Stoicism was a group of philosophers in the First Century who made laws that they thought should be followed by the citizens of Rome. Two of these laws were the concepts of rationality and nature. Marcus Aurelius was the Emperor of Rome at the time and he also the most known Stoic. His concepts were vital to the survival of the Stoics.
The concept of rationality is what tells a human being what’s right and wrong and what should be done and what is good for the human and the state by thinking. “the reason also, in respect which we are rational beings, is common: if this is so, common also is the reason which commands us what to do, and what not to do; if this is so, there is a common law also; if this is so, we are fellow citizens; if this is so, we are members of some political community; if this is so, the world is in manner of a state.”(1) Marcus Aurelius says here that the citizens who are ration beings as a part of the whole political spectrum, should combine to make he world one state. He wants the world to join as one state and governed by one, the people are all part of the same political system, so they should join together.
In his Meditations Aurelius talks about every action having a purpose. “Let no act be done without a purpose, nor otherwise than according to the perfect principles of art.”(2) He says here that the reason we have is because everything we do has a purpose. The purposes are there because they are the unwritten rules of art. These rules are abided because they just happen. The art sets its own rules through the purposes of the acts that are done. No act should be done if it does not follow the rules of art. Yet, the rules of are made by the act’s purposes. This meaning everything has a reason why it is done and the purposes are legitimate.
A man’s life does not become worse unless he makes it worse. “That which does not make his life worse, nor does it harm him either from without or with in.”(3) In this quote, Aurileus tells the Stoics that the things that don’t harm him won’t make his life worse inside or outside including the soul. This meaning that a person should do what they feel is right, because it will not hurt them physically or mentally.
... against him. With regard to the second objection, Aristotle can begin by accepting that whereas it is indeed true that the parts prior to the whole or the polis - the single associations, respectively - do not contain the virtue for the achievement of eudaimonia in themselves alone, it is through the conjunction of them all that the capacity for this virtue emerges. Indeed, the parts of the city-state are not to be taken distinctively. For instance, whereas five separate individuals alone may not have the capacity to each lift a 900 lbs piano, the five together, nonetheless, can be said to be able to accomplish this. Similarly, it is the city-state with all of its parts that can achieve the good life. In any case, it remains that humankind is essentially political since it fulfills the function of reason, and this function is best performed under the city-state.
This man had spent the better part of a year reading and rereading the Handbook of Epictetus, throughout that book the message is similar to one of the topics Sherman touches on, “Some things are up to us and some are not up to us,”(pg 2). Basically the circumstances maybe beyond our control, but ultimately what affects us is our judgements and the way we react. She makes a great point that we underutilize our ability to control ourselves when we let external things drive our happiness and that is the difference in so many people's lives, they wager their happiness and satisfaction on factors that should not ultimately
Cicero believed humans to not be estranged in essence, he thought the contrary, all were connected through god and his divine law and plan. Through following god’s law, humans could achieve what was planned for humanity. The scholar asserted that through a uniting universal force, humans had a sense of togetherness in their essence and who they were. He asserted that a common good could be achieved if enough effort would be applied.
	Living is about making choices. The choices people make shape their lives for better or worse. Even the decision not to choose has its effects, often not wanted. But the individual who chooses to make positive choices and to act accordingly is more likely to see his or her life reflect his or her beliefs and desires. Usually the individual who chooses to take action is also willing to face the risks and obstacles that such choices involve.
“The Greek maxim ‘Nothing in excess’” (Hollister 131) illustrates the need for self-control. Every tragic hero ended up committing an act of hubris based on his own fatal flaw. Many of those fatal flaws could have served the man and his country if tempered with self-control. “In the field of ethics, [Aristotle] advocated moderation in all behavior, arguing that emotions and actions (anger and love, eating and drinking) are themselves neither good nor evil and should be neither suppressed nor carried to excess: virtue is the avoidance of extremes, the ‘golden mean’” (Hollister 130).
Thrasymachus also argues that it is advantageous to live an immoral life rather than a moral one. He says, "morality and right are actually good for someone else… and bad for the underling at the receiving end of the orders… the opposite is true for immorality: the wrongdoer lords it over those ...
Cicero, was truly a man of the state. His writings also show us he was equally a man of
P. Vander Waerdt, Philosophical Influence on Roman Jurisprudence? The Case of Stoicism and Natural Law ANRW 4.36 (1990)
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.
There are both positive and negative consequences for all the actions that one does, unfortunately, Odysseus’ were not so positive.
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
Aristotle’s emphasis is on the city-state, or the political world as a natural occurrence. He says “every city-state exists by nature, since the first communities do.” (Aristotle 3). Aristotle continually reiterates the notion that the creation of a community comes from necessity; individuals aim at the highest good of all, happiness, through their own rationality, and the only way to achieve happiness is through the creation of the city-state. Aristotle follows the creation of a household and a village to the creation of the city-state in which citizens are able to come together to aim at the “good which has the most authority of all,” (Aristotle 1) happiness. In turn, this necessity for the formation of a city state comes from the idea of man as a rational being. “It is also clear why a human being is more of a political animal than a bee or any other gregarious animal… no animal has speech except for a human being.” (Aristotle 4). For Aristotle, human beings are political animals because of their ability to speak, their ability to communicate pleasures and desires, and their ability to reason. Aristotle’s state com...
Aristotle tries to draw a general understanding of the human good, exploring the causes of human actions, trying to identify the most common ultimate purpose of human actions. Indeed, Aristotelian’s ethics, also investigates through the psychological and the spiritual realms of human beings.
Aristotle’s thoughts on ethics conclude that all humans must have a purpose in life in order to be happy. I believe that some of the basics of his ideas still hold true today. This essay points out some of those ideas.
Marcus Aurelius was a stoic. In the book Archetypes of Wisdom, Soccio defines stoicism as a philosophy that, “counsel’s self-control, detachment, and acceptance of one’s fate as identified by the objective use of reason. Stoics believed that everything is about your attitude and that happiness comes only through the detachment from all external things. In book two of The Meditations Aurelius writes that nothing can injure him because no one can implicate him in what is degrading. This would be considered a stoic thought because Marcus is not letting external factors influence his happiness. Another example would be that when he speaks of his brother. His stepbrother Verus was very incompetent, but Aurelius could not turn his back on him, because it would go against Nature. Nature is the same thing as Logos. Logos is a force that governs the universe. It is also known as World Reason, Cosmic Mind, God, Zeus, Nature, Providence, Cosmic Meaning, and Fate. He mentions several of these throughout the document.