Mark Alfino

Fall 2007 Grad Seminar Page for Mark Alfino

Reading and Reserach Interests

My general interests

• Hellenistic conceptions of discipline, virtue, and happiness.
• Materialism and Theology in Hellenistic Philosophy.

Quick searches

Hume and Stoicism

Wed Sep 12 12:43:54 EDT 2007 CSA Marked Records Last Search Query: Hume and stoicism

Record 1 of 3

DN: Database Name Philosopher's Index TI: Title Hellenistic and Early Modern Philosophy AU: Author

Miller, Jon (eds.); Inwood, Brad (eds.)

SO: Source Cambridge: Cambridge Univ Pr, 2003. DE: Descriptors Epicureanism; Hellenism; Modern; Scepticism; Stoicism; Subjectivity; Hume; Locke; Spinoza AB: Abstract The book is a multiauthor reassessment of the profound impact of the Hellenistic philosopher (principally the Stoics, Epicureans, and Sceptics) on such philosophers as Descartes, Spinoza, Leibniz, and Locke. These early modern philosophers looked for inspiration to the later ancient thinkers when they rebelled against the dominant philosophical traditions of their day. In this volume, leading

   historians of philosophy, utilizing a wide range of styles and
   methods, explore the relationship between Hellenistic philosophy and
   early modern philosophy, taking advantage of new scholarly and
   philosophical advances. (publisher, edited)

Record 2 of 3

DN: Database Name

   Philosopher's Index

TI: Title

   Hellenism, Freedom, and Morality in Hume and Johnson

AU: Author

   Loptson, Peter

SO: Source

   Hume Studies, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 161-172, April 2001

DE: Descriptors

   Ethics; Freedom; Hellenism; Morality; Hume; Johnson, C; Potkay, A

AB: Abstract

   This essay discusses and evaluates Adam Potkay's The Passion for
   Happiness: Samuel Johnson and David Hume. Although some interesting
   parallels are acknowledged, the central conclusion is that Potkay is
   unsuccessful in arguing for close similarities, philosophically,
   between Johnson and Hume. Several of Potkay's positions are contested,
   some historical, some philosophical. Among them, claims that Cicero
   was a Stoic (or so viewed in the Enlightenment) or stoicism
   eudaemonistic ethically; and that moral objectivism is plausibly
   located in Hume, or freedom/determinism compatibilism in Johnson.
   These and other differences are noted, and concepts relevant to
   bringing them out (causal coercion, metacompatibilism, moral
   positivism explored.

Record 3 of 3

DN: Database Name

   Philosopher's Index

TI: Title

   HUME'S COGNITIVE STOICISM.

AU: Author

   Wilson, Fred

SO: Source

   Hume Studies (suppl.), pp. 52-68, 1985

DE: Descriptors

   Belief; Epistemology; Ought; Pride; Hume

Reading Log

9/11: Here are some notes I've been working from: Media:General_Notes_on_Stoicism.doc

I'm going to focus on AA.Long's opening chapters on Epicureanism for the 9/4 class. I should have something to offer from my responses to that reading. Alfino 10:37, 29 August 2007 (PDT)

Here's my reading notes, with ample suggestions for place we might raise some questions together:

"Chapter 35: The Garden of Epicurus", Green, Peter. Alexander to Actium: The Historical Evolution of the Hellenistic Age. Berkeley, Calfornia: University of California, 1990.

Chapter 35: The Garden of Epicurus

Athens, Spring 306, Epicurus' main philosophy set.

Important that Epicurus' system was a quasi-religion: mem. texts, no alternative views.

-"he suffered from chronic intestinal complaints. and died, finally, in great pain, of strangury and renal calculus." 619

-motivations for empircal knowledge exclusively practical, to show how ataraxia follows from understanding nature and the gods (similar to Stoics)

Green says he's not really an empiricits, but I think we can look at his empirical reasoning abilities in admiration. Good research question.

Green's indictment: "Whether ataraxia could be described as an ideal or a noble goal is debatable: a Buddhist is more likely to assent to the proposition than a Western humanist. Epicurus certainly believed it was. But a major achievement? There is (one wants to protest) more to Hfe than conquering the fears and superstitions associated with death, the jealousies and failures inherent in ambition. What Epicurus offered was mere quietism, near-total negation, a wholesale repudiation of Hellenistic life, politics, society, eschatology. With no afterlife to look forward to, the best that Epicurus could still do with this present existence was to sit Still and try to achieve a state of negative harmony, untroubled by the demons of unreason or power, and, like Gerard Manley Hopkins' nun, "out of the swing of the sea." 626

629: " der. As De Witt says, "the first missionary philosophy was a natural preparation for the first missionary religion. ... It would have been singularly easy for an Epicurean to become a Christian.""'

630: "To kill fear, to pursue happiness and friendship, in a world where the former was considerably more widespread than the latter, was an objective as praiseworthy as it was elusive. There is a ringing defiance about the "fourfold remedy," the tetrapharmakos: "The gods are not to be feared, there is no risk to run in death, the good is easy to get, the bad easily borne with courage.""'* A hint of Nirvana here, though no Greek would ever tolerate that kind of voluntary self-eclipse. There is more to life, in the end, than ataraxia.

Long, A. A. Hellenistic Philosophy. 2nd ed. California: U of California Press, 1986.

Notes: Chapter One: Introduction

Hellenism: 323bc - 31bc : victory of Octabian over Mark Antony

-major writers of Hellenism were immigrants to Athens from Other places? Where? What do we know about these places?

-Long downplays the thesis that Hellenistic philosophy is a response to instability: p. 3

-Some details about Alexander and Diogenes. discuss a bit.

-Both Epicureanism and Stoicism principally recommended themselves as philosophies for reducing suffering and achieving happiness.

-Early or pre-Epicurean: "Aristippus' importance rests on his claim that pleasure is the goal of life. He advanced this thesis long before it was adopted by Epicurus, and Epicurean hedonism, though possibly influenced by Cyrenaic views, differs from them in significant respects. " p. 8

Interesting point on p. 9 that Platonists and Peripatetics never achieved wide appeal and were beat in popularity by Stoic and Epicurean ideas.

Stoics were trying to retain some version of the declining Olympian gods, by giving them allegorical itnerpretations.

"Eastern religious ideas infiltrated into the Mediterranean world. Some embraced them; others chose Stoicism or Epicureanism instead." 12

Chapter Two: Epicurus and Epicureanism

"his slogan 'live quietly* was not a revolutionaiy denundation of contemporary society but a prescription for attaining tranquillity. "16

17: spread of Epicureanism in Med. world.

Oenoanda - note.

Epicurus 341-270 Lucretius 94 - 55, after that: DL, Cicero, Seneca and Plutarch.

19 and ff: good intro to Epicurus as empiricist.

first glance at his cosmology and willingness to trim metaphysical claims to closely match empirical evidence.

transmission theories of perception 21, atomist sense theoyr, 23: sounds like a neural network view of consciousness.

24: Direct Images - weird

disembodied causally efficacious direct images. ???? Explanations?

(maybe made clearly by the film-strip view of consciousness coming later)

-interesting evidence, especially at p. 27 of empiriciaal reasoning advances. Epicurus really comes across as more inductive than Aristotle. and, in the following.

32ff: background in atomism, how you do ontology in ancient materialism.

finite / infinite divisibility37: the swerve. importance to theory of free will. what does this look like today? compatiblism?

41: arguments against divine involvement: (this would be great to have summarized in a short handout. Anyone?)

46: problem of god's body. why he can't have one. Hard to act with a body.

- add/losing atoms, not something that happens for god.

48: again with the "direct images" someone help!

views on death 49

view of self, view of special "no name" atoms of the soul. round ones!

film strip view of vision and thought 55

57: we are sources of swerves! (need for an open system) --relation of body/thought great description p. 57.

ideas of pleasure in relation to cessation of pain - v. important p. 61

67: limit to pleasure

Justice, friendship,theory of society.

74: remarkable passage at the end here, but also a little weird. Anyone?

"Next Morning Blogs"

Method and more topics in Stoicism 9/12/07

9/12/07

Class:

Thanks for a good class. I like the way you guys follow up on each other’s views and raise problems and criticisms for the philosophy we’re discussing. Good use of the history of philosophy, too.

We haven’t really talked about method much. I think you guys are showing some great intuitions and graduate level skills in the early stages of a critical method that I’ll call (without prejudice) “standard academic work”: careful study of (at this stage, secondary and reference) sources, careful statement of main concepts and ideas. Maybe because it’s early still, we’re not always formulating strong theses about these philosophers, but I do think we’re identifying crucial problems. And some of you are starting to find theses to pursue. You don’t want to rush that process, but you don’t want to be doing only exegesis at the end of the semester, in my opinion.

Another note on method: We have discussed the difference between, say, Stoicism as an historical philosophy, and Stoicism as a “type” of philosophy. In the former project we are attentive to historical sources in a search for the “essential logic” of the position. From the latter standpoint, Stoicism is a kind of philosophy that we might review with respect to our interests and theoretical resources. The goal could be the best reconstruction of the philosophy as a whole, or even just of specific insights it has. For example, we’re in a position to bring in contemporary science, comparative culture, specific arguments from later in the history of philosophy to see what a contemporary Stoic perspective would look like. That’s very different from historical recovery, but for myself, both activities are valuable.

I do regret that we didn’t get more time to breeze by stoic epistemology/logic/language. Crucial issues there include their anticipation of Frege’s sense/reference distinction, their anticipation of propositional logic, their rich empiricist notion of self-certifying impressions, and their interesting view of sentence meaning and the way language mirrors reality. There are some real connections here to early twentieth century positivism and sense-data theory.

I also think there’s more discussion to have about the Stoic “faith” in purposiveness. Because the contemporary discussion of teleology is so complex (connected to the conflicts between some contemporary monotheologies (and their philosophies) and contemporary science (esp. evolution)), it’s a hard topic to approach. But you should let me know if you want to take a run at it. I could put some readings together. You should be somewhat familiar with Dennett’s objection to “mind-first” cosmologies and his constructive arguments about how we can appreciate design in nature. We could fill that in with a little seminar time.

Finally, I’d like to make a suggestion about our September 25th class. I still want to give you a week off of preparations for class while we meet individually to discuss your projects, but I think we should use the 25th for a discussion of research and philosophical method. We could combine that with a dinner, if you’d like.

As long as you’re getting back to me about 9/25, could you also drop me a line about how the seminar is going for you. My days seem unusually uncluttered right now, so please feel free to drop in to talk as well.

Mark

Unfair to Epicurus? Applied philosophy and foundational philosophy 9/5/07

Some of you are noticing, even at the speed of our "drive by" treatment, that we have in Hellenistic Philosophers a different breed. Why aren't they giving systematic foundational accounts? Epicurus pretty much cribs Democritus, though there is an original expression of it in both the "film-strip" idea of csness and the swerve. He seems interested in epistemology, but doesn't find the need for all the machinery of Aristotle's Theory of Soul. Like the Stoics, he's not too worried about giving a wholly materialist account of soul. Weren't there supposed to be insuperable difficulties with that? But then, isn't that the research agenda (naturalism) that is producing such great results in neuro-philosophy?

If Epicurus looks "unsophisticated" or unconcerned about lots of the more speculative metaphysics of Plato and Aristotle, it may be because he's doing applied philosophy. (Also, I think he sees in Plato and Aristotle the philosophical machinery of empire, and he's rejecting all that.) In applied philosophy, you often avoid filling in too deep a metaphysical grounding because you want your analysis to be a "negotiated solution" (especially in business and medical ethics issues in which there are clear and fundamental compteting values, and the patient (or business deal) is waiting). Another way of putting this is "you don't wait for the system" (Kierkegaard made fun of Hegel's "system" which was, of course, never complete). You especially don't wait for a complete philosophical system that will yield a deductively arrived at result.

So what are Hellenistic applied philosophers doing and how do we evaluate them? The difference between our Hellenistic philosophers (at least the Epicureans and Stoics) and modern applied ethicists is that Epicurus isn't just trying to settle a business ethics problem. He's trying to suggest a philosophically grounded way of living that will be demonstrably efficacious within one's own lifetime. That poses a significantly different problem than "creating a system" (from which you might infer an ethic for living). That doesn't mean you cut him slack on foundational issues, but it does mean acknowleding that his focus may be elsewhere. We should ask whether some reconstruction of his practical concepts would provide a more complete set of recommendations for hedonism. (I think there are philosophers who have pursued this project and it would be a great topic for someone.) The standards for evaluation of a practical philosophy need to engage the assumptions that must be made when one's goal is "advice for living". As a case study, you look at Plato's dismal efforts to be an applied philosopher with Dion in Sicily. It just wasn't his strength!

So, for evaluating an applied philosopher, additional thought on friendship and how that fits in with tranquility might be in order. We should also add a more complete analysis of types of pleasures in addition to sensual and social. There's intimacy, community, pleasures of achievement, pleasures of concentration. Epicurus' radically simplified world may have room for these. Remember, any empirical results from hedonic psychology would be in the spirit of Epicurean epistemology. That something you dualists have more trouble availing yourselfs of!

In the end, I don't really evaluate an ancient philosopher in a comprehensive way, as if I'm lining him or her up with contemporary ones, and putting him on trial. But I do think we can "mine" these philosophers for intrinsically fascinating issues, some really different thinking, and some resources for our contemporary projects.

Please shoot me a quick email about how the seminar is going for you at this point. I've got tons of time to meet with students, so don't be shy about coming in. Hope O'Dougherty's was fun. I'll look forward to joining you all some time.

Mark

Pyrrho, Epoche, Ataraxia 9/18

Well, gang, I hope we brought Pyrrhonism to life a bit. It's a tantalizing view for me, not only because of the possibility of cross cultural influences in Pyrrho, but also because I have trouble understanding how sceptics resolve the "criteria of truth / criteria of action" divide. The best I could come up with is that there really are two worlds for Pyrrhonists and so they find it less surprising than I do that the epistemology of truth is separate from the criteria for acting. But I must acknowledge that further reading might present other solutions.

I did want to return to the relationship between epoche and ataraxia, because this is really the focus of the practice, maybe more so than theoretical consistency. We made some progress on this with our various examples. It occured to me this morning that Pyrrhonists might be telling us to try seeing the world through our actual certainty about it rather than through an assumed certainty. So, for example, perhaps we can determine (whether Pyrrho would have allowed us or not) that we have relative certainty about the importance of some practice in our lives -- church, fitness, you name it. Maybe Pyrrho is telling us that we exceed this actual certainty by assuming that we have deep foundational knowledge (with absolute certainty). What would it be like to see the world only through the knowledge that we have certainty about? Sometimes I think it would be terror, but in a couple of cases, meditating on an example changes my view to ataraxia. So, the fear of something bad happening is somewhat moderated if I carefully inspect what I actually can or can't know about this event occuring.

Perhaps apropos of this, that book reference I've been dying to make (for Aaron's project?) is Kirsch, Jonathan. God Against the Gods: the History of the War Between Monotheism and Polytheism. New York, New York: Penguin Group, 2004. Kircsch gives a pretty well documented account of how monotheism changed the landscape of the Mediterranean world. He looks about monotheisms in ancient Egypt and among the Israelites, but focuses heavily on Christian monotheism. His overall thesis is that monotheism generally requires considerable violence to enforce and generally limits an otherwise rich set of cultural practices which included magic and multiple local gods. (Of course, a counter thesis here might be that there is a trade off for monotheism Some argue that Christian monotheism, in combination with the Greek metaphysics, positioned the West ultimately to discover science. That's pretty speculative, but you do have to wonder if there is an upside to monotheism since on the face of it it appears to come with considerable negatives. The ability to unite religion and state might thought of as another "up side," but one with ambiguities.) Kirsch will lead you to two other books, which I have at the moment: Klauck's Magic and Paganism in Early Christianity and Fox, Pagans and Christians.

Well, I'll get working on two short presentations, one on method and the other on research, for next week. Enjoy your break from class preparation, but don't forget that you are supposed to be pulling together some preliminary material for our conference on your topic. I've heard from a couple of you about topics. At this point its almost better to have a general interest and start browsing the literature. Unless, that is, you're already further down the road. It wouldn't hurt to get an email from each of you letting me know where you are on this. I'm generally free Monday and Wednesday mornings and early afternoons for conferences. Friday's have been a little sacred lately, but that gets called on a weekly basis!

Thanks to Rebecca for helping with the dinner organization. Please let her know what you're available to do. I'll take care of plates, forks, knives, etc. Ok? And maybe more beverage. There's cooking equiptment in the kitchen, so check out what you each need.

Making the Turn 9/25

Class,

What a great feast. Thanks. Let's do some more dinners.

I hope you found the research tips and methods useful. By the way, please add hermeneutic method to the list and look it up if you're not familiar with what it is. It's arguably an important method for our work since one of the central problems of hermeneutics in, say, Gadamer, is the interpretation across time horizons. So you history of philosophy types and literary/philosophic folks need to know about that.

I'm eager and a little anxious about our upcoming challenge to make the "turn" and become a true seminar (we're close!). One reason I recommended that we cancel class next week off is that I didn't sense that we were quite ready to block out our seminar sessions, but I think we can do it. The key idea here is that each of you present some issues and material for us to work with you on, supply some reading for us ahead of time (oh no!), and take us into the issues quickly and efficiently. The seminar model can be a powerful incubator of good philosophy, but you've got to plant the seeds.

Several of you have identified topic interests, some of you need to take your interests and do some browsing in the literature, either to find resources or let the literature refine your topic a bit. Others are lurking. I hope all of you will find time to do develop your topic interests prior to our individual conferences next. By the way, here is some time I've blocked out for you guys: 9/28 open, 10/1 1-3, 10/2 6-9pm, 10/3 10-12 and 10/5 open. If you can pick from that great. There are other times.

The seminar sessions you plan for us should include some short readings or excerpts of readings. Something that gets us into your work and lets us have a deep philosophical conversation about it. Plan on taking about 1/2 the class period on the night you select. As we said, if you do this early on (October), you can come with more exploratory ideas. If you do a seminar for us in late November, hopefully things will have progress. Feel free to choose your preferred dates. Of course, your seminar topic doesn't have to match what we're reading in the other part of the class time.

The short topics you contribute can be decided about 1-2 weeks ahead of time. If you do one short topic, a seminar, and participation, you could have a grading scheme with weights of 30%, 40%, 30%. If those seems like large numbers, you could do a second short assignment. We'll do a semi-formal evaluation of participation in late October. I've got a rubric for participation on the assignments link.

I really appreciated learning about some of the places you guys go for information and about that pop-philosopher guy. I'll check him out. I hope my information source biases aren't too old fashioned for you!

See you guys next week for conferences.

Mark

Miscellaneous

research exercise 9/18/07

Class,

Ok, here's a low key assignment to work in with your recipe for next week: Go the Foley research page on Philosophy (yes, there is one and it's really good). Click below or from www.foley.gonzaga.edu, click on research guides and then “philosophy”.

http://www.gonzaga.edu/Academics/Libraries/Foley-Library/Subject-Guides/Arts-Humanities-Subject-Guides/Philosophy.asp

Then browse through the guide and follow many of the links. Make sure you visit the Suber link, “Guide to Philosophy on the Internet”. I thought this thing was dead but it is apparently still updated. Drill down a bit at this point and follow some of the figure and movement specific material. Make sure you’re comfortable with the online text sites. Look at several issues of the Philosopher’s Magazine. This is a pretty interesting vehicle.

On the APA site look at the link on “Conferences” This is a pretty good indication of who’s talking about what and where. Not as exciting as the music listings for an average weekend in Portland, but, hey, this is philosophy.

If you have time, look at the “Online Information about Journals” This gives you access to information about the editorial and topical focus for many traditional print journals. You should also look at online journals, probably linked through Suber.

I don’t want to be presumptuous about your writing goals, but it you are thinking about doing publishable academic writing these are good resources for locating a community of scholars and style of writing that might be a good match for your interests.

Alfino

Research Project: Epicurean and Stoic Joy

My goal is to make a comparative investigation of major Hellenistic attitudes toward pleasure and joy. I think I'm going to find that Epicureanism has more scope for the pursuit of joy as a specific peak pleasure than typical accounts grant. I'm also interested in comparing epicurean and stoic views on joy.

Here's my initial literature search:

Pleasure and the Good Life: Concerning the Nature, Varieties, and Plausibility of Hedonism, Feldman, Fred Philosophical Quarterly, vol. 56, no. 222, pp. 152-154, January 2006

On Being Happy or Unhappy Haybron, Daniel M Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, vol. 71, no. 2, pp. 287-317, September 2005

What Kind of Hedonist Was Epicurus? Woolf, Raphael Phronesis: A Journal of Ancient Philosophy, vol. 49, no. 4, pp.303-322, 2004

Updating Epicurus's Concept of Katastematic Pleasure Splawn, Clay Journal of Value Inquiry, vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 473-482, 2002

Managing Mental Pain: Epicurus vs. Aristippus on the Pre-Rehearsal of Future Ills Graver, Margaret Proceedings of the Boston Area Colloquium in Ancient Philosophy, vol.17, pp. 155-177, 2001

Epicurean Hedonism Striker, Gisela Nussbaum, Martha C.(1993). Passions and Perceptions, Nussbaum, Martha C (ed). New York: Cambridge Univ Pr.

Epicurus on Pleasure and the Complete Life. Rosenbaum, Stephen E Monist: An International Quarterly Journal of General Philosophical Inquiry, vol. 73, no. 1, pp. 21-41, January 1990