Luc Ferry has written an absolutely marvellous book - do not be misled by the book's subtitle "A Young Person's Guide". "Learning to Live" is probably one of the most succinctly written guides to philosophy it is possible to find. He provides an express tour of the development of philosophical enquiry from Ancient Greece to the modern day. The language used is clear and precise and Theo Cuffe, the translator, has done an absolutely marvellous job in helping Mr. Ferry express complex notions in a clear and concise manner.
The book clearly demonstrates the links and between what we all consider classical ancient Greek thought and the thought of the modern era. In passing, Mr. Ferry deals very well with the philosophy of Christianity (or perhaps the lack of it) and explains very clearly the seductive attractions of this (and other) revealed religion(s). He sees Christian thought as being completely antithetical to a search for wisdom in the humanist sense, relying as it does upon something external to ourselves. He puts it very succinctly:
"Let me make myself clear: I am not saying that we `need' transcendence, as a somewhat inane modern habit of thought is given to proclaiming (that we `need' meaning, that we `need' God). Such formulas are problematic, because they instantly rebound on those who use them: it is not our need for something that proves its existence. Quite the contrary: there is a strong likelihood that the need pushes us to invent the thing, and then to defend it, with all the arguments of bad faith at our disposal, because we have become attached to it. The need for God is, in this respect, the greatest argument against His existence that I know of."
The book keeps returning to strands of thought which are common to both The Stoics and Nietzsche and from which Ferry derives his own outlook on life. He endorses fully much of Nietzschean philosophy, drawing the line (thankfully) at some of the extremes of that gentleman's thought:
"Nietzsche invites us to live in such a manner that regrets and remorse have no place and make no sense. Such is the life lived according to truth. Who, after all, would wish that all the instants of mediocrity, the petty struggles, the futile guilt, the hidden weaknesses, the lies, the cowardice, the little arrangements with oneself - that all of this should recur for all eternity? And, by extension, how many instants of our lives would happen in the first place were we to apply, honestly and rigorously, the test of their recurrence? A few moments of joy, no doubt; a few moments of love, of lucidity, of serenity ... "
This outlook and the conclusions drawn by Ferry himself can be summarised as "....hope a little less, regret a little less, love a little more."
There are one or two of his conclusions with which I would take issue. Not on a philosophical level, of course - I am no more qualified to do so than I am to read Aristotle in his original language - but on an interpretational level of where the world is today. In describing what he sees as a real threat to the modern world, Mr. Ferry says:
"Hence the fearsome and incessant development of technology, tethered to and largely financed by economic growth, and the fact that the increase of human power over nature has become completely automatic, uncontrollable and blind, because it everywhere exceeds the conscious will of the individual."
I agree wholeheartedly with his assessment of the various madnesses - technological, financial, societal - into which our present world appears hell-bent on throwing itself, but I disagree that this is the first time in Mankind's history that human development "exceeds the conscious will of the individual": in my humble opinion it has always been thus.
I also disagree with his assessment of the redefinition of what "a nation state" means to most people:
"....it is only on behalf of another human being that we are prepared, in the case of necessity, to undertake risks, and certainly not to defend the abstract entities of the past. Because no one any longer believes that, in the words of the Cuban national anthem, `to die for the homeland is to live for eternity.' Of course, we can remain patriotic, but the nation as such has changed meaning: it refers less to a territory than to its human inhabitants, and it is less a repository of nationalism than of humanism."
I think he takes a narrow view (dare I say an upper-class, educated, European view?) of the manner in which the majority of the world's denizens view their national identities: the vast number are still trapped in abject jingoism, I fear.
I was struck by the interesting juxtaposition between the title of Ferry's book, "Learning to Live" and the words of Montaigne which he quotes - `to philosophise is to learn how to die'. I am not convinced that Luc Ferry has succeeded in producing a philosophy, or even an analysis of it, that will "save one's skin", but he has performed a service of inestimable value insofar as he has certainly provided a thought-provoking primer for someone - young or old - setting out on a journey of philosophical enquiry.
All in all this is a most excellent book and one which will repay reading several times.
