{"id":6402,"date":"2015-07-17T14:54:59","date_gmt":"2015-07-17T14:54:59","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.idrlabs.com\/articles\/?p=6402"},"modified":"2020-06-20T22:38:50","modified_gmt":"2020-06-20T22:38:50","slug":"the-greek-loves-nomos","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.idrlabs.com\/articles\/2015\/07\/the-greek-loves-nomos\/","title":{"rendered":"The Greek Loves: Nomos"},"content":{"rendered":"

\u201cWe love our country-men, our neighbours, those of the same trade, profession, and even name with ourselves. Every one of these relations \u2026 gives a title to a share of our affection.\u201d – David Hume, A Treatise of Human Nature<\/em>, II.II.IV<\/p>\n

\u201cWe give our obedience to those whom we put in positions of authority, and we obey the laws themselves, especially those which are for the protection of the oppressed, and those unwritten laws which it is an acknowledged shame to break.\u201d – Thucydides, The History of the Peloponnesian War<\/em>, II.37<\/p>\n

\u201cCustom is king of all.\u201d – Pindar, The Nomos-Basileus Fragment<\/em>, S169<\/p>\n

By Ryan Smith<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"celebritytypes14FINISHED\"<\/a><\/strong>The second of the four Greek loves is nomos<\/em>. Though not its enemy or rival, nomos<\/em> is nevertheless the antithesis of agape<\/em> in several respects: Where agape<\/em> is whim-driven and reckless, nomos<\/em> is planful and deliberate; where agape<\/em> operates on the basis of impulse and wit, nomos <\/em>attaches importance to health and good sense; where agape<\/em> places personal desires and the need for admiration above the idea of mutuality, nomos<\/em> appeals to the cooperative instinct in man, prompting him to align his personal values with the values of his community as a whole.[1]<\/p>\n

Nomos<\/em> thus places a premium on security, belonging, patriotism, and the family. It is a love that concerns itself with the observance of rules and ancestral traditions, reminding us that there are rules that we ought to live by, in life as well as in love. It is in love as nomos<\/em> that two lovers become each other\u2019s dutiful guardians, resolving to take care of each other in the short time that they are fortunate to be together on earth. Nomos<\/em> is love as a bulwark against the hardships and troubles of life. It is a serious and dutiful love.<\/p>\n

Themes of obedience are thus central to love as nomos<\/em>, but can take the form of either ruler or ruled. Just as nomos<\/em> can amount to a wish for the beloved to obey oneself, nomos<\/em> can also amount to a disposition towards obeying one\u2019s beloved. In other words, the lover who loves through nomos<\/em> can find himself on either side of the master-servant divide. Just as the nomos<\/em>-father might wish for his children to obey him, so the nomos<\/em>-children may wish for themselves to be obedient and respectful towards their father, so that they can procure their father’s love \u201cby obedience and by fulfilling his demands.\u201d[2]<\/p>\n

Since nomos <\/em>seeks to align itself with the values of one\u2019s community, it follows that there is no private virtue in love as nomos<\/em>. This was particularly true of the Greeks who lived and died together in the institution of the polis<\/em> (or city-state). The notion of shared virtues and vices may be witnessed in the trial and execution of Socrates, for example, where the (alleged) blasphemy of one man was thought capable of bringing curses upon the entire state. Given that the Greeks lived and thought this way, it is hardly a surprise to find that the Greek tradition is teeming with examples of nomos<\/em>.<\/p>\n

For our first example, let us turn to Solon, the ancient lawgiver who is reported to have said:<\/p>\n

\u201cTellus of Athens [is the happiest of all men because] while living in a well-governed state, Tellus had fine sons, and he lived to see them all have children, all of whom survived … after living as good a life as the human condition permits, he ended it in a most glorious manner: He assisted the Athenians in a battle … and after putting the enemy to flight he died nobly; and the Athenians buried him at public expense where he fell and greatly honored him.\u201d[3]<\/p>\n

In accordance with nomos<\/em>\u2019 level-headed and sensible notions of what it means to be happy, Solon looks to parameters like a loving family, vigorous offspring, and the individual\u2019s harmonious participation in his community, with the individual serving it and in turn being served by it. Again we see that there is no private virtue in love as nomos<\/em>; one cannot be good without one\u2019s community, and the community cannot be good without its members taking a healthy and serious interest in it.<\/p>\n

This mentality and notion of love is echoed in the words of statesmen and historians like Xenophon and Thucydides. Together with Solon, all three of them converge on the ideal of love as nomos<\/em>, making repeated references to decency, propriety, and good sense in their writings, with all of them acknowledging the importance of upholding the laws \u2013 both the formally acknowledged ones, but also those \u201cunwritten laws which it is an acknowledged shame to break.\u201d[4]<\/p>\n

The poet Pindar also favored love as nomos<\/em>. Besides the Nomos-Basileus <\/em>Fragment (\u201ccustom is king of all\u201d) quoted above, another memorable instance of Pindar propagating nomos<\/em> may be found in his panegyric for the winner of a contest: Amidst his praise and exaltation, Pindar nevertheless admonished the winner that \u201cmortal things suit mortals best,\u201d meaning that even as we achieve goals and move up in the world, we should not forget our proper place in relation to our rightful superiors and our community.[5] On this point, Pindar also resembles Solon, who in turn had said that \u201cexcess breeds hubris<\/em>, when great wealth comes to people whose minds are not in order.\u201d[6]<\/p>\n

A darker take on nomos <\/em>may be found in the writings of Aristotle where the love between parent and child is reduced to an onus on the child to do everything to appease its parent.[7] In the eyes of Aristotle, parents love their children because their offspring are an extension of themselves, and similarly, the reason there is value in close relations is because we are able to see ourselves in the other.[8]<\/p>\n

Good and Bad Nomos<\/strong><\/p>\n

We are now in a position to take stock of the good and bad sides of nomos<\/em>. Good nomos<\/em> is the realistic, sensible, and humble voice that reminds his beloved that there are constraints that must be observed for things to be in order and so that everyone<\/em> can be happy and not just the unfastened individuals who follow their heart\u2019s dictates with abandon. Good nomos <\/em>thus blesses its lovers with the virtues of loyalty, reliability, and a sense of trustworthiness not found in the other loves.<\/p>\n

As for bad nomos<\/em>, however, a stern and serious temperament with a predilection for order and control may easily turn possessive in the love relation and attempt to encase the lovers in a prison of blind routine. In bad<\/em> nomos<\/em>, the compassionate fellow-feeling of a benevolent pater familias<\/em> descends into the nitpicky and over-exacting mock justice of a quid pro quo<\/em> custodian who aims to control the object of his affection rather than fostering genuine affection in his partner.<\/p>\n

Nomos\u2019 Fond-Hearted Reproach of Agape<\/strong><\/p>\n

As I said in the beginning of this installment, nomos<\/em> is the antithesis (but not the enemy) of agape<\/em>. Far from being enemies, they are in fact interlinked through the Heraclitean law of opposites running counter to each other so as to form a hidden harmony:[9] Where the unmitigated whims of agape <\/em>would throw all responsibility to the wind, nomos<\/em> reminds the beloved that it is necessary to plan not just for today but also for tomorrow. Where nomos<\/em>, left entirely to its own devices, would soon turn everything into a prison of cut-and-dry routine, agape<\/em> crawls out from under and wonders at the world anew. Through this balance, nomos<\/em> finds a fond-hearted joy in kindly reprimanding the spirit of agape<\/em> as if to say \u201cyou will never make it without me.\u201d Thus we soon find Thucydides professing that the excesses of poets \u201cbring delight for only a moment,\u201d or that while ear-catching agape-<\/em>orators may talk in a honeyed tongue about doing the right thing, real virtue consists not in talking, but in acting; in actually\u00a0doing<\/em> the right thing.[10]<\/p>\n

As in the previous installment, we end by calling attention to two examples of nomos<\/em> in philosophy: Roman Stoicism and David Hume.<\/p>\n

Nomos in Roman Stoicism<\/strong><\/p>\n

In contradistinction to the earlier Greek Stoicism of Zeno, Cleanthes, and Chrysippus, the Roman Stoicism of Seneca, Epictetus, and Marcus Aurelius relinquished most of the Greek speculations on metaphysics and cosmology that had originally been inherent in that\u00a0school. Instead, the Roman Stoics directed their attention to existential concerns: How to live decently and virtuously and how to develop a personality that is ideally suited for doing so.<\/p>\n

For the Roman Stoics, the key to happiness and a virtuous life was a\u00a0mature and level-headed acceptance\u00a0of the human condition with all its toil and misfortune. Of the fundamental reality\u00a0that every human being possesses\u00a0limited capabilities and a limited lifespan and that, sooner or later, he\u00a0will<\/em> encounter these limitations. Far from the childlike denial of these realities, advanced by\u00a0agape<\/em>,\u00a0there is a resigned and distinguished submission to the natural order of things. To nomos<\/i>, the prerequisite for\u00a0a dignified and happy life is\u00a0the knowledge that everything is determined by the realities of\u00a0fate, and in nomos,<\/em>\u00a0it is that awareness\u00a0that gives rise to\u00a0the right, responsible, and dignified attitude in human beings<\/span>.[11]\u00a0It is for this reason that\u00a0<\/span>Epictetus asks us \u201cnot to seek to have events happen as [we]\u00a0want them to, but instead to want them to happen as they do<\/em> happen” in order for us to live well.[12] A similar insight was summed up\u00a0by Seneca when he decreed that\u00a0“Fate leads the willing along and drags the reluctant in its wake.”[13]<\/p>\n

Nomos in Hume<\/strong><\/p>\n

David Hume\u00a0also\u00a0seems to have thrown his lot in with love as\u00a0nomos<\/em> when he characterized the wheels and gears of the love relation as operating on the basis of \u201cacquaintance and resemblance.\u201d[14] In fact, Hume does an outstanding job of\u00a0summing\u00a0nomos<\/em> up “from the outside”\u00a0in the following passage:<\/p>\n

\u201cThe mind finds a satisfaction and ease in … objects, to which it is accustomed, and naturally prefers them to others, which, though, perhaps, in themselves more valuable, are less known to it. By the same quality of the mind we are seduced into a good opinion …\u00a0of all … that belong to us. They appear in a stronger light; are more agreeable; and consequently fitter subjects of pride and vanity, than any other.\u201d[15]<\/p>\n

Here Hume provides us with an awareness and acceptance of those mechanics inherent in\u00a0nomos<\/em>, which are\u00a0often derogated in the modern world, but which are nevertheless part of the human condition and (for almost all of history) essential to what it means to be human. Little wonder, then, that Hume was a fond admirer of Pericles and an avid reader of Thucydides; ancients who shared his vision of the human condition.[16] Hume also expressed the importance that nomos<\/em> attaches to the well-being of its\u00a0community and its experiential and personalized locus of affection when he said that: \u201cWe love our country-men, our neighbors, those of the same trade, profession, and even name with ourselves. Every one of these relations … gives a title to a share of our affection.\u201d[17]<\/p>\n

***<\/p>\n

Image in the article commissioned from artist Will Rosales.<\/em><\/p>\n

REFERENCES
\n<\/strong>Fromm: The Nature of Love<\/em> Harper Perennial 2006
\nGottlieb: The Dream of Reason<\/em> Penguin Books 2001
\nSinger: The Nature of Love: Plato to Luther<\/em> Random House 1966<\/p>\n

NOTES<\/strong><\/p>\n

\n

[1] Singer: The Nature of Love p. 292
\n[2] Fromm: The Art of Loving p. 62
\n[3] Herodotus: The Histories 1.30 cf. Sophocles: The Tyndareus Fragment TGF 646
\n[4] Xenophon: Memoirs of Socrates 1.2.64, 1.5.3, 2.1.19, 3.4.7-12, 4.1.2, 4.5.10, cf.: Thucydides: The History of the Peloponnesian War: II.37
\n[5] Pindar: For Phylakidas of Aigina: Winner in the Pankration
\n[6] Solon: Commentary on his own Reforms, W5-6, lines 9-10
\n[7] Aristotle: The Nichomean Ethics 1163b
\n[8] Aristotle: The Nichomean Ethics 1161b
\n[9] Heraclitus: Fragment DK22 B51
\n[10] Thucydides: The History of the Peloponnesian War II.41, II.43
\n[11] Gottlieb: The Dream of Reason p. 286, cf.\u00a0Aurelius: The Meditations IV.10
\n[12] Epictetus: Encheiridion \u00a78
\n[13] Seneca the Younger: Epistle 107.11
\n[14] Hume: A Treatise of Human Nature II.II.IV
\n[15] Hume: A Treatise of Human Nature II.II.IV
\n[16] Hume: Essay XIII: Of Eloquence, note 21 cf. An Enquiry into the Principles of Morals II.I, cf.\u00a0Thucydides: The History of the Peloponnesian War II.35
\n[17] Hume: A Treatise on Human Nature II.II.IV<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

\u201cWe love our country-men, our neighbours, those of the same trade, profession, and even name with ourselves. Every one of these relations \u2026 gives a title to a share of our affection.\u201d – David Hume, A Treatise of Human Nature, II.II.IV \u201cWe give our obedience to those whom we put in positions of authority, and[\u2026] Continue Reading<\/i><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-6402","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-psychology"],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.idrlabs.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6402","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.idrlabs.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.idrlabs.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.idrlabs.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.idrlabs.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6402"}],"version-history":[{"count":29,"href":"https:\/\/www.idrlabs.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6402\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":6482,"href":"https:\/\/www.idrlabs.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6402\/revisions\/6482"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.idrlabs.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6402"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.idrlabs.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6402"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.idrlabs.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6402"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}