Philosophy is not just comfort

Deborton's "Consolation of Philosophy" selects six philosophers in the history of Western philosophy and explains the philosophical role of philosophy in life from different angles. There are all kinds of disappointments in life, some of which are ok, and some of which are not. For those flaws that are not available, philosophy provides a perspective that helps us face and accept it.

In this sense, it can be said that philosophy is a comfort. However, philosophy is not just comfort, but more. The difference between the two may be that comfort is similar to treatment, and it is important to adjust us. The adjustment is the overall vision of our world and life. Therefore, if the role of philosophy is reduced to comfort, it is possible to narrow or even distort the meaning of philosophy.

The most interesting thing I read in the book is to write a chapter of Seneca. Part of the reason may be that this chapter is more relevant, the Stoic philosophers themselves attach importance to the solace of philosophy, and Seneca himself has a book entitled "Consolation." As the minister of the Roman court, this person is known for his power and luxury, and he is quite tempted by people and future generations. However, he is a wise man. He is still in the midst of wealth and wealth. He can still clearly see wealth as something outside his body. In his words, he said: "I have never trusted the goddess. Everything I gave her to me - money , the official position, the power - all placed in one place, can let her take it back without disturbing me. I keep a wide distance between them, so that she just takes them away, not forcibly stripped from me go."

Not only that, but for the children, and even for their own bodies, they should be treated as such. Seneca’s view is that people have the strongest tolerance for being prepared and understood, and vice versa. The role of philosophy is, first, to make people aware that any kind of bad thing can happen, so that they can be prepared at any time. Second, help people understand the bad things that have happened, and realize that they are not necessarily so bad.

Why isn't the bad thing so bad? Please don't swear the bad dialectic of bad things and good things here. Seneca's reason is seen in a brilliant saying: "Why must you cry for part of life? You don't see all the life is tearful." Hua has a similar saying: If a person looks at the whole rather than his own, his behavior will be more like a wise man than a victim.

The philosopher is a philosopher. It is to see the panorama and limits of the whole life, so that he can stand at the height of the whole and open up the distance with all individual disasters to reach a settlement. Seneca said it was done. His officialdom was once frustrated and was exiled to the desolate Corsica, always calm. Finally, the tyrant Nero came to power, ordered him to commit suicide, and his companions cried. He calmly asked: "Where is your philosophy?"

......

In this era of worship, the chapter on Epicurus is also worth reading. The ancient Greek philosopher regarded happiness as the highest in life, and his philosophy was thus named after hedonism. He himself became the grandfather of all the wine-colored people. This is a big misunderstanding. In fact, the core idea of ​​his philosophy is precisely the claim that true happiness has very limited dependence on matter, and it is nothing more than the basic condition of food, shelter, and clothing. Exceeding a certain limit, the increase will no longer bring about an increase in happiness. Luxury has no substantial contribution to happiness and often leads to pain.

In fact, both Epicureans and later philosophers who inherited his basic ideas, such as British utilitarians, all advocated that happiness depends more on the spirit than on matter. This principle is not at all esoteric. Anyone who has tasted two kinds of happiness can prove it by their own experience. Those who indulge in material happiness and do not know the spirit and happiness can prove it by their own emptiness.