>seneca didn't live by what he taught at all
>he was rich and was scared to lose it
>he risked his life for sex
>he tried to over throw an emperor
>he helped kill nero's mother.
The book introduced me to Stoicism and philosophy in general but I can't take his advice anymore. What a hypocrite.
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
newadvent.org
twitter.com
slippery wet dog poop
wtf
Seneca's teachings helped me in life and that's all that counts. Why should his lifestyle have any impact on my reaction to his text?
so this is the power of lit? Why is no one responding. Have I defeated you all in the art of rhetoric?
ur gey xD
Fucking lit wtf. WHy do I come here this place is retarded
good dubs
You either get a retard or a fourth grade librarian tier pretentious jack ass on Veeky Forums
Sounds like OP
Where are you getting your information?
Letters from a Stoic seems like a sincere effort to me. Also, as far as I know Seneca was executed for being a Stoic buzz kill to Nero. He was a martyr for his cause. Show some respect, user.
Well first you need to prove why authenticity matters in this situation.
Stoicism provides many logical arguments on how one should live. So now tell me why does the inauthenticity of the author render the logic unsound?
underrated
A flawed man does not necessarily mean a flawed argument, friendo.
Do what I say, not what I do. This is a stick up.
Schopenhauer addresses this pretty well.
> It is therefore just as little necessary for the saint to be a philosopher as for the philosopher to be a saint; just as it is not necessary for a perfectly beautiful person to be a great sculptor, or for a great sculptor to be himself a beautiful person. In general, it is a strange demand on a moralist that he should commend no other virtue than that which he himself possesses. To repeat abstractly, universally, and distinctly in concepts the whole inner nature of the world, and thus to deposit it as a reflected image in permanent concepts always ready for the faculty of reason, this and nothing else is philosophy.
That...makes sense. Feel bad now
a painter or a sculptor doesn't have to be beautiful. It's similar with philosophers.
Just because someone is a blowhard asshole who doesn't practice what he preaches is no sufficient reason to disregard his maxims for living rightly. This is a hard lesson I have learned recently; I thought I was one of the most disciplined people I knew but lately I have learned how undisciplined I was. I know now I am more focused and tenacious than I was, but from this slightly higher vantage point I can see how much farther I can go in the task of training my mind and body. I have learned this from a despicable oaf of a man, but I have taken his lessons to heart.
However I strongly disagree with Schop here. Frankly it sounds as if he is making excuses for his own failure to live up to his ideals, or to even try to do so. One can pontificate all one wants but abstaining from taking responsibility for ones actions nullifies you as a moral agent.