John Vespasian

Despite his remarkable philosophical and literary skills, the Roman author #seneca (4 BC-65 AD) made grievous mistakes in his approach to #timemanagement . I find it important to look at his mistakes because many people keep making those more than twenty centuries after Seneca’s death. What’s the underlying problem in Seneca’s errors about time management? The lack of an integrated view of human action, purpose and motivation. Seneca gained some valid #insights on the subject, but failed to get the complete picture. I find it easier to explain Seneca’s mistakes by comparing his ideas about time management with those of #aristotle (384-322 BC), especially with the Aristotelian concept of happiness in the “Nicomachean Ethics” and “Eudemian Ethics.” When Seneca recommends to focus on life’s essential goals, discard distractions and conduct ourselves according to reason, he is giving sensible advice, but at the same time, he is raising new questions. What did Seneca mean by “life’s essential goals”? How did he tell distractions apart from essential activities? How did he define “living according to reason”? If we deepen ourselves into Seneca’s works, we can find his answers to those questions, but the answers will again employ poorly defined terms, for which we’ll have to undertake a new inquiry. Indeed, it would be a never-ending story to put together in a comprehensive manner Seneca’s views on time management. It is the opposite of Aristotle because, instead of giving pearls of isolated wisdom, Aristotle gave us integrated principles. In contrast to Seneca, Aristotle clearly defined the #purpose of human life, namely, happiness. He also identified the path to happiness, namely, #personaldevelopment , focused steady work and virtue. Here is the link to the original article: https://johnvespasian.com/senecas-errors-about-time-management/

When it comes to happiness, I can summarise the ideas of #seneca (4 BC-65 AD) in a few words: On this subject, Seneca knew little, learned nothing, and could not care less. In fact, only his essay “On the Happy Life” revolves primarily around this goal, and the means to attain it. Am I being too harsh with Seneca and #stoicism in general? I don’t think so, but I am going to put forward my arguments, so that readers can decide for themselves. However, before starting my analysis of Seneca’s insights on happiness, I must get the question of historical #perspective out of the way: In Ancient Rome, during Seneca’s lifetime, did people define #happiness in a manner different to ours? Would they have been puzzled by our relentless search for happiness? Certainly not, because today’s definition of happiness comes from #aristotle (384-322 BC), in particular from his “Eudemian Ethics” and “Nicomachean Ethics.” Seneca lived almost four hundred years after Aristotle, and must have been conversant with Aristotelian ideas such as the link between virtue, personal development, and happiness. The Aristotelian concept of “human flourishing” or “human thriving” is widely employed nowadays by psychologists and sociologists. Seneca did not have access to today’s vast body of knowledge on #personaldevelopment , but he couldn’t ignore the insights that #aristotle had gained. Thus, I want to reaffirm that an Ancient Roman’s definition of happiness would not have been far from ours, even if he was living in a world of primitive technology, low productivity, and exacerbated violence. Seneca almost never employed the Aristotelian definition of happiness. Instead, he went in the opposite direction and used a twisted definition. To make things worse, he never admitted openly that he had changed the definition. Here is the link to the original article: https://johnvespasian.com/seneca-on-happiness/

Although #seneca (4 BC-65 AD) never developed a solidly integrated #philosophy of happiness, he did gain some insights that we can apply today. Those #insights are based on #commonsense and have been proven true by the experience of twenty one centuries. Seneca noted that low-key, down-to-earth individuals tend to be happier than ultra-ambitious, bombastic, aggressive ones. He underlined this point in his 67th Letter to Lucilius. His recommendation of #equanimity brings to our attention a major component of happiness. When Seneca mentions that Marcus Porcius Cato Uticensis (95-46 BC) used to increase his stamina by walking barefoot in the snow, we should not take the recommendation literally. The anecdote should not prompt us to walk barefoot in the snow, but to accept that life is occasionally going to deliver us a bad hand. If we keep our expectations down-to-earth, we’ll react faster and more effectively. Let me nonetheless emphasise that coping effectively with adversity isn’t a synonym for happiness. It is a prerequisite, not a synonym. Seneca is not saying that Cato enjoyed walking on the snow barefoot, but that Cato would not complain if he had to do so for a little while due to adverse circumstances. Seneca gives numerous examples of individuals who made the best of their lives by adopting a down-to-earth attitude; one of my favourite examples is the Roman military officer Gaius Fabricius Luscinus, a contemporary of #zeno of Citium. We can find Fabricius’ example in Seneca’s 73rd Letter to Lucilius. Fabricius had adopted a #frugal lifestyle, eating simple food that he could cook himself. His low-key lifestyle had enabled him to withstand political pressures and refuse bribes. Despite those difficulties, he kept trudging ahead undisturbed. A lesser man would have broken down under the pressure or succumbed to the temptations. Here is the link to the original article: https://johnvespasian.com/senecas-best-advice-on-happiness/

Arthur #schopenhauer (1788-1860) had no problem accepting that he was eccentric. In fact, he considered it a privilege to be categorised as an eccentric. He considered it a confirmation of the originality of his ideas. Schopenhauer’s key contribution to #philosophy is the theory of the will, that is, the belief that the will (“life force”) exerts a strong influence on all living creatures. The will drives them at the same time towards survival, reproduction and pleasure, but without any consideration of cost and long-term consequences. By creating the theory of the will, Schopenhauer set himself apart from other philosophers, especially from #immanuelkant (1724-1804) and Friedrich #hegel (1770-1831). Kant and Hegel had placed philosophy on an idealistic path by focusing on #epistemology and proposing vague abstractions for defining morality. Schopenhauer rebelled against those vague abstractions that have no connection to reality; he simply pointed out that Kant’s “categorical imperative” and Hegel’s “absolute spirit” generate #confusion and fail to supply practical guidance for deciding on everyday matters. With the theory of the will, Schopenhauer placed happiness once again in the centre of philosophy; reflections on theory of knowledge (“epistemology”), history and society are important but should lead to practical recommendations. Otherwise, what is the point of philosophy? In this respect, Schopenhauer went much further than prior moralists such as Seneca (4-65 AD), which had called for #selfdiscipline , #equanimity and prudence. Here is the link to the original article: https://johnvespasian.com/happiness-and-schopenhauers-philosophy-of-life/

In the life of Arthur #schopenhauer (1788-1860), I’ve named the last two decades “the illustrious years.” During those two decades, Schopenhauer enjoyed the status of a minor celebrity in German-speaking territories. Schopenhauer published “The art of debate” (sometimes translated as “The art of controversy”) in 1839. He had turned fifty-one and was continuing with his strategy of publishing as many short books and essays as possible. The more titles he published, the more attention he attracted from reviewers, and the higher the chances of having one title become a best seller. I find “The art of debate” a demeaning book for a #thinker of #genius such as Schopenhauer. The book outlines argumentation lines, such as the “ad hominem” fallacy, that is, the strategy of attacking an idea by attacking the person defending it. “The art of debate” does not contain any #philosophical or #rhetorical innovation. All argumentation lines presented in the book were already known in Ancient Greece and Rome. For a great mind like Schopenhauer’s, it was a waste of time to write such a book. Nonetheless, “The art of debate” sold well and quickly grew into Schopenhauer’s best-selling book. It has been regularly re-published and can still be found in bookshops today. Sadly, the other books by Schopenhauer are much more difficult to find. Schopenhauer gave dozens of lectures, presenting his book “The art of debate.” People applauded and purchased the book, while Schopenhauer enjoyed the sweetness of popularity. However, Schopenhauer could not fail to realise that he was playing a foolish game. He was giving dumbed-down rhetoric lessons instead of spreading his innovative philosophy. He was catering to people who did not care about his ideas. It took Schopenhauer two and a half years to admit that he was wasting his time. Eventually, in 1842, he began to work on a more ambitious book. Here is the link to the original article: https://johnvespasian.com/schopenhauers-biography-the-illustrious-years/

Even for a genius like Arthur #schopenhauer (1788-1860), it’s far from self-evident to define success; the feeling of #achievement will wane fairly quickly if people are admiring you for reasons that have little to do with your life’s purpose. Schopenhauer started to experience #success in 1830. He was already forty-two years old and had spent decades in obscurity, despite his remarkable work. As of 1830, universities and other institutions started to invite Schopenhauer to give lectures, and journalists published some favourable articles about him. The articles did not clearly describe his #philosophy , but at least, they made people curious. Unfortunately, the truth is that, by 1830, only a few hundred people had read Schopenhauer’s masterpiece. I am referring to his book “The world as will and representation.” Schopenhauer had first published “The world as will and representation” in 1818, and revised and expanded it in 1828. He had mailed dozens of copies of the book to newspapers and magazines, asking them to review it, but few had done so. The demand for his lectures had convinced Schopenhauer that people were interested in his philosophy. He should have asked himself why they were not buying his books, but I guess that he was too proud to face the facts. If he had asked himself that question, he would have come to the realisation that people attended his lectures because they viewed him as a rarity. They felt attracted by the novelty effect, not because of a genuine interest in Schopenhauer’s ideas. Schopenhauer concentrated on pursuing success and tried to figure out how to get people to read his books. He concluded that the size of his work “The world as will and representation” was too intimidating. Here is the link to the original article: https://johnvespasian.com/schopenhauers-biography-disappointing-success/

The struggling decade in the life of Arthur #schopenhauer (1788-1860) encompasses the period between 1817 and 1827, that is, the year he had devoted to writing “The world as will and representation” and the ensuing nine years. Schopenhauer had very #optimistic #expectations for his work “The world as will and representation” and did not hesitate to pay for its publication. In the early nineteenth century, we are talking about a substantial investment. In contrast to today’s electronic editing, the publication of a book in 1818 entailed vast amounts of typesetting done by hand and the correction of mistakes detected during proofreading. It was a cumbersome, time-consuming process. On top of that, one had to pay for the printing and binding costs. Even if the initial run amounted to five hundred copies, I estimate that, all in all, Schopenhauer must have disbursed the equivalent of the price of a large motorcycle. After receiving the books from the printer, he mailed a few dozen to reviewers in newspapers and magazines. He awaited an #enthusiastic response, but was met with total indifference. The lack of response #disappointed Schopenhauer, but didn’t affect his self-confidence. He immediately began to plan a new book, expanding the ideas outlined in “The world as will and representation.” Schopenhauer undertook in the years 1821 and 1822 a long journey across France, Switzerland, and Italy. While travelling, he took copious notes that he intended to use in his next books. In 1823, Schopenhauer turned thirty-five. He settled down in Dresden and wrote the essay “On vision and colours.” It is a treatise on the nature of perception and aesthetics, excellently written, but adding little to Schopenhauer’s overall philosophy. Here is the link to the original article: https://johnvespasian.com/schopenhauers-biography-the-struggling-decade/

I regard his university years in Berlin as crucial in shaping the extraordinary self-reliance of Arthur #schopenhauer (1788-1860). He had just turned sixteen when he transferred to the University of Berlin and immersed himself in the writings of Immanuel Kant. Most sixteen-year old university students feel intimidated or at least impressed by professors. The large gap in experience, #wisdom and authority creates an atmosphere of blind respect; it normally takes years for students to shape their own ideas, and dare contradict or criticise their professors. Schopenhauer walked the path from admiration to criticism of his professors at an amazing speed. At the beginning, he felt fascinated by Kant’s abstruse ideas (”transcendental idealism”) about #metaphysics and epistemology, but it didn’t take long for Schopenhauer to poke holes in Kant’s philosophy. As a student at the University of Berlin, Schopenhauer went to #philosophy lectures given by Johann Gottlieb #fichte (1762-1814) focusing on the metaphysical ego of the German people. Fichte’s lectures were extremely popular, but Schopenhauer found them nonsensical. He viewed Fichte’s arguments for the existence of a metaphysical German ego as inventions lacking evidence and consistency. In a word, Schopenhauer considered Fichte’s ideas worthless. In contrast to his former quiet life at the Gymnasium and at the University of Göttingen, Schopenhauer had an active social life in Berlin. He attended a large number of lectures, not only in philosophy, and participated in seminars and debates. His transfer from University of Göttingen to the University of Berlin meant that he had definitively quit medicine to focus on philosophy. He had convinced his mother to continue her financial support, but she was unhappy with the situation. Here is the link to the original article: https://johnvespasian.com/schopenhauers-biography-the-path-to-the-theory-of-the-will/

I regard the biography of Arthur #schopenhauer (1788-1860) as worth studying because it provides a wonderful illustration of Schopenhauer’s ideas; he practised what he preached at each opportunity and published extensive notes about his thoughts. Schopenhauer is one of the best German-language thinkers and essayists, but he was born in Danzig, which is nowadays called Gdansk and belongs to Poland. His parents were both hard-working and successful, each of them in their own way. His mother was named Johanna. By the time Arthur Schopenhauer was still a teenager, she had already attained best-seller status with her romantic novels. Nevertheless, the largest share of the family income came from Arthur Schopenhauer’s father. His full name was Heinrich Floris Schopenhauer and had attained remarkable #success in an import-export business in which he was a partner. The family wealth enabled Arthur Schopenhauer to benefit from an excellent education, but life didn’t spare him a massive #setback in his infancy. When he was five years old, his father died unexpectedly. Joanna Schopenhauer could not make up for the lost father, but devoted vast resources to Arthur’s education. She hired teachers to tutor Arthur at home in languages (German, French and English), music, and other subjects. For what concerns primary education, Arthur was primarily home schooled. In 1797, Arthur began attending the Gymnasium, that is, the secondary #education in preparation for the university. He was only nine-years old when he enrolled in the Gymnasium. That is very young for today’s standards, but was not unusual in the eighteenth century. Schopenhauer’s biographers note that he was a loner at the Gymnasium. In his work “Parerga and Paralipomena,” we find Schopenhauer’s own explanation for his loneliness. He felt that he was more intelligent and sophisticated than his peers. It was difficult for him to enjoy their jokes, games and sports. Here is the link to the original article: https://johnvespasian.com/the-first-turning-point-in-schopenhauers-biography/

Living without regret is a crucial element of happiness, but it is easier said than done. Seneca devoted many pages to this subject because he was aware of the difficulty. It’s far from self-evident to let go of past mistakes, #setbacks and defeats. #seneca devoted his essay “On Clemence” to praising the benefits of leniency and #forgiveness towards other people, but failed to point out the importance of exercising those virtues also towards ourselves. Although “On Clemence” does not deal primarily with living without regret, it advises Emperor Nero (37-68 AD) to show clemency towards his enemies, explaining that clemency will also benefit its practitioner. It will reconcile him with the world and help him understand the #weakness of human nature. Seneca recommends Nero to govern the Roman Empire “in a firm, but gentle manner.” Fair enough, but how many people are able to govern themselves “in a firm, but gentle manner.” I have witnessed too many cases of individuals going to one or the other extreme. Either they apply excessive firmness and flagellate themselves psychologically for their errors, or they apply excessive leniency and abandon all ethical standards. Seneca correctly regarded excessive severity and excessive leniency as inhibitors of happiness. Gaius Julius Caesar (100-44 BC) exercised leniency on many occasions, but did it serve him well? Arguably not, since he was eventually murdered by beneficiaries of his past leniency. Caesar may have exercised leniency because he wanted to live without regret; he had already bought into the doctrine that Seneca would preach one generation later, namely, that it’s fine to err on the side of forgiveness. Seneca’s formula for living without regret requires careful calibration. If we go overboard on the side of leniency, we will fall prey to untamed passions; and if we go overboard on the side of severity, we’ll be harmed by #psychological or physical revenge. Here is the link to the original article: https://johnvespasian.com/seneca-on-living-without-regrets/