Category: Ancient Philosophy

Plato’s Republic is one of the most famous and influential works of Western philosophy. Written in the form of a dialogue between Socrates and several other Athenians, the Republic is a comprehensive exploration of the nature of justice, the ideal society, and the role of the philosopher in society. In this essay, I will provide an overview of the major themes and arguments of the Republic.

The dialogue begins with Socrates and his friend Glaucon discussing the nature of justice. Socrates suggests that justice is not simply a matter of obeying laws, but rather a matter of having a well-ordered soul. He argues that the just person has three parts to their soul: the rational part, the spirited part, and the appetitive part. The rational part is responsible for making decisions based on reason, the spirited part is responsible for defending the decisions of the rational part, and the appetitive part is responsible for desires and pleasures.

Socrates then proposes that the ideal city, which he calls Kallipolis, is also based on the principle of justice as a well-ordered whole. In the ideal city, the rulers are the philosopher-kings, who are selected based on their knowledge and virtue. The philosopher-kings are responsible for ensuring that the city is just, and they do so by ruling according to reason rather than self-interest.

In order to create the ideal city, Socrates proposes a series of reforms. The first reform is to abolish the family unit and replace it with a communal system of child-rearing. This is done in order to eliminate the possibility of nepotism and to ensure that children are raised in the most beneficial way possible. The second reform is to abolish private property and to replace it with a communal system of distribution. This is done in order to eliminate the possibility of greed and to ensure that everyone has access to the resources they need.

Socrates then proposes a series of three classes in the ideal city: the ruling class, the auxiliary class, and the producing class. The ruling class is made up of the philosopher-kings, who are responsible for ruling the city according to reason. The auxiliary class is made up of the warriors, who are responsible for defending the city and upholding the decisions of the philosopher-kings. The producing class is made up of the rest of the citizens, who are responsible for producing goods and services for the city.

Socrates then turns to the question of the education of the philosopher-kings. He argues that the education of the philosopher-kings must be rigorous and thorough, and that it must include a study of mathematics, astronomy, music, and philosophy. He suggests that the philosopher-kings must also be trained in the art of dialectic, which is the method of questioning and debate used by Socrates.

The dialogue then turns to a discussion of the Forms. Socrates argues that the Forms are eternal, unchanging, and perfect, and that they exist independently of the material world. He suggests that the Forms are the source of all knowledge, and that they are necessary for understanding the world. He also argues that the philosopher-kings must have knowledge of the Forms in order to rule justly.

Finally, Socrates concludes the dialogue by discussing the nature of the afterlife. He suggests that the just person will be rewarded in the afterlife, while the unjust person will be punished. He argues that the soul is immortal and that it survives the death of the body. He suggests that the philosopher must strive to live a just life in order to achieve the highest reward in the afterlife.

Plato’s Phaedo is a dialogue that takes place on the day of Socrates’ execution. In this dialogue, Socrates engages in a discussion with his friends about the nature of the soul, the afterlife, and the existence of the Forms. The Phaedo is one of Plato’s most famous and influential dialogues, and it has been studied and interpreted in a variety of ways.

The dialogue begins with Socrates discussing the nature of death with his friends. He argues that death is the separation of the soul from the body, and that the soul is immortal and survives the death of the body. He suggests that the philosopher should not fear death, as it offers the opportunity to separate the soul from the body and to attain true knowledge of the Forms.

The discussion then turns to the nature of the soul. Socrates argues that the soul is simple, indestructible, and immortal. He suggests that the soul is like the Forms, and that it exists independently of the body. He also argues that the soul is the source of life, motion, and sensation.

Socrates then presents several arguments for the immortality of the soul. He suggests that the soul must be immortal because it is the source of life, and that it must exist before and after the body. He also argues that the soul is like the Forms, and that it cannot be destroyed or changed. Finally, he suggests that the soul is like a pilot, and that it is responsible for guiding the body through life.

The dialogue then turns to a discussion of the Forms. Socrates argues that the Forms are eternal, unchanging, and perfect, and that they exist independently of the material world. He suggests that the Forms are the source of all knowledge, and that they are necessary for understanding the world.

Socrates then presents an argument for the existence of the Forms based on the nature of opposites. He argues that everything that exists has an opposite, and that the opposite of a thing is not the thing itself, but another thing altogether. He suggests that the Forms are the source of the opposites, and that they are necessary for the existence of the material world.

The dialogue concludes with Socrates’ execution. His friends mourn his death, but he encourages them to think of death as a release from the body and a journey to the afterlife. He suggests that the philosopher should not fear death, but should welcome it as an opportunity to attain true knowledge of the Forms.

The Phaedo is significant for several reasons. First, it presents a powerful argument for the immortality of the soul and the existence of the Forms. These ideas have had a profound impact on Western philosophy, and they continue to be studied and debated today.

Second, the dialogue presents a powerful defense of philosophy and the life of the philosopher. Socrates suggests that the philosopher should not fear death, but should welcome it as an opportunity to attain true knowledge of the Forms. This idea has influenced generations of philosophers, and it continues to be an important theme in contemporary discussions of philosophy.

Finally, the dialogue raises important questions about the nature of reality and the relationship between the material world and the world of the Forms. Socrates suggests that the material world is a shadow or copy of the world of the Forms, and that true knowledge can only be attained by understanding the Forms. This idea has had a profound impact on Western philosophy, and it continues to be studied and debated today.

In conclusion, Plato’s Phaedo is a powerful and influential dialogue that raises important questions about the nature of the soul, the afterlife, and the existence of the Forms. It presents a powerful defense of philosophy and the life of the philosopher, and it has had a profound impact on Western philosophy.

Plato’s Theaetetus is a dialogue between Socrates and Theaetetus, a young mathematician. The dialogue explores the nature of knowledge and the possibility of defining knowledge. The central question of the dialogue is whether knowledge is identical with perception or opinion.

The dialogue begins with Socrates questioning Theaetetus about his definition of knowledge. Theaetetus offers several definitions, but Socrates challenges each of them, exposing their inconsistencies and contradictions. Socrates argues that knowledge must be something more than mere perception, as perception is often mistaken and can lead to false beliefs.

Socrates introduces the concept of false beliefs, or “doxai,” and argues that they cannot be knowledge, as they are not grounded in truth. The dialogue then turns to the question of whether true beliefs are knowledge, and Socrates suggests that this is not the case, as true beliefs can be held without knowledge of why they are true.

Socrates then introduces the idea of an account or explanation, which he argues is necessary for true knowledge. An account must explain why something is true and cannot be based on mere perception or opinion. The dialogue then turns to the question of whether knowledge can be defined as a true belief with an account or explanation.

The rest of the dialogue is dedicated to exploring this question. Socrates offers several definitions of knowledge, but each is challenged and ultimately rejected. He argues that knowledge cannot be mere perception, nor can it be a true belief without an account. He suggests that knowledge must be a true belief with a “logos,” or an account that explains why the belief is true.

The dialogue concludes with Socrates admitting that he does not have a satisfactory definition of knowledge. He suggests that the search for a definition of knowledge may be an endless task, as every definition can be challenged and ultimately found to be inadequate.

The Theaetetus is significant for several reasons. First, it is a powerful critique of empiricist and relativist views of knowledge. Socrates argues that knowledge cannot be based on mere perception, as perception is often mistaken and can lead to false beliefs. He also argues that true beliefs are not sufficient for knowledge, as they can be held without understanding why they are true.

Second, the dialogue introduces the idea of an account or explanation as a necessary condition for knowledge. This idea is central to much of modern epistemology, and has been used to argue for a wide range of theories about the nature of knowledge.

Finally, the dialogue raises important questions about the possibility of defining knowledge. Socrates suggests that the search for a definition of knowledge may be an endless task, as every definition can be challenged and ultimately found to be inadequate. This suggests that the nature of knowledge may be inherently elusive and difficult to pin down.

In conclusion, Plato’s Theaetetus is a complex and challenging dialogue that raises important questions about the nature of knowledge. It challenges traditional views of knowledge and offers a powerful critique of empiricist and relativist theories of knowledge. The concept of an account or explanation introduced in the dialogue is central to modern epistemology, and the dialogue’s exploration of the possibility of defining knowledge continues to be relevant to contemporary discussions in philosophy.

Plato’s Meno is a dialogue between Socrates and Meno, a young nobleman from Thessaly. The dialogue explores a number of important philosophical themes, including the nature of knowledge, the relationship between virtue and knowledge, and the possibility of learning.

One of the central themes of the dialogue is the nature of knowledge. Meno begins by asking Socrates whether virtue can be taught, and Socrates responds by asking Meno to define virtue. Meno struggles to come up with a satisfactory definition, and Socrates uses this as an opportunity to question the nature of knowledge itself. He argues that if we do not know what something is, we cannot know anything about it, including whether it can be taught.

Socrates uses a dialectical method of questioning to explore the nature of knowledge further. He asks Meno a series of questions designed to elicit his beliefs about virtue, and then challenges those beliefs by exposing their inconsistencies and contradictions. This method is meant to encourage Meno to think more deeply about his own beliefs, and to challenge his preconceptions about the nature of knowledge.

Another important theme of the dialogue is the relationship between virtue and knowledge. Socrates argues that virtue is a form of knowledge, and that all virtues are based on the knowledge of good and evil. He asserts that if we know what is good and what is evil, we will always choose what is good, and that this is the essence of virtue.

The dialogue also explores the possibility of learning. Socrates argues that all learning is really a process of recollection, in which we remember knowledge that we already possess but have forgotten. He uses an example of a slave boy to demonstrate this idea. By asking the right questions, Socrates is able to help the boy remember the answer to a mathematical problem that he did not previously know. Socrates argues that this proves that the boy must have possessed this knowledge all along, even if he was not aware of it.

Throughout the dialogue, Socrates also challenges traditional beliefs about the nature of education and the role of teachers. He argues that true education is not about imparting knowledge, but about helping students to think critically and to question their own beliefs. He also suggests that teachers should not be paid, since true knowledge cannot be bought or sold.

One of the most interesting aspects of the dialogue is its ending, which is somewhat ambiguous. After a lengthy discussion, Socrates seems to have convinced Meno of the validity of his ideas. However, the dialogue ends with the suggestion that Meno may not have truly understood Socrates’ arguments, and that he may revert back to his previous beliefs.

In conclusion, Plato’s Meno is a complex and nuanced exploration of a range of philosophical themes. It challenges traditional beliefs about the nature of knowledge, virtue, and education, and encourages readers to think deeply about these important issues. The dialectical method used by Socrates encourages critical thinking and self-examination, and the ambiguous ending leaves the reader with much to ponder. Overall, the Meno is a thought-provoking and engaging work of philosophy that continues to be studied and debated to this day.

Plato’s Gorgias is a dialogue between Socrates and various other characters, including the eponymous Gorgias, a famous rhetorician. The dialogue explores a range of philosophical themes, including the nature of rhetoric, the relationship between morality and power, and the possibility of human knowledge.

One of the central themes of the dialogue is the nature of rhetoric. Socrates argues that rhetoric is not a true art, but rather a form of flattery and manipulation. He asserts that the purpose of rhetoric is not to find the truth, but to persuade people of something, whether or not it is true. Gorgias, on the other hand, argues that rhetoric is a valuable skill that can be used for good or evil, depending on the intentions of the rhetorician.

The dialogue also explores the relationship between morality and power. Socrates argues that true power comes from having knowledge of the good, and that those who possess this knowledge are the only ones who can truly be considered powerful. He asserts that those who use their power to harm others are not truly powerful, but rather misguided and ignorant.

This idea is further explored in the character of Callicles, a young man who believes that might makes right and that those who are powerful have the right to do whatever they want. Socrates challenges Callicles’ view by arguing that there is a difference between what is natural and what is right, and that those who act according to nature are not necessarily acting morally.

The dialogue also touches on the possibility of human knowledge. Socrates asserts that true knowledge can only be gained through reason and argument, rather than through sensory experience. He argues that our senses can be deceiving, and that true knowledge can only be gained by using our reason to analyze and understand the world around us.

Throughout the dialogue, Socrates uses a dialectical method of questioning to challenge the views of his interlocutors. He asks them to define their terms and clarify their arguments, in order to expose the flaws in their thinking. This method is meant to encourage a deeper understanding of the issues at hand, and to challenge preconceived notions and assumptions.

The dialogue also includes a number of extended speeches, including Gorgias’ defense of rhetoric, Callicles’ defense of natural law, and Socrates’ own account of the nature of the good. These speeches serve to flesh out the characters’ beliefs and provide a deeper exploration of the themes of the dialogue.

One of the most striking features of the dialogue is its ending, which is somewhat ambiguous and open to interpretation. After a lengthy discussion, Socrates seems to have convinced some of his interlocutors of the error of their ways. However, the dialogue ends with a note of uncertainty, as it is unclear whether the characters have truly been transformed by their conversation or whether they will revert back to their previous beliefs.

In conclusion, Plato’s Gorgias is a complex and multifaceted dialogue that explores a range of philosophical themes. It challenges traditional views of rhetoric and power, and raises important questions about the nature of human knowledge and morality. The dialectical method used by Socrates encourages a deeper understanding of these issues, and the extended speeches provide a deeper exploration of the characters’ beliefs. The ambiguous ending leaves the reader with much to ponder, and encourages continued reflection and inquiry into these important philosophical themes.

Ancient Mesopotamia, which is present-day Iraq, was home to one of the earliest civilizations in human history. It was a region that gave birth to some of the most important developments in human history, including the invention of writing, the wheel, and agriculture. In this essay, we will explore the philosophy of ancient Mesopotamia and its contribution to the development of human civilization.

Religion and Philosophy

The religion of ancient Mesopotamia was polytheistic, with a pantheon of gods and goddesses who were believed to control various aspects of life. The Mesopotamian people believed that the gods had created the world and everything in it. They believed that the gods controlled the natural forces of the universe and could be appeased through prayer, ritual, and sacrifice.

The Mesopotamians believed that their gods were not only powerful but also capricious and unpredictable. They believed that the gods could cause both good and bad events to occur and that it was important to maintain a positive relationship with them. This belief led to the development of a complex system of rituals and offerings designed to appease the gods.

In addition to their religion, the Mesopotamians also had a philosophical tradition that focused on the nature of reality and the relationship between humans and the gods. Mesopotamian philosophy was closely tied to religion, and many of the philosophical ideas were used to explain the workings of the gods and the universe.

The Concept of the Soul

One of the most important philosophical concepts in ancient Mesopotamia was the concept of the soul. The Mesopotamians believed that all humans had a soul that was immortal and would live on after death. They believed that the soul was made up of two parts, the “breath of life” and the “spirit.”

The Mesopotamians believed that the soul was essential for life and that it left the body at death to journey to the underworld. They believed that the soul would be judged after death, and that the judgment would determine whether the soul would be rewarded or punished in the afterlife.

The Nature of Reality

The Mesopotamians believed that reality was composed of two separate realms, the physical and the spiritual. The physical realm was the world of everyday experience, while the spiritual realm was the world of the gods and the afterlife. They believed that the spiritual realm was more important than the physical realm, and that the ultimate goal of life was to achieve a positive relationship with the gods.

The Mesopotamians believed that the physical world was subject to change and decay, while the spiritual world was eternal and unchanging. They believed that the gods controlled the natural forces of the universe, and that it was important to understand and respect their power.

The Problem of Evil

The Mesopotamians also grappled with the problem of evil. They believed that the gods were responsible for both good and bad events, and that it was sometimes difficult to understand why bad things happened to good people. They believed that it was important to maintain a positive relationship with the gods, even in the face of suffering and adversity.

The Epic of Gilgamesh

One of the most famous works of Mesopotamian literature is the Epic of Gilgamesh. The epic tells the story of a king who seeks immortality after the death of his friend, Enkidu. Gilgamesh embarks on a journey to find a plant that can grant him eternal life, but he ultimately fails in his quest.

The Epic of Gilgamesh raises important philosophical questions about the nature of mortality and the quest for immortality. It also explores the relationship between humans and the gods, and the importance of living a virtuous life.

Hippocrates of Kos (460-370 BCE) was an ancient Greek physician, widely regarded as the “father of medicine.” He founded the Hippocratic School of medicine, which was based on a philosophy that focused on the holistic approach to medicine, emphasizing the importance of treating the whole patient, rather than just the symptoms of a disease. In this essay, we will explore the philosophy of Hippocrates and its influence on modern medicine.

The Philosophy of Hippocrates

Hippocrates believed that the body had the innate ability to heal itself, given the right conditions. He believed that illness was caused by an imbalance of the four humors, which were blood, phlegm, yellow bile, and black bile. The four humors were believed to be the vital fluids that circulated in the body, and an excess or deficiency of any of these humors was believed to cause illness.

Hippocrates believed that the role of the physician was to help the body restore its natural balance. He believed that the physician should work with the patient to create a healing environment that supported the body’s natural healing process. This approach to medicine was based on the principle of “first, do no harm,” which has become a cornerstone of medical ethics.

Hippocrates also believed in the importance of observation and diagnosis. He believed that a physician should observe the patient’s symptoms and make a diagnosis based on those observations. He believed that the physician should also take into account the patient’s medical history, lifestyle, and environment, in order to arrive at an accurate diagnosis.

Hippocrates also believed in the importance of prevention. He believed that a healthy lifestyle, including a balanced diet, exercise, and rest, was essential for maintaining good health. He believed that the physician should work with the patient to identify potential health risks and take steps to prevent illness before it occurred.

Hippocrates also emphasized the importance of ethical behavior in medicine. He believed that physicians should be honest and transparent with their patients, and that they should always act in the best interest of the patient. He also believed that physicians should be knowledgeable about their profession, and should constantly strive to improve their skills and knowledge.

The Influence of Hippocrates on Modern Medicine

The philosophy of Hippocrates has had a profound influence on modern medicine. His emphasis on the importance of observation, diagnosis, and prevention has become the foundation of modern medical practice. The Hippocratic Oath, which is still taken by medical professionals today, embodies many of the principles of Hippocrates’ philosophy, including the principle of “first, do no harm.”

Hippocrates’ focus on the holistic approach to medicine has also had a lasting impact on modern medical practice. The idea that the physician should treat the whole patient, rather than just the symptoms of a disease, is now widely accepted as the best approach to medical treatment. The idea that the body has the innate ability to heal itself, given the right conditions, is also a central tenet of modern medical practice.

Hippocrates’ emphasis on ethical behavior in medicine has also influenced modern medical ethics. The principles of honesty, transparency, and acting in the best interest of the patient are now widely accepted as essential components of medical ethics.

Conclusion

Hippocrates’ philosophy of medicine was based on the belief that the body has the innate ability to heal itself, given the right conditions. His emphasis on observation, diagnosis, and prevention, as well as his focus on the holistic approach to medicine, has had a profound influence on modern medical practice. His emphasis on ethical behavior in medicine has also influenced modern medical ethics. The philosophy of Hippocrates has become the foundation of modern medicine, and his legacy continues to inspire medical professionals today.

The Hellenistic period, which began after the death of Alexander the Great in 323 BCE and lasted until the Roman conquest of Greece in 146 BCE, was a time of great intellectual and philosophical activity in ancient Greece. During this time, various philosophical schools emerged, each with its own unique set of beliefs and teachings. In this essay, we will explore the major Hellenistic schools of philosophy and their contributions to Western thought.

The Epicureans

The Epicureans were a philosophical school founded by Epicurus in the 4th century BCE. They believed that the purpose of life was to seek pleasure and avoid pain, but they defined pleasure in a very specific way. According to the Epicureans, pleasure was the absence of pain, both physical and mental. They believed that the key to a happy life was to live in a state of tranquility, free from the anxieties and stresses of daily life.

The Epicureans were also materialists who believed that the universe was composed entirely of atoms and that there was no afterlife. They believed that the soul was mortal and that death was the end of existence. This belief in the mortality of the soul was a radical departure from the traditional Greek belief in the immortality of the soul.

The Stoics

The Stoics were a philosophical school founded by Zeno of Citium in the 3rd century BCE. They believed that the purpose of life was to live in accordance with nature and to cultivate virtue. They defined virtue as the ability to reason and to act in accordance with reason. The Stoics believed that the universe was rational and that everything happened for a reason. They believed in the concept of fate, but they also believed that individuals had the ability to control their reactions to external events.

The Stoics were also pantheists who believed that God was immanent in the universe and that everything was interconnected. They believed that the universe was a single living organism, and that humans were part of this organism. They believed in the importance of self-discipline and self-control, and they emphasized the idea of living in the present moment.

The Skeptics

The Skeptics were a philosophical school founded by Pyrrho of Elis in the 4th century BCE. They believed that knowledge was uncertain and that it was impossible to know anything with absolute certainty. They argued that all beliefs were equally plausible and that it was impossible to determine which beliefs were true and which were false.

The Skeptics were also relativists who believed that there was no absolute standard of right and wrong. They argued that ethical values were culturally relative and that different cultures had different moral standards. The Skeptics were not nihilists, however, and they believed that it was possible to live a meaningful life even in the absence of absolute knowledge.

The Cynics

The Cynics were a philosophical school founded by Diogenes of Sinope in the 4th century BCE. They believed in living a simple life, free from material possessions and social conventions. They rejected traditional values and beliefs, and they believed in living in accordance with nature.

The Cynics were also skeptics who believed that knowledge was uncertain and that it was impossible to know anything with absolute certainty. They emphasized the importance of self-sufficiency and self-reliance, and they believed that happiness was to be found in the pursuit of virtue rather than in material possessions.

The Eclectics

The Eclectics were a group of philosophers who lived in the Hellenistic period but did not belong to any of the major philosophical schools. They believed in taking the best elements from each school and combining them into a coherent philosophy. They were critical of the dogmatism of the other schools and believed in the importance of open-mindedness and flexibility.

Xenophanes was a pre-Socratic philosopher who lived in ancient Greece around the 6th and 5th century BCE. He was a native of Colophon in Ionia, but he spent much of his life traveling around Greece, spreading his philosophical ideas. Xenophanes was known for his critical approach to the traditional Greek religion and his innovative ideas about the nature of the universe, the gods, and knowledge. In this essay, we will explore the philosophy of Xenophanes in more detail.

One of the key themes in Xenophanes’ philosophy was his critique of the anthropomorphic gods of the traditional Greek religion. Xenophanes was critical of the popular portrayal of the gods as having human form and exhibiting human characteristics. He believed that such representations were human projections onto the divine, and that the gods themselves were far beyond the comprehension of humans. He famously wrote, “Mortals think that gods are born and have clothes and voices and shapes like their own. But if oxen and horses or lions had hands, and could paint with their hands and create works of art like those made by humans, horses would paint the forms of the gods like horses, and oxen like oxen” (Fragment 15).

Xenophanes’ criticism of anthropomorphism extended to his rejection of the notion of divine intervention in the world. He believed that the universe was self-sufficient and governed by natural laws, rather than being subject to the whims of the gods. He argued that if the gods were involved in the world, they would create a perfect world without any flaws, which was clearly not the case. Xenophanes believed that it was up to humans to understand the world through reason and observation, rather than relying on divine intervention.

Another important aspect of Xenophanes’ philosophy was his rejection of the idea of knowledge as absolute and unchanging. He believed that knowledge was a product of human inquiry and was therefore always subject to revision and refinement. Xenophanes was critical of the dogmatism of his contemporaries, who claimed to have discovered absolute truths about the nature of reality. He argued that such claims were unfounded and that the search for knowledge was an ongoing process that required constant questioning and revision.

Xenophanes also had a unique perspective on the nature of the universe. He believed that the universe was infinite and eternal, and that it was composed of a single substance. This substance, he argued, was divine and was responsible for creating and sustaining the universe. Xenophanes’ idea of a single substance that underlies all of reality was a precursor to the monist philosophy of later philosophers like Parmenides and Heraclitus.

Xenophanes’ philosophy also had a strong ethical component. He believed that humans should strive for moral excellence and that this was the key to a good life. He argued that moral excellence involved living a life of moderation and avoiding extremes of behavior. He also believed that humans should respect each other and that all humans were equal in the eyes of the divine.

In conclusion, Xenophanes was an important philosopher whose ideas were ahead of his time. His critique of the traditional Greek religion and his rejection of anthropomorphism were innovative and influential, paving the way for later philosophers to develop more sophisticated theories about the nature of the divine. His ideas about the universe as a single substance and his rejection of absolute knowledge were also significant contributions to the development of Western philosophy. Finally, his ethical views on the importance of moral excellence and human equality continue to be relevant to this day.

The Laws of Manu speak about the four great aims of human life, the four-fold order of society (caste system), and the four stages of life. There are still many important matters discussed in the Laws of Manu, but these three are the most important. However, special mention is made about women.

The Four Goals of Life

The first goal of life according to the Laws of Manu is Artha. Artha is concerned with material wealth, which includes fame and power. According to some scholars, artha should not be understood in the negative sense as in the selfish accumulation of wealth. Rather, it could mean the accumulation of material things for the satisfaction of the person’s basic needs. As humans, we need to eat, drink, clothe, and put roof over our head.

The second goal is Kama. Kama is concerned with enjoyment or pleasure. Again, just as in artha, kama should be understood in the negative sense. Enjoyment and pleasure are parts of being human; hence, humans aim to satisfy these needs.

The third goal is Dharma. Dharma here is understood as righteous. As humans, we need to be righteous. We may need material wealth and sensual pleasure, but they must be done from the vantage point of dharma or righteous.

The fourth goal is Moksha. Moksha is understood as spiritual liberation. As we can see, moksha is the highest goal of life according to the Ancient Indian thinkers.

The Fourfold Social Order

In the Laws of Manu, four social classes are mentioned, namely:

1) Brahmin, which are composed of priests and teachers,

2) Ksatriya, which are composed of kings, princes and warriors,

3) Vaisya, which are composed of tradesmen, and

4) Sudra, which are composed of workers or laborers.

It must be noted that there are other group of people in ancient India that cannot be categorized as a class. They are simply the untouchables. They are outside of the four classes of the caste system.

The caste system is governed by ten-fold laws which are responsible for its order. They are:

1) Contentment,

2) Forgiveness,

3) Self-control,

4) Abstention from unrighteousness,

5) Obedience to the rules of purification,

6) Coercion of the organs or control of the senses,

7) Wisdom,

8) Knowledge (of the Supreme Self),

9) Truthfulness, and

10) Abstention from anger.

The Four Stages of Life

There are four stages of life according to the Laws of Manu, namely:

1) the student stage,

2) the householder stage,

3) the forest-dweller stage, and

4) the wandering ascetic.

The Student Stage. According to the Laws of Manu, in the eighth year after conception, one should perform the initiation of a brahmin, in the eleventh year after conception that of a ksatriya, in the twelfth that of a vaisya.

The Householder Stage. The householder stage is declared to be superior of all for he (the householder) supports the other three. A student who has studied in due order the three Vedas, or two, or only one, without breaking the rules of studentship, shall enter the order of householder. In other words, after the student has fulfilled his obligations as “a student”, then he may now marry.

The Forest-dweller. Verse 1: A twice-born snataka (one who has completed his studentship) who has thus lived according to the law in the order of householder, may, taking a firm resolution and keeping his organs in subjection, dwell in the forest, duly observing the rules given below.

Verse 2: When a householder sees his skin wrinkled, and his hair white, and sons of his sons, then he may resort to the forest.

Verse 3: Abandoning all food raised by cultivation, and all his belongings, he may depart into the forest, either committing his wife to his sons, or accompanied by her.

There in the forest, the forest-dweller observes the rules assigned to his nature.

The Wandering Ascetic Stage. This is the last stage. A wandering ascetic totally abandons worldly attachment. Verse 3: …having thus passed the third of man’s natural term of life in the forest, he may live as an ascetic during the fourth part of his existence, after abandoning all attachment to worldly objects.

Verse 4: He who after passing from order to order, after offering sacrifices and subduing his senses, becomes tired with giving alms and offerings of food, an ascetic gains bliss after death.