do you think that Caesar was happy?

The origins of the imperative, "know thyself", are lost in the sands of time, but the age-old examination of human consciousness continues here.

Moderator: MagsJ

do you think that Caesar was happy?

Postby Fixed Cross » Thu Aug 11, 2011 10:56 pm

if not, why?
If so, what does that say about morality of happiness?

What are morals for except means to get happy?
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides

Image

Thunderbolt steers all things.
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 6981
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: Thrudheim

Re: do you think that Caesar was happy?

Postby Stoic Guardian » Fri Aug 12, 2011 4:52 am

Fixed Cross wrote:if not, why?
If so, what does that say about morality of happiness?

What are morals for except means to get happy?


What does it matter what we think of another mans state of wellbeing? He was apparently a man of wants as his desire for glory being the motivation for his weeping before a statue of Alaxander the Great?
"Fascism combats, and must combat, without respite or pity, not intelligence, but intellectualism—which is, as I have indicated, a sickness of the intellect" - Giovanni Gentile

”After visiting these places, you can easily understand how that within a few years Hitler will emerge from the hatred that surrounds him now as one of the most significant figures who ever lived. He had boundless ambition for his country which rendered him a menace to the peace of the world, but he had a mystery about him in the way that he lived and in the manner of his death that will live and grow after him. He had in him the stuff of which legends are made.”- John F. Kennedy
User avatar
Stoic Guardian
Silvershirt Armchair Legionary
 
Posts: 4142
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 9:01 am

Re: do you think that Caesar was happy?

Postby Fixed Cross » Fri Aug 12, 2011 10:24 am

Stoic Guardian wrote:
Fixed Cross wrote:if not, why?
If so, what does that say about morality of happiness?

What are morals for except means to get happy?


What does it matter what we think of another mans state of wellbeing? He was apparently a man of wants as his desire for glory being the motivation for his weeping before a statue of Alaxander the Great?

Yes, he was very ambitious and could not resign to a life without world-changing success.
And then he succeeded at attaining that success.

Was this a moral man?

I think we may define morals in terms of self-worth.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides

Image

Thunderbolt steers all things.
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 6981
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: Thrudheim

Re: do you think that Caesar was happy?

Postby Stoic Guardian » Fri Aug 12, 2011 8:37 pm

Fixed Cross wrote:
Stoic Guardian wrote:
Fixed Cross wrote:if not, why?
If so, what does that say about morality of happiness?

What are morals for except means to get happy?


What does it matter what we think of another mans state of wellbeing? He was apparently a man of wants as his desire for glory being the motivation for his weeping before a statue of Alaxander the Great?

Yes, he was very ambitious and could not resign to a life without world-changing success.
And then he succeeded at attaining that success.

Was this a moral man?

I think we may define morals in terms of self-worth.


From what ive heard he was neither a terrible tyrant or a virtuous man.
"Fascism combats, and must combat, without respite or pity, not intelligence, but intellectualism—which is, as I have indicated, a sickness of the intellect" - Giovanni Gentile

”After visiting these places, you can easily understand how that within a few years Hitler will emerge from the hatred that surrounds him now as one of the most significant figures who ever lived. He had boundless ambition for his country which rendered him a menace to the peace of the world, but he had a mystery about him in the way that he lived and in the manner of his death that will live and grow after him. He had in him the stuff of which legends are made.”- John F. Kennedy
User avatar
Stoic Guardian
Silvershirt Armchair Legionary
 
Posts: 4142
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 9:01 am

Re: do you think that Caesar was happy?

Postby lizbethrose » Sat Aug 13, 2011 11:48 am

Which Caesar are you talking about? Caesar was a title as well as a name.

Beyond that, who really cares whether or not a ruler of the Roman Empire was 'happy?' Does that have any relevance to how history transpired? Would the world be different had the Caesars not been? I think you need to 'flesh out' your OP a bit more. Thank you.
"Be what you would seem to be - or, if you'd like it put more simply - never imagine yourself not to be otherwise than what it might appear to others that what you were or might have been was not otherwise than what you had been would have appeared to them to be otherwise."
— Lewis Carroll
lizbethrose
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3535
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2011 6:55 am
Location: Pacific Northwest

Re: do you think that Caesar was happy?

Postby Flannel Jesus » Sat Aug 13, 2011 12:32 pm

lizbethrose wrote:Beyond that, who really cares whether or not a ruler of the Roman Empire was 'happy?' Does that have any relevance to how history transpired?

What relevance does how history transpired have to the OP? He didn't ask how history transpired. He asked if you think Caesar was happy.
User avatar
Flannel Jesus
For Your Health
 
Posts: 5158
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2011 11:32 pm

Re: do you think that Caesar was happy?

Postby jonquil » Sat Aug 13, 2011 2:14 pm

Well, happiness hasn't exactly been defined yet; nor is it known whether the way that happiness would be defined now would even be a concept during Caesar's time. Think of it this way. He was a man of his times; a military and political leader... and ultimately the ruler of the entire known world. He got what he wanted and achieved his goals; then he was betrayed and assassinated. The bigger question is: was the assassination worth it for the perpetrators? Were they "happy"?
User avatar
jonquil
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3546
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2010 12:57 am
Location: Greenest city in the world!

Re: do you think that Caesar was happy?

Postby Flannel Jesus » Sat Aug 13, 2011 2:15 pm

Why is that the bigger question?
User avatar
Flannel Jesus
For Your Health
 
Posts: 5158
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2011 11:32 pm

Re: do you think that Caesar was happy?

Postby Abstract » Sat Aug 13, 2011 7:58 pm

Fixed Cross wrote:if not, why?
If so, what does that say about morality of happiness?

What are morals for except means to get happy?


I imagine most of them were to some degree, though it is plausible that they were as suffering of irritation as any other. I might think that if they had been more Buddhist things would have been better...
Love is the gravity of the soul.
User avatar
Abstract
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4351
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2011 12:19 am
Location: Nirvana

Re: do you think that Caesar was happy?

Postby Stoic Guardian » Sun Aug 14, 2011 4:15 am

jonquil wrote:Well, happiness hasn't exactly been defined yet; nor is it known whether the way that happiness would be defined now would even be a concept during Caesar's time. Think of it this way. He was a man of his times; a military and political leader... and ultimately the ruler of the entire known world. He got what he wanted and achieved his goals; then he was betrayed and assassinated. The bigger question is: was the assassination worth it for the perpetrators? Were they "happy"?


Happiness isn't a modern age pyschological term it's an emotion thats relavent through all of human history.
"Fascism combats, and must combat, without respite or pity, not intelligence, but intellectualism—which is, as I have indicated, a sickness of the intellect" - Giovanni Gentile

”After visiting these places, you can easily understand how that within a few years Hitler will emerge from the hatred that surrounds him now as one of the most significant figures who ever lived. He had boundless ambition for his country which rendered him a menace to the peace of the world, but he had a mystery about him in the way that he lived and in the manner of his death that will live and grow after him. He had in him the stuff of which legends are made.”- John F. Kennedy
User avatar
Stoic Guardian
Silvershirt Armchair Legionary
 
Posts: 4142
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 9:01 am

Re: do you think that Caesar was happy?

Postby Flannel Jesus » Sun Aug 14, 2011 9:01 am

Stoic Guardian wrote:Happiness isn't a modern age pyschological term it's an emotion thats relavent through all of human history.

It's not as though it's been consistently defined throughout all of human history.

THIS ARTICLE IS RELEVANT TO THIS THREAD IN GENERAL, but specifically to Stoic's post as well: see #5
User avatar
Flannel Jesus
For Your Health
 
Posts: 5158
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2011 11:32 pm

Re: do you think that Caesar was happy?

Postby lizbethrose » Sun Aug 14, 2011 10:01 am

Flannel Jesus wrote:
lizbethrose wrote:Beyond that, who really cares whether or not a ruler of the Roman Empire was 'happy?' Does that have any relevance to how history transpired?

What relevance does how history transpired have to the OP? He didn't ask how history transpired. He asked if you think Caesar was happy.


That doesn't answer my question about which Caesar we supposed to be discussing: in Roman history there were many. I asked FC which Caesar he meant--a perfectly legitimate question before any answer to his op can be given. If he meant Julius Caesar, that's fine. But what's he trying to ask? Was Julius Caesar 'happy' when Cleopatra came to him wrapped in a rug? Was he happy during his affair with her? Was he happy when he was victorious in battle? Was he happy when he was declared "dictator in perpetuity?" Was he happy when Crassus died?

Or does FC want to talk about the 'feeling' of happiness, in general?

And, please, let FC answer--it's his topic, after all.
"Be what you would seem to be - or, if you'd like it put more simply - never imagine yourself not to be otherwise than what it might appear to others that what you were or might have been was not otherwise than what you had been would have appeared to them to be otherwise."
— Lewis Carroll
lizbethrose
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3535
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2011 6:55 am
Location: Pacific Northwest

Re: do you think that Caesar was happy?

Postby Abstract » Sun Aug 14, 2011 10:02 am

Flannel Jesus wrote:
Stoic Guardian wrote:Happiness isn't a modern age pyschological term it's an emotion thats relavent through all of human history.

It's not as though it's been consistently defined throughout all of human history.

THIS ARTICLE IS RELEVANT TO THIS THREAD IN GENERAL, but specifically to Stoic's post as well: see #5


"But get this -- when doing a study of vacationers, the happiest people were the ones in the weeks leading up to a vacation. It was all about anticipation. Again, it looks like our brain rewards us more for working toward a goal than for actually arriving there."
That shows that one can hype themselves up into a feeling of happiness, thus through methods like those practiced in Buddhisim one can achieve happiness, or better yet one can choose to associate happiness to things that will be more conducive to producing more happiness and also feel happy when they are working hard to achieve some goal.(of course I would suggest that ones goal include insuring the future of their children to be, and to be 'good') What it seems to show to me is that reality is about the journey not the end of the journey... heaven could just be the start of the next journey if such exists.
Love is the gravity of the soul.
User avatar
Abstract
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4351
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2011 12:19 am
Location: Nirvana

Re: do you think that Caesar was happy?

Postby Flannel Jesus » Sun Aug 14, 2011 12:29 pm

lizbethrose wrote:
Flannel Jesus wrote:
lizbethrose wrote:Beyond that, who really cares whether or not a ruler of the Roman Empire was 'happy?' Does that have any relevance to how history transpired?

What relevance does how history transpired have to the OP? He didn't ask how history transpired. He asked if you think Caesar was happy.


That doesn't answer my question about which Caesar we supposed to be discussing: in Roman history there were many. I asked FC which Caesar he meant--a perfectly legitimate question before any answer to his op can be given. If he meant Julius Caesar, that's fine. But what's he trying to ask? Was Julius Caesar 'happy' when Cleopatra came to him wrapped in a rug? Was he happy during his affair with her? Was he happy when he was victorious in battle? Was he happy when he was declared "dictator in perpetuity?" Was he happy when Crassus died?

Or does FC want to talk about the 'feeling' of happiness, in general?

And, please, let FC answer--it's his topic, after all.

I don't know why you posted this at all, this response is just nonsense. I know i didn't answer your question about which Caesar, I agree that it's a reasonable question, I never said otherwise and that's precisely why i didn't quote that part in my response. It's fine that you asked that.

By sarcastically saying that it's my topic, you really only show your own hypocrisy: you're the only one who came here and tried to change the subject from Caesar's happiness to some completely random other topic about "how history transpired." I have no clue why you did that. Nobody is talking about how history transpired here and you come and say that that's what we should be talking about. Why should we talk about that? Why can't mrCross talk about Caesar's happiness?

If you want to come in here and say that OP's topic is not worth talking about, tell us why. Tell us why we should be talking about how history transpired instead of this.
User avatar
Flannel Jesus
For Your Health
 
Posts: 5158
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2011 11:32 pm

Re: do you think that Caesar was happy?

Postby Fixed Cross » Sun Aug 14, 2011 6:54 pm

lizbethrose wrote:Which Caesar are you talking about? Caesar was a title as well as a name.

Beyond that, who really cares whether or not a ruler of the Roman Empire was 'happy?' Does that have any relevance to how history transpired? Would the world be different had the Caesars not been? I think you need to 'flesh out' your OP a bit more. Thank you.

Of course it matters if a ruler is happy! In the first place, it says a lot about the nature of his rule, and of rule in general. Secondly, a rulers happiness says a lot about his morality. That is interesting because a person is never an objective fact, always subject of affections and sentiments.

Caesar was Julius' personal nickname. After he became Rome's first solitary ruler, the name Caesar was adopted as a term to denote Roman rulership. Later it has been used as Kaiser and Czar, the German and Russian terms for ruler of an empire.

I personally think that Caesar enjoyed a happiness so great few of us can imagine, and that the consequence of his murder was a small thing compared to his cumulative experience. But at the same time it is clear that he can be seen as a genocidal maniac, slaughtering entire tribes of hundreds of thousands.

That is the question I'm asking as well - do you think that a mass murdering tyrant can also be seen as a virtuous man? The answer is of course yes, because we do, as a culture, admire Caesar. I would say that we need to revise our ideas on the morality of violence to account for these things, in order to be able to deal with the concept of inflicting suffering more intelligently.

And not make claims like "the world is evil because I am in such pain", or "God cannot exist because if he did he would not allow suffering." What the hell is that, really? Who ever said God opposes suffering? The Bible makes it quite clear that the entity it describes greatly values suffering and never shuns to impose it on his loved ones.

Sorry to derail now to religion, this was only an example of how the fear of suffering obscures our view of our real moral principles, which, as I believe, favor violence if it is for a cause we admire.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides

Image

Thunderbolt steers all things.
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 6981
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: Thrudheim

Re: do you think that Caesar was happy?

Postby Abstract » Sun Aug 14, 2011 8:25 pm

FC...

I think that you are sort of right or probably right in your thought line but to say that is is just "suffering" caused is one thing, but in reality it is temporary "suffering"...but then it isn't really suffering as in pain at least not necessarily, it is more like having to work to get the goal... things don't come free... if one sees that the doing is valuable regardless of what one must sacrifice of the self, be that time, effort, etc, then it should not really be seen as suffering, or negatively "sacrifice" it is more like giving and receiving, putting forth to get back. In other words if to help humanity survive and be happy for a really long time, it is worth having to work for that and pay for it by having to give away parts of what is had... But what comes in is the capacity for one to justifiably decide whether another sacrifices them self for the cause for the one person... And if it may actually be better to keep people alive almost always, which is what i think ...IDK
Love is the gravity of the soul.
User avatar
Abstract
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4351
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2011 12:19 am
Location: Nirvana

Re: do you think that Caesar was happy?

Postby Stoic Guardian » Mon Aug 15, 2011 1:17 am

Fixed Cross wrote:
lizbethrose wrote:Which Caesar are you talking about? Caesar was a title as well as a name.

Beyond that, who really cares whether or not a ruler of the Roman Empire was 'happy?' Does that have any relevance to how history transpired? Would the world be different had the Caesars not been? I think you need to 'flesh out' your OP a bit more. Thank you.

Of course it matters if a ruler is happy! In the first place, it says a lot about the nature of his rule, and of rule in general. Secondly, a rulers happiness says a lot about his morality. That is interesting because a person is never an objective fact, always subject of affections and sentiments.

Caesar was Julius' personal nickname. After he became Rome's first solitary ruler, the name Caesar was adopted as a term to denote Roman rulership. Later it has been used as Kaiser and Czar, the German and Russian terms for ruler of an empire.

I personally think that Caesar enjoyed a happiness so great few of us can imagine, and that the consequence of his murder was a small thing compared to his cumulative experience. But at the same time it is clear that he can be seen as a genocidal maniac, slaughtering entire tribes of hundreds of thousands.

That is the question I'm asking as well - do you think that a mass murdering tyrant can also be seen as a virtuous man? The answer is of course yes, because we do, as a culture, admire Caesar. I would say that we need to revise our ideas on the morality of violence to account for these things, in order to be able to deal with the concept of inflicting suffering more intelligently.

And not make claims like "the world is evil because I am in such pain", or "God cannot exist because if he did he would not allow suffering." What the hell is that, really? Who ever said God opposes suffering? The Bible makes it quite clear that the entity it describes greatly values suffering and never shuns to impose it on his loved ones.

Sorry to derail now to religion, this was only an example of how the fear of suffering obscures our view of our real moral principles, which, as I believe, favor violence if it is for a cause we admire.


Yes I understand what you mean, like Bertrand Russels famous quote "No one can sit next too a dieing child and believe God'" as if the invincibility of children is a condition for the existance of god.

Im not sure if Caeser would be considered genocidal, to be honest I haven't researched much about him.
"Fascism combats, and must combat, without respite or pity, not intelligence, but intellectualism—which is, as I have indicated, a sickness of the intellect" - Giovanni Gentile

”After visiting these places, you can easily understand how that within a few years Hitler will emerge from the hatred that surrounds him now as one of the most significant figures who ever lived. He had boundless ambition for his country which rendered him a menace to the peace of the world, but he had a mystery about him in the way that he lived and in the manner of his death that will live and grow after him. He had in him the stuff of which legends are made.”- John F. Kennedy
User avatar
Stoic Guardian
Silvershirt Armchair Legionary
 
Posts: 4142
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 9:01 am

Re: do you think that Caesar was happy?

Postby Fixed Cross » Mon Aug 15, 2011 3:56 am

Stoic Guardian wrote:Yes I understand what you mean, like Bertrand Russels famous quote "No one can sit next too a dieing child and believe God'" as if the invincibility of children is a condition for the existance of god.

Indeed. What an idiot!

Im not sure if Caeser would be considered genocidal, to be honest I haven't researched much about him.

Well I read some about him and he didn't shun to erase whole tribes and these tribes were fairly vast.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides

Image

Thunderbolt steers all things.
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 6981
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: Thrudheim

Re: do you think that Caesar was happy?

Postby Fixed Cross » Mon Aug 15, 2011 4:03 am

Abstract wrote:FC...

I think that you are sort of right or probably right in your thought line but to say that is is just "suffering" caused is one thing, but in reality it is temporary "suffering"...but then it isn't really suffering as in pain at least not necessarily, it is more like having to work to get the goal... things don't come free... if one sees that the doing is valuable regardless of what one must sacrifice of the self, be that time, effort, etc, then it should not really be seen as suffering, or negatively "sacrifice" it is more like giving and receiving, putting forth to get back. In other words if to help humanity survive and be happy for a really long time, it is worth having to work for that and pay for it by having to give away parts of what is had... But what comes in is the capacity for one to justifiably decide whether another sacrifices them self for the cause for the one person... And if it may actually be better to keep people alive almost always, which is what i think ...IDK

In Caesars time there weren't really concepts such as "people" , you had either citizens or barbarians. Barbarians were uncivilized, not Roman, thus worth nothing in comparison to a citizen, let alone the whole glory of Rome! Happiness simply doesn't rely on humanistic morality. Which brings me to FJs question:

Flannel Jesus wrote:That doesn't answer my question about which Caesar we supposed to be discussing: in Roman history there were many. I asked FC which Caesar he meant--a perfectly legitimate question before any answer to his op can be given. If he meant Julius Caesar, that's fine. But what's he trying to ask? Was Julius Caesar 'happy' when Cleopatra came to him wrapped in a rug? Was he happy during his affair with her? Was he happy when he was victorious in battle? Was he happy when he was declared "dictator in perpetuity?" Was he happy when Crassus died?

He must have been exhilirated by most of that I cannot imagine anything else at least. Wouldn't you?

Or does FC want to talk about the 'feeling' of happiness, in general?

No, happiness in real life, like you say. I imagine that he has had lots of very happy moments, more then most of us, more than me likely. I want to talk about the happiness of tyrants, people who do thing that we consider morally wrong.

Or would Caesar have secretly suffered immensely and maybe he was glad to be killed?
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides

Image

Thunderbolt steers all things.
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 6981
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: Thrudheim

Re: do you think that Caesar was happy?

Postby Abstract » Mon Aug 15, 2011 4:24 am

Fixed Cross wrote:In Caesars time there weren't really concepts such as "people" , you had either citizens or barbarians. Barbarians were uncivilized, not Roman, thus worth nothing in comparison to a citizen, let alone the whole glory of Rome! Happiness simply doesn't rely on humanistic morality.
I didn't mean to necessarily say happiness in the way i think you are thinking about it so much as satisfaction or accomplishment of what is best, happiness is pretty much just a feeling that follows that , it is to say happiness like to say "I drove my 4 wheels to work", rather than to say "i drove my car to work"...maybe...
Love is the gravity of the soul.
User avatar
Abstract
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4351
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2011 12:19 am
Location: Nirvana

Re: do you think that Caesar was happy?

Postby Abstract » Mon Aug 15, 2011 4:27 am

Fixed Cross wrote:
Or would Caesar have secretly suffered immensely and maybe he was glad to be killed?

I imagine that many of the accomplishors like that do not feel happiness like some, as sharp exhilaration, I imagine Caesar was simply content and satisfied, and probably wasn't afraid of thing that might occur or the loss of happiness so much...IDK
Love is the gravity of the soul.
User avatar
Abstract
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4351
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2011 12:19 am
Location: Nirvana

Re: do you think that Caesar was happy?

Postby lizbethrose » Mon Aug 15, 2011 6:54 am

[quote]"lizbethrose"]Beyond that, who really cares whether or not a ruler of the Roman Empire was 'happy?' Does that have any relevance to how history transpired?

What relevance does how history transpired have to the OP? He didn't ask how history transpired. He asked if you think Caesar was happy.

That doesn't answer my question about which Caesar we supposed to be discussing: in Roman history there were many. I asked FC which Caesar he meant--a perfectly legitimate question before any answer to his op can be given. If he meant Julius Caesar, that's fine. But what's he trying to ask? Was Julius Caesar 'happy' when Cleopatra came to him wrapped in a rug? Was he happy during his affair with her? Was he happy when he was victorious in battle? Was he happy when he was declared "dictator in perpetuity?" Was he happy when Crassus died?

Or does FC want to talk about the 'feeling' of happiness, in general?

And, please, let FC answer--it's his topic, after all.


I don't know why you posted this at all, this response is just nonsense. I know i didn't answer your question about which Caesar, I agree that it's a reasonable question, I never said otherwise and that's precisely why i didn't quote that part in my response. It's fine that you asked that.

By sarcastically saying that it's my topic, you really only show your own hypocrisy: you're the only one who came here and tried to change the subject from Caesar's happiness to some completely random other topic about "how history transpired." I have no clue why you did that. Nobody is talking about how history transpired here and you come and say that that's what we should be talking about. Why should we talk about that? Why can't mrCross talk about Caesar's happiness?

If you want to come in here and say that OP's topic is not worth talking about, tell us why. Tell us why we should be talking about how history transpired instead of this.


I suggest you understand the difference between FC (FixedCross) and FJ (Flannel Jesus.) Then go back and re-read. Personal apologies are always accepted; personal checks aren't.
"Be what you would seem to be - or, if you'd like it put more simply - never imagine yourself not to be otherwise than what it might appear to others that what you were or might have been was not otherwise than what you had been would have appeared to them to be otherwise."
— Lewis Carroll
lizbethrose
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3535
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2011 6:55 am
Location: Pacific Northwest

Re: do you think that Caesar was happy?

Postby lizbethrose » Mon Aug 15, 2011 7:43 am

Fixed Cross wrote:
lizbethrose wrote:Which Caesar are you talking about? Caesar was a title as well as a name.

Beyond that, who really cares whether or not a ruler of the Roman Empire was 'happy?' Does that have any relevance to how history transpired? Would the world be different had the Caesars not been? I think you need to 'flesh out' your OP a bit more. Thank you.

Of course it matters if a ruler is happy! In the first place, it says a lot about the nature of his rule, and of rule in general. Secondly, a rulers happiness says a lot about his morality. That is interesting because a person is never an objective fact, always subject of affections and sentiments.

Caesar was Julius' personal nickname. After he became Rome's first solitary ruler, the name Caesar was adopted as a term to denote Roman rulership. Later it has been used as Kaiser and Czar, the German and Russian terms for ruler of an empire.

I personally think that Caesar enjoyed a happiness so great few of us can imagine, and that the consequence of his murder was a small thing compared to his cumulative experience. But at the same time it is clear that he can be seen as a genocidal maniac, slaughtering entire tribes of hundreds of thousands.

That is the question I'm asking as well - do you think that a mass murdering tyrant can also be seen as a virtuous man? The answer is of course yes, because we do, as a culture, admire Caesar. I would say that we need to revise our ideas on the morality of violence to account for these things, in order to be able to deal with the concept of inflicting suffering more intelligently.

And not make claims like "the world is evil because I am in such pain", or "God cannot exist because if he did he would not allow suffering." What the hell is that, really? Who ever said God opposes suffering? The Bible makes it quite clear that the entity it describes greatly values suffering and never shuns to impose it on his loved ones.

Sorry to derail now to religion, this was only an example of how the fear of suffering obscures our view of our real moral principles, which, as I believe, favor violence if it is for a cause we admire.


Don't derail into religion.

Caesar wasn't a nickname--it was a family name meaning 'hairy', btw. It later became a title. That's not really important.

"Can a mass murdering tyrant also be seen as a virtuous man?"

Yes, both as he was in time and as he is in history. It depends on your point of view. If he believed in "Veni, Vidi, Vici" as something the Roman populace wanted and needed, it was virtuous. If the Roman populace wasn't particularly interested in a small war in Turkey, then it becomes a statement of personal aggrandizement which is nothing more than political. Is this 'happy' or is it self-promotion in order to achieve a political goal?

Which is it that you want to talk about?
"Be what you would seem to be - or, if you'd like it put more simply - never imagine yourself not to be otherwise than what it might appear to others that what you were or might have been was not otherwise than what you had been would have appeared to them to be otherwise."
— Lewis Carroll
lizbethrose
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3535
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2011 6:55 am
Location: Pacific Northwest

Re: do you think that Caesar was happy?

Postby Fixed Cross » Mon Aug 15, 2011 2:16 pm

lizbethrose wrote:
Sorry to derail now to religion, this was only an example of how the fear of suffering obscures our view of our real moral principles, which, as I believe, favor violence if it is for a cause we admire.


Don't derail into religion.

Good to see you are giving orders now.

Caesar wasn't a nickname--it was a family name meaning 'hairy', btw. It later became a title. That's not really important.

wikipedia wrote:The third name, or cognomen, began as a nickname or personal name that distinguished individuals with the same names. Cognomina do not appear in official documents until around 100 BC. Often the cognomen was chosen based on some physical or personality trait, sometimes with ironic results: Julius Caesar's cognomen, in one interpretation, meant hairy (cf. etymology of the name of Julius Caesar) although he was balding, and Tacitus' cognomen meant silent, while he was a well-known orator. However, from the Republican era, many cognomina were no longer nicknames, but instead were passed from father to son, serving to distinguish a family within a gens (and frequently requiring an agnomen to distinguish people of the same family if they shared praenomen as well as nomen and cognomen).

It is perfectly clear who I mean when I say Caesar. If I had meant Augustus Caesar I would have said Augustus, if I had meant Tiberius Caesar I would have said Tiberius, obviously not Caesar.

"Can a mass murdering tyrant also be seen as a virtuous man?"

Yes, both as he was in time and as he is in history. It depends on your point of view. If he believed in "Veni, Vidi, Vici" as something the Roman populace wanted and needed, it was virtuous.

Do you mean if he believed that his victory was good for Rome?

Or what else could you mean by "if he believed in 'Veni, Vidi, Vici"... do you question that he believed that he had come, seen and conquered?

If the Roman populace wasn't particularly interested in a small war in Turkey, then it becomes a statement of personal aggrandizement which is nothing more than political. Is this 'happy' or is it self-promotion in order to achieve a political goal?

I am asking a simple question. Was he happy?

Which is it that you want to talk about?

I want to talk about the fact that violence makes people happy, and that by some standards this would mean it is virtuous.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides

Image

Thunderbolt steers all things.
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 6981
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: Thrudheim

Re: do you think that Caesar was happy?

Postby barbarianhorde » Mon Aug 15, 2011 4:29 pm

Yeah I think Caesar was happy because he was a very emotional man which is demonstrated by his crying at the statue of Alexander. If it bothered him so much that he didn't have success and glory, that made him unhappy. So it is natural that he would have been very happy when the success started coming. Like I said Caesar was probably very emotional, some even said in his time that he was gay, because of how he walked and dressed.
It is true that liberty is precious; so precious that it must be carefully rationed.
~ Владимир Ильич Ульянов Ленин

THE HORNED ONE
User avatar
barbarianhorde
Thinker
 
Posts: 905
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 2:26 pm

Next

Return to Psychology and Mind



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot]