Last Blog

This semester i learned a lot in Hellenistic Philosophy. I have a greater appreciation for Hellenistic philosophy after taking this course. When you go over the several schools and movements during this time period you become to understand the importance of how relevant some of these concepts are to fundamental questions and every day life. All of these philosophies were about praxis. They strive to achieve happiness by making their philosophy a way of live. Going over Christianity during the end of the semester from a philosophical perspective was very intriguing. I honestly was ignorant of the the fact that paganism does not necessarily believe they are polytheistic. It also makes since to me that Christianity is one in plurality. Once again in St. Austine's writings its evident that happiness is pivotal. Happiness for Augustine is contemplation of wisdom. This is where you can see a Hellenistic aspect in religion. Thus, showing how i have come to understand the importance and foundations of many concepts in philosophy. Hellenistic philosophy was far from an age of decadence, yet it was an age of revolutionary thought from ancient philosophy. Thank you professor Layne. I really enjoyed this class and learned a lot. I wish you the best of luck on your future endeavors.

Blog for week of march28th-april1st

Eclecticism was very interesting to me. I felt like it solved a lot of problems other Hellenistic philosophers had. However, it was somewhat stagnate with innovative ideas. I feel like at this time period we are still in a eclectic age. It made sense that it evolved during a sterile time period where schools oh philosophy were not present. Ethical polarization was probably the bright spot in their philosophy. All throughout Hellenistic philosophy the metaphysical world view and the ethical world view were very much disconnected. Eclecticism demonstrated how influential it was to philosophy when Plotinus emerged. It is evident in his philosophy when he explains the three hypo-stasis, which I am still very confused on. So far, i can agree with it, but im still going to need further explanation and elaboration on the theory before i can form a complete opinion.

Yesterday's Debate

Continuing from the heated debate yesterday. I would like to enter my input after listening. First of all, I question if skepticism can be considered philosophy. I have to ask, "What is philosophy?" It surely isnt continous question with no answer. It is like any other schience where one tries to arrive at a answer. Second of all, they wouldnt even know if the would consider themselves philosophers because they are so indecisive of everything. Third of all skeptics trying to apply some sort of dogma to their indecisiveness is absolutely absurd. You have to have a starting point at any philosophy or science and so forth. Nothing just is or just is continous. One lady in class said if you make one statement that is wrong in what you have to say then youre completely false. I think that is amusing, because she is the same person that prior to that said, "youre just attacking their physics, what about their metaphysics?" Im going to take her statement and apply it. If their physics is wrong so is their metaphysics Besides, metaphysics is a lot of things that will eventually become physics with technology and science. I am not disregarding skepticism. I am somewhat of a skeptic, but surely the absurdity is obvious within some of the philosophy.

Synopsis

Jared Bordere

Hellenistic Philosophy

Dr. Layne

In the most recent class we covered Epictetas. He was a slave of Epaphraditus. Epaphraditus educated Epictetas extensively. He went to lectures of Rufus. He is considered to be a bright light in neo stoicism. He later gained his freedom. After suffering in Rome due to Domition and banishing philosophers, he moved to Nicopolis. Epictetas being a slave allowed him to be among the common people, however being educated by his master allowed him to also be among royalty. Epicetetas did no write down his works. Arrian wrote his lectures for him.

Epictetas taught Spiritual Exercises. These spiritual exercises are Exegesis; exegesis is discipline at self. It is spiritual exercise that relieves pain. If it is not relieving pain then the exercises are not being done right. He also believed that there is a difference between discourse and praxis. Certain things depend on people. Rectitude of judgment, right attitude toward cosmos and duty has to be carried out for people to truly live a good life.

Lastly we began to cover Marcus. He was a philosopher that was informed by his way of life. He wrote meditations only for himself. It was similar to a diary. This allowed him to focus on his day along with his intent and desires.

Class Synopsis

Jared Bordere

Hellenistic Philosophy

3 March 2, 2011

Class Synopsis

Last class we cover ample content within Stoicism. We learned that the Stoics accept God as corporeal. God is what is. The theory of Stoicism rejects the theory of Epicurus because they believe there is no discreteness. There is unity in everything. Plurality does not exist. Space is actually just a measurement of things. Phusis implies matter, and matter gives forms to all things. Therefore, God is matter. Phusis is also logos. God, Phusis, and logos are all viewed as a unity as well. This unity is viewed as fire; the best analogy is a fire. Fire is all consuming and it is connected to air. Stoics believe it is an intrinsic principle which gives form to any and everything. Phusis is not just a material but is what allows to be what is.

Stoics believe the world is run on a divine providence. This goes against the perspective that the world is mechanistic and disregards chance. Everything is meant to be, and there is a perfection in the world. Fate is in existence with necessity. Everything in the world is fated. Causes are infinite in the world. Nevertheless, there is speculation of freedom in Stoicism. Stoics believe we have freedom in our will; once we accept faith we are free. A quote to illustrate this concept is, “Fate leads the willing, but the unwilling are dragged along.”

Lastly, we started to learn stoic ethics. Stoics teach happiness is the aim of philosophy. Logos would bring humans to completeness. We have a duty to make reasoning complete, and this would be viewed as virtuous. Happiness has an egalitarian sense to it; happiness is accessible to all. We learn that necessity and fate is indifferent to most of our desires. Happiness demands good and reason. We subject ourselves to pain when we give value to things that don’t have value thus, causing our unhappiness. To completely understand this we must have comprehension of the concept of our natural primary instinct which is Oikeioisis. Oikeioisis is the belief that all things seek to preserve themselves. It is an attachment or being at home in the world. When we use reason we can bring ourselves into harmony with the world.

Epicurus' Theories

I don't agree with the theory of the present moment. I don't think happiness is always available right now. The future is attainable and we will reach the future and it will become the now. I mean in theory yes all we will ever have is the now, but technically the future does in transition become the now. I think too much of Epicurus philosophy had too much chance. Epicurus actually made his philosophy into his ideal world which fit his comfort-ability. He made philosophy fit him, which is nice. However, Philosophy is the study of beliefs. So you cant discredit Socratic philosophy. Nor can you discredit the theory of experience of the intelligible or theology. Socratic philosophers could easily respond that we cant see air however we know it is here. That is an example of knowledge beyond the senses. Or some could respond with after life experience. That would be another example of knowledge beyond the senses. If in fact, Epicurus believe we only know through experience. Part of me honestly believes Epicurus is ridiculous.

Shame

Diogenes taught a number of things. Among these things he taught pahesia, free speech. In addition he also taught Anaidea, shamelessness in actions. Diogenes, a cynic, introduced these things to society in a exemplary lifestyle. Diogenes believed in a lack of shame. Even though, i believe Diogenes often uses a method of an extreme to get to a point, I completely agree with him. Shame does normalize humankind. I believe society uses shame as a force to control human behavior. Shame is established in society through laws, as well as, "taboo". For instance, some examples of taboo would be things such as young pregnant mothers, or speaking your mind in public. History truly repeats itself, and I believe society will always use shame to control human behavior. If you look back in time specifically during times of racial tension you see multiple examples. White women dating black men, or a black man, such as Martin Luther King Jr. speaking up. Laws that exemplify shame would be public nudity, which Diogenes would be to outraged and displaced if he lived in society today. People such as Diogenes would be considered a radical in modern day society. Diogenes and many other cynics used an extreme to set the bar to raise the standard of society. I believe in some cases it is needed because humankind can tend to get out of control if they have to much power. However, i believe if intelligent people spoke up more, regardless of shame the world could be a better place.

Then there is the opposition who believe people like Diogenes, who take things to the extreme are the reasons for problems in today's society. Some would argue there isn't enough balance. However, as i stated previously Diogenes acted above the norm to get people to at least step up.

Diogenes

Diogenes of Sinope was a historical cynic. Diogenes attempted to humiliate his peers. Regardless of his controversy he was considered one of the founders of Cynicism. He was on the move after he defaced currency under the advice of the oracle of Delphi. Diogenes became Antisthenes pupil even though he wasn't warmly accepted. He choose to be somewhat of an ascetic, along with his poor life and his belief in being naked. He looked down on those who praised money and their status. Diogenes was definitely an extremist. Modern day, he would be considered a drunken bum that roamed the streets and made outrageous claims. Nevertheless, Diogenes was very influential in his time period. He attempted to point too that what society holds is not equivalent to happiness that the natural state of nature can offer. Diogenes believed people should return to the origins of nature to achieve true happiness. However, it was difficult to understand why he didnt care for plato since he was the successor of plato who Diogenes shared many of the same concepts with.

Friendship

Every article I have read so far has been applicable to my life. In Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics he adresses several things such as Justice, Pleasure, Virtues, Happiness, and Friendship. Aristotle broke friendship down into three parts: friendship of utility, friendship based on pleasure, and friendship based on goodness of character. Aristotle explains the first two types of friendship is based of superficial qualities. However, a friendship based on goodness of character is a genuine . These friendships tend to be long lasting. Recently I got into an altercation with my friend over something. The friendship was questioned during the altercation. We both after a long discussion realized our friendship was based on goodness of character. Neither one of us tried to gain anything from one another and we are both equals. Often the problem with peoples friendships are that they are in it to gain something or use one another for entertainment.

The Pleasure after Pain

This week I had a conversation with a friend of mine about a break up they were going through. Honestly reading the Phaedo and understanding the relationship between pain and pleasure helped me give advice to my friend. Socrates described pleasure as the feeling after pain. He used the analogy of chains as a bond and how it hurts, and when the chains are released you feel pleasure. Socrates was using this analogy to refer to death. I assume being in prison and in a state of unhappiness is the pain. And death is the release of pain. I used this story to describe the break up. My friend was in pain and the relationship was a state of unhappiness. The breakup, which is the death allows for a pleasure of a new beginning. Like death, it is just a form of the beginning of life.

Jared's First Thoughts on the Intro to the Text

When reading the introduction to the text, the reader grasp a understanding for the origins of Hellenistic Philosophy. What caught my attention was the many misconceptions behind Hellenistic philosophy, as well as beginnings of Philosophy. Many skeptics of Hellenistic Philosophy believed it only answered ethical questions. Other questions were, Was it more monarchic rather than democratic. Moreover, The origins of philosophy came out of the movement of the Hellenistic Period with Alexander. This movement and change is similar to changes in society with things such as the civil rights movements. It formed and changed minds and civilization. The skepticism of the Hellenistic Culture is also similar to how many are skeptical of Socialism and Communism. People have these preconceived notions that are actually false and slightly irrational.