M. The economy of thought expressed in so many words

Economy, or in Ancient Greece the art to keep household as something separate from public life, is another way of describing how 'measures of life' apply in a community ruled by the spirit of men seeking 'the rule of the law', that is democracy. It poses general and specific problems in understanding first of all intuitively, that is practically, the sense of doing things in a certain way. Everything that man does in the 'community of man', is not only accountable to the Gods, but also to other men. The distance to go, the means by which co-operation and co-ordination is brought about, so that the stones to be used for building the temples, can be cut accordingly and lifted in their pre-designed place, this marvel of construction as described in detail by Manolis Korres presently supervising the restoration of the Acropolis, makes public enterprise into an art of techne. It is also a system of just distribution. The undertaking aims for a society providing everyone with equal opportunities. It accepts that the existence of man has to be practical on the material side. This must be reflected in the kind of economy strived for.

That there is not only one kind of economy, materialistically speaking, must be understood as a prerequisite for the kind of search men entered at that time when trying to give their community a viable basis. They understood that war is costly and that certain trade routes must be secured, so that the food supplies for the community are guaranteed. Pirates and other powers were always threatening such life lines. But they came out of a tradition where to take measure meant also to become more precise about the kind of economy they wanted.

For instance, Homer lets in the final account of Odysseus, that is after he has returned to Ithaca and faces the final fight with the suitors, the goddess Athena step in and intervene in time, in order to prevent further bloodshed. She challenges the fighters:

"Son of Laertes and the gods of old,

Odysseus, master of land ways and sea ways,

command yourself. Call off this battle now,

or Zeus who views the wide world may be angry."

Homer, Odyssey, Book XXIV, Lines 537-548

Through the goddess, Homer introduces really a new notion of economy based on ending first of all this bloodshed that the battle of Troy had started, and secondly, by making peace to last, so that it is possible that friends can come again to the house. That allows for a more concrete outline as to the purpose of any economy, namely to facilitate man's efforts so that he can live and enjoy life, that is share the good things with his friends and neighbours while treating any stranger as a privileged guest over whom Zeus watches.

Indeed, the economy of thought expressed in so many words is the beginning of the 'Logos' brought to bear upon what ought to govern the life of man in the community with other men. It is articulated best through poetry, for as rational thought combined with metaphorical traces of ancient mythologies such poetic nuances bring forth visions in relationship to experiences of man. As something capable of addressing very powerfully the imagination of man, it is forthwith an attempt to reveal what governs the lifes of men. As a realistic appraisal of things to come, it is for the first time an effort to link wise government with what moves man in reality. If it is desire, as Sappho outlined, then this motivation has to be linked to man's search for light, for all desire springs from the sun. Later such desire shall be perverted into a will, including Nietzsche's interpretation of man's motivation underlying 'the will to power'. This is pure none-sense, and only reveals what disasterous consequences in man's history this has upon perception, for once distortions of knowledge are possible, then there follows the neglect of love for life and with it a serious failure to recognize other people. Then they are no longer mere strangers, but worse than the enemy outside the community, people who no longer deserve to live, as was to become the fate of the Jews once the Nazis gained power on the basis of such hatred. The latter fails always to recognize the true desire of man, namely to become a part of the community, that is to be active and alive, argueing with others, all in an effort to come to terms with the 'rationality of man' - the underlying premise of any working economy linked to substantial thoughts about the purpose of man in life.

Such an 'economy of thought' governed by a unique understanding of rationality, as it prevailed in Ancient Greece, meant that men did their utmost to keep their oaths. The most lasting expression of that is the Hippocratic oath, and that of a very specific kind. As its main purpose it has the wish not to violate basic principles of a very new profession, namely the medical one. This is done with the promise that by keeping the oath, man may enjoy life and earn through honest work a high reputation amongst all men. It was the beginning of professionalism as a way of ruling out a life without 'rule of the law'. To that belonged making observations over an extended period of time, since what appears to be the case one day, may disappear already on another one, while lawfulness underlying good or ill health could not be discovered unless those observations were recorded, making it thereby easier to systematize, that is categorize and compare, while remembering small, but important details - a part of the practical work with memory.

The same applies for differentiated viewpoints on all laws governing lifes of men, for they have to be based on memory, since nothing can be said after seeing things being done and said only on one day. Whether a man keeps his oaths, or better his friendships, that was a matter of a period extending beyond mortal life, and touches upon really his efforts to reach immortality, or as long as he lives to remain true to his or her words, so that others may remember him or her.

How important such 'economy of thought' is, may be better understood by now as man's words matching his deeds as a way of keeping his promises. A cautious economy would be, therefore, not to promise too much, in order to be able to keep them. It is an economy of not loosing too many good friends which matters most to one who learns how to select his words when saying something, in order to avoid disappointments. By the time Cleisthenes designed his legal system for Athens, it was already a major concern of his: how to ensure that men do not break their promises, and don't go against the community by thinking they could gain something by breaking their promises. Such legal system preventing wrong promises was not a design to get rid of man's selfishness, in order to secure some altruistic motive man may have hidden in himself, but rests on a compatability of agreements since only such community would develop in which everyone would do his or her part to keep the respective oath.

There were thus special kinds of oaths which would altogether uphold life in the community. Homer recalls that Odysseus, upon returning home, but still in disguise, tested the true intentions of his courageous forester keeping his swineherd at a safe distance from the suitors until his master would finally return. To Odysseus' pleasant surprise this man was what he was: loyal to his master beyond all suspicion, and "not even an oath could change" (Homer, Odyssey, Book XIV, Hospitality in the Forest, Line 459) that. In other words, that man retained his character over time, and not even false promises or other oaths could make him break his first one made to Odysseus, the master.

The meaning of that 'test of intentions' as demonstrated by Homer is, that it is has repercussions about the kind of stories told. The example of Odysseus shows that such stories which are filled with wisdom, yet still cunning by speaking the truth indirectly, uphold the 'economy of thought' by not leaving "a word out of place" (line 604) nor containing so much as "a pointless word" (line 604). This is when true measures are fulfilled, and stories told simple and plain. They reflect the fact that man's life is then filled with such thoughts, that life seems possible again as it was before. Indeed, man needs a sense of continuity despite all the changes he undergoes, Odysseus' measure of time being the voyage itself. But while being oriented towards keeping that sense of continuity, man must not only keep the oaths made to his ancestors and Gods, lest they would forget him if he failed to remember them, but he must be oriented as well towards the future. This he is when showing himself capable of responding maturely to all changes going on, that is as new things become evident in man's life. With the 'community of man' in the making under such conditions, his actions mature by seeking at home and while on voyage 'the continuity in all changes'. Man's life is then no longer a matter of loyalty to his tribe or local area, but how to relate actively to the true spirit of democracy. As an oath spoken, it can only mean that the 'freedom of thought' prevails. For only free men keep their promises, as Herodotus assumed correctly when evaluating the reform work of Cleisthenes, and why historians like Robert Payne like to point out, that is explains why all Athenians could face the Persians successfully.

At an earlier stage, that is in the 7th century and just after Homer, or even around the same time, Hesiod spells out his understanding of economy linked to 'Works and Days'. Both ought to be conducted and filled in certain, not strange ways to avoid becoming a fool. In a most interesting fable, and before the coming of democracy to replace the master-slave relationship, he talks about the need to know when to keep one's place rather than challenging such order of things:

"And now, for lords who understand, I'll tell

A fable: once a hawk, high in the clouds,

Clutched in his claws a speckled nightingale.

She, pierced by those hooked claws, cried, 'Pity me!'

But he made scornful answer: 'Silly thing.

Why do you cry? Your master holds you fast,

You'll go where I decide, although you have

A minstrel's lovely voice, and if I choose,

I'll have you for a meal, or let you go.

Only a fool will match himself against

A stronger party, for he'll only lose,

And be disgraced as well as beaten.' Thus

Spoke the swift-flying hawk, the long-winged bird."

Hesiod, Works and Days, 195-223

Such a world of a stiff, hierarchical order makes it virtually impossible for slaves to dream about their freedom. By the time Cleisthenes enacts his reforms, Herodotus makes the important observation that anyone held down by authority would shirk his duty, as slaves always do. No one will ever do anything out of own initiative, if not free to be self-responsible. Implied is that the 'freedom of thought' is the best reason to act upon, since man makes freely the promise to do something. Furthermore he acts freely when accepting himself the measure of what is to come, because he knows when he fulfils or not that promise. To act upon such knowledge makes really the 'community of man' possible. There are, however, still those hierarchical relationships which keep others in slavery, so that some enjoy already the fruits of the community, while others remain in its shadow. Freedom had not come as of yet to all men by the time Pericles assumed power. Only later, in Aristophanes play 'Wealth', there is given another clue about the true relationship between wealth and freedom as dreamt by the slave Cario, the servant of Chremylus:

"How pleasant it is, friends, to live well, especially when it costs

nothing! What a deluge of blessings fall upon our house, and that too

without our having wronged a single soul! Ah, what a sweet and

pleasant thing is wealth! The bin is full of white flour, and our casks

are running over with fragrant wine, and every vessel in the house is

crammed with gold and silver, a wonderful thing to see, and the oil

jars are full to overflowing, and the oil flasks are filled to bursting

with unguents, and the attic with figs. And every cruet, pticher, stew-

pot and pannikin are turned to bronze, and the old rotting wooden

pails for fish are turned to silver, and the box for the night soil is

turned to ivory. The slaves among us play tiddlywinks with gold coins,

and we use no stones, but garlic leaves, when we wash ourselves. Just

now my master has crowned himself with flowers and is busy sacrificing

a pig, a goat, and a ram; but I was driven out of the room by the smoke

which hurt my eyes.

Aristophenes, Wealth

The last sentence indicates how the slave is driven out of his dream. Back in reality, he sleeps on a bed made out of stone and dwells in a cave-like hut in the neglected, that is poor area of Athens. There everyone tries to survive in the shadows of wealth, for slaves they are and the masters do not sacrifice anything, so that the Gods would take pity upon them, and free them from their misery. It means nothing bestows upon them the dignity of being a man filled with the desire to be free. Unfortunately because of an over-emphasis upon dignity, the 'desire for freedom' was not seen by philosophy. Easily confused with pride, a prime source of many errors according to Ancient poets, 'dignity' does not bring about a mature relationship to the 'community of man'. Rather it limits the interactions with other men and leaves too much to speculation. One result of that can be seen onhand of later political theories, in particular those of Marx, who over-exaggerates the alienation of man, so that there appears to prevail no longer any 'desire for freedom'. As such it eradicates the difference between self-determination and any automatistic determination made absolute by the thought that there exists no freedom. Only someone like Ernst Bloch did recognize that 'the slave society build the Acropolis, but the Parthenon survived the slave society'.

Slaves feel primarily the burden of an economy geared towards wealth, that is when men try to exceed the 'measures of life'. This wrong assumption about basic aims of life, namely the wish for wealth irrespective of what it means for others, has been nourished over centuries mostly by the Homeric descriptions of splendour. That poses some further questions about the 'economy of thought'. Hesiod interpreted this to mean 'self-control', in order to avoid the pitfalls of pride. He bases his assumption on how to avoid wealth becoming an one-sided affair. His judgement is based on a distinction between a noble and a common man, for only the former knows how to control his pride. This is due to following reason:

"The road to justice is the better way,

For Justice in the end will win the race

And Pride will lose: the simpleton must learn

This fact through suffering."

Hesiod, Works and Plays, 195-223

By introducing the notion of learning through either the hard way of suffering, or else by reaping fruits through learning to control oneself, the notion of 'master' is extended here towards knowing which way to go. The choice is obvious since Hesiod is convinced that justice will win the race. That is of crucial importance in terms of self-determination of man. In economies based on slavery and different levels of citizenship, many have to do what the hawk, that is the master tells them to do. Only in a 'just' economy, a concept later to be introduced by Aristotle, can they decide by themselves what activities they will persue, in order to survive not only, but to continue to live in the 'community of men'. But they will have to wait a long time for their emancipation. Socrates' advice to the youth not to accuse his father for having killed a slave is but an indication that still in that rational age of philosophers debating already how nature can be seen with the help of the 'Logos', that this has no practical consequences upon extending freedom to all men, although some statemen like Cleisthenes did make an attempt in that direction. He did it out of both wisdom and insight how important it is to alter the rules, so as to prevent through democractic forms the return of the tyrannts to the Polis.

Above was just said, that a mark of a free 'community of man' is a 'just economy'. It was not clear whether or not 'justice' meant really the freeing of the slaves. Foremostly justice meant keeping measures even if wealthy. There are other meanings given to that concept of 'justice'. For instance, it is interesting that Hesiod equates the question of justice to the kind of life made possible inside of the city guarded by the 'gods of Oaths':

"The god of Oaths

runs faster than a crooked verdict; when

Justice is dragged out of the way by men

Who judge dishonestly and swallow bribes,

A struggling sound is heard; then she returns

Back to the city and the homes of men,

Wrapped in a mist and weeping, and she brings

Harm to the crooked men who drove her out.

But when the judges of a town are fair

To foreigner and citizen alike,

Their city prospers and her people bloom;

Since Peace is in the land, her children thrive;

Zeus never marks them out for cruel war.

Famine and blight do not beset the just,

Who till their well-worked fields and feast. The earth

Supports them lavishly......"

Hesiod, Works and Days, 218-230

Most crucial in that early understanding of way of life connected with a thriving economy is the realization that the rule of justice must be alike for both citizens and foreigners. It would mean that justice alone sets the terms of trade and exchange while the fertile earth gives, and it would be unnecessary to take to the ships, in order to haul in from foreign lands often with methods of war rather than through trade, wealth. Such wealth ought to be avoided which does not really belong to such land remaining fruitful as long as this conviction in justice prevails. The overriding principle of such a community is the promise, that if all live in peace and are just to one another, then they will not be marked by war; instead there will be plenty of things to eat and the children will bloom like flowers in the fields. Quite something else is in store when the conviction prevails, it does not pay to be honest nor to believe in justice, for then break of promise follows the rule.

In a free economy based on equality, exchange means inquiry into what the other, including the stranger could give independent of any pre-conditions except to help and to fulfill the collective promise of keeping the community to be free. Theognis adds to such a life the tension between knowledge and incompleteness, since man can get easily swayed off the righteous path. It is interesting that the nightingale becomes here a metaphor for the human voice, that is a measure of man's own freedom to realize what he is doing, or rather should refrain from doing:

"I can't sing sweetly, like the nightingale;

Because of last night's party. I don't blame

The flutist for my excuse - it's just my voice,

Usually fine, which has deserted me.

I'll stand beside the flutist, on his right

And sing an invocation to the gods.

I'll walk a straight true path and not incline

To either side; my thinking must be sure.

I'll put my native land in order, rule

This shining city, neither flattering

The mob, nor listening to the criminals.

I'm like a lion, confident of power,

Who, with his claws, has seized a fawn away

From the mother doe, but doesn't drink its blood.

I've climbed the ramparts, but not sacked the town;

I've yoked the chariot's team, not mounted it;

Acting, I haven't acted; finishing,

I've finished nothing. Nothing is complete

Though I've completed much; accomplishing,

I've not accomplished anything all."

Theognis, Elegies, 939-954

To solicit the help of pure knowledge in such situations was really to inquire into what could make the exchange work. By not doing something right away, and in staying on the righteous path, man could avoid making false promises and gain in his life something substantial, that is a truthful life. However, if he avoids confronting the truth, then rather the opposite is the case, for even less and yet more is gained while the substance of life, his honesty, is not touched upon. Neither questions nor new informations will draw his attentions to life. He will live in ignorance of what is going on. The interesting point of Theognis comes, however, with the realization that when acknowledging of not having accomplished anything although having accomplished many things, then 'nothing is complete'. It is a first sign of trying to reconcile the difference between these two levels of expectancies: completeness and perfection. It puts the principle of exchange into a dimension of self-reflection about life marked by death, or as Theognis would point out, each man faces the gate of Hades through which he must go, but without knowing when. He uses the examples of different reactions by men to this basic facet of life, and all show different behaviour in spending or saving money, depending how they interpret this lack of knowledge when they are going to die.

"The wise approve most highly any man

Who watches his expenditures, but still

Has fun. If we could see our term of life,

And know how long we have before we cross

Over to Hades, we'd know what to do:

One who expected longer life could hold

His spending down, and have enough to last.

But we don't have this knowledge. As for me,

I'm wrteched, torn apart, and of two minds -

I'm standing at the crossroads, wondering

Which of the two paths to take: the first, to spend

Nothing, and live my life in misery

Or, to live pleasantly, accomplishing

Little. For I have seen a man who lived

So stingily, though he was rich, that he

Never would give his belly a free man's food -

He died untimely, went to Hades' house;

An insignificant heir got all his gold.

He suffered vainly, and he didn't give

To anyone he cared about. I've seen

Another man, who fed his belly well;

He used up all his money, then he said:

'It's been a lot of fun!' But now he begs

From all his friends, from everyone he meets.

So, Democles, it's best to have a care,

And live within our means. This is the way

Neither to give some other man the fruits

Of all your labours, nor to end your life

In the servitude of beggary. If you

Come to old age, your money won't run out.

These days, it's best to have some money. If

you're rich, you've lots of friends; if poor, you have

Few - and you're not a gentleman any more."

Theognis, Elegies, 903 - 930

Theognis's caution not to live outside one's own means, says something about the Ancient Greek way of thinking about economy as being the ability to 'household' one's own means by not giving away too much, but also by avoiding absolute poverty, that is the inability to share anything or to have guests.

Such council or poetic, equally practical wisdom of Ancient Greece meant man must learn to restrain himself. He had to learn to use pure knowledge as a guidance for life within an economy depending upon justice, and which he could help to realize by applying the right measures. It was seen as being something linked to the 'community of man', but equally independent of that for it depended upon how he conducted himself, or regulated the spending of his own money. This sphere of freedom existed independently from how how he obtained the money, and by what means he was seeking enjoyment, that is doing nothing to accomplish something, but only for fun. There was nothing absolute about it nor anything to put any blame upon, if he failed to live within his own means. Just the consequences had to be faced of what he was doing or failed to realize in time he should have done, in order to avoid ending up living in poverty.

By way of comparison in the manner of speech only the Chinese culture would add another dimension. They would advocate that prior to taking any decision about any economic activity, and this includes accepting the condition of trade, there was needed an 'exchange of words'. For to them it mattered most to be able to seek council, and that this should take place at the beginning of any transaction. However, the Chinese did so within their own hierarchical expectations for making this 'exchange of words' possible. Since they lived with the conviction that an emperor, or anyone else placed higher in the hierarchy, could better than anyone else distinguish between a mere utterance of words and some lucid explanation that would catch the attention of the superior, they subordinated any terms of transaction to such judgement.

That left any expression of ideas at the mercy of an 'economy of thought', or an appraisal what it takes to realize such an idea.

Although it appears to be quite practical to take such an approach serious, nevertheless an appraisal of that kind ends up being a mere outcome of favourable circumstances, and not necessarily a true expression of what it takes to ensure that the emancipation of man continues while economic transactions are going on at the same time. It is like seeking wealth without wishing to free all slaves: a contradiction in terms of both equality and what it takes to make any economy be liveable. Subsequently the danger of such transactions taking place after a mere 'exchange of words' was that the entire community was disregarded, or else in need of a face-lift, that is an imagine imposed upon it by those forces favouring a particular trade, but no longer in tune with its own authentic identity, aspiration thereof. Life under such circumstances, or constraints, would then be reduced to a mere matter of wearing a mask, in order to please the higher placed ones, while uncertainty would continue to prevail but why undergo such subordination leading to a falsification of man's own true identity, if no longer able to know what was to be gained by that? Self-estrangement leads usually to a lack of recognition by the others, until the entire community collapses under the burden of its own illusions. Misery and hardships would then be but the two sides of the same coin pressed upon the community having such a negative economy.

In Ancient Greece, freedom from such a negative kind of exchange was gained through making direct sacrifices to the Gods without impinging upon the freedom of man himself. That is why still today these two ancient cultures lasting now over 2000 years differ so much in substance, and in terms of their contribution to our understanding of human civilization, it matters most to specify that freedom means among other things also the freedom from the need to exchange, in order to survive. In other words, the 'community of man' rested upon the premise of the freedom to give without needing to ask something in return, for it was done for a higher purpose, namely to safeguard the lifes of all people in the community and to ensure that the principle of freedom was respected by all.

Positively speaking, practical wisdom is involved when judging 'a priori' if the proposed exchange could work. But this Chinese approach to business is a mistaken viewpoint insofar it concentrates all efforts upon gaining influence, even if it means giving and taking bribes, that is accepting an overall tendency towards corruption on account of wishing to influence the higher placed one to make a more favourable judgement. Once it has become the general practice to seek merely favourable terms of trade for one's own business, no one can tell anymore, if his or her personal interests would be served best in that way. After all, once there is no longer any gurantee that the entire community has not succumbed to the strictly hierarchical principle of organizing everything around such 'exchange of words' starting and ending all trade, there is no longer any value in seeking trade within a just economy. Indeed nothing is for sure if any pure economic transaction leaves aside completely the interests of the community of man, including the ability to get together when it is time to exchange not just words, but thoughts on matters of interest pertaining to all. By contrast, the building of the Acropolis under the democratic rulership of Pericles meant to ensure such a distribution of wealth that all could participate in and benefit from the enterprise. It was another kind of collectivity opening up to the freedom to distinguish between the household of every individual, and what it takes as an economy to link all of these units through a community spirit.

This then transforms the two aspects of collectivity into a broader sense of comprehension. On the one hand, there is the ongoing search for pure knowledge as a way of perceiving differences between the inner and outer world of mankind, on the other there has to be dealt with the practical morality involved in making decisions despite obvious dilemmas. Altogether they make up along with other factors the real tensions of life. By coming to terms with that, and prior to applying rules as expressions of laws, something the Romans did much more systematically, but also more brutally when shaping their empire, the Ancient Greeks came to realize that the measure of things has very much to do with how the nomos and the physis are reconciled while the rule of the law with mortal man as measure depends upon by which dynamics the rule is introduced as a 'way of doing things' into societal life.

Impressive is, therefore, the fact that the AGORA meant not only market place, but also where laws were announced and tested, that is measured in their consequences, the outcome of which was discussed in the assembly. It was obligatory for everyone to attend those assemblies in order to reach the same level of knowledge as to the understanding of the freedom under the rule of the law. How long it took them to reach such maturity is not so important, for they did it in a remarkable short time when compared with what historical developments followed. More significant is the step they took towards shaping their own destiny: the first form of self-responsible governing, or really democracy in the making.

^ Top

« L. Rule of law | N. Types of self-government or the unity of mankind »

Ποιειν Και Πραττειν - create and do

Navigation

M. The economy of thought expressed in so many words