Category: Philosophy

“There’s happiness in having less.” – Fumio Sasaki

We live in a consumer society. We are told to buy, buy, buy. The more you have, the happier you will be. You don’t want to be a “have not.”

But it is a lie. More does not lead to happiness, but to unhappiness.

I define minimalism as a spiritual practice of reducing your possessions to a minimum. It is also called voluntary simplicity, and it goes back way before the Japanese minimalism wave started in 2009.

Minimalism is more than a practice, it is a mindset and way of life.

Rabbi Hyman Schachtel once said, “Happiness is not having what you want, but wanting what you have.”

Like so many things in life, it comes back to the mind. Our mind is our greatest asset and our greatest source of unhappiness. It all depends on how you use it.

This may seem strange to people who have followed my blog. I am a big fan of minimalism, so why would I advise people not to become minimalists?

The answer is simple. Minimalism is a great tool, but a poor identity. A minimalist is simply a person with few things. Not much to get excited about, not much substance.

Flourishing should be the goal, not minimalism. Minimalism is a tool to help eliminate the obstacles to flourishing, but minimalism is not the goal. Confusing the tool with the destination is not wise.

Furthermore, becoming identified with a tool will result in being measured by the tool. For example, some people will claim because I have over 30 books that I am not a minimalist. But since I never claimed to be a minimalist, the criticism is hollow.

My goal is not to have fewer things, my goal is to make sure things support my personal flourishing rather than hinder it.

We own things, but we need to make sure that things don’t own us. Nonattachment is the key, and that has more to do with what’s inside the mind than the number of things on our kitchen counter.

But don’t confuse what I am saying. I think minimalism is a very important tool in breaking free from the chains of consumerism. Yes, we should practice minimalism, but no we should not call ourselves minimalists.

Socrates was a Greek philosopher who lived in Athens, Greece from 470 BCE to 399 BCE. Although not the first philosopher, he is credited as being the founder of Western philosophy and the first moral philosopher.

Since he is the ideal of what a philosopher is, I thought it would be interesting if we followed Socrates’ example today. What would happen if we lived like Socrates?

Well, firstly, we would not get a degree in philosophy. Socrates did not go to a University, rather he learned his father’s trade and became a stone worker. He was tutored in reading and writing. He served in the military and served in three campaigns. And after his father passed, he inherited part of his father’s estate.

With the idle time, he started hanging out with some friends and started asking citizens of Athens questions to see if they were wise. He would pop their intellectual ego by showing they were unwise. Eventually, this would contribute to his trial and death sentence.

Socrates was notoriously ugly, so if we follow his example, we should not worry about our looks. He showed indifference to his own appearance and personal hygiene. They say he “bathed rarely, walked barefoot, and owned only one ragged coat.”

Do we really want to follow his example. How many of you honestly think he would be accepted as a philosopher today?

Philosophy used to be a way of life, now it is merely a way of making a living. Philosophy used to be the most important pursuit in a person’s life, now it is regarded as irrelevant, boring, and a complete waste of time.

Philosophy has clearly lost its way.

How do you know that what you believe is true? That is the question known as epistemology or the “theory of knowledge.”

I don’t think we can know very much for certain. We have to give up that search. But I do think we can discover how probable a claim to truth is.

I will make a complex issue simple. You can tell whether a claim is probably true by applying the three C’s: correspondence, consistency, and consequences.

Truth is the correspondence of a claim with reality. If what you claim matches reality then what you claim is true. If your claim doesn’t match reality then it is false.

The important question is how do you tell whether or not your belief matches reality? By the objective and verifiable evidence for or against the belief. So the correspondence is mostly about a belief matching the available evidence.

The next test of truth is the consistency of the belief with one’s whole worldview. Contraction is a sign that something is wrong, either the belief is false or part of one’s worldview is false.

The final test of truth is the consequences of accepting the claim as true. If you can live it, it may be false. You will know a claim by its fruits. You don’t get bad results from a good belief, nor do you get good results from a bad belief.

This is a very simple epistemology. It is merely the outline for a larger exploration.

I am in pursuit of wisdom, because wisdom leads to flourishing, and flourishing leads to serenity.

But what is wisdom? I don’t think we really know for sure. I have tried a number of times to define it, so here goes another attempt.

Wisdom is the overall perspective from which one sees the true nature of reality and thus correctly interprets humanity’s relation to it.

Many people mistake a set of virtues for wisdom. Prudence, for example, seems like a part of wisdom. But so does justice, courage, moderation, and humility.

I think wisdom is the garden, while the virtues are the fruits.

The virtues, like fruits, show evidence of the health of the garden, that is wisdom. But the fruits are not the garden, and the virtues are not wisdom. You cannot separate them, but you can distinguish them.

So the question is, if you take away the virtues, what is wisdom? It is the overall perspective from which one sees the true nature of reality and thus correctly interprets humanity’s relation to it. From this perspective and insight arise the virtues.

After I originally wrote this post, I had another thought. Maybe I am being too analytical about wisdom. Maybe a simpler definition of wisdom would be better.

I think it is too easy to over define a word. So let me give you my simple definition of wisdom. It is only seven words:

Wisdom is practical insight into living skillfully.

I think this comes the closest to the essence of wisdom in the shortest of time. I think I will use this definition for now.