Que es cultura

Que es la cultura para el Ministerio del mismo nombre?, que lo es para el INC? Recuperar los restos  de la Universidad de Yale, construir museos, excavar tumbas?  es algo mas que eso y lo mas importante. La cultura es la poderosa herramienta de una sociedad, lo que determina que sea fuerte, civilizada renovable justa. Cultura es lo que comemos, lo que vestimos pero tambien y mas importante es como nos relacionamos en sociedad. Cultura es por ejemplo si valoramos la honestidad como valor de relacion entre las personas. Si respetamos las colas, sino  apresuramos ni presionamos en las colas,si respetamos nuestro turno, si no querenmos privilegios a la hora que nos atiendan en una ventanilla publica, Si nos respetamos entre personas. Sino mentimos, si respetamos los acuerdos. Si entendemos el ambito de la privado y lo publico. Si respetanmos la propiedad privada. Si castigamosla estafa condureza. Si valoramos mas la justicia y la seguridad que la compasion con los victimarios.Si nos banamos todos los dias, si no tiramos basura a la calle. Si entendemos que el estado es un instrumento al servicio de todos y no una fuente de trabajo para muchos. Es  la forma como vivimos com nos comportamos, la cantidad de instituciones que tenemos.  Si tenemos conciencia de individualidad o solo de grupo de manada. Si somos morosos en nuestras deudas. Si aceptamos que el otro tenga opinones diferentes. Si respetamos y admiramos el talento y lo valoramos mas que nuestras propias ambiciones personales aunque los talentos sean de otro. Elemento sin el cual no  puede haber lideres en una sociedad asi como renovacion en la misma. De lo contrario solo habra caudillos de papel. Sociedades con caudillos mediocres que solo tienen ambicion. De lo contrario el mediocre se encumbra como lider pero no lo es. Al mediocre no le inmporta su mediocridad. Solo tiene ambicion. No conoce sus limitaciones ni las de sus carencias morales e intelectuales ni las de su ambicion. Se rodea de mediocres y trata de destruir al que no los es porque es un escollo para conservar o lograr el poder. Sabe que de todas maneras habra personas que tienen debilidad por el talento y eso es peligroso para el. Eso puede ser aislado pero cuando es generalizado forma parte de la cultura de un pueblo.

Solo los pobres entraran en el reino de Dios y en el Partido.

Nunca he creido que Jesucristo defienda la pobreza, defiende a los pobres. Tampoco lo he creido de Haya de la Torre. Cuando escucho a Carlos Roca decir que APRA es un partido de los pobres oprimidos y que ahi no hay espacio para los ricos veo la desvirtuacion que existe tambien en la doctrina cristiana catolica y claro el APRA es un Partido de cristianos catolicos y estaba sujeta a esa desvirtuacion. Palabras en la presentacion en el Congreso de libros escogidos de Haya de la Torre.Que el ser rico no se contradice con los valores morales necesariamente. Que se puede ser rico y moral al mismo tiempo. El hombre mas rico de USA vive como un hombre de clase media y no tiene celular. Y ahora que se acerca el final de su vida esta programamando como entregar su fortuna para ayudar a los que menos tienen. En esto se ha aliado con Bill Gates. El ser rico puede significar que haz hecho empresa y al hacerlo has dado la oportunidad de trabajo a miles de personas y eso es moral. Que no se puede rico sin ser indecente inmoral explotador es un mito creado por la desvirtuacion de la doctrina catolica, por el marxismo y su lucha de clases teoria equivocada y gran mentira del siglo veinte: que la unica clase moralmente capaz de lograr la justicia social es la clase baja de los trabajadores obreros y campesinos.Y es que Marx fue muy religioso sin creer en Dios. Porque para ser religioso no se necesita creer en Dios y en el mas alla.La esencia de la religion es creer que hay fines en la vida mas sublimes que los simples naturales.

Estoy de acuerdo con el en que el mayor legado de Haya de la Torre es el moral. Y cuando se habla de relativismo moral eso no significa ser indecente. O se es decente o no se lo es.O se es honesto  o no se lo es. Sin embargo hay dos tipos de honestidad: el que es honesto bajo cualquier circunstancia y el que mide sus actos en base a honestidad pero tambien a las consecuencias de su conducta honesta. Es decir en base a los resultados. Esto nada tiene que ver con el que roba en el estado pero hace obra por si acaso.

La honestidad no es patrimonio ni de la izquierda ni de la derecha

el problema con la izquierda (y una definicion operativa de la izquierda es dicese de los que creen que la justicia social se logra estatizando y nacionalizando todas las o casi todas las propiedades, las estrategicas y las que ellos creen que son estrategicas), es que cree tener el patromonio absoluto de la Bondad Social. (es decir la bondad social es la preocupacion por los pobres por la pobreza y la justicia social). Osea la unica forma de ser una buena persona es preocupandose por los pobres y esto se logra o se hace operativo estatizando las empresas mas importantes controlando, no regulando ,controlando el mercado sino es que ahogandolo.

El izquierdista clasico de salon, el caviar por ejemplo detesta la empresa. Es que nunca ha formado una, Vive de sueldos del estado o ONGs o becas. Ve en la empresa y la propiedad al demonio. Es que los marxistas, el mismo Marcuse le hicieron  creer a medio mundo que el capitalismo era imnatamente inmoral y que no tenia solucion y que la unica solucion era destruirlo y cambiarlo por el socialismo. Pero ya sabemos que el unico socialismo que los comunistas pueden disenar el el estado totalitario en donde hay dos clases ; la burocracia del partido y los demas. Diseno copiado en LA  timidamente por   Velazco, Chavez y Morales pero no por eso menos daninos. Los peruanos ahora tenemos una version opaca pero no por eso menos peligrosa de Velazco en Humala. El Comandante que luce como  pergaminos una maestria en la Catolica (universidad de Lima controlada por caviares) y sus charlas con su padre tambien oficial ya retirado del ejercito. Los argentinos tambien tuvieron su Velazco en Peron. Hay quienes especulan que Velazco hizo retroceder al Peru 40 anos.Aparte de lo que no se avanzo. Otros dicen que gracias a Peron Argentina no se convirtio en lo que todos creian que se iba a convertir: una pais del primer mundo.

Pero la bondad social, el preocuparse por la pobreza por la injusticia social no es superior a la bondad personal. Es decir el ser honesto incapaz de hacerle dano  a nadie imnecesariamente y el respetar a todos por igual. La bondad personal es mas dificil de lograr que la bondad social. La bondad social se ejerce de lejos sin conocer directamente a las personas. Por eso muchos caviares explotan a sus empleadas domesticas (por si acaso no son los unicos) pero en la universidad o en los periodicos en donde escriben se desgarran las vestiduras por los desposeidos. No son los unicos porque tambien ( y los devotos son los equivalente religiosos de los ateos caviares) hay gente de la derecha creyentes devotos que se persinan,rezan todos los dias, odian los condones,pero explotan a sus trabajadores.

De ahi parte en parte la intolerancia que muchos de izquierda ejercen sobre gente de "derecha". Ellos no pueden ser mas buenos que nosotros los de la izquierda, porque defender la propiedad privada la empresa nunca podria ser bueno para los pobres.

Pero si las cosas se midieran por resultados y no por intenciones mucha gente de la derecha y entre ellos Vargas Llosa ,realmente serian de la izquierda porque  el capitalismo la empresa privada ha hecho mas mucho mas  que el comunismo por acabar con la pobreza en el mundo.

 

 

 

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&sqi=2&ved=0CBsQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FHerbert_Marcuse&ei=cm6yTNHAEofEsAPRlITfDA&usg=AFQjCNE9lyBwWfQpgz0SFnUA2XU_YvLkmQ&sig2=V_qcScXhUGDHvVDRq_KCEQ

---------- Mensaje reenviado ----------
De: Garcia, Manuel <manuel.garcia@intel.com>
Fecha: 10 de octubre de 2010 17:55
Asunto: RE: [LibrosG] Mario Vargas Llosa gana el Premio Nobel de Literatura 2010
Para: "librosgratis@gruposyahoo.com.ar" <librosgratis@gruposyahoo.com.ar>

 

Es triste pensar que hay personas, que piensen que para recibir un premio nobel haya que tener un color político.

Si escribe bien, por eso se lo merece. Hay pintores geniales y siguen siéndolo sin importar su color político. Que Einstein es un genio queda mas allá de su raza opiniones y creencias

Lástima que los de izquierdas solo admitan los que piensan como ellos para premios, y cuando se los dan a quien no piensa como ellos pues hacen lo que el partido comunista de China con el Nobel de la Paz. Las ideas de la izquierda tan hermosas en su concepción son sus militantes los que las están matando

Saludos
manolo

From: librosgratis@gruposyahoo.com.ar [mailto:librosgratis@gruposyahoo.com.ar] On Behalf Of Ricardo Cepeda
Sent: Thursday, October 07, 2010 4:22 PM
To: librosgratis@gruposyahoo.com.ar
Subject: RE: [LibrosG] Mario Vargas Llosa gana el Premio Nobel de Literatura 2010

El premio Nobel no se le ha dado por su posición política, ni nada por el
estilo. Es un Nobel por la genialidad de sus obras y el talento inmenso que
Vargas Llosa tiene. Me parece que tu opinión política al respecto esta de
más.

Felicidades a Mario Vargas Llosa, todo un orgullo latinoamericano de color
peruano.

Saludos,

Ricardo

De: librosgratis@gruposyahoo.com.ar<mailto:librosgratis%40gruposyahoo.com.ar> [mailto:librosgratis@gruposyahoo.com.ar<mailto:librosgratis%40gruposyahoo.com.ar>]

En nombre de false
Enviado el: Thursday, October 07, 2010 12:57 PM

Para: librosgratis@gruposyahoo.com.ar<mailto:librosgratis%40gruposyahoo.com.ar>

Asunto: [LibrosG] Mario Vargas Llosa gana el Premio Nobel de Literatura 2010

Vargas Llosa por el cambio político? Imágenes afiladas de las estructuras
del poder?
Esto sí que es nuevo. Un auto-avaluado derechista como él sí que debió de
tomárselo en broma, y tal vez por eso es que quiso "hacerse el sueco" con
esto del galardón...
En fin, que talento igual tiene, entre discursos fascistas y machistas igual
algo dice, aunque a los de izquierda no nos guste mucho lo que dice, pero
para un Nobel? Pues creo que es demasiado para él, aunque tampoco habría de
sobreestimar tanto este premio si hasta plagiadores como Neruda se lo ganan.

En fin, que siga la fiesta.
Caeron Rinkjard, el contador extremo.

[Se han eliminado los trozos de este mensaje que no contenían texto]

[Se han eliminado los trozos de este mensaje que no contenían texto]

__._,_.___

 

El Capitalismo hay que destruirlo sino se destruye solo.El viejo sueno comunista.

 

Al Capitalismo hay que destruirlo. Si es que no se destruye solo. El viejo sueno comunista. Porque si la historia no se cumple como los pronosticaron los historicistas hay que hacerla que se cumpla. Todo parte de bases que son falzas. Ese esquema se tiene que dar porque esta en mi mente.

Tanto dano ha hecho ese paradigma marxista de que nada puede cambiar sin un cambio social, sin la destruccion del capitalismo. Fijense nomas en el Peru. La educacion para PATRIA ROJA no podia cambiar mientras no se implantara el sistema comunista. Y claro tenian el referente de Cuba con muy buenos resultados que los ha estimulado mucho. Pero otros paises no precisamente comunistas como Finlandia Paises del Sudeste asiatico Japon han logrado tremendos resultados tambien en educacion.Y asi durante anos se han centrado en politizar a los profesores a tal punto que se llego a solicitar pertenecer al Sutep y claro por ende a PATRIA Roja  para poder lograr un nombramiento en educacion.

Este paradigma ha hecho que los comunistas desprecien la democracia formal la liberal. Porque dicen que en ella la verdadera libertad no existe. Si ustedes escucharan a Chavez a Humala con atencion verian que repiten este mismo catecismo. Ya en alguna oportunidad Humala trtao de justificar los atentados contra la libertad de prensa en Venezuela diciendo que esas libertades eran formales. El mismo catecismo arcaico de siempre. Pensamiento marxista y marcusiano puro.

Que experiencia trajo tantos anos de stalinismo, de totalitarismo en Cuba y en la URSS?. Acaso se logro la ansiada libertad del individuo en el socialismo?. Acaso mejoro la injusticia social, la pobreza. Acaso se logro disenar un sistema econmico alterno al capitalismo? NO.

Pero los defensores del totalitarismo se defienden diciendo que eso no es socialismo que socialismo es otra cosa que nadie ha visto. Defienden ese sueno para seguir justificando cualquier nuevo totalitarismo que dicen que sera transitorio mientras se consigue esa sociedad socilista.

Libros de religión y ateismo

 

Nueva carpeta

http://www.4shared.com/dir/rvVBXzLB/Religion.html

__._,_.___

Libros de religión y ateismo

 

Nueva carpeta

http://www.4shared.com/dir/rvVBXzLB/Religion.html

__._,_.___

Stoicismo

Stoicism

.

Stoicism (Greek Στοά) was a school of Hellenistic philosophy founded in Athens by Zeno of Citium in the early 3rd century BC. The Stoics considered destructive emotions to be the result of errors in judgment, and that a sage, or person of "moral and intellectual perfection," would not suffer such emotions.^[1] Stoics were concerned with the active relationship between cosmic determinism and human freedom, and the belief that it is virtuous to maintain a will (called prohairesis) that is in accord with nature. Because of this, the Stoics presented their philosophy as a way of life, and they thought that the best indication of an individual's philosophy was not what a person said but how he behaved.^[2] Later Stoics, such as Seneca and Epictetus, emphasized that because "virtue is sufficient for happiness," a sage was immune to misfortune. This belief is similar to the meaning of the phrase 'stoic calm', though the phrase does not include the "radical ethical" Stoic views that only a sage can be considered truly free, and that all moral corruptions are equally vicious.^[1]

Stoic doctrine was a popular and durable philosophy, with a following throughout Greece and the Roman Empire, from its founding until the closing of all philosophy schools in 529 AD by order of the Emperor Justinian I, who perceived their pagan character to be at odds with the Christian faith.^[3][4]

[edit] Basic tenets

"	Philosophy does not promise to secure anything external for man, otherwise it would be admitting something that lies beyond its proper subject-matter. For as the material of the carpenter is wood, and that of statuary bronze, so the subject-matter of the art of living is each person's own life.	"
—Epictetus[5]

The Stoics provided a unified account of the world, consisting of formal logic, non-dualistic physics and naturalistic ethics. Of these, they emphasized ethics as the main focus of human knowledge, though their logical theories were to be of more interest for many later philosophers.

Stoicism teaches the development of self-control and fortitude as a means of overcoming destructive emotions; the philosophy holds that becoming a clear and unbiased thinker allows one to understand the universal reason (logos). A primary aspect of Stoicism involves improving the individual's ethical and moral well-being: "Virtue consists in a will which is in agreement with Nature."^[6] This principle also applies to the realm of interpersonal relationships; "to be free from anger, envy, and jealousy,"^[7] and to accept even slaves as "equals of other men, because all alike are sons of God."^[8]

The Stoic ethic espouses a deterministic perspective; in regards to those who lack Stoic virtue, Cleanthes once opined that the wicked man is "like a dog tied to a cart, and compelled to go wherever it goes."^[6] A Stoic of virtue, by contrast, would amend his will to suit the world and remain, in the words of Epictetus, "sick and yet happy, in peril and yet happy, dying and yet happy, in exile and happy, in disgrace and happy,"^[7] thus positing a "completely autonomous" individual will, and at the same time a universe that is "a rigidly deterministic single whole."

Stoicism became the foremost popular philosophy among the educated elite in the Hellenistic world and the Roman Empire,^[9] to the point where, in the words of Gilbert Murray "nearly all the successors of Alexander [...] professed themselves Stoics."^[10]

[edit] History

Zeno of Citium.

Beginning at around 301 BC, Zeno taught philosophy at the Stoa Poikile (i.e., "the painted porch"), from which his philosophy got its name.^[11][12] Unlike the other schools of philosophy, such as the Epicureans, Zeno chose to teach his philosophy in a public space, which was a colonnade overlooking the central gathering place of Athens, the Agora.

Zeno's ideas developed from those of the Cynics, whose founding father, Antisthenes, had been a disciple of Socrates. Zeno's most influential follower was Chrysippus, who was responsible for the moulding of what we now call Stoicism. Later Roman Stoics focused on promoting a life in harmony within the universe, over which one has no direct control.

Scholars usually divide the history of Stoicism into three phases:

• Early Stoa, from the founding of the school by Zeno to Antipater.
• Middle Stoa, including Panaetius and Posidonius.
• Late Stoa, including Musonius Rufus, Seneca, Epictetus, and Marcus Aurelius.

Unfortunately, as A. A. Long states, no complete work by any Stoic philosopher survives from the first two phases of Stoicism. Only Roman texts from the Late Stoa survive.^[13]

[edit] Stoic logic

Diodorus Cronus, who was one of Zeno's teachers, is considered the philosopher who first introduced, and developed an approach and system of logic now known as propositional logic; which is an approach to logic based on statements, making it very different from Aristotle's term logic. Later, Chrysippus developed this approach to logic into the system that was Stoic logic. New interest in Stoic logic came in the 20th century, when important developments in logic were based on propositional logic. Susanne Bobzien wrote, "The many close similarities between Chrysippus' philosophical logic and that of Gottlob Frege are especially striking."^[14] Bobzien also notes that "Chrysippus wrote over 300 books on logic, on virtually any topic logic today concerns itself with, including speech act theory, sentence analysis, singular and plural expressions, types of predicates, indexicals, existential propositions, sentential connectives, negations, disjunctions, conditionals, logical consequence, valid argument forms, theory of deduction, propositional logic, modal logic, tense logic, epistemic logic, logic of suppositions, logic of imperatives, ambiguity and logical paradoxes".^[15]

[edit] Epistemology

The Stoics believed in the certainty that knowledge can be attained through the use of reason. Truth can be distinguished from fallacy; even if, in practice, only an approximation can be made. According to the Stoics, the senses are constantly receiving sensations: pulsations which pass from objects through the senses to the mind, where they leave behind an impression (phantasia). The mind has the ability to judge (sunkatathesis) — approve or reject — an impression, enabling it to distinguish a true representation of reality from one which is false. Some impressions can be assented to immediately, but others can only achieve varying degrees of hesitant approval which can be labeled belief or opinion (doxa). It is only through the use of reason that we can achieve clear comprehension and conviction (katalepsis). Certain and true knowledge (episteme), achievable by the Stoic sage, can be attained only by verifying the conviction with the expertise of one's peers and the collective judgment of humankind.

Make for yourself a definition or description of the thing which is presented to you, so as to see distinctly what kind of a thing it is in its substance, in its nudity, in its complete entirety, and tell yourself its proper name, and the names of the things of which it has been compounded, and into which it will be resolved. For nothing is so productive of elevation of mind as to be able to examine methodically and truly every object which is presented to you in life, and always to look at things so as to see at the same time what kind of universe this is, and what kind of use everything performs in it, and what value everything has with reference to the whole.^[16]

[edit] Stoic physics and cosmology

Main article: Stoic physics

According to the Stoics, the universe is a material, reasoning substance, known as God or Nature, which the Stoics divided into two classes, the active and the passive. The passive substance is matter, which "lies sluggish, a substance ready for any use, but sure to remain unemployed if no one sets it in motion."^[17] The active substance, which can be called Fate, or Universal Reason (Logos), is an intelligent aether or primordial fire, which acts on the passive matter:

The universe itself is god and the universal outpouring of its soul; it is this same world's guiding principle, operating in mind and reason, together with the common nature of things and the totality which embraces all existence; then the foreordained might and necessity of the future; then fire and the principle of aether; then those elements whose natural state is one of flux and transition, such as water, earth, and air; then the sun, the moon, the stars; and the universal existence in which all things are contained.^[18]

Everything is subject to the laws of Fate, for the Universe acts only according to its own nature, and the nature of the passive matter which it governs. The souls of people and animals are emanations from this primordial fire, and are, likewise, subject to Fate:

Constantly regard the universe as one living being, having one substance and one soul; and observe how all things have reference to one perception, the perception of this one living being; and how all things act with one movement; and how all things are the cooperating causes of all things that exist; observe too the continuous spinning of the thread and the structure of the web.^[19]

Individual souls are perishable by nature, and can be "transmuted and diffused, assuming a fiery nature by being received into the Seminal Reason (logos spermatikos) of the Universe."^[20] Since right Reason is the foundation of both humanity and the universe, it follows that the goal of life is to live according to Reason, that is, to live a life according to Nature.

[edit] Stoic ethics and virtues

The ancient Stoics are often misunderstood because the terms they used pertained to different concepts in the past than they do today. The word 'stoic' has come to mean 'unemotional' or indifferent to pain, because Stoic ethics taught freedom from 'passion' by following 'reason.' The Stoics did not seek to extinguish emotions; rather, they sought to transform them by a resolute 'askēsis' which enables a person to develop clear judgment and inner calm.^[21] Logic, reflection, and concentration were the methods of such self-discipline.

Borrowing from the Cynics, the foundation of Stoic ethics is that good lies in the state of the soul itself; in wisdom and self-control. Stoic ethics stressed the rule: "Follow where reason leads." One must therefore strive to be free of the passions, bearing in mind that the ancient meaning of 'passion' was "anguish" or "suffering",^[22] that is, "passively" reacting to external events — somewhat different from the modern use of the word. A distinction was made between pathos (plural pathe) which is normally translated as "passion", propathos or instinctive reaction (e.g. turning pale and trembling when confronted by physical danger) and eupathos, which is the mark of the Stoic sage (sophos). The eupatheia are feelings resulting from correct judgment in the same way as the passions result from incorrect judgment.

The idea was to be free of suffering through apatheia (Greek: ἀπάθεια) or peace of mind (literally,'without passion'),^[23] where peace of mind was understood in the ancient sense — being objective or having "clear judgment" and the maintenance of equanimity in the face of life's highs and lows.

For the Stoics, 'reason' meant not only using logic, but also understanding the processes of nature — the logos, or universal reason, inherent in all things. Living according to reason and virtue, they held, is to live in harmony with the divine order of the universe, in recognition of the common reason and essential value of all people. The four cardinal virtues of the Stoic philosophy are wisdom (Sophia), courage (Andreia), justice (Dikaiosyne), and temperance (Sophrosyne), a classification derived from the teachings of Plato.

Following Socrates, the Stoics held that unhappiness and evil are the results of human ignorance of the reason in nature. If someone is unkind, it is because they are unaware of their own universal reason which would lead to the conclusion of kindness. The solution to evil and unhappiness then, is the practice of Stoic philosophy — to examine one's own judgments and behavior and determine where they have diverged from the universal reason of nature.

The Stoics accepted that suicide was permissible for the wise person in circumstances that might prevent them from living a virtuous life.^[24] Plutarch held that accepting life under tyranny would have compromised Cato's self-consistency (constantia) as a Stoic and impaired his freedom to make the honourable moral choices.^[25] Suicide could be justified if one fell victim to severe pain or disease,^[24] but otherwise suicide would usually be seen as a rejection of one's social duty.^[26]

[edit] The doctrine of "things indifferent"

In philosophical terms, things that are indifferent are outside the application of moral law, that is without tendency to either promote or obstruct moral ends. Actions neither required nor forbidden by the moral law, or which do not affect morality, are called morally indifferent. The doctrine of things indifferent (ἀδιάφορα, adiaphora) arose in the Stoic school as a corollary of its diametric opposition of virtue and vice (καθήκοντα kathekon and ἁμαρτήματα hamartemata, respectively "convenient actions," or actions in accordance with nature, and mistakes). As a result of this dichotomy, a large class of objects were left unassigned and thus regarded as indifferent.

Eventually three sub-classes of "things indifferent" developed: things to be preferred because they assisted life according to nature; things to be avoided because they hindered it; and things indifferent in the narrower sense.

The principle of adiaphora was also common to the Cynics and Sceptics. The conception of things indifferent is, according to Kant, extra-moral. The doctrine of things indifferent was revived during the Renaissance by Philip Melanchthon.

[edit] Spiritual exercise

Marcus Aurelius, the Stoic emperor

Philosophy for a Stoic is not just a set of beliefs or ethical claims, it is a way of life involving constant practice and training (or askesis, see asceticism). Stoic philosophical and spiritual practices included logic, Socratic dialogue and self-dialogue, contemplation of death, training attention to remain in the present moment (similar to some forms of Eastern meditation), daily reflection on everyday problems and possible solutions, hypomnemata, and so on. Philosophy for a Stoic is an active process of constant practice and self-reminder.

In his Meditations, Marcus Aurelius defines several such practices. For example, in Book II, part 1:

Say to yourself in the early morning: I shall meet today ungrateful, violent, treacherous, envious, uncharitable men. All of these things have come upon them through ignorance of real good and ill... I can neither be harmed by any of them, for no man will involve me in wrong, nor can I be angry with my kinsman or hate him; for we have come into the world to work together...

The practices of spiritual exercises have been described as influencing those of reflective practice by Seamus Mac Suibhne .^[27]

[edit] Social philosophy

A distinctive feature of Stoicism is its cosmopolitanism. All people are manifestations of the one universal spirit and should, according to the Stoics, live in brotherly love and readily help one another. In the Discourses, Epictetus comments on man's relationship with the world: "Each human being is primarily a citizen of his own commonwealth; but he is also a member of the great city of gods and men, where of the city political is only a copy."^[28] This sentiment echoes that of Socrates, who said "I am not an Athenian or a Greek, but a citizen of the world."^[29]

They held that external differences such as rank and wealth are of no importance in social relationships. Thus, before the rise of Christianity, Stoics advocated the brotherhood of humanity and the natural equality of all human beings. Stoicism became the most influential school of the Greco–Roman world, and produced a number of remarkable writers and personalities, such as Cato the Younger and Epictetus.

In particular, they were noted for their urging of clemency toward slaves. Seneca exhorted, "Kindly remember that he whom you call your slave sprang from the same stock, is smiled upon by the same skies, and on equal terms with yourself breathes, lives, and dies."^[30]

[edit] Stoicism and Christianity

See also: Neostoicism

Stoicism was regarded by the Fathers of the Church as a 'pagan philosophy',^[3][4] nonetheless, some of the central philosophical concepts of Stoicism were employed by the early Christian writers. Examples include the terms "logos", "virtue", "Spirit", and "conscience".^[31] But the parallels go well beyond the sharing (or borrowing) of terminology. Both Stoicism and Christianity assert an inner freedom in the face of the external world, a belief in human kinship with Nature (or God), and a sense of the innate depravity—or "persistent evil"—of humankind.^[31] Both encourage askesis with respect to the passions and inferior emotions (viz. lust, envy and anger) so that the higher possibilities of one's humanity can be awakened and developed. The major difference between the two philosophies is Stoicism's pantheism where God is never fully transcendent but always immanent. God as the world-creating entity is personalised in Christian thought but Stoicism equates God with the totality of the universe. Also, Stoicism, unlike Christianity, posits no beginning or end to the universe, and no continued individual existence beyond death.^[31] Even so, Stoic writings such as the Meditations of Marcus Aurelius have been highly regarded throughout the centuries. St. Ambrose of Milan was known for applying Stoic philosophy to his theology.

[edit] Modern usage

The word "stoic" commonly refers to someone indifferent to pain, pleasure, grief, or joy. The modern usage as "person who represses feelings or endures patiently" was first cited in 1579 as a noun, and 1596 as an adjective.^[32] In contrast to the term "epicurean", the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy's entry on Stoicism notes, "the sense of the English adjective 'stoical' is not utterly misleading with regard to its philosophical origins."^[33]

Stoicism is also enjoying a recent revival, with various online communities such as 'New Stoa' and groups on social networking websites such as Facebook.^[34]

[edit] Stoic quotations

Below is a selection of quotations by major Stoic philosophers illustrating major Stoic beliefs:

Epictetus:

• "Freedom is secured not by the fulfilling of one's desires, but by the removal of desire." (iv.1.175)
• "Where is the good? In the will. Where is the evil? In the will. Where is neither of them? In those things that are independent of the will." (ii.16.1)
• "Man is disturbed not by things, but by the views he takes of them." (Ench. 5)
• "If, therefore, any be unhappy, let him remember that he is unhappy by reason of himself alone." (iii.24.2)
• "I am formed by nature for my own good: I am not formed for my own evil." (iii.24.83)
• "Permit nothing to cleave to you that is not your own; nothing to grow to you that may give you agony when it is torn away." (iv.1.112)

Marcus Aurelius:

• "Get rid of the judgment, get rid of the 'I am hurt,' you are rid of the hurt itself." (viii.40)
• "Everything is right for me, which is right for you, O Universe. Nothing for me is too early or too late, which comes in due time for you. Everything is fruit to me which your seasons bring, O Nature. From you are all things, in you are all things, to you all things return." (iv.23)
• "If you work at that which is before you, following right reason seriously, vigorously, calmly, without allowing anything else to distract you, but keeping your divine part pure, as if you were bound to give it back immediately; if you hold to this, expecting nothing, but satisfied to live now according to nature, speaking heroic truth in every word which you utter, you will live happy. And there is no man able to prevent this." (iii.12)
• "How ridiculous and how strange to be surprised at anything which happens in life!" (xii.13)
• "Outward things cannot touch the soul, not in the least degree; nor have they admission to the soul, nor can they turn or move the soul; but the soul turns and moves itself alone." (iv.3)
• "Because your own strength is unequal to the task, do not assume that it is beyond the powers of man; but if anything is within the powers and province of man, believe that it is within your own compass also" (vi.19)
• "Or is it your reputation that's bothering you? But look at how soon we're all forgotten. The abyss of endless time that swallows it all. The emptiness of those applauding hands." (iv.3)

Seneca the Younger:

• "The point is, not how long you live, but how nobly you live." (Ep. 101.15)
• "That which Fortune has not given, she cannot take away." (Ep. 59.18)
• "Let Nature deal with matter, which is her own, as she pleases; let us be cheerful and brave in the face of everything, reflecting that it is nothing of our own that perishes." (De Provid.)
• "Virtue is nothing else than right reason." (Ep. 66.32)

[edit] Stoic philosophers

See also: Category:Stoic philosophers

For larger list see List of Stoic philosophers.

• Zeno of Citium (332–262 BC), founder of Stoic and the Stoic Academy (Stoa) in Athens
• Aristo of Chios, pupil of Zeno;
• Herillus of Carthage
• Cleanthes (of Assos) (330–232 BC), second head of Stoic Academy
• Chrysippus (280–204 BC), third head of the academy
• Diogenes of Babylon (230–150 BC)
• Antipater of Tarsus (210–129 BC)
• Panaetius of Rhodes (185–109 BC)
• Posidonius of Apameia (c. 135 BC – 51 BC)
• Diodotus (c. 120 BC – 59 BC), teacher of Cicero
• Cato the Younger (94–46 BC)
• Seneca (4 BC – 65 AD)
• Musonius Rufus
• Rubellius Plautus
• Thrasea Paetus
• Epictetus (55–135 AD)
• Hierocles (2nd century AD)
• Marcus Aurelius (121–180 AD)

[edit] See also

• Glossary of Stoic terms
• Pneuma
• Ekpyrotic (cosmological theory)
• Plank of Carneades
• 4 Maccabees
• Categories (Stoic)
• List of ancient Greek philosophers

[edit] References

1. ^ ^{a b} Stoicism, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
2. ^ John Sellars. Stoicism, p. 32.
3. ^ ^{a b} Agathias. Histories, 2.31.
4. ^ ^{a b} David, Sedley (1998). "Ancient philosophy". in E. Craig. Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://www.rep.routledge.com/article/A130. Retrieved 2008-10-18. 
5. ^ Epictetus, Discourses 1.15.2, Robin Hard revised translation.
6. ^ ^{a b} Russell, Bertrand. A History of Western Philosophy. p. 254
7. ^ ^{a b} Russell, Bertrand. A History of Western Philosophy. p. 264
8. ^ Russell, Bertrand. A History of Western Philosophy, p. 253.
9. ^ H.D. Amos and A.G.P. Lang, "These Were the Greeks,"
10. ^ Gilbert Murray, The Stoic Philosophy (1915), p.25. In Bertrand Russell, History of Western Philosophy (1946).
11. ^ The Painted Stoa
12. ^ Where the Early Stoics Taught
13. ^ A.A.Long, Hellenistic Philosophy, p.115.
14. ^ [1] Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: Susanne Bobzien, Ancient Logic
15. ^ [2] Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: Susanne Bobzien, Ancient Logic
16. ^ Marcus Aurelius, Meditations, iii. 11.
17. ^ Seneca, Epistles, lxv. 2.
18. ^ Chrysippus, in Cicero, de Natura Deorum, i.
19. ^ Marcus Aurelius, Meditations, iv. 40.
20. ^ Marcus Aurelius, Meditations, iv. 21.
21. ^ Margaret R. Graver, Stoicism and Emotion
22. ^ American Heritage Dictionary - passion
23. ^ Keith Seddon, Epictetus's Handbook and the Tablet of Cebes, p. 217
24. ^ ^{a b} Don E. Marietta, (1998), Introduction to ancient philosophy, pages 153-4. Sharpe
25. ^ [http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0009838807000195 Cato's suicide in Plutarch AV Zadorojnyi], The Classical Quarterly, 2007, http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0009838807000195 
26. ^ William Braxton Irvine, (2009), A guide to the good life: the ancient art of Stoic joy, page 200. Oxford University Press
27. ^ Mac Suibhne, S. (2009). "'Wrestle to be the man philosophy wished to make you': Marcus Aurelius, reflective practitioner". Reflective Practice 10 (4): 429–436. 
28. ^ Epictetus, Discourses, ii. 5. 26
29. ^ Epictetus, Discourses, i. 9. 1
30. ^ Seneca, Epistles, xlvii. 10
31. ^ ^{a b c} Ferguson, Everett. Backgrounds of Early Christianity. 2003, page 368.
32. ^ Harper, Douglas (November 2001). "Online Etymology Dictionary - Stoic". http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=stoic. Retrieved 2006-09-02. 
33. ^ Baltzly, Dirk (2004-12-13). "Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy - Stoicism". http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/stoicism/. Retrieved 2006-09-02. 
34. ^ Macaro, Antonia (2010-05-15). "The Philosophers' Magazine: What can the Stoics do for us?". http://www.philosophypress.co.uk/?p=1209. Retrieved 2010-05-15. 

[edit] Further reading

[edit] Primary sources

• A. A. Long and D. N. Sedley, The Hellenistic Philosophers (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987)
• Harvard University Press Epictetus Discourses Books 1 and 2, Loeb Classical Library Nr. 131, June 1925.
• Harvard University Press Epictetus Discourses Books 3 and 4, Loeb Classical Library Nr. 218, June 1928.
• Gill C. Epictetus, The Discourses, Everyman 1995.
• Long, George Enchiridion by Epictetus, Prometheus Books, Reprint Edition, January 1955.
• Long George Discourses of Epictetus, Kessinger Publishing, January 2004.
• Hadas, Moses (ed.), Essential Works of Stoicism (1961: Bantam)
• Lucius Annaeus Seneca the Younger (transl. Robin Campbell), Letters from a Stoic: Epistulae Morales Ad Lucilium (1969, reprint 2004) ISBN 0-14-044210-3
• Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, Meditations, translated by Maxwell Staniforth; ISBN 0-14-044140-9, or translated by Gregory Hays; ISBN 0-679-64260-9.
• Oates Whitney Jenning The Stoic and Epicurean philosophers, The Complete Extant Writings of Epicurus, Epictetus, Lucretius and Marcus Aurelius, Random House, 9th printing 1940.

[edit] Studies

• Bakalis Nikolaos, Handbook of Greek Philosophy: From Thales to the Stoics Analysis and Fragments, Trafford Publishing, May 2005, ISBN 1-4120-4843-5
• Lawrence C. Becker, A New Stoicism (Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press, 1998) ISBN 0-691-01660-7
• Tad Brennan, The Stoic Life (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005; paperback 2006)
• Pierre Hadot, Philosophy as a Way of Life: Spiritual Exercises from Socrates to Foucault, (Blackwell, 1995) ISBN 0-631-18033-8
• Brad Inwood, (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to The Stoics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003)
• William Irvine, A Guide to the Good Life: The Ancient Art of Stoic Joy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008) ISBN 978-0195374612
• A. A. Long, Stoic Studies (Cambridge University Press, 1996; repr. University of California Press, 2001) ISBN 0-520-22974-6
• Vlassis G. Rassias, "Theois Syzen. Eisagoge ston Stoicismo", Athens, 2001, ISBN 960-7748-25-5
• John Sellars, Stoicism (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2006) ISBN 1-84465-053-7
• William O. Stephens, Stoic Ethics: Epictetus and Happiness as Freedom (London: Continuum, 2007) ISBN 0-8264-9608-3
• Steven Strange (ed.), Stoicism: Traditions and Transformations (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2004) ISBN 0-521-82709-4
• Zeller, Eduard; Reichel, Oswald J., The Stoics, Epicureans and Sceptics, Longmans, Green, and Co., 1892

[edit] External links

• Stoicism entry by Dirk Baltzly in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
• Stoicism entry in the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
• Stoics on PhilPapers
• New Stoa, a cybercity
• The Rebirth of Stoicism
• Stoic Logic: The Dialectic and the Doctrine of Lekta (Sayables)
• Annotated Bibliography on Ancient Stoic Logic and Semiotics (First Part: A - E)
• Annotated Bibliography on Ancient Stoic Logic and Semiotics (Second Part: F - Z)
• BBC Radio 4's In Our Time programme on Stoicism (requires RealAudio)

[show]