Bertrand Russell founded analytic philosophy and sat in jail for his opposition to WWI, which some for perspective, GK Chesterton gleefully supported.

But, eventually, I find out something about them that makes me lose interest...
w/ Ghandi and Tolstoy, it was their views towards sex. — anonymous66

>:O I'm exactly the same as you. If I find out something like that about a thinker, I'm much less tempted to investigate deeper what s/he said. If it couldn't help him live a good, moral life, why should I expect it to help me?

If I find out the person was married and unfaithful, that changes things for me as well. — anonymous66

Yeah, I'm like that too. My interest in, for example, Krishnamurti significantly decreased after I found out he had sex with his friend's wife (Rosalind), and secretly made her have an abortion.

Anyway, I've started making a list of people who I still admire, because I didn't find anything that gave me pause. — anonymous66

If it wouldn't be too much to ask, could you PM me that list, I'd also be interested! :P

So far, the people who make that list are:
Gabriel Marcel
C.S. Lewis — anonymous66

What about people like:

• Epictetus
• Marcus Aurelius
• Socrates
• Musonius Rufus
• Epicurus (I know he was supposedly a hedonist but he lived an exemplary life by most accounts)
• Aquinas
• G.K. Chesterton
• Blaise Pascal
• Sören Kierkegaard
• Immanuel Kant

If you like a writer/philosopher/historical figure, are there things about their personal life that would turn you off? — anonymous66

Absolutely! Any kind of significant immorality (killing innocent people, cruelty, vindictiveness, adultery and fornication, etc.) would turn me off.

I'm exactly the same as you. If I find out something like that about a thinker, I'm much less tempted to investigate deeper what s/he said. If it couldn't help him live a good, moral life, why should I expect it to help me? — Agustino

Does a wise idea lose it's credibility if the speaker can't uphold the idea? Think of Solomon.

Does a wise idea lose it's credibility if the speaker can't uphold the idea? Think of Solomon. — Noble Dust

It depends on a few circumstances. For example, if he came up with the idea after he had committed whatever sin is in question, and after he repented of it, then it probably wouldn't. This isn't the case with the example of Krishnamurti that I gave - he kept it hidden his entire life, all the while preaching honesty. That's a problem. It tells me that he used those tools of thinking that he was advocating, and he himself couldn't be honest by using them. Why should I expect myself to succeed with what he had to offer?

So you're saying you don't expect to succeed if you try to practice honesty?

Bertrand Russell founded analytic philosophy and sat in jail for his opposition to WWI — absoluteaspiration

Oh yeah, and he cheated on his wives too!

So you're saying you don't expect to succeed if you try to practice honesty? — Noble Dust

No, I'm saying I don't expect to succeed if I try to practice honesty using the tools K. advocated. In other words, he cannot help me become a better moral person (more honest).

No, I'm saying I don't expect to succeed if I try to practice honesty using the tools K. advocated. In other words, he cannot help me become a better moral person (more honest). — Agustino

What were those specific tools then?

What were those specific tools then? — Noble Dust

Practicing choiceless awareness, trying to rely solely on oneself and not on traditions, etc.

I'm not particularly opposed to adultery and fornication, depending on how much others were hurt and in what ways. But even if I were against it in all situations, I would still say that level of commitment in opposition to unjust war is on a different scale of moral courage than minor sexual infractions. Do those even count when compared side by side?

G.K. Chesterton... He's definitely on my good list.

I nixed Russell after I read about how he coldly dumped his first wife.

It's not that I dismiss their ideas altogether. I just don't see them as someone I want to emulate.

Interesting. I get the idea of not following a specific idea because the tools aren't useful for arriving there. But in a general sense, I'm wary of the idea that a thinker isn't worth investigating because they had a specific moral flaw. It sounds like a very legalistic way to go about investigating ideas in general. Getting into the specifics of when someone messed up in relation to specific ideas just sounds pedantic and gossipy. Ideas should stand on their own merit, and whether they're applicable to life should avail itself of your own experience of testing them, not to mention your own wisdom.

I am against divorce when poor men dump wives who are unable to support themselves. Bertrand Russell moved in other circles.

It's not that I dismiss their ideas altogether. I just don't see them as someone I want to emulate. — anonymous66

Fair enough, but you did say in the OP that you've "lost interest" in some of them, presumably because of their failings.

Does Chesterton's support of WWI not move you the tiniest bit?

But even if I were against it in all situations, I would still say that level of commitment in opposition to unjust war is on a different scale of moral courage than minor sexual infractions. Do those even count when compared side by side? — absoluteaspiration

I think they do. Supporting a war in theory - or in writing - directly harms nobody. Adultery and fornication directly harm several people, and you are the proximal, efficient cause of that harm. Not to mention that it shows quite badly on you - you can't even control your lusts. So I think it's quite serious.

What about people like:

Epictetus
Marcus Aurelius
Socrates
Musonius Rufus
Epicurus (I know he was supposedly a hedonist but he lived an exemplary life by most accounts)
Aquinas
G.K. Chesterton
Blaise Pascal
Sören Kierkegaard
Immanuel Kant — Agustino

Well, if someone lived long ago, I wonder if the stories about them aren't idealized. I do like the stories. And I like the way that Epictetus is portrayed (although he may have done some Epicurean bashing). It's hard to find fault w/ Socrates. Epicurus looks pretty good.

Kierkegaard? He lived an odd life, stressful life, and probably died young because of the stress he caused himself. He was very confrontational and a little rude, IMHO.

Does Chesterton's support of WWI not move you the tiniest bit? — absoluteaspiration

I know you didn't ask me this, but no.

Does Chesterton's support of WWI not move you the tiniest bit? — absoluteaspiration

I'll have to look into that.

I'm ready to agree to disagree. I have never been involved in adultery or fornication myself, but I honestly don't see the harm in all circumstances.

Fair enough, but you did say in the OP that you've "lost interest" in some of them, presumably because of their failings. — Noble Dust

I'm not even sure that I would even label the behavior... It's more like that I'm looking for someone whose life I wouldn't mind modeling my life after... and when I find out certain things about certain possible role models, I think, "I couldn't do that."

(edited to add) And I do keep reading... and thinking about the ideas they promoted, no matter what I think about their personal lives.

whether they're applicable to life should avail itself of your own experience of testing them, not to mention your own wisdom. — Noble Dust

Is there enough time though to test all ideas? There should be a screening method you know :P

w/ Ghandi and Tolstoy, it was their views towards sex — anonymous66

What did you find problematic with their views towards sex? (I'm just asking cause I never looked into their views on sex before)

You'll have to check it out.

Tolstoy was convinced sex was bad (and associated w/ sin). but, he kept having kids, and blamed his wife for seducing him. (I can't find the specifics right now. I've read a couple of biographies).

Ghandi would sleep (but not engage in sex) w/ young naked women just to prove he wouldn't be tempted.
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/features/thrill-of-the-chaste-the-truth-about-gandhis-sex-life-1937411.html

(edited to add) Ghandi also preached celibacy within marriage.

Epictetus
Marcus Aurelius
Socrates
Musonius Rufus
Epicurus (I know he was supposedly a hedonist but he lived an exemplary life by most accounts)
Aquinas
G.K. Chesterton
Blaise Pascal
Sören Kierkegaard
Immanuel Kant — Agustino

I like some Stoic ideas about changing what you can and accepting the rest, but their theories of what it is possible to change were seriously flawed and turned them into obsequious supporters of traditional power.

I don't like Pascal's unabashed support for inauthentic ways of life. "Do it and you'll come to believe it" is not even good Christian doctrine and can be used to support any number of criminal enterprises.

Kierkegaard... Look, I have nothing against bachelorhood, but having a lady love, believing in marriage and never proposing to her? I want to believe there was something more to his choice than cowardice, but I have not yet been able to figure it out to my satisfaction.

I love Kant. If I force myself to come up with a criticism, I can't deny the dude lived his life like a wind up toy. His withdrawal from the specifics of everyday life allowed him to discover an abstraction whose beauty and wonder hasn't aged to this day. Kant is my favorite reasonable ascetic.

A lot of you guys seem to like Christian thinkers. One name I haven't seen mentioned so far is Rudolf Eucken. He wasn't perfect, but I like him. His philosophy was called "activism", so you can already imagine what his life was like.

You've got to look into it.
Tolstoy was convinced sex was bad... but, he kept having kids. And blamed his wife for seducing him.

Ghandi would sleep w/ young naked women just to prove he wouldn't be tempted.
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/features/thrill-of-the-chaste-the-truth-about-gandhis-sex-life-1937411.html — anonymous66

Okay, I see. Thanks for sharing that link!

I'm surprised you like Kant. Isn't he on the Catholic banned books list?

Look, I have nothing against bachelorhood, but having a lady love, believing in marriage and never proposing to her? — absoluteaspiration

Not all people are meant to marry. K. knew that if he had married he would have to abandon his devotion to God and to philosophy.

If I force myself to come up with a criticism, I can't deny the dude lived his life like a wind up toy. — absoluteaspiration

>:O So what? There's not much to get out of life anyway.

Isn't he on the Catholic banned books list? — absoluteaspiration

I'm not a Catholic ;)

Is there enough time though to test all ideas? — Agustino

I never suggested that.



Fair enough.