Epictetus, the Enchiridion - Introduction to Philosophy

[@GregoryBSadler]

@RevDevilin well, my interests are all over the map, but they do include Ancient philosophy -- particularly Plato, Aristotle, the Stoics, the Neo-Platonists, and Patristic thinkers. I also do some work on a few of the Medievals (particularly Anselm), some of the moderns (particularly Hobbes), and on 19th and 20th century European philosophy.

[@GregoryBSadler]

It's not surprising Ellis led you to Stoicism, and to Epictetus in particular, since he credits some insights of CBT to him. Aristotle's texts on the emotions? Well, it's all over his corpus of writings -- he never wrote a single, tie-it-all-together treatise on the subject. The best texts to start with would be the Rhetoric (bk 2 in particular), the Nichomachean Ethics, and the Eudemian Ethics. I do have some lectures dealing with the topic -- and I'm writing a book on Aristotle and Anger

[@LadyGub7]

Thanks for doing these lectures and making them available. I have studied on my own my entire life, having dropped out of school at a young age, but am in college today, however I am studying biology and algebra at the moment. I love Epictetus and the Stoics and am looking forward to enjoying this video and lecture of yours now, as I have seen some of your others. Thanks again Professor! Do you do any mentoring?

[@GregoryBSadler]

You're quite welcome. You ended up commenting before I got up any of the video information, including the title. This is from my Introduction to Philosophy class. So, no, you're not likely to hear too many references to neuroscience n this series. I did talk a bit about DNA in a very broad sense a few back. In this one, I briefly mention CBT. These are historical in a sense -- I am historian of philosophy. They're far from "purely historical" -- my aim to to help students grasp material

[@GregoryBSadler]

Looks like I missed this comment. No, these aren't purely historical in nature, but this is an Ethics class for non-philosophy majors, and it's enough work just to get the kids a bit of the way into some of these great texts. I do have to admit that I'm not a big fan of rather sweeping claims that tend to get made by people in Philosophy of Mind/Cognitive Science, etc. about what physical phenomena tell us about highly complex moral matters -- often far too many unargued assumptions being made

[@GregoryBSadler]

Thanks! Well, not being angry -- or even being less angry -- is definitely a good thing from a Stoic point of view. Myself, I'm actually not a Stoic, just play one for the class, so to speak. I would say, though, that if I wasn't basically an Aristotelian with respect to the emotions, Stoicism would be my number two choice for positions

[@TheRazaak]

Always good to watch a good teacher. Keep up the good work.

[@MrHelpingHand]

Thanks for posting this Professor! Using this to study for a final exam.

[@GregoryBSadler]

You're welcome! Glad it was useful for you

[@GregoryBSadler]

Thanks! Glad you found it such

[@GregoryBSadler]

Hahaha! I hadn't thought about any of those sorts of changes, but perhaps some of my classroom students did!

[@madbaddad]

Thanks. Very useful addition resource for a philo.test my wife has this week on that wild man Epictetus. Keep 'em comin', son.

[@GregoryBSadler]

Glad you like it

[@TheSteinmetzen]

Reminds me a bit of Seneca -- the part about expecting things. Maybe Seneca is more into expecting the worst.

[@GregoryBSadler]

They're both in the Stoic tradition, and often address the same themes

[@GregoryBSadler]

Glad it was useful

[@GregoryBSadler]

Thanks!

[@GregoryBSadler]

I miss being a student as well

[@RevDevilin]

@gbisadler Understood, I am when I have the time going backwards through your videos Should I assume your main interest is in the ancient Greek field ? Ps,hold your mouse cursor over this reply, and on the right hand side some options will appear click reply to reply to this Otherwise you are simply adding comments to your own video :-) and I will not receive a notification of your reply

[@GregoryBSadler]

Somehow, I missed this one -- I do in fact do mentoring/tutoring through our company, ReasonIO. You would want to contact my partner, Andi Sciacca, who handles the particulars about those matters -- andi at reasonio.com

[@skzland]

What's your opinion on this paragraph, I tend to struggle with the concept of it? 24. Don't allow such considerations as these distress you. "I will live in dishonor, and be nobody anywhere." For, if dishonor is an evil, you can no more be involved in any evil by the means of another, than be engaged in anything base. Is it any business of yours, then, to get power, or to be admitted to an entertainment? By no means. How, then, after all, is this a dishonor? And how is it true that you will be nobody anywhere, when you ought to be somebody in those things only which are in your own control, in which you may be of the greatest consequence? "But my friends will be unassisted." -- What do you mean by unassisted? They will not have money from you, nor will you make them Roman citizens. Who told you, then, that these are among the things in our own control, and not the affair of others? And who can give to another the things which he has not himself? "Well, but get them, then, that we too may have a share." If I can get them with the preservation of my own honor and fidelity and greatness of mind, show me the way and I will get them; but if you require me to lose my own proper good that you may gain what is not good, consider how inequitable and foolish you are. Besides, which would you rather have, a sum of money, or a friend of fidelity and honor? Rather assist me, then, to gain this character than require me to do those things by which I may lose it. Well, but my country, say you, as far as depends on me, will be unassisted. Here again, what assistance is this you mean? "It will not have porticoes nor baths of your providing." And what signifies that? Why, neither does a smith provide it with shoes, or a shoemaker with arms. It is enough if everyone fully performs his own proper business. And were you to supply it with another citizen of honor and fidelity, would not he be of use to it? Yes. Therefore neither are you yourself useless to it. "What place, then, say you, will I hold in the state?" Whatever you can hold with the preservation of your fidelity and honor. But if, by desiring to be useful to that, you lose these, of what use can you be to your country when you are become faithless and void of shame.

[@GregoryBSadler]

Elliot Graham Well, that's right at the heart of the Stoic approach -- looking at the values of things, and what we have to trade them off against. We can't have everything that one can desire, so we have to decide upon what things really are a priority, and which aren't. Notice that E. doesn't say: don't pursue those things at all -- but be ready, if you have to make a decision between those and things that matter more (i.e. my "proper good", having one's faculty of choice in accordance with nature), to sacrifice those other things. What is it that you struggle with about this?

[@skzland]

What defines what is actually for the good of myself. How do you choose said path?

[@GregoryBSadler]

That's where you'll want to actually read more Epictetus. The Stoics present a pretty coherent theory of that, in considerable detail.

[@skzland]

OK thanks a lot for the help.

[@NoirFelis]

I can see myself saying something inappropriate when he asked, "What can you change about your body?"

[@philipcarpenter6718]

Damn you Internet for not letting me sleep.

[@Paljk299]

I thought I'd read the text and view a lecture again, since it's Stoic week this week. There's some very good advice in the book, I think. Even if you don't buy completely into Stoicism, there's a lot to take from it. Perhaps it does lend itself to harsher conditions. It was tough in Epictetus' times, for everyone, even a king could easily get an infection and die, or become disabled. Peoples wives died in childbirth all the time and infant mortality was high, perhaps this is part of why he mentions these things. Still a very useful philosophy today though.

[@GregoryBSadler]

Didn't know it was Stoic week, unfortunately -- that would have been something enjoyable to get in on. Yes, I'm of the mind that one needn't commit entirely to Stoicism to derive some use out of its insights. Incidentally, that was the view of many of the early Christian thinkers I work upon -- the Stoic conception of prohairesis is fairly close, not all the way, but fairly close to what Cassian, Augustine, Anselm, etc. would call "the will"

[@Paljk299]

Gregory B. Sadler I only chanced upon hearing about Stoic week, it's still not a big thing really. I think it's the University of Exeter who are behind it. It's a good idea though, inviting people to explore Stoicism for a week, with an accompanying handbook. I think it's partly to promote the use of Stoicism, more directly, in CBT and other therapies. I saw a video from an Exeter professor, suggesting the ancient philosophies may have a lot to offer modern therapies, much like Buddhism has done. I think he has a point. I will have to check out some of the Christian thinkers. I just skipped straight from ancient to Descartes, which means I've missed a lot out.

[@GregoryBSadler]

Well, perhaps next year, I'll do something for Stoic week. Yes, indeed, ancient and medieval (and some modern) philosophers have a lot to say to late modern psychotherapy

[@movadoband]

thanks