A Guide to the Good Life • Hacker News Board

Re: A Guide to the Good Life

#21

Post by NextUserName » Thu, Mar 20, 2014, 6:09 AM UTC

>Medieval Christian scholars were faced with a dilemma: their religious beliefs required them to believe that the soul was saved through a relationship with Jesus, yet going through the newly discovered Greek and Roman writings it was obvious to them that great men of virtue and honor were alive many centuries before Jesus lived. How could these people be of such high caliber yet believe such vastly different things?

If they were faced with a dilemma than they were certainly fools. Don't Christians believe that God created the world and thus was present long before Jesus was born? Did they think that virtue and honor did not exist (or were not even possible) before the birth of Christ? What about Noah, Job, Moses, David, Joseph, Daniel, The nations of Israel and Judah, ETC. of the old testament. These were scholars and had not read of these people or did not think that great men who were believers in God could influence those outside of their religion in a positive way? Did they not read when king Darius of Babylon make the God of Daniel the Official God of the land?

I am completely confused by this dilemma.

Re: A Guide to the Good Life

#22

Post by thewarrior » Thu, Mar 20, 2014, 6:30 AM UTC

acabal wrote: post #2

I read this a long time ago and I can't recommend it enough. It does a good job of introducing the concepts of stoicism and defending the philosophy from our modern assumptions of the word. A very good read. The word 'stoicism' has kind of a bad rap, but I find it a very peaceful and comforting philosophy, and one I actively try to model my life against. Like most life philosophies it's not something that comes natur…

I've found Ecclesiastes very comforting :

http://www.readbibleonline.net/?page_id=28

Re: A Guide to the Good Life

#23

Post by fit2rule » Thu, Mar 20, 2014, 7:29 AM UTC

NextUserName wrote: post #21

> Medieval Christian scholars were faced with a dilemma: their religious beliefs required them to believe that the soul was saved through a relationship with Jesus, yet going through the newly discovered Greek and Roman writings it was obvious to them that great men of virtue and honor were alive many centuries before Jesus lived. How could these people be of such high caliber yet believe such vastly different things…

Oh great, you read the Bible. The Christians you're talking about hadn't even written the thing in their day and age.

Re: A Guide to the Good Life

#24

Post by lastofus » Thu, Mar 20, 2014, 7:37 AM UTC

thewarrior wrote: post #22

acabal wrote: post #2

I read this a long time ago and I can't recommend it enough. It does a good job of introducing the concepts of stoicism and defending the philosophy from our modern assumptions of the word. A very good read. The word 'stoicism' has kind of a bad rap, but I find it a very peaceful and comforting philosophy, and one I actively try to model my life against. Like most life philosophies it's not something that comes natur…

I've found Ecclesiastes very comforting : http://www.readbibleonline.net/?page_id=28

It's my favorite book of the Bible but I always found it the opposite of comforting. If you disregard the bits at the end about the duty of man to keep God's commandments, it seems in parts to basically describe nihilism.

Re: A Guide to the Good Life

#25

Post by pgt » Thu, Mar 20, 2014, 7:46 AM UTC

Thanks for posting this. I'm working through some career changes and this reminded me to focus on the process, instead of the result, because I have no control over the result, only my attitude and efforts.

Re: A Guide to the Good Life

#26

Post by aytekin » Thu, Mar 20, 2014, 10:15 AM UTC

flycaliguy wrote: post #18

This is my game changer read, excited to see it here. Everything from dealing with my father's death to that black emptiness I've fought my entire life, I've read this book a few times now. It has a lot in common with Cognitive Therapy but doesn't require filling out mood journals (does anybody actually manage to do that?) It serves as an excellent intro to Seneca's Letter's from a Stoic, which is another great book…

Thanks for the link. Full of great ideas such as:

"analyzing what it is in your daily life that disrupts your tranquillity and thinking about what you can do to prevent such disruptions."

Re: A Guide to the Good Life

#27

Post by atmosx » Thu, Mar 20, 2014, 10:17 AM UTC

> How could these people be of such high caliber yet believe such vastly different things?

I guess a Greek philosopher (Socrates or Plato) would say that it's because things like Truth, Justice and Virtue do exist independently and universally. They are not attached to people's religion, human laws, etc.

In ancient Greek tragedies you can find themes that deal with this sort of questions[1] and if you look into Plato[1] you'll find incredibly thorough analysis on various topics such as knowledge, religion, laws, justice, slavery, etc. Considering the fact that Gods in Ancient Greece were beyond our definition of religion today, they were all over the place, in every-day life, that's astonishing.

I was born Christian and Greece is the only modern theocratic European state, but I also reckon that religion and philosophy play well together only if you allow doubt into the equation. Otherwise you better stick with the beliefs/answers of your religion - whatever that religion might be - and stay the hell out of philosophers of such caliber or your mind is going to explode.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antigone_(Sophocles)#Significan...

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plato

Re: A Guide to the Good Life

#28

Post by benrhughes » Thu, Mar 20, 2014, 10:43 AM UTC

peter_schwarz wrote: post #6

This is a great introduction to Stoicism for the modern world. The author takes quite a few of the concepts and updates them through a 21st century philosophic viewpoint (mainly through the use of more rigorous logic behind the scenes). The best update comes with how one should deal with things one can and cannot effect. He updates this from two to three: things you have no effect on whatsoever, things you have some…

I really dislike his transformation of the dichotomy into a trichotomy. It takes a simple, deep insight and muddies it. The middle category is just a subset of "things not completely in our control", all of which we should be indifferent to.

That aside, I found Irvine to be a great introduction to Stoicism, even if he misses some of the depth and grace of Epictectus. I think I would have had a much harder time getting into the Roman stoics if I hadn't started with this book.

Re: A Guide to the Good Life

#29

Post by chokma » Thu, Mar 20, 2014, 10:56 AM UTC

lastofus wrote: post #24

thewarrior wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've found Ecclesiastes very comforting : http://www.readbibleonline.net/?page_id=28

It's my favorite book of the Bible but I always found it the opposite of comforting. If you disregard the bits at the end about the duty of man to keep God's commandments, it seems in parts to basically describe nihilism.

When reading chapters 1 and 2, the author focuses heavily on the "nothingness" (hvl - wisp of air) of all human endeavors. But I think it's significant that he does not loose hope altogether:

"There is nothing better for a man [than] that he should eat and drink, and make his soul enjoy good in his labor."

So the philosophy of Ecclesiastes is almost hedonistic (and views god more as blind fate than a benevolent force or being).

Re: A Guide to the Good Life

#30

Post by joshuacc » Thu, Mar 20, 2014, 12:32 PM UTC

NextUserName wrote: post #21

> Medieval Christian scholars were faced with a dilemma: their religious beliefs required them to believe that the soul was saved through a relationship with Jesus, yet going through the newly discovered Greek and Roman writings it was obvious to them that great men of virtue and honor were alive many centuries before Jesus lived. How could these people be of such high caliber yet believe such vastly different things…

The original statement was worded in a slightly misleading way. Medieval Christians weren't confused about virtuous people before Jesus. As you point out, they knew the Old Testament. What they were confused about was the idea of the "virtuous pagan."