Michael Trembly of the Stoa Conversations podcast (no relation to The Stoa) invited me to his podcast because one of his listeners requested he speak with me about my interpretation of Stoicism. I swore off doing podcasts two years ago but said I would take up his listener's curiosity as a journaling prompt, replying via a public entry. This entry is my reply.
I gave my student your texts to read and contemplate about what philosophy should be - and the response was insightful and massive. I see now some of my student approach philosophy from anoter state of mind than just "being smart" to try "practicng less foolish" - So thanks for this precious lesson. I will continue to take inspiration from your writting.
Thanks - i will reply to this post on Mid september when it will happened for the feedback - i value your keen insights and your way of practicing Philosophy - it's comforting to not be alone in this attempt of being less foolish ! Thanks !
I Do love very much that one - to the extend that i would like to submit to some of my students when i will be back in class to make them more familiar with philosophy as a way to aspire to be less foolish - (yes because i'm trying to teach philosophy in the form i see here at less foolish and in the people that have gathered around) - so i'm asking the authorization here ; is it possible to do so ?
Love this one. When studying specific philosophies, they often feel burdensome, borderline dogmatic, if you try to implement all their facets into your life. Taking the most significant parts and developing your own wisdom for the rest seems like the best way to live a good life.
Do you see your virtues as being completely subjective?
Using your definition of wisdom, as below, what if someone decided to navigate life with a meta value that was foolish or harmful, but which they thought pointed toward "the good"? Would we still call this wisdom?
I don't have a concrete counter-definition to suggest, but perhaps we could claim that wisdom can be utilized for life navigation, but that its definition is something else.
"I also see defining wisdom as a Rorschach test, and each person’s definition represents what is wise for them to cultivate now. For me, “navigating life well enough” resonates. When combining both definitions, wisdom is the meta-value for life navigation, or “existential wayfinding.”
I gave my student your texts to read and contemplate about what philosophy should be - and the response was insightful and massive. I see now some of my student approach philosophy from anoter state of mind than just "being smart" to try "practicng less foolish" - So thanks for this precious lesson. I will continue to take inspiration from your writting.
Thanks - i will reply to this post on Mid september when it will happened for the feedback - i value your keen insights and your way of practicing Philosophy - it's comforting to not be alone in this attempt of being less foolish ! Thanks !
I Do love very much that one - to the extend that i would like to submit to some of my students when i will be back in class to make them more familiar with philosophy as a way to aspire to be less foolish - (yes because i'm trying to teach philosophy in the form i see here at less foolish and in the people that have gathered around) - so i'm asking the authorization here ; is it possible to do so ?
Love this one. When studying specific philosophies, they often feel burdensome, borderline dogmatic, if you try to implement all their facets into your life. Taking the most significant parts and developing your own wisdom for the rest seems like the best way to live a good life.
Less....wakes up More
Minimal....opens windows of Maximal
Virtue...quickens Life-fire
Thank-you...enjoyed the distinctions and the overview.
MVP I love it.
Ask not, be one.
Though Vervaeke's propositional architecture is (though complicated) really profound. It's helped me with the "existential way-finding" piece.
Once you've got a map it's time to "Play" Get in the game and do some philosophy!
Great post bub
Do you see your virtues as being completely subjective?
Using your definition of wisdom, as below, what if someone decided to navigate life with a meta value that was foolish or harmful, but which they thought pointed toward "the good"? Would we still call this wisdom?
I don't have a concrete counter-definition to suggest, but perhaps we could claim that wisdom can be utilized for life navigation, but that its definition is something else.
"I also see defining wisdom as a Rorschach test, and each person’s definition represents what is wise for them to cultivate now. For me, “navigating life well enough” resonates. When combining both definitions, wisdom is the meta-value for life navigation, or “existential wayfinding.”