The Bachelors of Egypt is a contemporary novel set in Egypt 2011 that covers multiple philosophical topics within its dialogues and incidents. Post the Egyptian Revolution of 2011, politics, economics, philosophy, sociology… gained massive interest among members of the middle class, and were casually integrated within daily debates and discussions.
Book sample:
Another book currently available for pre-order:
Among the prominent figures of philosophy, those who tackled
sensitive issues at their own times became the most popular in the Egyptian
Society. Philosophical approaches and views of Socrates, Plato, Machiavelli, Nietzsche…
were highly consumable.
In chapter 2, Ali Adel, a media student at TUC was defending
his side of an argument by reflecting on Socrates’ legacy:
“At Socrates’
trial, he would have been offered a lighter sentence like exile or jail time if
he admitted to the crimes that he didn’t commit. In his speech, he stated that
he doesn’t certainly know whether “Death” would be harmful or not, unlike jail
or exile which he was sure of their harm, he chose the unknown, instead of
choosing a lighter penalty. With our mighty professor, I feel like I’m
Socrates, and I have to defend myself, when the State’s elites have already
decided to kill me anyway,” Ali Adel, 2011, The Bachelors of Egypt
Book sample:
The Bachelors of Egypt on Amazon
The Bachelors of Egypt on Amazon
Socrates’ trial scene as described in “The Dialogues of
Plato” resembles plenty of less-critical situations in our lives. Being judged “Guilty”
before a trial begins seems like a redundant incident within different contexts
of social interaction.
Students like Ali, may choose to defy their professors’ logic,
whenever applicable, while other students may simply choose to glorify those
professors, out of “Respect”, “Fear”, or motivated by a hypocritical sense of self-interest.
Socrates’ Legacy:
Simply stated, the brilliant man never authored a book, he
was neither rich nor powerful, but he's definitely a game-changer within the
scope of philosophy. He used to walk around, gather people and express his
views on multiple existential matters, and they usually found him amusing.
Socrates was declared an enemy of state, and was judged to
death accordingly, which brings up the question is: how did his opinions
survive, if he never published a book? Socrates had many students, Plato
was the most remarkable; as he used to challenge and question all views
presented by his tutor.
When Plato started authoring "The Dialogues of
Plato" he included his teacher's philosophical approach, along with plenty
of his opinions on multiple issues.
Unlike Socrates, Plato founded his own academy, he had many
students... Aristotle was the most prominent, the man excelled in different
fields; impacting both science and philosophy by providing the basis and fundamentals
for modern philosophers and scientists across fields.
Years later, Aristotle became the teacher of Alexander the
great (before becoming great), the man who ruled most of the world. It's all
about a philosophical legacy, an approach and a set of tactics that survived
against tyranny.
Socrates, the man who was unfairly sentenced to death by the
state’s leaders is the teacher- of the teacher- of the teacher- of the man who led
the state to achieve goals beyond imagination.
Beyond Good and Evil:
This same dialogue, other dialogues within the same book, and
plenty of similar real life situations could be analyzed using Friedrich Nietzsche’s
philosophical approach toward “Morality”.
- Who determines morality?
- Is it all a matter of power?
In the lines of the unorthodox book, he moved forward to destructively
criticize the values of Truth, Self-awareness, Free-will… which were all held
by past philosophers, replacing them all with “The Will to Power”. According to
Nietzsche, “New Philosophers” should deny the presence of a universal Moral
code.
From Nietzsche’s angel and from that of other philosophers
who followed the same approach of “Beyond Good and Evil”, Morality is just a
tool used by powerful men to dominate a society, and find the legitimate basis to
harm less powerful individuals within this society
- Parents define Morality within a household
- Governments define Morality within a nation
- Priests define Morality within a church
If one would agree to consider “The Will to Power” as the
only motivation for every single action taken by a human being, analysis of
incidents like the one mentioned above, would become a much easier task.
Using Nietzsche’s approach to reflect on the same quote:
- “The mighty professor” mentioned above utilized his position/authority to oppress these students… with an apparent “Will to Power”.
- Ali’s colleagues/team mates were trying to keep him from defying the professor’s logic on every occasion. We can conclude that each of them had “self-interest” at heart, regardless of their own perceptions of the professor’s claims and criticism. In such case, “A” grades would be considered as the conventional means for these students to showcase their competence to potential employers post-graduation. Based on their own approach, they’ll need to please the professor, and feed his ego, as an easier/more convenient path to gain these grades. When these grades would help them gain post-graduate scholarships or start working for reputable institutions, which will in turn influence their future in terms of financial income, power, and image among members of the society, the link with the “Will to Power” could easily be established.
- Ali might be opposing the professor, defying his logic, and articulately expressing his opinion by reflecting on Socrates’ trial… just to dominate his team mates, showcase his leadership skills, and gain some sense of power by challenging the only person in charge of setting a moral code within a lecture hall. With that perspective, even Ali would be motivated by the “Will to Power”.
Characters aren’t judged within the novel, their opinions, actions,
and reactions to different incidents are rather displayed for the reader to reassess
and rethink about the main topics covered.
Book sample:
From a personal point of view, I’d generally believe that
human beings are complicated creatures, with multiple layers that can’t all be
uncovered at once. If the “Will to Power” is the only motivation for all of our
actions, we wouldn’t have needed psychology, sociology, and a list of other
sciences to help understand human behavior. Maybe a single textbook for each of
these fields would have adequately displayed the relevance of our single
motivation to every possible action/reaction of ours within the most common
life situations.
One can agree with some of these great philosophers’ views on
the world, and disagree with others, you may spot certain deficiencies, but you
can’t possibly disregard the presence of logic in their claims. Especially when
noting how these men used to disagree:
- Plato continuously disagreed with Socrates while discussing various topics, yet he was considered his “Prize Student”, and Plato called him “the wisest, and justest, and best of all men whom I have ever known”.
- Following the same manner, Plato’s “Prize Student”, Aristotle disagreed with him on many views.
- Nietzsche disagreed with almost everyone, whether alive or dead at his time J
Back to Personal Views:
“People” are the only reason for other people’s problems and
inconveniences, and are also the main reason for their happiness, inspirations,
and joyful moments. It’s unfair to classify human beings while placing them
into boxes of Good and Evil, yet it’s illogical to view them all
as greedy individuals who only care about possessing power.
A few days ago, I’ve experienced a situation that can’t
possibly be analyzed with Nietzsche’s philosophical approach. On July 29th,
“Martha Holiday” was the first reader to purchase my book on Kobo, she was also
the first to post a review on the same platform. She unintentionally reviewed
the book as “Awful” on the same night of purchase, she tried to remove it, but
the company didn’t allow it… On August 4th, she repurchased the
book, just to post a new review.
“This is to
rectify prior review which was meant for a different purchase. The company
didn't want to delete it even though I informed them within minutes that I've
made a mistake; An interesting take on issues and modern Egypt very different
than UK. Please accept my sincere apology. Martha”
She had to repurchase the product, and “repay” accordingly. If
she can do that for an indie author that she never met, and may never meet, one
must believe that there’s much more to human beings than just the “Will to
Power”.
No comments:
Post a Comment