As noted in my previous post, I cannot agree with Seneca's characterization of poverty as carefree. However, he continues the discussion of poverty and wealth in his eighteenth letter to Lucilius. Even though Seneca was wealthy, and would not forbid Lucilius from possessing riches, he advised his friend that Lucilius could be happy without wealth. This advice seems to be based on the traditional Stoic teaching that wealth is not one of the goods. Jumping forward to Letter 87, Seneca restates for Lucilius -- in the form of syllogisms -- some of the classic Stoic arguments regarding wealth:
"That which can belong to the vilest and most despicable kinds of people is not a good. But wealth can belong to the pimp and the manager of gladiators. Therefore wealth is not a good. ...
That which is good does not come of what is bad. But wealth comes of avarice. Therefore wealth is not a good. ...
If the pursuit of something brings many bad results, that thing is not a good. Our pursuit of wealth brings many bad results. Therefore wealth is not a good."
I find Seneca's arguments about wealth to be more persuasive than his contentions about poverty. The fact that Seneca was willing to test his theories in the real world likewise supports their persuasiveness. He begins the eighty-seventh letter by telling Lucilius about a recent trip. Apparently, Seneca traveled in a country wagon pulled by mules, slept on his cloak, and dined on a simple diet of dried figs along with bread. Seneca's credibility -- and one of the qualities in him that I find to be most charming -- is also enhanced by the fact that he is willing to be honest about his own faults. Seneca confessed to Lucilius that he did not like being seen by other travelers in such a simple vehicle, and blushed when those in a more glamorous carriage passed by. Seneca observes that the person "who blushes in a shabby carriage will boast of an expensive one." The frugal habits he admires and approves of are not yet firmly established in him, Seneca admits; he has made only a little progress on the path to wisdom, Seneca says, because he still cares too much about the opinions of others.
_______________
Seneca, Letters on Ethics to Lucilius, Translated with an Introduction and Commentary by Margaret Graver and A.A. Long (University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London, 2015), Letter 18, 13, page 69; Letter 87, 15-28, pages 303-305, and 2-5, page 300.
Monday, July 23, 2018
Wednesday, July 18, 2018
17: Is Poverty Carefree?
The seventeenth letter to Lucilius discusses another topic on which I have to agree to disagree with Seneca, at least in part. This letter begins with Seneca chiding his friend Lucilius about the latter's decision -- which he justifies by trepidation about poverty -- to continue in the family business and save money for the future rather than retire and devote himself to the study of philosophy. Seneca writes:
"Trust me: you should make philosophy your advocate. It will persuade you not to linger over your balance sheet. No doubt your aim, the purpose of all your delay, is to ensure that you need not fear poverty. But what if poverty is actually something to pursue? Many have found riches an obstacle to the philosophical life: poverty is untrammeled, carefree. When the trumpet sounds, the poor know that they are not the ones under attack; when the alarm of fire is raised, they look around for the exit, not for their belongings. When a poor person is about to embark, there is no tumult at the harbor, no bustling throng along the beach, attendants all of a single person; no pack of slaves standing around ... . Hunger is cheap; it is the palate that is expensive. Poverty is content to satisfy the immediate wants. Why, then, do you refuse to take as your companion one whose habits it is sensible for the wealthy to imitate? If you want to have time for your mind, you must either be poor or resemble the poor. Study cannot be beneficial without some time for frugality, and frugality is just voluntary poverty. So away with your excuses!"
I live about a mile away from one of the largest temporary homeless shelters in Chicago, and the residents there are among the least carefree people I have ever seen; rather, they appear to be suffering from chronic stress (among other maladies). Thus, I cannot agree with Seneca's argument that poverty is carefree. Seneca was born into a prosperous provincial family, and by the time he sat down to write the Letters late in his life, he was probably one of the wealthiest men in the Roman Empire; he seems, therefore, to have had no personal experience with poverty. However, in Seneca's defense, it must be noted that he attributed much of his success to good fortune.
Like Seneca, President Trump was born into prosperous family; like Seneca, Trump went on to build substantial personal wealth (although we do not know exactly how rich he is, because he will not release his income tax returns). But unlike Seneca, Trump attributes his success to "genius" -- instead of admitting that (after being given a head start in life) he has also been very lucky in business, as well as in politics.
_______________
Seneca, Letters on Ethics to Lucilius, Translated with an Introduction and Commentary by Margaret Graver and A.A. Long (University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London, 2015), Letter 17, 2-5, pages 64-65.
"Trust me: you should make philosophy your advocate. It will persuade you not to linger over your balance sheet. No doubt your aim, the purpose of all your delay, is to ensure that you need not fear poverty. But what if poverty is actually something to pursue? Many have found riches an obstacle to the philosophical life: poverty is untrammeled, carefree. When the trumpet sounds, the poor know that they are not the ones under attack; when the alarm of fire is raised, they look around for the exit, not for their belongings. When a poor person is about to embark, there is no tumult at the harbor, no bustling throng along the beach, attendants all of a single person; no pack of slaves standing around ... . Hunger is cheap; it is the palate that is expensive. Poverty is content to satisfy the immediate wants. Why, then, do you refuse to take as your companion one whose habits it is sensible for the wealthy to imitate? If you want to have time for your mind, you must either be poor or resemble the poor. Study cannot be beneficial without some time for frugality, and frugality is just voluntary poverty. So away with your excuses!"
I live about a mile away from one of the largest temporary homeless shelters in Chicago, and the residents there are among the least carefree people I have ever seen; rather, they appear to be suffering from chronic stress (among other maladies). Thus, I cannot agree with Seneca's argument that poverty is carefree. Seneca was born into a prosperous provincial family, and by the time he sat down to write the Letters late in his life, he was probably one of the wealthiest men in the Roman Empire; he seems, therefore, to have had no personal experience with poverty. However, in Seneca's defense, it must be noted that he attributed much of his success to good fortune.
Like Seneca, President Trump was born into prosperous family; like Seneca, Trump went on to build substantial personal wealth (although we do not know exactly how rich he is, because he will not release his income tax returns). But unlike Seneca, Trump attributes his success to "genius" -- instead of admitting that (after being given a head start in life) he has also been very lucky in business, as well as in politics.
_______________
Seneca, Letters on Ethics to Lucilius, Translated with an Introduction and Commentary by Margaret Graver and A.A. Long (University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London, 2015), Letter 17, 2-5, pages 64-65.
Tuesday, July 10, 2018
16: Self-Examination
In the sixteenth letter to Lucilius, Seneca touches upon some of his favorite subjects, including philosophy. Seneca tells Lucilius that he has made progress in wisdom, but advises his friend: "Shake yourself out; check yourself over; look at yourself in different ways. Above all, consider whether the progress you have made has been in philosophy, or in life itself."
Seneca gives a more complete example of self-examination in his treatise On Anger. As noted in my post of 11/9/17, Seneca argues in this work that anger is an extremely destructive emotion for individual humans in particular and the human race in general. As a way to make sure that anger is eliminated, Seneca has the following guidance for his brother Annaeus Novatus:
"Your anger will cease and become more controllable if it knows that every day it must come before a judge. Is there anything finer, then, than this habit of scrutinizing the entire day? What sort of sleep follows this self-examination -- how peaceful, how deep and free, when the mind has been either praised or admonished, when the sentinel and secret censor of the self has conducted its inquiry into one's character! I exercise this jurisdiction daily and plead my case before myself. When the light has been removed and my wife has fallen silent, aware of this habit now that's now mine, I examine my entire day and go back over what I've done and said, hiding nothing from myself, passing nothing by. For why should I fear any consequence from my mistakes, when I'm able to say, 'See that you don't do it again, but now I forgive you. In that discussion you spoke too aggressively: from now on don't get involved with people who don't know what they're talking about. People who have never learned don't want to learn. You admonished that fellow more candidly than you should, and as a result you didn't correct him, you offended him; in the future consider not just whether what you say is true but whether the person you're talking to can take the truth. A good man delights in being admonished, but all the worst people have the hardest time putting up with correction.'"
Seneca goes on to recount other humorous instances where he let anger get the best of him: the bruising remarks of others at a banquet; a rich man's door keeper mistreating his friend; being seated in a place of less distinction than another; and giving someone who spoke ill of his talent a dirty look.
However, in keeping with Seneca's legal metaphor, I think it makes sense to have a statute of limitations where self-examination is concerned. That is, one should not keep judging and re-judging the same actions and words. I'm not sure what the precise cutoff point should be -- a day, a week, a month? -- but there must be one. In my own case, I have to admit that I probably spend too much time ruminating about past decisions, whether of the previous day or of the previous decade. In keeping with the founding principle of this blog, I need to moderate my tendency to cover the same mental ground over and over again.
_______________
References:
Seneca, Letters on Ethics to Lucilius, Translated with an Introduction and Commentary by Margaret Graver and A.A. Long (University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London, 2015), Letter 16, 1-2, page 62.
Seneca, On Anger, translated by Robert A. Kaster in Anger, Mercy, Revenge (University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London, 2010); Book 36, 1-5, pages 91-92.
Seneca gives a more complete example of self-examination in his treatise On Anger. As noted in my post of 11/9/17, Seneca argues in this work that anger is an extremely destructive emotion for individual humans in particular and the human race in general. As a way to make sure that anger is eliminated, Seneca has the following guidance for his brother Annaeus Novatus:
"Your anger will cease and become more controllable if it knows that every day it must come before a judge. Is there anything finer, then, than this habit of scrutinizing the entire day? What sort of sleep follows this self-examination -- how peaceful, how deep and free, when the mind has been either praised or admonished, when the sentinel and secret censor of the self has conducted its inquiry into one's character! I exercise this jurisdiction daily and plead my case before myself. When the light has been removed and my wife has fallen silent, aware of this habit now that's now mine, I examine my entire day and go back over what I've done and said, hiding nothing from myself, passing nothing by. For why should I fear any consequence from my mistakes, when I'm able to say, 'See that you don't do it again, but now I forgive you. In that discussion you spoke too aggressively: from now on don't get involved with people who don't know what they're talking about. People who have never learned don't want to learn. You admonished that fellow more candidly than you should, and as a result you didn't correct him, you offended him; in the future consider not just whether what you say is true but whether the person you're talking to can take the truth. A good man delights in being admonished, but all the worst people have the hardest time putting up with correction.'"
Seneca goes on to recount other humorous instances where he let anger get the best of him: the bruising remarks of others at a banquet; a rich man's door keeper mistreating his friend; being seated in a place of less distinction than another; and giving someone who spoke ill of his talent a dirty look.
However, in keeping with Seneca's legal metaphor, I think it makes sense to have a statute of limitations where self-examination is concerned. That is, one should not keep judging and re-judging the same actions and words. I'm not sure what the precise cutoff point should be -- a day, a week, a month? -- but there must be one. In my own case, I have to admit that I probably spend too much time ruminating about past decisions, whether of the previous day or of the previous decade. In keeping with the founding principle of this blog, I need to moderate my tendency to cover the same mental ground over and over again.
_______________
References:
Seneca, Letters on Ethics to Lucilius, Translated with an Introduction and Commentary by Margaret Graver and A.A. Long (University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London, 2015), Letter 16, 1-2, page 62.
Seneca, On Anger, translated by Robert A. Kaster in Anger, Mercy, Revenge (University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London, 2010); Book 36, 1-5, pages 91-92.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)