So I saw the Misanthrope last night for the first time and I kept thinking to myself how perfect this show is for you guys. The timing couldn't have been better. Go see it as the subjects of frank speech, courage, integrity and courage abound in this show. For those of you who have seen it or who do see it, I would love to chat about it with you.
As for the question of the day....What is the care of self and how does Foucault relate it to the practices of the Epicureans, Stoics and Cynics?
See you soon,
Dr. Layne
As Foucault discusses Socrates, it seems that the 'care of the self' represents the education and forming and development of the individual. This basic definition, however, is represented in various ways for each of the philosophical groups mentioned.
ReplyDeleteFor the Stoics, this concept seems somewhat straightforward. In Laches, the older generals are concerned with the care of their sons, seeking to discover which kind of education they should receive. So, if to care for the self is defined by the development of the individual, for the Stoics, this very much includes the learning system and the information itself that is included. This learning helps develop the individual, as does the comparison and questioning by individuals who are the touchstones. The Stoics measure such development by who well ones words and actions match up. Therefore, care of the self is based upon how well one lives up to their ideas and speech.
The Epicureans certainly value frankness, because as they are the most community based of the three, the ability and freedom to speak truthfully and frankly is necessary to help others develop and grow. This concept is shown in their communal confession ceremonies, in which they would all disclose their shortcomings, flaws, and thoughts to one another. As it translates, this act granted them access to the good, beautiful life. The care for the self was to develop one's self and have the ability to receive access to such a life.
The cynics viewed this concept as much more of a daily lived action, leaving behind very little information of their specific doctrine. They believed that life itself and how individuals lived was the touchstone to how well they understood the truth. This idea is summed up in the statement Foucault makes, saying, "a person is nothing else but his relation to truth, and that this relation to truth takes shape or is given form in his own life." Therefore, care of the self is not only understanding the truth, but living as close to it as humanly possible.
I can do little more than say, "Ditto." I think Phil did a wonderful job of summarizing each philosophy while including all the significant aspects. Just to add a tiny bit more detail, the Epicureans believed in practicing parrhesia communally so as to help each individual discover himself or herself. Through this, he or she would then have access to the universal truth, and would therefore know the truth of life, the world, etc.
ReplyDeleteThe Cynics did wholeheartedly believe in following examples rather than doctrines, but that didn't mean that they only communicated the truth through deeds. Besides mass preaching, Foucault goes into great detail about the anecdote of a discussion between Diogenes and Alexander. Diogenes plays the parrhesiastic game with Alexander, but in a very different way from Socrates. Diogenes instead uses insult and trickery to prove to Alexander that he is not what he thinks he is, rather than using questioning and irony to prove that he does not know what he claims to.
Finally, the Stoics (or at least Plutarch and Galen) felt that because of one's natural self-love, one could never honestly discover truth by oneself. What was required was another - preferably a relatively unknown - who had a reputation for being a truth-teller. They must demonstrate through their deeds and a steadfast mind that they are not a flatterer, but are truthful in all aspects of life. Only with the assistance of another can one discover the truth of themselves, and thereby gain access to the universal truth.
Yes, it seems clear that care of oneself refers to a mental car: a furthering of the search for the good.
ReplyDeleteThe stoics seemed to find this good in a control of one's emotions, and a unifying of one's emotions to one will. in that way, their ability to will calm and their actual calm would constitute the good. self mastery is their good.
the epicuraians seems to find the good in self-knowledge. by acknowledging their flaws, in a community, they can work on them and improve-themselves. they appreciate blunt truth. by working as a community, they can avoid-self decepton.
the cynics were much more tricky, but seemed to find the good in being good. actions, not words, matterd to them.
as for the misanthrope- i agree. the production was very good on most levels, and it brought up some powerful questions. it was rather depressing, seeing that suggestion that only self-deception can lead to happiness, but we all deceive ourselves anyways, so perhaps it was right. i'd hate to see what we would do in an Epicurean style community truth blow out.
The care of self is a concept that Foucault explores through the example of the Laches. “Care of the self” is an end pursued through the means of parrhesia. One would practice free speech so that the target or object changes their lives in order to better care for themselves. This lines up with the idea of criticism; bettering that which the parrhesiastic figure criticizes by the way of caring for ones self.
ReplyDeleteCare of the self, the goal of parrhesia, is valued differently by each philosophy. The Epicureans value parrhesia as a part of the community. The want to better the whole by helping each individual in the community find that treasured ultimate happiness. He notes that some Epicurean communities had group confessions of “thoughts, faults, and misbehaviors” in order to “gain access to a good, beautiful, and happy life.” This practice is a perfect example of how parrhesia could lead to care of the self (in this case, both the courageous speaker and their audience). The Stoic valued parrhesia as a part of personal relationships. They focused on betterment of the self through education and other immediate ways. The Cynics viewed parrhesia as a component of public activity or demonstration-- bettering or caring for the self through care of the masses. It was a public quest to better all selves.
I agree with Phil in that care of the self involves the development and education on the individual. (Yay Phil!!!)
ReplyDeleteFor Cynicism, Foucault presents the idea of parrhesia as a public activity or a public demonstration. The Cynic philosopher becomes the sole possessor of parrhesia and must reject nomos, or the law. For an example, he uses Plato's Laches, in which he sees an example of parrhesia in Socrates. Socrates is the only one of the five Laches characters who can serve a parrhesiatic role; as the others are unsure how to raise their sons, they come to Socrates for advice, and he practices parrhesia in his answer. Care of the self for Cynics, therefore, seems to be based on the ability of an individual to find truth in another individual, or a teacher. That individual then can turn around and transmit truth to other people seeking advice.
For Epicureanism, Foucault presents parrhesia as an important part of community life. Throughout the text, there is a running theme of parrhesia as a tool or means to accomplish practical goals in politics, etc. Care of the self therefore appears to lie in more than just the upkeep of one's personal pursuits; one must also participate actively for the betterment of the community.
For Stoicism, Foucault presents parrhesia as an aspect of personal relationships--though he makes it a point to not limit the concept. Care of the self for Stoics seems to involve, as Kirby mentioned, self-mastery. One had to know oneself and curb personal desires and tendencies to ultimately become a better individual.