The image is Raphael’s version of Hypatia, the astronomer, mathematician, and neoplatonic philosopher who was murdered by a religious mob in 415.
Hypatia lived and died in Alexandria, Egypt, then a clashing hotbed of philosophical schools and rising radical religion. The rising radical religion of the time was Christianity.
Hypatia’s nemesis was Cyril, Bishop of Alexandria and leader of a fanatical group of Christian activists. The Christians lived their mission of converting everyone, by whatever means, to their doctrine. Under Cyril’s leadership, the Christians accused Hypatia of paganism and witchcraft, threw stones at her allies, and became increasingly violent until a violent Christian mob killed her, dismembered her body, and burned it on a pyre.
(Here is a recent encomium for now-Saint Cyril of Alexandria, “a guardian of the true faith,” by Pope Benedict XVI. For an unflattering portrait of Cyril, Agora is a worth-watching movie about Hypatia’s life and death.)
Those were the bad old days.
Fast forward 1,600 years to Egypt now and the resurgent Muslim Brotherhood. The MB movement was founded in Egypt in 1928 by Hassan al-Banna (also an admirer of Adolf Hitler and the National Socialists), and it has led a mostly-underground existence since then. In the second half of the twentieth century, Sayyid Qutb became the MB’s leading intellectual voice and his Milestones its manifesto:
“When Islam strives for peace, its objective is not that superficial peace which requires that only that part of the earth where the followers of Islam are residing remain secure. The peace which Islam desires is that the religion (i.e., the Law of the society) be purified for God, that the obedience of all people be for God alone” (Milestones, p. 63).
(Muhammad Qutb, Sayyid’s younger brother, was a university professor in Saudi Arabia, where one of his students was Osama Bin Laden.)
The ousting of Egypt’s thug-president Hosni Mubarak has led to a power vacuum, and the Muslim Brotherhood’s has now become a potent political force in Egypt. The MB’s motto: “Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. Qur’an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.”
So how different is Egypt 1,600 years later? And whither Egypt’s philosophers, scientists, and independent thinkers?
In an 1846 review of Grote’s History of Greece, John Stuart Mill makes this claim: “The Battle of Marathon, even as an event in British history, is more important than the Battle of Hastings.”
My first reaction to Mill’s sentence was agreement. My second reaction was to the audacity of the claim and to wonder how it could be justified.
The 1066 CE Battle of Hastings was 780 years Before Mill, and the 490 BCE Battle of Marathon was 2,336 years BM. But how does one make cause-and-effect claims about human actions involving millions of people across thousands of years? That takes major conceptualizing cojones.
Here is Mill’s sentence in context: “The interest of Grecian history is unexhausted and inexhaustible. As a mere story, hardly any other portion of authentic history can compete with it. Its characters, its situations, the very march of its incidents, are epic. It is an heroic poem, of which the personages are peoples. It is also, of all histories of which we know so much, the most abounding in consequences to us who now live. The true ancestors of the European nations (it has been well said) are not those from whose blood they are sprung, but those from whom they derive the richest portion of their inheritance. The battle of Marathon, even as an event in English history, is more important than the battle of Hastings. If the issue of that day had been different, the Britons and the Saxons might still have been wandering in the woods.”
Mill is doing “What-if” history: We know we are what we are today significantly because of the Greek victory at Marathon, but where would we be if the Persians had won?
Let’s separate two propositions:
1. The Greeks defeated the Persians at Marathon. Therefore, we are where we are today. What evidence do we have connecting those two sentences?
2. If the Persians had defeated the Greeks at Marathon, then … . How do we complete the sentence?
On 1. The Greeks’ defeating the Persians made it possible for Greek culture to be transmitted across the generations. That was not a deterministic process — each generation’s decision-makers to varying degrees had to accept and propagate its distinctive Greek inheritance of independent, naturalistic thinking, and to the extent that each generation did it developed a culture of rationality, creativity, innovation, science, and artistry. As historians we can see the positive evidence for those connections as they played out across time: the western European decision-makers of the 300-1000s largely rejected the Greek philosophy and declined into the Dark Ages; but further east Byzantium continued to flourish, keeping the Greek texts and ideas alive; the decision-makers of the 1100s to 1400s rediscovered and rejuvenated the Greeks and the Renaissance ensued; and so on.
On 2. What counts as evidence here? We can imagine victorious Persians stamping out Greek culture or dispirited Greeks letting themselves slide into insignificance. But we can also imagine a more relaxed Persian regime content with tribute or tenacious Greeks keeping the flame alive and rebelling a few years later.
Imagination aside, we can think analogically to real historical cases. From the 300s to the 500s CE, the victory of early Christianity did lead to the suppression and extermination of Greek culture. But previously, from 197 to 30 BCE, the Romans systematically defeated the Greeks — yet the Greek inheritance survived, becoming not only part of Roman culture but for many generations the dominant philosophy of the Romans. (I like the saying that the Romans defeated the Greeks but the Greeks conquered the Romans.)
So a Persian victory would have led to which result? I don’t know. And not knowing that, can we say how important Marathon was to where we are 2,500 years later?
Related:
My lecture “What Moves History: An Introduction to the Philosophy of History,” available as a free audio download.
Posted 1 month, 1 week ago at 10:57 am. Add a comment
In this third Socratic seminar on the Best Arguments against Free-market Capitalism, we take up three arguments: a) the paternalist argument that human beings are incapable of living freely,
b) the collectivist argument that wealth is a social creation (at 11 minutes), and
c) the religious argument that value is not of this world (at 32 minutes).
At Francisco Marroquín University, I led a series of seminars on the Best Arguments against Free-market Capitalism. The format is Socratic, with lively back-and-forth between me and an impressive group of UFM professors.
In first session, we take up the argument that Free-market capitalism is dog-eat-dog. The video’s editor, Luis Barrueto, provides a useful thematic table of contents for the discussion on the right side of the video frame.
Forthcoming: Five more arguments against free-market capitalism.
More data showing that culture, not race, is crucial to educational performance: “Africans outperform African-Americans in Seattle schools: Even the children of destitute Somali refugees do better.” From the Seattle Times report: “African-American students whose primary language is English perform significantly worse in math and reading than black students who speak another language at home — typically immigrants or refugees.”
Also relevant is the great education work by NFTE, successfully teaching entrepreneurship to low-income students, giving them the knowledge and skill set to overcome their cultural deprivations, and Marva Collins’ classic achievements.
And fundamentally relevant are those individuals of any race or culture who decide to make something of themselves no matter what.
I am neither Catholic nor Protestant, so I do not have a dog in that fight but rather a cultural history question about the financially bankrupt PIGS or PIIGS countries in Europe.
With the exception of Ireland, all are in southern Europe. Including Ireland, all of them are traditionally Catholic [except Greece, which is mostly Eastern Orthodox, as William W. points out].
Some questions:
1. Is the Protestant-work-ethic thesis — which is thought to encourage diligent labor, saving, and living more frugally — relevant here?
2. Is there something contrasting in Catholicism’s cultural heritage that makes it politically more spendthrift?
3. Are there predominantly Protestant nations in as much economic difficulty?
4. What about the exceptions — predominantly Catholic countries not in the PIGS category: France, Austria, Poland, etc.?
5. If we were to place all European nations along a spectrum from financially strong to weak, what would the distribution of traditionally Catholic and Protestant nations look like?
6. Is there a carryover to economic development in the Americas–e.g., that North America was mostly settled by immigrants from northern-Protestant-European cultures and South America was settled mostly by immigrants from southern-Catholic-European cultures?
Humor alert: Being a compilation of student research, gently edited by Stephen Hicks, Rockford College (updated: December 2011).
Is philosophy a waist of time?
Ethical debates have been around for a long time, but nobody seems to have any answers. Ethnics are very important. Basically, what you do with your life comes down to your personal ethnics. For the world to be good means having strong Altruistic people to help the society survive in this doggy dog world.
Socrates started democracy in Greece so he is a democrat. When Socrates was in court he was blamed for piety and disturbing the youth. Melekus is the accuser in the case of Socrates. Another charge brought up against him was pity. Socrates argues that the son is not a god but simply a burning rock in the sky. So Socrates was convicted and sentenced to life in prison.
To Socrates, having a good life meant dying. Socrates was completely opposed to the Sophists. Not only did the Sophists not have reasons, they also did not have reasons. Sophists felt that there were no real reasons.
For Aristotle, the virtuous person can be known as temperature, someone who is under complete control. Aristotle thinks the Principle of Noncontradiction is an axiom is because it is one.
God is known for many things. In the Bible, God created the heavens and the universe in seven days, so there are seven planets. (Seven is a big thing in the Bible.) The Bible has many commandments such as thou shalt not murder and honor thy mother and father.
The existence of God is questionable since evil does have some good points to make. The greatest gift is to be in God’s presents, but when we are in God’s presents we should not think about ourselves. John Hick rebukes the concept that God would not allow suffering if he existed in the third paragraph of his essay. Because of evil there is said to be another force in the universe—a dark force. His name is Satin.
Mysticism is the direct and immediate experience of the scared.
Under feudalism, a few at the top benefitted from power and everyone else was a pheasant. The aristocrats were trained for war and succeeded through their marital skills: swordsmanship, strategy, and self-defense. In feudal times, jobs were passed on from fathers to sons. For example, if your father was a priest, you would probably become a priest too.
Priests vow poverty and while money isn’t everything a priest should be able to have a little of life’s enjoyments just like every other human bean. Priests also take the vow of celibacy. On the conventional view, sex without the possibility of recreation is immoral. Priests want to sustain themselves from sex so they can have eternal childhood in the Lord’s eyes. One thing religions teach is that you should prey regularly.
Does man need religion? Yes, and we need religion a heck of a lot more than it needs us. Though some people base their life solely on religion, which may be perceived as silly, but imagine how lost they would be if they didn’t have something so vital. That would be like me going without coffee.
In modern times Decarrt explains why reason is wrong. He shows that I am a real thing but what kinda of thing? Descartes proved that God exists in Medication III. The argument is sound, me being from the South and a firm believer in the Lord.
Galileo was on trial for his blasphemic saying the Earth is the center of the universe. With his huge telescope, Galileo noticed that the earth moved. Galileo had people follow his exact word, and those people were called the people of Galilee. Galileo also worked with gravity, which is what causes the cause and effect effect.
Basically, we need to decide what’s best for society as a hole. That is the purpose of laws. Some states have laws that if broken cause one to be a criminal. Power definitely corrupts; both power and corruption are all too often abused.
Justice is really a double bladed sword: at times it is a warm blanket keeping you safe and at other times an uncontrollable juggernaut ready to mow you over.
In our country, the Deceleration of Independence sets the basic rights and laws. Some people have the right to liberty, but are unable to exorcize it. Shall I go against the laws put forth by my four fathers, who wrote, “All men are entitled to certain unalienable rights”?
Capital punishment is the death penalty for a crime that dates back to the beginning of civilization. Some people believe in capital punishment because of the “eye for an eye” theory: for instance, if you kill me, I should be able to kill you. Capital punishment is mostly about whether persons who have been executed will commit further offenses if and when released. Cruel and unusual punishment is included in the Constitution. But Capital Punishment violates the Eighth Amendment because it makes people feel like they are less of a person.
But really, the death penalty is not necessary because it is not needed.
In modern times, Utilitarianism is the doctrine that we should all strive to pleasure our neighbors. John Stuart Mill said that even if what is being said is true, it is still wrong to censor it. Of course, we cannot take it for granite that all of Mill’s assumptions are true.
According to Freud, the USA became a frightened country after the terrible events of 9/11. Freud opposes the tabula razor theory of human nature. According to Freud, the child has lust during the breast-feeding stage. Eventually his mother stops, and his lust is suppressed until his adultery stage.
Marx says the broughers who employ the workers can and do enslave the proliterate workers. So Marx promoted socialism, which operates the production of products produced by the society. Marx believed socialism was the best form of government for the world after World War II. Communist Russia failed because of Mises and Hayek’s lack of knowledge. Socialism is an ideal, but come on now! Let’s be realistic!
Against Marx, Rand advocates free enterprise and self interest. The rich are able to create new jobs and hand them out to the poor, which takes many poor people out of poverty and also gives the rich something to do. She said that minimum wage increases raise the cost of labor, so workers may lose their fridge benefits. But her philosophy is sort of controversial, in a sense. She commits the fallacy of hoc poc der doc.
The image is Raphael’s version of Hypatia, the astronomer, mathematician, and neoplatonic philosopher who was murdered by a religious mob in 415.
Fast forward 1,600 years to Egypt now and the resurgent Muslim Brotherhood. The MB movement was founded in Egypt in 1928 by Hassan al-Banna (also an admirer of Adolf Hitler and the National Socialists), and it has led a mostly-underground existence since then. In the second half of the twentieth century, Sayyid Qutb became the MB’s leading intellectual voice and his Milestones its manifesto:
a) the paternalist argument that human beings are incapable of living freely,
With the exception of Ireland, all are in southern Europe. Including Ireland, all of them are traditionally Catholic [except Greece, which is mostly Eastern Orthodox, as William W. points out]. 
Socrates started democracy in Greece so he is a democrat. When Socrates was in court he was blamed for piety and disturbing the youth. Melekus is the accuser in the case of Socrates. Another charge brought up against him was pity. Socrates argues that the son is not a god but simply a burning rock in the sky. So Socrates was convicted and sentenced to life in prison.
For Aristotle, the virtuous person can be known as temperature, someone who is under complete control. Aristotle thinks the Principle of Noncontradiction is an axiom is because it is one.
In modern times Decarrt explains why reason is wrong. He shows that I am a real thing but what kinda of thing? Descartes proved that God exists in Medication III. The argument is sound, me being from the South and a firm believer in the Lord.
Galileo was on trial for his blasphemic saying the Earth is the center of the universe. With his huge telescope, Galileo noticed that the earth moved. Galileo had people follow his exact word, and those people were called the people of Galilee. Galileo also worked with gravity, which is what causes the cause and effect effect.
Justice is really a double bladed sword: at times it is a warm blanket keeping you safe and at other times an uncontrollable juggernaut ready to mow you over.
Capital punishment is the death penalty for a crime that dates back to the beginning of civilization. Some people believe in capital punishment because of the “eye for an eye” theory: for instance, if you kill me, I should be able to kill you. Capital punishment is mostly about whether persons who have been executed will commit further offenses if and when released. Cruel and unusual punishment is included in the Constitution. But Capital Punishment violates the Eighth Amendment because it makes people feel like they are less of a person.
In modern times, Utilitarianism is the doctrine that we should all strive to pleasure our neighbors. John Stuart Mill said that even if what is being said is true, it is still wrong to censor it. Of course, we cannot take it for granite that all of Mill’s assumptions are true.
According to Freud, the USA became a frightened country after the terrible events of 9/11. Freud opposes the tabula razor theory of human nature. According to Freud, the child has lust during the breast-feeding stage. Eventually his mother stops, and his lust is suppressed until his adultery stage.
Marx says the broughers who employ the workers can and do enslave the proliterate workers. So Marx promoted socialism, which operates the production of products produced by the society. Marx believed socialism was the best form of government for the world after World War II. Communist Russia failed because of Mises and Hayek’s lack of knowledge. Socialism is an ideal, but come on now! Let’s be realistic!
Against Marx, Rand advocates free enterprise and self interest. The rich are able to create new jobs and hand them out to the poor, which takes many poor people out of poverty and also gives the rich something to do. She said that minimum wage increases raise the cost of labor, so workers may lose their fridge benefits. But her philosophy is sort of controversial, in a sense. She commits the fallacy of hoc poc der doc.
