Art of Living

Below, paraphrased from ‘Art of Living’

Seller’s describes the aim of his book ‘The Art of Living’ es exploring “the possibility of a conception of philosophy in which philosophical ideas are primarily expressed in behaviour, a conception in which understanding is developed not for its own sake but rather in order to transform one’s way of life, a conception of philosophy that would make biography not merely incidentally relevant but rather of central importance to philosophy”.

Philosophy does not promise to secure anything external for man, otherwise it would be admitting something that lies beyond its proper subject matter. For just as wood is the material of the carpenter, bronze that of the statuary, so each individual’s own life is the material of the art of living.

• Epictetus

Seller’s desribes this as seeing philosophy as an activity directed towards transforming ones way of life "$\beta \iota o\sigma$".

This link between an art changing someone’s behaviour links the early stoics to Socrates of the Apology and the early Platonic dialogues where philosophy is seen as an art. An art concerned with “transforming someones behaviour”.

• A common objection is that looking at philosophy in this way makes it no different to a religious way of life. That it downplays the role of $\lambda o\gamma o\sigma$ (logos: “reason” or “plan”).

“what distinguishes a philosophical way of life from these religious ways of life is the fact that it is grounder upon, and expresses a desire for, a rational understanding as opposed to, say, mystical insight or unquestioned faith in a system of beliefs.”

• Sellers says this is what makes this concept of living philosophical.

  • While other philosophers might see this rationality as constitutive of philosophy, the constitutive thing in perceiving life this way is one’s $\beta \iota o\sigma$“. The rational mind is taken for granted.
  • Logos is not the major constitutive element of philosophy.

The central task of this study will be to outline a conception of philosophy in which $\lambda o\gamma o\sigma$ is a necessary component but not the only constitutive element.

constitutive: having the power to establish or give organized existence to something.

Philosophers beard

The distinction between what is saccording to custom or convention and what is according to nature originated in the Sophistic enlightenment of the fifth century BC and was taken up later by both Cynics and Stoics.

• This is the appeal to character from Epictetus:

For Epictetus the true philosopher will only act according to reason or according to nature, rejecting the arbitrary conventions that guide the behaviour of everyone else.

For Epictetus shaving his beard would be a violation of living in accordance with nature, everything he’s against.

• This notion that you can get a glimpse of your true self in everyday tasks is interesting. Of course, what we know today throws light on how much we really knwo ourselves, or at least what might be natural isn’t actually how we want to live.
• The way people philosophers lived were considered templates or the ‘accounts’ of their personal philosophy in ancient times.

Socratic Origins of Art of Living

Philosophy as an art concerned with ones life

Sellers says that the Apology is concerned with ones life. How to transform it and examine it.

For Aristotle, philosophers search for this knowledge and this happens to impact upon their way of life; for Socrates, philosophers search for knowledge in order to transform their way of life.

Sellers goes into detail about how Socrates establishes this, which I’m not going to go into but one thing that did stand out to me. They separate the notion of what’s important to oneself and caring for oneself. Socrates says that the first step in the art of caring for oneself is to “know thyself”. I have marginallia that projects my own experience on to this. That I would like to know how we’re fooled, cognitive biases that I have etc. that to fully engage with oneself implies taking these things into account.

• Socrates also differentiates between one’s soul and one’s body. Both have associated arts that care for them. An art may not always feel right but it will

always involve and proceed according to a rational account ($\lambda o\gamma o\sigma$). An individual skilled in a particular art will always be able to offer an explanation of what it is that they are doing and why it is effective. This is what makes an art something that can be taught and learned.

A quick list of the different ‘types’ of art according to Socrates/Plato:

• Productive: clearly distinguished from practice. The art of shoemaking for instance, the product is distinct from the process of making it. This also seems to be what Aristotle thinks of as art.
• Acquisitive: like fishing.
• Performative: like dancing. Success is judged in reference to a performance.
• Theoretical: They could be classified as productive (producing results), acquisitive (uncovering things) or performative (characterized by a correct application of procedures).
• Stochastic: That of medicine, where you’re aiming for a distinct goal but failure to get at it isn’t considered a complete failure. In the case of medicine, you’re trying to make people better.

These are all derived from the Platonic dialogues so they can’t be considered strictly Socrates’

Socrates seems to view the art of the soul as the pursuit of some excellent state.

The consideration of how Socrates might see the art of philosophy in relation to these arts and how you acquire knowledge about each of them.

There is those who know nothing, the expert and the apprentice. The way to get from apprentice to expert is by practicing the principles ($\lambda o\gamma o\sigma$). You might know them theoretically but you must practice them.

alongside an understanding of the principles involved in an art, one must also engage in a period of practical training or exercise in order to mast that art.

• Socrates forms this basis or template for philosophy could have been viewed to those after his time. That it’s a form of mastery over one’s soul. What interesting is how resonant this becomes. There is a faculty of our nature that agrees with virtue. Maybe, from a social perspective it’s important to have temperance.

The Stoic Conception of The Art of Living

The ‘art of living’ phrase is primarily used by the Stoics and considers one’s internal state as the model that is worked on.

Stoic Ethical Theory

For a rational being, the fundamental characteristic will be its rational soul, rather than it’s animalistic impulses.

• Only excellence is determined to be good. The excellence of ones rational soul.

”To preserve and cultivate its own constitution, the rational being will cultivate the excellence of its soul. Thus, for the rational being (the philosopher) only this excellence is judged to be good.”

• Seller talks about the ‘sage’ as the ideal in Stoicism and that seemingly, this sage is Socrates.

The Art of Philosophy as the ‘Physician of the Soul’

Cicero uses a medical analogy to describe emotions as ‘diseases’ of the soul. That the true philosopher is free from these diseases.

Galen also states that this analogy was important to the Stoics.

The souls of virtuous men ought to be compared to bodies immune from disease, the souls of those making progress should be compared to bodies of robust constitution, souls of intermediate persons to bodies that are healthy without being robust, souls of the multitude of ordinary men to bodies that become ill at a slight cause

• Highlighted in this book is the notion of the different kinds of arts. Particularly the art of medicine where you’re goal isn’t to always succeed but be in pursuit of accomplishment. I think this is something the Stoics or at least popular culture Stoicism would agree with.

• The problem with this conception is that success ultimately lies outside one’s control which the Stoics would argue against. The Stoics seemed to end up with the notion of the performative art.

  emphasis my own

Art is a systematic body of knowledge based on empirically derived from observed principles and brought together through practice (Socrates). It is directed towards a goal which we have seen described as the health of the soul (Stoics) Finally, the goal is identical to practicing the art of living itself.

Philosophy treats the soul analogously to the way in which medicine treats the body; however, the way in which it achieves this is, for the Stoics at least, subtlety different.

• So there’s this departure, with the Stoics, from art applying to one’s life, to it applying to the soul.

Art:

a systemic body of knowledge, based upon empirically derived principles but also requiring practice or training, with some specific practical goal.

Socrates has this pure definition of philosophy as pursuit of wisdom. For the Stoics they describe philosophy as this art of living. In this sense it takes on a more corporeal nature, having a product of some form.

Seller’s uses the analogy of a cylinder that a man name Chrysippus uses. That it does as it’s nature entails but it’s shape.

As in the case of the cylinder, this internal nature directly impacts upon the way in which a thing behaves. Any alteration in this internal cause will have a direct and necessary impact upon an individuals behaviour. In other words, philosophy, conceived as a disposition of the soul, will have a direct and necessary impact upon an individual’s behaviour. Philosophy is thus both this internal corporeal disposition of the soul and an activity or way of living, the latter being a necessary expression of the former.

• The Stoic art of living is directed towards transforming this internal cause, namely the physical disposition of one’s soul.

Spiritual Exercises

Exercises, period of learning principles and then turning them into actions.

Thesse processes of habitutation and digestion form the function of spiirtiual exercises. They aim at the assimilation of philosophical principles into one’s soul that will, in turn, transform one’s way of life. Like

It’s a concept process of assimilating knowledge into oneself. Just knowing the principles isn’t enough, they must be practiced too.

Epictetus’ handbook is a guide to doing this whereas Aurelius is literally doing it.

• In Stoic Physics, fate is the word for the interconnected causes withing the complex set of causes in the cosmos.
• Epictetus tries to get one to change ones desires or at least associate your desires with this.
• Epictetus also places an emphasis on the study on logic to understand what is really the case so that we’re not affected or have somewhere to go that just our impressions.
• This also resonates with Stoic ethical theory, what is good is what the rational soul needs.
• The cosmos, for the Stoics is the large organism of a kind. From it’s generation (generative principle) it’s causes are predetermined.
• This notion is present in Meditations as Marcus tries to integrate himself with this cosmos,

• Freeing oneself of this limited first person perspective will free one from the emotional turmoil that comes with it.

• In the same way, when something is seen as food ‘for me’ or ‘bad for me’ elevating oneself to this position allows it’s evaluation outside of this first person perspective.
• Epictetus touts this extreme command over ones impressions of the world and one’s judgement. He sees this as the goal to carefully craft your impressions (presumably, in turn the soul).