Dreaming of Apatheia

Apatheia, in ancient Stoic philosophy, is a mental state free from emotional disturbance caused often by fears and desires, and therefore capable of reason and clear judgment.  It isn't apathy or indifference, with which the word "Stoic" is too often associated.  It is rather characteristic of an ideal mental condition in which decisions are intelligently made, according to nature.  Care and concern therefore are typical of apatheia-- one is concerned to make the appropriate decision and takes care to do so.

The ancients knew apatheia was difficult to achieve, and so recommended that the aspiring Stoic engage in what Pierre Hadot called "spiritual exercises."  He believed that what are known as the Meditations of Marcus Aurelius are examples of the Emperor performing such exercises, calling to mind Stoic maxims and applying them to day to day life.

I think it's clear that obtaining apatheia requires considerable discipline and effort. I also think we'd benefit enormously if most of us, or even some of us in positions of power and influence, obtained it.  I wonder, though, if it can be achieved in today's world.

It seems to me we're perpetually disturbed in these sad times, and that our society and technology fosters disturbance.  We thrive on outrage.  Traditional and social media encourage it and spread it.  Our so-called leaders seem incapable of rational thought, though it's possible they've simply abandoned it, or no longer believe it's of any use in persuading or leading a populace which itself appears unable to exercise judgment, merely want to be told what to do, and are incensed if what they're told to do doesn't work.

Is it possible that AI may turn out to be our salvation?  We seemingly no longer want to take the time to think; perhaps we no longer can think, not in any real sense--not as needed to resolve problems.   I suspect we'd be more than happy to let AI do it for us. 

 Perhaps we've reached the point where only AI is capable of achieving apatheia, as it would be less subject to emotional dusturbance.

The King Who Exalts Himself

The king referred to in the title to this post appears in the Book of Daniel.  He's sometimes associated with King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon; sometimes with Antiochus Epiphanes of the Seleucid Empire; sometimes with the Antichrist.  As may be expected, he exalts himself above all others, even the gods, is supremely arrogant and devotes himself to self-glorification.  As may also be expected, he comes to a bad end.

There's something peculiar about a person who, being in a position to do so, names places and things after himself.  Or for that matter refers to himself in the third person.  Or finds ways to glorify himself instead of or in place of others. Or at the expense of others.

 There's something very peculiar about someone who does so when it is normally the case that this is done only after the death of the person whose name is used in recognition of great deeds done while he lived.

No other president has indulged in this kind of self-glorification, and for good reason.  They would have been thought close to mad if they did so.  They would have seemed ridiculous, pitiful, unusually needy, risible.  They would be mocked.

This kind of excessive pride in oneself is particularly unbecoming in someone leading a republic.  It is, instead, characteristic of an autocrat or dictator. So, in modern times, such displays of hubris have been indulged in by the likes of Franco, Mussolini, Hitler, Mao, Stalin, Kim Jong-il, and the Duvaliers.  In antiquity Nero, Caligula and Elagabalus, among others.  Shelley's Ozymandias is an example from poetry.

The person doing this must be terribly insecure, convinced that he won't be remembered or if remembered will inspire laughter and contempt.  He can't expect he'll be honored by the nation, so instead he must honor himself.  One would think those close to him would warn him of how this makes him appear.

The curious thing is he'll be remembered for exalting  himself.  That's what will be considered remarkable about him.  Not in a good way, however.  Self-promotion will be what he's remembered for, to the point of absurdity.

Keep Sol Invictus in Christmas

There is a documentary on the pagan origins of Christmas and its customary celebration on one of the streaming services, and I watched it with some interest last night.  I know those origins fairly well, but wonder if those who insist that we "Keep Christ in Christmas" know that, in fact, Christ is a relatively new addition to the celebrations which have taken place around the Winter Solstice for many thousands of years.

As is appropriate for a religion which borrowed so extensively from pagan philosophy and ancient pagan mystery religions, the "Christian" traditions of Christmas have their basis likewise in pagan culture; the Roman Saturnalia and northern European traditions of the Yule in particular.  Gift-giving, feasting, bonfires, lit evergreen trees, wreaths of ivy and holly; all of these had their origin in pagan celebrations related to the solstice and the return of the light of the unconqueable sun, triumphing over darkness each year.

There is nothing in Scripture indicating when Jesus was born, and the early Church simply, and I think wisely, chose to celebrate it on the date already selected and celebrated as the birthday of Sol Invictus and Mithras as well as other deities--December 25th. The peculiar census which supposedly required all to return to the place of their birth (an absurdity) was fabricated as well in order to arrange for Jesus' birth in Bethlehem to comport in prohecy--why not that as well, since the Church was, in a way, making a story? In this fashion the church was able to allow popular ancient pagan rituals and celebrations to continue while substituting a Christian narrative.

But Chist as the new light of the Winter Solstice plainly was not enough and thus the complaints regarding his absence from the season.  But this shouldn't be surprising.  It's difficult to reconcile a religion which condemns this life and glorifies one which is said to come after it with the celebration of life as we wish to live it here; a life affirming festival.  And, of course, the Church decided to celebrate the Resurrection on Easter which if anything in Christianity should emphasize new life; but celebrates not this life, but rather life after death.

The grim, bleak Christianity imposed during the reign of Oliver Cromwell prohibited the celebration of Christmas.  In fact, it prohibited celebrations of any kind. That seems more consistent with the teaching of Jesus that we should give up our families and lives and follow him.

The Midway

 

And so I'm back in Chicago, once my home long ago, so long ago I barely remember it as it was when we left it a when I was five, also so long ago.  Since then I've been here many times as a visitor, now an aging one, sore from walking distances which made no difference once and now are daunting.

It's been whipped by an impressive snow storm, and recently whipped through the antics of an elderly cousin of an ape-like creature whose white-box haircut, wrinkled, corroded orange-tinted skin and feeble efforts at displays of chest-pounding render him ridiculous.  But he's malicious, and like Tiberius in his dotage is prone to cruelty he confuses with strength.  And so he sends sad creatures in para-military garb to harass those they may even here, unasked for and unwanted; has motorboats destroyed by the most powerful military in the world; and spends his time threatening a much weaker nation, all while racking in money wrinkled hand over swollen foot.

But Chicago survives and so do I.  Despite the posturing and the real violence, and the storm, downtown is crowded with tourists as it has been for years. This won't change as it's a real city, The Great American City.  No Bordello-Chic as the White House now displays. It knows con men well, and gangsters, and isn't fooled where others have been by cheap imposters.

At the Palmer House real history was made.  Real Presidents stayed here.  The Reno hearings after the Battle of the Little Bighorn took place here.  Custer stayed here on his way to  his death and the mutilation of his troops by the Sioux and Cheyenne.  The real won't be displaced by gaudy fraud or fraudsters.

Regarding Transhumanism

 

Transhumanism is, according to that invaluable and easily accessed source, Wikipedia, a movement advocating the modification of humans to increase longevity, cognition, condition and no doubt a host of other things considered desirable, through technology.  Such modification has been the subject of science fiction for quite some time, of course.  But now we have or will shortly have the technology needed to make the transhumanist dream come true.

Unsurprisingly, there are those who oppose this movement.  I suspect some do so merely because the dread prefix "trans" appears in the name.  Others may do so for religious reasons.  But those reasons are less and less persuasive these days.  They're reminiscent of claims like:  "If God had meant for us to fly, He'd have given us wings." And I suspect that few will be convinced if objections are made that we can't be changed because God made us "in his image and likeness."  What kind of god would consent to be like us?

I think most would like to be enhanced.  Assuming it's safe to do so, why not live longer, be smater etc.?  And I think the large corporations which I'm sure are pouring vast sums of money into the relevant technologies want us to be enhanced as well, and to pay dearly for enhancement.  So, I expect it to take place.

There's the risk that those controlling the technologies may use them to control the enhanced, of course.  But we've always valued our pleasure and satisfaction over our liberty.

I also expect that only the wealthy will be able to afford modifications to any great extent.  The benefits they already have will be increased accordingly.  They'll be not only richer than most, but will live longer, be smarter, stronger, healthier than most as well.  Gradually, a class of super humans will come to be, and grow.

Governments may be expected to take advantage of these technologies for military purposes, and enhanced soldiers will be developed.  Those unable to afford enhancements will be delegated menial tasks, though I expect a black market will develop through which enhancements will be made somewhat avaiable to the underprivileged, at least to the extent needed to keep them amused and from becoming dangerous.  Also, I think it should be expected that certain technologies of a lesser kind will become widely avaiable.

It sounds like a science fiction novel of the dystopian sort, doesn't it?  I have no doubt ethical concerns will be raised, but also have no doubt they'll be largely disregarded.

Perhaps transhumanism will allow us to compete with AI, though.  There's always a silver lining, they say.