Seneca,

Today’s letter is set about to remind us of both the humility of all humans, as well as the heights to which they may rise if they so will and so work.  Philosophy does not care for the titles, lands, and class of the people who come to her.

Surely, we can compare Diogenes and Plato (as history often does), and see that it is not their wealth or status which pits them against each other, but their minds, their virtue, and their philosophy.

Generally, we privilege academic titles, world success, fame, and all of the accoutrements of the world.  Seneca reminds us today that the common conception bears no force in the concerns of philosophy.

Farewell.

Part of Michel Daw’s Reading Plan of Seneca’s Letters.

Seneca,

“Do not, however, deem yourself truly happy until you find that you can live before men’s eyes, until your walls protect but do not hide you; although we are apt to believe that these walls surround us, not to enable us to live more safely, but that we may sin more secretly.”

Privacy is a funny thing.  There are folks close to us for whom the idea is barely existent, and others for whom even the mildest interjection is an affront.  The advice is good nonetheless, that we should live as if every act we take is witnessed by some great person whom we should admire.  Whither that be the Sage, God, or merely the person we wish we were and are striving to be.

Farewell.

Part of Michel Daw’s Reading Plan of Seneca’s Letters.

Seneca,

I find the idea that we ‘spend ourselves’ in acquiring things an interesting.  We usually use dollars to measure the value the thing, but we rarely tally the cost to minds and souls.

Epictetus does this, actually, come to think of it.  When he speaks of the thief that stole his lamp, his price was to become faithless – to become a thief.  A high cost indeed.  All Epictetus lost was  lump of shiny metal.

Thank you for the interesting thought.

I bid you farewell.

Part of Michel Daw’s Reading Plan of Seneca’s Letters.

Seneca,

“If you see a man who is unterrified in the midst of dangers, untouched by desires, happy in adversity, peaceful amid the storm, who looks down upon men from a higher plane, and views the gods on a footing of equality, will not a feeling of reverence for him steal over you, will you not say: “This quality is too great and too lofty to be regarded as resembling this petty body in which it dwells? A divine power has descended upon that man.” “

The western conception, I think, has been muddled by a couple of millenia of Abrahamic context.  It’s hard to imagine this divine, holy man you describe and not think of him as a saint or prophet of some sort.  Maybe saint isn’t too far off, I don’t know.  The religious nature of the Stoics is on the face apparent.  Yet, there’s a lot to un-learn to grok it as it was intended, I suspect.

“The lion with gilded mane, in process of being trained and forced by weariness to endure the decoration, is sent into the arena in quite a different way from the wild lion whose spirit is unbroken; the latter, indeed, bold in his attack, as nature wished him to be, impressive because of his wild appearance, – and it is his glory that none can look upon him without fear, – is favoured in preference to the other lion, that languid and gilded brute.”

This idea that the lion, or man, is made great by what is his own and not by any sort of additition or ornamentation is a good reminder.  It’s very easy to see wealth, power, influence, property, social rank, etc. and use those as our common measure.  But as you say, Fate can sweep these away without so ever much as a ‘by your leave.’  Indeed, he gets to keep one thing and one thing only.  And this, is even on loan for a short time.  His character.

Farewell.

Part of Michel Daw’s Reading Plan of Seneca’s Letters.

Seneca,

It’s hard to believe that we’re almost through with ten weeks and forty letters.  I guess that puts us almost a fifth of the way through.  Tempus fugit, eh?

“Besides, this sort of speech contains a great deal of sheer emptiness; it has more sound than power. My terrors should be quieted, my irritations soothed, my illusions shaken off, my indulgences checked, my greed rebuked. And which of these cures can be brought about in a hurry? What physician can heal his patient on a flying visit?”

Stoic rhetoric is an interesting critter.  By all accounts, the writings of Chrysippus were more akin to technical manuals for an engine, than the prose we’re used to consuming today.  It was the writings of Hierocles, Cicero, and Seneca which brought the highly technical language down to a more common plane.

It’s sometimes hard to bridge the gap of needing to be incredibly specific with the meaning of words as a philosopher must, but also not to lose the ability to reach one’s audience.  I’ve written before about the steep learn curve of acquiring Stoic jargon, and mitigating that with the sorts of moral exhortations which the Stoics were known for.

In this project, and most of my others, I usually try to adopt a more conversational tone; something easy to read, and pleasant to think about.  There’s a good bit of highly technical philosophical treatises out there on Stoicism, and there’s a good bit of popular fluffery as well.  The lack, it seems to me, lies in handling the actually philosophy in a less academic way.

Even though I had not heard your advice, Seneca, until today.  I think I’ve been following it well.  Thank you for the letter.

Farewell.

Part of Michel Daw’s Reading Plan of Seneca’s Letters.

Seneca,

Your letter today touches on a point I have been thinking about lately, as well as discussing with others.  There is a trend in modern Stoicism to boil down the philosophy to set of points or “lifehacks.”  These are the tricks, which when improperly applied, are said to bring about worldly success, and every other manner of indifferent.  Yet, that’s being touted as the goal!

There are a number of “pop Stoicism” books, some are distillations of Stoic doctrine, but necessarily superficial.  Others are theurapeutic, and still more are of the “lifehack” variety.

The society today is lazy and impatient.  It demands the quick fix, material success, worldly acclaim, and every other manner of luxury.  Worse yet, it demands it immediately, without work, without cost.  It believe itself to be truly entitled to everything.

They only things it ignores are character, excellence, wisdom.

When you see these see mentioned, it’s couched in a sort of New Age ‘woo,’ which plays on all of the flaws above.  Books like “The Secret,” and variants of new-age hippy philosophy.

They all lack depth.

The idea that one might study and work for the betterment of one’s own soul is something which, if found at all, would be relegated to the church house.  And when found there, it’s only of a very particular sort.

No, the claims of philosophy are left dusty on the shelf, a mere curiosity to a handful of academics and intellectual masturbators.  Where are those living “philosophy as a way of life?”

Farewell.

Part of Michel Daw’s Reading Plan of Seneca’s Letters.

Seneca,

Maybe it’s just “blue car syndrome,” but I’ve come across the word ἀμαθία, (ignorance, stupidity, or folly, the antithesis of σοφία, “wisdom”) four or five times in the past month.  It’s not a word I’d noticed much before, nor paid overly much attention to.

The idea that philosophy is the instrument of fortitude, protection, and freedom is interesting.  Why do you have to sell Lucillius so hard on this?  Is he not already committed?  Maybe the issue is that the fruits of this particular tree are long in ripening?

Your concerns about conversation are also of particular interest to me lately.  Most of Stoic philosophy is happening online these days, and almost all of it through text.  This amounts to the ‘harangues’ which you’ve mentioned.  Shouted at the top of one’s lungs, as it were.

This is not good for sustained development of the school.  We need to get real humans in real life, face to face.  We need Stoic communities.

Farewell.

Part of Michel Daw’s Reading Plan of Seneca’s Letters.

Seneca,

‘Aristo used to say that he preferred a youth of stern disposition to one who was a jolly fellow and agreeable to the crowd. “For,” he added, “wine which, when new, seemed harsh and sour, becomes good wine; but that which tasted well at the vintage cannot stand age.” ‘

I’m not sure I can rightly be called a youth any more, but “of stern disposition” is probably not inappropriate.  Whether that seems to produce a good aged vintage is to be seen.  (;

The crux of the issue regarding ‘retirement’ as you’ve put it, seems to be the stress that’s caused when one is torn between the values of philosophy and the values of society.  If one is expected to heap up a great surfeit of property, money, and status; the person doing the very opposite while working on themselves seems to be doing something vicious.

I suspect the moral here isn’t just for the retirement of one’s twilight years, as we think of it today, but rather the retirement (or renouncing) of the world in general.  To focus on philosophy, we must renounce certain things which the society says we must have to be happy.

Farewell.

Part of Michel Daw’s Reading Plan of Seneca’s Letters.

Seneca,

I received two of your letters today, and it seems to me that there is a commonality between them.  In the first, you extol the praises of your student, and you remark on the relationship between teacher and student.  In the second, you remark on the relationship between friends, and the bonds of love.

This has me thinking, in many traditions (and based upon your first letter, even in ours) the teacher-student lineage is an important one.  Oftentimes, in historical analysis, we can detect some … creative heritage making.  It’s important to be able to trace back a lineage, for most folks, as some guarantee of authenticity in the teachings.

We Stoics work to draw our lineage to Socrates, as do the Cynics (a bit tenuous, there).

Aside from pedagogical authenticity, I wonder if there’s some good reason for such a pedagogical lineage.  Maybe it’s the case that we’re unable to see our own progress, and even if we’re progressing in the correct ways and correct things.  If that’s the case, then the role of a teacher/mentor is indispensable.

Maybe we moderns are floundering without the rigor which a teacher can provide.  We can see in the writings of Musonius and Epictetus that they lay a firm hold on their students’ education in virtue.

We lack Stoic teachers.  We are all students floundering and splashing around in the pool and we call it swimming.

Farewell.

Part of Michel Daw’s Reading Plan of Seneca’s Letters.

Seneca,

“I shall indeed use the old road, but if I find one that makes a shorter cut and is smoother to travel, I shall open the new road. Men who have made these discoveries before us are not our masters, but our guides. Truth lies open for all; it has not yet been monopolized. And there is plenty of it left even for posterity to discover.”

This has long been, ironically, one of my favorite quips from your Letters.  It is true, that at some point we must actually produce ideas of our own, a shock I know.  But as you say, for the young (in philosophy in not in age) learning the dogma of the teachers who have come before is more than useful, it’s necessary.

The world is full of shallow and superficial philosophies, which sound deep and meaningful to the uninitiated.  It’s not challenge to produce such utterances.  The practice and ability of discerning where the the depth actually lies is one worth cultivating, however.

I’m content, at this point, to be the student.  I’m content to do much more listening that talking.  Thank you for the letter.

Farewell.

Part of Michel Daw’s Reading Plan of Seneca’s Letters.