Hiya- hope this finds you well. This curriculum is well timed for me- not only am I going to follow it, but my niece, about to start her first year of university, has recently proclaimed that Stoicism is “her thing”. I have gifted her your How To Be A Stoic book, and will follow that up with this curriculum.
Also, just read Chuck’s article and your response. Chuck made a strong case, but I agree with you. That said, for me I think it’s more-so that you need reasoning (logic) and worldly knowledge (physics) in order to implement Stoic ethical principles correctly rather than Stoic ethics necessarily being based on logic and physics (though everything is based on logic, so maybe I’ll focus on physics).
Of course, reasoning skills are necessary to behave ethically. That seems rather obvious to both of us. I think worldly knowledge is necessary or at least helpful as well. I need to know a bit about economics and m environmental science (among other things) to know how to vote. It would also be helpful to understand psychology as well (I’ll be less annoyed with someone if I know they’re behaving irrationally due to hunger or lack of sleep).
But I’m not as sure I’d say Stoic ethics is based on physics per se, at least depending on our meaning. I’m not sure that scientific and other such facts are what make things like “the dichotomy of control” true? That seems more based on our experience than science, unless we’re including our experience in “physics”. At the same time, if I were an immortal god that could control nature, perhaps it wouldn’t be true that anything is outside of my control! So at the very least I think it depends on what we mean when we say Stoic ethics is based on physics.
I also think Stoic ethics could still work even if we had an immortal nonphysical soul and if libertarian freewill were true. We’re still clearly limited by our bodies, so much is still outside of our control. The Stoics also seemed agnostic on the question of whether we survived death in any capacity, right? So I do think Stoic ethics seems rather robust to any realistic metaphysical/scientific viewpoints.
In the science column, I'd add "Darwin's Dangerous Idea" by Daniel Dennett, and almost any of Richard Dawkins' works on evolution, but I think "The Ancestor's Tale" is especially good.
oh, ti voglio bene Massimo. thank you!
Hiya- hope this finds you well. This curriculum is well timed for me- not only am I going to follow it, but my niece, about to start her first year of university, has recently proclaimed that Stoicism is “her thing”. I have gifted her your How To Be A Stoic book, and will follow that up with this curriculum.
Also, just read Chuck’s article and your response. Chuck made a strong case, but I agree with you. That said, for me I think it’s more-so that you need reasoning (logic) and worldly knowledge (physics) in order to implement Stoic ethical principles correctly rather than Stoic ethics necessarily being based on logic and physics (though everything is based on logic, so maybe I’ll focus on physics).
Of course, reasoning skills are necessary to behave ethically. That seems rather obvious to both of us. I think worldly knowledge is necessary or at least helpful as well. I need to know a bit about economics and m environmental science (among other things) to know how to vote. It would also be helpful to understand psychology as well (I’ll be less annoyed with someone if I know they’re behaving irrationally due to hunger or lack of sleep).
But I’m not as sure I’d say Stoic ethics is based on physics per se, at least depending on our meaning. I’m not sure that scientific and other such facts are what make things like “the dichotomy of control” true? That seems more based on our experience than science, unless we’re including our experience in “physics”. At the same time, if I were an immortal god that could control nature, perhaps it wouldn’t be true that anything is outside of my control! So at the very least I think it depends on what we mean when we say Stoic ethics is based on physics.
I also think Stoic ethics could still work even if we had an immortal nonphysical soul and if libertarian freewill were true. We’re still clearly limited by our bodies, so much is still outside of our control. The Stoics also seemed agnostic on the question of whether we survived death in any capacity, right? So I do think Stoic ethics seems rather robust to any realistic metaphysical/scientific viewpoints.
Good list! I have read six of these, and some of the others I have read in other translations.
Ah, I love a good curriculum to follow!!!! Thanks for the recs, Professor!! 😃
In the science column, I'd add "Darwin's Dangerous Idea" by Daniel Dennett, and almost any of Richard Dawkins' works on evolution, but I think "The Ancestor's Tale" is especially good.