Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essays on stoics
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Essays on stoics
Much of the knowledge pertaining to virtue is the resulting work of Stoics, such as Plato, Aristotle, and Marcus Aurelius. Stoicism can be referred to as the foundation of Christianity however, the lack of a personal relationship with “The One” or God prevents Stoics' souls from reaching their great potential.
Principally, Stoics fundamentally believed that “every event that occurs in the cosmos, from the most important to the most trivial, was fated to occur, and determined to occur” (Brennan, 235). They were fatalists. Furthermore, Stoics, as a whole, tended to view the physical and intellectual world in analytical and logical terms. In Stoicism and its Influence, R. M. Wenley makes the point that “the Stoics attempted to frame a theory of the physical universe, of the individual man as he finds himself under compulsion in this universe and, combining the two, to formulate a rule of life in conformity with Reason” (75). Consequently, Stoics wanted to achieve an other-worldly understanding of the physical and intellectual world they resided in. Moreover, the most important contribution to their central argument was that the highest good lies in virtue, and that the final purpose for man is to achieve happiness.
To achieve said good, many Stoics, like Plato, believed a set, careful process primarily focused in education and meditation was necessary. Marcus Aurelius, a Roman Emperor and Stoic, believed that through “following after the things produced according to nature”, one could begin to develop a virtuous soul, as shown in his Meditations (Book III: 2). Continuing his discourse of Platonic and Aristotelian principles, in Book II, line 7, Aurelius advises his reader to “give thyself time to learn something new and good, a...
... middle of paper ...
... (Romans 16: 25-27). In addition to reading these sacred texts, Christians had to abandon logic and reason and simply rely on their faith in order to achieve this happiness.
In conclusion, the wisdom achieved through Stoic principles is the foundation of the Christian religion. However, the impersonal relationship central to Stoic philosophy prevents its followers from obtaining the glorious after life known to Christians. The element of reason woven into the foundation of Stoicism greatly hindered the potential of its believers. Unlike the Stoics, Christians' personal relationship with their monotheistic God not only endows them with the instructions necessary to daily life, but also eliminates all mystery regarding the after life. Christians know without a single shred of doubt that their eternal life with their monotheistic God will be full of peace and bliss.
Moran, Sean. "Greek Conceptions of Virtue." Waterford Institute of Technology (n.d.): 1-5. Web. 30 Nov. 2013.
Over the course of human history every society, even the most culturally isolated of civilizations, has developed some form of faith-system for interpreting and understanding the spiritual and material worlds. Thousands of such systems have existed over the centuries, and as tribes and cultures expanded, these faith-systems inevitably met each other face-to-face and clashed. Two thousand years ago there was a particularly important collision; one between the Roman stoic and the gentile Christian. At this time in Western civilization, Christianity was just planting its seeds and beginning to grow, whereas stoicism was already legitimate in its foundation and strong in its following (Stavrianos 100). One might wonder how Christianity ultimately replaced stoicism as the prominent and official religion in Rome. There are a few particular political and historical events that tell us exactly when and how it happened, but the curious man is more concerned with the psychology behind the transition. In other words, why would men tend to prefer one over the other?
in order to lead a stress free life- what is the sense in being distressed over something that is beyond your control? The modern day notion of self-improvement implies changing one’s character to be a ‘better’ person. The issue of inconsistency is a result of the objectors’ misguided application of the modern day understanding of the terms. It is not an inconsistency that lies within Stoicism itself, but an inconsistent use of the definitions. The Stoics speak of one set of definitions and the charges speak of another. To prove inconsistency in their work it is necessary that the philosophy be challenged on it’s own terms. Therefore, the charges of inconsistency against Stoic determinism do not stand; they are misguided objections that do not coordinate with the Stoics established understanding of self-improvement and responsibility.
“Our hearts find no peace until they rest in you” (21). The return to God, the means of doing so, and the manners by which man is turned from him in the first place, are central themes in St. Augustine’s Confessions; a historical work serving as confession, praise, and examination of faith. Autobiographical in nature, Augustine’s work retells the story of his life and of his spiritual journey in retrospect, considering each event and its importance to the larger framework of his religious philosophy, a result of the merging of Neo-Platonist thought and Catholic theology. Through this fusion, Augustine is able to reconcile God and “evil,” make a distinction between the physical and spiritual realms, and lay out his views on how one can come to know and love God the truest sense possible; how one returns to him.
“Christianity is a religion of sacrifice and duty, even more than the stoics teach. In the end, Christianity will help the Roman Empire because it is making people better on the inside, where it counts.” “Christianity is the only real friend that Rome has.”
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.
Happiness is often viewed as a subjective state of mind in which one may say they are happy when they are on vacation with friends, spending time with their family, or having a cold beer on the weekend while basking in the sun. However, Aristotle and the Stoics define happiness much differently. In Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle describes happiness as “something final and self-sufficient, and is the end of action” (NE 1097b20). In this paper, I will compare and contrast Aristotle and the Stoics’ view on human happiness. Aristotle argues that bodily and external goods are necessary to happiness, while Epictetus argues they are not.
As a worldview, Stoicism is a philosophical approach to help people to cope with times of great stress and troubles. In order to give comfort to humanity, the Stoics agree with the Pantheistic view that God and nature are not separate. Instead, the two forces are one. By believing that God is nature, humans have a sense of security because nature, like God, is recognized as rational and perfect. The perfection of nature is explained through the Divine, or natural, Law. This law gives everything in nature a predetermined plan that defines the future based on past evens (cause and effect). Because the goal for everything in nature is to fulfill its plan, the reason for all that happens in nature is because it is a part of the plan. It is apparent that, because this law is of God, it must be good. The Divine Law is also universal. Everything on the planet has a plan that has already been determined. There are no exceptions or limitations to the natural law. The world in the Stoics’ eyes is flawless, equal, and rational.
W. Andrew Hoffecker. Building a Christian World View, vol. 1: God, man, and Knowledge. Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., Phillipsburg, New Jersey : 1986. William S. Babcock. The Ethics of St. Augustine: JRE Studies in Religion, no. 3.
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.
When comparing Aristotle and Jesus, we should look at the different beliefs the two have about life, and virtue by asking questions such as; what are we all pursing in this life? Or, what exactly is virtue, and how does Aristotle’s and Jesus’s view compare to each other? Another question that presents its self when reading about these two is, what exactly makes somebody character truly virtuous or moral? Although there is no one for sure answer to these question, both Aristotle and Jesus devoted there life’s to study and teach about what they believed were the answers and it brings two very different but very interesting points of views on how Greek and Christian view the world.
The intellectual traditions of the ancient world tend to focus on answering four questions that play into the purpose of one’s life. The four questions being, who am I, where am I, who am I with and what is necessary to be happy. Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Epicurus and Epictetus all had different opinions on these questions which allowed me to develop my own understanding through dissection of their philosophies. These four questions were also addressed through several aspects of readings throughout the quarter. The purpose of good and evil, religion, civilization, government, honor, shame and pleasure all helped develop some concrete background for the philosophers to apply their thinking.
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.
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.
“All of morals comes down to the virtues.” (Keenan, 142) Keenan asserts that these virtues are the cardinal virtues, consisting of courage, temperance, justice, and prudence, and date back to Aristotle in Ancient Greece. The word cardinal is derived from the root, cardo, meaning hinge. Simply stated, the Christian moral life hinges on the cardinal virtues. Keenan suggests an updating of the cardinal virtues to become justice, fidelity, self-care, and prudence. He provides reasoning for the new virtue list. He defines each virtue with its social implications. For example, individuals should seek to set up society with equal justice for all persons. These descriptions help the Christian understand when the virtues are best applicable to self and/or others. Thomas Aquinas adds three theological virtues to the mix: faith, hope, and charity. Familiar from the thirteenth chapter of I Corinthians, these virtues seek to help Christian theologians through the ages maintain the integrity of the Gospel and continue to make it relevant in the modern world. Keenan recounts Bernard of Clairvaux’s beliefs that cultivating the virtues is a way to assimilate with the humanity of Jesus. (Keenan, 136) According to Aquinas, “Every human action is a moral action.” (Keenan, 142) The purpose of the virtues is to guide Christians, and when the Christian studies and applies the virtues to his life, his actions will demonstrate morality. The Bible heralds in Proverbs 3:32, “Devious people are detestable to the Lord, but the virtuous are his close