Introduction (new member)

[ChoraulaSilens]

I wondered if that was where your user name: ChoraulaSilens was from. Maybe I'll watch it, what do you like about it? The Eastern Philosophy aspect?

This was the big surprise for me. All the Thao martial arts philosophy you got in TV series such as "Kung Fu", in the 1970s, can be read in Latin. Even Yin and Yang is explained by Apuleius, though not using those Eastern terms. I originally never associated Latin with higher values, self balance, harmony with nature, but I came to see the Roman culture had absorbed progressive teachings. Plus, the gladiator "styles" could be similar to modern Karate or Kung Fu. I suspect sometimes it developed into an art form.
Of course, I try to practise philosophy as to the mind and body aspect. Studying Latin seems to help me relax and disconnect from external concerns.

 

[Pacifica]

Even Yin and Yang is explained by Apuleius, though not using those Eastern terms.

Where is that?

 

[ChoraulaSilens]

The Yin and Yang is referred to, I think, by the resistive virtues.
"Inter pudicitiam libidinosamque vitam abstinentiam et intemperantiam posuit,"
So, supposedly we seek the middle line between the particular vice and its opposite virtue. The two opposites here we have are pudicitia (ethical lifestyle) or libidinosa vita (meaning, I guess, hedonism.
For virtue to manifest, we need abstinentia (a resistive virtue), which allows us to say no to our baser instincts. Yet, for that ideal to function, "intemperantia" (its opposite (lack of self control) needs to be "balanced" to the point of equilibrium.
That is, abstinentia needs to subjugate intemperantia, or, put simply, we need self discipline.
For any virtue to exist, we must acknowledge vice in the way light can't shine without dark.

 

[ChoraulaSilens]

Something to look at on a rainy day:
"Hinc et medietates easdemque virtutes ac summitates vocat, non solum quod careant redundantia et egestate, sed quod in meditullio quodam vitiorum sitae sint; fortitudo quippe circumsistitur hinc audacia, inde timiditate; audacia quidem confidentiae fit abundantia, metus vero vitio deficientis audaciae."
Admittedly, it can be a headache. I had to read this many many times over, till it "clicked" after many weeks.
He's saying a virtuous, whole individual is balanced by not lacking enough of a given quality, or alternatively having too much of it.
So fortitudo is strength but audacia (hot headedness) represents too much of that quality. Timiditas is the opposite end of the spectrum from audacia. Fortitudo is the balance and harmony between those two opposites.
I think we need our negative characteristics to be there so our higher characteristics can exist.
So a hot headed person isn't a brave person since he (or she) needs a bit of fear to create balance.

 

[ChoraulaSilens]

 

[Quaeso]

Well that is interesting, thank you for sharing. I don't want to be too harsh with you since this is only your introduction, and I'm not sure what others on this board think about things; but it seems best for the sake of a potential friendship with you that I am simply honest, and tell you that I myself rejected the idea that the fundamental elements of the universe are equal and opposite powers of good and evil (Cosmic Dualism) years ago. Consequently I reject the idea that evil is necessary or foundational for the existence of good, and am convinced instead that evil is an absence of good (however good is not an absence of evil, but a substance of it's own, yet evil has no substance, it is only an absence) , just as darkness is an absence of light and hatred is an absence of love. I rejected Cosmic Dualism in favor of a single and omnibenevolent creator which is the source of all things (Theism), which system seems to be also in accord with Aristotle's "Prime Mover". I've recently started reading Cicero on the side (mainly for grammar at first) but now and I'm waiting to see what type of Philosophy he proposes (I'm guessing that it's Platonic or Aristotelian).

 

[Pacifica]

hatred is an absence of love

I'm not sure I agree with that. Can't an absence of love simply be indifference? To me, hatred seems like an additional thing of its own, something more active than just the absence of something else. I can't say I love the guy that passed by me on the street earlier, say—I don't know him at all, he's indifferent to me—but I don't hate him. Now perhaps it depends how you define "love". Some people believe in a kind of "universal love" that consists in generally wishing well to your fellow humans—not a personal feeling. In that sense maybe I "love" that guy because if he'd e.g. had a heart attack in front of me I would instinctively have wanted to help him?

 

[Pacifica]

Even if I didn't care about him dying, though, I still wouldn't call that hatred. To my mind, hatred is more than just not giving a damn whether someone lives or dies or whether someone is happy or suffers; it's actively wishing for someone to die or suffer.

 

[Quaeso]

I don't want to get too far into this because I want to give ChoraulaSilens the space to respond. But, I'm glad that you asked, Pacifica; and I'm happy to share what little I know about this because this type of knowledge has done many good things I believe in my own life.

Firstly when I said "love", I meant technically "willing the good of another". You love to the degree that you will his good in thought and action. Now hatred is the privation or absence of good, and so hatred is simply willing evil for another. And evil is not a substance but a absence of good. So therefore hatred is not a substance, but the willing of a privation. Sometimes it is not easy to know what is good or evil for someone, but often it is. My understanding is that indifference is definitely not some extreme form of hatred as some say, but a neutral ground between love and hatred where neither evil or good is willed for another. Yet from the perspective of pure love, indifference would seem to be approaching to hatred.

Now in the example that you mentioned, the man whom you saw on the street. Your feelings are not necessarily reflective of the amount of love that you have for someone. It is your attitude and your thoughts and actions towards him. Perhaps it is best for him if you don't even look at him (he's married!), or if he is having a heart attack, the best course of action is dependent upon many external things, but I would say that at least calling for help is definitely an act of love, αγάπη, since it is likely best for him that his health improves.

 

[ChoraulaSilens]

Pacifica and Queso....
Good to see you both expressing your thoughts and your personal input.
I am not a Neo Platonist mainly because I think Plato went astray by introducing a social model for his philosophy. I think Diogenese wouldn't have agreed. More so, Jiddu Krishnamurti.
So, in fact, I read Plato in the hope of developing many of his ideas. Most of all I liked his connection of ethics and morality to knowledge - that the two go hand in hand. However, the Theory Of Forms, for me, has a lot of holes in it. I concluded the pyramid, geographical shapes, and so forth can have "forms" but, beyond that, I have had issues.
Moreover, we now know the solar system isn't geocentric.
Conclusion? Philosophy isn't a hard science. It's similar to quantum physics in some areas, but still not the same. Therefore, we need to study philosophy as knowledge of the history of the subject, and hopefully developing our own arguments (which you both seem to be doing beneficially).
As if yet, I have no set philosophy of my own since, for me, philosophy is just seeking and exploring all those ideas.

 

[ChoraulaSilens]

I'm not sure I agree with that. Can't an absence of love simply be indifference? To me, hatred seems like an additional thing of its own, something more active than just the absence of something else. I can't say I love the guy that passed by me on the street earlier, say—I don't know him at all, he's indifferent to me—but I don't hate him. Now perhaps it depends how you define "love". Some people believe in a kind of "universal love" that consists in generally wishing well to your fellow humans—not a personal feeling. In that sense maybe I "love" that guy because if he'd e.g. had a heart attack in front of me I would instinctively have wanted to help him?

This may interest you. It took me many, many readings and even months to "click" this sentence:

"audacia; in eius comitatum secuntur indignatio et incommobilitas aorgesian sic interim dixerim, quae non extinguit incitamenta irarum, sed ea stupore defigit immobili."

I may be wrong but I think the idea is that anger, or hot-headeness, is what triggers our potentially evil deeds.
The "species" such as indignatio seem to be aspects of anger, hot-headedness. When you're indignant, you tend to act by that trigger (sometimes the indignation can be for a just cause). "Incommobilitas" has been translated by "sluggishness" but I now think it may well mean lack of empathy.
So, the spectrum is apathy and indifference to someone, indignation and finally audacia.
What causes us to lash out? What caused Lenin to plan a revolution? (his brother was executed by the Tsar). Did he feel indignatio and was his incommobilitas a means to dismiss the impact of civil war?
What restrains our audacia? Plato claims continenta and prudentia should be dominant.

 

[ChoraulaSilens]

Well that is interesting, thank you for sharing. I don't want to be too harsh with you since this is only your introduction, and I'm not sure what others on this board think about things; but it seems best for the sake of a potential friendship with you that I am simply honest, and tell you that I myself rejected the idea that the fundamental elements of the universe are equal and opposite powers of good and evil (Cosmic Dualism) years ago. Consequently I reject the idea that evil is necessary or foundational for the existence of good, and am convinced instead that evil is an absence of good (however good is not an absence of evil, but a substance of it's own, yet evil has no substance, it is only an absence) , just as darkness is an absence of light and hatred is an absence of love. I rejected Cosmic Dualism in favor of a single and omnibenevolent creator which is the source of all things (Theism), which system seems to be also in accord with Aristotle's "Prime Mover". I've recently started reading Cicero on the side (mainly for grammar at first) but now and I'm waiting to see what type of Philosophy he proposes (I'm guessing that it's Platonic or Aristotelian).

"I myself rejected the idea that the fundamental elements of the universe are equal and opposite powers of good and evil (Cosmic Dualism) years ago. Consequently I reject the idea that evil is necessary or foundational for the existence of good, "
Consider that electrical polarity can't exist without negative potential. Birds can perch on high voltage cables, if the charged cable is isolated from ground. Electrons flow from + to -, which is often earth. So, to create energy, we need a potential difference.
So, good and evil? Plato tends to relate evil a lot to ignorance, claiming that dictators (such as Stalin) believed their actions were for a greater good. Plato calls this delusion and distortion of insight. I quite liked that argument. Not that I would go so far as to accept the Forms, which are fundamental to Platonism.

 

[rothbard]

Belated welcome! I tried reading Apuleius 1-2 years after I'd started stuying Latin, but the large number of unfamiliar words made it a bit of a struggle. Have you tried the In Usum Delphini editions? They include detailed notes in Latin, and a simplified Latin paraphrase alongside the original text. You can find the links for Apuleius here.

 

[ChoraulaSilens]

Thanks for that. I have made notes for large sections of Apuleius, you are welcome to copy. I list the vocab below each chapter. Lewis and Short sometimes is used amongst others.
You tend to get used to a writer over time. Apuleius was from what's now Morroco and Algeria but, as you know, he spent time in Alexandria.

 

[ChoraulaSilens]

For example: (I like to list words even if already known, just to make it neat.
APVLEI DE DOGMATE PLATONIS
I. Platoni habitudo corporis cognomentum dedit; namque Aristocles prius est nominatus. Ei Ariston fuisse pater dictus est; ceterum Perictione, Glauci filia, mater fuit: et de utroque nobilitas satis clara; nam Ariston pater per Codrum ab ipso Neptuno originem duxit, a Solone sapientissimo, qui legum Atticarum fundator fuit, maternus derivatus est sanguis. Sunt qui Platonem augustiore conceptu prosatum dicant, cum quidem Apollinis figuratio Perictionae se miscuisset. Mense etiam, qui apud Atticos thargelion dicitur, natus est, die qua apud Delum Latona fertur Apollinem Dianamque peperisse. Pridie Socraten genitum accepimus. Somnium etiam Socratis scitum ferunt: nam vidisse sibi visus est cygni pullum ex altari, quod in Academia Cupidini consecratum est, volasse et in eius gremio residisse et postea olorem illum pinnis caelum petisse, canore musico auditus hominum deorumque mulcentem. Cum hoc Socrates in conventu amicorum referret, Ariston Platonem puerum oblaturus Socrati magistro commodum prosequebatur. Quem ubi adspexit ille ingeniumque intimum de exteriore conspicatus est facie: "Hic ille erat, amici" inquit, "de Academia Cupidinis cygnus".

Codrus was the last king of Athens, ultimus rex Atheniensis fuit Codrus;
Prosero, proserere, prosevi, prosatus · beget · bring forth, beget, produce by sowing.
Figuratio, figurationis = forming, shaping
Mensis, mensis = month
Latona = Her basic role is the same: mother of Apollo and Diana by Jupiter.
Pridie = the day before
Cygnus, cygni [m.] = swan.
Apollo, Apollinis = god of prophecy, music, poetry, archery, medicine)
Pullus, pulli, = chicken, sprout, young twig.
Altare, altaris = altar, offering
Olor, oloris = swan
Volo, volare, = to fly
Prosequor, prosequi, prosecutus = escort, pursue
Conspicor, conspicari, conspicatus = catch sight of, see, observe, notice

 

[ChoraulaSilens]

Trying to develop a few practical skills, I just built a nesting bird box, with an entrance hole to suit house sparrows.
Did you know that Severus Alexander had a major inteterest in birds:

nam aviaria instituerat pavonum, fasianorum, gallinaceorum, anatum, perdicum etiam, hisque vehementer oblectabatur, maxime palumborum, quos habuisse usque ad XX milia dicitur, et ne eorum pastus gravaret annonam, servos habuit vectigales, qui eos ex ovis ac pullicenis ac pipionibus alerent.

Some vocab will help

Aviarium, aviari(i) = aviary
Pavo, pavonis = peacock
Anas, anatis = duck
Fasianus, fasiani = pheasant
Palumbus, palumbi = wood-pigeon,
concern, solicitude
Pastus, pastus = pasturage, pasture, feeding ground
Pullicenus pullicenii, = a young bird, a chicken
Pipio, pipionis = chick
Ovum, ovi = egg

The last line servos habuit vectigales, qui eos ex ovis ac pullicenis ac pipionibus alerent was translated to mean the birds collectively were fed by the collected eggs and chicks which the vectigales (collecters of resources) sought out. However, I think it could be possible that ex ovis and pullicenis implies adult birds were reared from their initial stage of bein eggs and chicks. We can say, I believe, ex homine lupus factus est. Of course, I may well be wrong.

 

[ChoraulaSilens]

I've never been so good at practical work. I once knew a guy in Sevilla who had doctorates in Psychology and Latin. He asked me back in the 1980s if I had any practical skills and advised this was a good balance to have. Evidently he was building a new house with an academy included. Like anything you can improve so my bird box is a better result than my first attempt.
Clearly, Severus was a great pigeon fancier.