A French Philosopher and writer, Michel De Montaigne, is considered an important philosopher from the period of the French Renaissance.

Fame and tranquility can never be bedfellows.

Unlike some of his contemporaries, Mr. Montaigne believed that seeking one's own glory or fame, keeps one from living a tranquil life.

If you are set on living a tranquil life, then the opinions of others should not matter to you, but if you seek fame, then you are obligated to seek their opinion, and since you are seeking their opinion, you can no longer be tranquil.

In his opinion, we should not of "other people's approval and admiration as being valuable". (p109 philosophers book)

Montaigne went on to say "we should imagine that some truly great and noble being is constantly with us, able to observe our most private thoughts, a being in whose presence even the mad would hide their failings.  By doing this, we will learn to think clearly and objectively and behave in a more thoughtful and rational manner."  (p.109)

You know I read that and I thought "huh... that is cool"... if we, as believers, realize that God can hear our every thought and idea, would it not cause us to be think through our responses a bit more?   Too often we jump the gun, and we act before thinking that we are responsive to a greater being... that being GOD.    Fascinating eh?

Anyways, back to talk about this philosopher.  :)

Montaigne was born into a catholic family and remained a member of the catholic church his entire life.    His family was wealthy and he was educated at home.   He made a great friend at age 24 with Étienne de la Boétie.   This was an intellectul as well as emotional friendship and they formed a great bond.  When de la Boétie died, Montaigne turned to his writing career.  Two years after his friend died, he married Françoise de la Chassaigne, and of six children born, only one daughter survived.

He often wrote in a personal manner, which was not the style of the day, and some disagreed with his methods. 

Sources:
IEP.  Wiki. Britannica.

Also known as Erasmus of Rotterdam, Erasmus was a humanist who said to know nothing is the happiest life.  He lived 1466 to 1536.  Erasmus was a writer, philosopher, scholar, linguist and more.   A dutch man born into illegitimacy.  He remains a source of controversy with people on both sides of faith arguing for and against him.

Erasmus was the second illegitimate son of Roger Gerard, a priest, and Margaret, a physician’s daughter.   He was born Gerrit Gerritszoon, but later adopted the name Desiderius Erasmus.  He is called Erasmus of Rotterdam due to his birthplace.

After his parents' death, Erasmus was forced to live with the monks for six years.  This experience did not endear the priesthood to him.  After leaving the monastery he because a teacher in Paris.    He later moved to England and spent most of the rest of his life living there.

Erasmus lived in a difficult time for people who didn't hold to all the teachings of the Catholic church.   He didn't agree with everything the reformers said, nor did he see the need for priests to not marry or for the laity to not be involved more in the church.  

He did see faith as a personal issue, one of a relationship between God and man and less of relationship based around church doctrines.  He wanted people to embrace "the true spirit of the Scriptures - simplicity, naivety and humility.   These, he says, are the fundamental human traits that hold the key to a happy life."   (p97 philosophy book)

After some time Erasmus divided his time between Brabant and England. 

He worked on a translation of the New Testament, wrote several books, pointed out the folly of people and the need to have a personal faith in God.   He walked a hard line of wanting to stay loyal to the Roman Church, and yet seeing truth in much said by reformers.   He couldn't commit to either fully... at his death he did not ask for last rites, which spoke to understanding of the need for personal faith above church doctrine.

Be mindful of who you are.
Know that if you know nothing, you can achieve happiness. 

Sources:
Britannica, Bio, History Guide, Standord, wiki.

Mr. Rumi was born in Persia.   Mongol invasions drove him from Persia into Anatoli, Turkey.   While in Turkey he meat Persian poets Attar and Shamas al-din Tabrizi and decided to devote himself to Sufism.

Sufism is the aesthetic and mystical interpretation of the Qur'an.  It hasn't always been well accepted by the mainstream of Islamic belief.   It was the Sufi concept of uniting with God through love that caught his attention.

Rumi became a teacher in the Sufi movement and as such believed that he was a medium between God and man.   He put a lot of emphasis on daily ritual prayers and litanys rather than analyzing the Qur'an.

He received various visions and shared them with others by writing them down in the form of poetry.

He believe that God is very present and that man is the link between the past and the future.   All of the past, present and future is all on one big continuum.    Everything is an endless cycle... death, decay, and life.... one dies and then is reborn again.

Rumi would say "I died as a mineral and became a plant, I died as a plant and rose to animal and I was Man".

Since life and death are an endless circle we should not grieve death or loss.    We should continually strive for spiritual growth... and that spiritual growth will come through what drives our emotions... music, song, dance etc.   It does not come through reason.

Sufism, as Rumi taught it, was instrumental in turning Orthodox Christian Turkey to Islam.   His beliefs also affected fundamental Islamic beliefs.   Into the 20th century his beliefs are starting to gain ground in western civilization.. think less, emote more.

Point brought up by a reader who is more up in history than I am.  :)

My appreciation to CN who says:

Moses Maimonides (original name Moses ben Maimon) was a Jewish Philosopher who followed Aristotelian thought.  He was also a jurist and physician.   He wrote a variety of  books on Jewish law and Aristotelian thought.

Maimonides issue with definition of God is that we CANNOT define God we can ONLY define what God does.    So God can act loving, protective, powerful and so forth but we cannot use those words to actually describe God.   For instance, we can say that God is a creator which shows what God does...   And if one does use a descriptor with God you must use the double negative to describe him.  For instance, God is powerful means that if you want to describe God you would need to say that God is not powerless.   Only the negations really show us who God is.

Maimonides early life was easy.   Growing up as a Jewish boy in Cordoba.   Religious freedom was a given.  This ended when a Muslim sect the Almohads took control.   They didn't allow the practice of Judaism.   The Maimons acted Muslim in public, but practiced their Judaism in secret.  They eventually found this too difficult and gradually found their way to Egypt where they could openly practice their faith.    He needed to end his studies when his father died and his wealthy brother perished, so he became a physician in order to support his family.

MY THOUGHTS:
Personally I think Maimonides was picking at straws a bit.   How is it so different to say that God is powerful then to say that God is not powerless?   Isn't that saying the same thing?    

I do think he showed some wisdom in insisting that we not anthropomorphize God.   God is SO MUCH greater than people are that to say that God is love so often limits people to how they understand love and that limits God.   God should not be limited by our finite understanding of who God is infinitely.

Sources:
Britannica.
The Philosophy book
Chabad.

Averroes is the Latinized name for Ibn Rushd, an Arabic philosopher who followed the Aristolean view on Philosophy.   He believed that philosophy and religion are not incompatible.

Averroes believed that "only the educated elite are capable of thinking philosophically and everyone else would be obligated to accept the teaching of the Qur'an literally".  (page 82, philosophy book) He said this while believing that the Qur'an was not accurate, but had a poetic closeness which was good enough for the masses...ergo they should believe it as is, but the educated should use philosophy to explain and understand it.

He wrote several books among them the Decisive Treatise on the Agreement Between Religious Law and Philosophy, Examination of the Methods of Proof Concerning the Doctrines of Religion, and The Incoherence of the Incoherence.    His position in life was that of chief judge who worked under the Almohads, one of the strictest Islamic regimes in the middle ages.    They were slowly becoming less rigid, but not at the speed that Averroes was learning/teaching.

Averroes had no issues dismissing or changing some Muslim tenet beliefs if it didn't fit his philosophy though.  For instance, the Muslim belief in the resurrection of the dead, he says we must believe in personal immortality but we don't really have souls it's just our shared intellect that survives.  And our bodies die.. no one really survives forever.

He lived in a time when most Muslims believed that philosophy was not a legitimate form of study.  He ended up exiled (with his books banned) from his homeland for two years because popular opinion was against him.

Sources:
philosophy book
IEP.
Britannica. 
Humanities.

Boethius was a Roman Philosopher who was also a Christian.   He proposed a solution to this question "If God already knows what we are going to do in the future, how can we be said to have free will?"

His thinking went thusly
God lives in the eternal present
God KNOWS the future as if it were the present
God knows what decisions we will make
God foresees our free thoughts and our actions.

God is outside of our time as we know (past, present, future).  God lives in the eternal present.   Just because God knows what we are going to do, doesn't mean that he interferes with our decisions.  Our decisions are our own, God just knows what those decisions are going to be. 

Boethius lived when the Roman Empire was in it's decline, he was orphaned at age 7 and raised in a Aristocrat Roman household.  He was well educated, speaking fluent Greek and had a thorough understanding of Greek and Latin literature.   He wrote "The Consolation of Philosophy" while he was in prison awaiting execution for treason (a wrongful accusation).

A good part of Boethius' life was spent in translating Aristotle's logical works into Latin, and then writing commentaries on them as well as logical textbooks,   He used his logical training to contribute to the theological discussions of the time.

In his book Consolation of Philosophy, Boethius argued that there was a higher power and that all suffering had a purpose.  He argued that true happiness can not be found in wealth and power but by turning to other virtues.

He also wrote books on math and music, introducing the concept of the threefold classification of Music.

For more information on Boethius Check out these resources
Stanford.  UK Philosophers. The Basics.   Anglican.  Grade-saver.

   St. Augustine of Hippo.   Does anyone not know who Augustine was?   Bishop of Hippo, writer of such works as "On Free Will"  "Confessions" and "On the City of God".   Augustine was a man that my son spent a great deal of time learning about last year through Veritas Press.   Born of a Christian mother, she prayed for his conversion which happened when he was 32 years old.     Archbishop Ambrose was instrumental in attracting him to the Christian Faith.

But what did Augustine believe?  How did he form his thinking?

Augustine is an important part of both Catholic and Protestant faiths due to his theological writings.   He was a fiery speaker and an excellent writer. 

He believed both in the predestination of man and in free will.

One of the things that Augustine believed was that God was not the parent of evil.   He formulated this train of thought.
People are rational beings.
As rational people, we must have free will.
Having free will means that we are able to CHOOSE between doing good and evil.
Therefore we act either in Goodness or Evilness.
God is not parent of evil.

Evil was defined less as an object or a thing, but more of a lack of something.   For instance, the evil of a blind man is that he cannot see, the evil of a thief is that he lacks honesty.   People queried though... why is there evil???   God made us a rational people.   AS rational people we are able to make choices about how we live.   This is our freedom of will.   How will we choose to act... out of goodness, or out of evilness?   God isn't making the choice for us... we make that choice.

Augustine was able to explain his thinking without using the bible, which puts him in the ranks of a philosopher as well as that of a Christian theologian.  

Another way of explaining his thinking is for us to picture how beauty can be added to by the presence of darkness...how discordant harmony can make a musical piece more beautiful, or how dark patches can bring out the beauty in a picture.

Can Augustine's thinking that evilness is a lack of something be dismissed?   Yes.    But the fact remains that evilness is not given to us by God.  He didn't create it.  Evilness is the result of choices made.  First by the devil, then by the devil proving convincing to Adam and Eve.   Through that choice, evil entered the world.

Sources:
Philosophy book
Wiki
New advent.
Encyclopedia Britannica.
Anglican.
IEP.
European Graduate School.

  I have to admit, I had not heard of this fellow before today.   Zeno of Citium was a philosopher from  Cyrpus (the town of Citium) who was a stoic.   He was a follower of Diogenes.  Like Diogenes he had little patience with metaphysical speculation.

Teaching on the "Sto" of a building, Zeno became the founder of Stoicism.   Formerly a merchant, he found his true calling in Philosophy.

He studied under a variety of philosophers, picking gems of thought up from each one.   Deciding the saying "NO" was defining yourself, and saying "yes" was allowing someone else to define you.   Therefore we must be slow to say yes.

His approach to Logic was this:
"Zeno said that there were four stages in the process leading to true knowledge, which he illustrated with the example of the flat, extended hand, and the gradual closing of the fist:

Zeno stretched out his fingers, and showed the palm of his hand, – "Perception," – he said, – "is a thing like this."- Then, when he had closed his fingers a little, – "Assent is like this." – Afterwards, when he had completely closed his hand, and showed his fist, that, he said, was Comprehension. From which simile he also gave that state a new name, calling it katalepsis (κατάληψις). But when he brought his left hand against his right, and with it took a firm and tight hold of his fist: – "Knowledge" – he said, was of that character; and that was what none but a wise person possessed."

The nature of the universe was that God was like a divine fire foreseeing all and working through all through eternity.  And as fire has different forms and life, the universe will regularly go through change as well.

He taught that people should control their passions and by doing so they will achieve wisdom and knowledge.    By use of meditation one can develop and indifference to pain and pleasure and thus apply oneself to gaining wisdom.  Wise people should have children.   He believed that "If one is self-aware, one is also aware of others and, further, recognizes that it is in simplicity that true contentment may be found".

Sources:
The philosophy book
Wikipedia
Philosophy basics
Crystal Links.
Ancient History.

I have to tell you, I have never heard of this philosopher before.   Plato called him "Socrates gone mad".  He meant this as an insult to him.  To some those, it seems well-suited to Diogenes of Sinope.

I thought this funny "He was a citizen of Sinope who either fled or was exiled because of a problem involving the defacing of currency".  (IEP)   It is factual that he damaged the money, it just seems funny to be kicked out because of it.  He then lived in Athens.   About the rest of his life, we have a bunch of sketchy details.

Diogenes took Socrates passion for virtue and rejection of material things to an extreme.  He believed that to live a good life one must live a simple life, governed by reason and natural impulses.   One lives a good life by renouncing property and comfort, and not living by societal conventions.

He is known as a cynic, one of the first of his kind, that believes one should turn away from social custom and etiquette, living as natural a life as possible.   The more you do this, the more you live the ideal life.   His life was one of contention, fighting societal norms, telling people TO THINK before they do something, not just do what was expected of them.   For instance, if you are hungry EAT, even if you aren't at home.

Diogenes lived under an abandoned tub.    Though some stories have in being captured by pirates and living in Corinth being in charge of his master's children.

He believed that by doing so he had the most.   The most of what was truly important in life indeed.

I have to admit, when I looked up some famous quotes, many made good sense to me.  Take for instance this one below.   Makes sense does it not that we should listen more than we talk?

I can understand what he means in some ways.  
Take for instance how happy people can be with less stuff cluttering up their lives.  Less stuff to worry about, more time to just spend with family and friends rather than keeping up with the Jones'.    Less instead of more is an expression often heard these days.

AND Christ himself tells us that we must give up all things in order to follow him, counting all things as loss as we strive for the cross.  

BUT Diogenes may have carried things a little too far ... he also didn't do this for the sake of Christ, he did this because he thought it was the way to peace within.   Not calling on Christ for the peace but depriving himself in order to feel better inside his own head about how he was living his life.

His willingness to do so makes me think though.  It really does.   Would I be prepared if asked of God, to give up all the material comforts that I have?   My household, my family, my bunnies, and what not?   And gasp.. my books!!!!  That's a hard one to consider.    Yet this is what Diogenes did. WITHOUT the love of God to sustain him.  Enduring ridicule and what not as well.

Interesting fellow.   My sources are linked below.

Sources:
Philosophy book
internet encyclopedia of philosophy
wiki