Philosophy – Guide to Happiness
We tend to accept that people in authority must be right. It’s this assumption that Socrates wanted us to challenge by urging us to think logically about the nonsense they often come out with, rather than being struck dumb by their aura of importance and air of suave certainty. This six part series on philosophy is presented by popular British philosopher Alain de Botton, featuring six thinkers who have influenced history, and their ideas about the pursuit of the happy life.
Socrates on Self-Confidence (Part 1)
Why do so many people go along with the crowd and fail to stand up for what they truly believe? Partly because they are too easily swayed by other people’s opinions and partly because they don’t know when to have confidence in their own.
Epicurus on Happiness (Part 2)
British philosopher Alain De Botton discusses the personal implications of the ancient Greek philosopher Epicurus (341-270BCE) who was no epicurean glutton or wanton consumerist, but an advocate of “friends, freedom and thought” as the path to happiness.
Seneca on Anger (Part 3)
Roman philosopher Lucious Annaeus Seneca (4BCE-65CE), the most famous and popular philosopher of his day, took the subject of anger seriously enough to dedicate a whole book to the subject. Seneca refused to see anger as an irrational outburst over which we have no control. Instead he saw it as a philosophical problem and amenable to treatment by philosophical argument. He thought anger arose from certain rationally held ideas about the world, and the problem with these ideas is that they are far too optimistic. Certain things are a predictable feature of life, and to get angry about them is to have unrealistic expectations.
Montaigne on Self-Esteem (Part 4)
Looks at the problem of self-esteem from the perspective of Michel de Montaigne (16th Century), the French philosopher who singled out three main reasons for feeling bad about oneself – sexual inadequecy, failure to live up to social norms, and intellectual inferiority – and then offered practical solutions for overcoming them.
Schopenhauer on Love (Part 5)
Alain De Botton surveys the 19th Century German thinker Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860) who believed that love was the most important thing in life because of its powerful impulse towards ‘the will-to-life’.
Nietzsche on Hardship (Part 6)
British philosopher Alain De Botton explores Friedrich Nietzsche’s (1844-1900) dictum that any worthwhile achievements in life come from the experience of overcoming hardship. For him, any existence that is too comfortable is worthless, as are the twin refugees of drink or religion.
April 7th, 2009 at 18:39
Thanks, Prezakias.
April 7th, 2009 at 17:41
Isaac Newton once remarked ,”If I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.”
Thank you for the wonderful uploads.
These men gave birth to new ideas for the world to adopt.Unfortunately not all of us are fit to be parents.
Keep up the good word.You are indeed a wonderful parent.
April 19th, 2009 at 20:52
A great series. Highly recommended. The foundations of humanity.
June 9th, 2009 at 07:38
Prezakias, you know that Newton was being very caustic with his words right? The statement is a double entrende. He said that in a letter to Hooke, who was a short man. So he was not only insulting Hooke’s physical features, he was saying he was not intellectually relevant either. Newton was the quintessential nerd. If he was around today, he’d be in Mensa and thumb his nose at the public. Royal jerk, but he was brilliant, so we have to pay our respects to him for co-founding calculus and other physical matters.
June 9th, 2009 at 07:53
Extra Ordinary
August 9th, 2009 at 23:38
Very good documenteries! They let you think about certain things in life and life itself. I would recommend everyone to watch them.
August 14th, 2009 at 15:02
I love this documentaries.
I specially liked Nietzsche because I was founding myself encountering the same answer and eager to find new challenges to overcome the new difficulties, so I would be stronger and happier in the end and at very step of it. Because even while I’m not feeling that happy during the journey I know I’m doing the right and fulfilling thing.
October 18th, 2009 at 22:05
Really inspiring. Thanks.
October 24th, 2009 at 23:11
These are truly practical and interesting documentaries not just for philophilosophers (those who are into philosophy).
I liked the one about Epicure and Socrates the most. They gave me some encouragement and food for thinking.
I would recommend those two having some free time, or, having enough time, all of these.
I’d be happy to see more documentaries in this category, by the way!
November 22nd, 2009 at 22:09
I don’t know if I exactly like the way De Botton demonstrates these philosophers ideas, or ideals as exact. Hes very upright in the one interpretations, for instance the Seneca on being a pessimist- perhaps in a sense, a realist? I don’t know if it’s the wording that throws me off.. I like the intention, but the scenes and monologue are not thoroughly convincing. And perhaps applicable to life, regardless of whatever century, but still not thoroughly effective or a little downgraded in my opinion. Nonetheless, I can still appreciate the philosophy aspect.
November 27th, 2009 at 18:39
This is really fantabulous. Watching these documentaries, one becomes aware of himself. They are in its own simplicity exceptionally great. Thanks for such a great WISDOM resource.
December 19th, 2009 at 12:14
Well paced, great scenery, great ideas. Truly a philosophical “how to” in a documentary.
January 15th, 2010 at 23:23
First, thank you for this great upload.
Though…
I was shocked to watch the episode on anger and see how untrue It was! We are advised to be pesimistic about life,
and therefore not be annoyed when things go wrong..?
He gives the example of a dog tied to a bike,
Instead of being annoyed about not being free,
we should give up and follow the bike?
So, when things go wrong for us,
as a result of a corrupt society,
we should not be annoyed,
and Instead just run along with It like everyone else,
Is It not possible that some people hold an exceptionaly high standard for themselves and the people around them,
and that If these standards are not met, then It Is perfectly natural to be annoyed. Its part of being human,
and drives us to be better and Improve.
I dont believe Its right to just accept that things go wrong.
Its better to believe In a world that not very much can go wrong, than to believe we`re better off getting used to a place where things do go wrong.
Otherwise you become numb, and your mind becomes dull.
January 16th, 2010 at 03:17
thomas I didn’t see the episode, but do some more thinking into it and you realize that the world and universe is the bike, you are the dog, you can fool yourself into enjoying the run or fool yourself into thinking you have a choice and get upset
at the end of the day you are only in control of yourself if anger gives you pleasure then by all means but otherwise accept what you can’t change, and change what you can, and know the difference
January 16th, 2010 at 15:58
@ Ignorant
Please try to watch something before you comment on It.
What you have done Is to Presume..
You presume the metaphor for the bike and dog has something to do with the world and universe. You have come to a conclusion without looking Into It.
You just gave It that meaning In your own mind.
In this episode, he equates It to things that go wrong,
the bike represents things that go wrong, Instead of being annoyed when something goes wrong, he says we should EXPECT IT, which means running with the bike.
(You have given your own meaning to the metaphor)
He then goes on to recommend that every morning we should run through all the things that can go wrong with the day ahead.
Hilariously.. the girl Is coming down with a cold and says,
I suppose Il get pneumonia and die!!
Anyone who knows anything about the power of the mind would never say such a thing, because you are just going to create It!!
January 19th, 2010 at 05:52
Yes, that anger episode is tricky. But, it is meant to be a means of dealing with anger and gives little explanation to the mental state a pessimistic outlook would give to one who consistently exists within it.
When you think of it, yes, if you expect it to go wrong, then you will not be surprised when it does go wrong, and you are indeed, less likely to blow up and get angry. That doesn’t mean it is an effective way to deal with anger.
I think the best attitude one might have is adaptability, and to understand that we cannot be in control of everything. To be able to realize that things are what they are, quite simply. And to be able to look at something with a realistic point of view. For example, we know the general population is made up of bad drivers, yet we set ourselves up for anger by driving too close to the person in front of us (here in Canada) and then get upset when someone buts in. Maybe if we planned ahead and left early and slowed down, we would be less encouraged to speed to get from point A to point B more quickly.
I think in dealing with anger, we have to consider our own role in the things that make us angry, and to own up to that responsibility and truth; and from there, really determine what is worth getting angry over.
January 19th, 2010 at 05:58
By the way, otherwise, I thought this series of documentaries was exceptional, giving us little bits and pieces of the minds of philosophers. It puts things into an alternative perspective from what some of us are used to, which is exactly what we need. We need to know that we can trust ourselves enough to remove ourselves from the “flock”. We need to really evaluate why our need for possessions does not make us happy and what truly does. We need to understand our anger and what is justifiable. We need to separate love from happiness just a little more because it would put added value in our relationships. If we separate the two, then we realize that we can maintain happy relationships with others. And we also need to recognize the value of hardship so that we might begin to respect sacrifice.
These are great documentaries, and this is among my favorite on the site.
January 21st, 2010 at 02:20
Thomas, there was so much in your response that I don’t agree with but I’d rather not attack you by propping up my opinion and belief as facts… The purpose of this reply is to signal to you the high horse you rode in on is still lower than the smallest hill
be well bro
un-ignorant
January 21st, 2010 at 02:23
ellebeck that’s a good point I didn’t look at it like that from the point of view of it being an a la carte of philosophers…I did learn something about Socrates and his anti-social behavior…will watch the rest this week
January 22nd, 2010 at 02:57
That doesnt change It from being true.
Also helps to watch the actual episode.
January 22nd, 2010 at 10:16
I have a problem with the overuse of metaphors to elaborate on concepts presented in this series. The selection of metaphor is important. Sometimes it is just better to speak outright on the concept itself. In the previous posts above we have a common problem with the use of metaphor; variation from the intended interpretation, also oftentimes even misinterpretation. Instead of attempting to make use of a famously quoted metaphor from the philosopher, the editor should maybe have instead come up with one with less chance of reinterpretation, OR merely do away with metaphor and describe the solution directly.
Other than this criticism, wow, what a great TV series of a Philosophy of Happiness! I’m glad that a group of people distilled the best they could six tenets that cover this philosophy. I have not seen this quality of a holistic treatment of this subject matter on American television. Bits and pieces cannot describe the whole concept. Typical American TV funding considerations eliminate any chance of a decent comprehensive series on Happiness. The pharmaceutical industry, for one, would not want to lose out on profits due to PBS viewers coming to their senses and realizing they too can attain a non-medical peace-of-mind. But that’s a discussion for another forum.
January 23rd, 2010 at 09:53
Excellent, the new age of philosophy! By watching a video/documentary instead of reading hundreds of pages of information trying to sort out the most relevant for ourselves, really makes philosophy interesting for the modern attention span lacking generation. I learned about all these philosophers in college but bringing them all together again in a concise documentary really makes it enjoyable. GREAT STUFF!
January 25th, 2010 at 01:28
Wow!!
January 25th, 2010 at 23:08
Amazing series
January 26th, 2010 at 22:26
While impressive all knowledge does and must be based on your own personal knowledge of what you learn. So to say that you are knowledgeable is to also profoundly say that you are NOT KNOWLEDGEABLE. Sterile knowledge has NO KNOWLEDGE.
What is learned must come from what we truly know and not from so based expert or authoritative persons. Taoism also states this profoundly. That due to the nature of the flow of life that knowledge is ever actually is a secure knowledge is not possible. And that simply words prove knowledge or intellect is then also not true.
January 30th, 2010 at 16:40
nice series, is it me or did anyone experience a 7 second continuous stutter … other films i have watched here on this site have not suffered from this and i can only assume it is because the 6 players are on the one page….please fix this as it is very annoying, even this comment suffered from the stutter. othewise thanks very much