4 ms·

I think in many parts most people's lives are not simple because they engage with them through muddled and complex intellectual frameworks using 16 letter words

I think in many parts most people's lives are not simple because they engage with them through muddled and complex intellectual frameworks using 16 letter words to explain 3-5 letter word concepts. You'd be surprised how much modern life begins to make sense viewed through the framework of antique philosophy.

bluetomcat 2y ago
Ancient societies were different. A male citizen from the aristocracy could lead a slow leisurely life, gathering with like-minded citizens on the agora and talking for hours, enjoying the finer things in life like wine and sporadic sexual contacts, taking part in sports competitions. The "ancient wisdom" we consume now is coming from that segment of the Greek and Roman societies.
- marginalia_nu 2y ago
  I don't think that invalidates their conclusions. There's also Epictetus. That man can hardly be accused of being a spoiled aristocrat.
  - bluetomcat 2y ago
    It discredits them. Imagine the modern version – a privileged upper-middle class person with an expensive upbringing and education talking about stoicism ala Ryan Holiday and hard work. Their version of stoicism is most likely about not worrying of the fluctuations of stock values. An economically disenfranchised man's stoicism is about seeing their health degrade.
    - marginalia_nu 2y ago
      I don't think this is a useful mindset. We judge ideas based on their merits, not who came up with them. You can throw these accusations at modern figures like Marx and Engels as well. They were very much coddled and wealthy, far removed from the workaday concerns of everyday life. Interesting ideas are disproportionately likely to come from people who have a lot of leisure time, as that is a prerequisite for having the time to think about anything.
simonmysun 2y ago
We are forced to make our life complex. You can't deny the fact that the society we are living in has evolved. Of course one still has the oppurtunity to get rid of it and live in a cave, but how many people are doing this?
- bigstrat2003 2y ago
  > We are forced to make our life complex. No we aren't. People choose (or not) to make their lives complex, it isn't forced upon them.
  - simonmysun 2y ago
    I'm glad you have a choice. I might also be able to choose not to, but there are more people who can't.
- marginalia_nu 2y ago
  In what sense is it more complex?
  - bluetomcat 2y ago
    You are born into a society with certain expectations and customs. Choosing the slow and simple path turns you into a social recluse with little opportunities for contacts and further development. You may be reading Plato and Aristotle and have no idea what's currently happening in your neighbourhood because of lack of social contacts. The path to transformation should be the collective consensus towards new visions of society, not some individual acts of virtue signalling.
    - marginalia_nu 2y ago
      > You are born into a society with certain expectations and customs. Choosing the slow and simple path turns you into a social recluse with little opportunities for contacts and further development. You may be reading Plato and Aristotle and have no idea what's currently happening in your neighbourhood because of lack of social contacts. Why do you think engaging with Plato and Aristotle will make you a recluse? > The path to transformation should be the collective consensus towards new visions of society, You use a should statement. Why should it be this way? Who has decided this is the way it should be? Also why does there need to be transformation? > not some individual acts of virtue signalling. Virtue ethics is also not the same as virtue signalling. Virtues in virtue ethics are for your own benefit. It's even a common point to do good things and not tell other people in e.g. stoic and early christian thought, as doing things to raise your esteem in the eyes of others is prideful and not virtuous.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
sesm 2y ago
For example, our concept of 'work most of your time to afford food and place to live' for Aristotle would translate to a single word 'slave'. Good for him that he didn't have to do it and had slaves working for him instead.

bluetomcat 2y ago

Ancient societies were different. A male citizen from the aristocracy could lead a slow leisurely life, gathering with like-minded citizens on the agora and talking for hours, enjoying the finer things in life like wine and sporadic sexual contacts, taking part in sports competitions. The "ancient wisdom" we consume now is coming from that segment of the Greek and Roman societies.

marginalia_nu 2y ago
I don't think that invalidates their conclusions. There's also Epictetus. That man can hardly be accused of being a spoiled aristocrat.
- bluetomcat 2y ago
  It discredits them. Imagine the modern version – a privileged upper-middle class person with an expensive upbringing and education talking about stoicism ala Ryan Holiday and hard work. Their version of stoicism is most likely about not worrying of the fluctuations of stock values. An economically disenfranchised man's stoicism is about seeing their health degrade.
  - marginalia_nu 2y ago
    I don't think this is a useful mindset. We judge ideas based on their merits, not who came up with them. You can throw these accusations at modern figures like Marx and Engels as well. They were very much coddled and wealthy, far removed from the workaday concerns of everyday life. Interesting ideas are disproportionately likely to come from people who have a lot of leisure time, as that is a prerequisite for having the time to think about anything.

simonmysun 2y ago

We are forced to make our life complex. You can't deny the fact that the society we are living in has evolved. Of course one still has the oppurtunity to get rid of it and live in a cave, but how many people are doing this?

bigstrat2003 2y ago
> We are forced to make our life complex. No we aren't. People choose (or not) to make their lives complex, it isn't forced upon them.
- simonmysun 2y ago
  I'm glad you have a choice. I might also be able to choose not to, but there are more people who can't.
marginalia_nu 2y ago
In what sense is it more complex?
- bluetomcat 2y ago
  You are born into a society with certain expectations and customs. Choosing the slow and simple path turns you into a social recluse with little opportunities for contacts and further development. You may be reading Plato and Aristotle and have no idea what's currently happening in your neighbourhood because of lack of social contacts. The path to transformation should be the collective consensus towards new visions of society, not some individual acts of virtue signalling.
  - marginalia_nu 2y ago
    > You are born into a society with certain expectations and customs. Choosing the slow and simple path turns you into a social recluse with little opportunities for contacts and further development. You may be reading Plato and Aristotle and have no idea what's currently happening in your neighbourhood because of lack of social contacts. Why do you think engaging with Plato and Aristotle will make you a recluse? > The path to transformation should be the collective consensus towards new visions of society, You use a should statement. Why should it be this way? Who has decided this is the way it should be? Also why does there need to be transformation? > not some individual acts of virtue signalling. Virtue ethics is also not the same as virtue signalling. Virtues in virtue ethics are for your own benefit. It's even a common point to do good things and not tell other people in e.g. stoic and early christian thought, as doing things to raise your esteem in the eyes of others is prideful and not virtuous.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

sesm 2y ago

For example, our concept of 'work most of your time to afford food and place to live' for Aristotle would translate to a single word 'slave'. Good for him that he didn't have to do it and had slaves working for him instead.