In the tree of Ethics, there are many twigs and branches that all trace back to a single root: how a person ought to act. Now, the paths that some branches take to get to that single root differ in many ways, yet all arrive at their own definition of how they themselves should live. The ‘branch’ that I will be talking about today, is Stoicism. I will discuss the history and beginnings of Stoicism in the Hellenistic period, the basic ideas of stoicism, and I will share my own personal beliefs and skeptical ideas as concerned with Stoicism.
To begin, what does the word ‘stoic’ mean? The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines ‘stoic’ as “one apparently or professedly indifferent to pleasure or pain.” In the world of Ethics, a stoic is defined as “a member of a school of philosophy founded by Zeno of Citium about 300 B.C. holding that the wise man should be free from passion, unmoved by joy or grief, and submissive to natural law.” So what school of philosophy are we talking about? Who is Zeno of Cittium? Why did the stoics behave as they did?
In the early part of the 4th century B.C. going on into the middle of the 3rd, a man named Zeno of Cittium left his home of Cyprus and went to Athens. There, he began to teach small groups of people about his ideas of ethics. He held his sessions on a painted porch on the Athenian agora known as the Stoa Poikile, from which the terms stoic and Stoicism derive from. At one point, Zeno, who had become adjusted to a life of riches, could not pay a resident tax, and as a consequence, was sold into slavery, where he was bought by a friend and freed.
At first glance, one could look at stoicism and dismiss it as a relatively easy way to lead one’s life. At the heart, stoics do not care about abstract reality, about how and why the universe began, or Earth for that matter. To a stoic, the most important concept is that of acceptance in human life.
Some of the ideas that Stoicism is based upon comes from the mind of one Heracletus. In the 6th century B.C., Heracletus formed his ideas at his home in Ephesus. In his mind, the universe is an ‘ever-living fire.’ In description, Heracletus came up with the Flux and the Logos. The Logos, in a universal sense, is a single connection between everything in the world, but is always changing with the Flux. Back when philosophers classified everything into 1 of the 4 elements, Heracletus’ Logos w...
... middle of paper ...
...believer in Fate, I am not a true believer. Instead of classical Stoic beliefs, where the Logos governs my every choice towards the final ‘good’, I believe that free will does play a part in philosophical life. Person A comes to choice X, but based on occurrences put out by Fate, makes a decision Y. Fate and free will are 2 strands to a rope, one depending on the other to be strong. Back with emotions, with free will depending on Fate, it depends on emotion as well. Person A comes to choice X, based on occurrences put out by Fate, but still is torn between decision Y and decision Z. Using his emotions and feelings, Person A makes decision Y, because of occurrences put out by Fate as well as feelings he has towards each decision.
In conclusion, I feel that Stoicism is almost a valid pattern of thought to live by, but is nonetheless quite interesting to look upon and debate. The basics and foundations of Stoicism, as well as the pillars on which it sits are something to be learned from, and could be wise to cite. My soul, the very being that I am, restricts me from devoting myself completely to Stoicism, although it is the closest thing to my ‘ethical standpoint’ that I have found.
In this short article I will explain that in what sense did Salutati adopt Stoic ethics according to his letter found in Jill Kraye. Salutati was an Italian humanist and man of letter and he is one of the most known political and cultural leader for Renaissance Florence and he was appointed chancellor of Florence on 1375 until his death , which was on that time one of the most important position in the administration of the republic of Florence.
The Stoic philosopher Epictetus is one such philosopher. In The Enchiridion he outlined how to live a good life as a stoic. Anything that is not one's own action is out of their control and should be ignored. He lists "Body, property, reputation, and command" as examples.1 He claims they are weak, and do not belong to us. Trying to control them will lead to unhappiness. On the other hand, he believes if you recognize that external things belonging to others, and internal things as yours you will be much better off.2 To Epictetus, proper way to live is to let things come to you, while being reserved. To illustrate this, he uses the example of a dinner party, where you should not reach across the table and take things. Instead you wait till they come to you.3
In the times of Seneca, the popular belief was that the liberal studies were the path to salvation; however, Seneca did not agree with that belief. Seneca was a stoic – an individual who could endure pain without expressing it emotionally or physically. Seneca stressed on how one must overcome adversity: “you must remove therefrom all superfluous things…Let all other things be driven out, and let the breast be emptied to receive virtue” (Seneca 28). These quotes represent an internal decision to
More specifically, Stoicism is a moral guide for humans. Though nature is absolute and perfect through God, the human thought is the one and only feature of life that is controlled and changed by people. Humans have the ability to reason and to know that everything in life is determined. For every event that they encounter, humans are able to acknowledge the fact that it is a part of their life plan. Therefore, a person can control whether he/she accepts that the action is unchangeable. Many humans think that they have a choice for all that they do and all that happens to them. But in Stoic reality, natures plan has one path with no possible differences. Thus, good is not defined by what a person does; but, by a per...
Whether Socrates is portrayed correctly or not, he certainly was a great man. His contribution to western thought cannot be denied. For even if his teachings were different from what they are known to be at present, his influence on Plato is immense. And so, it is no small matter to describe the tragic passing of such a man as Socrates was and remains for philosophy today. Yet in all the indignation which is expected to arise at the death of Socrates, the panache with which he departs is captured excellently in Plato's “Apology.” Specifically, at the end of the "Apology," Socrates makes a very important statement that has had great impact on philosophy ever since its original proclamation. The Stoics in particular have taken this to be the cornerstone of their ideology. The statement made is that "you must regard one thing at least as certain—that no harm can come to a good man either in his life or after his death,” (Plato 100). The following examination focuses therefore on a brief explanation of the circumstances which lead to this statement being made by Socrates, as well as a closer look at why he thinks this to be the case. It is assumed that this statement is true, and validation for that assumption is to be sought as well.
Stoicism is a philosophical school of thought that asserts virtue as the one true good that can produce eudemonia, the Stoic term for happiness or living well. This good is accessible to all, by means of using impressions properly and behaving in accordance with god and nature. Virtue is a good achieved through both internal and external sources. The Stoics associated virtue with the venerated status of sage, which can be achieved only when the soul is unwaveringly consistent with true human nature. But what is human nature? Unlike many philosophical theories that focus on the role of emotions in human nature, the Stoics thought human nature to be closely tied to rationality. The Stoics believed that it was human nature to seek out good and happiness, and that all wrong choices are made in the pursuit or avoidance of a wrongfully perceived value. These errors in rationale and perception contribute to the formation of false beliefs, which causes non-virtuous or vicious behavior. Determinism, or the acceptance of living in accord with events outside of our control is a key feature of Stoic theory. This strict determinism allows Stoics to distance themselves from encumbering emotional reactions that are often associated with negative or positive outcomes. A stoic would attempt to dissuade a non-sage from engaging in emotions because they lack the capacity of assenting strictly to kataleptic impressions because emotions negatively effect their beliefs. In order to behave in accordance with this logic it requires a rejection of common emotions. Ordinary emotions such as pleasure and fear are considered false impression, which contribute to a bad mental state. In order to avoid assenting to false impressions one must gain a rational und...
The mindsets of people in society are often heavily influenced by the conflicts and circumstances that are common within the time-span in which these people lived. In times of war, people may be more patriotic; in times of pestilence, people may be more pious. Whether cynical or optimistic, the understandings of these mindsets allow for a better insight into how theses people lived their lives and the philosophies that guided them. In the case of the philosophers Plato and Epictetus, their philosophies sprang up amidst collapsing cities and exile. Plato and Epictetus’ philosophies differed due to their individual experiences in that Plato believed that all is not what it seemed, while Epictetus believed that what was presented should only matter if they are within an individual’s concern.
The current inquiry considers some of the chief notions of the Stoics, but more specifically it focuses upon one important question: what does it mean to follow nature for the Stoics? To answer this question, the testimonies of several of the Stoics are pooled and examined together in the end. Not only does this inquisition illustrate chief attributes of Stoicism, but those attributes are eventually evaluated in light of their coherence as well.
Stoicism was popularized by the Roman elite of the Late Republic, and it appealed to the elites especially because it provided teachings on how to deal with strife. During the civil war between Pompey the Great and Julius Caesar and the resulting power vacuum after Caesar's assassination, the chaos and violence caused a desire for an...
As one ponders on how to live a good life, many ideas come to mind. Whether this may be wealth, family, or beauty, the early philosopher’s theories need to be taken into consideration. Those early philosophers include Plato, Aristotle, the Stoics, and The Epicureans. These four committed their lives towards bettering life, and are the basis of most philosophical theories. It is evident that these four need to be read, understood, and discussed to better understand one’s life. They always pondered on the thought of how to have a perfect life and society. When one makes their own theory, based upon these early philosophers, not only do they need to establish a strong belief system, it is required to practice this too. Plato had the most basic of theories, being that only virtue was needed in life to be happy and nothing else. For Aristotle, he used Plato’s foundation and added that external goods, such as wealth, respect, friends, and beauty were all necessary. Without one of these, Aristotle believes that one cannot live a happy life. For the Stoics, they settled on a balanced approached between virtue and external goods, saying that virtue is necessary, yet external goods are preferred too. The Epicureans largely argue the Stoics view, and present that pleasure (tranquility) is the goal of every life, but virtues and friends are required for this. Each theory has many critics, even with Aristotle being a critic of his own theory. None seems perfect, yet all fit today’s modern society. I found that I agree with the Stoics theory the most, and find that any external good is fine as long as virtue is the basis of that person’s life.
Many stoic philosophers have taken a different approach to virtue and happiness. Homer and Epicurus for instance argue that happiness through desires and virtue are co-dependent suggesting that men with no desires cannot live happy lives. This slightly counters Seneca’s belief that happiness is a result of virtue.
With their philosophical roots grounded in ancient Greece, Stoicism and Epicureanism had contrary yet significant impacts on Roman society. These two philosophies differed in many of their basic theories. Stoics attempted to reach a moral level where they had freedom from passion, while Epicureans strove for pleasure and avoided all types of pain. Stoics like the Epicureans, emphasized ethics as the main field of knowledge, but they also developed theories of logic and natural science to support their ethical doctrines.
Epicurus. The Epicurus Reader: Selected Writings and Testimonia. Hackett Publishing Company, Inc., 1994. Translated and Edited by Brad Inwood and L.P. Gerson.
Marcus Aurelius was a famous philosopher in 121 through 180 C.E. He lived a hard life and even though he was surrounded by crowds he was considered a recluse. He was known for his kindness and mercy. The last years of his life were spent on a military campaign. It is said that these years were the hardest and loneliest. However, instead of becoming bitter and angry Aurelius wrote The Meditations. This was a diary or journal of his personal thoughts. He believed that by writing this it was his duty to his soul. The Meditations, is a popular piece of stoic literature. In this paper I will be describing how Aurelius used stoicism in book two of The Meditations and what I liked and did not like about what he said.
When growing up in a predominantly Catholic background it is frowned upon to question the basis of human existence and the correct way to live your life. Catholics always assume the basis is God and to follow Jesus’s teachings. This essay will show how my life has slightly altered from a Christian background to a way of critical thinking through the writings of the Ancient Philosophers like the Stoics and Skeptics. First, I will show how the definition of God has altered in my mind because of Xenophanes definition of one unmoving unknowable effortless God. Then I will explain how I have less anxiety because of the Stoics way of living. Lastly, I will explain how none of my new and old thoughts are completely truthful because there will always