Stoicism is a philosophy focused on the pursuit of virtue as a means of permanent happiness through denouncing all external desires which may corrupt this path. Whilst the central view that one should only focus on things they can control is easily applied to materialistic externals, the more personal the connection, the harder it becomes to practice. The major flaw of Stoicism, highlighted in McGill’s ‘The Issue of the Satisfaction of Desire’ is the belief that emotion is a product of mistaken judgments and therefore is controllable. This leads to illogical conclusions evident in Epictetus’ ‘The Handbook’ which suggests both that it is possible to enjoy externals such as possessions, body and relationships whilst still not properly being attached …show more content…
However, Stoicism’s belief that virtue (and its corresponding happiness) is indestructible when acting rightly is highly ignorant and raises serious questions about how happiness can coexist with physical suffering or death. The belief that happiness through virtue is a constant and unchanging mindset is a pinnacle belief for Stoicism (McGill, 1967, p.231). Clearly, under Zeno’s description of valuable externals, Stoics agree that health and looking after the body is preferable but virtue is the absolute and situations may arise when they must sacrifice their life to maintain virtue and live in accordance with nature (Epictetus, 1995, p.290). As Epictetus states “It is better to die of hunger, but free from grief and fear, than to live in affluence with a disturbed mind” (Epictetus, 1995, p.290). Although unlike material possessions, Epictetus’s view that the body and one’s life is still merely external and therefore they should be completely unattached from leads to a rather fallacious position. To Stoics it should not matter if they are “cold or warm… and whether dying or doing something else” (McGill, 1967, p.235). But, sacrificing life is not the same as giving up an object and there is an underlying and uncontrollable emotional response which the Stoics overlook and oversimplify. In extreme situations, it is possible to be tranquil whilst living in accordance to nature to one’s own physical detriment but this is not the same as happiness. As summarised in Aristotle’s argument against unwavering happiness, enduring suffering to pursue a righteous life certainly coincides with virtue but none would argue that suffering can coexist with happiness like the Stoics suggest (McGill, 1967, p.229). Thus, Stoic lack of attachment to health or life is fairly unattainable due to the
The Leading Doctrines of Epicurean philosophy state that ‘it is impossible to live the pleasant life without also living sensibly, nobly and justly, and conversely it is impossible to live sensibly, nobly and justly without living pleasantly’ (Epicurus, 1998b, p.53). Therefore, the good Epicurean believes in order to live virtuously, one must adhere to a pleasurable life. For Epicureans it is impossible to live virtuously and unpleasantly or vice-versa. In addition, Epicurus describes pleasure as our ‘primary native good’ (Epicurus 1998a, p. 51), implying that all human actions are driven by pleasures and by the avoidance of pains. Another imperative concept to Epicurean philosophy is Epicurus’ idea of the three fundamental aspects in attaining pleasure, those of friendship, freedom and an analysed life
The ethics behind Epicureanism are very simple. Epicurus demonstrates that experience shows happiness is not best attained by directly seeking it. The selfish are not more happy but less so than the unselfish. This statement is very powerful for the simple person. Epicurus proves that if a person seeks to be happy he/she usually won't be able to find true happiness.
Stoicism made the transition from an intriguing foreign philosophy to a popular practice because it was taken up by several high profile figures. Scipio Africanus, the original esteemed Roman Stoic died in 129 BCE, but about 40 years later a new crop of celebrated Romans took up the Stoic practice. During the fall of the Roman Republic a group of famed orators, generals, and statesmen including Marcus Junius Brutus (85-42 BCE), Marcus Tullius Cicero (106-43 BCE), Pompey the Great (106-48 BCE), and Cato the Younger (95-46 BCE) all professed themselves Stoics. This group of powerful statesmen and leaders practicing Stoicism disseminated it throughout Rome. Octavian (63 BC- 14 AD) who later became Caesar Augustus had a Stoic tutor and many
In his epistle, “To Those Who Fear Want,” Epictetus challenges the rationale in an affluent society’s fearing poverty. Through the lens of Stoicism, Epictetus contends that men should not fear what they cannot control; a person who fears hunger, poverty, and death is shameful because he unknowingly ridicules a group of people who, largely, are not wholly responsible for their qualities of life. In truth, this wealthy person only fears his loss of luxury. Likewise, Epictetus defends his position by use of rhetorical questions, metaphors, and syllogisms to assuage the privileged. Yet, Epictetus’ audience will also observe that the stoic’s qualms with the higher-class reveals a major flaw in his logic; his inability to perceive
Born of different backgrounds, upbringings, and experiences, Epictetus and Seneca are Roman philosophers who outwardly appear very different. Epictetus spent most of his youth as a slave while Seneca was born into money and became a tutor of Nero. Although these two men seem to be very dissimilar, they each shared a common purpose in studying philosophy and teaching people on how to live well. Each suggested different paths for how to do so. Epictetus suggests in his book, The Discourses and The Enchiridion, that living a life in accordance with nature could be achieved by living moderately. Seneca suggests in his work, Letters from a Stoic, that a happy man is self-sufficient and realizes that happiness depends only on interior perfection. Despite the differences, both Epictetus and Seneca are considered Stoics because of their shared belief in the idea that character is the only guarantee of everlasting, carefree happiness. The world outside ourselves will never give us happiness, nor will it be responsible for our unhappiness. It doesn’t matter what’s happening outside ourselves, Epictetus and Seneca claim that the only thing that matters is how we interpret those events. Further evaluating Seneca’s, Letters from a Stoic and Epictetus’s, The Discourses and The Enchiridion, we will clearly be able to differentiate the two in their ideas and opinions regarding stoicism and the keys to living a well, happy life.
23. The stoics believed that the most important good in life was is the serenity of the mind, and they placed emphasis on duty and self-discipline as main virtues.
In evaluating the philosopher’s goal of determining how to live a good life, Epicurean philosophers argue that pleasure is the greatest good and pain is the greatest bad. Foremost, for the purpose of this analysis, I must define the pleasure and pain described. Pleasure is seen as the state of being pleased or gratified. This term is defined more specifically by the subject to which the pleasure applies, depending on what he likes. Pain is the opposite of pleasure, which is a type of emotional or physical un-pleasure that results in something that the person dislikes. “Everything in which we rejoice is pleasure, just as everything that distresses us is pain,” (Cicero 1). Through this hedonistic assessment of pleasure and pain, epicurean philosophers come to the conclusion that, “the greatest pleasure [is that] which is perceived once all pain has been removed,” (Epicurus 1).
In “The Handbook”, Epictetus provides a way of life a stoic should follow to be a good member of the society, which is a life detached from things one cannot change and focused instead on things that can be improved. For instance, he asked people to care none about the way others would judge them as he quoted “If anyone tells you that such a person speaks ill of you, don't make excuses about what is said of you, but answer: "He does not know my other faults, else he would not have mentioned only these."” Through this quote, Epictetus wanted all stoics to know all their faults better than anyone else can say about them. Hence, the person would not be disturbed by the way the society view him or her as well as would be able to control and fix
As a slave Epictetus was severely tortured on a rack for another’s mistake and in turn received a broken leg, which never correctly healed. “ See, it’s just as I told you.” I was never more free than I was on the rack.” In addition, Stockdale ‘s leg was also damaged during his various hardships as a POW. Through these brutal hardships Stockdale finds strength in Epictetus words. For example, Stockdale was recognized by his captors in regard to holding a leadership position in the prisoners of war resistance with better hopes of challenging the Vietnamese’s treatment of prisoners. In accordance to Stoicism Stockdale did not take the leadership position with hopes of change but it was principally in his control and part of his essential duty
Born of different stations, languages and creeds, Epictetus and Seneca are Roman philosophers who externally appear to be very different. Epictetus was born to a slave mother, sold as a slave himself and spent the majority of his youth as a slave in Rome. Seneca was born into money; he became tutor to a boy named Nero who later acquired position of Emperor of Rome in 54 A.D. Though these two men seem to be from very different worlds, they have a shared purpose in studying philosophy. The purpose of their writings was to teach people how to live well. Though they had a shared purpose, they suggested its achievement through different means. Epictetus professed an ‘expect the worst so you wont be disappointed when it happens’
After the death of Aristotle, philosophy that targeted greater complex depths was outrun by philosophy that focused on mere everyday lives. With the rise and fall of Skepticism, Cynicism, and Epicureanism there was an influence that survived years impacting life and that was Stoicism. Zeno of Citium who believed that the world had an ultimate plan and everything--including nature, animals, and humans, were there for a reason (Hergenhahn & Henley, 2014, p. 66). The reason Stoicism was easily used is because it was well-suited with the way Romans highlighted their law and order giving the extensive coverage displayed by many philosophers, including Marcus Aurelius.
“Happiness in particular is believed to be complete without qualification, since we always choose it for itself and never for the sake of anything else. Honour, pleasure, intellect, and every virtue we do indeed choose for themselves (since we would choose each of them even if they had no good effects), but we choose them also for the sake of happiness, on the assumption that through them we shall live a life of happiness; whereas happiness no one chooses for the sake of any of these nor indeed for the sake of anything else.” ( Aristotle 10-11) Aristotle is the other view of happiness that will be discussed. With him and the Stoics, they are both kind of similar due to both believe in virtue for happiness, Aristotle says virtue a different way and other ways about happiness. Aristotle along with the Stoic’s believe that virtues is the same, but Aristotle says this about virtue “and if we take this kind of life to be activity of the soul and actions in accordance with reason, and the characteristic activity of the good person to be to carry this out well and nobly, and a characteristic activity to be accomplished well when it is accomplished in accordance with the appropriate virtue; then if this is so, the human good turns out to be
Epicurus teaches us that life should be enjoyed for its own sake. Pleasure, friendship, and courage make up a life well lived. I would argue that it is these three main principles that support a modern interpretation of Epicurus’ teaching as a personal moral or philosophic code. Pleasure, Epicurus teaches, is primarily the absence of pain. Certainly one would be unable to impose a radical new moral code without the imposition of force and this was not Epicurus’ goal. Preferably, one would “withdraw from the multitude” and live a quiet life. The inherent corruption of politics was to be avoided.
In the opening lines of Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle states, “Every craft and every line of inquiry, and likewise every action and decision, seems to seek some good; and that is why some people were right to describe the good at what everything seeks.” Aristotle often wrote about happiness, but so did Epicurus. In a broad sense, Aristotle and Epicurus touched on similar points when discussing happiness. They both believed that happiness is the ultimate goal in life, and that all human measures are taken to reach that goal. While Aristotle and Epicurus’ theories are similar in notion, a closer look proves they are different in many ways. In this paper, we will discuss the differences between Epicurus and Aristotle in their theories on happiness, and expand on some drawbacks of both arguments. Through discussing the drawbacks with both theories, we will also be determining which theory is more logical when determining how to live a happy life.
To Epicurus happiness was the same as pleasure. And pleasure was freedom from bodily pain and mental anguish. He lived a simple life, owning only two cloaks and only eating bread and olives. With the occasional slice of cheese for a treat. He believed desire was a form of pain and therefore should be eliminated, and thus one should be satisfied with the bare minimum of what is needed to be happy. Therefore, while it was not a life of many desires, it was filled with the only pleasures you would need to be happy. There was a certain joy he found, in pure existence. Today’s society could learn a thing or two from this philosophy, most of which being living simply. It was better to take pleasure in simple things, rather than to chase pleasure.