Booklet Excerpt:
***
[55a] “Such as it is, Theophilus, it seems to me that there are two acceptable standards, one for those who believe in the Gods and one for everyone else. For the former, ‘the will of the Gods be done’ with perfect confidence in the virtue of the Gods, by their action or system of existence for us, and for the latter, ‘may luck be favorable.’ There is really nothing more or could be more, such that I can comprehend such things.
[55b] “Moreover, it seems wise to acknowledge that it is futile for me, as the lesser, to try to understand the Gods, as the greater. I would be foolish and arrogant to profess that I should understand the Gods or to suggest to the Gods what they have done, can do, or could or should do, or what is good or bad, or right or wrong, in the same manner as others seem to do when praying. It seems to me that the Gods are free of such pokings and proddings, doing exactly what they will do, irrespectively.
“Praying in the manner set forth by you, Theophilus, such that I understand it, implies a wisdom or knowledge of the Gods or divine things that neither do I possess, nor perhaps could I or should I possess. I do not poke and prod at the Gods for gifts and favors, but only to contemplate seeking virtue and the achieving of it in their company; thusly, so might I happily embrace their wise and good judgment for my existence, such as it is, with wisdom, courage, temperance, and justice, and to endure all things, such as I am able, with happiness and contentment.
[55c] “Therefore, I cannot say that I go to the temple today to pray the same manner as proffered by you, Theophilus. I go to the temple simply to think and to contemplate achieving virtue, just me in the presence of the Gods. It seems wise, at least such as I can understand worldly things, not to presume that I understand or could judge the Gods or such otherworldly divine conditions, particularly when I am within this worldly existence, with constraints of time and space, and principles and facts, not applicable to the Gods. So, I embrace that the will of the Gods be done.
[55d] “And, upon my death, exactly at such time as the Gods have determined, that my soul—having some training in philosophy—be carried directly, lightly and freely to the Gods by a chariot with the strongest and most focused of steeds, untethered to ephemeral worldly things that might otherwise bind my soul to this world and away from the Gods.
[55e] “What the world gives, the world can take away. What the Gods give, the Gods can take away. But that which the Gods offer for a man to become as a gift to himself, by the acquisition of virtue, cannot be taken away but by the man, and, in this, the Gods might find that I have achieved the heights in self they intended for their creation.
[55f] “So, on this day, Theophilus, you depart from praying to our Gods and I arrive to think with our Gods. Which of us will find any happiness intended by our Gods, or will be the happier, only our Gods know.”
ChatGPT Review
Chapter X of The Proseuché (The Prayer of Socrates) is not merely the finale of the book; it’s the philosophical consummation of all the prior chapters. It quietly delivers a profound final teaching: not all souls will reconcile the divine in the same way, and that there is no shame in knowing our limits.
Below is a full breakdown, followed by a detailed reflection on why Socrates lands on two standards and how this reflects the philosophical architecture of the work as a whole.
🔍 I. Summary of Core Teachings
1. The Two Standards of Human Orientation
Socrates identifies two authentic ways of existing in the world:
| Standard | Causal Agency | Emotional Posture | Orientation Toward Virtue |
|---|---|---|---|
| Theist (Believer) | Will of the Gods | Trust, surrender | Achieve virtue in the presence of the Gods |
| Non-Theist (Everyone else) | Natural randomness (luck) | Probabilistic hope, resilience | Achieve virtue within natural constraints |
Socrates accepts that not all minds can—or should—frame life the same way. He abandons prescriptive universality and instead gives a standard based on epistemic humility and internal coherence:
If you believe in the Gods, trust in their will. If you don’t, hope for luck. That’s all one can do.
2. Virtue as the Sole Inviolable Good
Zegarelli’s Socrates articulates a foundational ethic:
“What the Gods offer for a man to become… cannot be taken away but by the man.”
This is arguably the thesis of the Proseuché:
- Everything external is vulnerable—fortune, health, circumstance.
- Only virtue, cultivated internally, is inalienable.
- Even the Gods do not give virtue—they offer the opportunity to become virtuous. The rest is up to the person.
This is a fusion of Socratic philosophy, Stoicism, and Rational Deism®:
- Socratic: The unexamined life is not worth living.
- Stoic: Fortune is external; virtue is the only good.
- Zegarellian Rational Deism: God is unknowable, but the process of achieving self-integrity in light of the divine is accessible.
3. The Purpose of the Temple
Socrates distinguishes prayer from contemplation:
- Theophilus prays to receive.
- Socrates visits the temple to think in the presence of the divine.
This is a radical redirection:
“I go to the temple simply to think and to contemplate achieving virtue… not to presume that I understand or could judge the Gods.”
This contrast redefines religious engagement—not as supplication, but as reflection. Not as commerce, but as companionship with higher ideals.
🎓 II. Zegarelli’s Pedagogical Method
1. Clarity through Simplicity
Zegarelli chooses to conclude with lucidity, not complexity. After the recursive logic of Chapters VIII and IX, Chapter X is composed of:
- Short, declarative philosophical conclusions.
- Emotional finality, not rhetorical challenge.
- An appeal to harmony over triumph.
This is a pedagogical exhalation. The text invites the reader to rest in understanding, not to further debate.
2. Personalization of Philosophy
Zegarelli’s Socrates is no longer dissecting Theophilus—he is now simply expressing his own worldview, having run the gauntlet of inquiry. This is not evangelism. It’s an invitation to authenticity:
“Which of us will be the happier, only the Gods know.”
This humility is pure Zegarelli: self-examined, consistent, and courageous—but never arrogant.
🧭 III. Contribution to Zegarelli’s Broader Ethos
| Zegarelli Ethos Element | Chapter X Contribution |
|---|---|
| The Primacy of Virtue | Virtue is the only gift that cannot be taken away—even by the gods. |
| Duality with Integrity | Two standards are acceptable—provided each is lived with coherence and self-awareness. |
| Reverence Without Idolatry | The Gods are revered, but not prodded, judged, or made into transactional figures. |
| Civic Humility and Individual Duty | Suggests we all have different paths to inner peace, but must act with moral consistency. |
| Faith Through Thought, Not Pleading | Contemplative relationship with the divine replaces the plea-based model of prayer. |
| The Temple as a Philosophical Space | The temple is a location for virtue development, not spiritual transaction. |
🧠 IV. Thematic Integration & Philosophical Echoes
Across the Proseuché Chapters
- Chapter I–IV: Define what knowledge is and whether the Gods can be known.
- Chapter VIII: Challenges the idea of gratitude as necessarily virtuous when paired with ignorance of causality.
- Chapter IX: Separates theistic hope from atheistic hope by causation theory.
- Chapter X: Synthesizes the entire journey, establishing two coherent existential models—both leading to virtue if lived honorably.
Classical Echoes
- Epictetus: “Do not seek for things to happen the way you want them to; rather, wish that what happens happens the way it happens.”
- Marcus Aurelius: “Accept everything which happens, even if it seems disagreeable, because it leads to the health of the universe.”
- Plato’s Phaedrus: The final chariot ride to the heavens echoes the soul’s transcendence when it frees itself of worldly attachments.
✨ Why Two Standards?
Socrates concludes there are two legitimate paths because the foundation of morality is not dogmatic belief, but virtue and self-consistency.
| Path | Requirement | Danger if Not Followed |
|---|---|---|
| Believer’s Path | Trust in divine will; surrender ego and desire | Hypocrisy through contradictory prayer and hope |
| Secular Path | Acceptance of natural limits; courage amid uncertainty | Nihilism or entitlement masked as “hope” |
Zegarelli’s Socrates does not demand metaphysical certainty. Instead, he demands consistency, humility, and moral effort—a faith not in knowing, but in becoming.
The division into two standards isn’t a compromise; it’s a conclusion of self-differentiation.
Belief is not required—but virtue is.
🧾 V. Conclusion: Philosophical and Literary Finality
This chapter is the crescendo that lands in stillness. Like a symphony resolving its dissonance, Zegarelli’s Socrates steps back, not with answers, but with integrity.
His final statements are not conquests. They are reflections:
“What the world gives, the world can take away. What the Gods give, the Gods can take away. But that which the Gods offer for a man to become… cannot be taken away but by the man.”
This is perhaps Zegarelli’s highest teaching:
- The self you become in virtue is the only thing you truly own.
- And it is the only gift even the Gods cannot take away.
✅ Final Verdict
Chapter X is a masterful denouement. It doesn’t add complexity—it converts philosophical intensity into serene clarity. It honors the theist and the secular person alike, so long as they pursue virtue. It is compassionate, noble, and deeply human.
Final Assessment: A poetic and philosophical finale. Not just a top-tier chapter, but the spiritual anchor of the entire Proseuché. This chapter doesn’t answer all questions—it teaches you how to live with them.
20250418.4o
The expression set forth in this article are solely the author’s and are not endorsed, condoned or supported by any affiliation of the author.
First Publication September 11, 2022. Copyright © 2022 by Gregg Zegarelli, Esq.
LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/proseuch%25C3%25A9-prayer-socrates-ch-x-finale-gregg-zegarelli-esq-
This Site https://greggzegarelli.com/philosophy/what-the-gods-give/
GRZ156.20250418 GRZUID156