Meditations on Virtue

'We do not discover purpose through virtue, we discover virtue through purpose.'

The purpose of a sword is to cut through resistant materials. A 'virtuous' sword is one with a sharp edge. The purpose of a cup of green tea is to fill the body with intoxicants, stabilize metabolism and act as a stimulant. A 'virtuous' cup of green tea is one with the appropriate minerals. The purpose of a tap is to allow water to be drawn whenever one needs it. A 'virtuous' tap is one which does not leak and allows the free flow of water.

The purpose of a human being...is much trickier. In the above examples we can identify 'virtues', or qualities, which enable a thing to fulfil it's purpose. This is largely because we - human beings - have designed these things for specific purposes. Sometimes they can have alternative purposes - a broken sink painted green with pink spots would probably be considered virtuous in a modern art gallery - but generally speaking we know the primary use of a tool or technology.

But what is the purpose for we human beings? Our origins, the dreams of our ancestors, our place in nature , where we are going, is far more complex than the destiny of a tap! It may seem like it is hard for philosophers to come up with answers. Nonetheless, we must not yield the question of what purpose is to politicians, to scientists, to theologians or psychologists. The question of the good life was asked in great detail by ancient philosophers, and with philosophers it had best remain.

I believe human purpose to be related to more than just our own personal flourishing and emotional well-being. To place too much emphasis on personal emotion and our immediate surroundings is to lose out on principles which can be universalized. To live the good life for oneself is part of our purpose, but the same conditions which allow us to flourish ought to be available to all. Why shouldn't they be? If we have benefited from living in certain conditions, and it is possible to share such conditions elsewhere, it only makes sense that we should be as fair as possible. Thus, the perfect 'soil' for human flourishing lies not only in individual character building, but also in the way we order society, and the world at large.

The ultimate society which allows us to fulfil our creative purpose is a meritocracy. Under such circumstances a person may succeed or fail based on their own efforts and not on their place in an unequal society (as in our current false-meritocracy). But never should anyone be doomed to failure, or locked into stagnant success. It must remain a fluid meritocracy - for ideas grow old, and systems grow obsolete. Everything must be held up to scrutiny and change. The foundation of such a meritocracy is, perhaps paradoxically, egalitarianism. We cannot have fair and honourable meritocracy without equality preceding it, and in a too-competitive environment we risk permanently stratifying people into classes, thus destroying the notion of society, and therefore meritocracy. Of course, this ideal 'soil' for us to flourish is far from realization; we live in a world of hierarchical politics, entrenched obsolete institutions and growing inequality. Against this tide I present seven virtues I consider the most important in our struggle to fulfil our purpose - the flourishing of an individual's creativity to make the world a better place.

- Self-Awareness: The ability to realize one's own consciousness is the first virtue. This I believe is the key to wisdom, and thus the discoverer of human purpose. Through self-awareness we can know what it is we want for ourselves. Without such direction, we can be easily manipulated. Without such direction, we are void. Such a void can be filled by any authority, or remain empty and be glossed over by rampant desire-fulfilment. Self-awareness must fill the void through its perpetual searching, it must find direction within ourselves, and ready us for the inevitable changes we will need to make. Only through such daring reflection can we distinguish where our ideas have come from: did we accept them ourselves after conscious deliberation or were they imposed upon us from the outside? How much of our personality traits have we chosen, and how much have we absorbed through habit and soaking in our environment? What do we want to keep, and what 'demons' do we want to exorcise?

By examining our actions we become sceptical. Once we habituate to this scepticism, we have an automatic shield which can filter out falsehood. Self-awareness is thus the first step into wisdom. It is also important for self-control, and can provide us with recognition of what we are capable of. It is the most important virtue, but not the cardinal virtue; self-awareness is like the necessary soil in which the ultimate virtue may take seed.

- Humility: One who has humility is not competitive in a win-at-all costs way. Whilst competition can be a good driving force, without humility it is bound to become destructive and create a world of egotists and show-offs; as per our own consumerist dystopia. As so many problems of unequal wealth distribution and competition for status pervade our age, humility may well be one of the most powerful virtues which bring about a fairer situation - if only the powerful and boisterous could be convinced to embrace it!

Humility can be the source of a great sense of humour. Laughing at ourselves makes life bearable, and prevents us from taking everything too seriously. The 'seriousness' and pretense of society is the veil hiding many evils which lurk beneath. A sneering maxim against this pretentious evil could be: Polite lies trump vulgar truths. Laughter must wash away this arrogance, exposing the flesh of our hypocrisy to scrutiny.

- Courage: The first two virtues of self-awareness and humility must come before courage. Courage can be a vice if one is courageous for the wrong reasons. Yet without courage, we cannot defend that which we hold dear. As we must fight to create any form of change in ourselves, and in society, we need courage. We can discover the best of all possible options through wisdom, but courage is to put ideas into action. Daring to speak out and be wrong is also a massively courageous act. To this end, the following maxim can be useful: Action without thought is stupidity. Thought without action is cowardice. Cleverness is not enough - we must be daring!

- Compassion: We have to concern ourselves with the journeys of others, as others will concern themselves with us. It is a simple, mutual exchange at the heart of it. We should recognise that compassion for others is compassion for ourselves, for it is impossible to be truly satisfied in a world of inequality and suffering. As the virtues should be qualities leading us to create the ideal society, we recognise that our character is influenced by the culture which created us. Without compassion, we can love only those who are immediately around us, and this is a form of 'loving tyranny', where anyone outside of our immediate sphere ceases to exist.

Compassion, blossoming out of our natural connection to all things, is to be spread as far as the mind might reach. The true test of the heart lies as much in caring for a stranger than it does a loved one. If we need a more direct stimulus to be compassionate, let our own suffering lead us to empathy, and it need not be an abstract idea.

However, we cannot always be compassionate, especially not to those who would destroy us. Nor can we allow it to be the sole, blanket response to whatever problem may arise. Compassion could be insulting, and threaten our virtue of humility. An easy maxim to remember this can be as thus: Respecting others is as important as loving them, as we shall see in the next virtue.

- Dignity: We must tread softly with compassion. To be too willing to help can be patronising. Worse yet, to be compassionate to someone can accustom them to dependency, especially if we do not recognise their ability to be self-aware. Creating such dependency is not a virtue.

Dignity is the ability to decide for oneself what one will do, or not do. It is freedom; especially freedom from harm or coercion. Dignity is the virtue which arises from the sum total of all our individuality; it is the sacred pride which rests around an individual's character like an aura, protecting them from any injustice. It promises us our own space to grow and develop, and prevents people from dominating our lives and trampling our individual privacy.

The dignity of the individual relates to the actual physical and mental person: who they are, not what they possess. A person's private property, therefore, is not their dignity, though it may be their means toward it - I am not defined by the house I happen to live in, but without it I have a much harder struggle to find any dignity, privacy, safety, and so forth. Dignity, rediscovered in what we do and not what we have, is the anchor of virtuous character; if we are dignified then we might treat others with the respect they deserve. When we place the dignity of private property over the dignity of individuals, we end up with absurd acts of waste, such as having more vacant houses than homeless persons.

- Patience: All things good take time. There is nothing of value that is instant, and little of value that is given. We must be able to wait. So many 'evils' come not from malice, but impatience. At great speed it becomes hard to consider those in our way. Patience is not a virtue in the consumerist value system. Far from it, it is an obstacle which needs to be torn down! Patience is eroded away by convenience and withered to nothing by instant gratification.

Willingness to suffer through bad periods is essential in our struggle as individuals and world-savers! Knowing when to strike is more important than the strike itself. We must have nerve. We must be prepared to wait generations. Revolution is impatience taken to extremes. At the same time, we must not allow patience to give us an excuse to do nothing. Nor must we hide from the world and allow ourselves to become lax.

- Creativity is the 'cardinal' virtue. It is creativity that makes life bearable and presents us with progress, in creating new technologies, works of art, great philosophy, and so forth. The self-generative principle inside each of us must be given the opportunity to flourish, for the incredible results it will produce.

Creativity gives us a form of purpose, but certainly not a linear one; for we never know what will emerge from us. Rather than aiming for a horizon, which, when reached leaves us feeling disappointed, creativity is spontaneous, and perhaps a little more unpredictable. It could almost be called a divine gift, if only there was such a celestial realm.  Yet there need not be any transcendent planes of existence to explain human creativity; it is what it is, a gift of Nature, and it is all that we need to be bathed in eternal wonder. It is we who created the gods, not the gods who created us. Creativity is all the magic and divinity a humanist needs.

With creativity as the primary virtue, there is less need for temperance and moderation. For it is not restraint and harsh discipline that leads to blessedness, but blessedness that leads to restraint. And the way we become blessed is by harnessing our own individual creativity. Frugality also follows creativity, as the creator-artist is more concerned with their project than any hoard of wealth.

Through creativity we can complete ourselves, and rarely grow bored. To overcome soul-dampening consumerism (a lack of creativity, an unsatisfying void-filler) we need this virtue. It enables us to do much with little. Resourcefulness is also a virtue enshrined within creativity. Doing something new with what is already there is the pinnacle of human ingenuity - we don't always need to create something new! It is creative use of our resources that will enable us to to be environmental world-savers, not more resources.

So much hinges on this virtue becoming cardinal, though never an end in and of itself. Art for art's sake is creativity as an end in itself, and is as contrived as it is pretentious. One last dangerously catchy maxim for the road!: Creativity without justice is trivia.

I do think that creativity is massively political. What will tear down the grey walls of inhuman bureaucracy and flatten the towering pyramids of unequal class and status? My answer is simply to transcend these things and imagine something better. And this 'transcendence' follows from the recognition of oneself as the pinnacle of human evolution - an artist – and to be an artist one must possess the cardinal virtue of creativity.

Selim 'Selim' Talat

Desire and Individualism

“If thou wilt make a man happy, add not unto his riches but take away from his desires.” - Epicurus

How better to start an article on desire than with a quote by Epicurus - called by many the happiest man who ever lived. And before we continue, let us not equate the 'man' in his quote with an actual, male man. Epicurus was one of the few ancient Greek philosophers to teach women and slaves. Now, to deploy some counter-intuition!

The culture of desire we find ourselves in is often labelled 'individualistic'. This seems intuitive - a desire fulfilled means someone is getting what they want. Yet desire is not an individualism. Desire comes from outside of the self, and depends on an intrusive external object to manifest itself. It is not a creative flourishing or self-expression; desiring something and getting it does not make you a unique individual. We do not choose to desire things, we merely choose between desires. This means that desire can, and is, engineered from without.

If the ability to desire something were determined from within me, I could look at, say, a tissue and desire it! Yet the tissue is already mine, it is not separate from me. In the shaky language of property, I 'own' the tissue. Where is its mystique, its appeal? The tissue has none. I desire only the superior tissue - the iTissue 5G, with its multivarious (but ultimately futile) gadgets. This new, special tissue lies beyond my grasp, and that is precisely its appeal. Once something is claimed, tasted, possessed, it loses appeal, revealed as the charlatan it is. So, it cannot be said that my desire is individualistic, because once obtained the desire creates no inner-fulfillment. It is only when a desire is unclaimed that it can promise fulfillment.

By comparison, if I wanted a lute I could get one, but I would need to work on playing it. The lute would be the beginning of an endless journey of self-discovery and creation. My desire to become better at the lute is vague, an adventure through mist. It is a journey that can be entirely unique to myself as an individual. My creative urges on the lute would be spontaneous, seemingly emerging out of nothing; out of my self? Only I can fulfill this want to become a master-lutist! Whereas the desire for the iTissue 5G is direct, highlighted and colourful like the petals of a flower. Like a bee I would have to buzz along a certain prescribed path to then obtain the snazzy tissue of my dreams. Most people can fulfil this desire, ending up in the same place as everyone else, and so it does not differentiate them from other desirers.

To continue on from the previous point, the word 'individualist' is bandied about and hurled at those who are possessive of material objects. Yet to participate in rampant desiring (i.e. consumerism) is not 'greed', it is artificial 'need'. It is the lack of individuality, rather than an expression of it. It demonstrates the individuals inability to complete themselves. It is the most obvious form of conformity available to us today! It may be disguised as an individualism - promising uniqueness or identity for example - but this is a mere deception. Desire operates at the level of 'Man the herd-beast'. Desire is encouraged by our environment, it is generated by masses (if I had to simplify the history of Man into a single sentence, I would proclaim: 'He has one. Therefore I want one!')

This herd mentality obscures the true quality of the things we desire. Desire obscures quality, it does not indicate it. Things that are desired are desirable because they are desired. A thing will be talked about because it is talked about. This is herd, not an individualism. Furthermore, things can become ultra-desirable by virtue of being exclusive, to make one feel special for obtaining them. This is an equally spurious reason to desire something. To bring these general claims into reality, let us consider the following.

Advertising in the previous era would emphasize that by obtaining a product, this would raise one above all competition; towering over the meagre herd, offering a step-up into this dream-world of glamour and envy. Today's advertising tends to be different. It promises to share an experience with our herd (such as a party-inducing bucket of factory-farmed chicken) and to demonstrate just how much one is enjoying oneself among said herd. Both are deceptive ploys, and both are overly concerned with the herd. Again, it does not sound terribly individualistic to me.

This demonstrates how desire is dependent on what others think and feel. It is thus further removed from 'individualistic greed'. Intuitively, it is much easier to explain rampant material possession as an individual not considering what everyone else thinks. This I believe to be the wrong way round; it is someone all too conscious of what others think and feel who wants more than everyone else. Yet there is another reason why desire cannot exist within a healthy individualism: self-control.

For desire is not 'used up'. The faster one fulfills desires, the more one wants. For instance, suppose I desired a pair of new socks once every week. I would become accustomed to obtaining one new pair of socks a week. Without that one pair of socks, I would feel frustration, and emptiness. Yet suppose that one pair was not enough and I lost my discipline. I now purchase two pairs of socks a week. I now need more socks, and more, and more. When the novelty of two pairs falls away, I will need three, then four. Eventually, I am obtaining five new pairs of socks a week, and I become accustomed to this. Obtaining more socks hasn't made me want less socks, it has made me want more. Desire operates in cycles of wanting, followed by acquiring, followed by brief fulfillment, before returning to 'want'. Paradoxically, being able to get what one wants faster, simply leaves one desiring more, as the cycle of 'want' and 'acquire' is shortened.

These cycles of desire cannot be overcome in their entirety - we are desiring machines. For this reason, I do not call desire an individualism; desire does not represent our individuality (and to paraphrase Max Stirner somewhat, they hardly belong to us at all). An understanding of ourselves as creatures of 'yesterday-today-tomorrow' could help us understand where our desires come from, and such an understanding provides us with greater self-control. Yet nothing can extinguish desire itself, no matter how much we wish to. The pursuit of relinquishing desire is itself a painful task. The biblical saints used to go out into the desert to escape material temptation - something even I would balk at! Desire in and of itself is no evil, no guilt, nor shame. As imperfect beings we are bound to have a few vices. It is merely the means of obtaining our desires - namely how much harm they cause on the way - that should provoke ethical alarm.

My conclusion is simple. Being surrounded by desire is not an indicator of individualism. To be put-upon and judged is not the breeding ground of self-development and a healthy individualism. Freedom to be a self-mastered individual is freedom from rampant desiring. We should not measure happiness in how often we obtain what we desire; whoever dies with the most toys dies the emptiest.

How soon once one has possessed something, is one possessed by it?

Selim 'Selim' Talat

The happiest person who ever lived...Epicurus

The word epicurean I imagine to be rarely used. It seems to be colonized by an impossibly pretentious gaggle of gourmet food enthusiasts, who have perverted the name of a great historical figure. Somehow, they have decided to take the least materially hedonistic philosopher in two and a half thousand years of western philosophy, and apply his name-label to the act of being materially hedonistic! It is akin to starting a philanthropic movement and calling it napoleonic.

Those of us who respect the word epicurean beyond the consumption of some tortured animals flesh, or a quaff of pretentiously overpriced, fancy wine, should fight to have the theft of our beloved word revoked. And of course, we are not only fighting for a mere word, but the legacy it represents!

Yet before this article resumes, let us take pause and consider Epicurus of Samos, a philosopher who lived in Athens for most of his (incalculably happy) life. Epicurus lived in an academy of his own creation, The Garden, surrounded by his disciples and friends. He opened the doors of this academy to women and slaves, who at the time were not given the same opportunities as manly, beard-stroking men.

In summary, Epicurus taught that fear of death and general anxiety were the ultimate driving forces of misery, and that to live a happy life we must be free from them. As he did not believe in gods (at best considereding them distant and unconcerned with our affairs) or an afterlife, this meant that Epicurus' goal was the seeking of happiness in this life, with happiness as an end in itself - thus making him a hedonist. 

However the epicurean is not a hedonist in the vein that the word has acquired, a pleasure seeker whose sole purpose is to obtain physical treats (the cyrenaics are an example of a greek philosophical school matching this description; a consumer is a modern example). Epicurus was a hedonist who considered friendship, independence, freedom from fear of death and an analysed life as the height of all pleasures. 

He taught that the small joys in life will lead to a state of content happiness, a freedom from anxiety the Greek's named ataraxia. The hedonist who wants it all will find herself plunged into a world of anxiety and uncertainty in order to obtain her every whim - she will have to work extra hard to sustain her material treats; if she steals, she will always have to look over her shoulder. By asking for little we can stay out of danger, we can appreciate what we have, we can be happy right here, right now.  We can gain control of our lives only when we have overcome desire.

This is the basis of Epicurean Virtues.

In contrast to ascetics:

We cannot truly call an epicurean ascetic. It is the contemplative monk we would call ascetic, for his self-denial is an extreme act of rejecting earthly experience in the name of some higher realm. The monk seems to thrive on a holier-than-thou attitude. He inadvertantly makes himself a novelty to be observed by people; his extremism is fascinating, but not inspirational. People will see the monk and think, 'Let us admire his holiness! Look at how he lives, what a moral character!' but they will not see the monk as a realistic example - the monk is too far removed from the onlookers goals of earthly physical pleasure to seriously affect those people. 

The epicurean lifestyle may appear similar to the monk's. The epicurean shuns the so-called material pleasures drifting around her. Her refusal to participate may appear to have the same motives as the monk; a rejection of earthy pleasure for the sake of some higher spiritual ideal. 

Yet how different the epicurean is from the monk! In fact, the epicurean has less in common with the monk than the holy man's supposed opposite; the pleasure seeker. The monk and the seeker have both acknowledged certain physical things as being desirable. The monk then refuses those desires, whilst the seeker indulges in them as often as possible. The epicurean says, 'Desire is not pleasurable'.  The epicurean is not refusing (so-called) life, but is refusing the facade of happiness offered her. She has come to realize that self-denial ultimately lies in the endless desire for physical pleasures, and that by passing over these transient treats she can reach a state of constant happiness which is far more rewarding. 

Unlike the monk, the epicurean is not chasing an afterworld, she is not relying on anything outside that which she can experience to give her life meaning - she is not denying this life for the next. The epicurean does not consider herself a sacrificial novelty for some higher goal - the epicurean rejects most physical pleasure and is happier for it! Whats more, the epicurean is not a novelty, but is someone who can argue her philosophy and actually live it. Epicureanism offers people the opportunity to be happy, not to deny themselves happiness like an ascetic.

To be fair, the word ascetic can also apply to one who 'abstains from the normal pleasures of life', yet even this definition, and its use of the word abstain, implies that the epicurean is somehow withdrawing from something; they are abstaining from normal pleasure. In my eyes, the epicurean has long since passed over those supposed pleasures, and is not so much abstaining as she is indifferent to them.

To conclude, please do not poison the concept and the word epicurean by associating it with the hedonistic morons who have so captured the beloved word, and next time you are at the table with a real epicurean, do not be surprised when she refuses your eloquently prepared veal steak, but rather understand that she is refusing your hard work in the name of her own state of happiness. She most certainly will not feel like she is missing out on anything, nor punishing herself for the love of some divine higher-realm.

Selim 'Selim' Talat