Epictetus (55–135 C.E.)
Epictetus (pronounced
Epic-TEE-tus) was an exponent of Stoicism who flourished in the early
second century C.E. about four hundred years after the Stoic school of Zeno
of Citium was established in Athens.
He lived and worked, first as a student in Rome,
and then as a teacher with his own school in Nicopolis in Greece. Our
knowledge of his philosophy and his method as a teacher comes to us via two
works composed by his student Arrian, the Discourses and the Handbook. Although
Epictetus based his teaching on the works of the early Stoics (none of which
survives) which dealt with the three branches of Stoic thought, logic, physics
and ethics, the Discourses and
the Handbook concentrate almost
exclusively on ethics. The role of the Stoic teacher was to encourage his
students to live the philosophic life, whose end was eudaimonia ('happiness' or
'flourishing'), to be secured by living the life of reason, which – for Stoics
– meant living virtuously and living 'according to nature'. The eudaimonia ('happiness') of those who
attain this ideal consists of ataraxia
(imperturbability), apatheia
(freedom from passion), eupatheiai
('good feelings'), and an awareness of, and capacity to attain, what counts as
living as a rational being should. The key to transforming oneself into the
Stoic sophos (wise person) is
to learn what is 'in one's power', and this is 'the correct use of impressions'
(phantasiai), which in outline
involves not judging as good or bad anything that appears to one. For the only
thing that is good is acting virtuously (that is, motivated by virtue), and the
only thing that is bad is the opposite, acting viciously (that is, motivated by
vice). Someone who seeks to make progress as a Stoic (a prokoptôn) understands that their power
of rationality is a fragment of God whose material body – a sort of rarefied
fiery air – blends with the whole of creation, intelligently forming and
directing undifferentiated matter to make the world as we experience it. The
task of the prokoptôn,
therefore, is to 'live according to nature', which means (a) pursuing a course
through life intelligently responding to one's own needs and duties as a
sociable human being, but also (b) wholly accepting one's fate and the fate of
the world as coming directly from the divine intelligence which makes the world
the best that is possible.
Table of Contents
- Life
- Writings
- Epictetus' Stoicism
- Key Concepts
- The Promise of Philosophy
- What is Really Good
- What is in our Power
- Making Proper Use of Impressions
- The Three Topoi
- God
- On Living in Accord with Nature
- Metaphors for Life
- Making Progress
- Glossary of Terms
- References and Further Reading
1. Life
It is possible to draw only a basic sketch of
Epictetus' life. Resources at our disposal include just a handful of references
in the ancient texts, to which we can add the few allusions that Epictetus
makes to his own life in the Discourses.
Epictetus was born in about 55 C.E. in Hierapolis in
Phrygia (modern-day Pamukkale, in south-western Turkey). As a boy he somehow
came to Rome as a slave of Epaphroditus who was a rich and powerful freedman,
having himself been a slave of the Emperor Nero (he had been an administrative
secretary). Whilst still a slave, Epictetus studied with the Stoic teacher Musonius
Rufus.
There is a story told by the author Celsus (probably a
younger contemporary of Epictetus) – quoted by the early Christian Origen (c.185–254) at Contra Celsum 7.53 – that when still a slave, Epictetus was
tortured by his master who twisted his leg. Enduring the pain with complete
composure, Epictetus warned Epaphroditus that his leg would break, and when it
did break, he said, 'There, did I not tell you that it would break?' And from
that time Epictetus was lame. The Suda
(tenth century), however, although confirming that Epictetus was lame,
attributes his affliction to rheumatism.
At some point Epictetus was manumitted, and in about 89,
along with other philosophers then in Rome, was banished by the Emperor
Domitian. He went to Nicopolis in Epirus (in north-western Greece) where he
opened his own school which acquired a good reputation, attracting many
upper-class Romans. One such student was Flavius Arrian (c.86–160) who would compose the Discourses and the Handbook, and who later served in public
office under the Emperor Hadrian and made his mark as a respected historian
(much of his writings survive). Origen (Contra
Celsum 6.2) reports that Epictetus had been more popular in his day
than had Plato in his. Aulus Gellius (c.125–c.165) reports that one of Marcus
Aurelius' teachers, Herodes Atticus (c.101–177),
considered Epictetus to be 'the greatest of Stoics' (Attic Nights 1.2.6).
Our sources report that Epictetus did not marry, had
no children, and lived to an old age. With respect to marriage and children we
may note the story from Lucian (Demonax
55) about the Cynic philosopher Demonax who had been a pupil of Epictetus. On
hearing Epictetus exhort his students to marry and have children (for it was a
philosopher's duty to provide a substitute ready for the time when they would
die), he sarcastically asked Epictetus whether he could marry one of his
daughters.
2. Writings
It appears that Epictetus wrote nothing himself. The
works we have that present his philosophy were written by his student, Flavius
Arrian. We may conjecture that the Discourses
and the Handbook were written
some time around the years 104–107, at the time when Arrian (born c.86) was most likely to have been a
student.
Dobbin (1998), though, holds the view that the Discourses and the Handbook were actually written by
Epictetus himself; the Suda
does say, after all, that Epictetus 'wrote a great deal'. Dobbin is not entirely
convinced by Arrian's claim in his dedicatory preface that he wrote down
Epictetus' words verbatim;
firstly, stenographic techniques at this time were primitive, and anyway were
the preserve of civil servants; secondly, most of the discourses are too polished,
and look too much like carefully crafted prose to be the product of impromptu
discussions; and thirdly, some of the discourses (notably 1.29, 3.22 and 4.1)
are too long for extempore conversations.
There is no way to resolve this question with certainty.
Whether the texts we have do indeed represent a serious attempt to record
Epictetus at work verbatim,
whether draft texts were later edited and rewritten (as seems wholly likely),
possibly by Epictetus, or whether Epictetus did in fact write the texts
himself, drawing on his recollections as a lecturer with only occasional
attempts at strictly verbatim
accuracy, we shall never know. But what we can be certain of, regardless of who
actually wrote the words onto the papyrus to make the first draft of the text
as we have it today, is that those words were intended to present Stoic moral
philosophy in the terms and the style that Epictetus employed as a teacher
intent on bringing his students to philosophic enlightenment as the Stoics had
understood this enterprise.
a. Discourses
Written in Koine Greek, the everyday contemporary form
of the language, Epictetus' Discourses
appear to record the exchanges between Epictetus and his students after formal
teaching had concluded for the day. Internal textual evidence confirms that the
works of the early Stoic philosophers (Zeno, Cleanthes and Chrysippus) were
read and discussed in Epictetus' classes, but this aspect of Epictetus'
teaching is not recorded by Arrian. What we have, then, are intimate, though
earnest, discussions in which Epictetus aims to make his students consider
carefully what the philosophic life – for a Stoic – consists in, and how to
live it oneself. He discusses a wide range of topics, from friendship to
illness, from fear to poverty, on how to acquire and maintain tranquillity, and
why we should not be angry with other people.
Not all of the Discourses
appear to have survived, as the ancient Byzantine scholar Photius (c.810–c.893)
reports that the complete text originally comprised eight books, whereas all we have today are four books. Because
the text, chapter by chapter, jumps to different topics and shows no orderly
development, it is not readily apparent that anything is missing, and indeed,
the reference to eight books may be mistaken (though another author, Aulus
Gellius, at Attic Nights
19.1.14, refers to the fifth
book of the Discourses). The
range of topics is sufficiently broad for us to be reasonably confident that,
even if some of the text has been lost, what we lack by and large repeats and
revisits the material that we have in the book as it has come down to us. (To
find translations of the Discourses
on-line, please visit my 'Translations of Epictetus on the Internet' page at my
BT site or my Geocities
site.)
b. The Handbook
This little book appears to be an abstract of the Discourses, focusing on key themes in
Epictetus' teaching of Stoic ethics. Some of the text is taken from the Discourses, and the fact that not all of
it can be correlated with passages in the larger work supports the view that
some of the Discourses has
indeed been lost. (To find translations of the Handbook on-line, please visit my 'Translations of Epictetus
on the Internet' page at my BT site or my Geocities
site.)
3. Epictetus' Stoicism
The writings of the early Stoics, of Zeno (335–263
B.C.E.) the founder of the school, of Chrysippus (c.290–207 B.C.E.) the extremely influential third head of
the Stoa, and of others, survive only
as quoted fragments found in later works. The question arises as to what extent
Epictetus preserved the original doctrines of the Stoic school, and to what
extent, if any, he branched out with new emphases and innovations of his own. The
nineteenth-century Epictetan scholar Adolf Bonhöffer (1998, 3) remarks:
'[Epictetus] is completely free of the eclecticism of Seneca and Marcus
Aurelius; and, compared with his teacher Musonius Rufus … his work reveals a
considerably closer connection to Stoic doctrine and terminology as developed
mainly by Chrysippus.' Evidence internal to the Discourses indicates that Epictetus was indeed faithful to
the early Stoics. At 1.4.28–31, Epictetus praises Chrysippus in the highest
terms, saying of him, 'How great the benefactor who shows the way! … who has
discovered, and brought to light, and communicated, the truth to all, not
merely of living, but of living well' (trans. Hard). It would be inconsistent,
if not wholly ridiculous, to laud Chrysippus in such terms and then proceed to
depart oneself from the great man's teaching. At 1.20.15, Epictetus quotes
Zeno, and at 2.6.9–10 he quotes Chrysippus, to support his arguments. Aulus
Gellius (Attic Nights 19.1.14)
says that Epictetus' Discourses
'undoubtedly agree with the writings of Zeno and Chrysippus'.
Scholars are agreed that the 'doctrine of the three
topics (topoi)' (fields of
study) which we find in the Discourses
originates with Epictetus (see Bonhöffer 1996, 32; Dobbin 1998, xvii; Hadot
1998, 83; More 1923, 107). Oldfather (1925, xxi, n. 1), in the introduction to
his translation of the Discourses,
remarks that 'this triple division … is the only notable original element …
found in Epictetus, and it is rather a pedagogical device for lucid
presentation than an innovation in thought'. Our enthusiasm for this division
being wholly original to Epictetus should be tempered with a reading of
extracts from Seneca's Moral Letters
(75.8–18 and 89.14–15) where we also find a threefold division of ethics which,
although not exactly similar to Epictetus' scheme, suggests the possibility
that both Seneca and Epictetus drew on work by their predecessors that, alas,
has not survived. Suffice it so say, what
Epictetus teaches by means of his threefold division is wholly in accord with
the principles of the early Stoics, but how
he does this is uniquely his own method. The programme of study and exercises
that Epictetus' students adhered to was in consequence different from the
programme that was taught by his predecessors, but the end result, consisting
in the special Stoic outlook on oneself and the world at large and the ability
to 'live the philosophic life', was the same.
4. Key Concepts
a. The Promise of Philosophy
Epictetus, along with all other philosophers of the
Hellenistic period, saw moral philosophy as having the practical purpose of
guiding people towards leading better lives. The aim was to live well, to
secure for oneself eudaimonia
('happiness' or 'a flourishing life'), and the different schools and
philosophers of the period offered differing solutions as to how the eudaimôn life was to be won.
No less true of us today than it was for the ancients,
few people are content with life (let alone wholly content), and what
contributes to any contentment that may be enjoyed is almost certainly
short-lived and transient.
The task for the Stoic teacher commences with the
understanding that (probably) everyone is not eudaimôn for much, or even all, of the time; that there is a
reason for this being the case and, most importantly, that there are solutions
that can remedy this sorry state of affairs.
Indeed, Epictetus metaphorically speaks of his school
as being a hospital to which students would come seeking treatments for their
ills (Discourses 3.23.30). Each
of us, in consequence merely of being human and living in society, is well
aware of what comprise these ills. In the course of daily life we are beset by
frustrations and setbacks of every conceivable type. Our cherished enterprises
are hindered and thwarted, we have to deal with hostile and offensive people,
and we have to cope with the difficulties and anxieties occasioned by the
setbacks and illnesses visited upon our friends and relations. Sometimes we are
ill ourselves, and even those who have the good fortune to enjoy sound health
have to face the fact of their own mortality. In the midst of all this, only
the rare few are blessed with lasting and rewarding relationships, and even
these relationships, along with everything
that constitutes a human life, are wholly transient.
But what is philosophy? Does it not mean making
preparation to meet the things that come upon us? (Discourses 3.10.6, trans. Oldfather)
The ills we suffer, says Epictetus, result from
mistaken beliefs about what is truly good. We have invested our hope in the
wrong things, or at least invested it in the wrong way. Our capacity to
flourish and be happy (to attain eudaimonia)
is entirely dependent upon our own characters, how we dispose ourselves to
ourselves, to others, and to events generally. What qualities our characters
come to have is completely up to us. Therefore, how well we flourish is also
entirely up to us.
b. What is Really Good
The central claim of Stoic ethics is that only the
virtues and virtuous activities are good, and that the only evil is vice and
actions motivated by vice (see Discourses
2.9.15 and 2.19.13). When someone pursues pleasure or wealth, say, believing
these things to be good, the Stoics hold that this person has made a mistake
with respect to the nature of the things pursued and the nature of their own
being, for the Stoics deny that advantages such as pleasure and health (wealth
and status, and so forth) are good,
because they do not benefit those who possess them in all circumstances. Virtue,
on the other hand, conceived as the capacity to use such advantages wisely,
being the only candidate for that which is always beneficial, is held to be the
only good thing (see Plato, Euthydemus
278e–281e and Meno 87c–89a).
Thus, the Stoics identify the eudaimôn ('happy') life as one that is
motivated by virtue. The term we translate as 'virtue' (from the Latin virtus) is aretê, and means 'excellence'. To progress towards
excellence as a human being, for Epictetus, means understanding the true nature
of one's being and keeping one's prohairesis
(moral character) in the right condition. Epictetus uses the term aretê only occasionally, and whereas the
early Stoics spoke of striving for excellence as what was proper for a rational
creature and required for eudaimonia
('happiness' or well-being), Epictetus speaks of striving to maintain one's prohairesis in proper order (see Discourses 1.4.18 and 1.29.1).
Although things such as material comfort, for
instance, will be pursued by the Stoic student who seeks eudaimonia, they will do this in a different
way from those not living the 'philosophic life' – for Stoics claim that
everything apart from virtue (what is good) and vice (what is bad) is indifferent, that is, 'indifferent' with
regard to being good or bad. It is how one makes
use of indifferent things that establishes how well one is making
progress towards aretê (moral
excellence) and a eudaimôn
('happy') life.
Indifferent things are either 'preferred' or
'dispreferred'. Preferred are health and wealth, friends and family, and pretty
much all those things that most people pursue as desirable for leading a
flourishing life. Dispreferred are their opposites: sickness and poverty,
social exclusion, and pretty much all those things that people seek to avoid as
being detrimental for a flourishing life. Thus, the preferred indifferents have
value for a Stoic, but not in terms of their being good: they have an instrumental value with respect to their
capacities to contribute to a flourishing life as the objects upon which our
virtuous actions are directed (see Discourses
1.29.2). The Stoic does not lament their absence, for their presence is not
constitutive of eudaimonia. What
is good is the virtuous use one makes of such preferred things should they be
to hand, but no less good are one's virtuous dispositions in living as well as
one may, even when they are lacking.
c. What is in our Power
To maintain our prohairesis
(moral character) in the proper condition – the successful accomplishment of
this being necessary and sufficient for eudaimonia
('happiness') – we must understand what is eph'
hêmin ('in our power' or 'up to us'; see Discourses 1.22.9–16). If we do not do this, our prohairesis will remain in a faulty
condition, for we will remain convinced that things such as wealth and status
are good when they are really indifferent, troubled by frustrations and
anxieties, subject to disturbing emotions we do not want and cannot control,
all of which make life unpleasant and unrewarding, sometimes overwhelmingly so.
This is why Epictetus remarks: 'This is the proper goal, to practise how to
remove from one's life sorrows and laments, and cries of "Alas" and
"Poor me", and misfortune and disappointment' (Discourses 1.4.23, trans. Dobbin).
No one is master of another's prohairesis [moral character], and in
this alone lies good and evil. No one, therefore, can secure the good for me,
or involve me in evil, but I alone have authority over myself in these matters.
(Discourses 4.12.7–8, trans.
Dobbin)
What is in our power, then, is the 'authority over
ourselves' that we have regarding our capacity to judge what is good and what
is evil. Outside our power are 'external things', which are 'indifferent' with
respect to being good or evil. These indifferents, as we saw in the previous
section, number those things that are conventionally deemed to be good and
those that are conventionally deemed to be bad. Roughly, they are things that
'just happen', and they are not in our power in the sense that we do not have
absolute control to make them occur just as we wish, or to make them have
exactly the outcomes that we desire. Thus, for example, sickness is not in our
power because it is not wholly up to us whether we get sick, and how often, nor
whether we will recover quickly or indeed at all. Now, it makes sense to visit a
doctor when we feel ill, but the competence of the doctor is not in our power,
and neither is the effectiveness of any treatment that we might be offered. So
generally, it makes sense to manage our affairs carefully and responsibly, but
the ultimate outcome of any affair is, actually, not in our power.
What is
in our power is the capacity to adapt ourselves to all that comes about, to
judge anything that is 'dispreferred' not as bad, but as indifferent and not
strong enough to overwhelm our strength of character.
The Handbook
of Epictetus begins with these words:
Some things are up to us [eph' hêmin] and some things are not up to us. Our opinions
are up to us, and our impulses, desires, aversions–in short, whatever is our
own doing. Our bodies are not up to us, nor are our possessions, our
reputations, or our public offices, or, that is, whatever is not our own doing.
(Handbook 1.1, trans. White)
That is, we have power over our own minds. The
opinions we hold of things, the intentions we form, what we value and what we
are averse to are all wholly up to us. Although we may take precautions,
whether our possessions are carried off by a thief is not up us (but the
intention to steal, that of
course is in the power of the thief), and our reputations, in whatever quarter,
must be decided by what other people think of us, and what they do think is up to them. Remaining calm in the face of
adversity and controlling our emotions no matter what the provocation
(qualities of character that to this day are referred to as 'being stoical'),
are accomplished in the full Stoic sense, for Epictetus, by making proper use
of impressions.
d. Making Proper Use of Impressions
To have an impression is to be aware of something in
the world. For example, I may look out of my window and have the impression of
an airship floating over the houses in the distance. Whether there is really an
airship there, half a mile off, or whether there is just a little helium-filled
model tied to my garden gate by a bit of string, is a separate question. 'Making
proper use of impressions' concerns how we move from the first thing, being
aware of something or other, to the second thing, making a judgement that
something or other is the case. The Stoic stands in sharp contrast to the
non-Stoic, for when the latter faces some disaster, say (let us imagine that
their briefcase has burst open and their papers are scattered by the wind all
along the station platform and onto the track), they will judge this a terrible
misfortune and have the appropriate emotional response to match. Epictetus
would declare that this person has made the wrong use of their impression.
In the first place, do not allow yourself to be
carried away by [the] intensity [of your impression]: but say, 'Impression,
wait for me a little. Let me see what you are, and what you represent. Let me
test you.' Then, afterwards, do not allow it to draw you on by picturing what
may come next, for if you do, it will lead you wherever it pleases. But rather,
you should introduce some fair and noble impression to replace it, and banish
this base and sordid one. (Discourses 2.18.24–5, trans. Hard)
Few non-Stoics, ignorant of Epictetus' teaching, would
do other than rush around after their papers, descending deeper and deeper into
a panic, imagining their boss at work giving them a dressing down for losing
the papers, making them work extra hours to make good the loss, and perhaps
even dismissing them from their job. The Stoic, by contrast, tests their
impression to see what the best interpretation should be: losing the papers is
a dispreferred indifferent, to be sure, but having an accident of this sort is
bound to happen once in a while, and is nothing to be troubled about. They will
quietly gather up the papers they can, and instead of panicking with respect to
facing their boss, they will rehearse a little speech about having had an
accident and what it means to have lost the papers. If their boss erupts in a
temper, well, that is a concern for the boss.
Our attaining the eudaimôn
('happy') life requires that we judge things in the right way, for 'what
disturbs men's minds is not events but their judgements on events' (Handbook 5, trans. Matheson).
Remember that foul words or blows in themselves are no
outrage, but your judgement that they are so. So when any one makes you angry,
know that it is your own thought that has angered you. Wherefore make it your
endeavour not to let your impressions carry you away. For if once you gain time
and delay, you will find it easier to control yourself. (Handbook 20, trans. Matheson)
e. The Three Topoi
The three topoi
(fields of study) establish activities in which the prokoptôn (Stoic student) applies their Stoic principles;
they are practical exercises or disciplines that when successfully followed are
constitutive of the eudaimôn
('happy') life which all rational beings are capable of attaining.
There are three areas of study, in which a person who
is going to be good and noble must be trained. That concerning desires and
aversions, so that he may never fail to get what he desires nor fall into what
he would avoid. That concerning the impulse to act and not to act, and, in
general, appropriate behaviour; so that he may act in an orderly manner and
after due consideration, and not carelessly. The third is concerned with freedom
from deception and hasty judgement, and, in general, whatever is connected with
assent. (Discourses 3.2.1–2,
trans. Hard)
Our capacity to employ these disciplines in the course
of daily life is eph' hêmin
('in our power' or 'up to us') because they depend on our opinions, judgements,
intentions and desires which concern the way we regard things over which our prohairesis (moral character) has
complete control.
i. The Discipline of Desire
The first discipline concerns what someone striving
for excellence as a rational being should truly believe is worthy of desire,
which for the Stoics is that which is truly good, virtue and action motivated
by virtue.
Of these [three areas of study], the principle, and
most urgent, is that which has to do with the passions; for these are produced
in no other way than by the disappointment of our desires, and the incurring of
our aversions. It is this that introduces disturbances, tumults, misfortunes,
and calamities; and causes sorrow, lamentation and envy; and renders us envious
and jealous, and thus incapable of listening to reason. (Discourses
3.2.3, trans. Hard)
Epictetus remarks: 'When I see a man anxious, I say,
What does this man want? If he did not want some thing which is not in his
power, how could he be anxious?' (Discourses
2.13.1, trans. Long). Those things that most of us, most of the time, seek
after as being desirable, what we consider will make our lives go well, are
things that are not in our power, and thus the hope we have for securing these
things is placed in the hands of others or in the hands of fate. And when we
are thwarted in our efforts to gain what we desire we become frustrated (or
depressed or envious or angry, or all of these things). To be afflicted with
such 'passions', says Epictetus, is the only real source of misery for human
beings. Instead of trying to relieve ourselves of these unpleasant emotions by
pressing all the harder to secure what we desire, we should rather place our
hope not in 'external' things that are not in our power, but in our own
dispositions and moral character. In short, we should limit our desire to
virtue and to becoming (to the best of our capacities) examples of
'excellence'. If we do not do this, the inevitable result is that we will
continue to desire what we may fail to obtain or lose once we have it, and in
consequence suffer the unhappiness of emotional disquiet (or worse). And as is
the common experience of all people at some time or other, when we are in the
grip of such emotions we run the risk of becoming blind to the best course of
action, even when construed in terms of pursuing 'external' things.
The Stoic prokoptôn,
in contrast, sets their hopes on excellence, recognising that this is where
their power over things lies. They will still pursue those 'preferred
indifferent external' things that are needed for fulfilling those functions and
projects that they deem appropriate for them as individuals, and those they
have obligations to meet. But they will not be distressed at setbacks or
failure, nor at obstructive people, nor at other difficulties (illness, for
instance), for none of these things is entirely up to them, and they engage in
their affairs in full consciousness of this fact. It is in maintaining this
consciousness of what is truly good (virtue), and awareness that the
indifferent things are beyond their power, that makes this a discipline for the Stoic prokoptôn.
ii. The Discipline of Action
The second discipline concerns our 'impulses to act
and not to act', that is, our motivations, and answers the question as to what
we each should do as an individual in our own unique set of circumstances to
successfully fulfil the role of a rational, sociable being who is striving for
excellence.
The outcome of our actions is not wholly in our power,
but our inclination to act one way rather than another, to pursue one set of
objectives rather than others, this is in
our power. The Stoics use the analogy of the archer shooting at a
target to explain this notion. The ideal, of course, is to hit the centre of
the target, though accomplishing this is not entirely in the archer's power,
for she cannot be certain how the wind will deflect the arrow from its path,
nor whether her fingers will slip, nor whether (for it is within the bounds of
possibility) the bow will break. The excellent archer does all within her power
to shoot well, and she recognises that doing her best is the best she can do. The
Stoic archer strives to shoot excellently, and will not be disappointed if she
shoots well but fails to hit the centre of the target. And so it is in life
generally. The non-Stoic views their success in terms of hitting the target,
whereas the Stoic views their success in terms of having shot well (see Cicero,
On Ends 3.22).
The [second area of study] has to do with appropriate
action. For I should not be unfeeling like a statue, but should preserve my
natural and acquired relations as a man who honours the gods, as a son, as a
brother, as a father, as a citizen. (Discourses
3.2.4, trans. Hard)
Appropriate acts are in general measured by the
relations they are concerned with. 'He is your father.' This means that you are
called upon to take care of him, give way to him in all things, bear with him
if he reviles or strikes you.
'But he is a bad father.'
Well, have you any natural claim to a good father? No, only to a father.
'My brother wrongs me.'
Be careful then to maintain the relation you hold to him, and do not consider what he does, but what you must do if your purpose is to keep in accord with nature. (Handbook 30, trans. Matheson)
The actions we undertake, Epictetus says, should be
motivated by the specific obligations that we have in virtue of who we are, our
natural relations to others, and what roles we have adopted in our dealings
with the wider community (see Discourses
2.10.7–13). Put simply, our interest to live well as rational beings obliges us
to act virtuously, to be patient, considerate, gentle, just, self-disciplined,
even-tempered, dispassionate, unperturbed, and when necessary, courageous. This
returns us to the central Stoic notion that the eudaimôn ('happy') life is realised by those who are
motivated by virtue. The Discipline of Action points out to the prokoptôn how this should be applied in
our practical affairs.
Epictetus sums up the first two disciplines:
We must have these principles ready to hand. Without
them we must do nothing. We must set our mind on this object: pursue nothing
that is outside us, nothing that is not our own, even as He that is mighty has
ordained: pursuing what lies within our will [prohairetika], and all else [i.e., indifferent things] only
so far as it is given to us. Further, we must remember who we are, and by what
name we are called, and must try to direct our acts [kathêkonta] to fit each situation and its
possibilities.
We must consider what is the time for singing, what the time for play, and in whose presence: what will be unsuited to the occasion; whether our companions are to despise us, or we to despise ourselves: when to jest, and whom to mock at: in a word, how one ought to maintain one's character in society. Wherever you swerve from any of these principles, you suffer loss at once; not loss from without, but issuing from the very act itself. (Discourses 4.12.15–18, trans. Matheson)
The loss here is of course loss of eudaimonia.
Failing to 'remember who we are' will result in our
failing to pursue those actions appropriate to our individual circumstances and
commitments. Epictetus says that this happens because we forget what 'name' we
have (son, brother, councillor, etc.), 'for each of these names, if rightly
considered, always points to the acts appropriate to it' (Discourses 2.10.11, trans. Hard). To
progress in the Discipline of Action, then, the prokoptôn must be conscious, moment by moment, of (a) which
particular social role they are playing, and (b) which actions are required or
appropriate for fulfilling that role to the highest standard.
iii. The Discipline of Assent
This exercise focuses on 'assenting to impressions',
and continues the discussion already introduced in the section above on making
proper use of impressions. 'Assent' translates the Greek sunkatathesis, which means 'approve',
'agree', or 'go along with'. Thus, when we assent to an impression (phantasia) we are committing ourselves to
it as a correct representation of how things are, and are saying, 'Yes, this is
how it is.' The Discipline of Assent, then, is an exercise applied to our
impressions in which we interpret and judge them in order to move from having
the impression of something or
other, to a declaration that
such-and-such is the case.
The third area of study has to do with assent, and
what is plausible and attractive. For, just as Socrates used to say that we are
not to lead an unexamined life [see Plato, Apology
38a], so neither are we to accept an unexamined impression, but to say, 'Stop,
let me see what you are, and where you come from', just as the night-watch say,
'Show me your token.' (Discourses
3.12.14–15, trans. Hard)
Make it your study then to confront every harsh
impression with the words, 'You are but an impression, and not at all what you
seem to be'. Then test it by those rules that you possess; and first by
this–the chief test of all–'Is it concerned with what is in our power or with
what is not in our power?' And if it is concerned with what is not in our
power, be ready with the answer that it is nothing to you. (Handbook 1.5, trans. Matheson)
And we should do this with a view to avoiding falling
prey to subjective (and false) evaluations so that we can be free from
deception and from making rash judgements about how to proceed in the first two
disciplines. For if we make faulty evaluations we will end up (with respect to
the first discipline) having desires for the wrong things (namely,
'indifferents'), and (with respect to the second discipline) acting
inappropriately with regard to our duties and obligations. This is why
Epictetus remarks that the third topic 'concerns the security of the other two'
(Discourses 3.2.5, trans. Long).
Epictetus runs through a number of imaginary
situations to show how we should be alert to the dangers of assenting to poorly
evaluated impressions:
… We ought … to exercise ourselves daily to meet the
impressions of our senses …. So-and-so's son is dead. Answer, 'That lies
outside the sphere of the moral purpose, it is not an evil.' His father has
disinherited So-and-so; what do you think of it? 'That lies outside the sphere
of the moral purpose, it is not an evil.' Caesar has condemned him. 'That lies
outside the sphere of the moral purpose, it is not an evil.' He was grieved at
all this. 'That lies within the sphere of the moral purpose, it is an evil.' He
has borne up under it manfully. 'That lies within the sphere of the moral
purpose, it is a good.' Now, if we acquire this habit, we shall make progress;
for we shall never give our assent to anything but that of which we get a
convincing sense-impression. His son is dead. What happened? His son is dead. Nothing
else? Not a thing. His ship is lost. What happened? His ship is lost. He was
carried off to prison. What happened? He was carried off to prison. But the
observation: 'He has fared ill,' is an addition that each man makes on his own
responsibility. (Discourses
3.8.1–5, trans. Oldfather)
What we must avoid, then, is adding to our impressions
immediately and without proper evaluation any notion that something good or bad
is at hand. For the only thing that is good is moral virtue, and the only harm
that anyone can come to is to engage in affairs motivated by vice. Thus, to see
the loss of a ship as a catastrophe would count as assenting to the wrong
impression, for the impression that we have is that of just a ship being lost. To
take the extra step of declaring that this is a misfortune and harmful would be
to assent to an impression that is not in fact present, and would be a mistake.
The loss of a ship, for a Stoic, is nothing more than a dispreferred
indifferent, and does not constitute a harm.
f. God
For Epictetus, the terms 'God', 'the gods', and 'Zeus'
are used interchangeably, and they appear frequently in the Discourses. In the Handbook, God is discussed as the
'captain' who calls us back on board ship, the subsequent voyage being a
metaphor for our departure from life (see Handbook
7). God is also portrayed as 'the Giver' to whom we should return all those
things we have enjoyed on loan when we lose close relatives or friends who die,
and when we lose our possessions through misfortune (see Discourses 4.10.16 and Handbook 11).
If the Stoic making progress (the prokoptôn) understands God, the universe,
and themselves in the right way, they 'will never blame the gods, nor find
fault with them' (Handbook
31.1, trans. Oldfather):
Will you be angry and discontented with the ordinances
of Zeus, which he, with the Fates who spun in his presence the thread of your
destiny at the time of your birth, ordained and appointed? (Discourses 1.12.25, trans. Hard)
Indeed, they will pray to God to lead them to the fate
that He has assigned them:
Lead me, Zeus, and you too, Destiny,
Wherever I am assigned by you;
I'll follow and not hesitate,
But even if I do not wish to,
Because I'm bad, I'll follow anyway.
(Handbook 53, trans. White = extract from Cleanthes' Hymn to Zeus)
Wherever I am assigned by you;
I'll follow and not hesitate,
But even if I do not wish to,
Because I'm bad, I'll follow anyway.
(Handbook 53, trans. White = extract from Cleanthes' Hymn to Zeus)
[For] God has stationed us to a certain place and way
of life. (Discourses 1.9.24,
trans. Dobbin)
Epictetus presents orthodox Stoic views on God. His
justification for believing in God is expressed essentially along the lines of
what we recognise as an argument from design. The order and harmony that we can
perceive in the natural world (from astronomical events to the way plants grow
and fruit in season) is attributed to a divine providence that orders and
controls the entire cosmos intelligently and rationally (see Discourses 1.6.1–11, 1.14.1–6, 1.16.7–8
and 2.14.11/25–7). The Stoics were materialists, and God is conceived of as a
type of fiery breath that blends perfectly with all other matter in the
universe. In doing this, God transforms matter from undifferentiated 'stuff' into
the varied forms that we see around us. This process is continuous, and God
makes the world as it is, doing what it does, moment by moment. Just as the
soul of a person is understood to bring alive and animate what would otherwise
be dead and inert matter, so God is thought of as the 'soul of the world', and
the universe is thought of as a sort of animal.
Stoics hold that the mind of each person is quite
literally a fragment (apospasma)
of God (see Discourses 2.8.11),
and that the rationality that we each possess is in fact a fragment of God's
rationality; and this Epictetus primarily identifies as the capacity we have to
make proper use of impressions (see Discourses
1.1.12). Epictetus expresses this in terms of what God has 'given us'; He is
conceived of as having constructed the universe in such a way that we have in
our possession all that is within the compass of our own character or moral
choice and nothing else, but
this is no reason for complaint:
What has He given me for my own and subject to my authority,
and what has He left for Himself? Everything within the sphere of the moral
purpose He has given me, subjected them to my control, unhampered and
unhindered. My body that is made of clay, how could He make that unhindered? Accordingly
He has made it subject to the revolution of the universe–[along with] my
property, my furniture, my house, my children, my wife. … But how should I keep
them? In accordance with the terms upon which they have been given, and for as
long as they can be given. But He who gave also takes away. …
And so, when you have received everything, and your very self, from Another [i.e., God], do you yet complain and blame the Giver, if He take something away from you? (Discourses 4.1.100–3, with omissions, trans. Oldfather)
The capacity that the prokoptôn has for understanding, accepting, and embracing
this state of affairs, that this is indeed the
nature of things, is another of the main foundation stones of Stoic
ethics.
g. On Living in Accord with Nature
The outlook adopted and the activities performed by
the Stoic student in pursuit of excellence, as detailed in the sections above,
are frequently referred to collectively by Epictetus (following the Stoic
tradition) as 'following nature' or 'living in harmony with nature'. The Stoic prokoptôn maintains his 'harmony with
nature' by being aware of why he acts as he does in terms of both (a) what his
appropriate actions are, and (b) accepting what fate brings. If, for example,
the prokoptôn is berated
unfairly by his brother, he will not respond with angry indignation, for this
would be 'contrary to nature', for nature has determined how brothers should
rightly act towards each other (see Discourses
3.10.19–20). The task the Stoic student shoulders is to pursue actions
appropriate to him as a brother, despite
all and any provocation to act otherwise (see Handbook 30). This, for Epictetus, is a
major component of what it means to keep one's prohairesis (moral character) in harmony with nature (see Discourses 1.6.15, 3.1.25 and 3.16.15).
Keeping ourselves in harmony with nature requires that
we focus on two things. Firstly, we must pay attention to our own actions so
that we respond appropriately, and secondly we must pay attention to the world
in which our actions take effect and which prompts those actions in the first
place.
When you are about to undertake some action, remind
yourself what sort of action it is. If you are going out for a bath, put before
your mind what commonly happens at the baths: some people splashing you, some
people jostling, others being abusive, and others stealing. So you will
undertake this action more securely if you say to yourself, 'I want to have a
bath and also to keep my choice [prohairesis]
in harmony with nature.' And do likewise in everything you undertake. So, if
anything gets in your way when you are having your bath, you will be ready to
say, 'I wanted not only to have a bath but also to keep my choice [prohairesis] in harmony with nature; and
I shall not keep it so if I get angry at what happens.' (Handbook 4, trans. Hard)
In this extract about going to the baths, Epictetus
focuses more on accepting what fate brings, saying that we should anticipate
the sorts of things that can happen, so that when they do we will not be
surprised and will not be angry. In other situations, anticipation of trouble
or misfortune is impossible, but all the same, the Stoic will accept their fate
as what God has ordained for them, and this for Epictetus is the very essence
of keeping in harmony with nature (see Discourses
1.4.18–21).
It is circumstances (difficulties) which show what men
are. Therefore when a difficulty falls upon you, remember that God, like a
trainer of wrestlers, has matched you with a rough young man. For what purpose?
you may say. Why, that you may become an Olympic conqueror; but it is not
accomplished without sweat. In my opinion no man has had a more profitable
difficulty than you have had, if you choose to make use of it as an athlete
would deal with a young antagonist. (Discourses
1.24.1–2, trans. Long)
Every problem we face in life should be understood as
a new opportunity to strengthen our moral character, just as every new bout for
the wrestler provides an opportunity for them to train their skill in
wrestling.
To be instructed is this, to learn to wish that every
thing may happen as it does. And how do things happen? As the disposer [i.e.,
God] has disposed them. And he has appointed summer and winter, and abundance
and scarcity, and virtue and vice, and all such opposites for the harmony of
the whole; and to each of us he has given a body, and parts of the body, and
possessions, and companions.
Remembering then this disposition of things, we ought to go to be instructed, not that we may change the constitution of things, – for we have not the power to do it, nor is it better that we should have the power, – but in order that, as the things around us are what they are and by nature exist, we may maintain our minds in harmony with the things which happen. (Discourses 1.12.15–17, trans. Long)
The wise and good man … submits his own mind to him
who administers the whole [i.e., God], as good citizens do to the law of the
state. He who is receiving instruction ought to come to be instructed with this
intention, How shall I follow the gods in all things, how shall I be contented
with the divine administration, and how can I become free? For he is free to
whom every thing happens according to his will [prohairesis], and whom no man can hinder. (Discourses 1.12.7–9, trans. Long)
In this last extract we see Epictetus refer to the
ideal Stoic practice as that of 'following the gods'. This means essentially
the same as 'following nature', for God, who is immanent in the world (as the
Stoics understand it) is identified with the way the world manifests, so if one
follows nature, one must also be following God (see Discourses 1.20.15, 1.30.4, 4.7.20 and 4.10.14).
h. Metaphors for Life
Epictetus employs a number of metaphors to illustrate
what the Stoic attitude to life should be.
Life as a festival
Epictetus encourages us to think of life as a
festival, arranged for our benefit by God, as something that we can live
through joyously, able to put up with any hardships that befall us because we
have our eye on the larger spectacle that is taking place. Epictetus asks his
students:
Who are you, and for what purpose have you come? Was
it not he [i.e., God] who brought you here? … And as what did he bring you
here? Was it not as a mortal? Was it not as one who would live, with a little
portion of flesh, upon this earth, and behold his governance and take part with
him, for a short time, in his pageant and his festival? (Discourses 4.1.104, trans. Hard)
The whole thrust of Stoic ethics aims to persuade us
that we should ourselves contribute to the festival by living as well as we may
and fulfilling our duties as sociable citizens of God's 'great city of the
universe' (Discourses 3.22.4,
trans. Hard). (See also Discourses
1.12.21, 2.14.23 and 4.4.24–7/46.)
Life as a game
. At Discourses
2.5.2, in encouraging his students to appreciate that external things are
indifferent (being neither good nor bad), Epictetus says that we should imitate
those who play dice, for neither the dice nor the counters have any real value;
what matters, and what is either good or bad, is the way we play the game. Similarly
at 2.5.15–20, where Epictetus discusses the example of playing a ball game, no
one considers for a moment whether the ball itself is good or bad, but only
whether they can throw and catch it with the appropriate skill. What matters
are the faculties of dexterity, speed and good judgement exhibited by the
players, for it is in deploying these faculties effectively that any player is
deemed to have played well. (See also Discourses
4.7.5/19/30–1.) Epictetus also uses the metaphor of playing games when
discussing suicide, for just as someone stops playing a game when they are no
longer amused by it, so it should be in life generally: if life should become
unbearable, no one can force us to keep living it.
To summarize: remember that the door is open. Do not
be more cowardly than children, but just as they say, when the game no longer
pleases them, 'I will play no more,' you too, when things seem that way to you,
should merely say, 'I will play no more,' and so depart; but if you stay, stop
moaning. (Discourses 1.24.20,
trans. Hard; see also 1.25.7–21 and 2.16.37)
Life as weaving
. In this metaphor, the wool that the weaver uses to
make cloth takes the place of the ball in the game; that is, whatever material
comes our way, it is our duty to make proper use of it, and if possible make it
into the best thing of its kind as we can (see Discourses 2.5.21–2).
Life as a play
. We have already seen, when discussing the Discipline
of Action, that Epictetus urges us to 'remember who we are' and
what 'name' we have, because what role we play in life will determine which
actions are appropriate for us. Obviously, the metaphor of life as a play
expands on this idea, but also brings in the notion of our having to accept our
fate, whatever that may be, since we do not ourselves chose the role we must
play (for although we may aim for one role rather than another, we must
recognise that our attaining it is not, in fact, 'in our power').
Remember that you are an actor in a play, which is as
the author [i.e., God] wants it to be: short, if he wants it to be short; long,
if he wants it to be long. If he wants you to act a poor man, a cripple, a
public official, or a private person, see that you act it with skill. For it is
your job to act well the part that is assigned to you; but to choose it is
another's. (Handbook 17, trans.
Hard)
Life as an athletic contest
. This metaphor invites us to see an analogy between
one's training in Stoic ethics as preparatory for living the philosophic life
and someone's training in athletics as preparatory for entering the contest in
the arena. Epictetus addresses someone who has become distressed at not having
enough leisure to study their philosophy books, saying:
For is not reading a kind of preparation for living,
but living itself made up of things other than books? It is as if an athlete,
when he enters the stadium, should break down and weep because he is not
exercising outside. This is what you were exercising for; this is what the
jumping-weights, and the sand and your young partners were all for. So are you
now seeking for these, when it is the time for action? That is just as if, in
the sphere of assent, when we are presented with impressions, some of which are
evidently true and others not, instead of distinguishing between them, we
should want to read a treatise On Direct
Apprehension. (Discourses
4.4.11–13, trans. Hard)
Training to live a life that befits someone who
strives for the Stoic ideal is directly compared to athletic training. Such
training is difficult, demanding, and unpleasant; there is little point in
showing eagerness for any endeavour if we have not properly assessed the
demands that will be placed upon us, and in inevitably losing our original
enthusiasm we will look foolish. This applies to philosophic training no less
than to training as a wrestler in preparation for competing in the Olympic
games (see Discourses 3.15.1–13
= Handbook 29). Elsewhere,
Epictetus declares that delay is no longer possible, that we must meet the
challenges that life throws at us:
Therefore take the decision right now that you must
live as a full-grown man, as a man who is making progress; and all that appears
to be best must be to you a law that cannot be transgressed. And if you are
confronted with a hard task or with something pleasant, or with something held
in high repute or no repute, remember that the contest is now, and that the
Olympic games are now, and that it is no longer possible to delay the match,
and that progress is lost and saved as a result of one defeat and even one
moment of giving in. (Handbook
51.2, trans. Boter; see also Discourses
1.4.13–17, 1.18.21–3, 1.24.1–2 and 3.25.3)
Life as military service
. This metaphor returns us to the Stoic idea that the
universe is governed by God, and that, like it or not, we are all in service to
God. The Stoic prokoptôn
(student making progress) should understand that they should live life
attempting to discharge this service to the highest standards. Epictetus
addresses the person who is upset that they are obliged to travel abroad,
causing their mother to be distressed at their absence.
Do you not know that life is a soldier's service? One
man must keep guard, another go out to reconnoitre, another take the field. It
is not possible for all to stay where they are, nor is it better so. But you
neglect to fulfil the orders of the general and complain, when some severe
order is laid upon you; you do not understand to what a pitiful state you are
bringing the army so far as in you lies; you do not see that if all follow your
example there will be no one to dig a trench, or raise a palisade, no one to
keep night watch or fight in the field, but every one will seem an
unserviceable soldier.
… So too it is in the world; each man's life is a campaign, and a long and varied one. It is for you to play the soldier's part–do everything at the General's bidding, divining his wishes, if it be possible. (Discourses 3.24.31–5, trans. Matheson; see also 1.9.24 and 1.16.20–1)
i. Making Progress
In making progress, the Stoic prokoptôn will pay a price. In standing
to God, the world, society, herself and her undertakings in this new way (by
accepting the Stoic notions of what is truly good, what is truly up to her,
where her proper duties lie, and in considering her life to be one of service
to God), the prokoptôn
separates herself from the rest of society in fairly marked, if not profound,
ways. For example, Epictetus wants his students to enjoy and participate in the
'festival of life', yet at the public games (for instance) they must not
support any one individual, but must wish the winner to be he who actually
wins; they must refrain entirely from shouting or laughing, and must not get
carried away by the spectacle of the contest (Handbook 33.10). So
whilst the prokoptôn's friends
immerse themselves fully in the games, cheering on their man and jeering at his
opponent, the Stoic stands aloof and detached. Deliberately separating herself
from the crowd is the price she pays for well-being (eudaimonia), dispassion (apatheia), tranquillity and
imperturbability (ataraxia),
along with the conviction that she is living as God intends.
But having
declared her hand, the prokoptôn
will pay in other ways also, for those around her will rebuke and ridicule her
(Handbook 22), for in
abandoning the values and practices common to the wider community, she will
provoke hostility and suspicion. Yet there remains the hope that some at least
will see the prokoptôn as
someone whose wisdom has value for the community at large, as someone who
serves as an example of how one may get along in the world without being
overwhelmed by it, as someone with specific skills to offer, such as mediating
family disputes and suchlike (see Discourses
1.15.5).
Epictetus
characterises the differences between the non-philosopher and someone making
progress in these terms:
This is the
position and character of a layman: He never looks for either help or harm from
himself, but only from externals. This is the position and character of the
philosopher: He looks for all his help or harm from himself.
Signs of one who is making progress are: He censures no one, praises no one, blames no one, finds fault with no one, says nothing about himself as though he were somebody or knew something. When he is hampered or prevented, he blames himself. And if anyone compliments him, he smiles to himself at the person complimenting; while if anyone censures him, he makes no defence. He goes about like an invalid, being careful not to disturb, before it has grown firm, any part which is getting well. He has put away from himself every desire, and has transferred his aversion to those things only, of what is under our control [eph' hêmin], which are contrary to nature. He exercises no pronounced choice in regard to anything. If he gives the appearance of being foolish or ignorant he does not care. In a word, he keeps guard against himself as though he were his own enemy lying in wait. (Handbook 48.1–3, trans. Oldfather)
Epictetus' life
as a Stoic teacher can perhaps be regarded as a personal quest to awaken to
true philosophic enlightenment that person who will stand up proudly when his
teacher pleads:
Pray, let
somebody show me a person who is in such a good way that he can say, 'I concern
myself only with what is my own, with what is free from hindrance, and is by
nature free. That is what is truly good, and this I have. But let all else be
as god may grant; it makes no difference to me.' (Discourses 4.13.24, trans. Hard)
For having
attained such enlightenment himself (for surely this we must suppose),
Epictetus devoted his life to raising up others from the crowd of humanity who
could stand beside him and share in a perception of the universe and a way of
life that any rational being is obliged to adopt in virtue of the nature of
things.
5. Glossary of Terms
adiaphora 'indifferent'; any of those things that are neither good or
bad, everything, in fact, that does not fall under the headings 'virtue' or
'vice'. The indifferents are what those lacking Stoic wisdom frequently take to
have value (either positive or negative), and hence take to be desirable or
undesirable. Pursuing them, or trying to avoid them, can lead to disturbing emotions that undermine one's capacity to lead a eudaimôn life.
apatheia
freedom from passion, a constituent of the eudaimôn life.
aversion; the
opposite of hormê.
any
'dispreferred' indifferent, including such
things as sickness, poverty, social exclusion, and so forth (conventionally
'bad' things). Suffering any of the dispreferred indifferents does not detract
from the eudaimôn life enjoyed
by the Stoic sophos. See proêgmena.
appropriate
action
see kathêkon.
'excellence' or
virtue; in the context of Stoic ethics the possession of 'moral excellence'
will secure eudaimonia. For Epictetus, one
acquires this by learning the correct use of impressions, following God, and following nature.
askesis
assent
see sunkatathesis and phantasiai (impressions).
imperturbability,
literally 'without trouble', sometimes translated as 'tranquillity'; a state of
mind that is a constituent of the eudaimôn life.
duty
see kathêkon.
avoidance;
opposite of orexis.
'external'; any
of those things that fall outside the preserve of one's prohairesis, including health,
wealth, sickness, life, death, pain – what Epictetus calls aprohaireta, which are not in our power,
the 'indifferent' things.
emotion
see pathos.
end
see telos.
eph' hêmin
what is in our
power, or 'up to us' – namely, the correct use of impressions.
'happiness' or
'flourishing' or 'living well'. One achieves this end by learning the correct
use of impressions following God, and following nature.
eupatheiai
'good feelings',
possessed by the Stoic wise person (sophos) who experiences these special sorts of emotions,
but does not experience irrational and disturbing passions.
excellence
see aretê.
external
thing
see ektos.
God
see theos.
'commanding faculty'
of the soul (psuchê); the
centre of consciousness, the seat of all mental states, thought by the Stoics
(and other ancients) to be located in the heart. It manifests four mental
powers: the capacity to receive impressions, to assent to them, form intentions to act in response to
them, and to do these things rationally.
The Discourses talk of keeping
the prohairesis in the right condition,
and also of keeping the hêgemonikon
in the right condition, and for Epictetus these notions are essentially
interchangeable.
impulse to act;
that which motivates an action.
impressions
see phantasiai.
indifferents
see adiaphora.
any 'appropriate
action', 'proper function', or 'duty' undertaken by someone aiming to do what
befits them as a responsible, sociable person. The appropriate actions are the
subject of the second of the three topoi.
a 'right action'
or 'perfect action' undertaken by the Stoic sophos, constituted by an appropriate action performed
virtuously.
'desire' properly
directed only at virtue.
passion
see pathos.
any of the
disturbing emotions or 'passions' experienced by those who lack Stoic wisdom
and believe that externals really are good or bad,
when in fact they are 'indifferent'. A pathos according to the Stoics is a false
judgement based on a misunderstanding of what is truly good and bad.
'impressions',
what we are aware of in virtue of having experiences. Whereas non-rational
animals respond to their impressions automatically (thus 'using' them), over
and above using our impressions, human beings, being rational, can 'attend to
their use' and, with practice, assent or not assent to them as we deem
appropriate. The capacity to do this is what Epictetus strives to teach his
students.
nature. To
acquire eudaimonia one must 'follow nature',
which means accepting our own fate and the fate of the world, as well as
understanding what it means to be a rational being and strive for virtue. See aretê and God.
any 'preferred' indifferent, conventionally taken to be good, including such
things as health and wealth, taking pleasure in the company of others, and so
forth. Enjoying any of the preferred indifferents is not in itself constitutive
of the eudaimôn life sought by the Stoic prokoptôn. See apoproêgmena.
'moral
character', the capacity that rational beings have for making choices and
intending the outcomes of their actions, sometimes translated as will, volition,
intention, choice, moral choice, moral
purpose. This faculty is understood by Stoics to be essentially
rational. It is the faculty we use to 'attend to impressions' and to give (or withhold) assent to impressions.
one who is making
progress (prokopê) in living as
a Stoic, which for Epictetus means above all learning the correct use of impressions.
proper
function
see kathêkon.
right
action
see katorthôma.
the Stoic wise
person who values only aretê and enjoys a eudaimôn life. The sophos
enjoys a way of engaging in life that the prokoptôn strives to emulate and
attain.
assent; a
capacity of the prohairesis to judge the significance
of impressions.
disturbance,
trouble; what one avoids when one enjoys ataraxia.
end; that which
we should pursue for its own sake and not for the sake of any other thing. For
the Stoic, this is virtue. Epictetus formulates the
end in several different but closely related ways. He says that the end is to
maintain one's prohairesis in proper order, to
follow God, and to follow nature, all of which count as maintaining a eudaimôn life. The means by which this is to be
accomplished is to apply oneself to the 'three disciplines' assiduously.
God, who is
material, is a sort of fiery breath that blends with undifferentiated matter to
create the forms that we find in the world around us. He is supremely rational,
and despite our feelings to the contrary, makes the best world that it is
possible to make. Epictetus says that we should 'follow God', that is, accept
the fate that He bestows on us and on the world. Stoics understand that the
rationality enjoyed by every human being (and any other rational beings, should
there be any) is literally a fragment of God.
'topics'. The
'three topics' or 'fields of study' which we find elucidated in the Discourses is an original feature of
Epictetus' educational programme. The three fields of study are: (1) The
Discipline of Desire, concerned with desire and
avoidance (orexis and ekklisis), and what is really good and desirable (virtue, using impressions properly, following God, and following nature); (2) The Discipline of Action, concerned with impulse
and aversion (hormê and aphormê), and our 'appropriate actions' or 'duties' with respect to living in
our communities in ways that befit a rational being; and (3) The Discipline of Assent, concerned with how we should judge our impressions so as not to be carried away by them into anxiety or disturbing emotions with the likelihood of failing in the first two
Disciplines.
virtue
from the Latin virtus which translates the Greek aretê, 'excellence'.
Zeus
the name for God; Epictetus uses the terms 'Zeus', 'God', and 'the gods'
interchangeably.
6. References and Further Reading
a. Translations of Epictetus
(Note: 'Enchiridion', 'Encheiridion', 'Handbook', and 'Manual' all refer to the same work. Items
in print and currently available are indicated with an asterisk*.)
- *Boter, Gerard. 1999. The Encheiridion of Epictetus & its Three Christian Adaptations: Transmission & Critical Editions. Leiden: Brill.
- *Dobbin, Robert. 1998. Epictetus: Discourses Book 1. Oxford: Clarendon.
- Includes commentary.
- *Hard, Robin. 1995. The Discourses of Epictetus. ed. with introduction and notes by Christopher Gill. London: Everyman/Dent.
- Includes the complete Discourses, The Handbook, and Fragments.
- Higginson, Thomas Wentworth. 1890. The Works of Epictetus Consisting of His Discourses, in Four Books, The Enchiridion, and Fragments. Boston: Little, Brown, & Company.
- Higginson, Thomas Wentworth. 1944. Epictetus: Discourses and Enchiridion. Roslyn, NY: Walter J. Black.
- Reprint of the nineteenth-century translation with minor editorial alterations.
- *Higginson, Thomas Wentworth. 1948. The Enchiridion. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
- Reprint of nineteenth-century translation.
- *Lobell, Sharon. 1995. Epictetus: The Art of Living. The Classic Manual on Virtue, Happiness, and Effectiveness: A New Interpretation. San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco.
- A free paraphrase of the Handbook.
- Long, George. 1890. The Discourses of Epictetus with the Encheiridion and Fragments. London: George Bell.
- First published 1848.
- *Long, George. 1991. Enchiridion. Amherst, NY: Prometheus.
- Reprint of nineteenth-century translation.
- Matheson, P. E. 1916. Epictetus: The Discourses and Manual. 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
- *Matson, Wallace I. 1998. Epictetus: Encheiridion. in Louis P. Pojman. ed. Classics of Philosophy: Volume 1, Ancient and Medieval. New York: Oxford University Press.
- *Oldfather, W. A. 1925, 1928. Epictetus: The Discourses as Reported by Arrian, The Manual, and Fragments. 2 vols. Cambridge, MA: Loeb Classical Library, Harvard University Press.
- With original Greek text facing English translation.
- *Saunders, Jason L. ed. 1996. Greek and Roman Philosophy after Aristotle. New York: Free Press.
- Readings from Epicureanism, Stoicism, Scepticism, Philo, Plotinus, and early Christian thought. Includes P. E. Matheson's translation of the Manual of Epictetus.
- *White, Nicholas. 1983. Handbook of Epictetus. Indianapolis: Hackett.
- A very competent and readable translation, with notes and a helpful, clear introduction.
b. Translations of Hellenistic Philosophers, including the Stoics
- Inwood, Brad and L. P. Gerson. 1997. Hellenistic Philosophy: Introductory Readings. 2nd edition. Indianapolis: Hackett.
- Readings from the main schools: Epicureanism, Stoicism and Scepticism.
- Long, A. A. and D. N. Sedley. 1987. The Hellenistic Philosophers, Volume 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Readings from the main schools: Epicureanism, Stoicism, Scepticism, and the Academics. Includes commentaries on the readings. This is the standard primary source text. Volume 2 contains the original Greek and Latin.
c. Items that Address Epictetus Specifically
- Bonhöffer, Adolf Friedrich. 1996. The Ethics of the Stoic Epictetus. trans. William O. Stephens. New York: Peter Lang.
- A very nicely done translation of this significant nineteenth-century work first published in 1894.
- Hijmans, B. L. 1959. Askesis: Notes on Epictetus' Educational System. Assen: Van Gorcum.
- Long, A. A. 2002. Epictetus: A Stoic and Socratic Guide to Life. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Stephens, William O. 1996. Epictetus on How the Stoic Sage Loves. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 14: 193–210.
- A very clear, scholarly survey of Epictetus' ethics.
- Stockdale, James Bond. 1993. Courage Under Fire: Testing Epictetus's Doctrines in a Laboratory of Human Behavior. Stanford: Hoover Institution/Stanford University.
- An account of how the author used the principles of Stoic ethics to survive the rigors of a Vietnamese prisoner of war camp.
- Xenakis, Jason. 1969. Epictetus: Philosopher–Therapist. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.
d. Items Addressing Stoic Philosophy and/or Hellenistic Ethics Generally
- Annas, Julia. 1995. The Morality of Happiness. New York: Oxford University Press.
- Gould, Josiah B. 1970. The Philosophy of Chrysippus. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
- Hadot, Pierre. 1995. Philosophy as a Way of Life. Oxford: Blackwell.
- Engaging essays on the notion of philosophy as a way of life, with focus on Stoic practice.
- Hadot, Pierre. 1998. The Inner Citadel: The Mediations of Marcus Aurelius. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
- Contains a very helpful chapter on Epictetus.
- Inwood, Brad. 1985. Ethics and Human Action in Early Stoicism. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
- Lesses, Glen. 1989. Virtue and the Goods of Fortune in Stoic Moral Theory. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 7: 95–127.
- Lesses, Glen. 1993. Austere Friends: The Stoics and Friendship. Apeiron 26: 57–75.
- Long, A. A. 1986. Hellenistic Philosophy: Stoics, Epicureans, Sceptics. 2nd ed. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
- More, Paul Elmer. 1923. Hellenistic Philosophies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
- Nussbaum, Martha C. 1994. The Therapy of Desire: Theory and Practice in Hellenistic Ethics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
- Contains very helpful chapters on Stoic ethics from the view point of philosophy as therapy, as the ancients conceived it.
- Reale, Giovanni. 1990. A History of Ancient Philosophy: 4. The Schools of the Imperial Age. ed. & trans. John R. Catan. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
- Sandbach, F. H. 1989. The Stoics. London: Duckworth and Indianapolis: Hackett.
- Sharples, R. W. 1996. Stoics, Epicureans, and Sceptics: An Introduction to Hellenistic Philosophy. London: Routledge.
- Striker, Gisela. 1990. Ataraxia: Happiness as Tranquillity. The Monist 73–1: 97–110. also in Striker 1996
- Striker, Gisela. 1991. Following Nature: A Study in Stoic Ethics. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 9: 1–73. also in Striker 1996.
- Striker, Gisela. 1996. Essays on Hellenistic Epistemology and Ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
e. Other items on Hellenistic philosophy generally
- Algra, Keimpe, et al. eds. 1999. The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Annas, Julia. 1992. Hellenistic Philosophy of Mind. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Author Information
Keith H. Seddon
Email: k.h.s@btinternet.com
Warnborough College
Ireland
Email: k.h.s@btinternet.com
Warnborough College
Ireland
EPICTETO (55 - 135 )
Epitetus ou Epicteto (Gr.:
Επίκτητος, transl. epiktetos: "comprado"; Hierápólis, 55 - Nicópólis, 135) foi um filósofo grego
estoico que viveu a maior parte
de sua vida em Roma, como escravo a serviço de Epafrodito, o cruel secretário de
Nero que, segundo a tradição, uma vez lhe quebrou uma perna.
Apesar
de sua condição, conseguiu assistir as preleções do famoso estóico Caio Musônio
Rufo. De sua obra se conservam o Encheiridion de Epicteto
(também conhecido como Manual
de Epicteto) [1] e as Diatribes
(ou Discursos
[2]), ambos editados
por seu discípulo Lúcio
Flávio Arriano de Nicomédia.
Como
viver uma vida plena, uma vida feliz? Como ser uma pessoa com boas qualidades
morais? Responder a estas duas perguntas fundamentais foi a única paixão de
Epicteto. Embora suas obras sejam menos conhecidas hoje, em função do declínio
do ensino da cultura clássica, tiveram enorme influência sobre as ideias dos
principais pensadores da arte de viver durante quase dois mil anos.
Para
Epicteto, uma vida feliz e uma vida virtuosa são sinônimos. Felicidade e
realização pessoal são consequências naturais de atitudes corretas.
Citações:
"Se alguém
lhe disser que uma certa pessoa fala mal de você, não se justifique sobre o que
é dito sobre, mas responda:" Ele ignora minhas outras falhas, senão não
teria mencionado só essas".[3]
Referências
1.
Flávio Arriano. O Encheirídion de
Epicteto. Trad. Aldo Dinucci; Alfredo Julien. São Cristóvão,
Sergipe: EdiUFS, 2012].
3.
«O estoico»
Ligações externas
·
(em
inglês)
Obras de Epicteto no Internet
Classics Archive
·
(em inglês) "Epictetus", The Stanford
Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Spring 2009 Edition. Edward N. Zalta
(ed.). Por Margaret Graver.
·
(em
inglês)
Dialogue between Hadrian and Epictetus
- Uma composição ficcional do séc. II ou séc. III. The Knickerbocker,
agosto de 1857
·
(em
inglês)
Commentário sobre o Enchirídion de Epicteto
por Simplício
da Cilícia (séc. VI)
Obras
Encheiridion de Epicteto (também conhecido como Manual de
Epicteto) e as Diatribes (ou Discursos)
Discusos de Epicteto
Os Discursos de Epicteto são uma série
de extractos dos ensinamentos do filósofo estóico Epicteto, escritos por Arriano por volta de 108 aC. Existiam
originalmente 8 livros, mas apenas 4 permanecem até hoje inteiros, junto com
alguns fragmentos dos outros livros.
Os Discursos não são provavelmente uma transcrição
palavra por palavra, mas sim versões escritas das notas tomadas por Arriano. Os
livros não tinham um título formal nos tempos antigos. Apesar de Simplício
da Cilícia os chamar de Diatribai (Discursos),[1] outros escritores deram
títulos como Dialexis (Conversas),[2] Apomnêmoneumata
(Registos),[3] e Homiliai
(Conversações).[4] O nome moderno advém
dos títulos dados no manuscrito medieval: "Diatribai de Epicteto
por Arriano" (em grego:
Αρριανου των Επικτητου Διατριβων).
Edições manuscritas
O manuscrito
mais antigo dos Discursos provém do séc. XII, mantido na Biblioteca
Bodleiana, em Oxford.[5] Nesse manuscrito, uma
macha caiu em uma das páginas, tornando uma série de palavras ilegíveis;[6] em todos os outros
manuscritos conhecidos essas palavras estão omissas (por vezes passagens
inteiras),[7] e assim sendo, esses
outros manuscritos serão derivados da Biblioteca
Bodleiana.[8]
Os Discursos são impressos pela 1.ª vez em grego por Vettore Trincavelli, em Veneza, no ano de 1535.[9]
Referências
1.
Simplício, Comentário sobre o
Enquirídio de Epiteto.
2.
Aulo Gélio, Noites Áticas.
3.
Estrobeu
6.
Livro 1. 18.
8-11
7.
W. M. Lindsay
(1896), An Introduction to Latin Textual Emendation, page 44.
8.
Aston et al.,
(1984), The History of the University of Oxford, Oxford University
Press.
9.
Smith
W (1870) Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology.
Enquirídio ou Manual de Epiteto
O
Enquirídio (Enchirídion) ou Manual de Epiteto, é um
pequeno manual com conselhos éticos estoicos compilado por Arriano, que foi aluno de Epiteto no início do séc. II.
Apesar
de o conteúdo ser derivado dos Discursos
de Epicteto, não é propriamente um resumo dos Discursos,
mas sim uma compilação de preceitos práticos. O Manual é um guia para o
dia-a-dia. Ao contrário de outros mestre da Filosofia
da Grécia Antiga, como Platão e outros metafísicos,
Epiteto foca a sua atenção em como alguém se pode aplicar de maneira prática
num ponto de vista filosófico. O tema primário nesta curta obra é a de que uma
pessoa deve esperar o que deve acontecer e desejar que tal aconteça. O outro
motivo na narrativa que aparece é a opinião de Epiteto sobre o julgamento dos
eventos.
O que preocupa as pessoas não são as coisas em si mas o seu julgamento
acerca delas. Por exemplo: a morte não é algo opressivo (de outra maneira de
tal forma a Sócrates)... -- Manual - capítulo 5[1].
Subjacente
a isto tudo, no entanto, está a ideia de que "algumas coisas nos são
dependentes e outras não o são"[1] sendo que devemos
reagir e interagir em concordância com essas coisas.
Nos
séc.s seguintes, o Enquirídio foi visto como um manual prestável de
filosofia prática, mantendo a sua autoridade com os cristão e pagãos. No séc.
6, Simplício
da Cilícia escreveu um comentário sobre ele, e dois escritores
cristãos, Nilo do Sinai
e um autor anónimo, escreveram paráfrases da obra, adaptadas ao pensamento
cristão, na primeira parte do séc. 5. O Enquirídio foi publicado pela
primeira vez em latim por Angelo Poliziano, em Roma, no ano de 1493. Em 1496, foi traduzido por Beroaldus, em Bolonha. O
original em grego, com comentários de Simplício, apareceu primeiramente em Veneza, no ano de 1528.
O
livro foi um comum texto escolar na Escócia, durante o Iluminismo
Escocês. Adam Smith
tinha uma cópia de uma edição de 1670 na sua biblioteca, adquirida quando ainda
jovem estudante.[2]
Referências
1. Flávio Arriano. O Enquirídio de Epiteto.
Trad. Aldo Dinucci; Alfredo Julien. São Cristóvão, Sergipe: EdiUFS, 2012.
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário