Category: Philosophy

Stoicism and History as a Meditation on Death

Stoicism and History as a Meditation on Death

In a letter, believed to have been written in 139 AD, when Marcus Aurelius was just eighteen, his rhetoric master, Marcus Cornelius Fronto says in passing “I gave you advice on what you should do to prepare yourself for writing a work of history, since that is what you wished.”

…that I did not waste my time on writers of histories…

However, roughly three decades later, in The Meditations, looking back, Marcus thanks the gods that:

…when I had an inclination to philosophy, I did not fall into the hands of any Sophist, and that I did not waste my time on writers of histories… — Meditations, 1.17

Fronto himself was a Sophist of sorts, incidentally, although he taught Latin rather than Greek, but Marcus doesn’t seem to have him in mind here. By this point, in any case, Marcus seems to have thoroughly given up on the dream of becoming a historian.

Wander aimlessly no longer. For neither will you read your own memoirs, nor the acts of the ancient Romans and Greeks, and the selections from books which you were reserving for your old age. — Meditations, 3.14

What this seems to confirm, unsurprisingly, is that Marcus was mainly interested in Greek and Roman history. However, it seems that his desire to read histories has cooled along with his desire to write them. Indeed, he now exclaims: “Throw away your books; no longer distract yourself: it is not allowed” (2.2) and “cast away your thirst for books, so that you may not die murmuring, but cheerfully, truly, and from your heart thankful to the gods.” (3.2).

In general, the Stoic attitude toward books and study appears to have been that it’s good in moderation, precisely insofar as it serves the fundamental goal of life, which is to achieve wisdom and virtue. Studying can be virtuous but it can also be a vice if divorced from the goal of self-improvement.

History as a Meditation on Death

Throughout The Meditations Marcus reflects on history from a philosophical perspective, almost always as a reminder of the transience of material things and the insubstantial nature of our reputation after death.

Everywhere up and down you will find the same things, with which the old histories are filled, those of the middle ages and those of our own day, with which cities and houses are filled now. There is nothing new: all things are both familiar and short-lived. — Meditations, 7.1

This perspective lends itself to contemplation on transience and mortality but perhaps not to writing a detailed history.

Constantly consider how all things such as they now are, in time past also were; and consider that they will be the same again. And place before your eyes entire dramas and stages of the same form, whatever you have learned from your experience or from older history. For example, the whole court of Hadrian, and the whole court of Antoninus, and the whole court of Philip [of Macedon], Alexander the Great, Croesus; for all those were such dramas as we see now, only with different actors. — Meditations, 10.27

Here we get a hint at the individuals that Marcus’ histories may have focused upon. The historical figures he mentions most often in The Meditations are:

• Philip of Macedon

• Alexander the Great

• Pompey the Great

• Julius Caesar

• Augustus

Overall, this is not a particularly surprising list and the other names he mentions reflect the typical historical interest of educated Romans in the conquests of Alexander the Great, the Civil War of Julius Caesar, and the succession of emperors following Augustus. Indeed, the historical figure he mentions most often is Alexander the Great. However, when Marcus alludes to military and political leaders it’s often to criticize them, minimize their achievements, or to compare them negatively with philosophers.

Alexander the Great and Julius Caesar and Pompey the Great, what are they in comparison with Diogenes [the Cynic] and Heraclitus and Socrates? For they were acquainted with things, and their causes, and their matter, and the ruling principles of these men were the same. But as to the others, how many things had they for which to care, and to how many things were they slaves! — Meditations, 8.3

Despite having long contemplated the idea of writing histories, Marcus says very bluntly that Alexander the Great and his mule-driver were both levelled, and brought to exactly the same state, by death (Meditations, 6.24).

However, elsewhere he reminds himself that the wise are also mortal:

Alexander the Great, Pompey, and Julius Caesar, after so often completely destroying whole cities, and in battle cutting to pieces many ten thousands of cavalry and infantry, themselves too at last departed from life. Heraclitus, after so many speculations on the conflagration of the universe, was filled with water internally and died smeared all over with mud. Lice destroyed Democritus, and other lice killed Socrates. — Meditations, 3.3

The two philosophers he mentions or cites most frequently are Epictetus and Heraclitus, although he also mentions Pythagoras, Democritus, Socrates, Diogenes, Chrysippus, Epicurus, among others.

These meditations on the lives of famous historical individuals are sometimes expanded to encompass the history of great cities and even whole civilizations.

Augustus’ court, wife, daughter, descendants, ancestors, sister, Agrippa, kinsmen, intimates, friends; Areius, Maecenas, physicians, and sacrificing priests — the whole court is dead. Then turn to the rest, not considering the death of a single man [but of a whole race], as of the Pompeii; and that which is inscribed on the tombs: “The last of his race.” Then consider what trouble those before them have had that they might leave a successor, and then that of necessity some one must be the last. Again, here consider the death of a whole race. — Meditations, 8.31

Elsewhere he urges himself to think of how many are dead despite dedicating their lives to preventing illness or predicting the future. Every general who has defeated great armies has, in the end, been defeated by death. Great cities, like Pompeii, destroyed completely.

Think continually how many physicians are dead after often contracting their eyebrows over the sick, and how many astrologers after predicting with great pretensions the deaths of others, and how many philosophers after endless discourses on death or immortality, how many heroes after killing thousands, and how many tyrants who have used their power over men’s lives with terrible insolence, as if they were immortal. And how many cities are entirely dead, so to speak, Helice and Pompeii and Herculaneum, and others innumerable. Add to the reckoning all whom you have known, one after another. One man after burying another has been laid out dead, and another buries him, and all this in a short time. — Meditations, 4.48

Dead Emperors

Marcus asks himself to reflect, in particular, on the lives of earl emperors, particularly the first Augustus, but also Vespasian and Trajan:

Consider, for example, the times of Vespasian. you will see all these things, people marrying, bringing up children, sick, dying, warring, feasting, trafficking, cultivating the ground, flattering, obstinately arrogant, suspecting, plotting, wishing for some to die, grumbling about the present, loving, heaping up treasure, desiring consulship, kingly power. Well, then, that life of these people no longer exists at all. Again, remove to the times of Trajan. Again, all is the same. Their life too is gone. In like manner view also the other epochs of time and of whole nations, and see how many after great efforts soon fell and were resolved into the elements. — Meditations, 4.32

There’s nothing good or bad to say about them. Nero, however, mentioned in passing as a tyrant and moral degenerate comparable to the cruel Sicilian despot Phalaris (Meditations, 3.16).

Moreover, the names of famous Romans of the Republic, Augustus, the founder of the empire, and even recent emperors like Hadrian and Antoninus, all come to sound like historical references.

The words which were formerly familiar are now antiquated: so also the names of those who were famed of old, are now in a manner antiquated, Camillus, Caeso, Volesus, Leonnatus, and a little after also Scipio and Cato, then Augustus, then also Hadrian and Antoninus. For all things soon pass away and become a mere tale, and complete oblivion soon buries them. And I say this of those who have shone in a wondrous way. For the rest, as soon as they have breathed out their breath they are gone, and no man speaks of them. — Meditations, 4.33

They’re just names in history books or statues rather than references to flesh-and-blood individuals.

Autobiography as a Meditation on Death

Of course, Marcus also mentions not reading his own memoirs. We might have expected such a literate emperor to leave behind an autobiographical account of his own life for posterity. Once again, though, reflection on his life takes the form of a meditation on transience and mortality. Like Augustus and Hadrian, he will soon be nothing but another name in the history books.

This is the chief thing: Do not be perturbed, for all things are according to the nature of the universal, and in a little time you will be nobody and nowhere, like Hadrian and Augustus. — Meditations, 8.5

And again,

And call to recollection both how many things you have passed through, and how many things you have been able to endure, and that the history of your life is now complete and your service is ended. And how many beautiful things you have seen, and how many pleasures and pains you have despised, and how many things called honorable you have spurned, and to how many ill-minded folks you have shown a kind disposition. — Meditations, 5.31

Marcus even tells himself that when he sees living individuals he should call to mind historical figures of whom he’s reminded by them. Moreover, when he sees his own image he must “think of any other Caesar”, i.e., any preceding emperor.

Then let this thought be in your mind, “Where then are those men now?” Nowhere, or nobody knows where. For thereby you will continuously look at human things as smoke and nothing at all, especially if you reflect at the same time that what has once changed will never exist again in the infinite duration of time. — Meditations, 10.31

“Where are they now?” or ubi sunt, as it was known in Latin, became a well-known trope in poetry.

Conclusion

The theme of Marcus’ reflections on history, and his own autobiography, in The Meditations is very clear:

Consider the past — such great changes of political supremacies. You may foresee also the things which will be. For they will certainly be of like form, and it is not possible that they should deviate from the order of the things which take place now. Accordingly to have contemplated human life for forty years is the same as to have contemplated it for ten thousand years. For what more will you see? — Meditations, 7.49

This doesn’t lead Marcus to an attitude of hopelessness, though, but rather to one of non-attachment and perseverance. Those who engage in public life and merely imagine they are acting wisely like philosophers are absurd, he says, maybe because they pay too much heed to other people’s perceptions. Marcus tells himself, by contrast, to do right away what nature and reason require rather than looking around to see if anyone will observe it. However, Rome was not built in a day…

Nor yet expect Plato’s Republic: but be content if the smallest thing goes on well, and consider such an event to be no small matter. For who can change men’s opinions? And without a change of opinions what else is there than the slavery of men who groan while they pretend to obey? Come now and tell me of Alexander the Great and Philippus and Demetrius of Phalerum. They themselves shall judge whether they discovered what the common nature required, and trained themselves accordingly. But if they acted like tragic heroes, no one has condemned me to imitate them. Simple and modest is the work of philosophy. Do not draw me aside to insolence and pride. — Meditations, 9.29

What matters is doing what’s right whether or not you win acclaim for doing so. We should judge our own lives rather than being overly-concerned how history judges us.

This is a pretty cool video. I like the way it was edited, subtitled, etc., and had a lot of fun doing it.

Socrates, Stoicism, and the Philosophy of Apollo

Socrates, Stoicism, and the Philosophy of Apollo

Upon a column once standing at the entrance (pronaos) of the Temple of Apollo in Delphi, two famous maxims were inscribed: “Know thyself” (gnothi seauton) and “Nothing in excess” (meden agan).

In Plato’s Protagoras, Socrates claims that the legendary Seven Sages invented these sayings and had them placed at Delphi:

They met together and dedicated in the Temple of Apollo at Delphi, as the first-fruits of their wisdom, the far-famed inscriptions, which are in all men’s mouths — “Know thyself”, and “Nothing in excess.”

The god Apollo was the Leader of the Muses, and therefore ultimately responsible for arts such as music and oratory. He was also the god especially responsible for the arts of prophecy and healing. He is the god of the kithara or lyre (harp) but also of the “far-shooting” and death-dealing bow. He is also the favourite son of Zeus, and the one responsible for putting his father’s divine will into words and communicating them, through oracular pronouncements, to mortals.

Ever belovèd to me may the kithara be, and the curved bow;
I will declare to mankind great Zeus’s infallible purpose.
 — Homeric Hymn to Apollo

In addition to these traditional roles, however, Apollo came to be associated with philosophy. Indeed, Plutarch calls Apollo “that god who is above all things the lover of truth”, and claims that he “is no less philosopher than he is prophet.”

Apollo was also frequently associated with famous philosophers. Diogenes Laertius says that the followers of Pythagoras actually considered him Apollo incarnate: “his bearing is said to have been most dignified, and his disciples held the opinion about him that he was Apollo come down from the far north.” We are also told: “Of course the only altar at which he worshipped was that of Apollo the Giver of Life, behind the Altar of Horns at Delos.”

Plato’s Phaedo claims that Socrates wrote a hymn (paean) to Apollo, which Diogenes Laertius says some claim began with the words: All hail, Apollo, Delos’ lord! Indeed, in the Phaedo, Socrates describes himself as “the consecrated servant” of Apollo. There was also a tradition, reported by Diogenes Laertius, that Apollo appeared to the philosopher Plato’s father in a dream foretelling his son’s birth. Indeed, Plato’s birth happened to fall upon the very day the priests of Apollo on the isle of Delos claimed Apollo himself had been born.

We have a whopping list of 147 ethical maxims derived from the cult of Apollo, which survive thanks to a book of quotations from earlier sources, compiled in the 5th century AD, known as the Anthology of Stobaeus.

“[The god Apollo] is no less philosopher than he is prophet.”

Individual examples of many of the maxims listed by Stobaeus are, though, found scattered throughout other ancient writings. Certain themes recur such as the emphasis on moderation, friendship, contentment, virtue, and the pursuit of wisdom. We can therefore regard the temples of Apollo as propounding a sort of proto-philosophy, or perhaps even a fully-fledged philosophy of life.

The Lord whose oracle is at Delphi neither reveals nor conceals, but gives a sign.

However, Apollo was also renowned for speaking in riddles, through the cryptic pronouncements of his priestesses. The pre-Socratic philosopher Heraclitus said of him: “The Lord whose oracle is at Delphi neither reveals nor conceals, but gives a sign.”

Plutarch likewise says that whereas the god offers many remedies, solutions for physical problems, through dreams, etc., he actually creates intellectual problems for us, or riddles. These are intended to stimulate our natural love of wisdom, i.e., our inclination to philosophy and the pursuit of truth. They’re supposed, in other words, to make us think. Just look at the famous inscriptions “Know thyself” and “Nothing in excess”, says Plutarch — “How many philosophical inquiries they have provoked!” These ancient maxims are like seeds, he adds, from which countless arguments have grown over the centuries.

For inquisitive minds the Delphic Maxims often seemed to have a hidden meaning, although their intention might appear quite straightforward at first. Sophocles had long ago spoken of Apollo as being:

Unto the wise a riddling prophet aye,
to silly souls a teacher plain and brief.

Plutarch therefore describes maxims such as “Know thyself” and “Nothing in excess” as resembling streams rushing through narrow, channels, whose waters appear turbid and unclear. There is so much more to say about these little maxims that, without patient study, their true significance is actually quite opaque to our mind’s eye. If you want to learn what scholars have written about their proper meaning, he says, “you will not easily find longer treatises elsewhere.” In other words, a whole Apollonian philosophy of life is compressed into these short sayings.

Although the vast majority of these ancient treatises are now lost, we do, fortunately, encounter many philosophical discussions of the Delphic Maxims scattered throughout an assortment of texts that survive today. Of course, the maxims about which we learn most are the two most famous examples: “Know thyself” and “Nothing in excess”. As we’ll see, these can be viewed as complementing, or even depending upon, one another…

Know Thyself

In the Memorabilia Socratis written by Xenophon, we find a very interesting discussion of how Socrates interpreted the saying “Know thyself”.

And isn’t this obvious, that people derive most of their benefits from knowing themselves, and most of their misfortunes from being self-deceived?

Socrates asks a somewhat pretentious young student called Euthydemus whether he’s been to Delphi and seen the inscription “Know thyself”. Euthydemus replies that although he has, indeed, been there twice, he paid little attention to the saying because he felt certain that he already knew himself. Socrates encourages him, though, to think more deeply about its meaning…

Who do you think knows himself — the man who merely knows his own name, or the one who behaves like people buying a horse? They don’t consider that they know a horse in which they are interested until they have satisfied themselves whether it’s obedient or disobedient, strong or weak, swift or slow, and how it stands with respect to all the other qualities which make a horse desirable or undesirable as regards its usefulness; and the man I am thinking of has in the same way ascertained his own ability by examining his own qualifications in respect of human relationships. — Xenophon, Memorabilia, 4.2

We should carefully study our own nature, our character, particularly our strengths and weaknesses, because a man, he says, who “does not know his own ability is ignorant of himself.”

And isn’t this obvious, that people derive most of their benefits from knowing themselves, and most of their misfortunes from being self-deceived? Those who know themselves know what is appropriate for them and can distinguish what they can and cannot do; and, by doing what they understand, they both supply their needs and enjoy success, while, by refraining from doing things that they don’t understand, they avoid making mistakes and escape misfortune.

This self-knowledge also makes it easier for them to understand how to deal with other people.

Self-knowledge also enables them to assess others; and it is through their relations with others that they provide themselves with what is good and guard against what is bad for them. Those who do not know themselves and are totally deceived about their own abilities are in the same position whether they are dealing with other people or any other aspect of human affairs. They don’t know what they want or what they are doing or what means they are using; and, through making gross mistakes about all these, they miss the good things and get into trouble.

Through self-knowledge, particularly knowing what’s good or bad for us, we become clearer about our fundamental goals in life. We’re therefore able not only to live wisely and flourish ourselves but also to win the respect of others.

People who know what they are doing succeed in their activities and become famous and respected. Those who are like them gladly associate with them, while those who are unsuccessful in their affairs are anxious for these men to make decisions for them and to represent their interests, and pin to them their hopes of prosperity, and for all these reasons regard them with special affection.

Socrates says the same is obviously true for states. A state that does not know itself may overestimate its military strength and end up going to war with a stronger nation leading to its own people being destroyed or enslaved. Socrates says that the process of self-examination that leads to such knowledge should begin with the question “What is good or bad?”, by which he means what’s beneficial or harmful for us.

For Socrates, therefore, “Know thyself” means knowing our own character, our strengths and weaknesses, and the things that are good or bad for us. Later authors in the Socratic tradition, though, often focus more narrowly on certain aspects of self-knowledge. The Stoic philosopher Epictetus, for example, says that “Know thyself” means knowing what is “up to us”, or under our direct control, and what is not.

But the tyrant will chain — what? the leg. He will take away — what? the neck. What then will he not chain and not take away? the will. This is why the ancients taught the maxim, “Know thyself”. — Discourses, 1.18

However, in a well-known fragment attributed to Epictetus, he also used the same maxim to refer to our knowledge of our role, or position, in a particular situation, and our ability to act in harmony with others.

Is, therefore, also the precept at Delphi superfluous, “Know thyself”? — That, indeed, no, the man answers. — What, then, does it mean? If one bade a singer in a chorus to “know himself,” would he not heed the order by paying attention both to his fellows in the chorus and to singing in harmony with them? — Yes. — And so in the case of a sailor? or a soldier? Does it seem to you, then, that man has been made a creature to live all alone by himself, or for society? — For society. — By whom? — By Nature. — What Nature is, and how she administers the universe, and whether she really exists or not, these are questions about which there is no need to go on to bother ourselves. — Epictetus, Fragments

The Stoic philosopher Seneca claimed that this maxim was to be interpreted as a reference to human mortality:

Those whom you love and those whom you despise will both be made equal in the same ashes. This is the meaning of that command, “Know thyself”, which is written on the shrine of the Pythian oracle. — Moral Letters, 11

“What is man?”, asks Seneca. Nothing more than a potter’s vase, which can be shattered into pieces by the slightest knock.

You were born a mortal, and you have given birth to mortals: yourself a weak and fragile body, liable to all diseases, can you have hoped to produce anything strong and lasting from such unstable material? — Moral Letters, 11

Plutarch likewise says that, among other things, to know oneself is to realize that you are not the same person you once were. Our lives are constantly changing and our old self is dying, as our new self is being born, every day of our lives. Plutarch notes that the name “Apollo” can be interpreted as meaning “not many” in Greek. This implies that the god is one and eternal, whereas we are to know ourselves, by contrast, as mortals, consisting merely of a constant stream of varying states.

These interpretations may appear quite different but they’re potentially related. The Stoics in particular would say to know oneself is to realize that because our bodies, and indeed all external things, are fragile and transient, our true good resides not in possessions but in our use of reason. Indeed, they derive that notion from Socrates who argues elsewhere that man’s highest good is the love of wisdom not such unreliable things as health, wealth, or reputation.

Nothing in Excess

Apollo was known for his association both with archery and with playing the lyre. The strings of the lyre (an ancient harp) need to be tuned properly before the sound can become harmonious. If they are too tight or not tight enough, it won’t work properly. The same goes for stringing the bow. Both instruments symbolize Apollo’s symbolic association with beauty, and the notion of health being achieved through harmony and moderation. The arts of archery and lyre-playing both require the ability to know when the strings are even a fraction too slack or too tight. The maxim “Nothing in excess” expresses the same basic idea.

According to the doxographer Diogenes Laertius the saying “Nothing in excess” (meden agan) was typically thought to have originated with Solon, the ancient lawgiver of Athens and one of the Seven Sages. Its fame today is due partly to the fact that Socrates liked to quote it. For instance, Diogenes Laertius elsewhere claims that when asked what virtue is most suited for a young man Socrates replied simply:“Nothing in excess”.

In Plato’s Menexenus Socrates explains its meaning as follows:

Of old the saying, “Nothing in excess”, appeared to be, and really was, well said. For he whose happiness rests with himself, if possible, wholly, and if not, as far as is possible — who is not hanging in suspense on other men, or changing with the vicissitudes of their fortune — has his life ordered for the best. He is the temperate and courageous and wise; and when his riches come and go, when his children are given and taken away, he will remember the proverb: “Neither rejoicing overmuch nor grieving overmuch”, for he relies upon himself. And such we would have our parents to be — that is our word and wish, and as such we now offer ourselves, neither lamenting overmuch, nor fearing overmuch, if we are to die at this time.

It’s closely-related to another well-known Greek saying “Moderation is best” (metron ariston). Today we say “All things in moderation”.

One of Socrates’ paradoxes, according to Xenophon, was the notion that people who exercise self-control and moderation actually obtain more pleasure from their desires than people who indulge to excess. Someone who eats moderately will enjoy his food more, for instance, than someone who stuffs himself and spoils his appetite.

Aristotle is famous for propounding the related concept of the “Golden Mean”, which states that the best course of action is often “in the middle” between vices that lie at two extremes. For instance, courage lies in-between the extremes of recklessness and cowardice.

Some vices miss what is right because they are deficient, others because they are excessive, in feelings or in actions, while virtue finds and chooses the mean. — Nicomachean Ethics

However, this isn’t quite what the Delphic Maxim said. For Socrates, as for the Stoics, the emphasis was on avoiding excess, and finding the appropriate amount to do something. The appropriate amount doesn’t necessarily lie at the mean or middle between two extremes, though — that’s overly-simplistic advice. Rather we need to study ourselves very carefully in order to ascertain, for instance, when we’re sleeping, drinking, or eating too much and when we’re doing so too little.

“But it is necessary to take rest also.” It is necessary. However, Nature has fixed bounds to this too: she has fixed bounds to eating and drinking, and yet you go beyond these bounds, beyond what is sufficient. — Meditations, 5.1

Every individual is different; what’s appropriate for me might not be for you. Moreover, what’s appropriate will vary depending on our circumstances. The right amount of food to eat during a siege might be quite different from the right amount to eat during a wedding feast. Sometimes the right amount might be nothing; at other times it might be as much as possible.

Xenophon, in fact, claims that Socrates made no distinction between the virtues of wisdom and temperance (sophrosune). In order to exercise, self-control we have to know and understand what’s appropriate for us. When we really perceive the value of things clearly we’ll act accordingly.

“For I think”, he said, “that all men have a choice between various courses, and choose and follow the one which they think is most to their advantage. Therefore I hold that those who follow the wrong course are neither wise nor temperate.” — Memorabilia

Self-knowledge is therefore not only the basis for identifying when we’re doing something too much. It’s also self-knowledge, of a sort, that potentially helps us to change our behaviour — the knowledge of what is good or advantageous for us. Of course, people will say that they often know something is bad for them, such as smoking cigarettes, but they can’t help themselves and do it anyway. Socrates would reply by claiming that they don’t really understand how important it is to stop, though.

Although this seems like a perennial controversy, we can actually settle it quite easily by means of a simple example. Even someone who says they can’t quit a bad habit, no matter how hard they try, would normally succeed if we increased the stakes dramatically. Even the most weak-willed smoker would be able to voluntarily stub out their cigarette if they had a gun pointed at their head (threat) and were being offered a million dollars (reward) for putting it down. That’s true even if it turns out the gun is loaded with blanks and the bank notes are fakes — what matters is what we believe. Socrates would say that proves that it is our belief in what’s advantageous for us that ultimately determines our behaviour.

Conclusion

If Plutarch is right and we should consider Apollo “no less philosopher than he is prophet” then these two sayings appear to capture the essence of the Apollonian philosophy of life. Self-knowledge leads to what Stoics called the virtue of wisdom. It requires understanding our own nature so that we can grasp what’s truly good for us, throughout the course of life, and what isn’t. That means understanding that the sort of things people typically value such as health, wealth, and reputation aren’t entirely up to us, but always at least partly in the hands of fate. We’re fragile creatures and our true good lies in our ability to accept that while nevertheless making the best use of our circumstances, and thereby living wisely.

Knowing ourselves means genuinely understanding what’s in our own self-interest, in a way that changes our experience of ourselves at an emotional level. By studying our own natures carefully, we can learn how to judge better what “excess” means for us as individuals. Seeing this more clearly is the key to finding the balance, and living wisely and with moderation.

Upon a column once standing at the entrance (pronaos) of the Temple of Apollo in Delphi, two famous maxims were inscribed: “Know thyself” (gnothi seauton) and “Nothing in excess” (meden agan).

In Plato’s Protagoras, Socrates claims that the legendary Seven Sages invented these sayings and had them placed at Delphi:

They met together and dedicated in the Temple of Apollo at Delphi, as the first-fruits of their wisdom, the far-famed inscriptions, which are in all men’s mouths — “Know thyself”, and “Nothing in excess.”

The god Apollo was the Leader of the Muses, and therefore ultimately responsible for the arts, such as music and oratory. He was also the god especially responsible for the arts of prophecy and healing. In addition to these traditional roles, however, Apollo came to be associated with philosophy. Indeed, Plutarch calls Apollo “that god who is above all things the lover of truth”, and claims that he “is no less philosopher than he is prophet.”

Read the rest of this article on Medium.

Really enjoyed talking with @MGawdat about Stoicism on Slo Mo podcast. I think it’s one of the best podcasts I’ve done for How to Think Like a Roman Emperor!

Look again at the first part of the article. The premise of their argument is that when we fall in love with someone who doesn’t treat us well or reciprocate, etc., that’s when we’re lying to ourselves. Their strategy isn’t to deceive yourself but (generally, with some exceptions) to try to face the truth more completely and more honestly than before. The think that’s a remedy based on truth because lovesickness or infatuation entails a sort of self-deception.

I have applied Stoicism to contemporary and contentious problems (climate change, vegetarianism, immigration, economic inequality) that challenge us in the 21st century.

My unique selling point is that I have combined my philosophical and engineering/applied science expertise, to give readers a more in-depth understanding of the complexity of the problems and their potential solutions from a Stoic perspective. (website)

Quotes from others:

The Stoicism and sustainability lecturer and researcher Kai Whiting’s work centers around applying ancient wisdom to these challenges, how the “life well-lived” translates into something bigger than our personal endeavors – Daily Stoic

“Of the talks I liked this morning, particularly liked the one on “Stoicism and sustainability”. He made a very clear talk. My eldest son is an environmental scientist, I was thinking “I wish he was here” – Stoicon 2018, audience member

“The one that really inspired me is the sustainability [talk]. Stoicism has always been about myself, not necessarily about the wider world… but that’s given me a bit of a different perspective on it” Stoicon 2018, audience member

Topics I Cover

(The brackets are just so you can see, where the expertise comes from)

• Kleomenes III and Sphaerus’ Stoic social and land reforms in Sparta (Chapter 7)
• Stoicism and progressive education (Chapter 7, academic paper and chapter)
• Stoicism and unjust Economic Inequality (Chapter 5)
• The contemporary sage (various podcasts)
• Stoic God (Chapter 8, various academic papers)
• Stoicism and Islam (Chapter 8)
• Environment, climate change (various)
• Stoicism and politics (chat with Greg Sadler)
• Stoicism and immigration (Chapter 6)
• Stoicism and fate (Chapter 4, the cylinder and the dog to the cart)

Stories

• The story of the REAL connection between Stoicism and Sparta
• How Stoicism offers solutions to educators
• Stoicism is not indifferent to politics and certain types of activism (Cato, Cicero, Julius Caesar etc)
• Stoicism for a better world: The missing component of self-help
• The immigration stories in Stoicism (Zeno, Cleanthes, Chrysippus)
• Taking Stoicism Beyond the Self: The Power To Change Society

Media Questions

• Why do you say that Stoicism is anything but a “dead white man” philosophy?
• “Silicon Valley Stoicism” focuses on corporate exploits, but your book says Stoicism is much more community based than that – where have they got it wrong?
• You state that self-help shouldn’t be only about the self. Doesn’t that seem like a contradiction in terms?
• Stoicism is an ancient philosophy but yet your book talks about climate breakdown, the civil rights movement and economic inequality. How can you say that ancient wisdom has something to say about modern life?
• Stoicism and Sparta are often linked by male lifehackers because of a perceived sense of toughness but your book talks about a Spartan Queen and land reforms! Why is the popularity perception and historic reality so different?
• In your book, you tell the story of Muslims bridging the gap between themselves and the local English community through the building of an eco-mosque. Why do you say that is a good “Stoic” example? Is Islam and Stoicism the same?
• How can Stoicism help us build community and cope with COVID?

Some Podcast/article links

Podcasts

• Stoicon 2018: Kai Whiting on Stoicism and Sustainability
• Stoicism For A World Worth Living In | Kai Whiting | Stoicon X Midwest 2020
• A Conversation with Kai Whiting On Stoicism and Sustainability | Ideas That Matter Interview Series
• Kai Whiting | Coronavirus and our Duty as Stoics
• Eating According to Nature with Kai Whiting
• Stoicism and Education with Kai Whiting

Blog/Magazine Pieces

• Stoicism And Sustainability: An Interview With Kai Whiting
• Taking Stoicism Beyond the Self: The Power To Change Society
• Roman living and technology (in case people want to know how Romans lived, this is my non-Stoic work):
• An Interview with Kai Whiting
• The Stoic Gym Magazine (various)
• A Response To “How Stoic is Jordan Peterson?” by Kai Whiting and Leonidas Konstantakos
• Stoics are Already Standing Up

Contact

My friend Lalya Lloyd reading a passage from Ovid’s Metamorphoses in English and Latin.