do techbros misunderstand Meditations by Marcus Aurelius? also I am still Ojibwemaxxing

I will be yapping about these books:

Hi everyone! So I realize that the title of this post might be a bit clickbaity and I don't actually want to bash anyone's efforts to engage with the classics. However, what made me want to write this post was the fact that I recently read a book called Embers: One Ojibway’s Meditations by Richard Wagamese, and I could not help but be reminded of what is probably the most famous example of the “philosophical journal” style of book, which is Meditations by Marcus Aurelius. If you’ve been following this blog for a while, you’ll know that I’m a non-Indigenous learner of Anishinaabemowin, the Ojibwe language. I’ve written on this blog before about universal truths that are found across different storytelling traditions. For example, Basil Johnston’s retelling of the Ojibwe story of the wolverine reminds me an awful lot of my boy Satan from Milton’s Paradise Lost. For today though, I wanted to focus on how some people may misinterpret Stoic philosophy as being about isolating yourself, becoming hyperindependent, and avoiding relationships with others. I believe such ideas are erasing some of the nuances in Meditations and could be harmful. Aurelius does mention the important of community. So does Wagamese. In Embers, Wagamese draws from Anishinaabe worldview to remind us that all of creation is our community, so that includes creatures and plants.

Perhaps people who are huge fans of Meditations won’t like that I’m speaking of it alongside Embers. One is a timeless classic and one was written in the same century as us. However, Wagamese certainly draws from some very ancient teachings. And he seems to have been interested in making this wisdom accessible even to people who not know anything about Ojibwe culture. Aurelius was keeping a diary for the sake of his own self-improvement and did not intend for so many people to read it. Also, I understand why people who hate new age spirituality and self-help books might be reluctant to read “Embers.” Trust me, I hate that kinda stuff and I only read The Power of Now because my dad and my boyfriend like it. However, I enjoyed Embers. And I do not think an Ojibway writer writing about Anishinaabe teachings should be reduced to “new age.” Richard Wagamese isn’t a white woman.

Okay, lets pull up a banger from Meditations now. This is from Book 11, number viii. There are of course, many different translations of Meditations. But I am using this one on Wikisource because it is easy to access: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Meditations_of_the_Emperor_Marcus_Antoninus/Book_11

Here is the banger quotation. Notice especially the ending, where he talks about how you should value community but you shouldn’t lose yourself in it.

8. A branch cut off from the bough it belonged to cannot but be cut off also from the whole tree. Similarly a man, if severed from a single man, has fallen away from society as a whole. Now in the case of a branch, it is cut off by another agency, whereas man by his own act divides himself from his neighbour, when he hates him and turns from him, yet he does not realize that at the same time he has severed himself from the whole Commonwealth. Only there is this singular gift of Zeus who brought society together, that we are enabled to join again with the man we belong to, and again to become complements of the Whole. Yet, if it is often repeated, the effect of such separation is to make what separates difficult to unite and to restore. Generally speaking, too, the branch which originally grew with the tree and shared its transpiration, by remaining with it, is different from the branch which is engrafted again after being cut off, whatever gardeners may say. 'Grow together with them but do not share their doctrines.'

What do we make of this? Aurelius is not against forming relationships. He is against forming toxic, codependent attachments that would prevent you from thinking for yourself or having your own opinions.

A lot of what Meditations talks about is Logos or Reason, which is sort of like your inner god. It is an unshakeable part of you that should not be impacted by any life circumstances, however good or tragic they may be. You always have Reason even when you have nothing else. Guess what? Wagamese also speaks of having part of the Creator within him.

Lets pull up a banger from Embers. This is also a tree-related passage. It is about mast seeding, which is how trees use their roots to communicate with each other so that they all know that they should bear fruit at the same time. Pecan trees do this. This is what he says. Keep in mind that he wrote this stuff because these were thoughts that occurred to him during his morning meditations, so in a way it is sort of like Aurelius’s journal but less private:

“I’ve learned nuts are formed from symbiotic relationships between trees. They communicate through fungal networks in the soil. In a process called mast seeding, different species of trees communicate and come into fruit (the delivery of nuts) at the same time, ensuring their ongoing survival. Tree talk, tree people; as my own people say. These days I’m definitely a nut, learning to exist in unity, synchrony and harmony.”

Even trees have friends!!! And they talk to their frens. So you see, grindset advice that does not encourage you to form community or a support system is probably a bad idea.

Wagamese and Aurelius both suggest holding oneself to a very high standard while simultaneously having extreme compassion for others, and this is also how I personally want to live my life. By having very high standards for myself, but not for other people. I don’t want to judge others. If I am focusing on self-improovement, I would not have the time to do so.

That’s all for today’s chronic yapping post. Thanks for reading it!!

A Brief History of Insanity

Draft of my upcoming Spyglass article
~~~

One of Plato’s most enduring ideas was called the Allegory of the Cave. This story is quite easy to visualize, as it involves people chained inside a cave in such a way that they can only see shadows dancing and flickering across a wall. The shadows are the only entertainment they have ever known and none of them are aware of the world outside the cave. Plato asks us to imagine what would happen if one of them managed the painful and life-changing ascent to sunlight and then returned back to the cave, telling the others that there is much more to life than images on a screen. The cave dwellers would see the one who escaped as insane even though he spoke the truth. Plato believed his own teacher, Socrates, was an enlightened man whom the people of Athens considered crazy because of his wisdom.  The allegory shows the disturbing tendency of our society to label ways of thinking we don’t understand as ‘madness’. Part of the reason why we stigmatize the mentally ill is because we fear that they tell the truth. We often consider them to be less intelligent than us, failing to recognize the unique talents and creative gifts that they can offer the world.

In the book Madness and Civilization, French philosopher Michel Foucault expresses disgust and outrage at the dehumanizing treatment of the mentally ill. Throughout history, they have been subject to all kinds of torture and locked up in asylums. Many endured unethical medical practices like shock therapy or lobotomies. Yet Foucault argues that not all societies of the past were like this and that some were better at accepting differences. There is a lot we can learn from medieval European society for example, in which the wisdom of people we would now label as mad was sought out. They would be allowed to wander free and were often hired as court jesters or entertainers, positions in which they could often get away with questioning the authority of a ruler. Conditions that we now view as disorders, like Williams Syndrome, which causes one to have an excessively trusting personality and view all strangers as close friends, were seen as gifts.  People with Williams often score less than average on standard IQ tests, yet in ancient societies their charming personalities were the inspiration behind mythological elves depicted as helpful and good-natured. Instead of focusing on their strengths, such as communication and empathy, children with Williams are seen as problematic individuals who need to be fixed.

Even Socrates was said to have vivid hallucinations- like the type a schizophrenic would have. Plato and the historian Xenophon considered this to be a ‘sacred illness’ and believed that these visions were from the gods. The lesson here is to embrace diversity, especially different ways of thinking. Far too many creative and talented minds have been shunned by society simply because they didn’t conform to what is considered normal. People who work with the mentally ill seem to view their patients as problems rather than as human beings while the education system aims to make them act like everyone else instead of embracing their own gifts. The truth is that the world would not be worth living in if everyone thought the same way.

The Adventures of the Axial Squad: Wisdom and Benevolence

Zarathustra was starting to doubt Plato’s driving skills. “Is this the right place?” he asked.

“Well it’s not supposed to be a sprawling metropolis like Athens,” said Plato, checking Google Maps on his iPhone X.

Confucius cautiously emerged out of the car, careful not to trip on his silk robes.

Meanwhile, the Buddha felt right at home. He was used to meditating in the forest and calmly settled under a tall cedar tree.

“No wonder you got invaded by the Persians. Give me that map!” Zarathustra said. Of course he had lived long before the Persian wars, but the four ancient philosophers had spent the last few days getting to know each other ever since they had been plunged into the modern world. This included learning the history of each other’s civilizations. “Wait…” he squinted at the screen, “this really is what they call the native reserve. Our trade routes never reached this continent.”

“My people lived in more sanitary conditions than this back in ancient China,” Confucius said, evidently disappointed by the disregard for human rights that the new society seemed to have. He thoughtfully stroked his long beard.

As everyone gathered around, Zarathustra lit a small fire nearby. He believed that fire had cleansing properties. After what he had seen so far, he thought the world needed to be cleansed.

“I’ve always had a problem with democracy because I think it inevitably leads to tyranny, and clearly with what we’ve learned about the politicians of this time, I’m right,” Plato declared.

“You certainly are,” Confucius said “some people are just better at ruling than others. This society needs a strong emperor with a mandate of heaven, not some silly democratic system.”

“I’ll have to disagree with you right there. Democracy can definitely work if the people are educated. But the Buddha hasn’t said anything yet. I think we should ask him what he thinks,” suggested Zarathustra.

Everyone turned to the Buddha expectantly, who had been meditating quietly the entire time in his saffron robes, a serene expression on his face.

“What this society needs is to focus on the present moment, not look to the past. I always tell my disciples to concentrate on the present when they meditate. There was a time for great emperors in the past, but it is now up to the people to govern themselves.”

He said these words enigmatically before closing his eyes again.

“Yes, we must focus on the present moment. That involves this society seeing itself as a part of the world at large, as one with the universe and all of creation. They can travel to space now, so they should have no problem with doing that. They should pursue wisdom so that they don’t fall for the lies of their politicians,” said Zarathustra.

All around the philosophers, the trees swayed mystically and formed a bluish green shroud. In their warm native climates, the four men had never beheld the sight of conifers with silvery blue leaves. There was great diversity among the coniferous foliage as there were pine trees with their prickly, thin needles. Then there were the cedar trees, with branches that stretched out like the fan of a peacock’s tail.

“In my language, Avestan, mazda-yasna means worship of wisdom. Anyone who has the curiosity to learn more about this beautiful world can pursue it,” said Zarathustra.

“It’s not too different from the Greek word philosophy, the love of wisdom,” Plato observed. He was slowly warming up to the idea that anyone could rise to the myriad-minded thinking of a philosopher-king with disciplined study. Wisdom was not just something you were born with.

“Not only is wisdom important but benevolence as well. Every human has the capacity for altruism and good deeds, to look past themselves and help others,” said Confucius.

“Wisdom and benevolence. I like the sound of that,” Zarathustra smiled. His sacred fire was still burning.

If it weren’t for the poverty stricken community nearby, with its stream of polluted water and its inadequate housing, the landscape would have been sublime. The philosophers could understand why living off the land had been a lot better for indigenous people rather than relying on the meager scraps that were left for them by their oppressors.

Just then, an Anishinaabe man wandered into the forest, searching for cedar to burn in a smudging ceremony. He smiled at the peculiar visitors. “Don’t mind me.” He said. “I was just looking for something to help me cleanse.”

Another article I wrote for the Spyglass magazine

A/N: Okay so it turns out I'm not just a wannabe historian, I'm a wannabe philosopher too. Here's a random article I wrote for the Spyglass magazine, of which I am the co-editor in chief along with an IRL friend of mine. You may think it reeks of liberalism, but whatever.

The Value of Morality in a World of Lies 

        If I had a dollar for every time I’ve been called a hopeless idealist for simply caring about human rights, I’d have enough money to eradicate poverty in countries that have been systematically pillaged.

I’m very opinionated on indigenous rights, yet even my own family has tried to discourage me from raising my voice on the topic, saying that my ideals were naïve and unattainable. It is a tragedy that the title of ‘social justice warrior’ now brings up negative connotations of teenagers whose intentions may be in the right place but who waste their time by getting into problems they don’t understand and dismissing every opinion they disagree with as discriminatory. With so many critics saying we aspiring activists are insufferably ignorant, while others doubt the power we have to make a difference in the world, one can’t help but wonder if some of the critics actually have a point. I’m here to remind every teenager who has ever longed for a world free of poverty, where different ethnic groups live in harmony and no child is deprived of an education, that their vision is neither unimportant nor unrealistic and that their voice is more powerful than they think. At the same time, we must also listen to some of our criticism as part of the never-ending journey of educating ourselves. We have to admit there are many people in our movement who make a mockery of social justice, and also many intellectuals on the conservative side who are actually fully justified in questioning the value and morality of our struggle. They point out that in order to help the oppressed, one must be willing to sacrifice many of their own comforts in life and that the majority of people would be unwilling to do this. Such an opinion is perfectly valid, and is reminiscent of many great philosophical ideas that have been proposed before, such as Ayn Rand’s individualism in which selfishness is actually a virtue and a just society can only be achieved if there is recognition of the rights of the individual. The individual should not feel pressured by us social justice warriors into giving up any of their money to help the poor, as can be seen in one of Rand’s most famous quotes “the smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities.” It’s a compelling argument, so why do we social justice warriors continue in our quest? I would say it’s because we realize that when human rights are at stake for one group, it’s a threat to every individual’s well-being as well. The individual’s rights are impossible to alienate from the rights of humanity. This world has enough selfish tyrants in it already, and we really can’t fall into the trap of believing that injustice is more profitable to us personally than justice, because that idea is not true. If one group is being oppressed, how can we be sure that their oppressor won’t come after us the next day? The view that doing good for others will in turn do good for ourselves isn’t an irrational belief, nor is it a religious concept like karma, it’s a fact. Benevolent actions are more likely to have a positive outcome for everyone, which means activists are actually being more realistic than those who are skeptical about the morality of their movement.

I encourage all social justice warriors to continue in their courageous fight, but to never forget that change in society starts with the individual. Everyone has a universal moral compass inside them, so being uncompromisingly good, philanthropic, and selfless is as easy as being yourself. Never stop learning and asking questions, and in your busy schedule of public protests and fundraisers, always take some time as Immanuel Kant would say to reflect on the starry heavens above you and the moral law within you.

Goodreads Review: Sophie's World

Sophie's World by Jostein Gaarder
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

This was beautiful, not only because of all the lessons on philosophy that were embedded into it but because of the awesome mystery of the characters that made you keep turning the pages. The writing style is very different from anything I've ever read before, with all that "romantic irony" plus the fact that it was a story inside a story inside a story sometimes. The ending was really well done as well. I wasn't expecting it to end that way. I love how they became immortal characters in the end.  There were also parts that were really funny, for example whenever Alberto Knox would be explaining a philosophy concept, the interjection of Sophie would always be something really comedic.

So even though this book is awesome, I didn't know whether to give it 5 stars or 4, but I decided on 5. The slight imperfections were that it didn't talk much about philosophy outside of Europe. It did mention Eastern philosophy a bit, but not enough. I won't hold this against the book much though because it was already quite long and I think if the author tried to talk about every type of philosophy it would reach a ridiculous length and cause the plot to move along way too slowly. The cover should say "a novel about the history of WESTERn philosophy" then. The author did spend a long time on certain parts, like Romanticism, and gave other areas a rushed treatment, like the Enlightenment thinkers I guess. The part about Hegel's theory of history and the "world spirit" really stood out to me. I guess it was all necessary for the plot. I like how the author included stuff about feminism, but it was sad that they didn't include much about other cultures. The Native Americans were called "primitive people" :( , and hardly any non-Europeans were mentioned. Once again though, this omission was probably necessary to move the plot along, and the setting of the Nordic countries and the general descriptions of the culture were awesome enough. One more flaw was that at times in got super unrealistic. I don't know how the mother could have been so chill with Sophie always going out to visit a random philosopher.  I don't know how she just allowed her only daughter to do a disappearing act at the garden party. [ I don't know how she just allowed her only daughter to do a disappearing act at the garden party. (hide spoiler)]

I would recommend this book to anyone for its incredibly unique writing style and as an awesome intro to philosophy.

View all my reviews

So Frypania, it seems that my Goodreads account has been linked to my blog and is automatically posting my book reviews for me. Wonderful!