Sunday, January 22, 2017

Science is a Driving Force of the Women's March on Washington and Around the Globe

“Both skepticism and wonder are skills that need honing and practice. Their harmonious marriage within the mind of every schoolchild ought to be a principal goal of public education. I’d love to see such a domestic felicity portrayed in the media, television especially: a community of people really working the mix — full of wonder, generously open to every notion, dismissing nothing except for good reason, but at the same time, and as second nature, demanding stringent standards of evidence — and these standards applied with at least as much rigor to what they hold dear as to what they are tempted to reject with impunity.” 
 -  Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark (1996)

Fairbanks Alaska, 1/21/2017

“Without science, democracy is impossible,” - Bertrand Russell, Education and the Good Life (1926)

See Images of Women's March around the globe at The New York Times

Monday, January 2, 2017

Overcoming the Dominant Script of the Masses: The Adventure of Ana-theism and its Libido, Bārāq

“It is the tyranny of hidden prejudices that makes us deaf to what speaks to us in tradition . . .
the hermeneutical problem.”   - Hans-Georg Gadamer, Truth and Method

As a professed ana-theist, I do not need to agree nor participate in the national political fascinations, anxieties and dramatics that captivate (mediate) the masses. When the nation-state appears more lost than ever, sucked up in the vortex of political fever and anxiety, I am reminded that I am identified with and mediated by a counter narrative that takes serious the gift of life and the need for a non-anxious, interpretive guide via the great traditions, such as the Jewish and Christian traditions, yet not to exclude the contributions of Eastern and philosophical inputs. I am a Westerner on a journey, and this has been no choice of mine; it’s a necessity for existential survival.  Stanley Hauerwas makes this point plain in his essay, “Christianity: It’s not a Religion; it’s an Adventure.”  “[Y]ou do not choose God’s story. You don’t get to make God; God gets to make you. You are made by being brought into the community through which you discover your story.” [1] And one never really knows where that story unfolds.

It’s clear to someone like me who has passed through the liminal state—out of naïve theism (the majority blindly socialized by a dominate script or narrative), through the necessary force of doubt with the mediating guide of the apophatic tradition guiding me to work out the mythical traditions (hard, dark spaces of caves, clouds and mountains)—transformed to live quietly and yet prophetically (Parrhesia)[2], embracing the thinning niche of my existence.

The liminal state is well illustrated in the mythic story of Jacob (Genesis) the night before he nears the tribe of his brother Esau. Here Jacob in great inner turmoil wrestled with a stranger, demanding a “blessing”. This illustrates the rare epochs of one’s life when faced with the need to give great rigor, wrestling with text/story, language, questions, doubt and life itself in the midst of immense sense certainty[3], injustices, danger, and uncertainty. Wrestling is serious mediation (hermeneutics) that endeavors with courage to seek, explore, witness, and experience Bārāq (Hebrew). Often translated “blessing”, this word is overly and poorly understood by those who live by the dominant script[4]—the narrative for all who have no story, and the underlying script of the majority of Christians and their pastors who do newspaper, television exegesis.

Bārāq is the capacity or perhaps the energy/spirit (geist) to endure with faithfulness and prosperity (a rich Hebraic idea that does not sync with the consumerism of our day). It alludes to the things that feed “generativity versus stagnation” and “integrity verses despair”.[5] Like Job, one can be stripped of everything that life offers yet lacking nothing.  Bārāq provides the mediation, longevity and generativity to overcome the emptiness, the meaninglessness, absurdness of life (society and culture). Ergo, like Jacob, the consequences of wrestling with a stranger is passing through this state and walking away with a permanent limp, i.e., injured in a way that transforms us into a more wholly/fully human being. This is the mark of ana-theism.  In the words of John Caputo (“God Perhaps,” Philosophy Today, 2011) “

Anatheism is a clear, imaginative, fascination and robust account of the life of faith in the postmodern world, a world marked by cultural plurality and religious strife by the astonishing transformations brought on by new information technologies, as well as strident materialistic critiques of religion . . . it is a theism that comes after theism, that returns to theism once again after having passed through a certain non-theism or atheism, which [Richard] Kearney adroitly identifies in various postmodern movements . . . [a] return to faith after doubt [or coming to terms with doubt].”

Sadly, the American Christian right feed off the political machine as if it suffuses our lives with an authority that requires us to work out our allegiance to it while being somehow faithful to the kingdom of God.  Jesus’ wisdom rings true: one cannot have two masters.  Subjection to political government according to the ancient tradition and wisdom (St. Paul in Romans 13) means retaining moral independence and judgment and perhaps suffering the very patience of God. In The Politics of Jesus, John Howard Yoder explains this often misinterpreted text.

The authority of government is not self-justifying. Whatever government exists is ordered by God; but the text does not say that whatever the government does or asks of it citizens is good. . . “they are ministers of God to the extent to which they busy themselves” or “when they devote themselves” or in that they devote themselves” to the assigned function. . . they are ministers of God only to the extent to which they carry our out the function . . . or by virtue of their devoting themselves. . . what is “ordained” is the concept of proper government or the principle of government as such.[6]

From this the question is how to live in servitude (not obedience) along side the governing reality and dominant script, which from a theistic argument, such as Romans 13, is the working out in practical reasoning the ideal of the Kingdom of God. Of course, in a democracy one has a more tolerated response and greater opportunity to serve creatively; and the necessity of a counter narrative is normative and requires imagination, commitment, and humility along with patience, suffering and other virtues such as peacemaking to exist in faithful, generative ways.  An essential practice, e.g., that animates this ideal is hospitality to the stranger. How vital is this when our existing governing powers and the anxiety of the masses systematically forget the poor, immigrants, and marginalized people, while devoting itself to a market economy and ideology? Multitudes are being left out, inapt, without hope and aliveness.

Hope and sadness are intertwined in the paradox of the Jewish and Christian stories. The emergence and development of awareness of the Kingdom of God hungers for the true quality of Bārāq, the capacity that grows out of humility to listen to the universal wisdom that is resident in traditions ("Let one who hears, hear.") and to respond meaningfully with the gift of life (intentionality) among the stranger(s) while living in a politically saturated (mediated) society that holds to a common script that continues to delude the masses over time. Bārāq is the needed spiritual libido of the “great reversal; Ana-theism is the adventure of theism in the post-modern world. Both phenomena in tradition bring understanding to faith and unfold into practice (see Beatitudes). It is not necessary, nor is it anymore necessary to be “Christian” to experience such phenomena and to yearn to be set apart from the dominant script or narrative. Any source of disqualifying and limiting injunction that wants to censure a personal or group definitive awakening out-of the dominate script is primarily from those stuck in the admixture of a theistic view with the dominate script (mostly nationalism).  They will call you either unpatriotic or godless. I say, "Come!"

Identifying, locating and becoming aware of the dominate story is to realize that this is your story if you have no story.  You have been socialized by it no matter what your political affiliation is. So what’s your story? How do you work at and imagine yourself creating possibility in a world of disappointments?    

Here are a few examples of rich, faithful counter narratives linked to sources:
  • New Monasticism is producing a grassroots ecumenism and a prophetic witness within the North American church.
  • The enduring civil rights movement in the spirit of Dr. Martin Luther King, such as Black Lives Matter
  • The School of Life for Atheist is a fresh new paradigm of people seeking communal experience to enrich their personal human welfare
  • Those who have found and teach non-violence having found new narratives in eastern religion and philosophy (see “Being Peace in aWorld of Trauma”)
  • Serious thinking/acting Catholics and others who are guided by the outworking of theology in constructive ways—out of experiences in the world (not stuck in some ancient literal meaning).
  • The L’Arche movement

[1] Stanley Hauerwas, The Hauerwas Reader. Durham: Duke Univ. Press, 2001, 524.
[4] “Therapeutic, technological, consumerist militarism”—the script that permeates all of public life and promises security and “happiness. See   “Blessing” so often in common media is used to refer to material goods or a way of consoling oneself so as to think that “God is on my side.” It reduces God to some sort of sky-bound, wish-granting fairy who spends his days randomly bestowing cars and cash upon his followers.  (see
[6] John Howard Yoder, The Politics of Jesus. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1972, 205.

1. “Jacob wrestling with the Stranger,” from The Book of J, Harold Bloom (1990)

Sunday, December 11, 2016

Gentle Cynicsim as True Life - Part III: Truth Telling, the Authentic Link to Contemporary Practice

“It is the tyranny of hidden prejudices that makes us deaf to what speaks to us in tradition . . . the hermeneutical problem.”   - Hans-Georg Gadamer, Truth and Method

A fresh and critical look at ancient cynicism by way of Michel Foucault, The Courage of the Truth (The Government of Self and Others II) [1] is instructive in reshaping the the notion of a persistent, human foundation of truth telling with one’s life (parrhesia)[2] captured in his title phrase “courage of the truth.” My attention is what and how this notion informs a contemporary praxis of Gentle Cynicism.

To begin, cynicism schematically (Foucault’s outline) in its historical and ongoing form of philosophical practice can be condensed as follows:  First, it is a form of what could be called political boldness. While this occurs in our society, it is often misinformed. A second form is called Socratic irony.[3] This is an apropos response to the previous form and the das Man. A third form shows up distinct from the former two, called cynic scandal. It entails “getting people to condemn, reject, despise, and insult the very manifestation of what they accept, or claim to accept at the level of principles.” Perhaps this shows up in how one might face one’s angst or discontent when presented with the image or reality of what they accept and value in thought, while at the same time reject and despise it in their current life and society. A case in point is the formation of a counter narrative, which can have a scandalous quality to it. It is this form that comes close to the idea of Gentle Cynicism where the truth is told by the very way in which one interprets and lives; its cultivated countering practices may well derive from traditions that have gotten lost along the way (via Enlightenment, Modernity). Traditions are rich living (master) traditions whether wisdom, philosophical, religious, that, when vital, embody continuities of conflict. One who lives authentically and counter culturally displays its goods and risks it among the inauthentic modalities of das Man.[4]

It is the spirit of GC that taps into the rich traditions and human need to investigate and transcend conventional scripting that holds so many blind and dumb, and to challenge orthodox leanings that stifle human flourishing.

At the heart of the cynic life is parrhesia, the act of truth telling. Parrhesia in its nominal form is translated (Latin) "free speech"; in ancient Greek it conveyed the meaning “to speak freely", "to speak boldly", or with "boldness". By implication among the genuine cynic it came to describe a range of speech practice, not only freedom of speech, but the obligation to speak the truth for the common good, even at personal risk.[5]

Thomas Merton in The New Man wrote, “Parrhesia is the fully mature condition of one who has been questioned by God and has thereby become, in the fullest and most spiritual sense, a man.”[6] Foucault describes this mature condition thus: first, there is a manifestation of a fundamental bond between the truth spoken and the thought of the person who speaks; second, there becomes a challenge to the bond between two in dialog (the person who speaks the truth and the person to whom this truth is addressed). Hence, this distinct feature of parrhesia involves courage, e.g., consisting possibly in the parrhesiast taking the risk of severing the relationship to the other person which was precisely what made his discourse possible. In a way, the parrhesiast always risks undermining the relationship which is the condition of possibility of his discourse. This can be witnessed in parrhesia as spiritual guidance, which can only exist if there is friendship, and where the employment of truth in this spiritual guidance is precisely in danger of bringing into question and breaking the relationship of friendship which made this discourse of truth possible (classic examples Jung with Freud, Jesus with the establishment of Judaism; Martin Luther with the Corrupt Roman Church; individuals during the Civil Rights era).

In the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle also laid stress on the connection between parrhesia and courage when he linked what he called megalopsukhia (greatness of soul) to the practice of parrhesia. Parrhesia is not a skill; it is a stance, a way of being which is akin to a virtue, a mode of action. Parrhesia involves ways of acting, means brought together with a view to an end, and in this respect it has something to do with technique, but it is also a role which is useful, valuable, and indispensable for the city (organization, culture) and for individuals. Parrhesia should be regarded as a modality of truth-telling, rather than [as a] technique [like] rhetoric.[7]

Foucault provides a helpful contrasting with four basic modalities of truth-telling from Antiquity, which helps to put parrhesia in an applicable, ethical space.

Prophecy - The prophet’s truth-telling, his veridiction, is that the prophet’s posture, one of mediation. The prophet, by definition, does not speak in his own name; it is fate that has a modality of veridiction found in prophecy. He speaks for another voice; his mouth serves as intermediary for a voice which speaks from elsewhere. Chris Hedges is a post-modern example, one of the most important reporters who for some time has been responding (truth-telling) to what he characterizes as our collapsing corporate empire.[8]

Wisdom – Wisdom was very important in Antiquity, doubtless even more important for ancient philosophy than prophetic truth-telling.  The sage manifests his mode of being wise in what he or she says and, to that extent, although having a certain intermediary function between timeless, traditional wisdom and the audience addressed, unlike the prophet, he or she is not just a mouthpiece. Here one may consider the influential sages and philosophers who have helped carve new paths for thinking and being, Eastern and Western.  My own life has been deeply enriched from reading the wisdom of such sages as Stanley Hauerwas, Paul Ricoeur, Thomas Merton, Parker Palmer, Marilynne Robinson.  See modern examples in Krista Tippett’s journal article on Einstein.[9]   

Tekhne - A third modality of truth-telling which is that of the professor, the technician, [the teacher]. The prophet, the sage, the person who teaches [tekhne]—these characters (the doctor of X, the musician, the shoemaker, the carpenter, the teacher of armed combat, the gymnastics teacher), frequently mentioned by Plato in his Socratic and other dialogues, possess a knowledge characterized as tekhne, know-how, that is to say, entailing particular items of knowledge, but taking shape in a practice and involving, for their apprenticeship, not only a theoretical knowledge, but a whole exercise (a whole askesis or melete).

In modern times, the expert has become all too familiar and relied upon and supplanted by technology and the utterly insatiable need for data and research based evidence.  While important in the stream of human development and culture, we do well to view tekhne in its proper place. Heidegger in “The Question Concerning Technology” warned,

Everywhere [in Europe] we remain unfree and chained to technology, whether we passionately affirm or deny it. But we are delivered over to it in the worst possible way when we regard it as something neutral; for this conception of it, to which today we particularly like to do homage, makes us utterly blind to the essence of technology.[10]

Today, it would seem that we cannot exist without the aid of technology and experts’ research verifying this and that in every realm of concern (anxiety).[11]

 Then there is Parrhesia. Ethos has its veridiction in the speech of the parrhesiast and the “game of parrhesia.” In parrhesia “one speaks one's mind in a situation where the stakes are high.” The game is the interaction or dialogue (dialectic) between the speaker and the listener(s) which is intended to lessen the risk; the inherent risk being when the dialogue stretches the limits of the participants.  Edward McGushin explains,

A subject appears for herself when she is called to act and insofar as she can posit herself by taking a position within, and with respect to, the theater of action. The call issues from a dramatic scene—a possibility for meaningful action . . . parrhesia is essentially a “modality of veridiction.” [Foucault] Parrhesia has to do with who one is. [12]
Foucault associates each of the four modalities with distinct domains: fate or destiny for the prophet; being or ontology for the sage; the arts and tekhne for the teacher; and ethos for the parrhesiast. He further suggests that these models of parrhesia are not mutually exclusive, but can coexist and comingle—it is here that his models give historical insight. The GC seeks to hold these modalities in their natural tension while truth-telling from one’s own being in the world.

[1] Michel Foucault, The Courage of the Truth (The Government of Self and Others II) LECTURES AT THE COLLÈGE DE FRANCE. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011.
[2] Parrhesia is the act of truth telling is at the heart of the life of cynic. Parrhesia in its nominal form is translated (from Latin) "free speech". In ancient Greek its meanings conveys the meaning “to speak freely", "to speak boldly", or "boldness." (Liddell and Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon) By implication among the true cynic it came to describe a range of speech practice, not only freedom of speech, but the obligation to speak the truth for the common good, even at personal risk.
[3] This consists in telling people, and getting others gradually to recognize, that they do not really know what they say and think they know.
[4] Ultimately or purely, this may well speak to the individualization process playing out robustly, for as Jung explains, “The more he is the pure I, the more he divides himself from the collective man, who he is, and even comes into opposition to this.” [C.G. Jung, Letters II / 7.1.1955 to Upton Sinclair / p. 437] However, more broadly (world disclosive) is the tradition socially embodied and always in hermeneutical flux.
[5] Liddell and Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon.
[6] Thomas Merton, The New Man
[7] Foucault, 14
[8] See for other examples (some of which may well be sages).
[10] Martin Heidegger, The Question Concerning Technology and Other Essays; Trasl. William Lovitt (New York: Harper, 1977) , 4. Heidegger recognized that ‘Aristotelian phenomenology’ suggests three fundamental movements of life including póiesis, práxis, theoría and that these have three corresponding dispositions: téchne, phrónesis and sophía. Heidegger considers these as modalities of Being inherent in the structure of ‘Dasein’ as being-in-the-world that is situated within the context of concern and care.
[11] Pablo Freire in Pedagogy of the Oppressed clearly saw science and technology as an evolving tool that in the spirit of capitalism undermine democracy by development and use of powerful instruments for oppressive purposes: “the maintenance of the oppressive order through manipulation and repression.” The oppressed, as objects, as "things," have no purposes except those their oppressors prescribe for them.
[12] Edward F. McGushin, Foucault’s Askesis: an Introduction to the Philosophical Life (Northwestern University Press, 2007), 7.

Sunday, November 20, 2016

An Opportunistic Infection

by Robert Magrisso, M.D. 

"The Republican Party has been a sick, dysfunctional body for a long time. Denying reality and living within a narrative of its own creation, it cannot really participate in national governance and it cannot recognize its own illness. Donald Trump is the opportunistic infection that comes in the terminal phase." 

See full article printed with permission at Speaking of Jung, Blog   

Monday, November 14, 2016

After the Election; Chris Hedges's Prophetic Insight

What will happen when Trump's base realize they have been betrayed? Read the always insightful, prophet of true democracy, Chris Hedges Nov. 11, article from Truthdig, It's Worse Than You Think.

Tuesday, October 18, 2016

The Last Nuremberg Prosecutor Has 3 Words Of Advice: 'Law Not War'

The Last Nuremberg Prosecutor Has 3 Words Of Advice: 'Law Not War'

"War is hell. It's not terrible. It's awful. And in addition to being cruel and mean and rotten, it's stupid, because look at what we do now. We take young people, if the heads of state can't agree, you send young people to kill other young people they don't even know, who may never have harmed them or anybody else, and they get tired of killing them and then they stop and each side declares victory, rests for a while, and they go back again and they start killing each other again." - Benjamin Ferencz (96)

Beginning in 1945 with his prosecution of war criminals during the Nuremberg Tribunal, the work of Benjamin Ferencz has long focused on issues of international criminal justice and world peace. A strong supporter of the International Criminal Court, Mr. Ferencz advocates steps to replace the “rule of force with the rule of law.”  This website is devoted to his life’s work.  LAW. NOT WAR

Monday, September 5, 2016

Gentle Cynicism as True Life - Part II: Historical, Canonical Basis of the Life of Cynic

The only true commonwealth is as wide as the universe.

It was the “the disinherited of the earth” who were the original candidates and beneficiaries of the early Greek school of cynic philosophy organized in a public gymnasium outside of Athens called Cynosarges.[1] It was here that Antisthenes lectured, preached on the streets and developed the form of literature called Cynics. As a student of Socrates, Antisthenes assimilated the fundamental ethical precept: virtue not pleasure is the end of existence. Everything that the wise person does, Antisthenes taught, conforms to perfect virtue, and pleasure is not only unnecessary, but a positive evil. He is reported to have held pain and even ill-repute to be blessings, and said that "I'd rather be mad than feel pleasure".[2]

Foucault outlined the following interpretive description of the original characteristics that made up the ancient life of cynic (bios kunikos).
First, the kunikos life is a dog’s life in that it is without modesty, shame, and human respect. It is a life which does in public, in front of everyone, what only dogs and animals dare to do, and which men usually hide. The Cynic’s life is a dog’s life in that it is shameless. Second, the Cynic life is a dog’s life because, like the latter, it is indifferent. It is indifferent to whatever may occur, is not attached to anything, is content with what it has, and has no needs other than those it can satisfy immediately. Third, the life of the Cynic is the life of a dog, for it received the epithet kunikos because it is, so to speak, a life which barks, a diacritical (diakritikos)[3] life, that is to say, a life which can fight, which barks at enemies, which knows how to distinguish the good from the bad, the true from the false, and masters from enemies. In that sense it is a diacritical life: a life of discernment which knows how to prove, test, and distinguish. Finally, the Cynic life is phulaktikos. It is a guard dog’s life, a life which knows how to dedicate itself to saving others and protecting the master’s life.[4]

Underneath the Cynic’s life was a cheerful irreverence in its historical form. Moreover there was an air of eternal adolescence, for in its sovereign individualism it ignored the needs of society at large. Nonetheless, the Cynic’s life was a full-hearted response that was essential to human flourishing in a society that, like today, was beset with subtle and harsh, inhumanities, injustices and vanity. Accordingly, there was an absence of tribal recognition in the Cynics ethos, like Diogenes who was not an Athenian or Corinthian, but a wanderer, a citizen of the universe—a human being who made little of his race while standing apart from the rest of society. The Cynic possessed the right to exercise frankness (truth-telling, parrhesia). Demetrius, the first Roman Cynic, tormented three successive emperors, Caligula, Nero, and Vespasian, and remarkably, suffered nothing worse than exile. Other Cynics, no doubt, were less fortunate. In Roger Caldwell estimation, “Having the courage to tell what they saw as the truth without regard for rank or authority (in the capacity more­ or ­less of licensed jester) the Cynics are exemplary.”[5]

In our 21st century, a consumerist age, the message and practice of the Cynics ethic is essential for one’s preservation—to distinguish one’s wants from one’s needs, to simplify one’s life, to seek to do with less—less nationalism, less consumption of goods that pollute and destroy the air, water and atmosphere, and the mind—less head-in-the-sand naiveté with respect to the conventional forces that dumb down the larger society (das Man) with its dominant scripts and narratives that have been summed up by Walter Brueggemann as “technological, therapeutic, consumer militarism.”[6]

Of course, in everyday parlance, the term cynic or cynicism receives a poor rap, for it tends to conjure up ideas of pessimism and distrust. If virtue is the end or goal of existence, e.g., hope, then, as Maria Popova has wisely said, “Critical thinking without hope is cynicism.”[7] Hence the deficit is self-protective resignation (or the modern notion of cynicism) while the excess is blind resignation or naiveté. Foucault emphasized the virtue of courage in the historical practice and ethics of the life of Cynic; hence the extremes would be cowardice and fool hardiness. Fleshing out Gentle Cynicism in the last few years, I have recognized the development of the virtue, integrity (true to self, authentic, honesty) with its excesses being feign ignorance and arrogance.

The life of Cynic fleshed out this vital philosophical ethic using a host of methods and disciplines. While the ancient form appears more ascetic, the post-modern practice of Gentle Cynicism utilizes critical thinking, forms of phenomenology and various disciplines to navigate places of tension being self-aware while preventing the extremes. In the spirit of ancient Cynic, Gentle Cynicism negotiates a context of time requiring a response to move more fully to a place where hope enlarges.  It is a realm of practices and outlook that vigorously works with the limitations of a world juxtaposed with the social and moral issues of the day, filtered through narrative, poetry, philosophy and social ethic, and the classic virtues replace conventional sentiment and correctness.  In the end the life of Cynic is about discovering, living and promoting truth as it unfolds and devotion to the virtues that are the only source of human fullness (eudaimonia).

                                                             Truth can never hurt you; finding it is hard.[8]

[1] Κυνόσαργες Kynos + argos, from genitive of kyon (dog) and argos (white, shining or swift).
[2]References from Laërtius, Diogenes (1925). "The Cynics: Antisthenes". Lives of the Eminent Philosophers 2:6. Translated by Hicks, Robert Drew (Two volume ed.). Loeb Classical Library. § 1–19.
[3] Διακριτικός, piercing, penetrating; separative; able to distinguish(L&S)
[4] Michel Foucault, The Courage of the Truth (The Government of Self and Others II). Lectures at the College De France (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011), 243.
[5] Roger Caldwell, “How To Be a Cynic” in Philosophy Now, 104.
[6] Walter Brueggemann, “Counterscript, Living with the Illusive God” in Christian Century. Nov. 29, 2005. 
[7] Popova, Maria, transcript from interview, “Cartographer of Meaning in a Digital Age” accessed from On Being with Krista Tippett, 05/14/2015, accessed at See also “Response to Maria Popova’s Cautionary Essay regarding a Culture of Cynicism” accessed at
[8] Giles Laurén, The Stoics Bible and Florilegium for the Good Life (Createspace, 2010). Epilogue.

Image: Brandon Kidwell, "To Find Truth, Sometimes Have to Reach into the Darkness" at