Marcus Aurelius Meditations: The Stoic Ideal by Micheal Sugrue Lyrics
After the death of Socrates, and the break up of Greek culture that resulted from the Peloponnese war. Socratic philosophy went into a decline and fragmented into several pieces, and the fragments of Socratic philosophy make up the body of Hellenistic philosophy.
What I mean by Hellenistic philosophy is the subsequent developments of greek philosophy which take their cue from Socratic approach to philosophy, yet they don't have all the component parts of Socratic philosophy; they usually lack the wit, they almost always lack the poetry. Occasionally they absorb some of the ethical doctrines or epistemological doctrines, but the ones that come after Socrates never really live up to the Socratic ideal.
The three main fragments Socratic philosophy breaks into are called Stoicism, Epicurusism, and Skepticism. And these are the most important Hellenistic outgrowths from Socratic philosophy.
And since Rome, the Roman Empire in particular, is the political entity which ultimately dominates the Mediterran basin and absorbs and inherits the tradition of Greek philosophy. Most of the Hellenistic branches of philosophy are developed in connection or with reference to either politically or intellectually with Roman culture.
And the first of these development is hedonism, or Epicureanism . Named after a guy named Epicurius. And what Epicureanism says is that pleasure is the only good, and that the happy man is the one with the many great pleasures. But no corresponding pain. And there is a potentially a way to derivate that from Socratic philosophy. If you take the idea of Socratic purdence, the man who drinks a little bit inorder to get a certain degree of pleasure but then not so much as he will cause himself a hangover or himself some coresponding pain, he's being purdently Socratic, picking and choosing his pleasures, in such a way he does not generate any coresponding pain. you can see possibly how people who are not entirely committed to the Socratic conception of the soul and of virtue might want to derive that sort of justification for the pursuit of pleasure from the Socratic dialogues.
A second alternative, again a minor alternative is called Skeptism. Socratics throughout most of the dialogues, I emphasis most rather than all says that he doesn't know anything. Part of the Socratic irony is this posture of acting as if he's really an ignorant man when in fact he is wise, and saying that he knows nothing and thus never trying to teach people by directly making declartive sentences, for the most part Socrates teaches by question and answer. Socrates helps people articulate and realize what is already buried in their soul. When Socrates does that when
skepticism says he doesn't really know anything. say that he knows nothing, for the most part, socrates teaches by question and answer, when he is that skeptical mode. I'm the paitrant saint of rational inquire
remember
how skepticism might develop from that stance
forced to encounter, might come to the conclusion that school one theory of religion after another, made pretension, the best we can do is that pretension is just that ,we can be certain what we do not know.
easy way out, a way of avoiding the burden of socratic inquiry.
stoic never achieves the poetic and platonic overarching system is in fact a noble philosophy, is an excellence philosophy for the silvermen if they intend to pursue of the public good, is characterize by the rejection of pleasure as the good,
they take the position that the
he is not afraid of pain, he is not of death, he is not of poverty, he fears only that he should let himself down, all the doctrines are similar, you cant control the movement of the planets and the sun.
the only matter of philosophic man is
you cant control the society around you.
the wise man, the truly philosophical man,
you cant control that you are in control of it. that is you. the man that is entirely in control of himself.
because it is not in his control, there is no use wonder or worrying about tomorrow.do what's right today.
he not afraid of death, the only thing he cared about is that he should meet his moral obligations.
an organized soul that pursue rationalize ends of
virtue , moral virtue, an organized soul that pursue rationally the ends which are good for all human beings. we do not need wealth, we do not need
in the doing of right, nothing should be spared, not even our lives.
the stoic man is the honorable man is the man that stands stead-fast.
he wont live the swinish life, he will the full potential that human being has to offer.
both the slave and the emperor can participate in philosophy. he is not responsible for the social structure.
your job is not to disgrace yourself.
power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Marcuse Aurelius was the emperor of the known world.
he was the standing exception, absolute power allow us to see what kind of man he was. if a man can behave under circumstances like that.
What I mean by Hellenistic philosophy is the subsequent developments of greek philosophy which take their cue from Socratic approach to philosophy, yet they don't have all the component parts of Socratic philosophy; they usually lack the wit, they almost always lack the poetry. Occasionally they absorb some of the ethical doctrines or epistemological doctrines, but the ones that come after Socrates never really live up to the Socratic ideal.
The three main fragments Socratic philosophy breaks into are called Stoicism, Epicurusism, and Skepticism. And these are the most important Hellenistic outgrowths from Socratic philosophy.
And since Rome, the Roman Empire in particular, is the political entity which ultimately dominates the Mediterran basin and absorbs and inherits the tradition of Greek philosophy. Most of the Hellenistic branches of philosophy are developed in connection or with reference to either politically or intellectually with Roman culture.
And the first of these development is hedonism, or Epicureanism . Named after a guy named Epicurius. And what Epicureanism says is that pleasure is the only good, and that the happy man is the one with the many great pleasures. But no corresponding pain. And there is a potentially a way to derivate that from Socratic philosophy. If you take the idea of Socratic purdence, the man who drinks a little bit inorder to get a certain degree of pleasure but then not so much as he will cause himself a hangover or himself some coresponding pain, he's being purdently Socratic, picking and choosing his pleasures, in such a way he does not generate any coresponding pain. you can see possibly how people who are not entirely committed to the Socratic conception of the soul and of virtue might want to derive that sort of justification for the pursuit of pleasure from the Socratic dialogues.
A second alternative, again a minor alternative is called Skeptism. Socratics throughout most of the dialogues, I emphasis most rather than all says that he doesn't know anything. Part of the Socratic irony is this posture of acting as if he's really an ignorant man when in fact he is wise, and saying that he knows nothing and thus never trying to teach people by directly making declartive sentences, for the most part Socrates teaches by question and answer. Socrates helps people articulate and realize what is already buried in their soul. When Socrates does that when
skepticism says he doesn't really know anything. say that he knows nothing, for the most part, socrates teaches by question and answer, when he is that skeptical mode. I'm the paitrant saint of rational inquire
remember
how skepticism might develop from that stance
forced to encounter, might come to the conclusion that school one theory of religion after another, made pretension, the best we can do is that pretension is just that ,we can be certain what we do not know.
easy way out, a way of avoiding the burden of socratic inquiry.
stoic never achieves the poetic and platonic overarching system is in fact a noble philosophy, is an excellence philosophy for the silvermen if they intend to pursue of the public good, is characterize by the rejection of pleasure as the good,
they take the position that the
he is not afraid of pain, he is not of death, he is not of poverty, he fears only that he should let himself down, all the doctrines are similar, you cant control the movement of the planets and the sun.
the only matter of philosophic man is
you cant control the society around you.
the wise man, the truly philosophical man,
you cant control that you are in control of it. that is you. the man that is entirely in control of himself.
because it is not in his control, there is no use wonder or worrying about tomorrow.do what's right today.
he not afraid of death, the only thing he cared about is that he should meet his moral obligations.
an organized soul that pursue rationalize ends of
virtue , moral virtue, an organized soul that pursue rationally the ends which are good for all human beings. we do not need wealth, we do not need
in the doing of right, nothing should be spared, not even our lives.
the stoic man is the honorable man is the man that stands stead-fast.
he wont live the swinish life, he will the full potential that human being has to offer.
both the slave and the emperor can participate in philosophy. he is not responsible for the social structure.
your job is not to disgrace yourself.
power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Marcuse Aurelius was the emperor of the known world.
he was the standing exception, absolute power allow us to see what kind of man he was. if a man can behave under circumstances like that.