Marcus Tullius Cicero (106-43 BC) placed, from the philosophical point of view, among the eclectic. Indeed, he offers, like slipping G. Real, "the finest eclectic paradigm of thought, which is to say the best paradigm of the poorest of the philosophies, and, in a sense, the most antispeculativa speculation." However, he had the great merit of having done a job and dissemination of diffusione della filosofia greca nell’area della cultura romana.
Il tema della consolazione sembra particolarmente adatto per essere affrontato da un eclettico-divulgatore come lui. Cicerone, infatti, dedicò all’argomento il De consolatione , del 45, in occasione della morte di sua figlia Tullia (opera di cui restano soltanto dei frammenti), e molte pagine delle Tusculanae disputationes. Nel libro III di queste, Cicerone elenca, sinteticamente, i metodi offerti dalle varie scuole, optando per un approccio integrato o eclettico, di tipo — si direbbe oggi cognitivo-comportamentale. Nei §§ 75-79 leggiamo:
(75) This is therefore the duty of comforters, remove from the root sad, or calm, or reduce it as much as possible, stop it or prevent it from further expansion, or divert to other targets. (76) Some people think that the only task of the Counselor is to make people understand that evil does not exist, as claimed by Cleanthes. Others, that evil is not serious, as they say the peripatetic. Others shift the focus from evil to good, as Epicurus. For others it is sufficient to show that nothing unexpected has happened, such as Cyrenaica. Chrysippus thinks that what capital is removed from the person suffering the idea of \u200b\u200bperforming a proper and due. Other bring together all the various kinds of consolation, as each person will be touched on various topics, as I did myself in my Consolation bringing together the various topics: my heart was swollen and I had groped each kind of care .
But we must also seize the right moment to diseases of the soul no less than those of the body, such as the Prometheus of Aeschylus, which is said: "I think you know, Prometheus, who may speak treating anger. " And he answered: "Yes, if you apply the medication on time, and does not irritate the wound with a heavy hand."
(77) In the consolation, then, is the first remedy is to teach that there is no harm or at least not great, the second is rely on the common human condition and the specific characteristics, if any, of the person suffering; the third show that it is supremely silly being overcome by sadness, knowing that it takes no advantage. Cleanthes fact consoled the wise, which has no need of consolation, and if you are suffering persuades him that there is no evil except that which is shameful, not take away the pain, but the ignorance, however, the occasion is not favorable teaching. Yet it seems to me that Cleanthes has not considered enough the fact that sadness can sometimes arise just from what he saw as the supreme evil. What does it say of Socrates, according to tradition, Alcibiades persuaded not to be between a man and that he, the noble Alcibiades and any porter there was no difference when Alcibiades was upset and crying begging Socrates to teach virtue and to rid him of the habit? What then shall we say, Cleanthes? That there was no harm in this afflicting Alcibiades? (78) What are the arguments of Licone? He said that to belittle the sadness is caused by small things, luck or disadvantages of the body, not from the evils of the soul. But what Alcibiades complained was not just the evils and defects of the soul? As for the consolation of Epicurus have said enough before.
(79) It is not entirely certain even the consolation more common and often useful that says "not only to you this has happened." It is helpful, I said, but not always and not to all: there are those who reject it, but it makes no difference how it is used. What is at issue is in fact as he endured his misfortunes each of those who endure it wisely, and not what was the disgrace from which each of them was hit. The topic of Chrysippus is objectively more solid, but it is difficult to use in circumstances of pain. It is difficult to prove that a person suffering is suffering and why he believes his choice to do. And as in the cases we do not adopt the same position - this is the term we use for the kinds of disputes but adapt to the circumstances, the type of dispute, the person - as in the consolation we have to consider what kind of remedy for each person may receive .
Here we find the arguments that have strong similarities with the teachings that come from the tradition of the ancient school of Buddhism, on the latter, in particular, I would like.
The argument that the general pain reminds us of the history of Kisagotami, the woman who, desperate for the loss of a child, she was invited by the Buddha to bring him a mustard seed from a house where no there was no death. The woman, not found, is put in front of the universality and inevitability of death : "I just thought I was to suffer, but I saw that death is in every house in the village and the dead outnumber the living. The constazione that death is not something personal ('hoc tibi do not just' ) would free the woman from her despair and, on the basis of an automatic free from the observation that goes to the acceptance, Kisagotami would have been "enlightened." Weak argument, which makes sense only as a warning not to emphasize their status, but that does not lead to draw any consciousness of the tragic human condition. Cicero, and rightly introduced with caution, rather than looking to the example that can be offered during the miseries, " What is at issue is in fact as he endured his misfortunes each of those who endure it wisely and not what was the disgrace from which each of them was hit .
The consolation offered by Chrysippus (the evil of our judgments and depends on our will) appears in Cicerone very valuable on a theoretical level, but " difficult to use in circumstances of pain. It is difficult to prove that a person suffering is suffering because he believes his choice and had to do. " According to this view, evil is in the consciousness (of evil) and the "consensus" that is given to the court. Similarly, in the Sermon on the arrow , the Buddha says: "It is as if, monks, a man was shot with an arrow and immediately was struck by another, so that he or monks, perceive the pain of two arrows. Similarly, O monks, the ordinary man, who did not receive spiritual teachings, when touched by a feeling of pain suffers, grieves, mourns, cries beating his chest, u not enter into a state of confusion . He experiences two kinds of feeling: a bodily and mental. " For the essay that is truly evil is turpidudine, what is dishonorable, the rest or can not be seen as a bad or "evil so small that it is obscured by the wisdom and can be seen with difficulty, because this is not wise invents or add elements affliction by public opinion, and does not feel right torment as much as possible and let himself be consumed by grief, which is the worst possible attitudes. " Even here, if the speech is aimed at moderation, measure, control of behavior, we are in the presence of a teaching rather than valid and appropriate, but is no longer so if you fall into an anti-intellectual and we have the objective of denying the court, "reducing" and eliminating the subject. The hatred, anger (unlike the ethical indignation) are the result of separation and certainly increase the pain, so the attitude of the test will be to live with a non-dualistic attaggiamento the inevitable dualities of existence, in order not to suffer, to suffer, at least until the pain is not likely to overwhelm the ability to control and consciousness itself, but this should not be confused with the philosophical revival of anti-intellectualism , on which I would refer, as I have already re-written in slurs Buddhist , pp. 24 ff.
However, as a good eclectic, Cicero looks at the result and, like a doctor who wants to obtain the healing of the sick, do not worry too much focus on a particular therapy, but choose the one or ones that considers most appropriate for his patient. That is, an orator what is said also, "as in the cases we do not adopt the same position (this is the term we use for the kinds of disputes ) but adapt to the circumstances, the type of dispute, the person, as in the consolation we must consider what kind of remedy a person can receive " . Therefore, after listing various methods, he opts for an eclectic approach.
(continued)
0 comments:
Post a Comment