 |
There is an unfortunate tendency (at least I think it's unfortunate) to elevate any prominent person
with opinions to the status of philosopher. I heard a football coach being interviewed the other day; he
too had a 'philosophy', and then there was a marketing expert touting his 'philosophy' about
salesmanship, and so on. What this so-called philosophy boils down to is 'method'. The coach had a
method of coaxing competitiveness out of players, the sales guy a method of psychology centred on
ingratiation. In both cases, the use of the word 'philosophy' reflects, bluntly spoken, crass ignorance
of the nature of philosophy, and it is used by people of this ilk for no other purpose than to convey
some air of being smarter than people without a 'philosophy'. But there are plenty of respectable
examples of misuse, too. Albert Einstein (a scientist), Leo Tolstoi (a novelist), Mao Tse Tung (a
politician), Albert Schweitzer (a musician and humanist) can be found on philosophy shelves in
bookshops and libraries with morsels of their 'wisdom', well why not Seinfeld? Indeed, why not that
great classic Cicero?
|
 |
You are right. Cicero was a lawyer, a politician and a great stylist of Latin prose. He also dabbled in
philosophy. But to be frank, don't bother looking for a 'core philosophy'. No-one who's sincere about
philosophy could possibly maintain that Cicero has any claim to this title of honour.
|