Know yourself

It’s not wrong to say that, knowing oneself has become a difficult task.

In a world where doing something constantly is seen as productive, it becomes important for us to understand what matters and what not. 

We are bombarded with information everywhere we go. Information is supplied to us,  which may not be important. But the fear of missing out information has lead us to take everything and this in turn turned us into 24*7 exhaust machine.

It becomes necessary for us to understand ourselves. We may never have looked inside ourselves, due to ignorance, we might have thought these things wont provide us with any help. But starting to understand oneself is the best thing one can do. 

To start with, one must write down all things one likes(non materialistic things) and other things which one hates. All are likes and dislikes are associated with our past experiences. One may have encountered with situations which may have resulted us into fear about certain things. Other experiences might be childhood happenings, which had scared into our thoughts subconsciously. These subconscious memories work as defense whenever we are triggered with situations we fear. But If one practically examines, it becomes easy to know that these things are not actually to be feared about, but are a result of ignorance. 

We humans generally ignore things which we dislike, as we have memories and experiences associated with them. Same goes on with things we like. In situations like these, one must understand, other people may find these situations easy which we find hard. Same with things which we disliked are liked by others. If these things were actually so bad, they would have been universally bad. But it depends from person to person. They may have encountered situations which were perfectly handled in there childhood and hence not rooted as bad memories. 

If we understand that our reactions to things are in our control. And things which are beyond our control. Then life would become easier. Like we don’t need to continuously intake information, as there are people who live without information and they live happily. One must understand, consumerism has become so common that everybody wants to sell us ideas, information etc. These things are just a product to be sold to us. They do not alter our life in huge amounts.(social media).

One should try sitting alone without doing anything. Analyzing our thoughts, being aware of our breath and natural changes. We are here not to continuously be in a state of mind of pressure. Time may slip from our hands without understanding ourselves and it would be really late to take actions if not now.

Procrastination about such life changing decisions is also one sought of deep rooted fear from our old memories. So starting with a simple step could lead us to a change which would benefit us for the lifetime. 

    

Read more

Stoicism - The best way to live

Most people suffer more than necessary due to their inability to control their thoughts. But uncommon is the individual who takes concerted steps to correct of this deficiency, who strives in other words to master their inner discourse. 

When we find ourselves in a difficult period in our life we tend to look outward, we blame our discontent on other people, the state of society or a lack of wealth social status power or fame; but while there is no denying that the external world offers up many challenges, our environment is not the most fundamental determinant of our well-being for as humans we have a unique power. We can create misery or joy independent of our surroundings by thought alone. 

We can turn a peaceful environment into the worst of hell's or find internal peace in the midst of tragedy. Most people tend toward the former situation not the latter and for this reason we will turn to the wisdom of Epictetus the great stoic philosopher. His writings provide practical advice for escaping the self-imposed chains of our sometimes torturous thought patterns.  

He writes- You must be one person either good or bad. You must either work on your ruling principle or work on externals, practice the art of either what is inside or of what is outside; that is play the role either of a philosopher or of a non philosopher. 

Epictetus believed that we each have a choice we can take. The common path and structure our life around the pursuit of material good and external values such as social status or we can choose the path of the philosopher. 

For epictetus philosophy was first and foremost a way of life. A philosopher was one who strove to master the art of living and for the stoics this was analogous to mastery of one's mind for a good life.

According to the Stoics,happiness is more likely to be achieved by those who learn to control their thoughts then for those who believe that before they can be content they must attain some preconceived notion of worldly success. The reason the Stoics held this view was because they recognised that our control over the external events of our life is limited. 

Epictetus famously put it - “Some things are up to us and some are not up to us. Our opinions are up to us and our impulses desires aversions in short whatever is our own doing. Whereas our bodies are not up to us nor are our possessions our reputations or our public offices.”

If we tether our happiness to things not within our control be it wealth, beauty, social status or even our health we will suffer unnecessarily for chance luck randomness or whatever one wishes to call it plays a massive role in each person's life. 

We can easily lose the external goods or accolades on which in ignorance we base our happiness or even fail to attain them in the first place but acceptance of this does not have to lead to fatalistic resignation in the assumption that because some things are out of our control so too is our well-being. For his epictetus explained it is not things that trouble us but our judgments about things and because we can control our judgments the quality of our life is also within our control but if we have lived a life where negative thought patterns have reigned supreme how can we begin moving in the direction of mastery over our inner discourse. 

Epictetus suggested that we start off small for after years of neglect we need to strengthen inner capacities that have long laid dormant and this can effectively be done by practicing on the minor annoyances of life begin therefore with little things. 

Epictetus realized do not accept and play the dice of life as they have been thrown. This is a product of a weak mastery of the inner self for while they can accept the good they try to deny and flee from challenges and hardships if however we have chosen the path of the Philosopher's we will discover that we do not need to view hardships as misfortunes but instead can regard them as opportunities to strengthen our inner resolve. 

It is the circumstances which show men what they are. Conqueror but it is not accomplished without sweat. 

After learning of the wisdom of the stoic philosophers many people feel a brief sense of empowerment in the realization that there are other ways of existing in this world. Ways far more conducive to a fulfilling life but fear and laziness often get the upper hand and rather than taking steps to change many people persist as they are. They tell themselves that tomorrow they will make amendments but in most cases this tomorrow never comes. When there is no tomorrow or at least not enough of them to make up for the vast amount of time that has been wasted if you now neglect things warns Epictetus and are lazy and are always making delay after delay and set one day after another is the day for paying attention to yourself then without realizing it you will make no progress but will end up a non philosopher all through life and death. 

So decide now that you are worthy of living as a full-grown man who is making progress and make everything that seems best to be a that you cannot go against 

And if you meet with any hardship or anything pleasant or reputable or disreputable, then remember that the contest is now and you cannot put things off anymore and that your progress is made or destroyed by a single day in a single action.   

Read more

The mask we all wear

All the world’s a stage; And all the men and women merely players - Shakespeare 

In this theoretical quality of life is nowhere more obvious than in the social world. We all know that in this world we never reveal our true selves. 

What we are is the product of our genes, environment and the interaction of the two, but what we are in the public is only a side of this totality. 

From very early in life, we learn to present only our traits of character which give us social acceptance by others and diminish those traits which oppose acceptance. This behaviour leads us to creation of our social masks or what can be called a persona.

(persona: the part of a person’s character that they reveal to other people, especially when their real character is very different) 

Carl Jung explains persona as : 

“Fundamentally the persona is nothing real: it is a compromise between individual and society as to what a man should appear to be.” 

In the compromise, some fare better others, for what a society favours even in ideal conditions is good for most but never for all. If our values and the strength of our character do not align with the trends of conformity then a persona builds on these trends wills always feel awkward. 

We may try to solve this problem by superior acting skills and learning to play our role well, despite our distaste for it, but this never proves to be a real solution. 

So what can we do if our persona is not serving us well?

Should be resign ourselves to this fact that withdrawing ever more in to the inner realm. Our psyche and shun the social world along with the opposition if has to offer or can we reconstruct our persona into one that accommodate our individuality and allow us to navigate the social world with more success. 

While the passive stance in the our initial construct of our persona can make it feel like a permanent part of our being, but we do have the ability to resculpt the masks we wear in public.

Rather than being the man or women who others want us to be we can heel the ancient wisdom to become who we are and we can construct a persona more aligned with our values and the strengths of our character.

Carl Jung points out that in the construction of one’a persona, there are two sources around which to orient it. It can be oriented around the expectation and demand of society which is the path of the conformist or it can be oriented around the social aims and aspirations of the individual which is the path we must take if we are dissatisfied with our role in the stage of life. 

Constructing a persona built on the foundation of one individual is a task few dare to take. Most people believe that only through conformity will others accept them. Being different however is not the death kneel to social success that some imagine it to be . Many of us feel the chains of conformity to be suffocating and so the man of women who is able to loosen those chains can be refreshing sight. 

For as long as what makes us unique, it doesn’t install fear or disgust in other people it can be the raw material upon which to construct a powerful person.

To achieve social success while spurning the chains of conformity requires that we cultivate a genuine pride in who we are, we must accept what makes us unique if we are to have any hope of others doing the same. 

For if we are different but insecure about our differences, then we will forever remain a social outcast. Therefore if we choose to resculpt our persona in a manner that reflects our individuality, we need to first develop a solid foundation upon which to build. We should strive to love with purpose to adopt ambitious goals which align with our values and to take the consistent action requires to move us in this direction. By doing this we will develop justified pride in who we are and this will be reflected through whatever social marks we choose to wear. 

The reconstruction of our persona will only be effective if we couple this process with a devotion to strengthening our social skills. For social skills do not magically appear with a choice to adopt a new persona and they can be sorely lacking if we have spent years hiding being a mask.

We could never fully embrace to overcome this deficit we need to put ourselves into situation we fear and to be willing to experience the blunders and failures that accompany the mastery of any skill.

For only frequent practice will engender the boldness spontaneity and confidence that produces social success. This process can be made easier when we recognise that the social world is not full of individuals examining our every move, instead it is populated by men and women full of there own doubts, fears and insecurities. 

Most people are more likely to be stuck in their own heads than thinking about how others are behaving. 

Our blenders are never as dire as we make them out to be and recognising this can grow us a little extra freedom as we begin experimenting with our new role.

We may try to understand and car the way the powerful in the society behave and se there social skills. Even with improved social skills however we need to recognise that our choice to adopt a persona more aligned with our individuality means that we will not be accepted by everyone. But a universal acceptance should never be our goals in a world of such diversity and with so many individuals who harbour their own insecurities rejection and redouble are inevitable no matter who we are.

Goethe writes - It is a great folly to hope that other men will harmonize with us; I have never hoped this. I have always regarded each man as an independent individual, whom I endeavored to understand with all his peculiarities, but from whom I desired no further sympathy. In this way have I been enabled to converse with every man, and thus alone is produced the knowledge of various characters and the dexterity necessary for the conduct of life. 

This task of remaking our persona and establish a more effective role on the stage of life can be seem daunting especially if we have spent years or facades wearing the mask of an outcast.

Some of us may look to our past and all the disappointment we have experienced and wonder if it is worth the effort. But remaining a social outcast is itself a daunting task. 

The more we fear interaction the more we ill avoid it and the more we avoid it the Larger it’s absence becomes over our life. 

Robert Greene writes - “The character you seem to have been born with is not necessarily who you are; beyond the characteristics you have inherited, your parents, your friends, and your peers have helped to shape your personality. The Promethean task of the powerful is to take control of the process, to stop allowing others that ability to limit and mold them. Remake yourself into a character of power. Working on yourself like clay should be one of your greatest and most pleasurable life tasks. It makes you in essence an artist — an artist creating yourself.”

Read more

Solitude

The fear of finding oneself alone, that is what they suffer from and so they don’t find themselves at all - Andre Gide 

Human beings are social by nature and unfit to endure extreme cases of isolation. If we are alone for too long our mental faculty can degrade leading to states of insanity and deep despair. 

The use of solitary confinement has historical roots, indicating that people have long understood just how deeply the fear of isolation runs through our veins. But in our modern days, our fear are not restricted to extreme forms of isolation rather many of us fear being alone for any extended period of time. 

Many thinkers have suggested that the fear of solitude is at root a fear of oneself. In our normal daily routines in which we are busy with work and chores and most often in the presence of others, our social personality comes to the fore and frightening thoughts and emotions are pushed outside of our awareness. 

But one away from the restricting confines of others, these darker aspects of ourselves tend to rise to the surface and make there presence known. 

Hence, we can say there is a danger in spending a significant amount of time isolated from others as there will come a time when broken down by a beast within solitude will weigh us down and become a great curse. 

There are some who can endure this crisis of solitude, one through heroic effort tame and infegrate the darkness within, but most would be destroy by such a confrontation, which is why Nietzsche thought many should be dissuaded from solitude. 

The different response for those from whom solitude ness is too heavy a weight to bear is to cling to others to ensure, they never feel alone. 

One man runs to his neighbor because he is looking for himself, and another because he wants to loose himself. Your bad love of yourselves makes solitude a prison for you. Wrote Nietzsche 

Those who loose themselves and others may be saved from their solitude. But they always turn out to be crippled versions of the person they could have become. 

In order for us to actualise our potential, we need to fulfil our higher needs. 

Psychologist Abraham Maslow states these higher needs include the drive for truth, beauty and goodness. These needs cannot be completely fulfilled by other people. An attempt to fulfil the totality of our higher needs, through an intimate relationship will result in a godlike idealisation of the partner and result into a slavish dependence on them for our self worth and identity. 

Ernest Becker in its book Denial of death writes - 

“If the partner becomes God he can just as easily become the Devil; the reason is not far to seek. For one thing, one becomes bound to the object in dependency. ... No wonder that dependency, whether of the god or of the slave in the relationship, carries with it so much underlying resentment.”

To ensure we don’t like many individuals today fall victim to depend drive relationships. 

We must develop with the 20th century psychoanalyst Donald Winnicott’s idea which is called the “capacity to be alone”

When the dead of solitude makes us dependent on others we become overly compliant out of a fear of abandonment and this build up, what Winnicott called a false self, that is, our personality becomes a mere reflection of how we belive others want us to be. 

It is developing the capacity to be alone that the false self can be broken down thought when it caught rendering us able to rediscover our true self or in other words - our authentic feelings and needs. In moderns day most die oblivious to the Benefit of solitude instead many adhere to what is called object relations theory. 

This theory is based on the two key assumptions that the maturation of ones personality can only be facilitated through interpersonal relationships and that these relationships are the primary, if not sole, source of meaning of life. 

John Boeley in his attachment and loss wrote “Intimate attachments to other human beings are the hub around which a person's life revolves, not only as an infant or a toddler or a schoolchild but throughout adolescence and years of maturity as well, and on into old age.”

Taken to their extreme the assumption held by object relationship theorists imply that the individual life has no meaning apart from interpersonal relationships thus overlooking the well established fact that meaning can be found as personal growth stimulated when we cultivate in solitude a relationships with some form of creative work that consumes our attention.

In solitude we can loose our character away from the often constructed external demand of others and maintain our independence in the relationships we do cultivate thus ensuring we do not like many today lose our identity in them. 

Yet if we flourish in solitude we must not dismiss the dangers of if it while neither spoke of. 

We can increase our capacity to deal with these danger however if we consider the possible that the Benefits of solitude are embedded in dangers, meaning that it is only by voluntarily seeking our solitude and confronting the darkness within that we can extract the benefits of being alone and perhaps even eventually attain that rare self confidence of one who has gained sovereignty over himself.

As poet Rainer Maria Rilke said: 

And you should not let yourself be confused in your solitude by the fact that there is some thing in you that wants to move out of it. This very wish, if you use it calmly and prudently and like a tool, will help you spread out your solitude over a great distance. 

Read more

Propaganda

The American Historian Howard Zinn wrote - If those in charge of our society - politicians, corporate executives, and owners of press and television - can dominate our ideas, they will be secure in their power. They will not need soldiers patrolling the streets. We will control ourselves.

In this day and age we are exposed to lots of amount of propaganda some of which is used for the purpose of manipulating us into thinking and acting in ways which only furthers the interest of small minorities.

Propaganda can be defined as a type of persuasion tactic which displays three general characteristics:

1) Propaganda is deliberately made by an individual or group of individuals called propagandist for the purpose of manipulating individual into adapting certain ideas and behaviour.

2) Propaganda never presents an issue in clear and unbiased manner. Instead propaganda attempts present one side of an issue as if it were a absolute truth.

Adolf  Hitler with the help of his propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels implemented one of the most massive propaganda campaign of 20^th century captures this characteristics with the following words-

The function of propaganda is not to make an object study of truth and then set it before the masses with academic fairness; its taste is to serve our own right always and unflinchingly.

3) Propaganda tends to use psychological manipulation tactics and play on the emotions and prejudices of individuals so as to convince to that the ideas, actions or attitudes they adopted was one they chose through their own personal volition.

This last feature of propaganda is what can make it specially dangerous

Jacques Ellul provided a chilling description of the individual whose personality has been thoroughly molded by the porpogandists. He says – When he recites his propaganda lesson and says that he is thinking for himself, when his eyes see nothing and his mouth only produces sounds previously stencilled into his brain, when he says that he is indeed expressing his judgment – then he really demonstrates that he no longer thinks at all, ever, and that he does not exist as a person.”  

It should be noted that as a persuasion tactic propaganda is value neutral or in other words neither good nor bad.

The 20th century propaganda theorist Harold Lasswell wrote that “ Propaganda as a tool is no more moral or immoral than a pump handle”

While propaganda is merely a tool, moral judgements can be made regarding the ends for which the propaganda is used and it is because propaganda has so often being used for various purposed, today it is considered as end in end of itself.

Philip Taylor differentiates Education and propaganda. Propaganda tells people what to think while education teaches people how to think.However as education system have long being used to disseminate propaganda the distinction between education and propaganda is often blurry. As a persuasion tactic propaganda is one form or another been used for virtually the entire course of human history.

20th century is considered important turning point in the history of propaganda as it was during this period that the so called modern propagandist emerged.

What differentiates modern propagandists from all early forms of propagandist is the use of mass media as example radio, tv as a medium to disseminate propaganda.

One of the most present types of propaganda is the political propaganda. Political propaganda is used by a political organisation or state to achieve for the purpose of altering the ideas and behaviour of individuals in order to achieve certain political or economic ends. All propaganda is vertical propaganda in the sense that it is made by a propagandist who creates and implements propaganda which  stands over and above ignorant people.

People usually assume that political propagandists mainly consist of lies fabricated and extreme distortion of reality. But Ellul pointed out that although political parties sometimes consist of big lies, but modern political propagandist more often than not are committed to use of true facts. In other words, true facts are chosen and provided to the public yet onlt for the purpose of supplementing and substantially false and distorted interpretation of events.

The reason behind this tactic is that at no one questions the interpretation put forth by the propagandist, the propagandist can provide evidence that the facts they presented were true and therefore fool the public into thinking that their interpretations must also be true.

We will conclude by citing Ellul.

“Propaganda is necessarily false when it interprets it and colours facts and imputes meaning to them. It is true when it serves up the plain fact, but does so only for the sake of establishing a pretence and only as an example of the interpretation that it supports with the fact”

Read more

Dialectic Materialism

Dialectic materialism is a philosophy associated with Karl Marx. Marx was a German revolutionarist, who is famous for the concept of communism.

We know Marx as an economist, but before that he was a philosopher. He believed that all that exists in the universe is matter and that matter is constantly in state of motion.

In order to know what this theory of dialectic materialism is, we first try to understand these words, "dialectic" and "materialism" separately.

Marx was a follower of Hegel (who was a German philosopher). Hegel believed that history is driven forward through conflict/contradiction. 

Hegel believed that, when there are ideas, which cannot coexist with each other, they clash/contradict. In which, the first idea is called as thesis. And the second idea is called as antithesis. When these ideas clash, the result is called Synthesis.

Again, the Synthesis become thesis, then an antithesis emerges and they clash, and we get a new Synthesis. Which again becomes thesis and that is how history is driven forward.

And this is the way in which history is advancing and the way it advances is through contradictions. This is known as Dialectic.

Coming to the other word, Marx also studied materialism. In earlier times Greece, there was debate on " whether the mind created reality or reality created the mind" 

There was another popular theory known as"idealism". The idealists believe that the mind created reality i.e. our thoughts created the world. Example: religion (which states that we exist as a reflection of god)

Let's take an example, when we generally say, that what we think becomes reality. Like if we  imagine that we want money, it will appear. In short, if we think hard enough, things will happen .

But Marx believed in the opposite, he said "I am, therefore I think". 

Friedrich Engels while explaining Marx's beliefs, says that thought are inseparable from matter that thinks and that rather than reality being a reflection of the mind, the mind is the reflection of reality.

What we think is what is based around us. Our ability to think is because of brain that thinks and all that exists is matter i.e. materialism.

So it is the world filled up of matter or is the world a reflection of spiritual and ideal forces, that is the question.

The debate is between dialectic and materialism.

History progress changed through conflict and which is the nature of reality. Marx combines these both into one philosophy, i.e. Dialectic Materialism. This states that on one hand, Marx's following materialism, that all that exists is matter in motion and that thoughts and ideas are reflection of matter, so materialism).

That matter is constantly in motion and that conflict drives forward history so this is what dialectic materialism is.

Lenin has summed up the essential idea of dialectical materialism in the following words:

“The idea is the recognition of the contradictory, mutually exclusive, opposite tendencies in all phenomena and processes of nature. That is, in all phenomena and processes of nature there are diametrically opposite forces or tendencies and they are at clash or conflict and this continues until a solution is reached. This alone furnishes the key to the self-movement of everything in existence. It alone furnishes the key to the leaps, to the break in continuity, to the transformation into the opposite, to the destruction of the old and emergence of the new. In its proper meaning dialectics is the study of the contradiction within the very essence of things”.

Read more

Slavery

The human history is very much a history of control of power. And to control this power, humans have done many immoral things. Many so called leaders have come, who have tried to create a scenario of dominance. The history tells us that it was full of human enslavement. In authoritarian regimes, it is common to say that the masses are purely victims, in their enslavement unable to mount any any form of resistance due to the threat and force imposed by those in power. 

All governments, including the most tyrannical can only rule if they have the general support of the population.

Not only are those in power vastly outnumbered by over whom they rule but governments rely on the subjected populations on to provide them with the continual supply of resources and man power. 

If one day, the people refused to obey and stop surrendering their wealth and property, their oppression would in the words of “Etienne de la boetie” become naked and undone as nothing. 

Mass submission to over the most oppressive politician regimes is always a voluntary servitude. 

Most animals naturally instinct to be free, when an attempt is made to capture an animal, it flees in terror or also reacts with aggression. 

When placed in captitude, it’s native behaviour fades and is replaced by lathergy and despondency. 

In order for animals to be domesticated it requires numerous generation of selective breeding in order to eradicate the animals instinct to roam and be free.

La bortie asserts that, in human beings this Instinct for freedom is especially pronounced various social factors however has atrophies this nature instinct over time to the point where now the very hive of Liberty no longer seems natural.

One of those factors according to la bortie is the power influence of customs or in other word our tendency to become habitual to the social and conditions we were born into. 

Just like the animal born in capture knows nothing of freedom it lacks and hence does not resist its chains.

So to those born into state slavery the knowledge of what it means to be free and this tend to accept their servitude as if it were natural.

So when one spends early years of life watching those around them not resisting the oppressors, but accepts them and even adore them, the effects of custom tend to override the natural instinct for freedom and submission becomes normal and habitual.

But custom alone disks not account for readiness of which people consent to their servitude as ruling classes have long know that to maintain power they must play an active role in engineering.

In the modern days the instruments of tyranny have changed forms, but their essence remains the same. 

Another tactic for entering consent uses by ancient tyrants was analogous to what we call the welfare state today. 

In early time’s on selected days of the year ruling class used to distribute bread, alcohol and a little bit of money to their subjects and soon after those who were consent and satiated would cry o out long live the king.

The fools didn’t realised the library rights that were much recovering were just a portion of their own property and that their rule could not have given them what they were receiving without having first taken it from them. 

The ruler have also taken adoration and reverence of this subjects by opting techniques used by religions to make their authoritarian appear sacred. Myths, rituals, the use of religions, cult symbol in the construction of buildings symbolise power and authority resembling places of worship have long  been used by ruling classes to borrow in words by la boetie a stray bit of divinity, to boost the evil order. 

Just as there are those in all ages that seek to rule and exploit others, there exist individuals who instinctly rebel against form of servitude and thus are tortund by the chains which other appear not to notice.

These people use there time to educate themselves and to develop their critical capacities for the sake of awakening others of deceptive nature of political rule. 

As said by la boetie,

From all these indignities, such as the very beasts of the field would not endure, you can deliver yourselves if you try, not be taking action, but merely by willing to be free. Resolve to serve no more, and you are at once freed. I do not ask that you place hands upon the tyrant to topple him over, but simply that you support him no longer; then you will behold him, like a great Colossus whose pedestal has been pulled away, fall of his own weight and break into pieces.

Read more

Epicurus and his theory on pleasure

Epicurus was a Greek philosopher born in 341 BCE. He is the founding father of a popular school, known as Epicureanism. 

To understand the theory of Epicurus, we need to know what ethics mean.

Ethics is a branch of philosophy whose main subject matter is the examination of moral values and value judgements. Judgements concerning what is good or bad or judgement about what morally ought or ought not to be.

Since naturally we attempt to strive for what is good and move away from what is bad, ethics is concerned with question of how one ought to behave or how we ought to live our life. It deals with how things should be, rather than how things are, which are called factual existing statements.

There are mainly two questions which ethics deals with and which are 

1)  What is the ultimate good in life, and

2) How should one behave in order to obtain this goal and lead the best life possible.

Many have answered these questions but three answers have been specifically prominent. Some philosopher have stated that virtue is the ultimate good, some have answered happiness and others have said pleasure is the ultimate good and we must strive after it. 

Amongst the three answers, Epicurus's answers i.e. pleasure, which is perhaps the most famous amongst all. Epicurus gives us his views on pleasure and what we must do, to achieve this pleasurious life.

This theory that views pleasure as the ultimate good is called hedonism.  Many of the philosopher have laid importance to this view. In general, keeping philosophers aside, non philosophers prescribe hedonism as the default position.

Another philosopher Richard Taylor states :"Feelings of pleasure, it would seem, are always good and there opposite, i.e. Feeling of pain, are always bad. One need not be a philosopher to come to this opinion"

One general view about hedonism comes from another school of cyrenaics, who father was Aristippus. This school emphasises as, most intense pleasures are the bodily pleasures. This school thought that we should try to maximize these pleasures to greatest degree possible.

Epicurus's hedonism is far different from the school of  Cyrenaics. He readily agreed that the most intense pleasures are indeed the bodily pleasures, however he thought that over indulging in such pleasures was not necessary for the attainment of good life, and in fact prevented one from attaining a pleasurious life. 

Bodily pleasure, he reasoned are not only of short duration, but ending almost as soon as they have begun but more importantly they are often followed by intense pain. For example: the pleasure of being drunk may be great in the moment, but the pain of horrible hangover offsets that pleasure with a more intense pain of longer duration the following day.

Hence, in order to live a pleasurious life, Epicurus believed it is the avoidance of the pain that is essential, not the indulgence in pleasure. To avoid pain we must cultivate discipline and often decline opportunities to engage in bodily and sensual pleasures.

Paradoxically, he thought the most pleasurious life was actually the life in which we avoid chasing after the pleasures all together. 

As Epicurus says "When therefore we say pleasure is a chief good, we mean the freedom of the body from pain, and the soul from confusion"

We understand that the pleasure Epicurus wants us is to have freedom from pain, worry, fear, and confusion and not bodily pleasure.

Coming to the second question discussed earlier, i.e."What must we do to life a pleasurious life?"

Epicurus thought that one of the chief obstacle preventing most individuals from acting in a way that would enable them to achieve the good life was there ignorance, regarding the nature of their desires, as he explained all desires can be placed in the following three categories:

1) Desires which are natural and necessary: These are the desires we share with animals. They include the desire for food, drink and shelter. They are considered natural and are not product of social conditions and are necessary and we must fulfill such desires on order to survive.

2) Desires which are natural but unnecessary: example: The desire for sexual gratification. These are natural but unnecessary. These cannot be eliminated entirely however such desires can elad to painful life If not controlled. We should avoid such pleasures.

3) Desires which are unnatural unnecessary: These are most to blame for our inability to live a pleasurious life. Example: power, fame, extreme wealth, etc. I.e. all desires socially conditioned to us. These desires chained us to a life of continual frustration ad they are desires that are insatiable and keep us in a constant state of want and therefore pain.

To live a pleasurious life we must satiate desires which are natural, but only to the extent it eliminates pain. We must also discard all desires which are unnatural. 

The good life is the simple life, said Epicurus.

Epicurus leaves us a with a different perspective of pleasure in his theory. If this theory is used properly, a lot of our daily life problems could be solved.

Read more

Existentialism

Man has always been in search of answers that would lessen the burden of suffering. One such question is, the purpose of human beings in this universe. One philosophical term has been dominating in this sphere, known as "Existentialism".

Existentialism is not easy to define, as various thinkers have different views on it. What we know is, that it is not a philosophical system, but could be said as a philosophical movement.

Soren kierkegard and Friedrich Nietzsche, philosophers of the 19th century can be said to be the founding fathers of this movement. One another name, which is prominent to this movement is Fyodor Dostoyevsky. 

This movement came into prominence in 20th century after World war 2. Other famous people of the 20th century associated to this are Franz Kafka, Albert Camus and Jean Paul Sarte. 

All these thinkers have one thing in common, which they consider as monumental problem, which is "the problem of life as a human being", I.e. the human condition. 

Human beings since long back have encountered with various questions, such as :

•Why am I here

•What does it mean to be human ?

•How should one live it's life.

All thinkers have different concept of the condition, so it becomes difficult to define it. However what is common amongst all existentialist is that in addressing the human condition they tend to have rejected the common systems or theories whatever may be like religion, scientific or philosophical, which have claimed that they have answered the questions of human life in all encompassing or absolute manner. In other words, systems which profess to have answers to such questions which are not only seen as definitive and timeless but also seen as applying to all human beings whether one is willing to accept such answers or not.

It becomes extremely difficult for a individual to have its own system rather than already made systems like religion. As human beings are weak in such questions, they generally accept the so called systems which are followed by vast population.

The reasons which existentialist rely in favour of individuals to find their own answers is, that they believe that in adherence to systems which espouse absolute and all embracing answers to the existential problems of life is actually detrimental to once development into an authentic and free human being .

Existentialist criticize the systems for not taking into account what it is like to be humans. These systems see meaning and purpose of life as somehow emanting from an alternative objective reality. Such emanting reality may be heaven, or Plato's world of forms. But in doing so they loose the perspective of what life is like for an individual living on this earth and experiencing all the fears, anxieties,  hope, disappointment that are a part of human condition.

Problems with Religious system is that, they answer to these questions from the perspective of all powerful God(divine). A specific problem with the divine perspective is it does not consider fundamental aspects of human conditions that is our mortality. They emphasise on immortality.

Many existentialist want us to accept the only existence we can be certain of is temporal one. The shock of such a realization can help give us the strength to stop living in conformity with the masses and instead take control of our own lives and live by the standards and value of our choosing.

This idea of being able to freely choose standards of value and create meaning and purpose in ones own life is closely related to another famous Existentialist idea that for humans - existence precedes essence. This idea was put forward by Jean Paul Sarte. 

To understand Sarte we need to examine the meaning of the term "essence"

Aristotle defines essence as that every substance or independent thing (example a rock) has an essence of its own. Also referred as to it's nature, necessary properties and characteristics essential for a thing to be what it is.

Aristotle believed that all substances in nature tend towards the actualization of their essence(example a seed has a tendency  to turn into a full grown tree).

For Aristotle, the nature(essence) of humans was acting in full accordance with reason. This lead to the popularly known definition of man as a rational animal.

Aristotle believed that humans unlike inanimate matter and other animals were free to choose whether or not to act with accordance with their essence. However that being said he did not believe humans could create their own unique essence during their course of their lives.

Likewise for those who believe in an omnipotent God who created this world the essence of humans is not something determined in the course of ones life but rather determined by god prior to the existence of the individual. Thus for those who adhere to such beliefs the essence of human beings can be said to precede their existence.

Sarte on the other hand saw the situation of humans in opposite. Thus the statement that our existence precedes our essence. In Sarte's mind, humans are fundamentally different from things such as mobile phone, Tv etc. For things of these types it is obviously appropriate to say that their essence precedes their existence as they are designed and built with a predetermined function in mind.

But for Sarte who was an atheist, humans are not designed by a supernatural being with a specific function in mind, rather we come in to this world lacking a predetermined essence. However, our ability to make free choices gives us the chance to sculpt a unique essence of ourselves during our lifetime.

Read more

Religion

Religion has played a very significant role in the civilisation of human beings. It is a very diverse, controversial and debatable topic. 

When we talk about religion, we often have an idea of religion in the sense of major or organized forms of religion. It must be realized that these organized forms of religions are but a part of a larger concept. 

Till today there have been thousand of religions by small groups of people. And even personal religions with little to no formal organization. 

One has an general idea of religion in which there is presence of god or gods. As many of the major religions that we know have worshiped atleast one god. But this shouldn't be seen as defining essence of religion. As not all religions believe in supernatural beings. Example : Buddhism is a godless religion.

So what is a proper defining elements of religion.  

William James (philosopher) while trying to explain religion says 

"Religion, therefore, as I now ask you arbitrarily to take it, shall mean for us the feelings, acts, and experiences of individual men in their solitude, so far as they apprehend themselves to stand in relation to whatever they may consider the divine" 

Now, divine is a subjective term. It is open to whatever one may consider it to be. One may find God, other may find nature etc as divine .

Sociologist Robert Bellah says " Religion is a system of symbols that, when enacted by human beings established powerful, pervasive and long lasting moods that are motivating, that makes sense in term of an idea of a general order of existence"

Religions attempt to put powerful emotions in its followers. The individual who worships religions comes close to it when it feels it to be considering important.

So in short it can be said that religions attempt to question all fundamental questions in human existence.  We tend to accept religion for answers to these questions because of the inadequacy of our regular daily life.

In our regular life we are busy with work, aim of fulfilling our desires and other practical things, but these do not provide us with answers to these existential questions. Questions like death may come to us, which are frightening questions to many. We try to ignore such questions but not for so long, as these questions cannot be ignored for long.

So we try to find comforting answers which can help us escape these questions. I.e. religion. Religions are comforting as they provide us with stories, beliefs which sootheens our fear and doubts. Religions provide us with existential questions.

These questions are so strong, that even science cannot provide us comforting solutions.

We can say, using of reasons differentiates philosophy from religions. As religions rely on myths, narratives and in expressing feelings.

In short we can say religions strive to find answers to existential questions. They provide comfort in this uncertain world.

We may say. When nothing seems right in the outside world, when all disown him/her, religions redeems an interior world which often would have been of waste.

Read more