The question of our "passage through time" is one of the things that is most explored in Cioran's work. He is the one author who has deepened the subject the most because of his extreme experiences with insomnia. His answer is simple: time is our greatest enemy. We only function because we forget (through sleep). We feel like we start something new every day, which makes life easier. But when we have consciousness of time at all time, we quickly find life unbearable. Discontinuity is what saves.
My favorite are his Notebooks. He left behind 12 of them (I think) that were found after his death, with the mention that they should be destroyed. But they were published. This is what I enjoyed reading the most out of everything he wrote. But the first two books you mentioned are the ones that have marked me the most, and which I think are his best works. The last 7 pages of 'The Fall into Time' are amazing and crucial, too.
Flawless aphorist. Although, I have strong issues against stoics. And maybe I will do a video on that soon enough. But other than that. Cioran is in my top philosopher list.
Be sure to watch my next video. I'm gonna post something that explains why I am so fatalistic about it all. It's not cowardice, or defeatism; not even pessimism. Just fatalism.
Interesting video...Stoic wisdom is always an excellent way to look at reality. I guess I might ask if it makes more sense rather than asking with Cioran how to "bear oneself" or how to bear "another day," to ask instead how to understand ones self and how to understand its passage through time? The question might be, "When this world perishes, as Cioran so fervently hopes it will, what will follow it?" Something will fill the creative vacuum, no matter how much that displeases Cioran.
Schopenhauer and Nietzsche also admired the Stoics. Nietzsche called himself the "last of the Stoics." Right before I read Schopenhaeur I was finishing a study of the Stoics, and I found so much resemblance between the two. To be honest, I look at Schopenhauer as a Stoic; probably more so than Nietzsche. Schopenhauer's 'Wisdom of Life and Councils and Maxims' is pretty much a misanthropic Stoic's handbook as a whole. It's one of the best books I have read.
Thanks for the translation, Tranquil. Btw, which is your favorite Cioran book? I've read and own The Trouble with Being Born, a Brief History of Decay and The Temptation To Exist. Which is the brightest gem I've missed?
"Something will fill the creative vacuum, no matter how much that displeases Cioran." Not according to the good old second law of thermodynamics! You know that old Vegas maxim, "The House always wins?" Well... the name of the house is Entropy. Right now, its name is stated in big neon letters above its door... but at some point, them neon words will go out forever. Yes, there will still be some energy left for little particles to dance wildly, and maybe even waltz sporadically...
The most interesting thing about the Stoics is their struggle. Epictetus is the least interesting because there isn't much of his struggle with life and with himself available to us. But Seneca was prone to depression and melancholia, and so was Marcus Aurelius. We get to see how they manage to live with it, according to their own ideals and efforts, which is what makes them formidable and interesting. It's not meant to convince you to live exactly like them, but it's very helpful in some ways.
You are right, there is nothing we can do about it, so we shouldn't worry or care about what comes next. What we can do, though, is live well, be kind, and not hurt others. Practice virtue for the sake of it. And this is where being Stoical comes in. Being Stoical has nothing to do with being blindly optimistic as you just said. This is a misconception of Stoic philosophy. Essential good does not come from preaching anything alone, it comes from one's own self-development and integrity.
The first two are his best books. If you have read these, you have pretty much read everything Cioran was to ever say in all his other books. 'On the Heights of Despair' shows an angrier Cioran, an insomniac Cioran. Nothing to do with his later self. 'Tears and Saints' shows a Cioran who is obsessed with the mystics and saints, & who knew once and for all that he could never become a believer, even though he was never areligious. So it depends. I would recommend his interviews the most for you.
Yes. I think that he has somewhat killed pessimistic literature for me. Especially since I read him in French, and his French is the best French ever. He really made this language his own. So now when I read Ligotti or whoever I can't find it as compelling because I'm used to his pen, which is, in my mind, superior to everyone's. Even Zapffe and Schopenhauer's beautiful prose do not equate it for me. It is dangerously seductive.
So did he. It's their approach to living life that he admired, not their exact beliefs about the world. Same with the Epicureans and the Cynics. It's evidently normal that in the postmodern age most people would have issues with the Stoics.
(continued)... who knows, maybe they'll gang up and sing a little song in the dark... maybe they'll play charades, and the only one they'll know how to do is Poe's raven, quoting "Nevermore!". Oh, but this trifling little thing we call organic life? It'll be gone. Over the hills and far away! Gone daddy gone, your light is gone... and so is your precious record collection.
Ever read any of the works of the Stoics? It sounds to me like you are only judging the philosophy based on misconceptions of people who looked into it very superficially (if at all). That is not even close to what Stoicism is about - & it should be easy to know this considering that they had a positive view towards suicide. Do you think this would be possible if it was a "feel good no matter what" philosophy? That Cioran - the great philosopher of despair - admired them should say enough.
Do you really think that stoicism is "looking at the world through rose-colored glasses?" For you & others, existence is shit. I understand that. I think the world is facing critical problems, but to say that we should give up because the game is so corrupt is just cowardice and defeatism. What actions would make the situation better -- not perfect-- but better? It's as if some people want to insist that we need to quit trying. The "game" is what we do in the world. I get you don't care btw.
So for you life is a malignant tumor? OK, if you want to think that your natural habitat is shit, I'm not going to try to convince otherwise. Stoicism is not "Feel ok no matter what" ...
Compelling & interesting as always, thank you. Cioran is a formative writer for me. O that pristine void of wisdom...
The question of our "passage through time" is one of the things that is most explored in Cioran's work. He is the one author who has deepened the subject the most because of his extreme experiences with insomnia. His answer is simple: time is our greatest enemy. We only function because we forget (through sleep). We feel like we start something new every day, which makes life easier. But when we have consciousness of time at all time, we quickly find life unbearable. Discontinuity is what saves.
My favorite are his Notebooks. He left behind 12 of them (I think) that were found after his death, with the mention that they should be destroyed. But they were published. This is what I enjoyed reading the most out of everything he wrote. But the first two books you mentioned are the ones that have marked me the most, and which I think are his best works. The last 7 pages of 'The Fall into Time' are amazing and crucial, too.
Flawless aphorist. Although, I have strong issues against stoics. And maybe I will do a video on that soon enough. But other than that. Cioran is in my top philosopher list.
Be sure to watch my next video. I'm gonna post something that explains why I am so fatalistic about it all. It's not cowardice, or defeatism; not even pessimism. Just fatalism.
Interesting video...Stoic wisdom is always an excellent way to look at reality. I guess I might ask if it makes more sense rather than asking with Cioran how to "bear oneself" or how to bear "another day," to ask instead how to understand ones self and how to understand its passage through time? The question might be, "When this world perishes, as Cioran so fervently hopes it will, what will follow it?" Something will fill the creative vacuum, no matter how much that displeases Cioran.
Good stuff, tranquil.
Schopenhauer and Nietzsche also admired the Stoics. Nietzsche called himself the "last of the Stoics."
Right before I read Schopenhaeur I was finishing a study of the Stoics, and I found so much resemblance between the two. To be honest, I look at Schopenhauer as a Stoic; probably more so than Nietzsche. Schopenhauer's 'Wisdom of Life and Councils and Maxims' is pretty much a misanthropic Stoic's handbook as a whole. It's one of the best books I have read.
Thanks for the translation, Tranquil. Btw, which is your favorite Cioran book? I've read and own The Trouble with Being Born, a Brief History of Decay and The Temptation To Exist. Which is the brightest gem I've missed?
"Something will fill the creative vacuum, no matter how much that displeases Cioran."
Not according to the good old second law of thermodynamics! You know that old Vegas maxim, "The House always wins?" Well... the name of the house is Entropy. Right now, its name is stated in big neon letters above its door... but at some point, them neon words will go out forever. Yes, there will still be some energy left for little particles to dance wildly, and maybe even waltz sporadically...
I'll try to translate some more for you & others like you!
The most interesting thing about the Stoics is their struggle. Epictetus is the least interesting because there isn't much of his struggle with life and with himself available to us. But Seneca was prone to depression and melancholia, and so was Marcus Aurelius. We get to see how they manage to live with it, according to their own ideals and efforts, which is what makes them formidable and interesting. It's not meant to convince you to live exactly like them, but it's very helpful in some ways.
Thanks. I'll check out 'Utopia' next I think. If you write pessimistic philosophy you'd best have a a golden pen and that he had indeed.
You are right, there is nothing we can do about it, so we shouldn't worry or care about what comes next.
What we can do, though, is live well, be kind, and not hurt others. Practice virtue for the sake of it. And this is where being Stoical comes in. Being Stoical has nothing to do with being blindly optimistic as you just said. This is a misconception of Stoic philosophy. Essential good does not come from preaching anything alone, it comes from one's own self-development and integrity.
The first two are his best books. If you have read these, you have pretty much read everything Cioran was to ever say in all his other books. 'On the Heights of Despair' shows an angrier Cioran, an insomniac Cioran. Nothing to do with his later self. 'Tears and Saints' shows a Cioran who is obsessed with the mystics and saints, & who knew once and for all that he could never become a believer, even though he was never areligious. So it depends. I would recommend his interviews the most for you.
any idea where one can find the full interview?
Yes. I think that he has somewhat killed pessimistic literature for me. Especially since I read him in French, and his French is the best French ever. He really made this language his own. So now when I read Ligotti or whoever I can't find it as compelling because I'm used to his pen, which is, in my mind, superior to everyone's. Even Zapffe and Schopenhauer's beautiful prose do not equate it for me. It is dangerously seductive.
I actually voted for Cioran to be on a antinatalist shirt contest for Amanda. One should have him on a shirt.
So did he. It's their approach to living life that he admired, not their exact beliefs about the world. Same with the Epicureans and the Cynics. It's evidently normal that in the postmodern age most people would have issues with the Stoics.
Unfortunately the person who made the drawings did not draw him.
(continued)... who knows, maybe they'll gang up and sing a little song in the dark... maybe they'll play charades, and the only one they'll know how to do is Poe's raven, quoting "Nevermore!". Oh, but this trifling little thing we call organic life? It'll be gone. Over the hills and far away! Gone daddy gone, your light is gone... and so is your precious record collection.
But if you really want a book of his to read, I'm thinking 'History and Utopia' would probably fit you pretty good.
Ever read any of the works of the Stoics? It sounds to me like you are only judging the philosophy based on misconceptions of people who looked into it very superficially (if at all). That is not even close to what Stoicism is about - & it should be easy to know this considering that they had a positive view towards suicide. Do you think this would be possible if it was a "feel good no matter what" philosophy?
That Cioran - the great philosopher of despair - admired them should say enough.
Do you really think that stoicism is "looking at the world through rose-colored glasses?"
For you & others, existence is shit. I understand that. I think the world is facing critical problems, but to say that we should give up because the game is so corrupt is just cowardice and defeatism.
What actions would make the situation better -- not perfect-- but better? It's as if some people want to insist that we need to quit trying. The "game" is what we do in the world. I get you don't care btw.
So for you life is a malignant tumor? OK, if you want to think that your natural habitat is shit, I'm not going to try to convince otherwise.
Stoicism is not "Feel ok no matter what" ...