The Master Spreadsheet!

Greetings!  Haven't been active enough on here.  But I have been working in the background.  And I'm happy to say that I've finished one of the first steps to make the Great Books as accessible as possible to as many people as possible.  Here's the culmination of my background work over the past few months:  The Great Books Reading Schedule spreadsheet!!

This sheet automatically calculates your reading times and lays out the dates for when you should start and finish each work in order to complete the reading plan within the ten year time frame.

The defaults are set to reading at 200 Words Per Minutes (WPM) for 20 minutes a day.  Adjust them as you need.  To get your own copy click "File" then "Make a copy."  Then input your personal WPM and how much time you wish to dedicate daily to reading (calculated in minutes).

You can get a rough estimate for your reading speed here.  I highly recommend reducing your reading speed on the sheet by at least 50 WPM since you will be slowed down by the different writing styles and new ideas.

If 20 minutes a day seems like a large investment (as a single block of reading it can be a bit overwhelming), reduce it to 5 minutes 4 times per day.  If you have a bit more free time than most, try for 5 minutes of reading per hour.  Those minutes add up more than you think.  Play around with a little bit of time spend reading per hour to see what works best for you.

REMEMBER:  you may not always enjoy the reading.  I felt mostly as if I suffered through Rabelais.  But approach the reading with the idea that you will be able to look back on your day before you go to bed and feel a little pride at having dipped your toe into the vast history of Western though and culture.

I've included all the sources I've been able to find so far that are free and available online.  I'm missing about six at the moment.  But I hope to transcribe those and upload them myself within a year or so.  The first missing source is four years into the reading plan; so I have time.

Feel free to leave comments on the spreadsheet.  I know many improvements will need to be made once I get a bit better with the Google Sheets format.  Example:  right now the checkboxes are more-or-less just for aesthetics.  Eventually I want a bit more functionality for "checking off" a work that you've completed.

That's about it.  I hope you enjoy this and that it makes it a bit easier for more individuals to take that leap into checking out the Great Books for themselves.

"Of Custom, and not easily changing an accepted law" from the "Essays" of Michel de Montaigne

First off, I highly recommend that you read Montaigne for yourself.  Or you can listen to him.  There's a lot to be gained from even a cursory reading of his personal musings of the subjects at hand.

Of Custom, and not easily changing an accepted law is an interesting chapter for me after having previously been familiar with the works of Nassim Nicholas Taleb.  Taleb first introduced me to the concept of having skin in the game (at least in a more formal, philosophical sense) and not being able to change things that will effect others without proportional consequence to yourself.  And Montaigne covered much the same ground almost five centuries earlier.  From the chapter:

"The legislator of the Thurians ordained, that whosoever would go about either to abolish an old law, or to establish a new, should present himself with a halter about his neck to the people, to the end, that if the innovation he would introduce should not be approved by every one, he might immediately be hanged[.]"

Think government and bureaucracy passing laws and amendments that will effect others whilst simultaneously evading the consequences when those decisions have negative effects; especially those who think they know what's better for others:

"There is a vast difference betwixt the case of one who follows the forms and laws of his country, and of another who will undertake to regulate and change them; of whom the first pleads simplicity, obedience, and example for his excuse, who, whatever he shall do, it cannot be imputed to malice; 'tis at the worst but misfortune:  '[For who is there that antiquity, attested and confirmed by the fairest monuments, cannot move]?'  Besides what Isocrates says, that defect is nearer allied to moderation than excess:  the other is a much more ruffling gamester; for whosoever shall take upon him to choose and alter, usurps the authority of judging, and should look well about him, and make it his business to discern clearly the defect of what he would abolish, and the virtue of what he is about to introduce."

"It argues a strange self-love and great presumption to be so fond of one's own opinions, that a public peace must be overthrown to establish them, and to introduce so many inevitable mischiefs, and so dreadful a corruption of manners, as a civil war and the mutation of state consequence to it, always bring in their train, and to introduce them, in a thing of so high concern, into the bowels of one's own country." 

Does this mean that things should never change?  Of course not.  But there is a strong case to be made for being far more cautious than we seem to be when it comes to passing what are, at best, only theoretically beneficial ideas that will inevitably have unexpected, if not flat-out unquantifiable, consequences.

After all that, how can society change?  To add my own two cents, from what I've gathered reading others such as Jordan Peterson and Nassim Taleb change is best had at the level of the individual.  Things seem to always go awry when beneficial change is enacted at any other level than that of the individual.  People need to change for the better of their own volition at the level of the individual.  Society can't help but benefit from the betterment of an individual by his own will.

What do you think?

"The best pretence for innovation is of very dangerous consequence: '[We are ever wrong in changing ancient ways.]'"

"The Prince" by Machiavelli

Quite enjoyed this book; very short and to the point.  It was written by Machiavelli in order to aid and garner favor with Lorenzo de' Medici, whom Machiavelli saw as the best person to bring prosperity and order to Italy.

TL;DR - a prince must have an outer appearance of virtuousness (mostly for the purpose of endearing himself to the common people) while maintaining both a capacity for force and craftiness in order to effectively carry out his agenda with the end of safeguarding his state from outside forces.  He must not rely on outside assistance unless there's no other option since even in victory he would be beholden to another.  Fear is better than love since love wilts in the face of danger while fear of punishment keeps others loyal while facing danger.  Frugality is better than charity.  Power is better than virtue.

There's much more, but you can check out my summary of each chapter below if you wish.

I've heard mostly negative things about this book over the years, but now that I've finally read it I can see the pragmatic commonsense nature of the work.  Though I would be remiss to say that this is a faultless guide for how to rule.  It's focus on "pragmatism" over virtuousness is troublesome and reeks of a desperate man who saw no alternative.  Also, the book makes it clear at the beginning that this is purely for the edification of princes ruling over principalities.  He avoids the subject of the rule of republics since it is expounded upon in another of Machiavelli's work.  Even if it was the best guide ever, some might find it difficult to adapt everything to modern governments which are much larger and more complex than the principalities of the day that are spoken of in the book.

After reading it, I am on the side that sees this as the work of a patriot who was desperate to have his country unified and strengthened by the rule of one whom he saw as a savior figure, that being Lorenzo de' Medici.  I highly recommend giving it a read.  You will certainly find yourself thinking a lot about modern politics with reference to Machiavelli's insights.

Thanks for your time and attention.

For those who are interested, below are my summaries/notes on each chapter.  Apologies in advance for their unrefined nature.

1. There are principalities and republics.  Of principalities there are inherited and created (this includes those that a prince acquires by force from another)
2. Inherited principalities are easier to maintain since the people are used to the family in power ruling.  Don’t change the laws to much and don’t give great harm to the people and they’ll be content with how things are.
3. Because of the preceding it’s much more difficult to maintain a new principality.  The people are likely to throw you over for another in the hopes that things can be better.  And you can’t trust those who helped you to overthrow the previous authority.  It’s easiest when laws and language are the same.
4. A prince should ideally take up residence in the principality so that he can more closely observe dissidence and nip it in the bud.  He should make examples of dissidents to quelch future rebellions as much as possible.  An easier method is to set up colonies with those loyal to him so that the previous population is scattered and weakened against rising up against the prince.
5. When having conquered a place that once lived by its own laws it can be advantageous to allow them to continue under the old laws while taxing them and establishing a loyal oligarchy.  The oligarchy will secure loyalty for the prince if only for the sake of keeping the power that the prince has bestowed upon them.  The most effective is to decimate the place. Older traditions and laws will remain in memory otherwise which will always threaten to have the people rise up against a conqueror.  Though places that have been ruled by princes before will tend to submit to a new ruler once the old family has been taken out since the people don’t know how to exist without a ruler.
6. Princes will tend to demand more respect and loyalty by taking a principality by force.  Prowess in battle doesn’t rely on lukewarm support from those who think they may be able to benefit from his eventual take over.  Prowess commands respect and admiration even of the conquered.
7. Princes will tend to demand more respect and loyalty by taking a principality by force.  Prowess in battle doesn’t rely on lukewarm support from those who think they may be able to benefit from his eventual take over.  Prowess commands respect and admiration even of the conquered.
8. If a prince is to gain a principality through cruelty and backstabbing he should get it all done at once so that the memory and resentments can die in the people lest they prove troublesome and unwilling to bear any future atrocities if he must continue in cruelty to maintain rule.
9. Nobles and common people are naturally opposed to each other.  Either will seek to bring a prince to power to represent their interests.  In both cases the prince is to seek the friendship of the common since the nobles are greedy and always ready to oppose the prince if he doesn’t do as they desire.  The nobles consider themselves the prince’s equal.  The people will not.  The prince stands alone at the top to the common.  Having the people on his side will protect him against the nobles lest the common people rise against the nobles for taking the prince they appreciated.
10. A prince should fortify defenses as much as his means of aggression.  If the city is besieged by an aggressor then the prince can take the opportunity to unite and impassion the people to take up the defense.  If they win, then the prince has ennobled himself to the people all the more.
11. Ecclesiastical principalities unique.  There are sustained  by powers that cannot be fathomed by humans.  And a prince never truly rules one of these.  They are ruled by religious principles rather than human authority.  But the Church has in the past expanded its power through arms.
12. A good state has a good army and good laws.  A prince may rely on his own men, mercenaries, or auxiliary armies.  It’s best to rely on his own men.  Mercenaries have bad morale and are disloyal except to money and the leader’s own ambition.
13. Auxiliary units are borrowed from a more powerful ally.  These are just a terrible as mercenaries.  Either they lose leaving the prince defenseless or they win leaving the prince indebted to whom the troops were borrowed. A prince must command his own troops to secure his principality.
14. A prince’s main concern should be the art of war.  The armed (his troops) won’t have respect for the unarmed prince.
15. A prince should not concern himself with the virtuous life since it is impossible to live as such, but rather should dedicate himself to the practical attainment of safeguarding his state even through what would be considered non-virtuous means.
16. Liberality (i.e. free spending and generosity) endears people to a prince at first, until the money runs out and the prince must resort to taxation to keep up his liberality, which will only breed contempt.  Parsimony (i.e. frugality and unwillingness to spend money) may breed contempt at first, but will bear the fruit of generosity in the future.  Parsimony allows the prince to store up for such times as he will need those resources.
17. A prince should be prudent when dealing out compassion.  Too much and even disloyal traitors will not be adequately made an example of and will sow discord amongst the prince’s subjects.  And it is more practical to be feared than loved.  Humans are fickle and ungrateful.  When hard times occur love can dissipate far more efficiently than fear will.  Fear of punishment for the desertion of loyalty is a more effective motivator. But the prince must take care to not sow hatred amongst the fear.
18. A prince must emulate the fox and lion.  The fox is crafty and deceitful whilst the lion is strong and has force.  A prince must be able to be crafty and hide his true motives to manipulate others to his advantage while also retaining the necessary force to do what needs be done.  Have a surface level impression of virtuousness to the people will aid the prince. As long as the prince appears virtuous and delivers the results that the people want, his state is secured.
19. A prince should never be held in contempt and hated.  He can avoid this mostly by not taking his people’s property and women and not injuring their honor.  Having neither the hate nor scorn of his people is a strong defense against internal conspiracies to overthrow him.  The conspirators will now have to consider the consequences of overthrowing the prince that is loved by his people.  It’s impossible to avoid all hatred so a prince should seek to appease the most important groups of the people; the troops being the most important.  But the troops should never be appeased to the detriment of the common people.
20. In essence, a prince should have the love of the people in order to stave off the possibility of rebellion by conspirators since the people are more powerful than the armies on average.  But there have been occasions in which it was prudent for a prince to be more amenable to the rapacity and violent nature of the soldiers.
21. It’s good for a prince to arm those who have none who can help me take over a principality for this creates trust.  Disarming breeds distrust. He should be wary of those who are discontented with their government and help him to take over for they can just as easily become discontented with him.  He should prefer those who are his enemies when he takes over.
22. A good prince is never neutral; he will be irresolute and a coward in the eyes of people and allies.  And must never, unless absolutely necessary, appeal to a stronger ally for aid for then he will be more inexorably beholden to the stronger ally if victory is achieved.
23. When choosing a servant a prince should never choose one that has personal concerns outside the prince.  The servant should be fully focused on matter pertaining to the prince.  And the prince will retain the servant’s loyalty by showing appreciation and honouring him enough to let him know what he gets by the prince’s kindness.
24. A prince should let it be known that others should only ever speak the truth to him and only ever when the prince asks.  Good counsel comes of a wise prince who has prudence.  Otherwise the prince is split on counsel with each counselor attempting to benefit his own position.
25. In times of peace a slothful prince will neglect prudence thinking that there can’t be change that will upend his rule.  A conquering prince that establishes a new principles with new laws and arms the populace is doubly good.  A prince is doubly shamed who inherited and lost it through lack of prudence and slothfulness.
26. A prince should always be read to change to meet fortune while not bowing to caution.  Fortune is a woman, and thus is only properly subdued by a violent and young man who can better command her.
27. Final chapter in which Machiavelli appeals to Lorenzo de Medici to take the preceding advice, with the addition of some battle strategy against enemies, in order to bring Italy to the glory it deserves under a ruler that can get the job done.

The Gospel of Matthew

The Book of Matthew is concerned with the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy and the legitimization of Jesus to the Jewish people. 

It’s been quite some time since I’ve made a serious foray in the Scriptures.  And I must say that after having neglected them for so long that I look upon them with very different eyes than I once did.  There is a sense of awe from reading them that comes mostly from an intuition of their sheer profundity, but it’s hidden from me. 

Matthew 13:11 - “Because to you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven: but to them it is not given.”

I suppose for now I’m in the latter category.  But I shan’t despair.  Many far better men have spent their whole lives contemplating upon the scriptures.  Jesus spoke of “things hidden from the foundation of the world.”  Deep mysteries have existed from the beginning.  After all this time we still have not unpacked it all. 

The Schedule (In Progress)

DISCLAIMER:  this post is currently incomplete.

Greetings!  Thought it prudent to make a post that lays out plainly the schedule for all these readings.  Written posts for each of the readings will not adhere to this outline.  Written posts will be posted whenever I get to them since the readings need to be allowed some time to process in the mind before being written.  Also, this post will be updated after each reading with the most recently completed reading being moved to the bottom of the post in order to keep the next reading at the forefront.

The format is:

• #) Author:  What to Read (Date to have it finished)
• Number of pages/ Time to read (rounded up)/ Number of days to read (rounded up)

Reminder:  Reading times are estimates based on a rough word count of 800 words per physical book page read at a rate of 300 words per minute for at least 10 minutes of reading per day.

Note:  The Great Books set does not include the Bible due to its ubiquitous nature in the Western World.  I've chosen the Douay-Rheims Bible.

The reading plan started with The Great Conversation by Robert M. Hutchins on May 7th, 2018. I set aside six days to read this for the group I was working with. The official reading plan started on May 13th, 2018.

The Schedule:

YEAR ONE:  

NOVEMBER:

12)  Shakespeare:  Hamlet (November 9th, 2018)

• 44 pages/ 119 minutes/ 12 days

13)  Locke:  Concerning Civil Government [Second Essay] (November 25th, 2018)

• 57 pages/ 154 minutes/ 16 days

14)  Rousseau:  The Social Contract [Book I-II] (November 30th, 2018)

• 19 pages/ 52 minutes/ 5 days

DECEMBER:

15)  Gibbon:  The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire [Ch. 15-16] (December 15th, 2018)

• 55 pages/ 149 minutes/ 15 days

16)  American State Papers:  (December 19th, 2018)

• The Declaration of Independence
• The Constitution of the United States

• 15 pages/ 41 minutes/ 4 days

JANUARY:

17)  Hamilton, Jay, Madison:  The Federalist Papers (January 1st, 2018)

• 1-10
• 15
• 31
• 47
• 51
• 68-71

• 47 pages/ 127 minutes/ 13 days

17)  Smith:  The Wealth of Nations [Introduction-Book I, Ch. 9] (January 14th, 2018)

• 48 pages/ 130 minutes/ 13 days

18)  Tocqueville:  Democracy in America [Vol. I, Part II, Ch. 6-8] (January 21st, 2018)

• 25 pages/ 68 minutes/ 7 days

19)  Marx-Engels:  Manifesto of the Communist Party (January 26th, 2018)

• 19 pages/ 52 minutes/ 5 days

FEBRUARY:

20)  Ibsen:  The Master Builder (February 6th, 2018)

• 35 pages/ 95 minutes/ 10 days

21)  Schrödinger:  What is Life? (February 19th, 2018)

• 48 pages/ 130 minutes/ 13 days

MAY:

1)  Plato:  Apology, Crito (May 19th, 2018)

• 20 pages/ 54 minutes/ 6 days

2)  Aristophanes:  The Clouds, Lysistrata (June 2nd, 2018)

• 51 pages/ 138 minutes/ 14 days

JUNE:

3)  Plato:  The Republic [Book I-II] (June 8th, 2018)

• 29 pages/ 54 minutes/ 6 days

4)  Aristotle:  Nicomachean Ethics [Book I] (June 14th, 2018)

• 10 pages/ 27 minutes/ 6 days

5)  Aristotle:  Politics [Book I] (June 17th, 2018)

• 11 pages/ 30 minutes/ 3 days

JULY:

6)  Plutarch:  The Lives of the Noble Grecians and Romans (July 13th, 2018 )

• Lycurgus, 
• Numa Pompilius, 
• Lycurgus and Numa Compared, 
• Alexander, 
• Caesar
• 96 pages/ 260 minutes/ 26 days

7)  New Testament (August 2nd, 2018)

• The Gospel According to Saint Matthew, 
• The Acts of the Apostles

• 74 pages/ 200 minutes/ 20 days

AUGUST:

8)  St. Augustine:  The Confessions [Book I-VIII] (August 23rd, 2018)

• 77 pages/ 208 minutes/ 21 days

SEPTEMBER:

9)  Machiavelli:  The Prince (September 3rd, 2018)

• 39 pages/ 106 minutes/ 11 days

OCTOBER:

10)  Rabelais:  Gargantua and Pantagruel [Book I-II] (October 7th, 2018)

• 127 pages/ 343 minutes/ 34 days

11)  Montaigne:  The Essays (Audio)(October 28th, 2018)

• Book I - Chapter 22:  Of Custom, and not easily changing an accepted law; 
• Book I - Chapter 24:  Of pedantry; 
• Book I - Chapter 25:  Of the education of children; 
• Book I - Chapter 26:  It is folly to measure the true and false by our own capacity; 
• Book I - Chapter 30:  Of cannibals; 
• Book I - Chapter 40:  That the taste of good and evil depends in large part of on the opinion we have of them; 
• Book III - Chapter 5:  On some verses of Virgil
• 76 pages/ 205 minutes/ 21 days

"Lycurgus" from "Lives of Noble Grecians and Romans" by Plutarch

TL;DR - Lycurgus made Sparta into the legendary city and people that we remember.  He made it strong and austere, if only for a time.

Lycurgus is the legendary law maker of Sparta.  He succeeded his brother as king until his sister-in-law gave birth to a son.  He continued in place of the boy until the boy came of age to rule.  Though Lycurgus fled after becoming aware of some people thinking him planning to murder the young boy to take the throne for himself.  

While abroad he visited many places where acquainted himself with different systems of law and cultures.  He then returned to Sparta to install what he thought to be a far superior system than what was already in place.  He started with bringing friends to support his cause.  Then while armed they approached the current king, his nephew, who fled for his life. Afterward Lycurgus convinced him that they were not after his life.  Lycurgus told the king about his new system and won the king to his cause.

Lycurgus established the Senate consisting of 30 men, 28 of whom were chose form among men above the age of 60 and of the two Spartan kings.  This group of 30 was established to balance the tyranny of both the populace (i.e. anarchy) and the monarchy.  This group was known as the Gerousia.  

Lycurgus exchanged all the gold and silver currency for poorly wrought and heavy iron.  This was to discourage the accumulation of wealth.  And a consequence of this practice was the decline of outside labor and craftsmen since payment was inefficient.  So Spartans learned to do for themselves, but Lycurgus forbid elaborate and ornate craftsmanship.  

In order to create a sense of equality people were to take dinner in public with groups of fifteen rather eating dinner at home.  Those who ate before coming and didn't partake of the public dinner were shamed.  And each man had to take turns giving food to be consumed at the public dinner.  This food came from the equal tract of land that Lycurgus allotted to each Spartan man to keep and grow food for himself.

After birth, Spartan children were washed with wine and examined.  If deemed weak they were discarded.  But if after seven days they survived the exposure they were allowed to live.

At the age of seven each male boy was taken by the military to begin training.  The boys even learned such things as stealing whilst in the military.  They would have to steal in order to provide food for themselves.  And the penalties for being caught stealing were so harsh that it is said that a boy allowed himself to be disemboweled by a fox he'd stolen which was hidden under his clothes rather allow his superiors to catch him having stolen something.

The boys around twelve years of age sometimes had an older Spartan man who took an interest in them and developed an intimate relationship and sponsorship.  

Marriage involved a woman getting her head shaved and put on clothing similar to male clothing.  She would wait in a dark room for the man to come and perform.  This would go on for sometime until a  pregnancy occurred.  Monogamy was not something that was aspired to seeing as husbands and wives had the option to have the wife sleep with another man for the prospect of having strong children.

Lycurgus' story ends with leaning Sparta to consult the Oracle.  He has the city promise to never change the laws he established until he returns.  Upon hearing the positive message that the Oracle has for him, he resolves to allow himself a respectable death; perhaps by starvation.  And some say that his bones/corpse was never returned to Sparta for fear that the city would take that to mean they could change the laws.  In the end the laws seem to have either failed to uphold the city, or the city did go against the wishes of Lycurgus.  Sparta is no more.

I doubt I got even a third as much from this chapter as I should've.  Lycurgus is an interesting character.  He has conviction, and commands great respect in others.  One man who, being opposed to Lycurgus' Rhetra (i.e. laws), knocked out one of Lycurgus' eyes with a stick became one of Lycurgus' greatest supporters afterwards do to Lycurgus' treatment of him after the offense. He certainly inspired to the best in people.

Though it seems as if for all his goodness and justice that he turned the Spartans more into cogs in a machine rather than properly developed individuals, but in fairness to him he was more interested in creating citizens to form a stable and strong commonwealth that could defend itself.  I always try to keep in mind that I keep perspective when comparing modern society to ancient society.  It's not to condone the past, but to remember that things were different.   

Something that I find particularly odd about Lycurgus is his strictness with allowing in foreigners and letting citizens go abroad.  It was his going abroad that allowed him the opportunity to observe other cultures and their practices which became synthesized into his Rhetra.  So it seems odd that he became so worried about bad influences destroying what he had built.  

Sources:

The Book Chapter

Video #1:  this is short summary by another who followed the Great Books reading plan.

Video #2:  this goes into pretty good detail of the Spartan Constitution.

Video #3:  another following the Great Books reading plan.  This individual is currently in progress.

Video #4:  talks a little about the doubt that some historians have about Lycurgus' existence.

UPDATE: Study Materials

Okay.  I've been lazy with the study notes.  The General Grammar section of Sister Miriam Joseph's The Trivium felt particularly taxing at times.  But I'm happy to say that I have reassessed how I'll be approaching the matter.  It can be a bit difficult to track down quality guides and study materials, but I think I've found some solid sources to at least give a bit of guidance.  Here's Source #1, Source #2, and Source #3.

I'm currently only working with Source #1, but Source #2 has some really cool texts I'm eager to read. I'm on my final review of Chapter 3: General Grammar of The Trivium.  I can attest that rereading has certainly helped to embed the material much better in my mind than I would've previously thought considering the struggles I had attempting to comprehend it the first time through.

After I finish the final read of Chapter 3 I'll probably attempt a post more-or-less from memory about the basics of General Grammar: Categorematic words, Syncategorematic words, Substantives, Attributives, Copulas, etc.

As for Lycurgus, hope to have that out tomorrow.  I decided to take some extra time to re-read it since I'm finding it difficult to wrap my head around Plutarch's text.  I think I've gotten a bit more the second time around.

Well, that's all for now.  Bye!

Peace Out GIF from Peaceout GIFs