The Consolation of Philosophy of Boethius

Boethius

And so for this and other reasons resting on the same ground, inasmuch as baseness of its own nature makes men wretched, it is plain that a wrong involves the misery of the doer, not of the sufferer.

The Consolation of Philosophy of Boethius was described in its introduction as being one of the most influential books of its day, claiming that every philosopher of the era owned a copy. Whether or not this is true, Boethius’ philosophy is at times mind-blowing. The book covers many topics, all under the Job-like consolation of a man who once had everything and now has nothing. Boethius had risen to incredible levels of success and wealth, but lost all due to political machinations of his world.

While in prison, sunk in despondency he composed this “Consolation” which is his reasonings as to how such a thing could happen and what his reaction ought to be. Beginning then with whether he has a right to complain or not, he develops a case which says that he lost nothing in losing everything. While it refrains from venturing into the ambiguous realms of “Vanity of Vanities,” Boethius’ Consolation still plunges into philosophical depths which I have never visited.

Specifically, the quote above, comes from a portion of the Consolation where Boethius attempts to reason out why seemingly good things happen to bad people, as well as the converse. Ultimately he comes to the realization that when an evil man succeeds in his desires (whatever they are) that man is to be more pitied than the good man who continually fails in his desires. I won’t lay out his argument here, but I assure you it is far more logical than should have been possible.

Also as an interesting note, Boethius concludes his work with a lengthy discussion of the paradox of foreknowledge and free-will. This seemed to be one of the better resolutions of the paradox, although it promised many of the same answers which are generally submitted in response to the question.