Paper (or better), just an excercise

I'm beginning to discuss how I want this paper to look like. 1- First choose a theme; preferably one you feel strongly in favor or against (we want the paper to be fun). 2- Inform yourself of all the arguments for the position you defend and then research the arguments from the position you're arguing against. Remember, the more you know your enemy's point of view, the better your paper will look. 3- Now flesh out the arguments. When you have this ready. You can go ahead and write the exercise. I think that six paragraphs is enough to embroider both points of view. For now, I don't want a conclusion. Instead, I want you to warm up and mix the ingredients. Let's leave the conclusion for the next exercise. Tips: You could use phrases like this: "My thesis is that" or "I believe that" or "With this paper I would like to show that," etc. When you want to mix both arguments you move to "on the the hand," "however, one could say that" or "one could retort that," etc. So, it may look like this: "Although some people argue that abortion is killing a person, I believe that..." Any questions? Post it! The deadline for this exercise is around February 8 or 9 (depending whether the class meets T&R or M,W,&F).

Ahimsa

Yesterday, we had a very interesting discussion concerning Ghandi's view of ahimsa. So, in the spirit of problematizing, let's share our thoughts.

Homework

Section 7.3 #1-6 and 6-10.

Ataraxia

ataraxia (from Gr. a (not) and taraktos (disturbed) refers to unperturbedness, freedom from emotional and intellectual disturbance, tranquility of soul. Sextus Empiricus writes: “Scepticism has its arche, its inception and cause in the hope of attaining ataraxia, mental tranquillity.” The goal is not truth, but eudaimonia (contentment). The central means to ataraxia is the suspension (epoche) of beliefs. Not all beliefs, but only those that give rise to contention and strife.
_______

We've learned lots of terms from the Gita: dharma, action/non-action, action as yajna, discipline, bhakti, infinite spirit. Then, from Stoic philosophy, ataraxia, aretê, etc. What are your thougts?

Homework

For some classes, I've have assigned Section 7.2. all study questions (p. 571). If your group is not there yet, you now what's next.

Stoic cosmogony

Yesterday, I pointed to obvious similarities between Hindu and Stoic cosmogies. They happen at the same time in two different parts of the world. Stoicism arose in the Hellenistic period. The beginnings of Stoicism lie with Zeno of Citium, who came to Athens from Cyprus. For many years a student of the Cynic philosophy Crates, Zeno eventually founded his own school in 300 B.C. Because he taught his students in a stoa or portico in Athens, Zeno's philosophy came to be known as Stoicism. Zeno was succeeded as head of the school by Cleanthes and Cleanthes by Chrysippus. According to Diogenes Laertius, these three early Stoics wrote many works, but nothing except fragments of these have survived. Diogenes's summary of Stoic philosophy in his Lives of Eminent Philosophers is the best source of information for early Stoicism. Some information about Stoic philosophy also derives from their critics, such as Plutarch or Sextus Empiricus. Cicero cites from Stoic sources in his On the Nature of the Gods. 1- God as Soul of the Cosmos: Now the term Nature is used by them to mean sometimes that which holds the cosmos together, sometimes that which causes terrestrial things to spring up. Nature is defined as a force moving of itself, producing and preserving in being its offspring in accordance with seminal reasons (spermatikoi logoi) within different periods, and effecting results homogenous with their sources (Lives 7;148-49). In this passage, Nature is defined as the force at work to hold the cosmos together and to bring things into existence. 2- God as Identical to the Cosmos: The Stoics conceive God as identical with the cosmos. The cosmos is defined as the totality of all entities, as if it were a single entity or subject that has predicates. This ultimately allows the Stoics to deify the cosmos. As the totality of all things, the cosmos is perfect since it lacks nothing. Zeno is said to have argued further that, since it is the greatest of all things, since it is inclusive of all things, the cosmos cannot be denied the greatest attribute, which is reason: There is nothing more excellent than the cosmos (Cicero, Nature, 2.8). God not only made all things but is or is in all things. Plants and bodies are "bound up and united with the whole." Since the human soul is really a portion of God as soul of the cosmos, it follows that whatever human beings know, God also knows. God does not simply oversee all things, but is said "to be present with all," and is thereby identified with the all. The sun that illuminates all things, except that part of the on which the shadow of the earth falls, is likewise a small part of God, so that one must conclude that God is even more illuminating. 3- For Stoicism, the state of being in conformity with nature is virtue (aretê); according to Chrysippus, virtue "is a harmonious disposition, choiceworthy for its own sake, and not from hope or fear or any external motive" (Lives, 7.89). To be virtuous is to be in harmony with oneself and the cosmos, which is the same thing; this goal is intrinsically valuable, and should be pursued for its own sake. Thus, for the Stoic, happiness is not the goal of the exercise of the human will, but it is, nonetheless, a by-product of living according to nature and being harmonious (Lives, 7.86, 88-89).

Help needed: The books arrived, but there's a problem

I just came from the MDC bookstore. They have 12 copies of the Dhammapada and Gandhi on Non-violence. I found only one copy of the Gita and didn't see the Analects. Where are the Lao Tzus? Could you find out and leave a comment below?

Just in case: 1- The Bhagavad-Gita, Translated by Barbara Stoler Miller (Bantam Books, 1986); 2- The Way of Life According to Lao Tzu, translated by Witter Bynner (Perigee Book, 1986).

But don't order anything until we find out what's going on.

Shaivism and Vaishnavism

New religious contexts require a new body of scriptures. These were produced in form of the Puranas, Agamas Tantras and hymns. Two of the principal sect that developd during this period are Shaivism and Vaishnavism. 1- Shaivism is the cult of Shiva. The beginnings of the Shiva cult have been traced back by some scholars to non-Aryan phallic worship. Although this is not conclusive, it is clear that the Vedic god Rudra ("the Howler") was amalgamated with the figure of Shiva ("Auspicious One") that emerged in the period after the Upanishads. Shiva is inseparable from Parvati (also referred to as Shakti). There is no Shakti without Shiva and Shakti is His expression; the two are one, the absolute state of being -consciousness and bliss. Shaivism, like some of the other forms of Hinduism, spread in the past to other parts of Southeast Asia, including Java, Bali, and parts of Indochina and Cambodia. 2- Vaishnavism is the worship of Vishnu and his various incarnations. Vishnu has been the object of devotional religion (bhakti) in his incarnations or avatars (especially as Krishna and Rama). Like most other gods, Vishnu has his especial entourage: his wife is Lakshmi or Shri, the lotus goddess, granter of beauty, wealth, and good luck. Vishnu's mount is the bird Garuda, archenemy of snakes, and his emblems are the lotus, club, discus (as a weapon), and a conch shell, which he carries in his four hands. Vaishnava faith is essentially monotheistic, whether the object of adoration be Vishnu or one of his avatars. Characterized by a continual consciousness of participating in God's essence, Ramanuja, however, complete self-surrender (prapatti) came to be distinguished from bhakti as a superior means of spiritual realization.

Homework

Section 7.1 #1, 2, 4, 7, 8. Also the definitional gray boxes on pages 531, 533, 535.

Commenting post

After our discussion this morning, I kept thinking of Baruch Spinoza (one of my favorite philosophers), born in Holland of Jewish parents. He was to receive from his parents a "fine education," with a thorough grounding in such subjects as Latin and physics (further, he studied Descartes and Bruno). Later, he supported himself by grinding and polishing lenses, an occupation which eventually led to his early demise (glass dust in his lungs). Spinoza is a pantheist / monist. He believed that there is no difference between God and the universe. God moves and lives in nature; the whole of it, the entire universe is God. Nature (or God) is Its own cause and is self-sufficient (So, I guess this makes of Spinoza the first Eco-philosopher of the West). According to Spinoza, we have a need to anthropomorphize God, as if HE had a special interest in, and concern for us. The Spinozistic God does not love nor hate. (Note: Spinoza’s cosmogony may have been inspired by the Kabbalah [incidentally, Kabbalistic works propose a theodicy where evil is in an intimate relationship with God, not that far apart from the Hindu theodicy]).
___________________

Although it's still too early in the course, I’ve sense your uneasiness (resistance?) with some of these concepts. Don't worry. The nice thing about philosophy is that we don’t have to argue over the literalness of some of these concepts. Let's play the game of seeing a paradox "with three eyes" (as in the old myth), in order to grasp deeper and subtler meanings. We need to enrich our understanding and multiply the world in different ways. There’s plenty to talk about: Monism, pantheism, samsara, bhakti, karma, OM… go ahead!

Homework

Section 1.3 (all study questions).

Homework

I have assigned section 1.2 on page 40; #1-5 for next class.

Gordon Rule and Update

1- As we discussed this morning, our Gordon Rule contract will be fulfilled by commenting my posts. By "comment" I mean a minimum of 110-word exchange per post requiring comments (Note: Ununnilium, with atomic number 110 is a synthetic element that is not present in the environment) 2- I went by the bookstore today and found that they had not ordered our books yet. However, they assured me that the textbooks would be ordered today (and expect our books to be available this weekend or the beginning of next week).

Brief historic background

The story of Hinduism begins during a cultural period known as the Indus Valley civilization (3,500-1,500 B.C.). Some of what we know of this civilization comes from archaeological digs in the 1920s at Harappa and Mohenjo-daro. These digs show an advanced civilization as early as 2,500 B.C., with cities laid out in rectangular blocks with drainage systems. Houses were made of fired brick and contained bathrooms with running water. The civilization also had a written language, which has yet to be translated. Archeologists discovered religious statues and amulets of fertility gods and goddesses; some figures sit in a lotus position. The only written accounts of these people are from Hindu texts of a later time (the Vedas). These imaginative accounts describe them as having snubbed noses, curly black hair, and crude behavior. A common theory associates this civilization with dark skinned inhabitants who spoke Dravidian languages (a language group now found in the southern region of India). According to this theory, at around 1,500 B.C., a group of white skinned people migrated to the Indus Valley from Persia and drove the Dravidians south. The invaders called themselves Aryans, meaning noblemen or landlord, and scholars often connect them with the Hyksos people who invaded and ruled Egypt around 1700 B.C., and to the Celtic people of the British Isles. Those who didn’t migrate to India stayed in Persia and established the Zoroastrian religion. The Aryans spoke an Indo-European language called Sanskrit, which is the language of the ancient Hindu texts. The Aryans may have been less culturally advanced than their Dravidian counterparts and in time they absorbed many of the Dravidian cultural practices including some of their religious beliefs. For the next thousand years the Aryans extended their influence over India. Although this theory remains to be proved, historians and sociologists commonly use it to explain the origins of the northern Aryan language group and the southern Dravidian language group.

Koans

I'll be posting some interesting links over the weekend. In the meantime, a couple of Buddhist koans:

Hot Tea

Leaves swirl, into
Autumn streams fall.
Old men drink from
Withered hands.
Hot tea!

Killing

Gasan instructed his adherents one day: "Those who speak against killing and who desire to spare the lives of all conscious beings are right. It is good to protect even animals and insects. But what about those persons who kill time, what about those who are destroying wealth, and those who destroy political economy? We should not overlook them. Furthermore, what of the one who preaches without enlightenment? He is killing Buddhism."

PHI 2010 Homework (All classes)

Section 1.1. (all questions) for next monday and tuesday.