[00:00:00] Speaker A: Foreign.
[00:00:10] Speaker B: Hello.
Welcome to the On Duties podcast with the Ciceronian Society. I'm Josh Bowman, executive director of the Ciceronean Society, and for those who've been following along, you haven't seen my face or heard my voice in a few months, but I'm so glad you've joined us on this journey through Cicero's magnum opus, his second seminal work, On Duties, also called De Officiis in the Latin. I just want to take a moment to thank all the people who have jumped on this podcast to cover book one in the first six months. Very especially thankful to Chris Anadale's leadership for this and organizing it and facilitating every episode, for Catherine, of course, as well, our resident Latin expert, and for all the folks, Ben Coyle, et cetera, who have joined us for this journey. It's been a lot of fun. We've had a lot of great comments and compliments on it. Cicero has so much more to offer in terms of discussion points than I think we were even prepared for, in many ways, which is a good thing. And for those of you who might be joining us late to this party, if you will, the Ciceronean Society encourages and equips Christian scholars as they serve the Church. We're not so much a Cicero fan club, but his name represents a lot for us. It represents that small R republican tradition of virtue and duty that we ascribe to as Christians believing that we have a duty to our citizens and to our. To our Lord in many ways. And so this is a great text to engage with. We do so as Christians, often critical of him, but also sympathetic in many ways. I was actually just telling Chris and Catherine before we got on, there's a book I came across just a few months ago working on a separate article about Cicero and. And it's called Cicero in Heaven, the Roman Rhetor and Luther's Reformation by Carl Springer. I only read pieces of it, so I can't tell you if I recommend the entire book or not. I really don't have enough information. But I will say one of the interesting things we find here is that Martin Luther, of course, the Protestant of the Protestant Reformation, was so taken by Cicero and his work that he was disappointed that he could not justify the presence of Cicero in heaven. He would love Cicero to be in heaven. He can't really take himself all the way there, but just thinks very, very highly of him. And I think that speaks well of Cicero, kind of the, you know, Dante's virtuous pagans, if you will. And of course, Dante's Inferno. We find, I think he's referred to as Tully in. Is it limbo? Is that what it's called there in the beginning? So this is just a great conversation. We welcome your comments and ideas as we move forward. Today we're going to be starting book two, and book two and three will probably take us through to the end of the year of 2026. But if you're just starting with us, go back to at least that first episode that we recorded so you can get some background information where I share more about Cicero's life and the context of this book.
Please leave any notes or comments on YouTube or wherever you listen to this podcast. If you have questions, critiques, we're always looking to hear them. And I also want to make sure I make a plug before we go on for three other things. We have a second podcast, the Sower, which deals with our other themes, tradition, place, and things divine, and that is released every Sunday. We also got two events coming up. Our fall symposium, October 22nd through the 24th in Holland, Michigan, and that's in 2026. Take a look at the website for that.
We also have the Logres Institute for Classical Liberal Studies. When this comes out, registration for that new certificate program will be available and courses start in October. This is a certificate for those looking for the content knowledge that they need for classical education, homeschooling, or for just lifelong learners. So take a look at
[email protected], it's a great time to sign up and we're really excited about that project. Well, I've said enough, Chris, and so I'm going to. You're the pro here. I want to make sure I hand it over to you and. And you can facilitate this discussion as we go to book two of On Duties.
[00:04:08] Speaker C: All right, fantastic. Thank you, Josh, for the. For the great lead in and intro. We're starting with book two of On Duties and the Cambridge translation we use. We're on page 63.
We're about, I think about halfway, maybe not quite halfway through the entire text.
We're going to read chapters one through eight in this episode and I think I'll start reading just chapters one and two of book two. And Catherine, ask you to take lead comment and then we'll go around the circle like that.
[00:04:37] Speaker A: All right.
[00:04:38] Speaker C: And so we begin.
Marcus, my son, I think that in the preceding book I have explained well enough the way in which duties are based on what is honorable and on each particular type of virtue.
Next, I must pursue the classes of Duties that relate to civilized living and to the availability of the influence and wealth that men find beneficial.
As I said before, we must ask both what is beneficial and what is the opposite, and then what is more or most beneficial of several beneficial possibilities.
That is what I shall go on to discuss. But first, let me say a few words both about my overall project and about my own view of philosophy.
My books have inspired in some men a devotion not only to reading, but also to writing.
Occasionally, though, I still fear that some good men despise the very name of philosophy and are amazed that I spend so much time and effort on it.
For my part, when the republic was being run by the men to whom it had entrusted itself, I devoted all my concern and all my thoughts to it.
But then a single man came to dominate everything.
There was no longer any room for consultation or for personal authority. And finally, I lost my allies in preserving the Republic, excellent men as they were then. I did not surrender to the grief that would have overwhelmed me had I not fought it, nor to pleasures unworthy of an educated man.
[00:06:19] Speaker A: Ah, there's so much here.
So the. Of course, we return to the. Marcus, my son, let me address you and remind you of what my project is and the. The summation of what we just went over. I mean, Cicero never stops being an orator, so here we go.
So it's helpful to be reminded of last book, we were mostly focused on honestas that honorableness, moral. Sometimes it's translated moral rectitude and its divisions. And so we got the abstract bit down. Now we're really getting into.
Here's what is going to become more practical, because we're going to talk about what is util. What is, yes, useful or beneficial. And then.
But, oh, wait, now, let me, let me. The Romans are an eminently practical people.
So why are we spending so much time on philosophy?
And so again, orator, I anticipate the objection. I'm going to answer the objection. And now here we go.
And I think it's so. I've heard this described as a very kind of oddly personal section, because he talks about like it's not. It's not just, oh, philosophy's good, he'll get there, but it's also, I have time. Why do I have time? I wish I didn't have time, but I do, and here's why.
And so it's this interesting mix of both the. I'm doing this because it's a good thing, but also I'm doing this because I am avoiding being in despair over the fall of the Republic.
So it's an interesting mix to start the book with.
[00:08:11] Speaker B: Yeah, I like the fact that we start with.
He's returning to his context, and that personal aspect is here. I also think it's funny. He says, but first, let me say a few words about my overall project. He's not just going to use a few words, as we see here in a moment, but he is. He's turning to this practical side.
There is something autobiographical about this, especially here, where, you know, what is the meaning of life if you've been exiled? Right. What is my purpose here if it's not to serve the republic that I gave my life, you know, gave my life to, and will eventually give his life for in many ways.
And so I think it's a really interesting look into the life of someone who can't see. Who's struggling to see beyond this life. Right. What is. I mean, the emphasis of the Romans on the practical, on the republic itself, gives them a lot of power and energy to where they can do so much. I mean, we won't get into the engineering of the Romans here because we're, you know, the three of us aren't really qualified to talk about that, but anytime you learn more about it, it's just amazing how brilliant they were and how practical they could be and how they could. They could just dominate the landscape around them in ways that is hard for us even to imagine, even with our modern technology.
I think in the same way Cicero is trying to say, how am I going to live this life that I find myself in now?
You know, next I must pursue the classes of duties that relate to civilized living and to the availability of the influence and wealth that men find beneficial. So he's. He's. He, you know, this is describing him, and he's, why am I going to live this life the way I'm going to live it? And philosophy is going to be at least part of the answer to it. I don't know if he's going to go full Boethius and, you know, the consolation of philosophy, but I think it is an interesting start. It's. It gives Cicero a.
A depth in many ways, as a rhetorician, as a writer, as a philosopher. He's not looking at this with any impersonality. This is very much an act of love, pain, frankly, sorrow, loss, mystery. I think that's what gives us. It makes it more compelling.
[00:10:37] Speaker C: Yeah, Josh, I think you said very well that the kind of reaction that I've had as well, there's something Very moving.
I think about this both about Cicero's choosing to begin an entire section of the work about the useful, about wealth, the acquisition and the use of wealth, properly beginning. But let's talk about philosophy. Let's talk about my philosophy. Let's talk about philosophy as a whole. Let's talk about the men who despise philosophy and why they're mistaken.
That's obviously affecting to me as a teacher of philosophy, but it's also. I think it's very bracing to think of this being written by Cicero in this time of uncertainty, the 18 months or so between the death of Julius Caesar and the death of Cicero.
He doesn't know what's going to happen. He's fallen from power. He's in exile. He's writing to his son. There's so many layers of emotion here. There's a kind of elegiac feel to it. There's also a kind of advisory feel. Young Marcus, heed my advice. There's also the kind of, you know, the proud public servant, right. I did well by the Republic when it entrusted itself to my care.
Now things are worse, and I will sort of bear up among this. There's a kind of nobility, it seems to me here, when he speaks personally about this, not. Not boasting, but being very realistic. I think about, at a time of intense uncertainty, you know, in his own. In his own. About his own personal affairs and about the affairs of the republic, who knows what's going to happen in the next six months, the next 12 months, et cetera. So this is maybe the part of Cicero where I feel like the. That the gap between us is narrowest. And I feel like I could really sort of look at it and admire the nobility of a character like this. Trying to be a good father in middle age, you know, early middle age, speaking to his son, thinking about the future of the Republic and about, as it turns out, philosophy and the value of these disciplines in relation to what is honorable and virtuous and also what is useful and prosperous and beneficial.
[00:12:39] Speaker B: One of the things I'd like to add real quick, I just thought of it based on something you were saying is this context of the dictatorship of the Caesar and then Antony and Octavian is in many ways, it is the dismissal or the destruction of politics itself. Politics requires give and take. There has to be stakes that someone could lose power, gain power. And so in some ways, there's always a game to play. You know, dictatorship doesn't remove that, as we'll see in Roman, in the history of the Roman Empire.
But the republican small R, republican politics is going away. You can, in a way, you can be exiled politically without having to remove yourself to Greece or wherever, you know, Cicero finds himself. I think one of the things that's important here, and one of the reasons that this is relevant, is that in many instances, even when you live in a democracy, you can become a kind of political exile. Yeah, sure, you have a vote, but no one really seems to represent what you actually think and want. Right. You feel like a political exile or you can't participate because, and this is maybe cynical of me, but in a sense that at some point we all could experience that kind of exile where the lack of political efficacy weighs on us.
And for Cicero, that is soul crushing.
For me, I don't really care about politics, but it's kind of like, it's nice not to have it in my life all the time. But I think there is something to be said about.
He is unknowingly addressing those who in later democratic times and liberal democratic times are going to experience that same exile because they're either in the electoral minority or something like that. So, I'm sorry, I just had that thought.
[00:14:22] Speaker C: That's fantastic. Thank you, Josh.
Catherine, I'd like to ask you to read chapters three and four, if you would. And Josh, lead us off with comment, please.
[00:14:33] Speaker A: I only wish that the Republic had remained in its original condition rather than fall into the hands of men greedy not merely for change, but for revolution.
For first, I would be devoting myself to action rather than writing, as I used to when the Republic was standing. Secondly, it would be my own speeches rather than my present subject matter that I would be putting on paper, as I have often done before.
All my care, all my thought, all my effort used to be directed towards the Republic. When that ceased completely to exist, then inevitably legal and senatorial speeches ceased to flow from my pen. But my mind could not be entirely inactive.
Therefore, as I was versed in such studies from my youth, I thought that I could most honorably set aside my troubles by turning to philosophy. I had spent much time on this as a young man for the sake of education.
Later, I began to take up the honorable burden of public office and gave myself completely to public life.
Now the only time I had for philosophy was that which I could spare after seeing to the needs of my friends and of the Republic. All of that was used up in reading. I had no leisure for writing.
[00:15:43] Speaker B: I mean, it's a continuation what we just heard, right? In the sense that. Look. And by the way I want to just put a little plug in here. So, Catherine, give us some thoughts on that word revolution when it comes time for you to address this, because I was kind of surprised to see that here.
What does that mean in this context? The word revolution, of course, has a very long history.
But what does it mean when Cicero says it?
But I think he's lamenting this loss of the active life in a way or the honorable act of life.
And could he still be honorable and just do philosophy?
It's like he doesn't want to admit that maybe that's true, but I don't really want it to be true because it just seems like this is all pointless unless I can put it into action.
I don't just want to sit here and think that's not who I am. I actually want to get in the ring and fight in some way, shape or form.
He likes the reading and the speeches and things, and all this is going away because the Republic has essentially died.
It's as if his duty is so wrapped up in the existence of the republic as a country that in the absence of it, does duty have any meaning still now I think he would say yes, right? Cicero, the great natural lawyer in the sense that there is a natural law and that helps him get there. But so much of his thought is still wrapped up in that political life that in its absence or in its retreat from him, what does duty mean anymore? Right.
This is where the whole Aristotelian. You're either in politics or a beast, essentially, or a God. And saying and realizing that you're neither a beast nor a God, can you.
Is just doing philosophy moving you in that direction? Are you becoming more beastly or more divine by just doing philosophy and not actively participating in politics? I think Cicero's going to come back to that idea later, but I'll leave it at that. For that one.
[00:17:54] Speaker C: I'll just add briefly that I think some of the notes in this edition refer to this as a kind of apologia, an apology. It's a defense of philosophy. But it's also defense of Cicero's turn to philosophy in his defeat. And in some ways this makes it a little bit sad. Right. I'd rather be giving legal and senatorial speeches and teaching instead of writing. Writing is a kind of second best, it seems. But then we're going to see a kind of vindication of philosophy in the very next chapters. He's going to praise it very, very highly. It's not going to be that I've been demoted from the best kind of active life to the sort of second best. I guess I'll write some books and maybe go on a lecture tour, so to speak.
He still has this opportunity to.
Good and noble and inspiring. And I'm recollecting now, since we're coming up on the America 250 Independence Day celebration as we're recording this, that this is one of the reasons Cicero is such an aspiring figure for the Founding Fathers.
[00:18:52] Speaker A: Right?
[00:18:53] Speaker C: He goes through all different phases of political activity, Right. He acquires power, he uses power. He exposes conspiracies, he defends the Republic, he fights for the Republic. He loses.
He lives through his loss and continues writing and continues being the kind of inspiring figure that he is all the way to the time of his death. In a sense, you could say, well, what area of politics could Cicero not teach us something about by his example and in here by his writing? Catherine?
[00:19:29] Speaker A: Yes, and that is one of the wonderful things about Cicero, and you see that later as well.
The Founding Fathers are one great example, but another one is the Renaissance. So the Renaissance humanists, they love them some Cicero, and to the degree that Petrarch, who's kind of the father of, you know, the Renaissance, as a thought, writes poetry that are letters to Cicero and says, and actually is.
He writes a pretty famous poem where he says, you know, I admired your, like, political things and your, Your, Your, your, Your philosophy so much. And then I found your letters and you're a normal person with, like, normal emotions. This is weird.
My. My hero is actually a real human being. I don't know what to do.
And so there's a, There's a level at which we get a little bit of this in, in on duties where he's, he's in this kind of personal section. His letters are way more kind of raw as he's writing to his family about these kinds of things.
But to your question, Josh, the, The word for revolution in, in our translation is actually two words in Latin. Ever tendarum rerum. So like, the, so rerum is just
[00:20:57] Speaker B: the word for like, things, the inversion of things.
[00:21:00] Speaker A: Yeah, the, the turning upside down of things.
[00:21:03] Speaker B: Yeah. Yeah.
[00:21:04] Speaker C: Wow.
[00:21:05] Speaker A: Yeah. So it's, it's not just even the word for like, revolution in Latin. That's nova, race. It's, it's like the new thing because the Romans don't like new things. They like old things.
Yeah, the, the Ever tendi. Race.
The, the overturned things. This is a, a much more punchy term because it's, it's not the, it's not just like revolution. Oh, well, this is a new thing. This is like everything has been turned upside down and inside out and. And chaos has ensued.
This is what he was trying to avoid with the cons, you know, when he exposed the conspiracy of Catiline. Catiline was the senator who's trying to overthrow the Republic and turn it upside down and then make it a dictatorship. And Cicero, like, was consul at the time and over and. And discovered this and drove out Catiline very famously.
And then we get Caesar, who basically does the same thing, just without the plan to burn everything down, literally.
So. So for Cicero, this is. I mean, this is a. This is a man who has devoted his entire life to one project, saving the Republic and seen it go down in flames.
And so, yeah, that sense of meaninglessness, Josh, that you're picking up on is Cicero's trying to hold it in, but it's just coming out in this very controlled way. I mean, he's saying, like, I would rather this, but you can tell that it's that I'm holding this in just barely.
So he is a human being. He is not just a philosophical robot.
[00:22:54] Speaker C: I was just.
Catherine, what you said about the inversion of things puts me in mind of Shakespeare's genius with the line, cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war. That's a great line. And it works perfectly for Anthony at that moment in the book play. It's in my head also, because I just watched with my family, the. The 1950s Marlon Brando. Julius, the best one, which is really good with Alan Napier actually cast as Cicero.
Alan Napier, Alfred the butler in the 1966 Batman series.
He plays Cicero in, I think, two scenes in that movie.
[00:23:31] Speaker A: Yeah. And John Gielgud is Cassius. I mean, that is the best. That is the best. Julius Caesar.
[00:23:37] Speaker C: I'll say, hands down, we were really, really astonished by Gielgud's performance. He was just fantastic. So I won't take this down a movie review line, but I just wanted to mention Shakespeare, I think, hit that sort of feeling of chaos and the overturning of all things really, really well in that play.
The next passage I'd like us to read is chapters five and six. Josh, would you read that? And I'll take the first comment.
[00:24:04] Speaker B: Sure.
From the greatest evils, I seem to have salvaged a little good. I now have the chance to put into writing ideas that were not familiar enough to my countrymen, but most worthy of knowing in heaven's name what is more desirable, what more distinguished than wisdom, what Is better for a man what more worthy of a man?
Those who seek it are called philosophers. And philosophy, if you want to translate it, is nothing other than the pursuit of wisdom. Wisdom, according to the definition of the philosophers of old, is the knowledge of everything divine and human and of the causes which regulate them. If anyone despises the pursuit of that, it is difficult to see what on earth he would see fit to praise.
Perhaps it is mental entertainment that you want and a break from your worries.
Philosophers are constantly investigating anything that strives to promote a good and happy life.
What pursuit could you compare with theirs? Or maybe your concern is constancy and virtue. If any discipline can attain those for us, it is this one.
But perhaps for such great matters there is no such discipline.
That suggestion, when even the most trivial of matters have their method, is the suggestion of a man who speaks without reflection, a man mistaken in the things that matter most. If, on the other hand, there is a way of learning about virtue, or could you find it if you rejected this field of study?
When I am advocating the study of philosophy, as I have done in another book, I usually discuss these things in more detail. Now, though I only needed to explain why, deprived as I am of the obligations of public life, I have devoted myself primarily to this pursuit.
[00:25:46] Speaker A: Very good.
[00:25:46] Speaker C: Well, here is the really eloquent defense of philosophy.
If you're not interested in knowledge of all things human and divine, what.
What's your higher priority? Right. What are you spending your time on in preference to that?
What is it that you want out of life? The philosophers are there for you. They have something to say. If they have something wrong to say, then engage with it and improve upon it.
I should maybe excerpt this passage to read with my classes when I'm teaching again in the fall.
And he does end on a personal note. I am.
He refers to his book the Hortensius, which is now lost sadly, where he speaks more, advocates the study of philosophy. But speaking now only about the fact that I've turned from in my sort of forced retirement to now writing and teaching about philosophy, which is fully as noble and important a task for somebody to study and to teach for anyone, but especially for a man.
For man like Cicero. So I'm. I'm. I'm just, you know, glorying in the. In the prose and the eloquence of. Of what's being said here. In defense of philosophy, I think he. He puts it quite well also in a very dad mode.
[00:27:02] Speaker A: Right.
[00:27:02] Speaker C: Well, my son, you know, what. What do you want out of life? What are your priorities? Well, despise, not philosophy.
[00:27:11] Speaker A: Yes. And this is. I mean, you want to. You want a definition of philosophy in the classical sense. Like what. What do the ancients think about the philosophy? This is, this is a fantastic place to go. It's because, of course, you have the etymological. You know, philosophos means a lover of wisdom. Okay, that, that is. That is so used by Plato on down that it becomes a trope. But then he. He expands. You know, wisdom is the knowledge of everything divine and human and of the causes which regulate them.
I mean, it is. It is knowledge. Plus you have leveled up.
And if.
What, if. If anyone despises this, then what are you doing? It's what is praiseworthy, if knowing how the world works, becoming, to use Josef Pieper's phrase, in tune with the world.
If that is.
If that is not a priority, then what. What is higher than that for.
For someone.
So this is, it's interesting because in one of his speeches, Cicero defends the liberal arts and the pro archia poeta, very famously. So people tend to go to that one because it's like, here's why you should read basically, oh, practical person.
But he's sort of revisiting this concept. But then this is philosophy instead. So not just why should you read a practical person, but why should you go particularly to philosophy? Well, it's good for you, and it's also interesting and fun.
And so you have both of the appeals. And it really does sound like the kinds of conversations that you. That you want to have with young people of, you know, okay, well, yes, it's good for you, but it's also enjoyable. So come on, join the fun.
[00:29:11] Speaker B: It is enjoyable, but I think it's interesting. He says here at the beginning of chapter six, perhaps it is mental entertainment that you want and a break from your worries.
What I'm trying to understand there, and maybe I'm misreading him, is he disparaging that pursuit, which, when I first read it, that's what I thought. I thought he was kind of mocking that. But, Catherine, you're saying. No, that he's actually not disparaging. And I think you're right. The more I think about it, it makes sense, because there's another way to think of this, is that philosophy can provide you mental entertainment and a break from your worries. To a point. But I would also, in my mind, I thought to myself, I don't think Cicero would see this as therapy, right, Necessarily. Because there is something. I mean, when you go down These, These pathways that philosophy leads you, it can lead to some very difficult places. Right. Personally, politically, socially, it's not necessarily an easy path. It is fraught with peril in many ways. Also mystery and joy and peace and happiness, all that stuff. Right. I think he's giving that there, and I don't want to develop that too much. Two other quick notes. This is one of the passages that we, as a Ciceronian society get our tagline from tradition, place and things divine. Specifically, that phrase things divine, which I always have to explain comes from Cicero, that wisdom is the knowledge of, in part, the knowledge of things divine. I also want to encourage our listeners or viewers. That book Hortensius is lost to us, sadly. But a lot of the spirit of it, if you will, and even some. I believe some key passages of it are recorded in St. Augustine's Confessions and maybe his City of God. But it's. We. We definitely know that it had an impact on St. Augustine, and it's probably. If you. If you don't read Cicero directly to kind of get an idea of what he said, Augustine's probably your best entree into that particular book.
[00:31:06] Speaker C: Very good. I think that brings us around to the last passage that we'll read for this episode. That'll be chapters seven and. And eight. And it's my turn again, so I'll. I'll read that with Katherine commenting.
An objection is brought against me by educated men at that, who ask whether I seem to be acting quite consistently.
For although I say that nothing can be securely grasped, I am still ready to discourse on various matters. And now, indeed, I am engaged in advising about duty.
I should like them to learn my views satisfactorily.
We are not the ones whose minds wander in uncertainty and who have nothing by which to direct themselves.
If we took away our grounds not only for arguing but also for living, what would reason, indeed, what would life be like?
No, what we do is this. Where other men say that some things are certain and others uncertain, we disagree with them and say rather that some things are persuasive and others not.
What, therefore, should prevent me from accepting what seems persuasive to me and rejecting the opposite, so avoiding the presumption of assertion and escaping the recklessness that is so far removed from wisdom.
We argue against every opinion on the grounds that what is in fact persuasive could not be revealed unless the two competing sides of each case had been heard. I explained all this well enough, or so I think in my Academica.
My dear Cicero, although you are now, studying so old and so distinguished a philosophy under Cratippus, who is not unworthy of that noble tradition's founders, I still wanted you to know something of the very similar tradition of that I prefer.
But now let me proceed to my proposed topic.
[00:33:12] Speaker A: Indeed.
So here there's a sense in which Cicero is shifting again, and he's talking about sort of his school of philosophy, particularly as opposed to just philosophy in general.
So he starts with the refutation of, you know, I'm being inconsistent, or even then he proceeds down to well, nothing is certain, which is another school of thought, and then explains his own. So he's making a fine a distinction of, I'm not saying nothing is certain. I'm not saying that it's impossible to know anything. That's a different school.
But I am saying, because Cicero is an academic philosopher, so he says some things are more persuasive is the word that our translation uses. The Latin is probabilia, like where we get our word probable from.
Some things are more understandable, some things are more probable, some things are more likely, some things are more explorable, others not. So. The academics don't like to say this is certain.
Which way Back in book one, we talked about how Cicero kind of has this idea of if you say you're certain about something but you're not certain about something, that that in itself is a breach of duty.
This is where he's getting. It is his philosophical school doesn't even admit that you can say for certain 100% that X is so and Y is not so.
You can say X is much more probable, but you can't say it's certain.
And then his. His little backtrack of, well, my dear Cicero, my dear son, you're studying with a peripatetic, like an Aristotelian guy.
We're really similar.
You can go and do that if you want. I just want to make sure you know what I believe first.
[00:35:30] Speaker B: Yeah, I. Catherine said a lot of what I was going to say. I actually would like to use my brief moment here to kind of tee up Chris, who's going to know a lot more about this than I will, because I know for a fact that David Hume is deeply indebted to Cicero. He's explicit about it, and I'm wondering to what extent can we see some of that pre. I don't know if he's not, you know, is he Humean here?
I don't know, but there is a. Where he's distinguishing between these schools. It Almost makes me think of some of the debates about what is philosophy and what can and cannot be known and what is knowledge and what's the pursuit of all this thinking of kind of late 18th century, really until now in the philosophical world. I mean, is there for someone, a professional philosopher such as yourself, do you see echoes of that here in the distinction he's making between these two schools?
[00:36:24] Speaker C: Oh, I would say absolutely. And I think it's one, not maybe the only way, but one safe way to present Hume. And the way that I prefer is he's a kind of Ciceronian humanist in the modern age.
He's sort of, you know, reviving a certain kind of pyranism. He's like Montaigne, but he's also, you know, attempting to be a kind of gentleman philosopher. And so he's. He's willing to sort of work with, here's what's necessary to live a good life. And so I think a lot of Hume's metaphilosophy, his sort of philosophy about what the philosophical task is, acquires a lot of its motivation from. Or it has a lot of similarities, too. Let me say Cicero's project here, where Cicero is saying, you know, I'm not a dogmatist, I'm not a skeptic. And at Hume, right down that same sort of, sort of narrow path between these against the dogmatists, against the radical skeptics, I'll be a sort of mitigated skeptic, says Hume. So, you know, can we justify these things? No. Can we live without them also? No. And so how do we live well with them? How do we engage in common life, you know, methodized and corrected by the tools of reason, without being so ambitious as to have a system of certainty and without being so despairing as to sort of give up because nobody can prove anything? And there's always a counter argument against whatever we want without going too deep into either modern philosophy or Cicero's philosophy, which I don't know as nearly as well.
I think that's the sort of similarity. I think definitely, when he says, I'm not with the. The dogmatists, I'm not with the radical skeptics, I think some things are more persuasive, more probable than others. And what is that if not reason when I'm talking about those sorts of things? Does that lighten things up a little bit, Josh?
[00:38:14] Speaker B: Yeah, that's exactly what I was thinking. Thank you. Yeah.
[00:38:18] Speaker C: Okay.
Well, I think we're at the end of the passages that we had in mind for today chapters one through eight of Book two, and so I think we'll sign off now. You've been listening to the Cicero on Duties Podcast, a production of the Ciceronian Society. I want to thank my co hosts Josh Bowman, Director of the Society, and Katherine Bradshaw for being with me through this part of the book. We will be picking up next week with Chapter nine and beyond in Book two as we get deeper into Cicero's theory of the beneficial and the useful and how those contribute to an excellent life.
Please do subscribe to this podcast and share an episode with a friend. Leave us a comment below if you wish. And thank you for watching today.
Goodbye.
