#920 Jean-Manuel Roubineau: The Dangerous Life and Ideas of Diogenes the Cynic

00:00 Ricardo Lopes: Hello everybody. Welcome to a new episode of the Decent. I'm your host as always, Ricardo Loops. And today I'm joined by Doctor Jean Manuel Rubin. He is a professor of Ancient History at University. He is a classic, a scholar who specializes in Greek antiquity, the historical anthropology of sport and the history of social inequalities. And today we're focusing on his book, The Dangerous Life and Ideas Of Diogenes, The Cynic. So Jean Manuel, welcome to the show. It's a pleasure to everyone. Thank

00:35 Jean-Manuel Roubineau: you. Thank you. It's a

00:36 Ricardo Lopes: pleasure to be there. So, just before we get into diogenes self, just to get a little bit of historical background, historical context to the period where he lived. So uh back then, uh te tell us about this idea about how, how apparently back then uh many ancient Greek philosophers thought of philosophy as a way of life. And why perhaps this is relevant for discussing uh diogenes philosophy.

01:17 Jean-Manuel Roubineau: Yes. Uh You have different uh uh form of uh Greek and Roman philosophies who are conceived as a uh ethic philosophy, meaning philosophy of life, uh philosophy, which is providing a kind of uh uh moral compass, moral scheme uh to uh organize your choices and to decide what is wrong and what is right in life. And the, the, the maybe the beginning of this movement is uh with Socrates. And the Diogenes is a pupil of Antisthenes, which is who is a pupil of Socrates. So you have this kind of Greek tradition of uh um building um schools of thought uh which are a way of life, ways of life at the same time. And cynicism is strongly based on these ideas, ideas that you cannot be only uh a philosopher producing ideas, but you have to uh leave them in your everyday life. So you cannot be only a scholar. You have to be a kind of agent of your philosophy.

02:24 Ricardo Lopes: And what was basically the context of the wider Mediterranean world back in the fourth century BC, which is apparently when Diogenes lived.

02:39 Jean-Manuel Roubineau: Yeah, he's born at the end of the fifth century BC and he died during the 300 twenties uh around that. Um So, yeah, he's a man of the fourth century BC. Uh It's a, it's an opening world, meaning that there is a kind of very dynamic international economy at the time and lots of conflicts too around the Aegean Sea. And the thing is we have what is interesting is there are lots of foreigners moving from one city to the other and diogenes was one of them because he suffered from an exile. He had to exile from his city, Sy up on the Black Greek City and is one of these many thousands of foreigners going from one city to another. And the fourth century BC is really a moment when we see lots of foreigners in different cities, we cannot really observe that before. There were some foreigners at the fifth or the sixth century BC in the cities, cities were not closed communities but maybe not so many. Mhm So maybe that's, that's the first thing. The second thing is you have at the same time in the fourth century, you have very little cities, meaning with 3000 inhabitants. And you have also very large ones like Syracuse like Alexandria at the end of the first century, like Rhodes, like Athens and Corinth and Athens and Corinth were two of the largest cities of the time. And Diogenes choose to live alternately in each of them. He was living during the, during the the winter in Athens and during the summer in in, in Corinth. So he was living in very large city which are very specific kind of city, city with a lot of different nationalities, people from all over the Mediterranean world.

04:45 Ricardo Lopes: So tell us a little bit about perhaps what were some of the main events in the life of diogenes that you think really played the biggest role in shaping his philosophy? Because I mean, I know that he was exiled at a certain point and then he leave the situation there in different cities. So tell us a little bit about why, why that happened and why he basically had to be moving between different cities because I guess that then later on plays a role in aspects of his way of thinking and philosophy.

05:23 Jean-Manuel Roubineau: Um YEAH, he is, he is in exile. So he, he has to flee from his city for a very specific reason. He was involved with his father uh in a kind of uh money counterfeiting affair case. And uh he had to go away to avoid prison or even execution. So he left his city. We don't know exactly when, but it could be in the 300 sixties around that, that he had to leave the city. And I think his exile in the fourth century BC doesn't mean the same maybe or maybe it means the same as today. It's a very hard uh experiment of life. It's considered by ancient people as the kind of ultimate uh detachment, uh ultimate loss. Uh Because when I was talking about lots of foreigners in the 400 century world, most of them were coming back on a regular basis to their city, their original cities, they were just moving from one to the other doing some uh trade, but they were back to the city. And then you have exiles and exile is a very complicated thing because then it means you lose your complete social environment, you lose the ability to get buried when you die in your, the earth, the ground of your motherland, which means a lot to an ancient Greek of the, of the time. So this, this is the first really traumatic experience of diogenes uh life. And um this is the beginning, in fact of his philosophical career, we don't know if uh two months, six months, two years, five years uh happened before or between the exile and the beginning of the philosophical life. But we know that there is a kind of very strong link between the two episodes. Uh The thing is when you lose attached to your, to your city, uh you lose your, your main belonging, you were suppose in a Greek world, you are supposed to belong to your family, to your neighborhood, to your village, to your city mainly. And then you, you are apart from this uh belonging and this kind of experience of detachment uh had a strong effect on uh um the way uh diogenes conceived his philosophy because cynicism is a philosophy of detachment. You are, you are supposed to refuse uh every kind of belonging. You're not supposed to get married, you're not supposed to build a family. Uh Family is a cultural construct. City is a cultural construct. So uh there is a, there is a clear link between the experience of exile and the, the way diogenes shaped uh cynicism philosophy, cynic philosophy.

08:26 Ricardo Lopes: So this is one of the main ways we got into the idea of cosmopolitan, cosmopolitanism, right. Yeah,

08:34 Jean-Manuel Roubineau: this is one of the routes. Uh There is maybe a second uh context uh element which is Sinop is the original city. Is a native uh city, is a city on the south shore of the Black Sea, uh meaning uh north of Asia Minor. Uh And here at the time, there are lots of um barbarian uh ethnic. Many of them were in the Persian Empire and were, which are in contact with uh Syn O or threatening Syn up on the other Greek cities of the Black Sea, meaning that very early diogenes had a personal experience of the relationship with other culture, other ethnic non-greek uh people. Uh So, so the, the cosmopolitanism, which is uh which is credited of the invention um the cosmopolitanism uh is at the same time, can be understood as a, as a consequence of his exile. And at the same time, uh of his experience of uh barbarian uh ethnic and conflicts in Asia Minor.

09:45 Ricardo Lopes: Yes. And by the way back then, because uh in the kind of world we live in nowadays, things work, I guess very differently. But back then moving, for example, between cities and between states, I mean, how hard or easy was it? Because I mean, I imagine that back then people didn't have really documentation and but then when it came to, for example, the social and political status of an exile or someone was not considered a citizen. I mean, how did it work back then? I would imagine it would vary between, for example, city states in Greece, how would they deal with those kinds of people? But how was it back then? A living that way?

10:35 Jean-Manuel Roubineau: Yes. Yes, there are different situations. Every city is a kind of, is a city state. So it's a kind of very little nation if you want. So, so, so you have a body of citizens. They are the one with the power, the political power, uh and the the uh judiciary power. So they, they go, they, they are working in courts, they are working in the assembly, in the councils, et cetera, then you are foreigners. So if you are in exile, uh the normal situation, if you are free, if you're not a slave, the normal situation is, is is that you will be a resident for now. Uh THEN in some very specific situations, some cities including Athens um build some uh like exclusive personal status from uh for exiles coming from a city that is a kind of ally city. So when you have a civil war in an allied city and when the democratic people are exiled from their city, it has happened in the fifth and the fourth century, we see that Athens built some very um um exclusive with some privileged uh personal status for this group of exiles. But this didn't happen to diogenes when he arrived in Athens or in Corinth, he was only just a kind of resident foreigner. So you have to register, uh and you have to pay taxes as a resident foreigner, which is very important. It's not very expensive, but it's very important because if you don't, you are suspected to try to pretend you're a citizen. If you don't pay the foreigner tax, then you are, you can suffer a trial and there are some heavy risk uh with that coming. So uh the the situation where you are moving from one city to the other is is that you will be uh if you are there for some days or some weeks, you will be like a provisory foreigner and then there is no administration, but you have no rights either. Meaning that if you are threatened, beaten, stolen, you have no way to defend yourself in court. Uh But then when you are a resident for Rena, then you have a kind of protection from the city, but you have no political right, no judiciary, right? Meaning you, you cannot, uh you cannot vote in a court, you cannot vote in an assembly, you cannot be a magistrate. So that's the situation for free people. Of course, for, if you are suspected to be a slave, then the situation is even different.

13:03 Ricardo Lopes: And by the way, diogenes himself was a slave for a little while.

13:08 Jean-Manuel Roubineau: Yes. Uh DURING the 300 forties, it's been abducted by pirates, which was a very not, not common that uh not unusual event. There are lots of pirates in the Aegean and Mediterranean Sea at the time. And even Alexander, the Great had to uh to fight against pirates around crete for some time. Uh And uh yes, so the pirates were attacking villages, they were abducting people and then uh two ways. The first way is they were asking for a ransom and they were giving back the people they had abducted if they got the ransom. First situation, second situation, they were um going away from the place where they did the abduction and selling everyone on a market slave. That's what happened to diogenes. It's been uh it's been sold to a Corinthian uh Man Xenia. And after some years he's been released, freed and franchised. So, yes, he, he had an exper a personal experience of uh uh slavery. He's not the only philosopher who had that experience, but he's one, he's one of them and lots of people had this experience and this fear to be abducted by pirates. Yes.

14:26 Ricardo Lopes: Mhm And I mean, of course, I imagine that he was exposed to different cultures. So was the uh cultural relativist in any way.

14:40 Jean-Manuel Roubineau: Yes. Uh Yeah, in a way you could, you could say that he, he, he, he had the idea that lots of uh things in everyday social life were culturally, culturally built. So uh he was uh looking as most of social conventions as convention on social customs as customs, meaning for diogenes, marriage was a cultural uh custom, family was a cultural uh custom wealth as a cultural custom. So in a way, uh when you develop this kind of uh um philosophy, you could, you could say you are a cultural relativist meaning that you are. But the thing is he was, he was not interested in comparing culture was interesting and uh in opposing culture and nature.

15:33 Ricardo Lopes: Yeah. And basically, I guess that through his life experiences, it became easier for him to basically question norms.

15:43 Jean-Manuel Roubineau: He spent most of his life doing that. Absolutely. Doing, trying to uh to unbuilt uh uh norms and to, to not, not always to contest them but to question them to, to make people understand that they were only customs norms and they were not facts uh by nature. So it was a, it is a big part of uh uh cynicism uh that the to, to, to point at uh culturally built uh ways of life.

16:17 Ricardo Lopes: Yes. Mhm A and the uh in the book, you also talk about how one of his ideas was about attacking uh power, glory and the obs the obsession some people have with social status. Could you tell us about that

16:35 Jean-Manuel Roubineau: uh attack, you said glory and of social status

16:39 Ricardo Lopes: and obsession with social status.

16:42 Jean-Manuel Roubineau: In fact, for diogenes, there are important matters, philosophical ones and they are superficial matters and to Search for power is a kind of super, super act to search for glory. If you are an athlete or political um um leader or a military leader is a, is a superficial one. And to search for better status too, meaning that uh for dere, if you are a slave, you don't need to search for freedom. If you are a foreigner, you don't need to search for citizenship. If you are a citizen, you don't need to search for uh kind of better political position in your city. All of these are superficial goals. They are not helping you uh in a philosophical way to behave uh better uh without um pursuing uh artificial goals. So uh one of the parts of cynicism was to point at those um artificial uh artificial goals and intentions. You are supposed to go back to what is essential, what is necessary needs uh not nothing uh extravagant and the power is considered as a kind of uh useless uh goal and glory to a athletes are attacked on a regular basis because they are uh two diogenes, eyes focused uh on uh the search of glory instead of being focused on the search of philosophy.

18:19 Ricardo Lopes: And of course, he ended up living in poverty most of his life. And in the book, he talked about how he distinguished between the fact of poverty and the feeling of poverty. So, what's the distinction there?

18:37 Jean-Manuel Roubineau: Yes. So it's uh the distinction is very popular in the philosophical field of the end of the fifth century and the beginning of the fourth century. So, eogene is like uh uh um appropriating an idea that has always been uh that, that has been, I'm sorry, that has been formulated before him, by Socrates, by uh antisthenes, by Xenophobe. So it's a very popular idea uh which is the distinction between the fact of poverty and the feeling of poverty, meaning uh indigenous point of view, you have to make a distinction between people who are uh like uh really poor because they have absolutely nothing to live and survive and people uh who feel poor because there are more needs that they have means, meaning that you can uh extremely wealthy, you can be one of the wealthiest men of your city. But if you have uh piled uh lots of obligations, uh financial ones, personal ones, maybe you are in difficulty to face all these obligations. So, uh the, the idea is that you have to, to see if someone is rich or poor, you have to look at what he needs on a regular basis. So he does he have a frugal life or not? And what are his means? And even if you have big means, if you have bigger needs because you are organizing banquets for your friends all the time because you are financing very expensive um programs in the city, et cetera. Maybe you will suffer from a feeling of poverty, even if not, if on the paper, you're not poor at all. So that's a kind of very interesting distinction because it's, it's been um uh it's still in use in uh contemporary sociology, the distinction between fact and feeling of poverty. And it came from uh those from the Socratic school. In fact, Socrates, Antisthenes xenophobia, genist. So yes, and this is linked with um this question, in fact, is linked with the um a kind of revolution in the intellectual world of the 4th, 5th, 4th century BC, which is the part of the idea of economy. Um AT the end of the fifth century and the beginning of the fourth. So around 400 BC, we have a series of new words, words uh in the Greek lexicon were appearing in the language uh meaning uh econom, uh economical, economical, economia, economia, we gave that gave birth to our economy, uh econom uh which mean someone which mean a manager of his household, uh econo, which means uh someone uh who has some qualities in management in his private household. Uh What I'm trying to tell is at the end of the fifth and beginning of the first century, there are some new words to describe a reality which is new to Greek Ice at the time, which is the uh economic management. Before that nobody has ever developed a kind of uh thought about this economic world. And suddenly uh it appears to Greeks that it is, it is something you have to understand. And uh of course, as it's the same time when you have a new discipline appearing, there is no economist at the time. So all um the people who are thinking about this new economy are philos of philosophers. So every uh uh philosophical school of the time uh has produced some economic treaties about this question of management. What it is to uh to be rich, to be poor, what it, how do you organize your household or how do you manage your slave? How do you choose your wife, et cetera, which are considered as economic questions

22:47 Ricardo Lopes: a and related to his uh to diogenes econom, economic ideas. There's also this idea of his criticizing a system governing the accumulation and distribution of wealth. Right?

23:03 Jean-Manuel Roubineau: Yes, absolutely. In different ways uh In diogenes, ice money, coins are a cultural construct. They are useless. So we shouldn't need coins to, to trade, for example. So that's maybe the first level. But the second level is that wealth is not a goal. You, you, you shouldn't try to get richer because it's useless. You should do the opposite. You should try to feel rich by um decreasing your, your needs. So, in the relationship between means and needs, uh it says, OK, people are focused on increasing their means. They shouldn't, they should be focused on decreasing their needs. And this is cynic uh way of life. You are supposed to live a very simple, very frugal, very aic oric uh life. So yes, that's, that's the idea that's uh wealth on the field of wealth and patrimony and owning uh is uh something you have to fight against. This is useless and this is even more useless in diogenes eyes because you're not supposed to build a family on the dynasty. So in Greeks eyes, you are supposed to build wealth patrimony household because you want to give it to your heirs. So this is a family matter, you are supposed to, to transfer to provide, to increase the family wealth and to give it to the next generation. And diogenes says we don't need to make kids and and we don't need to uh transfer any kind of wealth. So everything is linked in a way, the the the need for our family and the need for the source of wealth are both uh contested in scenic point of view

24:54 Ricardo Lopes: and related to the distribution of wealth. Did we care about economic inequality? For example?

25:03 Jean-Manuel Roubineau: No. Uh YOU couldn't say that really. Uh THERE is no uh um social conscience in a cynicism in a way we could say that in a, in a, in a modern world. Uh FOR, for diogenes, this is an individual question that is not really like a social categories uh that we have to improve the situation as the way to improve your situation is to live a philosophical life. So it's not uh um social aid won't help you. Uh Anyway, social aid in the Greek City is a very, very tiny uh uh matter for everyone. But apart from that endogenous uh point of view, like you said, with the fact of poverty and the feeling of poverty, that's what you have to deal with is this uh ability to feel rich and this is a very individual matter, you have to face it by yourself. So as long as you don't, again, for, for cynics, you, you are not supposed to belong to any kind of category, including social category.

26:08 Ricardo Lopes: And of course, he was also a mendicant philosopher, he practiced mendicancy. And back then, how did uh Greeks look at that way of living? I mean, was that also a sort of violation of some norms in Greek society?

26:30 Jean-Manuel Roubineau: Yeah, you could say that. Yes. Uh It's uh um for Greek of the first century, a beggar is a parasite basically. Uh It is considered as a parasite because the main um uh the main social value in the relationship is, is what they call Philia, which is a known philosophical concept. We uh we often uh translate it by friendship, but the the closest translation would be will be reciprocity. Uh So uh what does it mean? It means that you are in a world where there is no social security, there is no insurance, meaning that the level of protection on, on security and safe social safety you can get is heavily linked with the number of um reciprocal relationship. You build with people, with your friends, with your family, with your neighbors, with uh the citizens of your city. So uh you build relationship. What does it mean in everyday life? It means that if you have a sacrifice, you sacrifice an animal because you have, you are uh organizing the wedding of your daughter, for example. Uh THEN if you don't invite your neighbor, you will come to your neighbor and you will give your neighbor a piece of the sacrifice because maybe in two months, in three months, you will have a problem. You will be on your field and you will break a tool and you will need your neighbor to, to borrow uh a tool. So uh um that's, that's the way Greeks understand social life. You are, you are giving to people and they are giving to you when you need something. So it works in the family. It works with one. It, it works with neighbors. The thing is uh um beggars, they don't, they are not part of that uh like virtual circle. They are away from that because they never give anything. Basically, they only ask for arms. So uh they are considered as a um lost causes if you want. There is a uh a Greek proverb saying something like uh uh not even uh um not even a beggar's parents or his friends. Uh So So, meaning that you, if you are a beggar, you are alone, you are by yourself. Uh So they are the, the, the basic conception of a man decency is that uh beggars are parasites. And then cynics come and they change the, the, the pattern. They say uh that of course, they ask for something, they ask for arms, but in exchange, they provide philosophy, they provide advice, they provide wisdom, they provide clarity of thinking, et cetera. So they are giving something in return. And that is a Greek word to say, to ask for S uh E and there is a Greek word to say to give something in return at it. Meaning that in the, in the Greek conception, in the cynic conception, I mean, uh the fact of begging is not a parasite attitude. It's a kind of give and take attitude. So that is what is really new with uh um uh cynic uh philosophy. It is um giving birth to the, the idea that a beggar uh the life of begging can be a life of philosophy.

29:58 Ricardo Lopes: And by the way, of course, we tend to associate diogenes very much with the with these jar. I mean, many times people talk about it as being a barrel and not a jar, we can get into that. But why is the jar so important as a sort of symbol of his life? Why do people associate him so much with the jar?

30:25 Jean-Manuel Roubineau: Um BE first, it's a symbol first. It's a symbol uh of uh um of frugality of uh life of uh uh economy. Uh A very uh uh OIC life, very simple life. So that's first, that's a symbol. But the thing is in real life, that's the way it could be for some people. Some people were living in empty graves, in cabins, in huts, in tents and in jars. And we know that from the fifth century during the Peronne Asian War, we have some uh text mainly a text from toy leaders, the historian, the main historian of the Peronne Asian War. Uh AND he's explaining and he's giving details about the way um Athenian people had to leave when they took refuge inside the walls of the city in 431. And we have information about these temporary shelters, temporary accommodations and it is empty graves. It is tents and it is jars. They use jars because those jars are what Greek call pit oil are very large, very high ceramic jars. They can be more than 2 m high. We still have some, some of them thanks to the archaeology of it. And uh uh they can be very high. They were used to store food, to store uh uh grain cereals and different kind of uh different kind of uh of food. And most of the time they were put inside the ground like uh uh you have to dig to put them half of them in the ground to, to make them stable and then you could use them in a crisis situation to live in it. So, and that's what diogenes did in Athens in the, in the edges of the Ara, uh, in the metro sanctuary. He had a jar and he decided to leave to live there. No, we have no idea how the jar arrived there, but it must have been a jar from the sanctuary and then it was empty and uh someone maybe cleaned it, maybe not. Uh ANYWAY, he, he used it uh to, to live there for, for some time. So it's not a tale or legend. It's a uh it's a normal um uh crisis uh housing in certain, in certain context. So when uh when Diogenes in the 300 sixties, 300 fifties did that in Athens, lots of Athenians had already seen some people living in this kind of drought. So this is no surprise. Uh FOR them, this is not a kind of abnormal way of living. It's not usual on the Agora, but it's not totally uh unique or crazy. And then uh the story has uh changed in Roman times when uh Latin philosophers and Latin writers began to tell Diogenes story in Latin. And they had to translate from Phos the Greek work to the draw to a kind of uh Latin equivalent. And they used uh do mainly uh which is a way to say barrel, uh a cask, wooden cask. And uh but when they did that translation, they knew they were uh um they knew that the original word was meaning ceramic jar. They were just adjusting to their uh l uh But then after that, the memory of that got lost in the way. And after, during some centuries, we've been uh describing painting, showing, telling that diogenes lived in a barrel. So we have lots of uh modern paintings, for example, with uh Diogenes in um in a barrel and lots of books talking about Diogenes barrel, which is a pure le for, this is a pure legend because when Diogenes was alive in the first century BC, there was no wooden barrel on earth. The, the first uh cask um the first barrels uh to store wine uh appeared. Uh We have some archaeological data and we have some text appeared during the first century BC. So basically 300 years after the Eugene's life. So he has never lived in a barrel in Athens. He lived in a jar and this jar is uh uh is uh at the same time, a kind of um he is reflecting the place of the, the role of ceramic stuff in everyday life. There is a lot of ceramic uh vessel in uh in uh everyday life in Athens. At the time, there is a huge ceramic uh production area in the north of uh of Athens called Krauss.

35:21 Ricardo Lopes: Mhm. And of course, as a foreigner and a mendicant philosopher back then, of course, he had very low social status. But I guess that a class of people that probably were even lower in social status than him were the slaves. And so, because we've already mentioned, hear that he was a slave in himself for a while. What ideas did he have about slaves? I mean, how did they think about them? Did they think that they were like other common citizens? They, they were the same as other people or not?

36:01 Jean-Manuel Roubineau: Yeah. The, the uh uh to diogenes mind it is status is irrelevant in a way. So you are as free as you want to be, whatever is your status. So there is no like a political claim uh against, against slavery. Um But the idea is that you um what is interesting uh diogenes is less slavery than dependence. You are um you are free if you do not depend, if you don't depend of any kind of uh uh specific uh need. So you have to, to build uh the strongest autonomy, you can the strongest freedom and this you can do inside a slave life. So the fact that you are a slave doesn't mean that you cannot live a philosophical life in diogenes uh point of view. So uh slavery in a way is not a very um important matter in a way that uh cynics use it mainly as a model as a metaphorical model to dependence. You are, the point is to try not to be depend of dependent of anything. Meaning that if you are a master and if you own many slaves, but if your full life depends on your slave, if you are unable to do anything by yourself, and if you have a level of comfort that is uh strongly based on the way you own slave, you are in fact more a slave than your slaves. So, so in uh in diogenes point of view, again, it's a question of uh we would say to the per personal development. Uh YOU, you, you have to be able to uh to build uh a kind of space of freedom in your life. Whatever is your status. Of course, if you have a free status, it will be easier, but uh it will come with more obligations sometimes. So maybe it will be more difficult in a way. So when you say that uh slaves are even a harder situation that uh um foreigners, in fact with uh beggars, we, we could ask the question because in a way laves there are some uh they have some reciprocal relationship with the master with all the slaves. So they can, they can have kind of uh some protections in a way that beggars won't get from anyone. So, so sometimes uh slaved as other better lives than beggars or may maybe a more protected one even.

38:36 Ricardo Lopes: Mhm Yeah. Perhaps I was thinking more about the sort of modern point of view where being a slave would be worse than being a beggar because at least the beggar would have more freedom. Yeah.

38:52 Jean-Manuel Roubineau: Yeah. But you're on paper, you're absolutely right on paper. The, the worst stages is to be a state. But the thing is in everyday life, some slaves have uh money, have a comfort, comfortable life and can be protected. Meaning if they have a value to their master and if they are molested by someone, the master will prosecute injustice for them. So uh uh which that this is something that nobody will do for a be so, so uh so um that's a complex situation. That's a complex situation.

39:24 Ricardo Lopes: So, getting into other aspects of diogenes philosophy, it is pleasure, a legitimate desire for diogenes and the cynics more generally.

39:39 Jean-Manuel Roubineau: Um All the cynics didn't have the same uh opinion about that. Antinous uh with a kind of master of Diogenes. Um Antus was refusing pleasure at least as far as we can understand antinous philosophical proposal. So, uh which uh Diogenes didn't do uh part of life. Uh So uh scenic philosophy with diogenes and after diogenes is not uh um refusal of pleasure, philosophy. Um THE thing is again, is the question of autonomy and dependence. Pleasure is a problem. If you are dependent of a pleasure, you can drink some wine. But if you need to drink wine every, every week or at every banquet. There is a problem. You can have a sexual life. But, uh, if you are addicted to it, it's a problem. You can, you have the right to love food and to enjoy a good piece of bread and nice olive oil. It's no problem with that. But again, if you cannot live without it, then it's a problem. So, pleasure is not in itself, um, uh, has no moral issue or ethical issue in itself. The question is uh if you are dependent of one or other kind of pleasure

41:02 Ricardo Lopes: and, and how did they think about other animals? Did they see? Did they look in any way at other animals as a possible model for human conduct? At least to some extent?

41:15 Jean-Manuel Roubineau: Yes. Uh Yeah, the, the the animals are model to uh to scenic uh meaning that uh they have an ability uh to uh simplicity, to oar to uh frugality, which is much bigger than men. So in the scenic point of view, you have gods on the top, you have animals in the middle and you have men in the bottom. So that's the cynic hierarchy of the uh world in a way. And then you have um wise uh men, philosophers that sometimes uh can be higher than the animals, but lower than the gods like in between. But uh for normal um animals are supposed to be a model first because they live a life of simplicity. They don't have so many needs uh and they adjust uh their uh needs to their means. Um So they live a life of, of frugality and then some specific animals in the scenic point of view, like dogs will have some uh uh qualities uh uh that should be inspiring. Uh DOGS are low. Uh They are honest. Uh THEY are, again, they live a simple, very simple life so you can give them a bone and they will be very happy with that. So, uh the, the idea is that the animal world and some of the animals specifically uh can be used as a model for, for human conduct. Yes.

42:48 Ricardo Lopes: Mhm. And related some other, let's say norms in Greek society. Of course, we've already talked a little bit here about marriage for example. But what worries views exactly about things like marriage, pity and prostitution.

43:07 Jean-Manuel Roubineau: Um So marriage is a cultural construct in a scenic point of view. So you are uh you are not supposed to try to get married. So we have one exception. Uh uh ONE of diogenes pupils, Krates who got married with Hipaa. But it was a very strange marriage was basically unbuilding every rule of uh marriage. So it's not very classical uh marriage, you could say. So, uh marriage is a social convention. Uh PACY is, it's a very common practice in Athens in the fourth century BC, meaning that uh uh for me, for most of men, adult men, I mean, free men citizen or foreigner, but free men. Uh It was normal to, um, you had like basically two sexual options on the table if I could say that, um, women and boys when I say boys, I mean, uh, boys, uh which are not adults yet. So let's say 10 to 20 boys if you want 20 years boys. Um So this was considered as a kind of too equal uh possibility to, uh, to live a sexual life. And you, lots of men were leaving the both possibilities in parallel. Uh So this is a very common way uh um to, to do things. Uh But we have no uh not a single detail about any pistic relationship of diogenes. The only anecdotes we have around that are presenting him as a kind of protector of kids. Uh Not someone who was uh using them, using them for pleasure or not someone who was using pacy as a way to educate kids because that's why that's the way Greeks were describing this social practice, a way to um get boys to become uh citizens, adults through a personal, intimate and intellectual relationship. Uh So, uh to, to no marriage, basically, no pity and uh with prostitution. Uh You asked, uh we know that he had a personal relationship with the Athenian uh prostitute but not uh um not a relationship involving money. So it was not as far as we know, it was not a commercial trade uh relationship. It was a kind of uh love uh uh normal, intimate personal uh relationship. So, uh um again, with prostitution uh in diogenes uh conception, apart from his personal life, the, the question is the level of dependence. So he was making fun of people were going on a regular basis to see prostitutes because in diogene ice and in scenic Ice, this was a red flag. It meant that you were, you were dependent of it, of this kind of pleasure. And this was a problem in a philosophical point of view. If you cannot live without it, then you have to uh to face the philosophical issue. It is.

46:15 Ricardo Lopes: Mhm And what were his views on athletic competition? Exercise and health?

46:24 Jean-Manuel Roubineau: Um So, so maybe there are two parts. Uh THE, the, the, the, the, the exercise uh is uh good in a cen point of view, you are supposed to uh exercise your body because your body is the main tool of your everyday philosophy. So you are supposed to be uh to try to be in good shape, to uh to strengthen your, your, your body, to train it. Uh And diogenes was known to um even to twist some athletic exercises like uh uh what you would say, I am not sure what is the English word to say that like there was some uh gym, gymnastic exercises with statue, like statue grabbing, you were working with statue with positions, statues that were in the gymnasium. And instead of using it for wrestling techniques to, to train some wrestling techniques and attitudes, diogenes was using these statues when they were covered with snow in winter to grab them and to uh um train to resist to the cold. So, uh and that's a good anecdote because it's showing that at the same time to exercise your body, to strengthen your body was important, but it was not to uh uh to prepare to some competition or to improve in some very specific technical uh sport. And that's why I was saying that there are like two parts to the answer. The first thing is health is important because the body has to be strong to help the philosophy. But then sport athletes competition, that's something that has a very uh strong uh and uh unfavorable opinion because uh competition again is um a frame to search for glory. So uh athletes are focused on the search for glory uh which is a problem in a phys view. We, we talked about it and the second is they are uh so focused on that, that they are only training their body and they are not um having a kind of uh um intellectual uh development of education in parallel. So in diogenes point of view, uh the problem with athletics is at the same time, the obsession for victory and the, the fact that you neglect to develop your mind and not only your, your, your body So the, the view on uh exercise is positive but the view on athletics is negative.

49:03 Ricardo Lopes: And of course, another interesting thing about diogenes is that he was all about speaking one's mind freely and sometimes that would entail insulting reprimanding sarcasm. So te tell us about that.

49:21 Jean-Manuel Roubineau: Um Yeah, that's one of the, um, maybe most interesting part of the philosophy of uh cynics are in a way. Um They, they, they consider, they have a kind of mission you could say. So they are trying to get more people come to philosophy, philosophical ideas, philosophical attitude and, and life. So you have to go to people and to provide some philosophical experience by talking with them by dialogue, et cetera. Uh INCLUDING insult, including uh sarcasm. Every way is good to uh to um to force people to philosophy. So the, that's, that's really a kind of philosophy with uh no old bar in a way that you, you, you, you uh cynic philosophers consider they have the right to do everything if it helps philosophy or if it helps someone to come to philosophy. So they will use every means to provoke philosophical conversation, philosophical uh situations. The key principle is uh what the Greek called parea, meaning, meaning, uh uh freedom of speech, speaking freely, speaking tersely, uh uh speaking with no um specific courts of any kind. Uh Because Cortesi is a social convention on what you have to do is to force people to understand they are not living a life of philosophy and to try to convince them to, to try to live a philosophical life. So, yes, that is uh uh one of the main tools of uh cynics when they try to convince other people to come to philosophy is uh freedom of speech, Parecia. So uh very, sometimes very aggressive way to uh to get in contact with people.

51:16 Ricardo Lopes: And do you think that his defense of speaking one's mind and being honest relates in any way with these hate toward demagogues and populists?

51:30 Jean-Manuel Roubineau: Yes, you, you could say that you could say that um the thing is uh populist uh in uh uh political life of uh cities, big cities or little cities, but mainly big cities like Athens. Um There are people who are trying to get some political power. Um And we are ready to say whatever citizens uh want to hear. So, uh the main uh tool of a populist is to lie uh to life, to get uh the power you want to get to, to be able to uh decide of some uh of the political lines of the community. So, uh at the same time, they are lying, which is uh in a scenic point of view, uh not an appropriate way of behaving. And at the same time, they are pursuing an artificial goal which is power. Uh So they behave dishonestly on the search for uh something which is uh in fact useless. So for these two reasons, uh you, you could say that uh um to speak one's mind is in contradiction with the populist uh model. So the scenic way of speaking, one's mind is in contradiction with the, with the populist and demagogue model. Yes.

52:48 Ricardo Lopes: And, and there are certain very curious supposed episodes in diogenes life, like for example, his supposed encounter with Alexander, the great that people disseminate a lot, but we are actually not sure if that really happened, right?

53:08 Jean-Manuel Roubineau: Uh Yeah, we cannot be sure. The thing is the, the question is, do we have reason to believe it happened? That's, that's the main question we could, we could ask. Yes. Uh And uh yes, we have reason to believe the met. Uh First Alexander had a strong interest uh to philosophy. He's been educated partly by Aristotle and he made several, he met, sorry, several philosophers through his lives. For example, Kates when he, when he was in t uh et cetera. And uh so uh if Alexander had an opportunity to meet Diogenes, there is no reason to doubt that they didn't meet. And the thing is they had some opportunities mainly during the 303 100 in 338 when Diogenes was involved in the Kona battle in which Alexander was involved too. Uh And in 336 2 years later, uh Diogenes was during a part of the year in Athens during the other part of the year in Corinth. And Alexander went during that year in those two cities and even twice in Corinth during that year. So yes, to answer your question clearly, we cannot be sure, but we have many good reasons Alexander would have been interested to meet theogenes. He had several opportunities to do it. And we have text describing the uh the encounter, of course, the the the texts are describing the encounter in a very legend way. So, so uh behind your question, I think that's, that's what you mean. Is there, is there a part of legend in here? And yes, there, there is, there must be a part of legend in it. And the legend goes quite far because the legend tells us that they died the same day. Uh So they are supposed to have died the same day. We know exactly when uh Alexander died during the night of the 10th to the 11th of June 323. We have no clue for diogenes. We have some reason to believe he's dead during the 300 twenties, maybe in 323. This is possible, but we have no detail and clearly this detail, the idea that they are, they died at the exact same day. This is a part of the legend, Greeks love this kind of uh synchronic events or alleged synchronic events. So there are some parts that are completely probable and some parts that are um likely legends.

55:46 Ricardo Lopes: But, but when diogenes died, I mean, as, at least as far as we know, we must have been in his, uh, like early eighties or something like that.

55:59 Jean-Manuel Roubineau: Yeah, we have, we don't know, we have different information about the date of birth. So I wouldn't, uh, give a precise age but we know he was around 80 a bit more than, uh, 80. Yes. Uh, ABSOLUTELY. Uh, IT'S difficult to be more uh more precise. Yeah, because we don't know when he died and we don't know when he's born. So,

56:21 Ricardo Lopes: yeah. And by the way, when it comes to his death, how did he die? And in this particular case, what does it matter? Uh uh THE the way a philosopher dies does it matter and why?

56:38 Jean-Manuel Roubineau: Yes. So, so, so for the first part of your question, we have several um versions of his death with different, different dates and different context. So uh for the way he died, we have at least four different version. One saying that he died of eating a raw octopus uh trying to demonstrate that cooking was useless. Um Why one that he died of an infection after being bitten by dogs with which he was disputing a piece of octopus. Uh One telling us that he died of self suffocation uh on the car in Khan, on the heel of the car in Khan with his own cloak. Um One telling us that he died of fever So of course, he cannot um he, he cannot have been uh killed by these four reasons. So most of them are wrong, maybe all of them, which is likely uh he might have just died of age. He was a very old man. And uh so we have, we have no clue. But I think is why do we have so many legends? Because exactly that's the question you ask is, is there a physical way of dying? And this is, these legends are a way to express the idea that there is a philosophical way of uh of dying in ancient times. The death of a philosopher is supposed to be uh the the last uh demonstration of his philosophy. So uh we have lots of anecdotes, biographical anecdotes about philosopher showing that they were um uh either very close to their philosophy when they die when they died or on the contrary, extremely far from their philosophy are in contradiction with their philosophy when they, when they died. So there is a uh very uh there's a huge interest in the scientific uh ancient world about the death of uh philosophers because again, this is this idea that philosophy uh can be demonstrated through your actions and your death is in a way the last even it's the last even of your life. Did you leave it in a philosophical way or did you not? And diogenes is not an exception. The legends around his life are in a way exploring the idea of, did he, did he live a scenic death or not?

59:05 Ricardo Lopes: Yeah. The, there's also that, uh tale II, I would call it a tale because I am not 100% sure if it's true or not, but about epicurus where I mean, because of the way he fought about that and now we shouldn't fear death that he apparently, he died with a very severe illness and he apparently was suffering a lot. But because of his idea of death, he should have died peacefully. Right. Yeah, exactly. That's another example, I

59:38 Jean-Manuel Roubineau: guess. Yeah. Yeah, you have, in fact, uh lots of examples that have been gathered by a French researcher some years ago in an article Lucien Jaron, which it's an article in French, which is uh the southern, the southern way of death of dying of ancient philosophers. So, yes, you're right there, there are lots of examples and some of them are dying exactly the way you are. They are expected to die and others are like uh in full contradiction. So it's, it's a, it's a, it's a way, it's a funny part of the philosophical history of philosophy, if I could say

1:00:14 Ricardo Lopes: by the way, in, in what ways did die is relate philosophically intellectually, of course, to some of the other very prominent Greek philosophers like Socrates and Plato, they, they have something to say about their philosophy or the, their way of doing philosophy or something like that.

1:00:41 Jean-Manuel Roubineau: Yeah. Uh WI with uh um Diogenes as far as we know, as a kind of uh um very critic uh opinion about Socrates and extremely critic uh opinion about Plato. Uh THE, the that uh he was considering Plato that a kind of um ne negation of uh of the principle of uh philosophy in action. The, the main critic Diogenes was uh uh doing at uh uh Plato and Plato's philosophy. That was that he was not living a life of philosophy. It was just like producing philosophical ideas, but you couldn't see. And then in his uh everyday uh life, so he wasn't, he was useless in, in Diogenes's point of view, plateau was uh uh was useless. And he says that he said something like uh of what's used for us. He is a man who's been philosophy for uh so long and has yet not upset uh anyone. So he was considering him as a kind of a lost cause someone was producing very high level philosophical ideas, but that we are not grounded. So that was the main critic. And about, you know, the idea of the human being, the way a plateau defined what is a human being. So, meaning a biped uh with no leaves um with no feathers, sorry with no feathers. Um And then uh uh Theogenes says the legend uh took a rooster plucked, the, the rooster came to the um to uh Plato's gymnasium and said this is Plato's human being uh to, to, to make fun to the, this kind of philosophical corpus. So, uh Diogenes was i, in that way, he was positioning himself against uh plateau's school that he considered as a kind of very theoretical philosophy and not a philosophy in action. Mhm.

1:02:45 Ricardo Lopes: And uh do we know if Biogen wrote a lot? Uh I mean, did he write at all?

1:02:53 Jean-Manuel Roubineau: Uh AS far as we know he did, he did uh essays uh Economic Treaties Tragedies too. We have two long lists of his opera. Uh They are not exactly identical. There are reasons for that but maybe I won't go so far in the conversation. But, but uh uh we have no reason to doubt that he wrote. He wrote meaning that he must have had some kind of material support, material help. Uh BECAUSE you need some scrolls, you need, you need to have some material to write in ancient times like today, I could say. Uh BUT yes, he, he wrote, he used writing to develop his ideas including tragedies again, Seattle. Uh But the thing is we, we lost everything basically apart from a, a big fragment of his uh um uh Political Philosophy Treaty uh polit that we, we, we, we, we, which is, which has been saved by Philo Dema of Garra and quoted. But apart from that, we lost uh most of his text. So we know his philosophy from uh his uh Apotex. And for his um sayings, so the, the, the big part of his philosophy, we, we grasp it, we get uh it's true uh anecdotes, uh meetings, encounters and the dialogues he had with uh some people. So some of these sayings are, must have been close to the truth, other are very uh rebuilt by time and uh diff the different philosophical schools that use them uh to defend cynicism or to attack cynicism. So sometimes it's a bit difficult to see through this uh uh very long and complex transmission process to get to go back to the like original diogenes

1:04:49 Ricardo Lopes: and which prominent philosophers uh mentioned having been influenced by diogenes. And I'm not just asking about the Greek and Roman philosophers, but basically across history.

1:05:07 Jean-Manuel Roubineau: Um And that's, that's, I'm not sure I am able to fully answer to the, to the question. But I would, to, to my knowledge, the, the um the philosopher who has been the, maybe the most influenced by uh diogenes. He will be Emil Cioran, the Romanian uh philosopher

1:05:27 Ricardo Lopes: from the 19th century.

1:05:29 Jean-Manuel Roubineau: Uh A bit uh a bit after that. He, he died. Uh I don't remember exactly when he died. I don't know if he died end of the 20th or beginning of the 21st. I'm sorry, Emil C

1:05:40 Ricardo Lopes: Yeah. Yeah, I know, I know who you're talking about. I, I just thought that he was born in the 19th century but perhaps I'm

1:05:48 Jean-Manuel Roubineau: wrong, maybe no, I wouldn't say that. I don't think so. I think he's born in the beginning of the twenties. But you, you maybe, you know, better. The so, so, so which was a Romanian philosopher? But he lived in, not in exile. But yes, he lived in gold books in Romanian. Then it changed uh to uh to French on the road the rest of his life. Uh IN um in French, he lived a very simple uh life uh basically with no uh family, a very poor life. He didn't work. Uh He wrote mainly uh a aorist sayings. So even the way he was communicating philosophy uh as some has something in common with the way we know uh diogenes uh philosophy. It was very critical with basically uh everything in the social uh about social customs, social conventions. So, um a very uh uh brutal uh way of looking at uh humans and their behavior and society. So, um I would say maybe uh the, the, the, the, the, the biggest he uh of the 20th century will be em. Yes.

1:07:03 Ricardo Lopes: Mhm. And what about the influence that diogenes might have had on stoicism? The, did, did they have an influence there?

1:07:13 Jean-Manuel Roubineau: Yes. Yes. Uh The first influence is uh genealogy. Uh The, you know, Socrates are uh antisthenes as a pupil, antitheism, a diogenes as a pupil uh di direct or indirect pupil. We, we are not sure that depending diogenes arrived in Athens before the death of antisthenes in 366 or after. We're not sure. Diogenes at Ks as a pupil and CS as Z and Zeno is the founder of the stoic school of South. Um So there is a genealogical link. That's the first thing. The second thing is there is an ideological link. Yes. Uh Stoics in a way are like uh civilized cynics. If you could say uh Cynics, you can be in company with without being insulted. Um So the the level of the of provocation transgression uh exhortation to is much uh lower. But there, there are some common points. It's a, it's a stoic stoicism is an ethic philosophy as cynicism uh virtue. The search for virtue is key in uh stoicism. And uh there is this idea that you, you cannot be controlled by your feelings. Uh uh The cynics will say that you cannot be controlled by your needs. Stoics will say that you cannot be controlled by your feelings, meaning you cannot be controlled by your, by your pain or by your pleasure, which is a common point with uh uh Cynics. Uh There is another strong common point is it is a philosophy in action. Stoics uh consider that the way you behave is key in a philosophical point of view. Again, it's not a theoretical philosophy. There is a theoretical um corpus which is uh uh explaining uh analyzing the, the idea of virtue, the relationship to Phoenix, et cetera. But what is most important is the way you uh you behave. And maybe there is another element which is the relationship with nature. For Stoics to understand the rules of nature is key to uh choose your philosophical way of life. You need to stay in contact with the rules of uh nature. So, yes, there are, there are lots of lots in common. But again, Stoics must have been much easier to um comp sti company must have been much easier and nicer than Phoenix one,

1:09:51 Ricardo Lopes: right? And, and by the way, actually, I've asked you about stoicism specifically because we've seen in recent years uh resurgence of spices in popular culture actually. But uh do you look at these recent resurgence uh as and as having anything to do with the original sto

1:10:18 Jean-Manuel Roubineau: Yeah, I don't know if it's more stoicism or more cynicism, the, the this uh the, the development of the search of frugality, achy, um self sufficiency. Um I, I think that some people will, will, will uh claim to be influenced by the model. Some will claim to be influenced by the stoic uh model. I, I have never made a kind of a full survey of the phenomenon. You're right. I think it's an increasing trend movement across the world of people who are trying to rethink our relationship to progress. And cynics and Stoics are of can be of great help to uh to rethink the relationship to, to progress the idea that we have to accumulate more and more to, to, to produce uh more and more. Um SOME people are trying to live a kind of decreasing uh life in that uh perspective. And, and diogenes is kind of uh the ultimate model of life in that uh uh perspective. So, yes, there is a kind of uh um uh increasing popularity of this uh ancient philosophic uh movement, ancient philosophies in actions uh that are more popular than they've been uh doing. I would say a century ago, the popularity of this movement was not the same in the, in the population, not in the academic world, but in the uh normal world, I would

1:11:49 Ricardo Lopes: say. So, one last question, then how do you look basically at the legacy of diogenes? I mean, how is he viewed today by philosophers in general and in popular culture?

1:12:07 Jean-Manuel Roubineau: Um I think there is still some time um uh is still forgotten, sometimes it was forgotten sometime in the ancient uh uh time in antiquity. Uh Some histories of philosophy, I mean, in the ancient times, uh uh forgot to uh to study uh uh cynicism and it still happens sometimes you have some very large book about ancient philosophy. We don't uh even credit anything to uh cynicism. So uh that is a kind of very old uh tendency but uh things are, things are changing. Uh I think in that, in that matter. So that is a kind of uh rehabilitation of the interest of uh cynicism because of his genealogy with the Socratic philosophy and the stoic uh philosophy that is a kind of rehabilitation. Uh AND the, the fact that we are facing this very modern question of uh and the way the world is uh going now and the economics, the industrial uh uh issues we are, all of us are, are, are facing. Uh IT should, it should give to uh cynicism a kind of new uh uh new light on.

1:13:23 Ricardo Lopes: Mhm Great. So uh the book is again the Dangerous Life and ideas of diogenes, the cynic. I'm leaving a link to it in the description of this interview. And uh J Manuel, just before we go apart from the book, would you like to tell people where they can find you on the internet? Uh

1:13:45 Jean-Manuel Roubineau: What can you mean if I have some kind of

1:13:48 Ricardo Lopes: internet? Yeah, like uh university page website, social media. I,

1:13:54 Jean-Manuel Roubineau: I have no social media page of any kind. I don't have any Facebook page, Instagram page, Twitter page uh or youtube channel. Uh I just have a professional page uh where my uh work is uh uh referred. Uh So uh when I release a new uh a new study, a new book, uh you, you can uh find it uh there. Uh So that, that's it. Basically, I'm afraid I'm not a, a very electronic uh

1:14:25 Ricardo Lopes: person. Uh And do you have, for example, fuel uh uh few people profile or Research Gate or something like that.

1:14:35 Jean-Manuel Roubineau: Um I, I'm sorry, I did not understand your question

1:14:38 Ricardo Lopes: because. Ok. Ok. So, uh thank you so much again for coming on the show. It's been a real pleasure to talk

1:14:46 Jean-Manuel Roubineau: to you the same. Thank you very much.

1:14:50 Ricardo Lopes: Hi guys. Thank you for watching this interview. Until the end. If you liked it, please share it. Leave a like and hit the subscription button. The show is brought to you by N Lights learning and development. Then differently check the website at N lights.com and also please consider supporting the show on Patreon or paypal. I would also like to give a huge thank you to my main patrons and paypal supporters, Perera Larson, Jerry Muller and Frederick Suno Bernard Seche O of Alex Adam, Castle Matthew Whitting B are no wolf, Tim Ho Erica LJ Conners, Philip Forrest Connelly. Then the Met Robert Wine in NAI Z Mar Nevs calling in Hobel Governor Mikel Stormer Samuel Andre Francis for Agns Ferger Ken Hall, her ma J and Lain Jung Y and the Samuel K Hes Mark Smith J Tom Hummel s friends, David Sloan Wilson Yaar, Roman Roach Diego, Jan Punter, Romani Charlotte, Bli Nicole Barba, Adam Hunt, Pavlo Stassi na Me, Gary G Almansa Zal Ari and YPJ Barboza Julian Price Edward Hall, Eden Broder Douglas Fry Franka, La Gilon Cortez or Solis Scott Zachary ftdw Daniel Friedman, William Buckner, Paul Giorgio, Luke Loi. Georgio Theophano, Chris Williams and Peter Wo David Williams Di A Costa Anton Erickson Charles Murray, Alex Shaw, Marie Martinez, Coralie Chevalier, Bangalore Larry Dey Junior, Old Ebon, Starry Michael Bailey. Then Spur by Robert Grassy Zorn. Jeff mcmahon, Jake Zul Barnabas Radick, Mark Temple, Thomas Dvor Luke Neeson, Chris Tory Kimberley Johnson, Benjamin Gilbert Jessica. No week in the B brand Nicholas Carlson Ismael Bensley Man, George Katis, Valentine Steinman Perros, Kate Van Goler, Alexander Abert Liam Dan Biar Masoud Ali Mohammadi Perpendicular J Ner Urla. Good enough, Gregory Hastings David Pins of Shan Nelson, Mike Levin and Jos Net. A special thanks to my producers is our web, Jim Frank Luca Toni, Tom Ween, Bernard N Cortes Dixon Bendik Muller Thomas Trumble, Catherine and Patrick Tobin John Carl Negro, Nick Ortiz and Nick Golden. And to my executive producers Matthew Lavender, Si Adrian Bogdan Knits and Rosie. Thank you for all.