General Editors L. C. BARGELIOTES, Athens - GR. KARAFILLIS, Ioannina Editor CH. MAGOULAS, Athens Editorial Committee G. ANAGNOSTOPOULOS, San Diego (CH. EVANGELIOU, Towson M. KATSIMITSIS, Athens Advisory Committee J.P. ANTON, South Florida —R. BERNSTEIN, New York J. BRUNSCHWIG, Sorbonne ~ P. CANEVI, Bosporous A. DELIGIORGI, Thessaloniki — P, DIAMANTOPOULOS, New York M. DRAGONA-MONACHOU, Athens — M. FREDE, Oxford F. HAGER, Ziirich — B. HARRIS, Norfolk Y. IWATA, Tohocu - G. KLINE, Brun Mawe J. MICHELSEN, Victoria— PH. MITSIS, New York J. MURUNGI, Towson - A. NEHAMAS, Princeton K. PETSIOS, Ioannina — R. POLANSKY, Pittsburgh ‘A. PREUS, New York - G. SANTAS, Irvine J. J. STUHR, Oregon —A. M. TOPPOLO, Bari A. ADAMOPOULOS, Editorial CoordinatorSubscriptions: 45,00 $ Academia Verlag © Copyright by Skepsis, International Center for Philosophy and Culture ISBN: 978-960-6813-47-4 ISSN: 1105-1582 Distributed by: ‘Academia Verlag / Sankt Augustin - Postf. 16 63 - D-53734 Sankt Augustin Tel: 0 22 41 /34 52-10 - Fax: 34 53 16 Intemet: www-academia-verlag.de - E-mail: kontakt @academia-verlag.de For HELLAS & CYPRUS: For Hellas & Cyprus: N. & S. Batsioulas Publications, Solonos 136, 10677 Athens Tel: +30 210 3315186 - Fax: +30 210 3315134 Intemet: www-batsioulas.gr - E-mail: info@batsioulas.gr Information for authors SKEPSIS is a peer-reviewed journal for Philosophy and interdisciplinary research. Papers submitted for consideration should be about twenty double spaced typed pages (text and notes) and submitted electronically to the following address: skepsisjournal@gmail.com. Authors whose paper is accepted for publication will be sent reviewer comments and writing guidelines.CONTENTS XXIL iv 1, MICHELLE CARPENTER: Voluntary wrongdoing in Plato's Hippias Minor. 7 2, JASPER DOOMEN: Cornering ‘Free will” 30 3, COURTNEY D. FUGATE: Did Plato nearly discover synthetic judgments A priori?. A4 4, ALEKSANDAR KANDIC: Mathematics as a science of reality: Pythagoras, Plato, Descartes. 51 5. GRIGORIOS KARAFILLIS: Moral dilemmas on human nature and human action in the twenty first century. 69 6, VASILIKI KARAVAKOU: Reclaiming critical thinking in moder political education, 79 7. CHRISTOS KYRIACOU: Meno’ inquiry paradox and the problem of the criterion, 2 8. ELENA PAPANIKOLAOU: The modal status of intentionalism in art 102 9. GEORGIOS STEIRIS: Platonic and Aristotelian mathematics in Georgius ‘Trapezuntius’ Comparatio Philosophorum Platonis et Aristotelis 112 10. ALEXANDROS THEODORIDIS: The scars suffered by democracy in the name of democracy: Democratic education in name only and re-emerging face of totalitarianism in the contemporary world. 125 I, HARA THLIVERI: Ancient influences in the painting of Nikos Engonopoulos. 135 12. SOTIRIA TRIANTARI & FOTEINI SARIMICHAILIDOU: Learning as a way of the treatment of pathos and acquisition of eudaimonia in Epectetus and Theodoros Metochites, 150150 SOTIRIA TRIANTARI & FOTEINI SARIMICHAILIDOU LEARNING AS A WAY OF THE TREATMENT OF PATHOS AND ACQUISITION OF EUDAIMONIA IN EPICTETUS AND THEODOROS METOCEDTES Introduction The views of the stoic philosopher Epictetus and his subsequent Byzantine philosopher The- odoros Metochites, in regard to education and its direct relation with virtue and eudaimonia, remind us the basic perception of Plato for the education as “therapeutic force” of the soul.! Education aims at the perfect moral development of human, as much in Plato’s reflections, as in his student's, Aristotle. According to Plato, the proper upbringing and education cre- ate virtuous and honest persons. Moreover, if somebody is virtuous and afterwards he / she receives a proper education, then the same person will be rendered far more decent than before? Followingly, Aristotle, having as background the views of his schoolteacher, Plato, correlates the virtue and the bliss of human with the basic consequence of education that is his ability to judge objectively and of course to hamess his desires. The proper education renders the person a valuable critic not only of himself, but also of others. This exact ability of the educated person is that distinguishes him from illiterate and uneducated? Obviously, the opinions of Aristotle had a significant impact on the stoic philosophy. This observation is strengthened even more, if we consider that, the Aristotelian difference between the educated and the uneducated, Stoics determine as the imperturbability under all circumstances which characterizes the educated and as the turbulence that characterizes the uneducated.* This basic stoic perception is consolidated by Epictetus, who clarifies that “one of the traits of the uneducated person is to ascribe responsibilities to others for his misfortunes” $ ‘The opinions of Epictetus have influenced the byzantine philosopher Theodoros Metochites, who has as a principle the common ancient Greek perception that virtue is the first and absolute good that springs from education. In this frame, Metochites considers as a final goal of educa- tion, in order to lead to eudemonia, the provision, that is the control and in-depth examination of the situations that occur in everyday life, even if these cause grief.® Metochites, adopting the stoic perception for lifelong learning and being also influenced by the reflection of Epictetus, considers learning as a way for the treatment of pathos and the confrontation of life’s adversi- ties. In this thesis, it is going to be attempted to point out the importance of learning for stoic Epictetus (50-120 A.D.) and byzantine Theodoros Metochites (1260-1332). According to both * Plato, Terms, 461227. ? Plato, Laws, 854e. See also, Koumakis, 2001: 264-266. > Aristotle, Statesman, 1287b25-27, 1266230-31. “ Von Amim, SVF (Stoicorum Veterum Fragmenta), I. 89, 20-21. See also, Koumakis, 2001: 270. 5 Epictetus, Encheiridion. Chapter 5, p. 27. See also, Karakatsanis, 2007: 10-11. * Theodoros Metochites, Ethikos € Peri paideias, & 58, 247-249.LEARNING AS A WAY OF THE TREATMENT OF PATHOS AND ACQUISITION OF EUDAIMONIA.. philosophers, leaming constitutes a true wealth and a medium for the avoidance and the healing of the feelings of fear, grief, turbulence, arrogance, envy and more. Learning, that entails proper education, shapes morally the person and predetermines his/her blissful life. ‘Learning as therapeutic force of soul and guide to virtue ‘According to Stoics, the development of the natural possibilities of a person focusing espe- cially on the powerful mental configuration, which leads to virtue and in consequence to eu- daimonia and the completion of a human entity, constitutes part of an educational process.” In this process, essential prerequisite for the authentic education is learning, which is identified with the philosophical knowledge, that is the only capable to lead to the “life fluency”.* The propriety of life or as it is else referred as “life fluency” is considered by the Stoics as the eudaimonia that is the result of the activation of virtues and its identification with prudence Based on the above, it is figured out that in order the Stoic to be led to eudaimonia, it is nec- essary for the learning to be preceded. For Stoics and for Epictetus as well, leaming is identi- fied with philosophical knowledge, which covers all areas of human knowledge and refers to knowledge about ourselves and the world.”® In the Hellenistic period, learning, which is the philosophical knowledge, is distinguished for its practical character. More precisely, in this, period, the effort of a person to live a much happier life, avoiding the infelicity and the con- frontation of the difficulties of life, comes first; something that is obvious through the work of Epictetus. Followingly, Philosophy, looking towards morality, functioned as a therapeutic means for the repression and treatment of sufferings that disturb the soul and disorientate the human behaviour." The deliverance from pathos and the creation of a blissful character, for Epictetus, have as a starting point ourselves, so as certain things are in our power to accomplish (éo"Huiv), while others are not." As V. Kyrkos notices correctly, Epictetus lived in an era, during which the speech of Philosophy becomes consolation of life and moral assistance to the person; in other words, philosophy becomes eminently moral, philanthropist and altruistic.” Consequently, the philosophy and mainly the practical philosophy, which is stressed particularly by Epictetus, is Epictetus’ centre of education as well as Stoics’ generally. What 7 In regard to the system of education in Stoies, ef. Karakatsanis, P. 2007:14. For stoics the role of teacher ‘was important. Equally important was the system of philosophical training, which had been divided to the “weeks” and depended on the age of the educated. The essential education began at the second week, while the content of study was distinguished based on the distinction of the stoics’ philosophy. It began with the ‘teaching of reason, then of physical and finally morals science. © Karakatsanis, 2002: 90. ° Manos, 2002: 29. Manos points that “the above perception of Stoics proves the kinship of stoic morality to the platonic tradition with which Stoies were connected through the Cynics, without overlooking the influ- ence of Aristotelian morality”. » Koumakis, 2001: 278, 1 Dellis, 2005: 48-49. See also, Tseller-Nestle, 1990: 345. 2 Epictetus, Encheiridion, chapter 1 & 2, p. 17. © Kyrkos, 1991: 226.152 SOTIRIA TRIANTARI & FOTEINI SARIMICHAILIDOU is the content of the education, is the learning of “ourselves and the selves of others”. For Epictetus this means that: “in order to judge what is reasonable and what absurd, we do not only use the values of things that are found around us, but also what each of us allocates in his/her character”.™ The eagemess of a person to acquire knowledge and become educated, avoiding one of the most important pathe, that of irresponsibility is: “that we should never put the blame on others but on ourselves, that is on the views we have about things. This trait, to say that someone else carries the responsibilities for our misfortunes, belongs to the unedu- cated person”.'* Epictetus attempts to differentiate the person who is still in the initial stage of his/her education from another, who has received a complete education. This distinction is underlined by Epictetus, who notices that “a basic trait of a person, who now is becoming familiar to teaching, is to put the blame on him/herself; the trait of the person, who has inte- grated his/her education, is to put the blame neither on the others nor on him/herself”.’* Epictetus conceives learning and especially philosophical knowledge as a way to defeat athe; it constitutes the solution through which, the person will realize the cause of his/her grief, turbulence and fear, as well as the medium that will endow the person with a vision of temperance toward his/her desires.”” Epictetus considers learning as the practical philosophy and the moral teaching that will help the person to experience the reality of life as painlessly as it is possible, relieved from grieves and dead ends. The education of a person equals to the knowledge of two basic principles of philosophy. The first is the awareness of our weakness." While the second is the awareness that people’s turbulence is not caused by the things but by our opinions of these." Epictetus’ views appear to be adopted several centuries later by the byzantine intellectual Theodoros Metochites. Obviously, Metochites, living in an era charac- terized by internal crises with political revolutions, religious disputes and with the threat of ‘Turkish attacks, attempts to emphasize on practical life, reversing in this way, as much as it was feasible, the excessive priority that the Byzantines gave to the theoretical life until then” In this point, Metochites probably considered necessary his familiarization with the stoicism and more specifically with Epictetus, who expressed more intensely the necessity of practi- cal life. Inspired by this, Metochites appears as an advocate of education which along with virtue, have as a common characteristic their stability and reliability, as from them depends the human eudaimonia" Metochites, undoubtedly influenced by Epictetus, supported that ‘W Epictetus, Discourses I, 6-8, p. 100-101. 1 Epictetus, Encheiridion, chapter 5,27. % Epictetus, Encheiridion, chapter 5, 27. Epictetus, Encheiridion, chapter 2 & 2, 21-22. See also, Kyrkos, 1991: 233. * Epictetus, Encheiridion, chapter 1 & 2, 17, See also, Discourses HI, 11, 13, p. 104-108, % Bpiccus, Enchtrion, cheper 5, 2425, See also. Asso, Nicomachean Eihics 11136, Ct. tones, 2 ‘In regard to the life and the action of Theodoros Metochites, of. Triantari-Mara, 2005: 503-507, With re- gard to the effort of Metochites to reverse from the base the Byzantine theoretical and theological grounds, of. Polemis, 1995: 46. 21 Metochites, Theodoros Ethikos & Peri paideias, & 15, 10-12, & 16, 25-26 (p. 100-101).LEARNING AS A WAY OF THE TREATMENT OF PATHOS AND ACQUISITION OF EUDAIMONIA... the educated person is silent for those that are not in his hand to make, protecting in this way him/herself from the risk of failure? Avery important opinion, that is detected at first in Epictetus and then influences the thought of Metochites, is the possibility of the educated as a wise man and possessor of philosophy to have self-control. The self-control is founded by Metochites, as once did his predecessor Epic- tetus, in the difference that exists between learning and sorrow. According to Metochites, the educated person is master of himself due to philosophy and his prudence. Undoubtedly, the educated is likely to feel irritated for any pitfalls may happen to him and react, but he is not go- ing to do anything like this” With his attitude, Metochites reminds us the earlier of him percep- tion of Epictetus, which states that turbulence, grief and pain are caused mainly by our thoughts about things. In this precise point the stoic Epictetus and byzantine Theodoros Metochites create an unbreakable relation and combination between learning and the pleasure that lightens the soul, because as rightly observes Metochites “suspicion and envy upset continuously his/her soul, causing at hinv/her a permanent pain” Sadness, pain and generally the pathe are related under no circumstances with Jeaming and do not constitute characteristics of the educated. On the contrary, learning and wisdom are considered by Epictetus and Metochites as therapeutic forces of the soul. Moreover, as for Metochites if somebody takes refuge to wisdom, then he/ she enjoys its fruits and his soul finds peace, so that he/she confronts the sorrows that may hap- pen to him, in such a way, that is appropriate. The beliefs of Metochites resemble Epictetus” ideas: “If you want your moral prosperity, put aside thoughts such as this “If I neglect my duties, I will barely make ends meet”.”’ At this point someone could wonder what the basic prerequisite for learning is, so that this will be rendered therapeutic force of soul. Epictetus, as well as Metochites, stresses the magnificent importance of logic and mind, which human must protect and use wisely. Epictetus advises protection and care of the hege- monic, the mind, in order the actions to be accurate and have the desirable result.* Metochites highlighted that the nature constituted the mind sovereign and healer, and not a destroyer of those that belong to nature.”” Based on the mind, the educated person has examined in-depth the things and has meditated, before he moves to actions. The mind is the tool or the medium ® Metochites, Theodoros Ethikos & Peri paideias & 9, 20-21 (p. 80-81). In regard to the value and the im- portance that has the education on the person, whom exempts from the difficulties, that faces in his life, cf. In their Miscellanea Philosophica et Historica of Metochites. Concretely cf. Metochites Theodoros, Miscel- Janea Philosophica et Historica, chopter 17, p.189. See also, Theodoros Metochites Ethikos é Peri paideias. Notel2. Also, ef. Epictetus, Discourses J, 22, 10 (p. 128-129). ® Metochites, Theodoros , Ethikos & Peri paideias, & 17, 19-24 (p. 104-105). ™ Metochites, Theodoros Ethikos @ Peri paideias, reference 19. 2% Metochites, Theodoros Ethitos é Peri paideias, & 17, 24-26 (p. 104-105). Sce also, Koumakis, 2001: 307-308. % Metachites, Theodoros Ethikos & Peri paideias, & 17, 10-20 (p. 106-107). 7 Epictetus, Encheiridion chapter 12, 32-33. % Epictetus, Encheiridion , chapter 38, p. 86-87. With regard to the importance of hegemonic to Stoics, cf. Long, 1990: 273-274. » Metochites, Theodoros Ethikos & Peri paideias, & 30, 11-13 (p. 158-159). 153154 SOTIRIA TRIANTARI & FOTEINI SARIMICHAILIDOU, of the educated and the philosopher in order to meditate rightly. So much Epictetus as Me- tochites claim for the meditation the examination and the control of things.” Accarate cogitation is consistent with virtue, having as tool the logic and ruler the reason, which is no other than the conquest of knowledge, which is included in philosophy. The way to virtue, is learning, which in tum is the author of mental pleasure. The virtue is con- quered through leaming. This virtue is praised by Epictetus characterizing the person who is endowed with it “as a complete person, as a person who bas followed the road of moral prosperity”. For the blissful person the virtue is the absolute good, the unbreakable law.” In the same way, Metochites conceives the virtue as the unique human acquisition, which is sure and perfect, without any fault. Virtue gives more pleasure than all the other goods of life? In Epictetus’ and his later Theodoros Metochites’ reflections the manifestations of virtue are shown clearly in piety and prudence. The influence of Epictetus to Metochites is obvi- ous, as both determine the piety or devotion as the clear perception for the divine. Epictetus stresses as the most important: “To have a correct perception for the gods, that they exist and that they rule everything so rightly and fairly”.® Followingly, Epictetus defines as pious “the person that cares to seek or to avoid what he/she has to”.»* The place of Epictetus constitutes spiritual nourishment for Christian Metochites, who encloses the stoicism of Epictetus in his own perception for piety, considering “that the first and most important of all for someone who will live properly is to have correct and orthodox faith to God and the divine”. Epictetus’ ap- proach to Christianity was so close, that a Christian philosopher, such as Metochites could attribute almost with the same thought and parallel formulation the definition of the pious person, who can show “his zeal and devotion not only by saying impetuously whatever he has on his mind about various matters, but even by avoiding speaking for those that appear easy”.°* Through Metochites’ thinking, the stoic work on ourselves is emerged, while he calls his audience for self-criticism, in a control of conscience, supporting that: “While in the oth- ers we see just the ugly things and we mock them, we do not conceive, I believe, that also ours are the same. We are passionate both with ours and with others’, formulating in both cases crises that correspond to reality”.*” Metochites appears to represent in his times the sto- ic spirit, seeking that intellectual education, which will yield to a person proper meditation, ® Epictetus, Encheiridion, chapter 29, p. 58-59: chapter 3, p. 22-23: chapter 4, p. 24-25. Epictetus Discourses Ml, 24, 33-35 (p. 236-237). See also. Metochites, Theodoros Ethikos @ Peri paideias, & 58, 24-27, 1-2 (p. 246- 247), Also, of. Koumakis, 2001: 309. Koumakis points out that for Metochites the forecast, that is to say it ‘calculates and checks the person the things is the aim of education. » Epictetus, Encheiridion, chapter 51, & 2 (p. 104-105). » Metochites, Theodoros Ethikos & Peri paideias, & 1, 16-21 (84-85). lion, chapter 31, & 1 (66-67). lion, chapter 31, & 4 (68-69). 3% Metochites, Theodoros Ethikos é Peri paideias, & 10, 3-7 (p. 82-83). % Metochites, Theodoros, Ethikos é Peri paideias., & 9, 24-27 (p. 80-81,82-83). In regard to the approaching of Stoicism in the Christianity and more specifically the approach of Epictetus, ef. Duhot, 2009: 226, 283. » Metochites, Theodoros, Ethikos & Peri paideias, & 43, 22-23, 1-2.LEARNING AS A WAY OF THE TREATMENT OF PATHOS AND ACQUISITION OF EUDAIMONIA.. correct analysis of his reflections, self-control and self-criticism always in combination with his blissful everyday life, that will guide him to eudaimonia. Logic is the exclusive privilege of persons, which with the appropriate education, guides everything in an excellent way and becomes a teacher of genuine happiness and proper behaviour.* In the reflection of Metochites is clear the basic perception of Epictetus that the leaming and more specifically the philosophy is a way of the treatment of pathos, therapeutic force of soul, but also a guide to the acquisition of eudaimonia. Metochites points out that “with the help of philosophy the human life can move to the right direction, while without its own supervision nothing goes well...”2” Obviously, for stoic Epictetus and byzantine Metochites, the learning of divine and human things, which is philosophy, distinguishes the philosopher as a complete personality that has achieved eudaimonia, educating his soul through his in- tellectual education. The intellectual education cultivates reasoning and self-control. In this way, the person is rendered philosopher and discovers truths, which direct him/her in good actions, achieving the combination of thought and virtue, philosophy and morality.® Inspired by this, Metochites brings to the surface the dilemma that Epictetus posed to human many centuries ago: “Either you will cultivate the hegemonic of your soul or you will be kept busy with exterior things; you will take care either of your internal matters or of your outside ones. In other words: either you will become a philosopher or a human of the mass”. The philosopher possessor of eudaimonia in Epictetus and in Theodoros Metochites The above dilemma posed by Epictetus makes it easy for us to comprehend what education means for stoic Epictetus and byzantine Metochites and whether finally the education fall within the same scope and consequently, if it distinguishes the philosopher and the fully educated person. Undoubtedly, for both of them education means the voluntary occupation and learning of all things that happen. The educated receives the meaning of each thing and the reason for its existence and he/she manages through the order and harmony of things to discover that there is a universe controller and that everything that happens has been done by him. Having said this, education is identified with philosophy. Philosophy is the genu- ine learning, Also, as Stoics supported, it is created aiming to resemble universe; it is the knowledge of harmony and the unity of universe and of course the knowledge that all these presuppose a unique regulator. 3 Bpicte iridion, chapter 35 (p. 84-85) ; chapter 41 (p. 90-91). See also, Metochites, Theodoros Ethikos & Peri paideias & 61, 3-1, 15-20 (p. 258-259), With regard to the stoic conscience and intemal life, ef. Duhot, 2009: 191. » Motochites, Theodoros Ethikos é Peri paideias, & 35, 3-6 (p. 170-171). “© Metochites, Theodoros thikos é Peri paideias, & 32, 14-19 (160-161). 4" Epictetus, Encheiridion, chapter 29 & 7 (p. 62-63, 64-65). Epictetus, Discourses I, and 12, 15-16, 17-18 (p. 176-177). See also Metochites, Theodoros Ethikos & Peri paideias, & 32, 14-26, 1 (p. 162-163, 164-165). © Duhot, 2009: 68-69. 155156 SOTIRIA TRIANTARI & FOTEINI SARIMICHAILIDOU Philosophy directs the person to the knowledge of him / herself and this is the genuine education. The education for Epictetus and Metochites is the educated, the wise human to be able to distinguish that other things depend on us and others do not; the wise person, there- fore, has awareness of his/her own weakness. ‘This awareness constitutes the philosopher free and happy, because he/she knows those things that cannot or should not perform and so, with this self -knowledge and self-possession gains his eudaimonia. The philosopher, as this idea is conceived by Epictetus and Metochites, has the ability to meditate and to foresee the dangers, to find way for their evasion and to take measures for their confrontation, keeping away in this way any probable pathe, which could be developed in the opposite case.* In case we want to determine, bearing in mind the reflections of Epictetus and Metochites, the personality of the true philosopher, who through his attitude and his everyday actions is di- rected in the bliss, we will underline the following: Firstly, the main virtues that distinguish the philosopher are the ability to restrain from the material pleasures, the humility, the truthfulness, the hard work, the love towards our fellow people, even towards those who are hostile to us, the godliness, the devotion to our homeland and the discipline regarding the laws and the sov- ereigns. All the above portray the virtue of philosopher, which according to the Stoics leads to eudaimonia, impassivity and peacefulness. Secondly, impassivity, which in a much obvious way dominates all classic and byzantine thought, is this precisely disengagement of person to pathe, This disengagement is achieved by the philosopher, having disciplined his/her desires and subjugating his/her actions to the control and judgment of reasoning.” Thirdly, the area of practical exercise, in which Epictetus and Metochites insist, corresponds to the philosopher's everyday human action. Stoic Epictetus relates this area with the human relations in the city and matches the human actions (duties) to the tendencies of our nature. These actions suit our reasonable nature and are recommended for the placement of ourselves in the service of the human community, with the form of the city - state and that of the family.** Furthermore, Metochites considers as essential the individual action in community, due to the fact that removal from community means suppression of philosophy that is to political life and this in its tum results to the absolute inaction. The political life, which also involves the political ‘Epictetus, Discources J, & 22, 9-13 (p. 226-227). Epictetus, Encheiridion, chapter 1, & 2, (p. 16-17). See also, Theodoros, Metochites Ethikos é Peri paideias, & 50, 1-5 (p. 216-217). Epictetus, Encheiridion, chapter 29, & 3 (p. 60-61). Sce also, Theodoros, Metochites Ethikos @ Peri paideias, and 48, 6-9 (p. 210-211). “ Epictetus, Encheiridion, chapter 31, & (p. 66-67) ; chapter 34 (p. 82-83) ; chapter 39 (p. 88-89) ; chpater 51, & 2 (p. 104-105) ; chapter 24, & 3 (48-49) ; chapter 24, &I (p. 46-47). See also, Karakatsanis, 2002: 106- 109, Karakatsanis, 2007: 10. Also, ef. Theodoros, Metochites Ethikos & Peri paideias, & 10, 15-27 (p. 82-83), 1-15 (p. 84-85) ; and 14, 20-25 (p. 96-97); &16, 7-20 (p. 102-103). © In regard to the stoic term of impassivity, ef. Felepinis 2004 7980. Her we point out the equitable ‘observation of Th, Pelegrini that for Byzantine mystikistes the impassivity constituted the way in which the person can approach the God and achieve his divinity. * Epictetus, Discourses II, & 2, 1-2 (p. 68-69). Epictetus here talks about the three sectors in which the wise ‘man should be practiced. Specifically the first concems the desires and the restraints; the second concerns the choices and the refusals and the third refers to the consents, with a corresponding one the avoidance of deceit.LEARNING AS A WAY OF THE TREATMENT OF PATHOS AND ACQUISITION OF EUDAIMONIA... virtue, contributes to the prosperity of the mind and the soul.” Fourthly, the evasion of sovereignty of senses is a basic element that distinguishes the philosopher; something that is stressed by Epictetus and Metochites. It is about uncontrolled senses that can deceit the person, without the consent and the reasonable thinking that logic uses to handle them. These senses and more specifi- cally their impressions should be dominated and be subject to the mental control of reason.*° The personality of the philosopher is composed by all the above elements. Metochites, being intensely influenced by Epictetus, attempts to enlighten the personality of the educated person, the philosopher drawing attention to his/her basic trait that is, the sovereignty of logic and extensively, the sovereigaty of the intention to the corrupt desires and to the unbridled human passions. These are what the philosopher tries to fight through all his/her life. And these passions should he faced with prudence: “to endure with mental calm whatever hap- pens to him/her ... when things favor him/her, he/she should not get upset and become con- ceited and arrogant; if the opposite happens, neither then should he/she be overwhelmed” ** With this spirit the hegemonic, the cognition of a person is not influenced, but conforms to the reasoning and the nature “the whole nature is commanded and governed by him (m. God) with reason, maintaining the excellent order that he set from the beginning of the world”? The right use of reasoning ensures on behalf of the philosopher the happiness, from which derives also his freedom. The free area of human substance is found inside the judgments made by the philosopher and the decisions that he also takes. The judgments and the deci- sions, according to Metochites, should be distinguished for the stability that characterizes the philosophers up to the end “without changing and abandoning the position that themselves determined for life”. It has to do with the stability, which, as Epictetus supports, concerns all those that the philosopher “considers absolute goods”. * As for Epictetus and Metochites, the rightness of judgments and decisions lies in the in- tellectual and moral constitution of the individual. This constitution is acquired with the tue education, the learning which is not other than the philosophy, which is also the only way to eudaimonia, The true philosopher directs himself/herself to eudaimonia, provided that he/ she overcomes his/her pathe and follows the reason, harmony and natural order of universe, ‘The genuine philosopher has reason and virtue; the only reliable and permanent goods in life, which can nobody profane “really if somebody finds shelter in the education and remains, like in a temple that no one can profane, then he/she feels safe and fears neither the imposi- © Metochites, Theodoros Ethikos é Peri paideias, & 36, 11-25, 1-19 (p. 172-175). ® Epictetus, Discourses III, &2, 5-6 (p. 70-71). Epictetus, Encheiridion, chapter 42 (p. 90-91). See also, Metochites, Theodoros Ethikos @ Peri paideias, & 5, 2-15 (66-67). 3 Metoctiles, Theodoros Ethos € Per paideias,& & 6,18 (6-69). nega to human se conscience in the Byzantine philosophy,cf. Benakis, 2002: 204~ 5 Metochites, Theodoros, £thikos & Peri paideias, raed 6, 1216 (9. 68-69). ® Metochitis, Theodoros Ethikos € Peri paideias, and 13, 8-18 (p. 90-91). Epictetus, Encheiridion, chapter 22 (p. 44-45). See also, Long 2007: 99. 157158 SOTIRIA TRIANTARI & FOTEINI SARIMICHAILIDOU, tion and the instability of the circumstances, nor even the envy and the avarice of the tyrant nor any other hostile energy”.** ‘The philosopher should accord with nature; this accordance equates with moral progress. ‘The philosopher should recognize the good and the bad, the ugly and the beautiful, the world in which he/she is found and also those who he/she lives with. All this knowledge has as an essential prerequisite the education. Otherwise, he/she falls in ignorance, that is to say the mistaken estimate of things; a fact that poses the wiseacre.** Conclusions From the arguments mentioned above, it becomes comprehensible that for the stoic Epictetus and the later byzantine philosopher Theodoros Metochites the leaming, which equates with the philosophical training, constitutes the antidote for the illnesses and pathe of soul. The acquisi- tion of philosophy is the object of the whole educational process in the centre of which the ex- ercise of morality and reasonable intelligence was cultivated, Consequently, the virtue and the reason represent for the stoic and the Byzantine intellectual the philosophy and what of course has priority is their practical application to the everyday life. The actions and the attitude of the philosopher through learning depicted his daily life. Role models of this life style were pre- sented by the ancient Greek philosophy with central representative Socrates along with other wise men, who with their theory and their action gave stimuli for the thought of the modern.” The philosophy is the knowledge and the essential treatment of pathos, with the help of which the philosopher removes the emergence of pathogenic situations. The philosophy pre- pares the individual spiritually and mentally for any cases that holds for him the human des- tiny, But above everything, philosophy prepares the true philosopher to play his role properly, while the life resembles a drama, where the human is called to play as well as he/she can his/ her role. At this point is more explicit the influence of Epictetus to the byzantine Theodoros Metochites, as the latter conceives the importance of practical life in this big theatre of life, where the person and the philosopher more specifically should acquire with a tum in him/ herself the self-possession and the self-control. The learning and in the present case, the phi- losophy contributes to the constitution of reasons and actions, in order the soul to live without fears and suspicions and always with the guidance of mind. The reason is the tool of learning and at the same time a steadfast treasure and wealth for person.” ‘Studying carefully the Ethikos @ Peri paideias by Theodoros Metochites, it can be con- 55 Metochites, Theodoros Ethikos 2 Peri paideias, & 15, 15-19 (p. 100-101). % Epictetus, Discourses If, and 24, 19-21.Metochitis, Theodoros Ethikos @ Peri poideias, and 4, 21-25, 1-3. ® Rpictetus, Encheiridion chapter 51, & 3(p.104-105). Sce also, Metochites Theodoros Ethikos & Peri paid- eias, & 20, 23-25, 16-25 (p. 118-119, 122-123). 2 Eplctenis, Encheiridionchater 17 (. 40-41) See also Metchtes Tenderer. Ethikos € Peri paideias, & 54, 15-23 (p. 230-231). 5 Epictetus, Encheiridion chapter 38 (p. 86-87). See also, Metochites Theodoros Ethikos & Peri paideias, & 58,26 (p. 250-251} & 614-6 (262-268).LEARNING AS A WAY OF THE TREATMENT OF PATHOS AND ACQUISITION OF EUDAIMONIA... ceived the influence that had the byzantine philosopher by the educational opinions of Epict- etus, as these were expressed through the Encheiridion and his Discourses. Perhaps it would attract more attention a more thorough study in regard to the effects that the stoicism gener- ally had on the intellectuals of Byzantium, and more specifically on the intellectuals of last centuries, where the stoic necessity for the transformation of human finds a wider support, due to the historic and social needs of the time. Bibliography Benakis L. G., Byzantine Philosophy. Texts and Studies. Athens: Parousia, 2002. Dellis I. G, Philosophical Advisory. The philosophy as “treatment. Athens: Typothito-Giorgos Dardanos: 2005. Duhot J. L, Epictetus and wisdom of Stoics. D, Papathanasopoulou (trans.), Athens: Enalios, 2009. Epictetus, Discourses J. Translation, comments: D. N. loannidou & I. P. Christodoulou. Thessaloniki: Zitros, 2002. Epictetus, Encheiridion, Introduction-Translation N. M. Skouteropoulos. Athens: Moment, 2004. Karakatsanis P, “The pedagogic perceptions of Stoics” in Sciences of Education 2 (2007), 7-17. Karakatsanis P,, The philosophy of Stoics about education. Athens: Atrapos. Texts of Education, 2002, Koumakis G. X., Theory and Phitasoply of Education. Athens: Typothito-Giorgos Dandanos, 2001, 264-266. Kyrkos V., “Epictetus: the reason of wisepatience” in the Hommage in Konstantinos Despotopoulos. ‘Athens: Papazisi, 1991, 225-237, Long A. A., The Hellenistic Philosophy. Stoics, Epikoureioi, Sceptic. St. Dimopoulos, M. Dragona- ‘Monachou (trans),. Athens: Educative Institution of National Bank, 1990, Long A. A., Epictetus: A Stoic and Socratic Guide to Life. Oxford: Clarendon Press, [2002], Reprinted 2007. Manos A., The eudaimonia as life fluency in Ancient Stoies Philosophy. Athens: Institute of Book-A. Kardamitsa, 2002. Metochites Theodoros, Miscellanea Philosophica et Historica. Amsterdam: Adolf, M. Hakkert, 1966. Metochites Theodoros, Ethikos @ Peri paideias. Athens: Kanakis. Current: Byzantine Literature 1, 1995. Pelegrinis Th., Dictionary of Philosophy. The significances, the Theories, the Faculties, the Currents and the Persons/Exaglossi Terminology. Athens: Greek Letters, 2004, Stones, G. V. “The Ethics of the Stoic Epictetus”, The Classical Review, New Series, Vol. 50, No. 1 (2000), (154-155), 155. ‘Triantari-Mara S., History of Philosophy. Volume A’. From the Antiquity in the Middle Age. Thessal- onica: Anton. Stamoulis, 2005, Zeller-Nestle, History of Philosophy. (13th ed.) X. Theodoridi (trans.), Athens: Hearth, 1990, Sotiria A. Triantari Padagogic Faculty University of Western Macedonia Foteini Sarimichailidow Aristotle University of Thessaloniki 159