Which of the philosophers said live unnoticed. What is epicureanism or why the ancient Greeks believed that you need to live unnoticed
Great prophets and thinkers. Moral teachings from Moses to the present day Huseynov Abdusalam Abdulkerimovich
EPICURUS: LIVE INDEPENDENTLY
EPICURUS: LIVE INDEPENDENTLY
The contradiction between virtue and happiness is also reproduced in each of these opposites separately. Virtue is not just a service to other people, but a service for which the individual does not give an account to anyone but himself. These are the obligations of the individual to himself for other people. So, a moral person who has committed an unworthy deed is tormented by remorse, regardless of whether others know about it or not. In turn, happiness is not just a service to oneself, but a service that is sanctioned by the opinions of others. This is the duty of the individual to others for himself. For example, whether a person is satisfied with his wealth or not depends to a decisive extent on how wealthy his neighbors and acquaintances are, what wealth is considered sufficient in his environment and in his time, on whether he is ashamed of his position in front of other people or not. . If we understand virtue as unselfishness, and happiness as self-interest, then the first can be concretized as selfish unselfishness, and the second as selfless self-interest.
The contradictions between virtue and happiness can lie through overcoming the self-contradiction of one of its sides. Socrates proposed a version of ethics based on overcoming the self-contradictions of virtue. By identifying virtue with knowledge, he gave virtue a generally valid form. In essence, Socrates interpreted virtues as such duties of an individual to other people, which for them, other people, have the same certainty as for the individual himself. Epicurus approached the problem from a different angle. Unlike Socrates' ethics, which can be called moralistic, his ethics are eudaimonic (from the Greek word eudaimonia, meaning happiness). Epicurus believed that the solution to the ethical problem lies in the correct interpretation of happiness, overcoming its inconsistency. For Socrates, virtuous people are happy. For Epicurus, happy people are virtuous. Happy people have neither need nor reason to quarrel among themselves - such is the moral pathos of the teachings of Epicurus. Eudemonism is usually understood as a doctrine that considers happiness as the highest goal of man. This is true if we consider eudemonism in the context of anthropology. But in ethics eudemonism means something else. Here the pursuit of happiness is seen as a way to solve a moral problem and for this reason alone as the highest goal (good).
Initially, the concept of happiness meant luck, luck, favor of fate (this is indicated by the etymology of the word eudeimonia, which meant the support of a good deity, the Russian word “happiness” also contains a similar meaning - to receive your part, your lot). Aristotle divided the concept of happiness into two components: a) internal (spiritual) perfection - that which depends on the person himself, and b) external (material) - that which does not depend on the person. They correlate with each other in such a way that the spiritual qualities of a person determine his happiness to a significant extent, but not completely. Epicurus goes further, believing that happiness is entirely in the power of the individual. He understands happiness as the self-sufficiency of the individual. To achieve such a state, Epicurus believes, a person must live unnoticed, curtail his being to serene peace. The main sources of the ethics of Epicurus are his letter to a certain Menekey, in which he sets out his main ethical ideas; two collections of short sayings; essay on the life and work of Epicurus in the historical and philosophical work of Diogenes Laertes "On the life, teachings and sayings of famous philosophers."
20. Epicurus Greek philosopher who lived in the 4th-3rd centuries. BC e. The vast majority of people believe that Epicurus was an unbridled hedonist who valued worldly pleasures above all else. In fact, this philosopher defended the idea that it was moderation in desires
Epicurus Saluting Herodotus
Epicurus From the vast creative heritage of Epicurus, separate fragments, sayings, as well as the full texts of three letters have come down to us, which contain a summary of the three parts of his philosophy - below is the text of the letter to Menekey containing the author's abstract
§ 14. Live in the present (Aristippus) The influence of Socrates on Greek thought turned out to be so significant that after his death several philosophical schools called Socratic schools arose, each of which continued to develop the ideas of the Athenian thinker in its own way.
Epicurus and the Epicureans The Epicurean Hellenistic philosophical system moved even further away from idealism and was the expression of an extremely sober and positive way of thinking. In ethics, hedonism was proclaimed a school, in physics - materialism, in logic - sensationalism. theoretical
V. Epicurus As extensive, or even more extensive than Stoicism, was Epicurean philosophy, which is the direct opposite of Stoicism, for while the latter saw the truth in being as thinkable - in a universal concept - and firmly held on to this
Epicurus 341–270 BC e. Ancient Greek philosopher materialist, atheist. Whoever does not remember past happiness, that old man is already today.* * *Everyone leaves life as if he had just entered. You
Epicurus Epicurus was the creator of one of the most significant moral teachings of antiquity and the founder of one of the main Athenian philosophical schools, which bears his name. He was the son of the Athenian Neocles and was born in 342 BC. on the island of Samos. We don't know much about his early life.
Epicurus and the Epicureans The Epicurean Hellenistic philosophical system moved even further away from idealism and was the expression of an extremely sober and positive way of thinking. In ethics, hedonism was proclaimed a school, in physics - materialism, in logic - sensationalism. theoretical
7. Epicurus The concept of legal understanding, based on the concept of justice and law as a contract of general benefit for ensuring individual freedom and mutual security of people in socio-political life, was developed in the era of Hellenism by Epicurus (341-270 BC. Topic 9 EPICURUS With the name Epicurus associated one of the most important traditions of philosophical ethics, called eudemonism (from the Greek word eudaimonia - happiness).Epicurus believed that the solution to the ethical problem lies in the correct interpretation of happiness.Happy people
Be content with little. Epicurus The founder of one of the Hellenistic philosophical schools was Epicurus of Samos (from the island of Samos), who believed that before finding out how to achieve happiness, it is necessary to remove the obstacles to it. What prevents you from getting good? Fear,
EPICURUS (341-270 BC) Ancient Greek philosopher. From 306 B.C. e, - in Athens, founded a philosophical school. He divided philosophy into physics (the doctrine of nature), canonics (the doctrine of knowledge) and ethics. In physics, Epicurus followed the atomism of Descartes. Recognized blissfully indifferent gods in
Text source:
Monuments of late antique scientific literature. The science. 1964.
1. However, after all, the person who said these words did not want to remain unnoticed: he even expressed this judgment in order to be noticed as a person of an unusual way of thinking - in other words, he slyly prepared glory for himself by calling for dishonor!
Ridiculous sage, unwise in his own business!
They talk about Philoxenus from Eryxida and about the Sicilian Gnathon, as if they were such gluttons that they blew their nose into dishes with delicacies in order to inspire their companions with an aversion to these dishes, and to eat plenty themselves; so people who are excessively greedy for fame want to slander her before others, as if they were their rivals in love for her, if only to get her without competition. They are also like rowers who sit facing the stern, but the ship is nevertheless driven forward, and the reverse movement of the water arising from the blows of the oars pushes the boat - so these people, giving such advice, are chasing fame, as it were. turning his face away from her. Why say all this, why write it down, why publish it for future times, if he wanted to remain unknown to his contemporaries - it was he who made sure that even descendants would know about him!
2. But enough about that. But isn't the saying in itself bad? "Live unnoticed" - such advice suits a grave thief. Or maybe live shamefully? Why shouldn't anyone know about us? But I would advise: "Even if you live badly - do not try to live unnoticed; better come to your senses, repent, correct yourself. If there is something good in you, do not be useless, if bad - do not avoid education."
But it is better to distinguish and isolate, to whom, in fact, you give such instruction. Let us suppose that an ignorant, vicious, absurd person is the same as saying: "Hide your fever, hide your insanity, otherwise the doctor will find out! Go, hide in a darker corner so as to remain unnoticed with your ailments!" Here are your words: "You are sick with a persistent and fatal disease - your depravity; so go and hide this envy, these bouts of superstition, but be afraid to give yourself into the hands of those who are capable of admonishing and healing!"
But in ancient times, the sick were used publicly: everyone, if he himself had previously suffered the same ailment or went to the sick and, from experience, could tell something useful, gave advice to the needy: so, if you believe the stories, great things were born from the accumulated experience the art of healing. Like this, unhealthy morals and spiritual ulcers should be laid bare before the eyes of everyone, so that everyone can consider the state of affairs and say: “Are you angry? Beware of this. Are you envious? Do this. Are you in love? in love, but sensible." But instead, people deny, hide, hide their vices and thus drive them deeper.
But suppose that you advise worthy people to hide and hide. In this case, you say to Epaminondas: "Do not command warriors!", to Lycurgus - "Do not make laws!", to Thrasybulus - "Do not overthrow the tyrants!" and to yourself first, Epicurus, - "Do not write letters to Asian friends! Do not call disciples from Egypt! Do not accompany the Lampsak ephebes everywhere! And do not send out books, do not show your wisdom to everyone and everyone - and do not make orders about your funeral !" Indeed, why joint meals, why gatherings of friends and handsome men, why all these thousands of lines, so laboriously composed and compiled and dedicated to Metrodorus, or Aristobulus, or Heredem, so that they would not be unknown even after death, as soon as you do you prescribe dishonor to virtue, silence to wisdom, oblivion to success?
4. But if you want to banish publicity from your life, as the lights are turned off at a feast, so that in obscurity you can indulge in all sorts of pleasures - well, then you can say: "Live unnoticed." Still - as soon as I intend to live with hetero Hedia and Leontion, "spit on the beautiful" and see the good "in carnal sensations" - such things need darkness and night, for this oblivion and obscurity are needed. If someone in the world order does not praise God, justice, providence, in the moral world - law, harmony, civil community, and in the latter - worthy, and not "benefit", why for the sake of such a person hide his life? In order not to have a good influence on anyone, not to encourage anyone to compete in virtue, not to serve as an excellent example for anyone?
If Themistocles had been hiding from the Athenians, Camillus from the Romans, Plato from Dion, then Hellas would not have defeated Xerxes, the city of Rome would not have resisted, and Sicily would not have been liberated. Light, it seems to me, helps us not only to see each other, but, above all, to be useful to each other; so publicity gives virtue not only glory, but also an opportunity to prove itself in practice. In fact, Epaminondas remained unknown until the age of forty, and during this time he could not bring any benefit to the Thebans; but when he was trusted and given power, he saved the fatherland from destruction and delivered Hellas from slavery, using fame as a light in order to show valor ready for action at the right moment.
It shines habitable, like copper shine;
But, idle and abandoned, will perish...
-
not only a "house", as Sophocles says, but also the human spirit: in inactivity and obscurity, it seems to rust and decrepit. Dull rest and idle, sluggish life relax not only the body, but also the soul. Just as water rots in the absence of light and runoff, so in people who lead a motionless life, if there was anything good in them, all these innate forces perish and dry up prematurely.
5. Don’t you see how, with the advent of night, people’s bodies are shackled by a lazy numbness, and souls are seized by sleepy lethargy, and the mind, limited by the limits of itself, like a barely smoldering fire, is shaken by incoherent visions from idleness and exhaustion, testifying only to the fact that does the person still live?
But as soon as it disperses the visions of a deceptive flock
the rising sun, as soon as it, as if uniting together, wakes everyone up and turns its light to action and thought - then people, "with new thoughts at the beginning of a new day," as Democritus says, drawn to each other by spiritual impulse, as if by an inescapable craving , from different places are going to start work.
6. It seems to me that life itself, that we are born into the world in general and become involved in birth, was given to man by a deity in order to be known about him. No one in the whole world knows or knows a person while he remains insignificant and isolated; when he is born, when he comes to people and grows up, he becomes known from the unknown and noticeable from the hidden. After all, birth is not a path to being, as others say, but to knowing about your being: whoever is born does not yet become a man, but only comes into the world. So the death of the existing is not a transition into non-existence, but rather a reduction through decay to a state inaccessible to perception. That is why the Hellenes, believing, in accordance with the ancient paternal institutions, that Apollo is the Sun, they call him Delius and Pythian, and the ruler of the opposite destiny - be it a god or a demon - is given a nickname in accordance with the fact that we retreat to a place inaccessible to sight we, undergoing destruction: it is called "the king of the dark night and idle sleep."
I think that the ancients also called man φως because each of us has an innate passionate desire - to know others and to be recognized in communication himself. Indeed, some philosophers consider the soul itself, according to its essence, to be light; At the same time, they use both other arguments and the consideration that, of all things, the soul suffers ignorance the hardest of all, that it hates darkness and is afraid of darkness, which inspires fear and suspicion in it. The light is so sweet, so desirable for her, that she does not want to enjoy any of the other things that are naturally pleasant without it, in the dark: light, like a universal seasoning, makes every pleasure, every joy and fun attractive for a person. The one who plunges himself into obscurity, dresses in darkness and buries himself alive, he seems to be dissatisfied with the fact that he was born, and refuses to be.
7. After all, the nature of glory and being is not alien, according to the stories of poets, the abode of the blessed.
Even at night the sun shines in the depths of the underground,
In the meadows that are covered with purple roses ,
and before them stretches a valley, adorned with the flowers of fruitful, flowering and shady trees; some rivers flow quietly and calmly. And the inhabitants of those places spend time in memories and conversations about past and present affairs.
The third path, prepared for those who lived their lives wickedly and lawlessly, plunges souls into a kind of darkness, into the abyss,
From the sluggish rivers of the gloomy night .
These rivers pick up the doomed car and hide them in obscurity and oblivion. After all, kites lying in the ground do not torment the liver of villains - it either burned out or rotted! - the bodies of the punished do not suffer and do not languish under the burden of the load, because:
Strong veins no longer bind either their muscles or their bones. ,
and the dead have no flesh left to take the punishment imposed. No, but one punishment truly exists for those who have lived a bad life: infamy, obscurity, traceless destruction, which draws them into the mournful river of Oblivion and drowns them in a bottomless and desolate sea, plunging them into worthlessness and idleness, into complete obscurity and dishonor.
“Live unnoticed” is the famous saying of Epicurus (fr. 551 Usener), which was very popular in antiquity: references to it, its echoes and polemics with it are found in many ancient writers, from Horace and Ovid to Themistius and Julian the Apostate.Euripides, fragment 905.
The anecdote about Philoxen and Gnathon is not found in other authors. Plutarch mentions Gnathon. as an example of an impudent parasitic who loves to gorge himself on a gratuitous thing, also in "Table Research", VII, 6.
Plutarch resorts to a similar comparison of patients with bodily diseases and those who need healing of the soul in his treatise “How You Can Feel Your Successes in Moral Self-Improvement”, ch. eleven.
The descriptions of the custom of nationwide counseling of patients in the ancient East (among the Babylonians) found in ancient authors go back to Herodotus, I, 1–97.
Thrasybulus - Athenian politician and commander of the 7th century. BC e., who led in 404-403. restoration of Athenian democracy.
The relationship between Epicurus's correspondence with his Asia Minor and Egyptian followers is known only from this mention. In Lam-psak (a city in Asia Minor), Epicurus himself visited and had talented students from among his natives (Metrodor, Idomeneo, Kolot, etc.).
The testament of Epicurus is given in Diogenes Laertes, X, 18. It obliged the students every year on the birthday of their teacher to make sacrifices to himself, his parents and brothers and, in addition, to gather in memory of him on the 20th of each month.
Metrodorus of Lampsacus (330–277 BC) is a follower and one of the closest friends of Epicurus, to whom many of the teacher's writings were dedicated. Aristobulus and Heredem - brothers of Epicurus; some of the lost writings of Epicurus took the form of epistles to them, and after their death the philosopher honored each of them with a word of praise.
Gedia and Leontion are hetaerae. Of these, the second is especially famous, characterized by tradition as a learned woman: she was even credited with the essay “Against Theophrastus” (Cicero, “On the Nature of the Gods”, I, 33, 93).
This refers to the words of Epicurus (fr. 512 Usener) "I spit on beauty and on those who admire it in vain when it does not give any pleasure."
This statement of Epicurus causes an outburst of indignation in Seneca, letter 92, 6: “So bodily sensation makes happy? Why do you hesitate to say that a person is good if his palate is good? And you will reckon - I will not say to men, but to people - the one whose highest good lies in taste, visual and sound sensations!
Defense of the idea of divine providence, good providence is the main motive of Plutarch's anti-Epicuran controversy, which, in the words of Marx, attracts "philosophy to the judgment of religion." See: K. Marx and F. Engels. From early works. M., 1956, p. 24. However, in our diatribe, questions of attitude to religion take up very little space, receding into the background before the main theme.
Apparently, Epicurus spoke in some of his lost writings about practical utility as a source of morality and the basis of people's social life (fr. 524 Usener). These views are met with a little sanctimonious indignation in Plutarch.
Dion of Syracuse, a passionate follower and friend of Plato, in 357 overthrew the tyrant Dionysius the Younger in Syracuse. However, nothing came of his attempts to implement the aristocratic utopia of Plato, he himself was soon killed by his own supporters, and Dionysius the Younger returned to power. Plutarch wrote a biography of Dion.
Sophocles, fragment 780.
Callimachus, fragment 93.
Democritus, II, 91, 19 ff. Diels.
These considerations about the nature of Apollo are highly characteristic of Plutarch. Plutarch speaks about the solar essence of Apollo more than once (for example, “On the fall of the oracles”, 42, “On the inscription “E” in Delphi”, 21, etc.). The epithets "Delius" (i.e. "Delian") and "Pythian" (i.e. "Delphian") are used by Plutarch for a play on words: the first is compared with the adjective δῇλος ("clear"), the second, apparently, with the verb πυνθάνομαι (“I know”), since sunlight makes it possible to know the world.
This refers to Hades, whose name, not directly named, also serves as a pretext for a play on words due to its similarity with the adjective ἀειδής - “invisible” (cf. below “we are retreating to a place inaccessible to sight ...”). We find a similar antithesis of Apollo and Hades as the world principles of light and darkness in Plutarch's dialogue "On the inscription "E" in Delphi", 20.
Again a play on words: φώς (an archaic word) - “husband”, “man”; φῶς - "light".
At the beginning of the seventh chapter, the text is badly corrupted and contains a significant gap. The translation of the first phrase of the chapter is approximate, in meaning. The phrase about the "third path", apparently, should be understood as follows: one road leads a person to Olympus (if the hero becomes a god after death, as was the case with Hercules), the second - to the country of the blessed, described at the beginning of the chapter, the third - to places where sinners are punished.
Pindar, fragment 129.
Pindar, fragment 130.
According to a common myth, kites torment the liver of Titius in the afterlife, who insulted the goddess Latona; as for the "burden of the load", Plutarch could have in mind Sisyphus, rolling a stone up a mountain, or water-carriers - Danaid.
"Odyssey", XI, 218 (translated by V. Zhukovsky).
"River of Oblivion" - Lethe (λήθη in Greek and means "oblivion").
EPICURUS(c. 341-270 BC) - ancient Greek philosopher, founder of one of the most influential areas of ancient philosophy - epicureanism .
Epicurus grew up on the island of Samos, the son of a school teacher, Neocles, a native of Athens. He began studying philosophy at the age of 14, according to one version, after the writings of Democritus fell into his hands. Epicurus' teacher in philosophy was the follower of Democritus Nausifan, then the Platonist Pamphilus. Epicurus himself considered himself self-taught and spoke very unflatteringly about his teachers, however, as well as about most of his contemporary philosophers.
In 306 BC Epicurus founded his own philosophical school in a garden near Athens, which was later called the “Garden of Epicurus”, and its inhabitants were called “philosophers from the gardens”.
Epicurus wrote about three hundred works, but only fragments, doxographic () and individual works have come down to us: To Herodotus, To Pythocles, To Menekey and Main Thoughts.
The philosophy of Epicurus has a pronounced practical character. Its three parts: canon (theory of knowledge), physics and ethics are subordinated to a single goal - to teach a person how to achieve a happy, blissful life, free from suffering of the body and confusion of the soul.
Canonics is the doctrine of the criteria of truth and the rules of its cognition, without which rational life and rational activity are impossible.
According to Epicurus, sensory perceptions are the source of human knowledge. From the surface of all material objects, especially fine particles emanate, which, penetrating into the sense organs, produce sensations. From many similar recurring impressions in the soul, general ideas or anticipations are formed that allow a person to recognize objects and designate them with words. Sensations and anticipations have undeniable evidence and are criteria for the truth of knowledge.
All delusions arise as a result of erroneous judgments of the mind, in which we speculate that something is contained in representations that does not find confirmation or is refuted in sensory perception.
The physics of Epicurus is based on the natural philosophy of the pre-Socratics and, in particular, on the atomism of Democritus. It is designed to give such an explanation of the world that will allow a person to overcome the fundamental obstacles to achieving bliss - the fear of the gods and the fear of death.
According to Epicurus, the universe was not created by the gods; it is eternal, since being cannot arise from non-being, just as non-being cannot arise from being. The universe contains bodies moving in space, or emptiness. The existence of a void between bodies follows from the fact that otherwise motion would not be possible.
All bodies are compounds of indivisible and immutable particles - atoms that differ in size, weight and shape. Moving in the infinite void with equal speed, the atoms deviate slightly from their trajectories, connecting into complex bodies. In infinite space and time, there are countless worlds that are born and die due to the incessant movement of atoms.
The assumption of spontaneous deflection of atoms (the fundamental difference between the teachings of Epicurus and the atomism of Democritus) serves a twofold purpose: in physics, it explains the collision of atoms and, thereby, the formation of bodies, which would be impossible if the atoms moved only in a straight line; in ethics - theoretically substantiates the doctrine of freedom, proving that everything in the world happens not only out of necessity, but there is also an accident, there is something that "depends on us."
Thus, a person should not be afraid of the gods, since they, contrary to the opinions of the crowd, do not have any influence either on the world or on people. The gods are immortal, blissful beings who are not characterized by either anger or favor towards people.
Death should not be feared either, since the soul, which is composed of atoms, dissipates after death, just like the body. “Death has nothing to do with us: when we exist, then there is no death yet, and when death comes, then we are no longer” ( To Menekey 125). The liberation of the soul from its oppressive fears opens the way to a blissful life.
The ethics of Epicurus is based on the position that "pleasure is the beginning and end of a blessed life" (Diogenes Laertes X, 128). Man, like all living beings, by nature strives for pleasure and avoids suffering, and in this sense, pleasure is the measure of good. However, a blissful life does not at all consist in obtaining more and more pleasures, but in reaching the limit of pleasure - freedom from bodily suffering and mental anxieties (ataraxia).
To achieve this state of self-sufficient peace of mind, a person must overcome the suffering that arises from unsatisfied desires. According to Epicurus, desires are: 1) natural and necessary (hunger, thirst, and other elementary necessities of life); 2) natural, but not necessary (for example, gourmet dishes); 3) absurd desires that are neither natural nor necessary (thirst for fame, wealth, immortality). Most people are unhappy because they are tormented by exorbitant and empty desires. Genuine pleasure is available only to those who know how to be content with the easily achievable minimum of natural and necessary needs.
The serene peace of a person, in addition to his own desires and fears, can be threatened by external circumstances, including the people around him. The best way to cope with them is the one who does “what is possible, close to himself, and what is impossible, then at least not hostile, and where this is not possible, he keeps aloof and moves away as far as it is beneficial” (Diogenes Laertes, X 154). Crowds should be avoided, while observing the necessary minimum of social norms that are designed to limit the mutual hostility of people. Only in a circle of like-minded friends is true communication possible, which is not only a pleasure in itself, but also contributes to the achievement of a happy serene life.
The ethical ideal preached by Epicurus is summarized by the phrase: "Live unnoticed." It requires a person to be content with simple food, modest clothing, not to strive for honors, wealth, public office; to live avoiding everything that can disturb the serene peace of the soul. The life of Epicurus and his fellow disciples was the practical embodiment of this ideal.
Polina Gadzhikurbanova
Against the Epicureans, Plutarch, as head of the Platonic school, wrote at least ten works (Lampr. cat. 80-82. 129. 133. 143. 148. 155. 159. ”, “That even a pleasant life is impossible if you follow Epicurus” and “Is it good to say:“ Live inconspicuously ”” . The latter appears in the so-called “Lamprian list” (Lampr. cat. 178) under the title: “On the saying: “Live inconspicuously””. In form, it is a monument of oratorical prose, more precisely, a public recitation, which was very common in the era of the second sophistry and served as a means of education and at the same time moral and philosophical influence on the urban population in all civilized regions of the Roman Empire. Delivered to an unknown audience, this speech is an assertive, in an aggressive tone, refutation of the well-known thesis of the philosopher Epicurus about the advantage of an apolitical life, remote from a public and public career.
The manner of presentation here, as in general in recitations of this kind, is extremely rhetorical, the system of proofs is frankly playful, frivolous. Quotations from the classics, such as Homer and Euripides, are intended to substantiate such an illogical assertion, for example, that Epaminondas was invested with trust and power, as a result of which he became famous and saved his dying city. Sophisticated overexposure aside, common sense suggests that in reality the situation was exactly the opposite: first, Epaminondas became known for his merits, and only then he was entrusted with command in the war against the Spartans.
Nevertheless, despite the seeming playfulness of Plutarch's attack on Epicurus, one should take it quite seriously: these were the rules of the game, and the Chaeronean philosopher was merely following the generally accepted standards for conducting ideological polemics. The incendiary, fiery character of the speech captures the reader, especially since the speech, already begun on a fairly high note, reaches a completely exceptional intensity towards the middle, and especially towards the end, so that the author, in the words of Plato (Ion 7, p. 536 b), falls into here in real poetic frenzy (ἐνθουσιασμός ). Phrases become more and more emotionally excited and syntactically complicated (which is worth, for example, chapter 5, which is completely filled with one powerful, complex sentence with sophisticated architectonics), the language acquires a sublimely poetic coloring (the number of direct and indirect quotations from the majestic Pindar increases, moreover, in places Plutarch's phrases are so closely intertwined with the words of his Boeotian compatriot that it is almost impossible to separate the first from the second), finally, a petty and captious polemic with an opponent gives way to an inspired, vivid hymn to the statements of those philosophers who interpret all birth and being as a manifestation of latently existing forces and subjects, and no less vivid description of hellish torments, the main of which is infamy and obscurity.
The whole monument as a whole, undoubtedly, shows us the most curious page of ancient culture, and the reader, we hope, will enjoy both its rhetorical form and its philosophical content. Translation made according to the publication: Plutarchi Moralia. V. VI, 2. Ed. M. Pohlenz, R. Westman. Leipzig: B. Teubner, 1959. Quotations from ancient authors, unless otherwise noted, have been translated by us from the original.
Content: invective against the author of the aphorism: dissuading others from the pursuit of fame, he himself sought fame in every possible way (). Refutation of the aphorism itself: hiding from society is detrimental not only for those suffering from mental illness and leading a vicious life, but also for outstanding people, since this deprives the former of moral support (), and the latter of the opportunity to show their virtue (). Secrecy is appropriate for those who indulge in debauchery, but not for those who are useful to society; fame gives virtues fame and application, and obscurity is detrimental to talents (). Darkness suppresses reason, and light stimulates mental strength and reason (). Life itself is a transition from an invisible state to a visible one, and death leads to decay and immersion in darkness (). Confirmation of this is the abode of the blessed, where even at night the sun shines on them, and the hellish abyss, where the wicked are deprived of the opportunity to see the light ().
Do you really not see that with the onset of night, sleepy lethargy takes possession of the bodies, e and souls are seized by impotent weakness, and the mind, shrinking from inaction and despondency, trembles a little, like a tongue of dim flame, with incoherent dreams, as if hinting to a person about what is happening in reality, " and when the rising sun disperses false dreams, and, as if mixing together, awakens and enlivens everyone’s activity and consciousness with light, then, according to Democritus, “feeding new thoughts with the advent of the day”, people connected, like a strong thread, by mutual aspiration, rise, each from their place, to their daily activities.
F And I believe that life itself, and, more broadly, existence and participation in birth are given to man by a deity for fame. He is invisible and unknown, carried in all directions in the form of scattered small particles, but when he is born, then, condensing into himself and gaining dimensions, he begins to glow, becoming visible from the invisible and visible from the invisible. After all, birth is not a path to existence, as some say, but to the knowledge of existence. After all, it does not create what is being born, but only reveals it, 1130 just as the destruction of the existent is not a removal into non-existence, but rather a withdrawal into the invisible that has fallen apart. That is why the sun, considering it, according to ancient and primordial customs, Apollo, is called Delian and Pythian, and the lord of the other world, whoever he is, god or demon, is called, as if, breaking up into parts, we passed into the invisible and an invisible state, "the ruler of the invisible night and lazy sleep." I think that the ancients called man himself "light" precisely because everyone, by virtue of kinship, has an irresistible desire to know and be recognized. Yes, and some philosophers consider the soul itself, in essence, to be light, proving this, among other things, by the fact that of all the existing soul, obscurity is the most burdensome, hates everything vague, and is confused by darkness, full of fear and suspicion for it, but the light is so sweet and desirable for her that without light, in darkness, none of the things that are by nature pleasant please her, but, mixed with everything, like a seasoning, it makes every pleasure, every entertainment and joy joyful and gratifying. c The one who plunges himself into obscurity, is clothed in darkness and buries himself alive, apparently, is burdened by his very birth and does not want to be.
After all, the abode of the pious shows the nature of glory and being: “there, even at night, the bright sun shines for them, and among the meadows covered with purple roses”, a plain spreads, full of flowers of fruitful, lush, shady trees, and full-flowing rivers silently flow, and they themselves, walking together and peacefully talking, spend time in memories and conversations about those who were born and exist. The third road, d throwing souls into a dark abyss, is intended for those who have lived an unholy, lawless life. “From here the slow rivers of gloomy night pour out boundless darkness”, taking into themselves and enveloping the punished in obscurity and oblivion. After all, kites do not forever torment the liver of villainsburied in the ground (it burned out or decayed without a trace long ago), and dragging weights does not exhaust the bodies of the punished (for "strong veins no longer bind either their muscles or their bones", and the dead have no remnant of the body who can take the weight of a well-deserved punishment), but truly, there is only one punishment for those living a vicious life: dishonor, obscurity and disappearance, completely eliminating them into the gloomy waters of Lethe, plunging into the bottomless sea abyss, entailing worthlessness and inaction, as well as complete disgrace and obscurity.
NOTES
Loading...
