4 ms·
I read the article on Schopenhauer and Marcus Aurelius. Pretty amusing I have to admit, but a lot seems to be lost in the process. That is to say, you could com
by mberning 4y ago
I read the article on Schopenhauer and Marcus Aurelius. Pretty amusing I have to admit, but a lot seems to be lost in the process. That is to say, you could come away with some wrong impressions of the subjects covered. At least as far as I understand them.
- steve_adams_86 4y agoThis was my take away as well. There is a lot of important nuance lost. A lot of stoic philosophy taken in bite size pieces can seem totally bat shit and stupid, but if you read generations of people’s thoughts, learn to place the ideas temporally and culturally (to some degree at least), even the bizarre parts begin to make sense contextually. Even so, anything that tries to make philosophy more accessible and interesting to people is good in my book. Reading bro Marcus Aurelius is arguably better than reading nothing at all.
- morelisp 4y agoIt’s so weird to see Marcus Aurelius summarized this way because Marcus Aurelius was already bro Marcus Aurelius.
- steve_adams_86 4y agoHow so? Because he wasn’t a typical scholarly philosopher?