Classics and the Western Canon discussion
General
>
Planning for our third 2017 read
date
newest »
newest »
message 51:
by
Everyman
(new)
Apr 18, 2017 01:06PM
I don't want to pre-judge the vote, but if Cicero does win, and you want to buy a copy of the work, it can be found as either On Obligations or On Duties. Same work.
reply
|
flag
You may also see it referred to by its Latin title:
De Officiis
(
On Duties
or
On Obligations
) is a treatise by Marcus Tullius Cicero divided into three books, in which Cicero expounds his conception of the best way to live, behave, and observe moral obligations.
I am trying to decide between:
On Obligations by P.G. Walsh, and,
On Duties: A Guide To Conduct, Obligations, And Decision-Making a recent translation by Quintus Curtius, a practicing lawyer claiming to give the translation an updated and lawyerly edge that Cicero would approve of.
I will also reference the free Perseus text.
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/t...
M. Tullius Cicero. De Officiis. With An English Translation. Walter Miller. Cambridge. Harvard University Press; Cambridge, Mass., London, England. 1913.
Just in case the trend for surprising election results continues, I may stick with the PDF version of Hume's work from earlymoderntexts.com
http://www.earlymoderntexts.com/autho...
I have not found a good kindle version of Hume's work that I like or isn't just a quick cut and past job from Project Gutenberg.
David wrote: "I am trying to decide between:On Obligations by P.G. Walsh, and,
[bookcover:On Duties: A Guide To Conduct, Obligations, And Decision-Making|30..."
Thanks for the links, David.
If Hume wins, I will be reading the edition I used for a philosophy class on the first Enquiry: An Enquiry concerning Human Understanding, edited by Tom Beauchamp. It is a student edition based on the Clarendon text of Hume, which is the standard critical edition. The student edition is helpfully laid out, with useful notes. But I voted for Cicero, and will be looking for a bilingual edition. My Latin was never good enough to read Ciceroin the original, and is nowhere near as good as it used to be anyway, but it's still nice to have for reference.
Are there major differences between the various editions of Hume's Enquiry? I'm going to read the free edition from Gutenberg (http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/9662) along with one audiobook from Audible (three audiobook versions there).
These days, for the first time since my daughter's birth, I seem to be able to find significant time to read, so I may be able to join you for Cicero (who looks to be winning the current poll).
Nemo wrote: "Are there major differences between the various editions of Hume's Enquiry? ."If there are, I'm not aware of them. He wrote in English, of course, so there's no issue of translation differences.
Rex wrote: "These days, for the first time since my daughter's birth, I seem to be able to find significant time to read, so I may be able to join you for Cicero (who looks to be winning the current poll)."Excellent. We'll be glad to have you joining us.
In response to any disappointment felt in Hume's current deficiency in the run off poll for our next read, I would like to offer some potential relief by suggesting one or more of these four Hume essays, or others in the public domain, for consideration for an interim read.Tragedy
The Standard of Taste
Suicide
The Immortality of the Soul
They can be found for free here:
http://www.earlymoderntexts.com/asset...
I would hate for David to be disappointed! [g]Actually, though, even before his plaint, he Moderators considered the two options, Cicero and Hume. Both are relatively short, for what we normally read here, and if Cicero wins, as looks likely, or if Hume comes back with a Patriots-level comeback (football fans will get it, others just ignore the comment), in either case we would need to start a fresh poll for the following read very soon.
Both books were well ahead of the competition in the first poll, and both books are getting good support in the run-off. So to avoid having to go though another voting process so soon, and not to disappoint the adherents of either book, we will go ahead and read both, in the order in which they win the raw vote (which will save me having to calculate the weighted vote). Both books are very worthy of our attention, and the two together (with the usual Interim Read between) will take about as much time to read as a more normal length selection.
We trust that this will meet with the approval of at least most members of the group.
Everyman wrote: "I would hate for David to be disappointed! [g]Actually, though, even before his plaint, he Moderators considered the two options, Cicero and Hume. Both are relatively short, for what we normally ..."
Thanks, Everyman. I'm a little disappointed that we're not reading and probably will never read Hume's Treatise of Human Nature, which would qualify as a major read, but isn't even on our bookshelf, and I suppose there is no use adding it for it will never be selected.
Great plan re Cicero and Hume. I want to read both so am pleased I get to do so one after another.
Everyman wrote: "I would hate for David to be disappointed! [g]. . .and not to disappoint the adherents of either book, we will go ahead and read both"
Great idea, but now I am disappointed we don't get to read the Hume essays! :)
Patrice wrote: "agree, great plan. as yogi berra once said, when you come to a fork in the road, take it!"
You mean when you come to "Hume's fork" in the road, take it. :)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hume%...
Any idea which one you will do first? I have had trouble keeping up with the pace in the past, and my only chance of participating is getting a head start.
David wrote: "I would like to offer some potential relief by suggesting one or more of these four Hume essays, or others in the public domain, for consideration for an interim read."I've copied the link; who knows whether they might show up some day. Keep your eyes peeled! (Though not right around the Hume reading; some time when nobody is expecting them.)
Icydove wrote: "Any idea which one you will do first? I have had trouble keeping up with the pace in the past, and my only chance of participating is getting a head start."In the order they finish in the poll. Right now, that means that Cicero would be first. And since the poll now doesn't matter, since we're reading both, I doubt that anybody will bother voting now. But if they do, and Hume makes a late dash to the post, then that will change. But I'm assuming Cicero first.
David wrote: "You mean when you come to "Hume's fork" in the road, take it. :)"Better that than Morton's Fork!
Everyman wrote: "Better that than Morton's Fork!"Who knew there was so much philosophical flatware?
Excellent news on the double read! I was thinking of giving Hume a go in any case, but am now much more likely to do so with the group.
Nemo wrote: "I'm a little disappointed that we're not reading and probably will never read Hume's Treatise of Human Nature, which would qualify as a major read, but isn't even on our bookshelf, and I suppose there is no use adding it for it will never be selected. "Of course it should be on the bookshelf -- I've added it, and thanks for noticing its absence.
As to whether it will be selected if nominated, who knows. Maybe if enough people read and appreciate the following squib, they'll be willing to vote for it:
From Goodreads on the Treatise:
A Treatise of Human Nature (1739-40), David Hume's comprehensive attempt to base philosophy on a new, observationally grounded study of human nature, is one of the most important texts in Western philosophy. It is also the focal point of current attempts to understand 18th-century philosophy. The Treatise first explains how we form such concepts as cause and effect, external existence, and personal identity, and to form compelling but unconfirmable beliefs in the entities represented by these concepts. It then offers a novel account of the passions, explains freedom and necessity as they apply to human choices and actions, and concludes with detailed explanations of how we distinguish between virtue and vice and of the different kinds of virtue. Hume's Abstract of the Treatise, also included in the volume, outlines his 'chief argument' regarding our conception of, and belief in, cause and effect.
The importance of the Treatise is obvious when you see that a Goodread search on the title brings up many, many books of commentary and analysis. Not as many as The Republic, perhaps, but not far behind.
And a reminder -- if you see a book that should be on the bookshelf and isn't, let the moderators know.
Everyman wrote: "Nemo wrote: "I'm a little disappointed that we're not reading and probably will never read Hume's Treatise of Human Nature, which would qualify as a major read, but isn't even on our bookshelf, and..."My impression is that the Enquiry IS an abstract of the Treatise. Once we've read the gist of Hume's arguments, I'm not sure the extended version will still be worth reading. We'll see... (Anyone want to guess which one will be selected by the group first, anything by Aristotle or Hume's Treatise? :) )
Just to clarify, we can still add books to the group shelf ourselves without notifying the moderators, is that right?
Nemo wrote: "My impression is that the Enquiry IS an abstract of the Treatise...."Nemo -- take a look at the Wiki article on Hume for one view on the relationships of Hume's writings. It almost sounds to me as if the "pieces" should stimulate an appetite for the whole, but can't tell for certain....
Nemo wrote: "My impression is that the Enquiry IS an abstract of the Treatise. Once we've read the gist of Hume's arguments, I'm not sure the extended version will still be worth reading. We'll see..."The relationship between the two is more complicated than that. The First Enquiry is a product of Hume's mature philosophy, and as such gains much more focus today. While heavily based on Book One of the Treatise, as Tom Beauchamp says in his introduction to the work, "it is not merely a restyled version of the Treatise: it is an original work with a large body of new material."
Book Three of the Treatise received a similar treatment in the Second Enquiry (An Enquiry concerning the Principles of Morals).
Lily wrote: "Nemo wrote: "My impression is that the Enquiry IS an abstract of the Treatise...."Nemo -- take a look at the Wiki article on Hume for one view on the relationships of Hume's writings. It almost s..."
I read it when you first posted the Wiki link. :)
I also found the following ~20 min video on Hume informative. It is one of a series of intros to philosophers. The prof seems to be of the opinion that the Treatise is Hume's best work.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uI0z8...
Nemo wrote: "...The prof seems to be of the opinion that the Treatise is Hume's best work...."That is the view I have developed as I have been exploring his writings. I have downloaded it and started to read it. One of the things that concerns me is the extent to which the "pieces" pick up the section on passion, which seems to be one of the places of human query and research today -- to what extent did the "rational brain" evolve to control the "emotional brain" versus to "justify" and support it? Haidt's work is driving my interest.
For what it's worth, I also love the idea of reading both.
Nemo wrote: "Just to clarify, we can still add books to the group shelf ourselves without notifying the moderators, is that right? ."Not any longer. We were getting some inappropriate additions, books about philosophy instead of philosophy, books of non-Western literature, books being put on the "read" shelf instead of the "to read" shelf so it looked as though we had already read them, and they wouldn't show up as possible nominations since I only run that on the "to read" shelf, all of which required time to correct every time I went to run the random number generator, so we set it so only the moderators can add books.
Thanks for the explanation, Everyman. How the times have changed! :)
Nemo wrote: "Thanks for the explanation, Everyman. How the times have changed! :)"Some things have. Fortunately, the quality of the participants and discussion here hasn't.
David wrote: "These are my suggestions, but others will no doubt suggest other works.."Thank you for the list. It's helpful for newcomers wanting to get their feet wet on the subject. Would you recommend reading Russell before diving into the other titles mentioned?
Sarah wrote: "David wrote: "These are my suggestions, but others will no doubt suggest other works.."Thank you for the list. It's helpful for newcomers wanting to get their feet wet on the subject. Would you r..."
No. I would suggest you either start with the first Plato book, or Descartes' Meditations.
The Russell is after all, a history of philosophy, and as such really a secondary source. However, as a history, it will obviously introduce you to many more philosophers than the eight I suggested. Moreover, written by one of the great philosophers of the twentieth century, it is a classic in its own right. As, I said, I haven't read the whole work, but just various chapters concerning philosophers I was interested in. Maybe I should soon. Russell also has a reputation for being very opinionated about the views of the philosophers he is discussing, which I think is a good thing, as it forces you to ask yourself whether you agree with his assessment. But if you prefer a more straightforward descriptive history, you won't find it here.
David wrote: "No. I would suggest you either start with the first Plato book, or Descartes' Meditations."Thanks for your input. I'll read all three. I don't mind an overview. I know the nuggets will follow and I'm able to connect the dots much easier as others are added to the mix.
Everyman,Don't we normally have an Interim Read between major reads? Not that I'm complaining about meeting Cicero so soon. :)
Nemo wrote: "Everyman,Don't we normally have an Interim Read between major reads? Not that I'm complaining about meeting Cicero so soon. :)"
Indeed we do. It will be posted before the end of the evening, even though it officially doesn't start until tomorrow. But I post Tuesday evening so the East Coasters won't have to wait until we West Coasters have arisen.
The Cicero posts aren't for starting the discussion, that won't start for two weeks, but we always post background and reading schedule ahead of time, though this week I might have been a few days earlier than usual.
But anyhow, yes, the Interim Read is coming soon! It's been picked out, and I'm just finishing putting together the opening post.
Patrice wrote: "just want to express my appreciation. you do such a great job!"Thanks. I appreciate that. It's a lot of fun, even if also some work, but it's made very much worth it by the great group of people assembled here who add so much richness to my life.
Just want to clarify: will you begin Hume on June 14th? I hope to join you for that one.
Kathy wrote: "Just want to clarify: will you begin Hume on June 14th? I hope to join you for that one."No. The current schedule does have us finishing up Cicero on June 13, though that may get extended. Whenever we finish it, there will be the usual two week Interim Read, then we will start Hume. Except that occasionally the Interim Reads are three weeks if they are slightly longer works, like a Shakespeare play.
All very confusing, I know! But Hume won't start until 28 at the earliest, and maybe a week or two later than that if we extend either of the other works.
But the reading schedule will be posted before the discussion begins, so as they say, watch this space!!
Ah, got it! I didn't realize there would be another interim read first. Thanks for the clarification!
Kathy wrote: "Ah, got it! I didn't realize there would be another interim read first. Thanks for the clarification!"There's always an interim read, primarily so that people can feel easy finishing the current book and keeping active with the discussion and not feeling that they have to start the next book to be ready to discuss the very next day. It gives a bit of a breather between the heavier works, what I call an intellectual palate cleanser. But mainly, I find in groups which go straight from one book to the next that people fade out in the last week or two of a book so as to get started on the next book so as not to get behind. Which is okay if the object is mostly to read the books and the discussion is secondary, but here the discussion is central to the group experience, so we don't want people feeling pressured to get on to the next book before they're really finished with the current one.
Everyman wrote: "The Random Number Generator, in its wisdom (it's of course not actually making the decisio..."What list do you draw from in order to make your selections?
Bryan wrote: "Everyman wrote: "The Random Number Generator, in its wisdom (it's of course not actually making the decisio..."What list do you draw from in order to make your selections?"
The group's Bookshelf, specifically the "to read" shelf.
Everyman wrote: "The group's Bookshelf, specifically the "to read" shelf."Ah...thank you!
Classics and the Western Canon
Books mentioned in this topic
An Enquiry concerning the Principles of Morals (other topics)An Enquiry concerning Human Understanding (other topics)
On Obligations (other topics)
On Obligations (other topics)
On Obligations (other topics)
More...
