Of the books from the series, this is the one I liked the least and I honestly think that the author missed the mark when summarizing Aristotle's importance on innovation. Maybe my expectations were wrong, but as a scientist, I was looking for some insights about a man who largely defined the scientific method. Also, I was looking for insights into the role of empiricism, observation, and deductive reasoning that he systematized and are still present in modern times (see Darwin). The best part for me was actually referring to Archimedes. Anyway...I like the series overall, I had great pleasure reading the books about Plutarch and John Cassian, to mention some out of my comfort zone, but I missed most of this one...Cheers.
Marcelo, I actually agree, the bit on Aristotle here was underwhelming, particularly as he is featured in the very title! And yes, I did enjoy the part about Archimedes, in my mind a far better example of innovator from antiquity. I thoroughly enjoyed my visits at the Archimedes Museum in Syracuse, Sicily.
Thank you for the tip. Syracuse is now on my list. BTW just finished the volume on how to grow old by Cicero and this one I found truly spectacular. Happy 2025 and my best wishes of a fulfilling year.
So, here was me having faith in Ecclesiastes 1:9 as true through and through, but no-- Seriously, interesting and (for us not classical scholars) revealing account. Now if the Greeks had just shown us the way to safeguarding democratic society/government. Thanks, Massimo Pigliucci. And Aristotle.
Ah, but in a sense Ecclesiastes was right. Marcus Aurelius says the same thing in the Meditations: human affairs and human nature haven't changed that much, despite all the technical and scientific innovations. That's a major reason the ancients are still relevant!
As to preserving democracy, the Greeks and Romans showed us how *not* to do it: don't pay attention to populist, narcissistic demagogues. You know who I'm talking about...
As I read Ecclesiastes, what he/it was declaring is a bit incompatible with "He then arrives at the conclusion that the new is hardly ever completely new, but depends in complex ways on the old." Not *completely* new, but also not unchanged. Do I know who you're talking about?--hard to discern.
Hmm, the new is usually not completely new, and does depend in complex ways on the old. But I think both Ecclesiastes and Marcus Aurelius were referring to human nature, not to technology.
Of the books from the series, this is the one I liked the least and I honestly think that the author missed the mark when summarizing Aristotle's importance on innovation. Maybe my expectations were wrong, but as a scientist, I was looking for some insights about a man who largely defined the scientific method. Also, I was looking for insights into the role of empiricism, observation, and deductive reasoning that he systematized and are still present in modern times (see Darwin). The best part for me was actually referring to Archimedes. Anyway...I like the series overall, I had great pleasure reading the books about Plutarch and John Cassian, to mention some out of my comfort zone, but I missed most of this one...Cheers.
Marcelo, I actually agree, the bit on Aristotle here was underwhelming, particularly as he is featured in the very title! And yes, I did enjoy the part about Archimedes, in my mind a far better example of innovator from antiquity. I thoroughly enjoyed my visits at the Archimedes Museum in Syracuse, Sicily.
Thank you for the tip. Syracuse is now on my list. BTW just finished the volume on how to grow old by Cicero and this one I found truly spectacular. Happy 2025 and my best wishes of a fulfilling year.
Likewise, Marcelo! You won’t regret putting Syracuse on your travel list!
So, here was me having faith in Ecclesiastes 1:9 as true through and through, but no-- Seriously, interesting and (for us not classical scholars) revealing account. Now if the Greeks had just shown us the way to safeguarding democratic society/government. Thanks, Massimo Pigliucci. And Aristotle.
"What has been will be again,
what has been done will be done again;
there is nothing new under the sun."
Ah, but in a sense Ecclesiastes was right. Marcus Aurelius says the same thing in the Meditations: human affairs and human nature haven't changed that much, despite all the technical and scientific innovations. That's a major reason the ancients are still relevant!
As to preserving democracy, the Greeks and Romans showed us how *not* to do it: don't pay attention to populist, narcissistic demagogues. You know who I'm talking about...
As I read Ecclesiastes, what he/it was declaring is a bit incompatible with "He then arrives at the conclusion that the new is hardly ever completely new, but depends in complex ways on the old." Not *completely* new, but also not unchanged. Do I know who you're talking about?--hard to discern.
Hmm, the new is usually not completely new, and does depend in complex ways on the old. But I think both Ecclesiastes and Marcus Aurelius were referring to human nature, not to technology.