FLVE - "Aristippus"

ARISTIPP 

1) PHYSICS ("owner") 

2) LOGIC ("rhetorician") 

3) WILL ("bourgeois") 

4) EMOTION ("gawker") 

Aristippus was the founder of hedonism, a philosophy centering on the priority of carnal pleasures over all other pleasures. 

Diogenes of Laertes, in his biography of Aristippus, gives the following characteristic episodes from the life of the philosopher: "...he was the first of Socrates' disciples to begin to charge his hearers and to send money back to his teacher. One day, having sent him twenty mines, he received them back, and Socrates said that Demonius forbade him to accept them: indeed this was not to his liking. 

Xenophonte disliked Aristippus: so he attributed to Socrates a speech condemning pleasure, and directed against Aristippus... 

He was rebuked for taking money from his disciples as a follower of Socrates. "You bet!" - he said, "True, when Socrates was sent bread and wine, he took only a little, and returned the rest; but his subsistence was taken care of by the best citizens of Athens, while mine was taken care of only by the slave Eutychidus..." 

Someone said that he always sees philosophers at the door of the rich. "But even doctors," said Aristippus, "go to the doors of the sick, and yet everyone would rather be a doctor than a sick person. 

One day he was sailing on a ship to Corinth and was caught in a storm and terribly frightened. Someone said: "We common people are not afraid, but you philosophers are afraid?" Aristippus replied, "We both worry about our souls, but our souls are not of the same value..." 

To the man who censured the luxury of his table, he asked: "Would you refuse to buy all this for three obols?" - "Of course not," replied the man. "Then it's just that you value money more than I value pleasure...." 

Hetera said to him, 'I have a child by you,'" "You don't know that," Aristippus objected, "as if you were walking through the reeds and said, 'This thorn pricked me. Someone rebuked him for abandoning his son, as if he had not begotten him. "And phlegm and lice are also generated by us," said Aristippus, "but we, knowing this, still discard them as far away as possible for lack of use...." 

He was able to apply himself to any place, time or person, playing his role in accordance with all the circumstances. The same is true for the court of Dionysius (the tyrant of Syracuse - A.A.), he was more successful than all the others, always perfectly mastering the circumstances... 

When Dionysius spat at him, he bore it, and when someone began to scold him for it, he said: "Fishermen expose themselves to the splashes of the sea in order to catch small fish; will I not bear the splashes of saliva, desiring to catch large fish?" 

Dionysius gave him money and Plato a book; in response to his reproach, Aristippus said: "So I need the money more, and Plato needs the book." 

Such is Aristippus in the description of Diogenes of Laertes: greedy, thick-skinned, cynical, tongue-tied - and this portrait, judging by its order of functions, is quite close to the original. The last example of the Dionysian gifts to Plato and Aristippus is especially expressive. It shows that even in those distant times and even tyrants were subtle enough psychologists to sense in those around them their First Function and act accordingly: Plato with his 1st Logic really needed a book more, while Aristippus with his 1st Physics needed money. 

But Aristippus thought as he lived, his philosophy was simple: "There is no difference between pleasure and enjoyment, neither is sweeter than the other. Pleasure is attractive to all living beings, pain is repugnant... Pleasure is a good thing, even if it is generated by the ugliest things... even if the deed be unworthy, yet pleasure is still a good thing, and should be sought for its own sake." 

* * * 

Although Aristippus' philosophy is limited to the realm of ethical teaching, unethical according to our understanding, "Aristippus," like other psychic types, is not only moral, but a whole worldview. Therefore, the "aristippos" who lived much later than Aristippus considerably extended the scope of his original philosophy. 

One of them was the English philosopher Thomas Hobbes, and while he fully agreed with Aristippus on the principle of the primacy of sensual pleasures over all others, he also proved to be such a hardened atheist that he first had to flee England to France and then from France to England. The whole cosmos, according to Hobbes, is thoroughly material and consists only of bodies, nothing immaterial, spiritual in nature exists. Hobbes is a consistent empiricist who accepts as true only that which is confirmed by experience, by the bodily senses. Man's peculiarity lies only in the fact that he is given the thinking to analyze and systematize these experiences, to see the past clearly and to predict the future plausibly. 

In retelling Hobbes, let us not make the mistake of thinking that his teachings contain something original, purely individual. Such is the world-formed or unformed, spontaneous outlook of any "Aristippus," because it derives directly from his order of functions. The superfluous 1st Physics conditions the consistent materialism and empiricism of Aristippus' philosophy; it also easily converts him to atheism, for the 1st Physics abhors the asceticism more or less characteristic of most religions. "Aristippus" believes neither in God nor in the devil, also because his 1st Physics mates with the 2nd Logic. It is well known that any faith contains too many contradictions not to irritate a strong, healthy Logic. And the common for religion appeal to feelings is powerless before the coldbloodedness of "aristippus", in whose Emotion occupies the last, fourth line and is therefore the least reliable instrument. The same 2nd Logic also determines the fact that in the worldview of the "aristippus" he most values clarity of thought and vastness of knowledge after carnal pleasures. Therefore, there is nothing individual in Hobbes' combination of crude materialism with an equally crude rationalism that goes beyond his "aristippus" psychotype. 

* * * 

Hobbes is not original in his political doctrine. He is both in life and in theory a consistent monarchist, which is more or less inherent in all "aristippos," and to a greater or lesser extent in the possessors of the insecure 3rd Will in general. 

What an "aristippus" is as a functioning politician can be seen in the example of such brilliant figures as Emperor Tiberius, James I Stuart, Talleyrand, Joseph Stalin, and Fidel Castro. An "aristippe" politician is a tyrant by definition, just as any "bourgeois" is. His tyranny is original only in that it is the tyranny of a well-informed, clearly and incessantly thinking person. This circumstance guarantees the "aristippus," minus the possibility of losing the throne as a result of external aggression, a long stay at the top of the power pyramid until the hour of death. Cemetery peace inside the country ensures "aristippus" both unparalleled cruelty (combination of the 1st Physics with the 3rd Will) and quick, dodgy mind (the 2nd Logic). 

Another notable detail of the image of the "aristippus in power" is the general opinion of those around him about his unparalleled talent for comedy. But there is an error here. "Aristippus" is certainly a hypocrite, but no more so than any other "burgher. The illusion of some special gift for acting is created by his Fourth Emotion. As we remember, the Fourth Function is characterized by the ease of its extrinsic grasp, so it is easy for an "aristippus," a captive of his feelings, to laugh with those who laugh, to cry with those who weep. However, it is the "aristippus" who is guided less by his emotions when making decisions and taking action, which is why it was such a great shock for a society that seemed used to everything when someone with whom yesterday the "aristippus" was laughing and crying, today laid his head on the scaffold. But, I repeat: it was not a special talent for comedy in such cases, but a simple combination of the 3rd Will with the 4th Emotion. 

The boundary between the world of politics and the world of crime is transparent, if it exists at all, so if background, upbringing, circumstances or the scale of personality do not allow an aristippe to pursue a political career, he moves easily into the criminal sphere. As in politics, in a criminal organization, the aristippus is rarely made boss, and if he is, it is by right of succession, not by right of creation. The aristippus lacks character and determination (the 3rd Will) for a true unquestionable leadership, so in gangs he more often takes the place of a vizier under the boss, becomes the brain center of the criminal organization, carefully developing both the general strategy of criminal activity and the tactics of individual operations (Meyer Lansky?). 

However, the Aristippus carefully avoids direct participation in operations. The fact is that as a creature of cruelty, sometimes pathological, with complete equanimity, he is not, to put it mildly, a brave man and is too afraid of retaliatory violence to take personal risks. Because of this typical character trait of the "aristippus", it is easy to answer the question of Stalin's direct participation or non-participation in the terrorist attacks by his revolutionary gang, which has long been raised in history. Now with full confidence we can say: no, he did not. And certainly right was Trotsky, not a brave man himself and generally psychologically close to Stalin, when he wrote: "Political opponents clearly exaggerated this side of Stalin's activities, saying how he personally dropped a bomb from the roof of the first square in Tiflis in order to seize public money. However, Stalin's name is never mentioned in the recollections of direct participants in the Tiflis raid. He himself never said a word about it. This does not mean, however, that he stood apart from terrorist activity. But he acted from behind the scenes: he selected people, gave them the sanction of the Party Committee, and he himself timely stepped aside. This was more in line with his character. 

When circumstances force the "aristippus" to do lawless things alone, he usually chooses a career of swindling, and, one must admit, this choice is almost always successful. The example of Count Cagliostro, the king of adventurers in the extremely rich in adventurers XYIII century, shows: what heights an "aristippe" can reach in this field, even when he is ill-mannered and ignorant. To surpass such no less impudent, but better educated and more cultured swindlers as Saint-Germain, Casanova, Mesmer, Krenk, it was necessary to have not only a special talent, but also a corresponding psychotype. 

* * * 

The Aristippus is also lucky in marriage scams, or rather, any marriage is a big or small scam. This luck is aided by the fact that often the "aristippus" is handsome with lush, sensual beauty (1st Physics), and if not always handsome, he is always diabolically cunning and totally unconscionable. I happened to know one "aristippus" who, rising from the bottom, from juvenile prison, from wife to wife - seven marriages - improved his situation immensely: financially, socially, geographically. By "geography" I mean in this case, that as a native of a remote province, he married for the seventh time a Muscovite, of course, for the sake of a Moscow residence permit. And my "aristippe" had a curious, perhaps irrelevant, but curious, slip-up with his registration. The day after the wedding, early in the morning, before the passport office even opened, he was standing at the door with his passport in his hand. One can imagine the shock of the passport holder, who is well aware of the Russian tradition of multi-day drinking sprees after the wedding, when she found her husband, who had just been sober before dawn, at the door of her office. The passport-issuing lady quite rightly suspected cheating and kept my "aristippe" busy with the registration as long as she could. 

Speaking of the marriage scam, we have come very close to such an important topic as psycho-type and family. And though we didn't want to say it, we will have to say it: "aristippe is the most dangerous man on earth. He is ruthless, evil, deceitful, hypocritical, and violent, which makes him akin to "Dumas" (a combination of the 1st Physics and the 3rd Will), but at the same time he is absolutely cold-blooded and strictly rational (a combination of the 2nd Logic and the 4th Emotion), and this last circumstance makes "aristippe" the most dangerous creature in the world. No, it is not for nothing that my acquaintance, the "aristippe" described above, a shy-looking wretch, liked to say that he had never met his equal in the criminal world. 

Naturally, the "aristippus" family is particularly at risk, since it stands closest to the source of the danger. Recall the emperor Tiberius, who cut out his kin almost entirely, finding this villainy the sweetest mythological consolation, often saying that "Priam, who survives his loved ones, is happy. 

Usually only self-interest and vanity are able to lead the "aristippus" to the wedding, and until the purse and connections of the amiable half are exhausted, he will not let go. If the half of the "aristippus" is poor and simple, but young and good-looking, he is easily made a pimp, using her as bait for rich and influential people (such was the marriage of Cagliostro). A remarkable feature of "aristippe" pimping is that it gets along remarkably well with rabid jealousy. Therefore the encouragement of adultery is easily replaced in his family by violent scenes of jealousy, usually accompanied, if the victim has no influential defenders, by ruthless hand-to-hand violence (combination of the 1st Physic and the 3rd Will). 

Aristippus sex, if not directly accompanied by sadism, is still so coarse, selfish, and unscrupulous that it is more reminiscent of rape. This brings to mind the legend that the intimacy between Stalin and his second wife Nadezhda began with rape. As if some relative with a gun came running at the screams of the victim, and Stalin only by vowing to marry her saved his life. Participants in this drama are long dead and can neither confirm nor deny this legend, but there is no doubt that it is highly plausible, given Stalin's psychotype. Aristippus sex is rhinoceros sex, and there is simply no line between voluntary and forced intimacy. 

* * * 

In my description, "Aristippe" looks like a complete villain, and perhaps this picture could be limited if there were a single psychotype so simple and one-dimensional in life that a single color would suffice to recreate it. Absolute villainy is as unrealistic as absolute virtue; they exist only in movies. There are attractive traits of their own in the character of the "aristippus." Naturally, they are connected, as in every human being, with his Second Function, in this case the 2nd Logic, and if the "aristippus" is turned to his partner exactly by this better side, contact with him can be a real pleasure. 

"Aristipp is a genius and a titan of intellectual communication. From his point of view, Fidel Castro's fifteenhour interviews are not a feat, but an unheard-of success. In his irrepressible talkativeness, Aristippe would be completely unbearable were it not for two important circumstances: the pithiness of his verbal outbursts and delicacy, i.e. the ability not only to talk, but also to listen with interest. At the same time, possessing a strong, flexible, morbidly cynical mind, the "aristippus" is often somehow timid in thought and is rarely a pioneer, a true revolutionary in the field of intellectual work. This timidity is conditioned by the third Will of the "aristippus," for it is not enough to have a free and energetic mind for true innovation; it is necessary to have the character and the will to be able to see through his deductions, whatever they may be, and to make them public, even against the prevailing opinions and prejudices. But it is precisely with the will that the main mental disadvantage of the "aristippus" is connected. 

Another remarkable characteristic of the Aristippus is that he has an absolutely irrepressible thirst for knowledge. Of course, his awareness varies greatly depending on his background, upbringing, and circumstances. But one can be sure that in the circle of information outlined to him by fate, he will try to scoop it all. According to Gabriel Garcia Marquez, Fidel Castro "does not miss a single opportunity to extract information. And at any time of the day or night he is willing to read any paper with letters on it... His cars...are always equipped with lights for reading at night. Often he picks up a book as soon as it begins to get light..." 

I know of a case in which an "aristippus" performed an almost heroic act, giving up his bread-and-butter job for a librarian's position with the scantest content, just to be closer to sources of information. And this story makes me say a few words about the almost unique psychotypical bifurcation peculiar only to the "aristippus. It is hardly only this type that is inherent in the contradiction between the upper functions: First and Second. The fact is that the pay for intellectual labor is almost everywhere so low that it is completely incapable of satisfying the usual need for the 1st Physique - to live 20-30% better than its social group. That is why the soul of the "aristippus" is chronically divided between selfinterest according to the 1st Physics and intellectual thirst according to the 2nd Logic. And to the delight of those around him, the latter often triumphs. 

Also. Like other holders of the 3rd Will, the "aristippe" is doubly lonely. The fact is that high ranking Logic is rare among people in general and is so rarely demanded by society that anyone who possesses it lives with the feeling of being an orphan until the end of his days. "Aristippe is an orphan twice over, hiding the vulnerable corpus of his personality (3rd Will) from strangers; even if he turns his best intellectual side toward them, he often encounters indifference, even dislike, and full-blooded communication; that is, maximum realization of the normative, strong, flexible, dialogical 2nd Logic is more a dream than reality for an "aristippe". The same Marquez wrote of Castro: "Private parties are not in his character, for he is one of the few Cubans who does not dance or sing, and those rare house parties at which he does appear take on a completely different mood with his arrival. Maybe he doesn't notice it. Maybe he does not realize how he immediately begins to dominate everyone and take up all the free space ... But, no matter how you look at it, as soon as he appears, the dancing stops, the music stops, the dinner is moved away, and the audience concentrates around him to engage in the instantaneous conversation. It's a state you can stay in - on your feet, without booze or food - indefinitely. Sometimes, before he goes to bed, he'll knock on the door of a trusted friend's house at a late hour, only to appear unannounced and tell him he's only here for five minutes. He says this with genuine sincerity. But gradually he becomes engrossed in a new subject, falls into a chair, stretches out his legs, and utters: "I feel reborn." This is all he is: tired of conversations, he finds rest in conversations. In his complimentary essay about the Cuban dictator, Marquez tries not to notice that, in Russian, "an uninvited guest is worse than a Tartar," that the refusal of Castro's interlocutors to dance is hardly entirely voluntary. And most importantly, he does not see, or tries not to see, the real drama of his favorite, the drama of an isolated intellectual standing orphaned in a crowd of his mindlessly dancing compatriots, a drama that makes the "aristippe" even more timid and lonely than nature has created him. 

* * * 

If we imagine an Aristippus from a purely external point of view, we imagine a tall, broadboned man with a lushly sculpted face. His hair is short and uncomplicated. Clothing is expensive, solid, but discreet (especially in men). Women may overuse makeup. The look is elusive, sly, and without glitter.