For example, some have issues with concentration, others wish to speed on before fully understanding a concept...
Do you have to be on a certain wavelength ?

Finally, thanks for sharing your personal exploration of Stoicism: in the way it has changed your life and your hope that it will change others as well.
I particularly enjoy hearing advice about how to treat insults ( quite useful on a philo forum ! ).
Talking of which:
Do you think Greta Thunberg is a Stoic philosopher ?

Not sure if she practises all the spiritual exercises. Or has even read Epictetus...
However, I love how she dealt with Trump's Viciousness.
This was when he belittled her ( after she glared at him and condemned him for inaction on climate change ) with the sarcastic: " She seems like a very happy young girl looking forward to a bright and wonderful future...so nice to see !"
Greta fully embraced this by adding it to her Twitter profile which had read "16yr old climate activist with Asperger's".

I'd say that Greta, and all that she progresses, is a shining example of Virtue in Action.
Just as you are :sparkle:
* Ducks quacking in agreement *

A couple of his posts were reported and I deleted them for being too personal. That's the type of thing that could get someone banned if it was a pattern because it could be considered trolling. — Baden

There are more than a few people who leave forums because of unpleasant attacks or trolling. It is unfortunate that they leave - better to stay and improve than be chased away. But only if they think it's worth it. I've been on the point of leaving many times. However, I simply take a break to gain perspective.
Prioritise my time and energy.

The one thing that would help identify the pattern in someone's inappropriate behaviour would be if people flagged up such posts i.e. report them. On a regular basis. Mods can't see everything.

Why people can't or won't use this function is interesting. I suppose it's like being a tell-tale in the playground crying and running off to the teacher. Nobody wants to be that kid, do they?
However, if there is bullying involved, this needs to be addressed.

As a matter of interest, I didn't report @Bartricks in his later responses to me, perhaps I should have. I didn't see it as anything destructive, a 'horrible attack'. Instead, I gave a brief reply and then ignored.

Another thing, that might be considered a pattern is that of returning to posts and editing them after the discussion has moved on without informimg the interlocutors. It is dishonest and only a keen eye can detect this and call it out - as @Wallows did with @Bartricks in the Stoicism thread.

I don't particularly like threads calling for a Banning of someone. Nor do I like the 'Bannings' thread.
The latter could be renamed the (Reason for) 'Leavings' thread. This would give a good overview of why people leave, or are made to leave, and then issues can be addressed.

The banned person goes through a shaming process which is far from ideal, especially if there are mental health issues involved. They can still read what is being said of them for better or worse with no recourse to defend selves.

I would hope that, after reflection and having time out, people would feel able to return without any grand declarations having to be made.

Thanks.

What I mind about is up to me.
You are clearly not listening. Repeating your claims when I, and others, have addressed them is a waste of time and energy.

I don't know what you're saying. Sounds wishy washy and makes Stoicism into a label for nothing very clear. — Bartricks

Never mind, eh. So many isms, so little time...

It is the sense of the term according to which all of the following (and many others, of course) would qualify as philosophers: Plato, Kant, Hobbes, Locke, Berkeley, Hume, Mill and so on. — Bartricks

If anyone is interested in Massimo Pigliucci's article on Hume:
https://howtobeastoic.wordpress.com/2016/04/22/david-hume-the-skeptical-stoic/

Analogously, says Hume, a few people can live the life of the philosopher in the narrow sense, i.e., spend most of their time reading and writing philosophy at a fairly abstract level, treating it almost as a monastic practice. But most of us can live a “philosophical” life in the sense of reading and reflecting about certain principles and attempting to put them into everyday practice, while at the same time engaging in other, more common, pursuits, what the Stoics call “preferred indifferents.”

The Stoic position, then, becomes untenable for Hume if they meant that only the narrow philosophical life is conducive to happiness. But they clearly did not. Just like there were Stoics who did live that life — Zeno, Chrysippus, Musonius Rufus, Epictetus — there were others who lived a Stoic life in the broad sense, including Cato and Marcus Aurelius.
— Massimo Pigliucci

I'd be concerned about overloading the guidelines (it's enough trouble to get posters to read them as they are) but I might put a version in resources ("How to Write an OP" or something). — Baden

Yes, I understand the concern. To avoid overload, couldn't you include a link to the Resources section.
I am not sure that posters visit this section all that much.
It's a shame because the material there is most useful.

What about banality? Well, let's say that Stoicism is the view that we ought to cultivate the virtues. Well, now it is banal, for virtues just are character traits that it is good and right to cultivate in oneself and in others. So now it is saying just "it is good to be good". Yes, it is. But we knew that already.
— Bartricks

I think the nature of goodness is difficult to pin down. There's much controversy about what the definition of "good" is. "Virtue" seems an easier target, a safer bet so to speak, if one wanted to talk about ethics. — TheMadFool

You are right, there will always be controversy in defining what 'good' is.
There is nothing banal about considering how to live as well as we can, cultivating certain virtues.

Given that the discussion is about Stoicism, here's an Introducion to the 4 cardinal virtues:

1. Wisdom
2. Courage
3. Justice
4. Temperance

https://dailystoic.com/4-stoic-virtues/

Excellent critique with advice for improvement.

I think this more detailed information should be attached to the general 'Site Guidelines' thread, so that people have a clearer idea of what is involved. As things stand, we have:

b) Able to write a thoughtful OP of reasonable length that illustrates this interest, and to provide arguments for any position you intend to advocate. — Baden

I will copy my previous post from the Guest Speaker section where posters have the opportunity to pose questions to Massimo Pigliucci:

@Bartricks Have you considered offering up a question in the form of detailed OP, here ?

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/7089/discuss-philosophy-with-professor-massimo-pigliucci/p1

Hi Wallows - I don't intend to compete with this excellent set of questions.
However, I'd like to comment on what you've written so far, if that's OK.

I have sympathy with the view that Stoicism can be seen as secular spirituality with religious overtones.
Re: 'How to be a Stoic':
I read in an interview that Massimo talked of Epictetus as 'playing the role of his personal 'daimon'. This reminded me of Socrates' 'daemonion' who kept him on the right track. This seems to be spiritual if not divine in nature.
It would be interesting to ask just how Massimo has his Conversations with Epictetus ? Is it 'spiritual' in that Epictetus is seen as some kind of 'God' - or is it by a close, analytical reading of the Discourses.

There does seem to an evangelical zeal involved. Having said that, perhaps it is warranted so as to balance out the extremism of certain religious beliefs.

I like the idea of life as an ongoing project. Massimo has shown how an individual's life can be changed by conscious reflection ( 'Know Thyself' ) and a bit of serendipity. From being a scientist, going through a midlife crisis, to being a personable, pragmatic, public philosopher of Stoicism.

Re: the Athens TED talk and the role model of Nelson Mandela. I didn't know that he had been inspired by Marcus Aurelius' Meditations. I love that ! He speaks to me too.
I do see philosophy, in particular Stoicism, as a practical way to progress wellbeingness. (Massimo points out the overlap in psychology and psychiatry. Also, the importance of an evidence-based approach. It's all good ).

From the Meditations 5.9:
'Do not give up in disgust or impatience if you do not find action on the right principles consolidated into a habit in all that you do. No: if you have taken a fall, come back again, and be glad if most of your actions are on the right side of humanity.
Do not come back to philosophy as schoolboy to a tutor but rather as a man with opthalmia returns to his sponge and salve...obedience to reason is no great burden, but a source of relief.'

[ My bolds: In other words, you can only do your best ! ]

Finally, this quote:
'I have a habit of reflecting about my feelings and experiences...adjusting what I actually do and what I want to do in a neverending exercise of reflective equilibrium' - Massimo Pigliucci.

How inspirational is that ?
The forthcoming discussions should be fabulous.

I take philosophy to be inquiry into what's true and its method to be reasoned argument. — Bartricks

Stoics think grief is irrational. — Bartricks

So, is it true that Stoics think grief is irrational ? Where is your evidence for this ?
Stoics look at natural facts. The philosophy is evidence-based. To reach awareness and understanding.

People around us will die and it will hurt. Often, quite badly.
The question for the Stoics then was how to make sense of this fact, how to come to terms with it. How does one deal with the natural grief that loss provokes?

The Stoics are often stereotyped as suppressing their emotions, but their philosophy was actually intended to teach us to face, process, and deal with emotions immediately instead of running from them. Tempting as it is to deceive yourself or hide from a powerful emotion like grief— by telling yourself and other people that you’re fine—awareness and understanding are better.

https://dailystoic.com/stoic-response-grief/

...philosophy as I - and I think most contemporary analytic philosophers - conceive it is not about being wise, but about figuring out what's true. — Bartricks

So, I don't think this is an either/or situation.
Practical wisdom relies on exploring and reflection, particularly of the self and how it relates to others in the world.

The centrality of self-knowledge is not something most modern and contemporary philosophers address. There are probably a few exceptions out there that you can think of.
As you say, the goal would rather seem to be about achieving certainty about certain topics via philosophical discourse.
And when has this ever resulted in agreement between 2 opposing parties, or views ?

For the Stoics, philosophy is a continuous act or art of living.
For Massimo Pigliucci it is ' a never-ending exercise of reflective equilibrium'.
It is an ongoing progress...
And this can also include study of analytical or continental philosophy. Whatever.
There is not just one way.

What we could do is let Massimo know what's been contributed — Baden

That sounds fair. Thanks again :smile:

Just to add that we appreciate all the input and effort made here and apologise in advance to anyone who is not chosen. Again, there's a limit to what we can put forward based on our original invitation and if anyone's question doesn't make it through, it shouldn't be taken as a negative judgement on it. — Baden

You have made this as open as you can. However, I think that people will inevitably feel disappointed, especially if they have taken time to prepare a detailed OP. One way to alleviate this might be:

Given that this thread will be open to comments and questions related to the chosen questions, it might be good ( time allowing ) if Massimo would be gracious enough to select and respond to interesting questions/comments here. Just an idea.

Hey, can we keep discussions about specific questions in their own threads? (create one if you'd like). I'd prefer that this not be too cluttered so we can easily keep track of questions for Prof. Pigliucci. Thanks. — StreetlightX

Hey, that's fine by me. I was done anyway. I won't be creating a separate thread. Thanks.

Yes... Though, I suppose I shall go and wallow a little now. — Wallows

All of this requires quite a bit of energy, doesn't it ?
Be good to yourself :sparkle:

Finally, from a religious standpoint, it seems that Stoicism is becoming lately, dare I say, a type of secular religion of sorts. Would you agree with this characterization, or not?

c.1 contextually an elaboration) Marcus Aurelius and Epictetus are icons to be followed in the minds of many. They are shining examples, of the very role models you talk about in your TED talk in Athens. — Wallows

Hi Wallows - I don't intend to compete with this excellent set of questions.
However, I'd like to comment on what you've written so far, if that's OK.

I have sympathy with the view that Stoicism can be seen as secular spirituality with religious overtones.
Re: 'How to be a Stoic':
I read in an interview that Massimo talked of Epictetus as 'playing the role of his personal 'daimon'. This reminded me of Socrates' 'daemonion' who kept him on the right track. This seems to be spiritual if not divine in nature.
It would be interesting to ask just how Massimo has his Conversations with Epictetus ? Is it 'spiritual' in that Epictetus is seen as some kind of 'God' - or is it by a close, analytical reading of the Discourses.

There does seem to an evangelical zeal involved. Having said that, perhaps it is warranted so as to balance out the extremism of certain religious beliefs.

I like the idea of life as an ongoing project. Massimo has shown how an individual's life can be changed by conscious reflection ( 'Know Thyself' ) and a bit of serendipity. From being a scientist, going through a midlife crisis, to being a personable, pragmatic, public philosopher of Stoicism.

Re: the Athens TED talk and the role model of Nelson Mandela. I didn't know that he had been inspired by Marcus Aurelius' Meditations. I love that ! He speaks to me too.
I do see philosophy, in particular Stoicism, as a practical way to progress wellbeingness. (Massimo points out the overlap in psychology and psychiatry. Also, the importance of an evidence-based approach. It's all good ).

From the Meditations 5.9:
'Do not give up in disgust or impatience if you do not find action on the right principles consolidated into a habit in all that you do. No: if you have taken a fall, come back again, and be glad if most of your actions are on the right side of humanity.
Do not come back to philosophy as schoolboy to a tutor but rather as a man with opthalmia returns to his sponge and salve...obedience to reason is no great burden, but a source of relief.'

[ My bolds: In other words, you can only do your best ! ]

Finally, this quote:
'I have a habit of reflecting about my feelings and experiences...adjusting what I actually do and what I want to do in a neverending exercise of reflective equilibrium' - Massimo Pigliucci.

How inspirational is that ?
The forthcoming discussions should be fabulous :cool:

So, in the end, there will be about five separate discussions in this space by five different posters which Massimo can respond to, but again only the posters chosen will be able to post in their respective discussions while anyone wishing to comment on them while they're ongoing can post here.) — Baden

OK, understood.

... propose an OP in the form of a detailed question/inquiry on one aspect of his work that you find interesting.

We will pick a selection of these questions (hopefully within a week or so) and set them up in discussions for Prof. Pigliucci to read and then respond to. You may also ask follow-up questions on receiving a response, which he may engage with. — Baden

I am not sure how this is supposed to work :chin:
People will have questions but not necessarily in the form of an OP.

Is the idea to start several discussions ( how many ? ) headed by the chosen OP.
A particular aspect or category - like Stoicism, Science v Philosophy, Philosophy v Religion ?
Then other questions ( sub- categories ) can be put forward as part of the discussion ?

All help gratefully received.

:up:
Thanks to you and team for all of this. An excellent introduction which covers an almost overwhelming amount of material. There is something there for everybody :smile:

It's happening Amity, no worries. — Wallows

Yes, I know. Thanks to @Baden :smile:

Now you are back, welcome.

How is that a discussion, what do I do with that? I need more than that. So here I am again. — Brett

Sounds like you want an effective way to argue.
It is unfortunate that some people who rely on faith alone without recourse to evidence don't seem to be amenable to reason. In some cases, where they don't even listen, it is a waste of breath.
Bandying statistics about is my idea of hell. My ears would close up too.

So, there's a good thread on effective argumentation, started by @Baden.

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/7014/effective-argumentation

I've just found what might be an informative site on critical thinking which includes types of argument: deductive, abductive...
https://www.khanacademy.org/partner-content/wi-phi/wiphi-critical-thinking

Others here will have more knowledge and experience in the effectiveness, or otherwise, of their own arguments. Best bet is probably to get stuck in and practise...ask questions e.g. why someone would prefer an abductive argument.

Nay. Horse declines the invitation. Nobody fuckin' cares :rage:

Fagan the Horse, accompanied by Eva Meijer - a Dutch philosopher, novelist, visual artist and singer-songwriter.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2019/nov/13/of-course-animals-speak-eva-meijer-on-how-to-communicate-with-our-fellow-beasts

No idea.
Taking a break now. Later...

Oh hang on...just had a wicked thought :naughty:
How about having the competition along ?
Rick and Anja From Philosophy Now :cool:

Rick Lewis was working in the laboratory of British Telecom when he decided, just over 20 years ago, to launch a philosophy magazine for non-academics, called Philosophy Now. He tells me about the early days, how grassroots philosophy has grown, how he met his wife Anja Steinbauer, who runs Philosophy For All, and where he sees the 'movement' going. — Jules Evans

Excellent :up:

As to more suggestions, I think I've done my bit.
Over to others...