It wasn’t my intent to read a trio of ancient Roman books in a row – would you believe me if I told you it was an accident? No? That’s probably fair. In this case, though, it’s sort of true, mostly because I didn’t remember who wrote On Benefits when I picked it out from my reading list. I don’t regret the choice, though, and of the three, I would most highly recommend On Benefits as being one of those books that everyone will, well, benefit from reading.
To understand why, it’s worth realizing the amount of uncertainty and debate there is in the translation of the title. “Benefits” seems to be the most common and literal translation, but you will also see it translated at times as “Charity,” “Generosity,” or “Giving.” One annotated version I came across titled it An Ancient Guide to Giving. Though perhaps less accurate than On Benefits, I think this last might be the most appropriate. It’s certainly the most effective at conveying what Seneca wrote about in this book (and yes, I think this is the same Seneca).
Why do we give? What is altruism, and why does it exist? On Benefits addresses these deep questions, but it does not spend all its time in such theoretical matters. In fact, the majority of the book is more concerned with practical questions of how, what, and when to give. It acknowledges the benefits which can accrue upon the giver, but it does not make these the reason for being generous, like objectivism does. Nor does it suggest that simply being generous is a virtue of itself – according to Seneca (and I agree), it is quite possible to be generous badly. Fortunately, he wrote a guide about how to be generous well, and it is little diminished in its relevance and applicability by the intervening millennia.
It might seem a simple thing to give well. Pick some charity with a cause you agree with, write them a check, and move on. Oh, it might be complicated by the fact that charities can be rather untrustworthy, that many of them aren’t particularly efficient with their money, or by how few people seem to know how to write a check these days, but the basic act of giving is straightforward. Except…that’s missing the point. Much of what makes giving matter is the thought that is put into it. Give someone a check, and they’ll appreciate it. They’ll spend it, and that will be that. Give someone exactly what they need at exactly the right moment, something durable and high-quality, and they will appreciate it and remember for years.
I like to think I’m pretty good at giving gifts most of the time. At least, I put a lot of time and thought into it, paying attention and writing down ideas to save for when gift-giving holidays come around, and often doing extensive research in support of the choice of gift. On Benefits suggests these are some of the key factors which make for good gift giving: paying attention to what is needed, choosing an appropriate time, providing a high-quality benefit. Memory plays a significant role in Seneca’s gift-giving ideas, too. Though credit to the gift-giver should not be expected in good gift-giving, the receiver should still remember the gift, even if they never find out who gave it to them. I think of this as obvious enough when it comes to giving gifts to people I’m close to, but On Benefits takes the next step, suggesting that this is the way all giving should be done.
You’ve probably heard that charities often don’t want you to volunteer your time. They would rather have your money. It’s an economic argument, and you may have even heard this particular example. If a lawyer wants to contribute to a charity, they are better off working extra hours and donating the extra income, or providing pro bono legal services, than they are working in a soup kitchen, assembling houses, or otherwise doing charity work that is outside their specialty. Most people I know are uncomfortable with the notion, but struggle to argue with the productivity argument. Seneca articulates the counterargument: giving in this fashion is more than a productivity optimization problem.
Today, we think of gift-giving and charity as distinct concepts, and we approach them in fundamentally different fashions. In erasing the distinction between what we today call charity and this kind of interpersonal gift-giving, Seneca captures the hollowness of charity as a productivity optimization problem, and suggests an avenue by which to make it as meaningful and satisfying as a well-considered gift to a friend. All benefits should be personal.
Much is said about the decline of classics education and how it impacts culture, morality, and development. There’s something to the argument, but it can sometimes be overstated – as much as I think there is value to reading, say, Herodotus, I don’t think people not reading his Histories is a root cause of societal decline (and how do we even define societal decline? As Cato pointed out, every generation perceives a societal decline, though the reality is more of a mild ebbing and flowing across decades and centuries). Certain classics, though, have an enduring relevance that puts them on a short list of books that I think everyone should read, books that I do believe people are worse off for not reading. On Benefits is now on that list.
IGC Publishing 