Laura said:maiko said:Thank you for sharing this. It sounds realls interesting. And I like what you said about his style of writing
You need to be awake when you read this one, and may have to re-read a paragraph now and then to follow the close arguments, but none of it is too complex or fancy to finally grasp.
Alejo said:I actually realized that this morning... woke up and picked it up and then found myself having to read a paragraph and stop for a few minutes. It might be in part due to the writing style but the concepts themselves require some clearer attention.
maxtree said:Thanks for the recommendation. I ordered it right away.
At the moment I am reading "The secret origins of the first World war" by Gerry Docherty and Jim Macgregor.
What they call 'the secret elite', used then and (now?) the same strategy : control the press and do not write (too) much on paper what has been decided amongst the group. In the book that is : (re)creating the British empire and going to war with Germany.
What a difficult job for historians ! If they don't have the thruthfull and correct information about things that happened in the past and how they came to be.
Thanks to you Laura I have learned how important and fun it is to read about history and religion and all the things you wrote about in your own books .
Another big thanks for all the books you recommended throughout all these years. Knowledge brings more light to see better I realized.
What I found really difficult to read was "Purity and danger" by Mary Douglas. (As a non-speaking english person) I started her second book "Natural Symbols" but could not finish it.
On the other hand "Cosmos, chaos and the world to come" by Norman Cohn was a great read.
"The dawn and twilight of Zoroastrism" by Zaehner is on the list.
jhonny said:Thanks for the recommendation Laura ;)
I started reading it a few days ago and I think it's like "history for dummies doing the work".
I like the way he explains history about history
Polybius does not think that the study of history will enable men to avoid the mistakes of their predecessors and surpass them in worldly success; the success to which the study of history can lead is for him an inner success, a victory not over circumstance but over self. What we learn from the tragedies of its heroes is not to avoid such tragedies in our own lives, but to bear them bravely when fortune brings them.
[...] As the canvas on which the historian paints his picture grows larger, the power attributed to the individual will grow less. Man finds himself no longer master of his fate in the sense that what he tries to do succeeds or fails in proportion to his own intelligence or lack of it; his fate is master of him, and the freedom of his will is shown not in controlling the outward events of his life but in controlling the inward temper in which he faces these events. Here Polybius is applying tho history the same Hellenistic conceptions which the Stoics and Epicureans applied to ethics.
Both these schools agreed in thinking that the problem of moral life was not how to control events in the world around us, as the classical Greek moralists had thought, but how to preserve a purely inward integrity and balance of mind when the attempt to control outward events had been abandoned. For Hellenistic thought, self-consciousness is no longer, as it was for Hellenic thought, a power to conquer the world; it is a citadel providing a safe retreat from a world both hostile and intractable.