hello! i am looking for a book that will teach me all about love, and explore the complexity of human relationships :’)

something that can perhaps answer these questions i have:

• what is love if not embracing the sharp edges of a person. do you truly love something if you don’t accept the ugly parts of it?

• does love hurt as much as love heals? can love be as ugly as it is beautiful?

• can love can be the root of uglier emotions, or is it obsession. where do we draw the line? what truly is love?

• when something hurts us, it only hurts us because we value it so deeply. when we feel lonely, we only feel it so deep in our bones after we know what true connection is.

• can love sometimes make way to the worst of you just as much as it can make way to the best of you — e.g. when our loved one is hurt, how are we to sit and not seethe in rage?

• is it true that love has never been about possession? but when we love something you think it’s mine to care for, mine to tend to, mine to love. so can love take root in jealousy?

• to love is not to mutually destroy, but when you love do you let yourself be ruined? when does it become too much?

• how much of a person do i hold for it to be love?

i would prefer for the writing of the book to be beautiful and heartfelt.

a book i like so far since starting on is “all about love” by bell hooks.

i am a huge fan of japanese literature.

so i hope this is not a repetitive question. anyway as the title suggests i am looking for absolute beginner books in philosophy. i am completely new to it and would like to start from the foundation. also i would like to read something that's an easy read without too much jargon or hard to understand words. would love your suggestions!

THE SOCRATIC CIRCLE on PATREON Announcement: www.Patreon.com/TheSocraticCircle

The Philosophy of Science Discussion Group will hold its first meeting on Wednesday, October 23rd, from 7:30-8:30pm ET. (Reminder: Discussion Groups are open to all tier-level members; membership begins at $3/month.)

We will discuss chapters 1-3 of Carl Hempel's classic Philosophy of Natural Science. Here's a link to a free PDF of the book:

http://www.thatmarcusfamily.org/philosophy/Course_Websites/Readings/Hempel%20-%20Philosophy%20of%20Natural%20Science.pdf

After we read Hempel's book (probably three to four meetings) to get a sense of what the philosophy of science was like circa 1966, we will read Thomas Kuhn's famous The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Below, you will find the link to a PDF of a philosophy of science anthology of readings. I'm sure we will dip into it at some point, as well.

https://ebookppsunp.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/46121900-the-philosophy-of-science-1.pdf

--Matt :)

Hi Reddit, my name is A A Aydin, and I’ve been exploring a new way of thinking about time, space, and the origins of the universe. I’d love to share this theory with you and see how scientists and thinkers in this community view it.

Alternate Realities and the Sphere Paradox

Imagine a scenario where we live inside a reflective sphere, filled with water. In this environment, we could move in every direction, and due to the mirrors, we’d see infinite versions of ourselves. This setting mimics the idea of parallel universes, where every movement we make could be mirrored by countless versions of ourselves.

Now, think of this on a cosmic scale: what if our world moves forward in time while a parallel version of our world moves backward? Could this explain the nature of parallel universes, where every forward movement in time creates an opposite version moving in reverse?

Your Anti-Self and Time Symmetry

In this theory, I propose that if we move forward in time, our anti-selves move backward. If we were to meet at a crossing point—let’s call it the X point—this meeting of two contradictory timelines could be the cause of an explosion. Could this paradoxical meeting be similar to the Big Bang? Could this meeting of forward and backward time be the origin of the universe, where all energy was concentrated before exploding outward?

Dimensional Movement in Time

I suggest that time, like space, might have multiple directions. While we experience time as a one-way street (moving forward), there could be alternate directions in time that we simply don’t perceive. For every direction in space—up, down, forward, backward, diagonal—there could be corresponding directions in time.

In this case, if we move forward in time, a parallel version of us could be moving backward, upward, downward, and in every other direction possible. We only experience one version because we are limited by our perception, but there may be infinite versions of us, all moving through different axes of time.

Infinite Selves, Matter, and Antimatter Collisions

If we imagine ourselves moving infinitely around a sphere, meeting our backward-moving selves at the X point, this could result in a massive release of energy—much like the Big Bang. The energy generated by this paradoxical meeting could create mass out of nothingness, just as energy converts into mass through E=mc².

Now, consider the interaction between matter and antimatter: when these two meet, they annihilate each other, releasing massive amounts of energy. If our forward-moving selves represent matter, and our backward-moving selves represent antimatter, their collision at the X point could lead to the release of pure energy. This energy might then condense into new matter and create the building blocks of the universe.

New Universes Through Multiverse Collisions

Finally, let’s expand this to the multiverse: if there are infinite versions of the universe, what would happen if they all collided? Would this result in a massive explosion of energy that creates new realities, new mass, or even new timelines? The meeting of infinite universes could be an ongoing process of creation and destruction, where the energy released from these collisions is used to fuel new realities, much like how the Big Bang is thought to have created our universe.

• A A Aydin

This theory builds on the idea that time and space might have multiple directions and that through the paradoxical meeting of forward and backward movements, we could generate pure energy, create new mass, and even fuel the ongoing creation of the universe itself. I’m excited to see how this theory resonates with you all, and I’m eager to hear thoughts from those in the scientific community.

Just started reading Beyond good and evil and im curious why Neitzsche seems so bitter did something happen to him that made him dislike other philosophers so much?

I'm taking up political philosophy class in my graduate studies this semester where we're reading Rousseau's The Social Contract (and Locke's Second Treatise).

What reading guide and/or supplementary readings would you recommend to help me understand The Social Contract on both a synthetic level and analytic level?

I currently have a list of texts I'm interested in getting to, but I'm willing to work with people on getting a book we all like. I can develop a Discord channel as well for this.

I am into any philosophy really. Recently, I have read some Kant, Kierkegaard, and Becker. One book I'm interested in reading in John Rawls's A Theory of Justice, as an idea.

I'm also interested in getting into some philosophical novels like Metamorphosis, The Stranger, etc. I can read as fast or slow as needed really but right now I'd aim for a pace of 1-2 hours or 25-50 pages per day.

Thanks.

I wanna start reading philosophy books, so which books do you suggest to a total newbie. My friend recommended me to start with The Myth of Sisyphus by Albert Camus, is it a good choice? Also can you tell me what to expect from philosophy reading. Thanks!!

PS: ignore grammatical mistakes, english is not my first language

By modern let’s go with post-war; 1945-current day.

Are there any authors of modern political thought that are worth reading (i.e. not just pundits selling a book)

We discussed Thomas Hobbes in class today, and it piqued my curiosity and interest in his style of thinking. I've known him for a while and understand much of what he talks about, but where do I even begin as I've never read any of his writings?

While I agree with the author, I’d like to venture out and learn about opposite points of view.

What I don’t want to read is some CEOs hot takes on philosophy and economics, though.

Which authors/books would you recommend to read to understand positions favoring/defending meritocracy?

Thanks!

hi I’m a recent school leaver with a gap year ahead of me and I’m super interested into getting into philosophy and don’t know where to start! I’ve watch YouTube videos on the types of philosophy and periods and found my self more attracted to the enlightenment period than early philosophers but I’d like to get to know a range of topics and ideas and because of the internet (and I’m dyslexic) I do have the attention span of a fly so the more easily read (to start with) would be super helpful.

thanks!

In "Ego is the Enemy," Ryan Holiday delves into the intricate relationship between ego and the human experience, asserting that ego serves as a formidable barrier to personal and professional growth. The narrative unfolds in three pivotal sections: aspiration, success, and failure, each illuminating the insidious nature of ego in various stages of life.

In the realm of aspiration, Holiday articulates the necessity of humility and self-awareness as foundational virtues for anyone striving toward their goals. He posits that unchecked ambition can manifest as a form of hubris, blinding individuals to their limitations and the areas ripe for improvement. This blind spot, he argues, cultivates an environment where learning becomes stifled, as ego demands a façade of invulnerability. Instead, he advocates for a posture of receptivity—an embrace of mentorship and a commitment to the process of growth. This approach underscores a philosophical understanding that true aspiration is not merely about achieving one's desires but engaging in a continual journey of self-discovery and intellectual humility.

Transitioning to the theme of success, Holiday warns of the corrosive effects that accompany achievement when viewed through the lens of ego. He highlights how success can breed complacency and overconfidence, distorting one's perception and leading to decisions that prioritize self-interest over collective wisdom. This phenomenon is deeply philosophical, reflecting the paradox of success; the very accomplishments that should inspire gratitude and reflection can instead foster a disconnection from reality. Holiday implores readers to remain grounded, to cultivate an ongoing commitment to personal development, and to acknowledge the interconnectedness of their achievements with the efforts of others. This perspective challenges the individualistic narrative often celebrated in society, advocating instead for a more communal understanding of success that honors collaboration and shared experiences.

In the exploration of failure, Holiday contemplates the ways in which ego exacerbates setbacks, often rendering individuals incapable of gleaning valuable lessons from their missteps. The refusal to confront one's vulnerabilities, he argues, stifles the ability to learn and adapt, transforming failure into a cycle of self-reproach rather than a catalyst for growth. Here, he emphasizes the philosophical principle of resilience—an acceptance of one's limitations and an openness to critique. This dialogue between failure and growth underscores a fundamental truth: that true strength lies in vulnerability and the willingness to embrace discomfort as a pathway to transformation.

Throughout "Ego is the Enemy," Holiday employs historical anecdotes and personal reflections to elucidate his arguments, weaving a narrative that is both compelling and profound. He challenges readers to transcend the allure of ego, advocating for a life characterized by humility, discipline, and an unwavering pursuit of knowledge. Ultimately, the book serves as a philosophical treatise on the necessity of overcoming ego as a means to achieve genuine fulfillment and to navigate the complexities of existence with grace and wisdom.

Hi there, just wondering if anyone has any book recommendations or any type of resources to understand how anything exists? Thank you.

Books defining oppression, social and economic exploitation, and discrimination

Hi everyone,

I hope you're all very well

I'm looking for (introductory) or comprehensive books analysing the concept of oppression, social and economic exploitation, and discrimination, primarily engaging (moral) philosophers, political theorists, or/and social scientists. It doesn't matter if the books are ideologically biased or politically leaning towards the left or the right, or even a more comprehensive analysis from both sides.

I just want to understand what is really unjust when using words like oppression, imposition, alienation, exploitation, social misrecognition, social pathology, etc.

Guys, I have always been interested in philosophy, and I have read quite a few things on my own, but I really want to deep dive into this philosophical world and read more about different types of ideologies and morals, and just in depth about this subject and the worst part is that I am in a reading slump right now, so I need something really, really gut trenching and life altering to bring me back on track so if any of you have any suggestions like that, that would be great. Thankyou 🩵

So, basically, I’m in year 11 and looking to take philosophy as one of my year 12 courses, but my school doesn’t offer it, so I’d have to take online courses, but if I do that, the school looses out on money, so obviously the school doesn’t want me to take online philosophy and will try to stop me unless I can find a way to make it seem absolutely necessary for my career path. The problem? I want to be an author (backup plans are basically journalist and teacher). And I know that I can survive without taking a philosophy class, but I really love it, and I also struggle to come to school (to the point of almost failing) so I think that being in a class I love that challenges me will help. So I guess what I’m asking is for help coming up with arguments for my school to let me do this.

If you just consider the headline of this topic, it’s quite thought-provoking, especially for deep thinkers or anyone who considers themselves wise. However, if you ask this question directly to someone who claims to be an adult, you might get two typical responses:

• When you pass a certain age

• When you become responsible and mature

But the real question is, are these answers actually correct? You can decide for yourself after my explanation.

We often consider someone an adult when they meet certain criteria set by society. If you display traits that society deems as "adult," you’re recognized as one—traits like those mentioned in the typical responses. Being an adult, in many ways, means not copying others and understanding the difference between right and wrong, along with knowing the boundaries of acceptable behavior in society.

For example, imagine you're with friends and you accidentally do something that's usually associated with little children. People around you might laugh and say, "You're acting like a kid." I know this isn’t the best example, but it shows how being an adult is often about following society's rules. When you’re a child, you’re forgiven for your mischief. But after a certain age, you’re expected to be punished for the same actions.

Jean-Jacques Rousseau, a philosopher who deeply questioned society's influence on individuals, believed that people are inherently good but are corrupted by societal norms. He argued that society imposes restrictions that chain us, taking away the natural freedom we are born with. This resonates with how we see adulthood today—filled with rules and expectations that shape our behavior. Rousseau famously stated, "Man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains." As we grow, we move from the innocence and freedom of childhood into the constraints of adulthood, dictated by the norms that society has constructed.

I personally think that small children, usually below the age of 4 or 5, represent the very basic nature of humans. When your parents raised you, they taught you all the societal restrictions and expected behaviors because you were going to live in society, so they raised you accordingly. We often feel like doing certain things, just like little children do, but we restrain ourselves—sometimes out of embarrassment, and sometimes because it’s illegal or unacceptable in society.

People talk about freedom and free will while ignoring the cage-like life they’re actually living. Rousseau’s views help explain why many adults miss their childhood. In childhood, we experience a kind of natural freedom that is gradually lost as we are molded by societal expectations. Our ancestors chose to live in societies because of the safety and privileges they provide. There’s nothing wrong with that; every animal wants to live as long as possible, and we are animals too, using our intelligence to increase our chances of survival. But everything comes at a cost. The intelligence that gives us an advantage over other species might also become the reason for our downfall, much like how Rousseau feared that society’s "chains" would lead to our discontent.

In this strange headline, by "treasure" I meant time and freedom. Now, if you read the topic headline again, you'll get the idea about "stop trading your treasures in exchange for nothing." In simple words, don’t trade your time and freedom for pieces of paper to experience pleasure over and over again. We often get trapped in this unfair trade to maintain a consumption-based lifestyle and comfort.

Let’s take an example: you’re working a 9 to 5 job, earning money to maintain your living and provide for your family. Maybe this sounds necessary, but it isn’t—if you can let go of your desire for pleasure and comfort. The fact is, most individuals earn 60 to 70 percent more than they need to live (excluding those in poverty or below the poverty line). So what happens to that remaining sum? Usually, it’s spent on unnecessary consumption in the pursuit of pleasure, and a considerable amount goes to family expenses if you have one.

To understand this better, try observing your daily routine. After you do something, ask yourself why you did it (excluding basic human activities). Just give that question some thought, and shockingly, you’ll realize that either you are consuming something or putting your body and mind to work to earn better opportunities to consume more in the future. Today, almost everyone shares the same internal desire to consume every flashy thing the world can offer. It’s not natural; it’s a wrong philosophy we’ve been taught since childhood—that happiness equals consumption.

For example, today we judge a person’s success based on their net worth and assets. This clearly reflects a mindset rooted in consumption, like “Oh, they have a net worth of millions—what a successful individual.” In simple words, this statement means, “They have so much money to consume and exploit the world as much as they please, to fulfill their unnecessary desires,” and we call that success. That’s the reason everyone is willing to be a slave—legally. This mindset leads to disaster because the more you consume, the more you desire. It’s a loop: no matter how much you consume, you’ll never be satisfied.

We need to realize that spending our precious time and freedom to get ourselves trapped in this infinite loop of dissatisfaction isn’t worth it. In the end, your valuable youth will slip away, working for someone else. Finally, after retirement, you may find yourself empty-handed, receiving pity compensation in the form of retirement benefits. The majority of the world’s population is already stuck in this loop, and it has affected the world in a way that will never be the same.

Now, I’d like to mention some major problems I’ve noticed because of humanity’s insane desire for consumption:

• Exploitation of Earth's limited resources: Expensive items and flashy products don’t fall from the sky. The more financial success a person has, the more they exploit the planet. Just take a look at this statistic: The top 1% of global emitters had carbon footprints of over 50 tonnes of CO2 in 2021, more than 1,000 times greater than those of the bottom 1%. Meanwhile, the global average energy-related carbon footprint is around 4.7 tonnes of CO2 per person.
• Crimes are committed: Many people are too poor to consume, or they want to consume but don’t want to earn it.
• Treating other living organisms as objects: This includes animals and even fellow humans, who are treated as mere objects of consumption.
• Mindless use of time and effort: Many people waste time doing things that add no value to humanity, such as playing video games, watching most movies, or consuming from the entertainment industry.

I don’t have a simple solution for this major issue, but I’d like to share an experience that taught me a small lesson. Yesterday, while heading home from college on the metro, a little baby was standing on the seat next to me. I was reading news articles on my phone when, moments later, I heard him laughing. He was watching the view outside from the window. I observed him for a few minutes and realized he was just living in the moment, enjoying every passing second, appreciating the stunning view. He didn’t care about his past or future, or whether his mom was nearby. It made me smile seeing him so full of joy, and when he noticed me, he chuckled. That baby made my day.

I’ve heard many spiritual leaders and saints advise living in the present moment. But just reading and listening about such a way of life isn’t always enough to help you truly understand its beauty. Inspired by that baby, today, when I didn’t feel like attending a lecture, I skipped it and went to the rooftop of my college to enjoy the refreshing rainy weather and write. In other words, I chose life over the system that only teaches us how to earn money and get trapped in the consumption loop.

In conclusion, consumption isn’t entirely wrong, but it should be limited to our needs. Mahatma Gandhi, a famous politician, social activist, and writer, once said, "The Earth has enough resources to meet the needs of all but not enough to satisfy the greed of even one person.” Working for money is fine if you have to fulfill your and your family’s basic needs, but don’t let your desire for consumption turn you into a slave. This will not only be disastrous for your life but also for the world. Invest your treasures—your time and freedom—into personal growth and passion.

Thank you.

François de La Rochefoucauld’s reflections and moral maxims offer a profound and often skeptical examination of human nature and societal behavior. His work, renowned for its incisive observations, delves deeply into the motivations that drive human actions, revealing the complexities and contradictions that underpin our interactions and self-perceptions.

Central to La Rochefoucauld’s reflections is the idea that self-interest profoundly influences human behavior. He famously asserts that "We are more concerned about our own interests than about our friends' fortunes," capturing his belief that even actions that seem altruistic are often driven by personal gain. This observation suggests that our apparent selflessness is frequently a façade, masking deeper, self-serving motives.

La Rochefoucauld also critiques the superficial nature of virtue in society. He argues that "It is not enough to possess virtue; one must also be seen to possess it," highlighting the performative aspect of morality. This reflection suggests that societal approval and personal reputation often overshadow genuine moral integrity, revealing how the appearance of virtue can be as important, if not more so, than actual virtue itself.

In his examination of love and desire, La Rochefoucauld adopts a skeptical view, positing that romantic love is frequently a projection of personal desires rather than a true connection with another person. He famously remarks, "Love is like a fever which comes and goes quite independently of the will," emphasizing the unpredictable and often selfish nature of romantic passion. This perspective challenges the idealized notion of love as a purely selfless and enduring emotion.

The dynamics of ambition and power are another significant focus of La Rochefoucauld’s maxims. He observes that ambition is often motivated by a desire for recognition and distinction rather than by any intrinsic virtue. His reflection, "We are more concerned about being envied than loved," reveals that the pursuit of power and status is frequently driven by a need for admiration and acknowledgment from others, rather than by a genuine quest for personal or communal betterment.

La Rochefoucauld’s work also explores the role of flattery and deception in social interactions. He notes that "We are more concerned about the opinions of others than about our own actions," highlighting how individuals often prioritize their public image over the morality of their conduct. This observation underscores how flattery and deceit are used to manipulate social perceptions and enhance one’s standing, rather than to foster genuine relationships or ethical behavior.

Lastly, La Rochefoucauld addresses the paradox of happiness, suggesting that it is often elusive and entangled with illusions. He reflects, "The pleasure of being deceived is a great pleasure," indicating that the pursuit of happiness is frequently complicated by self-delusion. This insight reveals that people may find satisfaction in their own illusions, rather than in the reality of their circumstances.

In summary, François de La Rochefoucauld’s reflections and moral maxims offer a sophisticated and often critical perspective on human nature. His observations challenge readers to examine the hidden motivations behind their actions and societal norms, providing a nuanced understanding of virtue, love, ambition, and self-perception. Through his penetrating insights, La Rochefoucauld invites a deeper exploration of the complexities and contradictions inherent in human behavior.

Attachment can be a serious issue for mental health. We’ve all felt that sharp pain when we lose something we’re attached to—be it a childhood toy, a favorite shirt, a pair of shoes, or even a person. Attachment can form with anything we experience through our senses. It’s so common that almost everyone has faced it at some point. We might call it a bond, love, or emotion, but at its core, it’s attachment. 

I recently started thinking deeply about attachment when my uncle borrowed my favorite shirt. I couldn't say no, and it bothered me. I know it's a bit silly example but It made me reflect on why attachment happens. It starts with liking something and then wanting it for ourselves. Once we have it, we care for it and protect it. We even get upset if someone else touches it without permission. 

Attachment isn’t just about things; it also affects our relationships. After a breakup, the pain isn’t only from the end of the relationship but from the attachment itself. Jiddu Krishnamurti, a philosopher, said that attachment causes fear and suffering. He believed that true happiness comes from letting go. 

Buddha also noted that attachment is a major cause of suffering. Schopenhauer argued that much of our pain comes from clinging to fleeting things. Kabir, an Indian poet, said, “Maya maha thagini hum jaani”—illusion is the greatest deceiver. Similarly, the Bhagavad Gita advises, “Karmanye vadhikaraste ma phaleshu kadachana”—do your duty but don’t get attached to the outcomes. 

Handling attachment is challenging. One approach is remembering the purpose of the object or person in your life. Don’t cling to it or see it as central to your happiness. Instead, let it serve its purpose and move on. Marcus Aurelius suggested we should appreciate things while they’re here but not let them define us. Material things aren’t worth our deep attachment; something more profound and divine deserves that. 

In summary, if something serves a purpose in your life, use it with gratitude and then let it go. It’s fulfilled its role. This is just my perspective, and I could be wrong, but I hope it offers some insight. 

In this generation, it feels like nobody trusts anyone anymore. Everyone’s too busy trying to benefit from others. But even in a world like this, there are still people who give good advice to help improve your life. The problem is, as soon as we find out they’ve made mistakes or have bad habits, we feel betrayed. The first thing we do is question everything they ever told us. We might even forget their good advice, label them as a bad person, and stop listening to them altogether.

Now, I’m not saying people who react like this are wrong. There are definitely people out there who fake their identity for fame or wealth. But this isn’t about those fake saints. This is about why we refuse to accept good advice from people who may have made mistakes in the past—even when that advice could be helpful. What’s wrong with listening to someone who tells you to be kind, positive, or respectful to others, even if they aren’t perfect themselves?

-The Problem with Idealizing People

When we meet someone who seems intellectual, kind, or wise, we tend to admire them. Everyone, deep down, wants to be like them. But since most of us are caught up in our own lives, we settle for supporting those who try to serve others selflessly. We start idealizing them, and sometimes, we even worship them. But then, when we discover that these same people made mistakes or had bad habits in the past, it hits us hard.

The truth is, most of the time we don’t even know the person in front of us—their true character, what they’ve been through, or who they are on the inside. We only see what they show us or what we want to believe. So, when we learn something negative about them, it feels like a betrayal. But this reaction is more about us than them. We create this perfect image of them in our minds, thinking, “They’re so kind and wise, they can’t be human.” So when we realize they’ve messed up just like anyone else, it breaks our belief in them. And once that happens, we stop caring about all the good they’ve done or the advice they gave us. But this is where ego comes into play. It’s our own idealized version of them that’s been shattered, and we can’t handle the fact that they’re just as human as the rest of us. The truth is, no one is born perfect, and no one should be treated as a god.

-The Foolishness of Rejecting Good Advice

Honestly, it’s kind of dumb how people refuse to take good advice, even if it’s for their benefit, just because the person giving it isn’t perfect or has done something wrong in the past. I’ve seen so many people say things to the advice-giver like, “Have you even tried what you’re suggesting?” or “Judging from your past, I shouldn’t take your advice.” This way of thinking ignores a simple truth: good advice can come from anyone, no matter their age or what they’ve done before. The person doesn’t have to be perfect for their advice to be valuable.

So, at least listen to what they’re saying. If the advice seems suspicious or bad, then check its validity. But don’t immediately throw away something that could help you just because of who it’s coming from.

For Example: Rejecting Spiritual Advice

A good example of this is how people often reject spiritual or life advice from leaders, especially if they’ve made mistakes in the past. I see so many people, particularly in Gen Z, who refuse to listen to spiritual leaders or life coaches just because they’ve made a mistake, or because someone else like them turned out to be corrupt. It’s like they’re saying, “How can I trust someone who’s messed up before?”

But here’s the thing: just because they’ve made mistakes doesn’t mean their advice is useless. People grow and change, and no one is perfect. In fact, nobody is born a saint. These leaders often go through their own learning journeys, and their advice could still be helpful, even if they haven’t always been perfect. What matters is the advice itself, not their personal history. If it’s good advice, it should be considered, no matter where it’s coming from.

-Conclusion

In the end, my suggestion is simple: listen to everyone, but always think for yourself and do your research before you accept their advice. Don’t let someone’s past mistakes stop you from benefiting from the good they have to offer. You’re in charge of your own life, so be smart about who and what you listen to.

It is true that every human is born with God-given or natural advantages. There are two types of advantages that every human has:

1. Environmental Advantages – Being born into a wealthy, loving family or in a developed country with better chances for education and character development, etc.

2. Physical Advantages – Being born with a high IQ, good genetics, or favorable physical features.

When it comes to advantages, most of us think of materialistic advantages, which are easily visible. For example, if you see a rich teenager with a Porsche, you might immediately feel jealous and think about how lucky he is. However, instead of feeling sad and envious, consider that you might be judging him based only on the surface of his life. Perhaps he never received his family's love because his parents are too busy, or there could be other issues. Money can make us happier up to a certain point, but after our basic needs are met and we’re comfortable, having more money doesn’t make us significantly happier. While money does contribute to happiness by helping us meet basic needs, research shows that beyond a certain level, more money does not necessarily lead to more happiness but the devastation of mental health.

In my lifetime, I have seen people with a lot of wealth still seeking other things like love, peace, or power. Conversely, I have seen people who have love in their lives and are surrounded by those who care for them, yet they still seek wealth and become ungrateful for what they already have. Just because a millionaire’s son has luxury cars does not mean you are unlucky; it simply means you have different advantages, such as a loving family or other benefits. It’s just a matter of time before you figure out what you have.

In this world, the most visible advantage is wealth. Many of us restlessly seek money because we have never had much, but people who are born wealthy also seek something more. Have you ever thought about what they seek if they already have what the whole world is after? Honestly, I don’t know too many wealthy people, but from what I know, they often seek peace, true happiness, and unconditional love.

Let me give an example from my own life. I was born into a poor family, and the environment around me was challenging due to a toxic household and lack of facilities. However, my mom worked incredibly hard and made many sacrifices to protect me from negative influences and ensure I had a good education. Despite not being able to afford proper meals, she begged my father to enroll me in a good school. She endured abuse and harassment from my father and stayed despite everything because she wanted to raise me into a good man and ensure that I wouldn’t remain deprived of the love of both parents. Not every child in the world is blessed with such a loving mom.

Regarding my other advantages, I would say that from childhood, I have always had a unique perspective on the world. Additionally, as an Indian and Hindu, I believe that studying our holy books and ancient scriptures can guide one toward eternal peace, freedom, and liberation. People from different religions might not be interested in our religious philosophy, as they are not aware of the precious knowledge in Hinduism, so they may be deprived of this advantage.

everyone is equally blessed in different ways. Instead of envying others' visible advantages, we should recognize our own advantages and work hard to fulfill our potential in life.

PLEASE NOTE THAT THE PROGRAM IS NOW SCHEDULED TO BEGIN ON MONDAY, SEPT 23RD.

www.Patreon.com/TheSocraticCircle

https://www.patreon.com/posts/book-program-5-7-111179045

The title of this post says most of what you need to know about it. Our fifth book program will feature Marcus Aurelius's Meditations. The program will meet for FIVE sessions beginning on Monday, September 23rd and concluding on October 21st. The sessions are on Mondays from 7:30-8:30pm ET. The schedule of readings is posted below. I will post the Zoom information a few days before the first session. In the meantime...

Here's the link to the Project Gutenberg translation of Meditations:

https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/2680/pg2680-images.html

REVISED Schedule of Readings:

Monday, September 23rd: Chapters I - III

Monday, September 30th: Chapters IV - V

Monday, October 7th: Chapters VI - VII

Monday, October 14th: Chapters VIII - IX

Monday, October 21st: Chapters X - XII

________________________________________

Here is the link to a previous post which contains a link to the Enchiridion of Epictetus, which you may find useful as a relatively short preparatory read: https://www.patreon.com/posts/enchiridion-of-5-110193748

________________________________________

I look forward to discussing Meditations with you!

--Matt :)