CLASSICAL PHILOSOPHY EER ARSTOLI

pleasure. Instead, the Stoics sought happiness through wisdom, a wisdo by

which to control what lav within human power and to accept with ipied
resignation what had to be. They were profoundly mtlueiced by Socrates, who
had faced death with serenity and courage. "This example of supert control ove
the emotions in the face of the suprenne threat to one 's existeIce, the threat of
death, provided the Stoics wvith an authentic odel alter which to pattentheir
lives Centuries later the Stoic Epictetus said that "Icnot escape eath, but
cannot l escape the dread of it?" Developing this sane theme in a more general
way, he Wrote, "Demand
" not that events should happen as you wish; but wish
them to happen as they do happen, and you willgo on well" We cannot,that is,
oontrol all events, but we can control our attitude toward what happeDs. I1 is
useless tofear future events, for they will happen in any case. But it is possible by
anl act of will/to control our fear. We should not, therefore, fear events-in a real
sense we have "nothing to fear but fear itself."
There is an elegant simplicity to this moral philosophy, and yet it was a
philosophy for an intellectual elite. The conclusion was simple enough, to control
one's attitudes, but how did the Stoics arrive at this conclusion in a philosophical
way? They did it by creating a mental picture of what the world nust be like and
how man fits into this world. The world, they said, is an orderly arrangement
where man and physical things behave according to principles of purpose. They
saw throughout all of nature the operation of reason and law. The Stoics relied
upon a special idea of God toexplain this view of the world, for they thought of
God as a rational substance existing not in some single location but in all of
nature, in all things. It was this kind of God, a pervading substantial form of
reason that controls and orders the whole structure of nature, that the Stoics said
but
determines the course of events. Herein lay the basis for moral philosophy,their
set by
the direction in which Stoic thought moved on these matters was
theory of the nature of knowledge.
how
Stoic Theory of Knowledge The Stoics went into great detail to explain in
succeed
human beings are able to achieve knowledge. They did not entirely
important for at least
doing this, but their theory of knowledge was nevertheless theory of nature.
two reasons. First, it laid the foundation for their materialistic
certainty.
and, secondly, it provided the basis for their conception of truth or stem from
Both of these consequences of the Stoics theory of knowledge and
their account of the origin of ideas. Words, they said, express thoughts.
The mind
thoughts are originated by the impact of some object upon the mind.
is blank at birth and builds up its store of ideas as it is exposed to objects. These
senses. A
Ob}ects make impressions upon the mind through the channel of the
tee, for example, impresses its image upon the mind through the sense of vision
In the same way that a seal leaves its imprint in wax. Repeated expOsure to the
Worldof things increases the number of impressions, develops our menory, and
aDles us to form more general conceptions beyond the objects immediately
before us.
Ihe real problem the Stoics faced was how to explain this last point, that is,
112 THE ANCIENT PERIOD

how to acvount for Our general ideas. They had to show how our
related to our sensations. lt is one thing to prove thal our idea of a
trom our vision of trees. But how can we account for general idcas. tree
thinkicOtmgnesIN
ideas
refer to things bevond our senses as, for example, the idea of goodness that
the Stoics in effect replied that all thought is in some way related to
even thoughts that represent judgnients and inferences. Ajudgment t orhhean senses
ence, that something is good or true, is the product of the mechanical infer.
impressions. Our thinkingin all its foms starts with inpressions, and process ol
sone
thinking is based upon impressions that start from within us, as in the ca of our
feelings. Feelings can, therefore, give us knowledge; they are the source of
Sistible perceptions," which. in tun, are the ground of our sense of
the Skeptics later pointed out. this explanation could not stand upcertainty. As
to al the
critical questions one could raise against it. But the Stoics not only found in it a
basis for truth, thev had also, through this theory of k1owledge, imposed a
distinctive slant upon their general philosophy. For, to argue as they did, thatmosal
thought derives from the impact of objects on the senses is to affirm that nothing
real exists except things that possess some material form. Stoic logic had cat
Stoic philosophy into amaterialistic mold.
Matter as the Basis of All Reality This materialism provided Stoicism with an
ingenious conception of the physical world and the nature of man. The broad
picture the Stoics drew of physical nature followed from their logic that allthat
is real is material. Evervthing in the whole universe is, therefore, some
form of
matter. But the world is not just a pile of inert or passive matter-it is a
dynamic.
changing, structured, and ordered arrangement. Besides inert matter, there is
force or power, which represents the active shaping and ordering element in
nature. This active power or force is not different from matter but is rather a
different form of matter. It is a constantly moving, subtle thing, like an air
current or breath. The Stoics said it was fire, and this fire spread to all things
providing them with vitality. This material fire had the attribute of rationality.
and since this was the highest form of being, it was inevitable that the Stoics
should understand this rational force to be God.

God in Everything The pivotal idea of Stoicism was the notion that God is in
everything. To say that God is fire, or force, or logos or rationality and then to say
that God is in everything is to conclude that all of nature is filled with the
principle of reason. In a detailed manner the Stoics spoke of the permeability of
matter, by which they meant that different types of matter are mixed up to
gether. The material substance of God, they said, was mixed with what would
otherwise be motionless matter. Matter behaves the way it does because of the
presence in it of the principle of reason. The continued behavior of matter in
accordance with this principle is what is meant by natural law, the law or princt
ple of a thing's nature. When we recall that the Stoics aseribed the origin of
nature to God, the warm, fiery matrix of all things, and that all things immedi
ately receive the impress of God's structuring reason and continue to behave as
 CLASSICAL PHILOSOPHy AKTER ARISTOTLE 113

they were arranged to behave, we can see how the Stoics also developed from
these ideas their other notions of fate and providence.
Fate and Providence To the Stoics, providence meant that events occur the
way they do because allthings and persons are under the control of the logos, or
God. The order of the whole world is based upon the unityof all itsparts, and
what unifies the whole structure of matter the fiery substance that permeates
everything. Nothing "rattles" in the universe, for nothing is loose. It was against
this backgrond of a material universe that is totally controlled that the Stoics
fashioned their moral philosophy.
Human Nature The Stoics knew that to build a moral philosophy it is necessary
to have a clear vievw of what human nature is like. They shaped their view ot
human nature by simply transferring to the study of man the very same ideas
they had used in describing nature at large. Just as the world is a material order
permeated by the fiery substance called reason or God, so also man is a material
being who is permeated by this very same fiery substance. When the Stoics said
that man contains spark of the divine within him, they meant that in a real
world,
sense man contains part of the substance of God. God is the soul of the
and man's soul is part of God. This spark of the divine is a very fine and pure
material substance that permeates man's body, causing it to move and to be
capable of all sensations. The soul is corporeal, comes from God, and is trans
soul
mitted by parents to children in a physical way. The Stoics thought that theWhat
was centered in the heart and that it circulated through the blood stream.
well
the soul added to the body was the delicate mechanisms of the five senses as
or reason,
as the powers of speech and reproduction. But since God is the logos
the soul of man is also rooted in reason and consequently human personality finds
however, human rationality
itsunique expression in its rationality. For the Stoics, about things, but
did not mean simply that man is able to think, or to reason order of the
structure and
rather that man's nature participates in the rational
of the actual
vhole of nature. Human rationality represents man's awareness
that all things
order of things and of his place in this order. It is the awarenesschief concern of
was the
obey law. To relate human behavior to this order of law
Stoic moral philosophy.
thought rested upon a
Ethics and the Human Drama Moral philosophy in Stoicdrama. What Epictetus
SImple insight, wherein man was viewed as an actor in a choose his role, but om
not
neant when he used this image was that an actor does
selects people to play
the contrary it is the author or director of the drama who principle of reason
the various roles. In the dranma of the world, it is God or the
he will be situated in history.
Wno determines what each man shall be and how in this
one's role
uman wisdom, said the Stoics, consists in recognizing what "bit parts," while
people have
drama is and then performing the part well. Some pleasure
"If it be[God's) that you shoudd act a
others are cast into leading roles. citizen. For
poor man, see that you act it well; or a cripple or a ruler, or aprivate
 THE ANCIENT PERIOD

114

arh,
"lo act well the given part." The
this is vour business says Fpicteus, has n0 control. 2as
things over which he
develops a great inditterence to those other players will
exanple, the shape and torn of the scenery as well as who the
one t,:
cOntrol over the story or its plot. But there is
especially has no
the He
be. actor can control, and that is his attitude and Cmotions. He can sulk because
jealousy because Someone l
he has just a bit part, or he can be consned with because the makesr
was chosen to be the hero, or he can feel terribly insulted
nor jealousy IOr
artist put a particularly ugly nose on his face. But neither sulking
teeling insulted an in any way alter the fact that he has a bit part, is not a her
happine.
and must wear an uglv nose. All these feelings can do is rob bin of his
If he can remain free from these feelings, or develop what the Stoics called
apathy, he will achieve a serenity and happiness that are the mark of a wise man
The wise man is the one who knows what his role is.

The Problem of Freedom There is, however, a persistent problem in Stoic

moral philosophy, and this concerns the nature of human freedom. The whole
Stoic analysis of the structre of nature as being fixed, that is, caused or ordered.
by Cod'sreason, is rather easy to follow, especially when we think of this grand
scheme as a cosmic drama. It may be true that actors do not choose their roles.
But what is the difference between choosing your role in the drama, on the one
hand, or choosing your attitude on the other? If you are not free to choose one.
how can you be free to choose the other? It could very well be that God not only
chose you to be a poor man, but also cast you as a
particularly disgruntled poor
man. Do attitudes float freely waiting to be chosen by the passing parade of
mankind, or are they as much a part of a person as the color of his eves?
The Stoics stuck doggedly to their notion that attitudes are
trol
under the COn
of man's choice, that by an act of will we can decide
how we shall react to
events. But they never provided a satisfactory explanation for the fact
dence rules everything while at the same time that provi
providence
attitudes. The closest they came to an explanation was to does not rle our
everything in thewhole universe behaves according to law orimply thator whereas
reason,
that they behave according to theirlogos,
is the special feature of human beings it
edge of the law. For example, water knowl
evaporates
condenses and returns in the form of rain. But one drop from the heat of the sun and later
"here we goagain," as if to register disgust at never says to the other,
Ahuman being undergoes a being uprooted from the blue sea.
face death; but a man knows what issimilar process of change when he begins to age and
cal process of aging, he knows that happening,
it
for in addition to the mechani
knowledge will change the fact that he isis happening. No amount of additional
mortal,but the Stoies built their whole
moral philosophy on the
understands conviction that if a man knows the rigorous law and
his role as inevitable,
move cheerfully with the he will not strain against the
is rather a quality of
inevitable but will
pace of history. Happiness is not a product
existence, of choice: it
what has to be. which follows from acquiescing or agreeing
rather the absence of Freedom, therefore, not the power to alter our destiny but
is
emotional disturbance.
 CLASSICAL. PHILOSOPIY ARTER 115
ARISTOTLE

Cosmopolitanisn and Justice It was inevitable that the Stoics should have also
developed a strong notion of cosmopolitanisI), the idea that all men are citizens
tebe same human comimunity. To look at the world process as a
drama was to
nit that everyone had a role in it. Human relations were viewed by the Stoics
as having the greatest significance, for human beings were the bearers of the
divine spark. What related man to his fellow man was the fact that each person
shared a common elerment. It was as though the logos were a main telephone line
and each person had his OWn phone and the entire circuit was on a party line,
thereby connecting God to all men and all men to each other. Or, as Cicero put
it. "... since reasonexists both in man and God, the first common pOssession of
Imanand God is reason. But those who have reason in common must also have
richt reason in comnon. And since right reason is Law, we must believe that men
bave Law also in common with the Gods. Further, those who share Law must
also share Justice, and those who share these are to be regarded as members of
the same cornmonwealth. Universal brotherhood and the doctrine of a universal
natural law of justice were among the most impressive contributions made to the
Western mind by the Stoics. They had injected basic themes into the stream of
thought that were to have a decisive impact, particularly upon the development
of Christian philosophy in the next period.
Although Stoicism shared many of the characteristics of Epicurean philoso
put
phy. it had made some radical innovations. With the Epicureans, the Stoics
regarded self-control
their chief emphasis upon the practical concerns of ethics, terms, and sought
materialistic
as the center of ethics, viewed all of nature in
by the Stoics was
happiness as the end. "The most significant variation injectedas the product of an
but
that they viewed theworld not as the product of chance
Stoics in a highly optimistic
ordering mind or reason. This view involved the claim
wisdom. Yet it was against this
attitude regarding the possibilities of human about the detailed operation of the
much
to wisdom, a claim that we can know so
of the Skeptics.
world, that there developed the critical philosophy

WITHOUT A
SKEPTICISM: HOW TO BEHAVE
CRITERION OF TRUTH

whose basic mood is that of doubt. But the old

Today we refer to skeptics as men derived, meant something rather
skeptikoi, from which skeptics is
Greek word, To be sure, the Skeptics were doubters,
diferent, namely, seekers or inquirers.
Aristotle had succeeded in discovering the
Plato and
too. They doubted that these same doubts about the
Epicureans and
truth about the world, and they had were nevertheless seekers after a method for
Stoics. But for all their doubt, they was Pyrrho (361-270 B.C.), and early
life. Their founder
achieving a tranguil Pyrrhonism. as Academics,
They were also knownAcademy
OKepticismn was known also as of Plato's in the
B.C.) who became head
developed the doctrine of prob-
316-24l
ter Arcesilaus (ca. metaphysics, and
third
century, rejected Plato's
notable Skeptics the names Carneades(214-129
abilism. AImongthe many other