Book

III

r ) lf pleasure laclecl such ten:rcious ldr ocatcs, Brutus, irnd spokc fr-rr hcrsclf, I think the prcrious book \\rruld conrpel hcr to conccdc dcfeirt to lcirl \\orth. llos shamelcss she lould be to lcsist liltuc anl longcr, to plcle:'lhat is l)leirsint to \yhirt is good, or to contencl that boclilr cnjolncnt and thc nrentll Jc!ighr that it causcs ar c of nrore lalue thar a steldfast sctiousncss ofpurpusc. So lct us clismiss her :rnd ordel her to stal s ithin hcl onn borclcrs. \\'c do not wilnt thc rigc-rur of our rlcbatc to be hnmperecl bl hel secluctile charms. (z) \\c must inrcstigate \hcre thlt suplcmc good thirt \\'c \rirnt to disco\el is ro bc firund. Plersure has bccn eliminirtcd [r'om thc inqtiilr, and plcttl much thc same objcctions holcl agirinst thosc l.ho maintaincd thlt thc ultimatc good l ls l'rccdom fi'onr pain. Indecd no good should be dcclarcd supleme if it is lrrcking in r-irtue, since nothing cirn bc su1'rctiol to that. \\ic l cle folcehrl cnough in our dclxtc $ ith 'lbrquatus. But rr still ficlccr

stiugglc Nith

Lhc Stoics

is.rt hrncl. 'l'he topic of pleasure militirtes ilgirinst

lclllr
r

sh:rlp or plofirund discussion. 'fhose

lho

dcfend plcasure;uc not

lell

crsccl in u gumcnt, ilnd hel opponents aLc conh'onting a casc that is not hlld to relutc. (.j) Er cn Hpiculus himsclf slitl thirt pleirsulc is not ir natter ftr llgu nrent, sincc the critcrion fbr judging pleasurc is locltecl in thc scnses. T hus ir lccollectiou ol plcasurc is suflicient; proof is ilrele\ rnt. So thc detlittc * c held
rvas l simplc olc on cithcr sidc. Thcle \1,1s nothing in\ol\cd or itbstruse iu Torquirtus' c\pr)sition, :lncl mr oln spccch, so I bclicre. rras ltrl-ectlr luciclThc Sroics, on thc othcr hancl, ls 1ou rcll knol, hle l rnr of:rlguirrg ru hiclr is not so nuch subtlc irs obscurc, cr en iit thc Glcck readcr', irncl tl'tus l:rl mole ro lirl us Romus l ho har c to fincl a net rrrcatrulur and in\ent ne\ tclnts to ntttclt nel conccpts. This ncccl r ill surplisc no onc ol er en moclet-

it is rccoqnizecl thlt itnr lielcl ofknouledgc shose crelcisr: clcglec ol spccializatiorr hls l lrrrilc uny,^c ofncl telnrs sct up t() (lcsignirtc the subject-mrttcl of thc rcler rnt 6cld. (+) 'l'hus hgic irncl Irhr sics usc terminologr unknorln clcn to thc Grccls. Gcolrleh\ trrd music, its lcll :ls y,^r'imm:tl j hlle thcir osn llngu;rg-e. l}cn the irlt of rhctolic, dcspite bcing
irrc lcirr-ning oncc

irrrohes

tl'roloLllihl\ public rrncl lirniliar, still uses rr roclbuhn

instnrction

tir

thc pulposcs of

lhich

is

plettl nrucb its orrn6a

(h Mortl litds
Thcse rcfined:rnd noblc arts asidc, not evcn itrtisins could prcser\e thcrr crafts lithout using tcrminologr unkno\\n to the rcst of us but familiar to them. -tgliculture too, a topic thich quitc rcsists fine l'riting, has none thr lcss coincd ncn tcrms to dclineate its thcmes. Hos much morc, thcn, doe. philosophl necd to do this! Philosophr is the rrrt of life, and it cannot t:lk. ordinirrr llnguagic as thc brsis lor its discussions. (5) Thc Stoics hlrc bcen thc erertcst innovators of all philosrDhers in thi. regald, and Zcno thcir fbunder l as more an inycntor crl'ne\1 rrords than nc\\ icleas.r The most lcarned peoplc, sorking in l languagc t hich is generlll. considcrcd to be richcr thin our ovn. are still allorrccl to use unfamiliar tcrn. thcn dcrling $ith recondite matcri:rl. All the grcatcr is thc allornance th'ri should be mitcle firr us \r ho are so bold as to tacklc thcse topics lor thc fir:: timc. \\'i-' har c oftcn stated, in thc fice of complaints not onll from Grccks bu: irlso tiom pc<4rlc sho \\'ould rilthcr be considcred Glcck than Roman, that ou: lrrng;ulge clocs not come ir poor second to Greck in lvcalth of rocabul:rrr, .rn. indccd is lctullll superior. So \rc must \\olk hirrd to demonstrNte this trur.r not just in our niti\ e irrts, but in those of the Glccks themsellcs. No* thcr. ilre ccrtirjn sords rrhich b1 icnerirblc tridition Ne trcnt as J,rtin, such.,.

'philosophf itsel[,'r'hetolic','dialectic','plmmmar'','icometrJ' :rnd'musi! Onc could usc Lirtin ;rlternatilcs, but thcsc s:ords hlrc becn adopted thlour
Jong uslge and se should tleat them as oul o*'n.

(6) So much firr cpcstions of tclminologl. 'furning to thc subject its(i:. lSrutus, I irm in constant fcirr. th.t I \ ill hc rcproachccl for addressing this l lr. to rou, \'ho rre such irn eruditc student ofphilosophr in gencral and thc b..

If I rvcre doing so:rs if to instrr.rct yru, thcn ti, reprorch lould be jr,Lstified. llut thrt is fu from rnl intcntion. \or',rnr scntling vou this rolk to let lou knol lhat lou lherdl knos rerr rtr.
pirlt of it in prrticulirr.

l{athcr, I takc thc grcrtest comfort in lssociating it sith lour namc. -{n.i rcgard \1)u as the most imp.rti.l critic and judgc in those liclcls of stud) \\ h.:. ruc sharc rn irrtelcst. Plv ck)sc 'Jttention, thcn, :rncl bc thc judgc in the dr. rgrecmcnt I had \ith Rrur unclc, l Nontlcrful irnd uniquc man. (7) I l as in Tusculum, rnd $anted k) consult sorrc books frorl thc libr.r: of the lrung Lucullus. So I $cnt to his villrr, rrs I ofien clid, to tlkc thcm thc shelres lrrsclL \\'hcn I arrired, I sal llarcus Ortq rrho I hld not kn,,, \as thcle, sitting in thc librarr surroundcd bl Stoic rvorks.l FIc had a r'. passion fol rcacling, is 1ou kno\\; rnd coulcl ncr,el get cnough of it. After' .. hc srruld olien scoln thc cnptr mockcrr of thc mob rrnd actuallv rclcl in : . r \rs nole(l fi)r its prcci!c (listincti{msoftcrminologr; helc Ciccro cotrplcs thi'; rith\ntiochuschin.shichsillbeprominentirrboolsnind\.thrrSkri.difiercncc.rSroicisnl

rhc \ristotrli.n r.diLi('r xrc \erbirl r.ther thrn substrntiil. l he issuc is nisccl ir ro:rr,l lo\irrg. 'Ihc clranltic cl.rte is;.:. gircn hr .r rrlercrcc n) r btr'1.lr in booh n. r. 'l hc sttll
'fLLsculLrrn.

ncrr Ronrc,l

her< (liccrrr h.ts conc

\orrnc-er Luc!llLrs k,n l.ucullLrs'

l) \\i

iithcl

sec

orcr lrorrr his (trln counrN housc ro thrr brnli rt rrote 7r ). O'r \ltrcus (:to scc Inrrod!.'

66

Bouk I

II

:ntrudc on public business. All thc rnorc, thcn, tith total lcisurc and ir husc .uppll of re:ldinlt-mattcq did he appcal to bc go|gi[g himself on books. if I nr.rr applr t)ris term ro s,) hunour'3bls dD occufitlion.

Senate-house. Hc did this \rhile thc Scnate sas irssembling, so as not to

Our 1l'icld I ucullus should start familiarizing himself l ith this grcat collccrion. I hopc hc tirkcs more dclight in thcsc books than in all thc other olnamcnts of the house. I know this is reallr lour oun cluq, but I :rm tcuibll .rnsious that hc should get an cduc,ttion th.rt s ill makc him the match of his i:athcl and dclr Cacpio and 1ou vourself * ho are such a closc t el;rtion. I har c good Lcason fbr m1'concern. I chelish the memorl of his unclc (1ou knos horr highh l lated Cacpio in m1 opinion hc lvould nou trc one of oul lc:rcling figurcs had he !ilcd). Lucius l-ucullus too is at the forcfront oi'm1 mincl. He \\rs a min of enormous distinction. Elcrl lttitudc rncl opinion rrc held cemcntcd thc bond of fricndship bct*ccn us.' (9) 'lbur rcmcmbrance of thcsc mcn, each of t hom berlucathed their children to \1rur care, dr)cs Jou glcxt credit', slid Crrtq 'as docs rlur conccrn for roungi Lucullus. I am far from shilking lhat lou call mr' "dutr". but I shall enlist \ou to sharc it. I $oulcl acld that the bo1 has alrendl shoNn me signs of both moclcstl and intclligencc. But lou knol hol loung he is.''I do indced', I replied, 'but still, it is high timc fbr him to gct a tirstc ofthe skills s hich $ill bcttcr cquip him fol the adult world should hc imbibc thcm in his l outh.'l 'Ycs', said Gto, 'and uc s ill discuss thcsc matte rs morc clrcfulll irnd frc' qucntlv in thc futulc, and takc joint acti{)n. But let us sit dolr n, shall Nei' Ancl so le did. (ro) CLrto thcn said,'\Vhrt is it th:1t Jou, the o$ncr of so mlnl lolumes, need from this placci' 'l came to pict some ofthc {ristotlc notc-books,+ nhicl't I knen scre herc', I rcplied. 'I can lcatl them during shat is a larc holidil ft,r' me.''If onll', crclaimed Clto,'-rou hird madc cause sith the Stoics! liru, if anlone, should sulclr belier,c thirt there is nothing good erccpt rirtuc.' 'Perhaps rou Stoics ought not to hilc dressccl up the samc itlcirs in nes telminologl', I replied,'givcn thirt therc is rgrcemcnt bctleen us on the point

(8) Oul mceting being ir mutuirl surprisc, hc immcdiltelv sptang to his lcet. '\\'hat brings 1ou hcrel'he askccl. 'l supposc 1'ou hllc cone from t.out rill,r. li I had known vou \\'erc thcre) I soulcl hare paid rou a risit m1self.' "fhc tirmcs bcppn l cstcrclal ', I leplicd, 'so I left torr n and iurir cd in thc er cning. \lr rc:rson for cominpJ hcre \\'as to lict hold o1'some books fi'om the libralr.

I his uDdc.lines rhc pirthos of rhe f:rct. rtich (l;crro ,rssunrcs thit his k.rdcrs $;ll tno\\. rhrt thc rounger l,ucLrllus sas kilietl in thc civil uar in +2. tighring igrinst (:iesrr rs \rrrs (]ln). 'l hc rounger Lucullus rrrs thc r rrd o{ (lrto, his nnnhcr's step-brorhra rnd Cicero sc(ms io h e hrd sonc inllLnrl Icsponsibilitr lbr hinr. 'l he relcrcncc ftr Crcp;o hcLc is puzzlirrg. rnd thcre is some conlusion in thc nrnuscripts ('uncle'rrinsi.llcs ,r conjccturc lor'grrndlllh(r'. vhich produces impossible rcsults). Thc pcrsrn ncant is pmb:rbh (Iuintus Scnilius (ircpr,. Cato's step brother and unclc to both llrutus end I-ucullus. sho dicd rLrung ind fbr $h,'sc son Ciccro app,rrcntlt rlso hacl somc rcsponsibilitr: Sec Inr.oductioD, p. \\iii. cspccirllr norc:o.

6j

On

l'lorul Enls

and Aristo, s.ho clcclare all things to be cquali I rrould klc to hcar lour opinion of thcm.'5 'lbu lrc lsking mv opinionl' crclaimed Cato. "l'hesc nlcn \\'ere liood. brale, just and tempcrrte in public lifc, rrs ue havc cithcr hcard told ol sec'n fil oursclves. \\'ith no s]stcmxtic doctrine, thel follolcd nlture hcrself, lncl achicvcd rr grcat dc.l thirt is praisesorthr In mr-opinion thcJ'$ere bcttcr instructcd bl nirturc thrn thcl could h*c becn br philosophr, had thc\ adoptcd anl othcr philosophl than that shich holds moralitl to be the onl\ g;ood, imnloralitl' the onll er,il. All other philosophicll slstcms - some more than others, no doubt, but still all - count somethinli othcl than viltue :rs l good ol cr,il. Thcse slstcms. in m1 r'ies, not onlv fail to assist or cncourage u. to become bettcr, but actualll corrupt our r.en-nature. Unless it is mtintaincd th.t $h{t is moral is the onlr good, thelc is no s a1 of establishing that it i' lirtue thrt b ngs ibout the happl lifc. And if this is so, then I do not sce s hr s,c should trouble oursclles lith philosophr'. If it s.cre possible frrr rr si:. pcrson to bc unhappr,, I fear I uould set littlc r alue on gkrlious irnd \ronderCato', I replicd, 'could cquall) be said [r\ i atllc thlt this morilitJ $ e arc di.cussing is rcgarded bl thcm not iust as thc highcst good but also, in linc t'itlr lour os.n liet; u the onll good. Ancl ifthat is correct, the conclusion thirt knol yru uphold docs indced follor' - cvcrl n isc pcrson is aln al s hlppr'. ,{ r. rou thcn commending thcse philosophers ancl adrising us to follo\ thci:

ofsubstance. Oul arguments coincidc; it is mercll-in thcir form ofexprcssion that our dispute irises.' 'Thev do not coincidc in thc slightest', said Cato. 'In saving that anl thing cscept lirtuc is to be sought, ol countcd as goocl, 1.ou dcstrol moralin itsell. the vcrl light of \ irtue. and lru dismantlc \ irtue complctclt.' (t r ) 'Splcndid sords, Cato', I said, 'but rre lou alr'.rrc that you sharc l-our glort with Pvrrho

ful virtuc.'

(rz)'\\ihrrt rou harc srrid

so fiu',

fblloser of Ptrlho or Aristo. You alc u,ell

lincl'
'Not at ill'. sxid Cato. 'It is of thc essencc of \.iltuc thirt onc makes choicc. :rmong the things th:rt are in accordirncc \rith niturc.'fhcsc philosopher. makc elcrlthing ctlu:rl and collapsc all distinctions betlcen altcrnlrire' Hence no selection is possible, irnd rirtue itselfis abolishcd.'(r3)'.{ rcrv rrr,,.. point', I rcplied. 'But lct me ask if Iou arc not committed to the same pori tion u hen 1<lu declirrc that nothing is grxrd sar-c s hat is riEiht aud molal, ln. abandon rll means of distineuishing bet$ccn othcr things.'

i li)r

P\ rrho rnd Arisro. scc bool, Il, notc jo. Ciccro herc sl,ctchcs an rrguncnt $hicb \ill pronin(ni irr bool o i /i;1/k? the Stt'ics s.r thxt \irtue is thc onh good. bur rhrr \\itb hr.rl: \c.rlthirndsoon..rlileisbcttcr,in$hichctrsethc\rres:rlinSrhcs.rmcrhingislrismtlr.rin dilicrent terninohg\: Or rhc! Nrc s.rring rhrrt rirruc is the onlr good. rnd rhrt hc.)l \rilth. ctc. (lo rol mrkc a lifc hcttcr - in rhich casc ths are lblln ing {risto rnd orhcr \ | dcDt drat thcrc is rn\ raiionrl basis fi,r choicc anrong things other thin r;rtuc. On cri . opti{xr. rhc S n,ics hck n sublun rh l lhcort of thcir ol n. l'his cla im is put frrrs arcl to prot fhto's prtscnt.rtion of just such :r theor\.

6ll

Book

III

'l'hc

But I am not.'(r4)'Hou

anss cr rvould bc 1cs', he said,

sol'I

'if I u cre guiltl of such abandonment. askcd. 'N,lolalitl alone is the onc rhingl rrhich

rou crll lirtuous, right, praiserrorthl and deccnt (its natule rvill be bcttcr undcrstood ifI rcfer to it b1 a variet-r ofslnonl ms). So I ask 1rru, if that is thc

onll'' good, rvhrt elsc rvill thcre bc to pursuci On the othcr sicle, if the only clil is $'hat is basc, r'icious, indeccnt, crlrrupt and fuul (hcre too a \,rrictl- of tcrms s ill make things clear ), r.hat elsc rvill vou sal should bc nloided?' 'liru s cll tnol l hat I shall sa1', he rcplicd. .-{nd I suspect r-ou cannot t rit makc:r bricf lcsponse. So I rr ill not rcpll have plcntl of lcisurc, I trill erpound the \\ hoic slstem of Zcno lnd thc Stoics - unless vou u-ould rather I did not.' 'qritc thc contrar]', I said. 'Your crposition Nill bc of grcnt assistitncc in to scize upon somc point or othel

point

bl point. Instead,

since

le

il'I

rcsolving thc qucstions \\c arc investigating.'(r5) ''I'hen let us make the rttcmpt', hc replicd, 'ho|erer diliicult rnd obscurc Stoic doct ne may bc. At one timc the tcrminologl used ftrt thcir ne\.ide,.rs did not see'm lcccptable er en in the Greck languagc. Long habituiltion hds no$ madc it familiar But lhlt do rou think uill happen in thc case ofLatini' 'Thcle is no problcm s'hatsocrcr', I rcplied. 'IfZcnrl las allotcd to invent ! ne\1 term to match the discorcrl ofan unfamiliar idca, thcn sh1 not Catoi' \one thc lcss, thelc is no nced for ln crilct \r-ord-for-$ord correspondencc s hen a more familiar term alrcadl crists to conr,el the sxmc meaninli. 'fhit is thc mirrk of an unskillcd translator. \,Il usual plactice, rrhcrc thcre is no lltcrnrrtive availablc, is to erprcss l single Greek rvord bl seleral l,atin oncs. .{.nd I still think rvc should be lllolccl to usc :r Grcck $ord $ hen there is n{) I-atin equivalcnt. If"cphippia" and "acratophora" irre irllolecl, then "prodgmcna" and "lpoprogmena" should celtainll be rrllosed too, crcn though thcv mar correctll bc rcndered as '!relerr ecl" :rnd "rejected."'(' (r6)'I apprcciatc lour hclp', said Cato. 'I shall usc for prcfcrcnce the nonGrcck rcrsions 1.ou har.c just gi\.cn. If l ou sce mc in dillicultl in other cascs, pleasc comc to rn1 aid."l certainll sball', I leplied,'but fortunc firours thc blarc, so I bitl l ou press on. \\'hat more sublime lcntut c could * c undcrtakei' 'Those l hosc thcorl I ircccpt', began Oato, 'hale the follon ing vicr'.t Evcrr " "llphipp;:r" rl'c saddles, rnd "'rkratt4rhora"
\rrucli Ciiccro
as

jars ot ncl]r {ine. Pcrh.rps thcse Gecl srrrds beins.rs clurnsr rs Zcno's coiuscs ')rcfcLrcd" rrnd'\cjccled" t,r'tlisp.clcrrcd"), introdLrced to relcr to thc Lind ofralur posscssed bf elcr\rhin8 orhcr rh.rn \irhrc. Olto frequcntll refcrs to Stoic ttchnic.rl tcrnrs in Grceli. His plcsrnration is rathcr lilc l Lertboot. scll nrfoLmerl but rel.rtirch gr celess. crnxrnsting $ith rhc rmtrteur enthusi,rsm ol' lirrqu.ttus in bool t and thc polishcd rctoric ol Pim in book t. (iato begins rrith thc Stoic idea ofarld,jsr.r or lirm;litrriztrtion (thoush no lcrm 1o[ it). Thc idor is drat of fincling somcthing congcnirl rnd reg.rrding it as onc's o{n. }ro'n 16 to 2i Clrto crpounrls 'pcrsoml a r'izj's. shich tnccs our crrlicsl rrlcm pls i t lind ing rh ings congcn irtl to ouro ginllrudimcntxry sen\c ofscll .\s $c gro\; \\'e come b hrlc morc maturc corceptions ofl)odr \h.t $c rcrlh arc rnd t\hrt i\ rcrlll congrn;rl or ikin n) uq. I)crclopmcrt rnd mrnr mtion t:rlc us fr onr thc bib\'s priniti\ e le11--lo\ e to thc ritioDal person's rccosniti()n that thc onlrgoodforhin.as.rrtrtionrlpcrson.is\irtuc.('SociNl ,tidt N'. erplicficd fron 62 to 6ar. is l colresponding dcrclopmcnt lrom primirilc conccrn for othcrs \\ho ,rre'1ours () mortrl concern tbr nll mrn,nnl bcings.)

6g

On

llorul Ewls

animal, as soon as it is born (this is rvhere onc should statt), is concerncd rr ith itsclf, and takcs calc to prescrrc itscll It farrrur s its constitution and $hitevcr preserrcs its constitution, lhcreas it rccoils from its destluction and rrhatcrcr' appcars to promotc its dcstluction. In support of this thesis, the Stoics poinr out that babics seel $hat is good for thcm and aroid thc opposite bcfore thel evcr fccl ple,,rsurc ol pain.s This s'ould not happcn unless thcl r'alued thcir o$n constitution and fearcd dcstruction. But neither could it happcn that thel sould seck anl thing at all unless ther, had sclf-awareness and thcrebl- self-lorc. So onc must rcalisc that it is self-ftlrc which prolidcs the primar) motivation. (r7) '\{ost Stoics do not belie\,c thnt pleasurc should bc ranked irmong the nirtural principlcs - I passionatcll agree. If it $ cre othcnrisc, if nature \\-erc thought to hare includcd pleirsurc itmongst the prinirr objccts of desilc. then a host of loathsomc conscquenccs sould follor-. As to uhl r'r c lorc thosc objcctii lhich br naturc rre lirst take up, thc follrling is sufficient explanation: anyone, givcn thc choicc, lrluld prefer all thc prrts of thcir' bodl to bc s,cll adaptcd and sound rathel than of equal utilitl but impailed and tlvisted. 'Nos cognitions (rrhich rre mal call graspings or pcrceir,ings, ori if thcsc terms irre dis;rgreelblc or obscurc, "cirtalepscs" from thc Grcek) rvc consider'

\\orth rttainini in thcir o$n fight, since the! harc nithin thcmsches

an

clemcnt that irs it rvele enfolds and cmbr:rces thc truth. This ma1 be scen in thc crse of thc loung rrhom le can obserlc taking; delight in har ing; lorkcd something out for thcmschcs clen where therc is no ultcrior moti\c. (r8) \\e also bclierc that the scicnces should be tlkcn up for their otn sake, lirstll bccausc l'hat thel contrin is somhl of adoption, and sccondl) becxuse thel consist of cognitions and embrirce a bodl of tork cstablished bl slsrcmati,, rcasoning.e As for irssenting to \rhat is false, the Stoics hold th:rt r.rf:rll things that are against nlture, this is thc most repugnant to us. f['Of the nrcmbcrs or parts ofthc bod1, some appcar to hare bccn bestowccl bl naturc for thcir oln usefulness, such as hands, legJs and fcet, and also the irternal organs, though the ertent of thcir utilin is a matter fbr dispute o cn rmonist doctors. Othel palts, though, hare no apparcnt utilitl and are thcrc as a kind ofdecolation, lix cxamplc the pcacock's tail, the dove's plumagc that changes colour, ancl thc nipples and beard of the adult malc.ll' (rg) '\,I1 exposition has pcrhaps bccn rathcl thlcrdbarc. I have bccn clealing rvith rlhat might bc crllcd thc basic clcmcnts of naturc, and a fullness
$

"

Epicurcan point hus bcen used inbooLn. lo; inbool\,2+-tl \ntiochus gree'. The shled idca is that to c\plain rhe rpproprirtcncss ol an rnimrl s or lnbr's lcsponses iit )n of thc kinti hilc kr rssunre rhrt the aninrrl or b:rb] is bi nging ro dic siir.rtioD some c( 'ne'cpri( ol rhing it is. not mcrell r'circtirrg to pxrlic!Llnr encountels r ith plcrsure ,rrd p.rin. \ cognit;on is r grtrsp of ,r lirct, r grusp \hich could nol bc \ rong (xnd thus rnounrs n) \\ har $c \r(,uld c:rll Lno$lcdgc of thit fict). 1s rhese trrc Iinlecl b! s\stcDr.tic rcrsoning, rhe\ build up into the rrrxe srstcmatie lno\\ledsc Ihrt constitutcs rhc scienc!s or brinches of lno\ lcd!.r

lhis.rnri

" 'l

his plrrgrnph is brnckctcd

b\ thc OC'f rs it hr$ no rele\ince ro its conrcrt.

7o

Baok

III

case I lm not nrirclccl ro .rttcmpt it. Nonethcless, \'hcn one discourses on lir',rndcr thcmcs. thc \cr\ arpic carrics thc langu.rgc along lith it. l'hc more leightl the c(ntcnt, thc

,rt strle is thcrcforc scarcell appropriatc. In anl

arorc brilliant the stlle.' '-[ust irs lou sa1', I rcplied. 'But still, in m1 r'icl, $ hcn ir $orthr theme i5 crpoundcd s ith claritl, it is thercbl erpoundcd u ith clistinction. It is surch

ihildish to tant to discuss

to;ric of the prcsent sort in ir rhctolical

st lc. For

,,nc of lcarning rrnd intclligcncc, r clcar rrnd straightfolsard erposition is the

rim.'
C:rto.'\1'e halc becn tlig-r'essing liom thc thcse thrt uhrrt fbllols n'rust cohcre. \\e hegin *ith a chssilicntion: thc Stoics cirll "r rrlulble" (this. I think, is thc tern'r rre should use) r'hatelcr is cither itsclf in accordance tith nature, or brings .ri)out somcthinli that is. \\irrthl of selection, thercfbre, is s,hatcr er hirs sufli.ient importxnce to be \r,orth\ of laluc (r'aluc tlre Stoics call a]irr). On thc ,rrhcr hand, thel-call "non-virluirble" rlhat is contru\ to the abo';c.'l'hc stllting point, thercfrrr e, is tlut things in rrccorclancc u ith nature arc to bc ltkrptctl tirl thcir o*n s.rkc, irnd thcil contraries arc likelr- isc to bc rcjcctccl.li) '\\iith this established. thc initial "rpplopriate action" (this is n hat I crrll rhc GlccL lrilhilar) is to preservc oncself in one's nltural constitution. 'lhc nert is to trke Nhat is il lccorclancc \\ ith llirture rnd rc;cct ils oppositc. Once rhis method of selcction (and likctisc rcjection) has bcen discolcred, selccrion then gocs hlnd in h;rnd \1 ith :rpproplirrte rction.'l'hcn such selcction becomes continuous, tlnd, llnnll\, strblc rntl in agreement r ith nxtulc. -\t this p()int that \i hich can truil bc srtid to be good first irppcu s irncl is recognized
(zo)
srrid

"fhcn let us mor.e on',

nltural principles, lnd it is

lith

lbr $hat it
nitturc. But

is.
as

(zr)',1 hunran being's eallicst conccrn is firr shirt is in irccordancc sith

soon xs one bas girincd some undcrstirnding, ol lirthcl "conccpsees iur ordcr ancl as it rlerc concorrl:lncc in thc things l hich olc ought to clo, onc thcn lalues that concordance nruch mole highlr than tirosc hrst objects ol':rlTcction. llcncc thtough lcrrning rncl Leason olc concluclcs thirt this is thc phce to 6nd thc supreme humirn rood, that gootl s hich is to be pnisecl lnd sought on its ol n irccount.lr 1'his liood lies in * hrt thc Stoics clll iarr/agia. Let us usc thc tcrm "consistencr ",

rion" (nhat thc Stoics call ennait), and

il vou apprrlrc. Hercin lics thirt liood, n:rmcll moral action rnd trrorillitJ itsell, .rt thich elcrlthing clsc ought b l)c dirccted. 'l'hough it is a lrter
:
{ilh

'l'hings other thrn rirruc. li)r rlrc Sto;cs.,rc not g(nrd. r)r ro be choscn'. bur br\c rheil o\n Lind of'sclectir c' r rluc: \c h.l\ r- rcrson to sclcct fur rciccr) rhcrr. sincc rhc\ irc h rcco(hncc
our nfl rc (r'not). 11 is irr dc\cl(4)ing thr trll\ rc sebcr rhcm rlur Nc tll.e lcd to rc(otrnizc\ir1uc,\rhichisSoo(lrndrohechoscn.hr\ingddiflcrcnttnal(,ilrluellr)n]ihcLin(lrhcl

r\\crlcrelopfronrrlluingourrc.rsoningrrsame,rnsrorcquirirgthingsrirhscl$tirc\rluc,lilic herlthrndrcrlth,tosccingthxtihisrcisoningisrhconllthirgralu'rblc its o\D r;ght.'l'his rttitude isirlcntjfied lith rilruc, rathcrsnilih;'rs r'1lcrr, thc nroc !s nurc pliusiblr \\hrr) hrrr secn ir thc contcrt olothcr Sn)ie idcis. such is s,rci.rl rft,r,ris .
71

0n,lloral l')nls
it is nonc the lcss the onlr thing to bc sought in r irtue ofits ol n poscr and \1orth, \\,hctqrs nonc of thc plimall objccts of nature is to be
der clopment,

sought on its osn itccount. (zz) '\\'hat I have c lcd "appropriate actions" otigin.rre lrom naturc's st 'ting points, and so thc fbrmcr must llc dirccted to$ alds thc latter. 'l'hus it ma1 rightll bc srrid that all approprirtc actions ar-e iimcd at our attaining the n:rtural principlcs- It docs not mcirn, ho$crer', that this irtt:rinmcnr is our ultitnirtc good, since mor:lI rction is not inclucled rrmon!i oul oligintl nttulnl ;rtt:lchmcnts. l{|ther', such action is a conscqucncc tnd il l:ltcl' det clr4rment, as I said. But it too is in accordirnce Nith nature irnd, to a fir glcatcr e\tcnt than lll thu rLrrlier objeets, stimuldlcs uur pursui[. 'Hcrc, though, one must jmmcdirtelr iuoicl thc error of thinking thAt thc thcrlrl is committcd to there being t\\'o ultim.ltc goods. Tirkc thc casc of onc *hosc task it is to shoot a speu or itro\! strnight ilt somc tiu!,..ct. Onc's ukimirte irim is to do all in onc's po\cr to shoot str':riliht, irnd the samc applies l ith our ultimate grxrd. In this kind of cr.lmplc, it is to shoot stririliht that one must do all one can; nonc thc lcss, it is to clo all onc can to accomPlish thc t.6k thatis rcall) thc ultimatc ain, It is Iust thc sanrc l ith rr hat l e call thc suprcmc good in lif'c. To rctuall) hit thc targct is, as se sar, tr) be sclccted bur lrot sought.l2 (23)'Sincc all appropriatc irctions oligtinatc fiom the naturll principles, so too must sisdom itscll Nos it often happens that \rhen onq is introclucecl to somcone, onc comes to rllue that person nlrrc highll thin one docs the

pcrson \rlro madc the introduction. Similalll it is the strrrting points r-r1nirture \\lrich lilst introducc us to \\isdom, bur it is no surprise that .\\'e then comc to chcrish risdonr hcrsclf lil nrorc than \rc do those objccts br shich \1c qlnrc to her'. 1he bodill P:uts that \'\'e iuc ui\'en iue er iclcntll giicn tl) us fol sonrc prrticular s a1 <-rf lifc. So kxr our mild's clesirc tcrntcd huni in Gleck - scems gircn not fi)1 .D! kind oflifc but fol ir palticulrr-form ol lir itg. 'l'hc same goes fbr rclrson ancl contplctc lcisolr. (24)Just.ls tctors ilnd dlnccrs arc not assignccl arbitriul rolcs o:'steps but certiin fi\ed oncs, so too lilc is to bc led in r certlin fired u ar, not in irnr \\:l\ one pleases. 'This is rhe ulr \\'c rcfcr to irs consistent ancl concortllnt. \\c clo not think tbirt \\isd(mr is lilc naligation ol mcclicine. l{:rthcr it is likc the rcting ol dlncing that I just rrlcntjoncd. Ilcre the encl, Dilmcl\ thc pcrfbrnrlnce o1'thc Nl't, is contitincd $itlrin rhc iut itsclf. not sought outsicic it. let ercn thcse lllttcr ill ts :ll c in rnothcl rr a1 clificrcnt from l iscLrm. In tl'rcil cisc. \\ hcn solt'rc thing is righth clonc it docs nor inclu(le c\ cr\ aspect of \r hich thc irlt consists. But nltrt te might crll - if 1ou irpplorc - cither "r'ig,^ht actions" r.r '\'ishth pcr'fbrnrecl irctions" (thc S tr-rics crrll thcn l,,u tat t h ittn t t) conttin l ll thc mcirs
rr 'l ht iurDcclirtc t,rr3ct i\ to rcq irc sonrcrhin!- \ith rrrlue. Thc rrcr.rll rinr is ro l,c .r 'eleetirc \ ifl u,,us f(rsoni rhis is tr sLill lilr rhfl (,f bcifg ,rn trclrcr, bLr { c (\rcndinq o\ cr onc's lilc r. r sholc. \chioingthcorer.rllrimisconprtiblesithmissin3thcinrnredi.uct,r3er.ind.sile. rhc\ h!\c dinerenL kI)(ls ol \xluc. thc\ .rrc not conrpcturg go|ls in litc.

j:

Rook

lII
cntirctl; this is not thc

ures of virtue.
c,rse

Onlr tisdom
ar

is dirccted at itsclf in its

rith

othcr

ts.ll

(25) 'Nos it is foolish to compiue the goal of rr isclom rvith that of meclicine or navigation. \Visdom embrrces magnanimitl rnd justicc, and juclgcs itsclt' supcrior to rnl thing l hich might bcfall a pcrson. 'lhis is not a fcaturc of thc othcr arts. lndccd no one could att:rin those \.er1 r irtucs that I just mentioncd \\ ithout dctermining thlt rll things are indiflcrcnt :tncl indistinguisluble fi on ',nc rlnothcl

c\ecll lor r iltur rnd

r ie,..

us nos see hol cridcnth thc fbllosing points f'los f'rttm lhat I hLne just liricl doln.r{'lhe linal nim (l think yru rcalizc it is the Grcck sord tr,/as I halc long bccl translating, somctimcs irs llrat is "finll", somctimcs

(26)'Let

''ultimate" irnd somctimes "suprcme", though onc ma1 also usc "cnd" fol rr hrt is finrl or ultimate) - thc finll rrim, then, is to lire consistcntll and h:rrmoniousll u ith naturc. 1'his being so, all rr ho alc t ise ncccssarilv live happl' pcrfect lnd trlcssed liles, tith no impedime:rt or obstlclc, lacking nothing.

'l'hc controlling idca bchind not onll thc phikrsophicai slstcm I am discussing but our li\cs rnd clcstinics too is the belicf that shirt is moral is thc onlr' qood.rj This itlea crn bc claboratccl rnd drcssed up in lhctotical stl le, s ith rrn lbundant outpouling of evcrl choicc phrirse and rrcightl sentjment. I hosercr prcfcr thc blief aud pointcd rral in lhich thc Stoics c\plcss thcit'
''conscclucnces",

(27) '-fhcir' irgumcnts, thcD, rle summrrized in thc fbllol ingi srllop;ism: orth]'; \\ hirtc\cr is pr:riselrorthl is nroral: thcrcfi)le rulutcrcr is good is nrorirl. Does this seen to lou l lalid argumentil6 Of course it docs. Ybu can see that tire conclusion is shat fblkrrs ltom thc nro ptemises. 'l'l're first of thcse prcmiscs, that \\'hatercr is good is pllisoror-thr,
rr

hrrter er is g<xrd is pr il isc\\

'

' '

Io 24 xml .:i (urd xlso in r:. shich is our ot phcc in ils conte\r bLrr $ould So \cll herc) \ irtuo conprled to pcrlornring skills, \hcrc thc e\crcisc ol sliLl is thc perforn nc!. rithcr thfir prorluctirc skilJs r hich lcsulr in scprriblc producrs l hc (lrtrm.lliu rolcs oficlDrs,rnd drnccN xlso illusrrrc {.rts iD shich se de\cl'p \iruc in pcr'lnrnrins our socirl rolcs (r poi r rroh,rhll oligin.uing rith P'rn.rctius. anct sith specialr1)c.rl n) Rr)mir)s) Ilole\cr. x \iruous rcr is dcfined b\ irs i cnii,)n,unlikelpcriirrmrncclhichisjudscdbr its artistic succcss. lionr 16 ro 66 (i,ri() d|r\s our lhc ihc,,r'cricrl corscquenccs .rnd corollrrics. prrricLrhrlr lor hippiness. ,,l rhe rccounr jusl si\en l'his is chsch jtr\oposcd, t's nr orhcr ict.ornts ol Str)ic clhics. f riculirh rhxt in \ius llidtmus. to rhccltrirrr (hrt,,tlrlinrlcn(lisroli\e c(,nsistcnd\ rnd hrnnonioush sithmtu|t' (;rLo Lrlcs ir rhtrr rr h.rs |cnrdc(l thc lunlnriion ro rhirk of ihcsc .rs t\ o clislind cnds. O!Lr inmcdiric lrrsers rrc ir iccordrncc $irh nrrturc.l)lrt our orcull .rinr is lning;r r \i\ rhich isnor jusl iDrLcordincc \\ith ntrturr,but is corsistcnt rrnd hrrnrnious'riLh rcspcct to nrtu( in ,rinring nor n)e.cl\ .rt the urgcts but rt rn ororll rrrr of ln nrs r hich rcrsous rptropri.rrcl\
is

rhich is liiinr- rirttrcush. 'S\llosisnr'h(Leeo\crsxnrtleducrirc[\rlidilrsurrrcnt.noijusrlh(t\pchlnilirrrousllorr]

Lrbout thenr.

of \ri!r,rrlc s logic. ( l hc Sroics \!rc ir t)or'lrnt i'rn,^.tors ir hgic.) 1t bo|lt r\. +li. Cirer(, ridic lcs rhis Lusunrcnr orr thc qrour(ls rh,rr nob,xh tlisincliDcel to.tccept thc
rhe dc\cl,,lnrrenr

conclusion l illgrrnt thc lirsr prcnris.. lheSk)ic\.lrrnrorr.lrrt$cllh.\ebelDr\nrcofrhi.. rnd rcg,r(le(l ihis tnrd,,1 il.{{uDlcnr n,)t,rs r pcrsuxsi\e dc\ ice bui rs r com|cndioui rntl merr
oLtrbic

$,r!,,l cncrpsulllnr{ S(oi. doctincs rhich \\crc.nguccl lirr on oLld gllrunds. \lilcolnr Sch,ticld. "l he s\ Ilosisns ol Zcno.rl (liriuln . 1'r,",.vJ :ll ( r lsr). i r -iS.
7.1

Sce

0n Moral

is the onc that is normallr challenged. There is no disagrecmenr thar'$hatelcr is pririsc$ orthl is moral. But it rvoulcl bc the height of absurdity for thcrc to bc a good that should not be sought; or somcthing to bc sought \rhich $as not pleasing, or pleasing but not \rorthy of choicc, and so also commenclable. and so also praisc\\orth\; but thcn it is moral. So it is the case that whatevcr is good is also moral. (28) 'Ncrt, I ask, can anlonc be proud of a lifc thrrt is miserable or not happl'l It follols that onll a happt life is a soulcc of pride. Hencc a happl lifc, if I mal put it this rra1, dcsen cs to be takcn pridc in, and this can onll righth happen s'ith a life that is morll. So it is thc case that the moral lifc is thc happl lifc. One uho justiliabll' r'ins praisc has outstandingl cause for honour and pride; rnd thesc in turn arc potcrful enough to makc one happ\ on thcir o\rn account. So the lifc of such a person u,ill quite rightlv be cnlled happ1. Hcnce, ifa happl life is marked out bl its moralin, onll lhat is moral should be leglclcd as goocl. (zg) '\krreorcr, unlcss it is cstablishcd thirt pain is not an cvil, it is undcniabl) the crsc that no onc of steadfast, constrnt tnd loftl spirit such as $'e call "brar e" - could evcr crist. One lho counts clcath an cr il can nelcr fail to bc afiaid of it. So $ ith anl thing, one cannot scoln or disrelitrd \,i hirt onc has clcciclcd is an elil.'fhis is a hrpothcsis that commirnds unilcrsal irssent. \\e also ilssumc thilt a brlvc ancl loftr spilit has no respcct ot regxld for anl ofthc misfurtuncs likcll to befall rr human being. This bcing so, it lbllols that thcrc is no eril ercept lhirt is immoral. '\tr'hat llc arc tn ingJ to producc, I tell rlu, rhc objcct of our search, is r person noblc and distinguished, l lofty spirit, trull bralc, rho mrkcs lighr of rll hunan r icissitudcs ancl lcgarcls thcnr as insignificant. Such a person must surell harc sclf'-confidence as lcll as confidencc in thcir lif'c both past antl futulc; high sclf-cstcern ancl thc liel th:1r norhirg bad can belall the s.ise. l'-rom this irrgumcnt too onc can scc thirt \\ h|t is moral is thc onll gootl, and that to lilc happill is to lilc morlllr, thar is, \'irh fir.rue.rT (ro)'\or I arn rvell rrl ue that therc lrc dillcrenccs ofopinion amongst the larious philosophers $ ho loelrcd thc supremc good (t hat I crrll thc ultimate good)rs in thc mind. Some o1'thcse philosophers' r'ie.n s u.c fJilrecl. None thc r;
C.rtrr is nor claining thrt thcre nre:rdutrll\ iirntrus pcoplc;uouncl. but thrr \c (lo h1r\c rhc idcnl ofsucb cour:rge.rn(l r irruc. so thrr thcorics establishing less thrrn rhis f.ril to tlo jusricc ro our Lo'rs lered ric$s.

r3 I n

jo

r Cr to rcfels

bricil

to Cnr.ne.rdes'

tlirision

(sec

rrod ucdon. pp.

\riIh those \rho issulne thrrt our 6nal good rquircs rgrsoning. not just thc use of thc stnses. Flc rejccts final goods rhich erclude rir.ruc. or.inclurlc it in crnbin.rrion wirh xnorher ircm. llc rlistinguishes rlrc mrinsrc.nr Sroic !ic$ from thc ercosirch inrellccturt ric\ of\irruc hcld (rllege(lh ) b\ Billus. and rhc rllcged \ irs of \ri\ro. thrr !;ruc hrs \llue iD i \\r\ rbrt renders crcr\1h;ng ehe uttcrh in.eleranr lirr h,rpprnc\\ (S(( hoot ii. nurc -to ) Fl( (,'n.:tuLles b\ insisring rhat nrrinstrcnD Sroicism c\rdes rhc dilemmr C:iccro susgesred. ro rr.'Ihe Sroics hold lhat rirtuc is thc onh s^ood. but rrc nor commitrcd ro ig-rloring ererlrh;ng clsc: rirtue is ercrciscd in mlling choit'cs.rnrong thin5 th.rt arc naturalh prcferrblc li,r us or nor (thus in liringconsisrentl\ \'irh nrrurc). 11

\\iii-rr!ii).

Ic bcgins

Book

III

I still rank them abovc trrtr othcr classes of philosophcr Thc lirst, rvith thrcc members, regards virtue as distinct from the supreme good, and identifies the latter u,ith pleasurc, or frcedom from pain, or the primarl objccts of nature. The second, also numbering three, considers virtue inadequate rvithout somc further good; and so adds on one ofthe three items I just mentioned. An1' philosopher, of whatever kind, who locates the supreme good in the mind and in virtue, is to be prcferred. (3r) 'It is, horvevcr', an absurd philosophical position to declare that the ultimate good is to livc knou,lcdgeabll'; or that all things are indifferent, and the wise person will be happy in not ranliing an_vthing abore anything else to
less,

the slightest degree. Absurd too is the supposed view ofthe Academ-r* that the

final good and suprcmc duty of the l'ise person is to resist appearanccs rnd resolutell' withhold assent to thcm. 'The usual procedure is to lespond at lcngth to each of these latter positions in turn. But obvious ripostes do not need to be long ones. It is perfectly clear that if one does arvay with thc notion of choosing bet$'ccn Nhat is in accordance with nature and what is againsr, then thar highly sought after and hallorved virtue of practical reason rvill be completell' abolished. Hcnce wc eliminate the positions I just set out and anl lik them. \\ihat remains is that thc supreme good is to live applling one's knos,ledge of the natural order, slecting what accords (ith nature, and rejecting $,hat is contrarl,. This is what it is to livc consistcntly and harmoniousll- $,ith nature. (32) [['Nol in the case of the other arts, the term "artistic" should in a sense be considered applicablc on11'subsequent to and as a rcsult ofthe acti\ ity in qucstion lvhat the Stoics call epigenntnatikon The tcrm "wise", on the other hand, is quite properly applied at the outset of a $'isc act. Every act that the rvisc person initiates must be immediatell- cornplete in all its parts, sincc rve say that the desirablc end is located vlithin the act. Some things are judged wrong by rcference to their outcomes betraying one's countrl', assaulting onc's parents, robbing temples; but fear, grief and lust are wrong lvithout reference to outcome. These latter, then, arc wrong not so much in their subsequcnt effects as in their original and immediate nature. So too an act motiratcd by virtue should be judged as right at its inccption, not its com pletion.llr' (33)'The term "good", uscd so much in this discussion, may also be clar ified by a dcfinition. The Stoics define it in a number of slightll' different rval's, rvhich nonc the less point in thc samc direction. I side rvith Diogenes in defining the good as what is complete b! nature.re Following on from that, he also stated that the "beneficial" (as one might rendcr the Grcek |lrhelima) is
D

ltr

Diogcnes Lacrtius 7.9,t Ior, and Arius Didlmus in Stobaeus, t,tusrr 2,5d 5m. \\rhat is good' is rhat benefits in thc most basic r'.r1: \\'c necd r.rtional infcrcncc ro reach the notion ofgood, since ir has r laluc $hich is dilTcrcnt in kind from nhat ne halc encountered in cxpericncc.

Diogenes of Babylon see book r note 7. Simil,rr dcfinitions of good crn be fouDd at

r' This paragraph is bnckIed bI the OCT

as

it

has no rcler ancc to its

contcrt.

Sce

13

abolc

'75

Ott,'l'loral lintls

mo\cment

or rest $hich originates from Nhat is completc b1- naturc.

(jonceptions of things rrlc for med in our minds bl larious cognitire pro ccsscs: erpcricnce, associxtion of ideas, anrlogr; r'ltional inferencc. Our notion of thc go'od is si|en br thc fourth and last of thqsc. Br thc proccss of rational inlercncc our mincl ascends fiom thosc things $hich arc in accordancc \\'ith nirturc to a conccption of the liood. (34) 'It is not br irddition or crtension or comparison s ith other objects that 1\,e hllc :r\\'arencss of this g;ood in itself, and clll it good, but b1 rcfcrencc to its o* n propcr qullin. I{oncv is the srleetest thing; but it is pcrcci\.cd as swect through its oNn pirticular kind of llarour, and not bl compalison l ith other fbods. In thc samc lnl thc liood uc are discussing is suprcmclr lalulblc, but its laluc is a mattcr of kind, not quantin-. \hluc (thc Grcck a.rirr) is not countcd amongst goods nor again nmongst elils, so it l ill lemlin in its otvn cirte!ior\, ho\\'ercr nuch lou add to it. Hcnce the particular $aluc of {irtue is cliitinct: l nratt<r of kind. not Jcgree. (35) 'Emotional disturbrnccs, r hich mtke the liles of thc un\risc il hiush miscr) (thc Greeks call such disturbances 2tthi, nJ I could hate literallr trirnslirted thc 1\'ord as "illnesscs", but it rrould not suit all cases. Onc docs not usualll call pitl ol inclccd anger an "illncss", but the Stoics c tll ctch t pu thos. So let our tcrm bc "disturbance" - thc r crJ- name scems indicatir e of r ice.)
all thcse clisturlranccs fallinto one offirur citegories, each \rith nunrerous subcrteliories. 'fhc four arc: solrol, feaq lust and lrhat thc Stoics call /zlrloztr, r

term applicable to bodl as rvell as mind. I prefcr to spcak of "clation", mcaning thc sensuous dclight of the crultant mind. Thcre is nothing natural about the forcc that rrouses these disturbirnces; thcl arc all mere bcliefs.rncl lrivokrus judgcmcnts. Thc l ise pcrson l ill al* rrr s bc fice of them.zo

(36) 'Thc r-ie* that anlthing moral is to bc sought for its ortn sakc is onc \\'c shue \1ith miln] other phillsophcrs. \\''ith the exccption of the thlcc schools rrhich do not includc r iltrrc in thcir supremc good, this is thc posi tion unirelsalll maintained, in particr.rlar of c<rurse bl those lho held thr,rt nothinei clse counts i,rs a lioocl ercept molllitl: 'fhis position has l simple and re;rdl dcfcncc. Hoserer burning one's grccd, holcrer unbridlecl one's dcsires, thcrc is no onc todr1, nol \\'ls there eler, l ho u'oulcl elen dream of attaining sonc gioal br an act o1'*ickeclncss, \\'hcn the srnc lioal rvas irchicv ablc l ithout such means, e\ cn if complete impunin l as offercd in the former
ci1sc.

(37) '\Ioreor cr, it is surclr- no utilifl or ird\ ant.Be that notilatcs oul desile to discorcr the secrcts of the unir crsc. and thc nature and causcs ofthe mo\e
r0 Cxio is brief rbo! t thc y'drr.r, pxssions or ern( )Iions. hcre introd u ccd mcrch rs d isturbances in the \1ir\ ol \ ir e. (Cl: book nr, rl trnd n{rtc r+.) Ciccro trcits thc subjcct dt lcngth in bools II and tr ofthc Tirrr'rlrrrr /)ryrrrrrrrrars Thc sise. r irtuous pcrson \r ill bc frce ofemotions becNuse she $il1 not harc thc :rtta.hncnt proper k) \irtue to rn\ thing othcr th:rn rirrLrc. C.rto rcllrs bricl!\ t(' thc Stoic chim thr emolions rre beliclisi rhis is not tr cl.in] thll rmotion is merclr iu intcllcct url stll tc. bulrshorlh.nd relcrencc I., r con1plc\ rheorr \tichcmphisizes ihcpoinr rhrt bclief is ccnrrdl ro.rnoiion ,rnd detlrDrincs rhe olhcr ispccrs ol it.

16

Book

III

ments

of the hcarenh bodics. \\'hatevcr barbarian st:rndards onc livcs b\, hosevcr absolutcll one might bc sct lgainst scicntific pursuits, no onc could

find such forthJ objects of stud]- rcpugnant in themselves and scck them onll merns to some plcasute or adlantage, and othcr$ ise virlue them rt nought. \\iho can fail to contemplate sith dclight the noblc dccds and rrise nords of thc \'laximus and Africanus families, or ofml os n great-grandfathcr - a man never fir from voul lips - :rnd mln! othcr outstandinglv brar c and distinguished men?rr (38) 'On thc other-hand, no onc ruiscd in a good familr and brought up s ith dcccncl can fail to be sickencd b"r inmoral bchl iour in its orvn right, r'cgarclless ofu hcther such bchlviour causcs onesclfhllm. It is impossiblc to regartl lith cquanimirl onc lho lires a sordid and profligatc lifc; impossible to applove ofsqualicl, cmpt\ -hcadcd, ficlile or unffust\\orth) peoplc. One must declale that immoralitl is to bc shunned on its o\rn account; othersisc there is nothing to be said apiainst those s ho act dislcputabll but do so alone or undcl cor cr of dirrkncss. '.fhc onll clcterrent hcrc is thlt immclrirl bchaviour' is hidcous in itsell I could go on encllesslv in suppolt of this vie*, but therc is no necd. \othing is morc ccrtain than that nroralitl is to bc sought for its orvn sirke, and immoralitl Iilel isc :rroided. (39)'Norv lc carlicr esttblished thc point that \\'hat is moral is the onl1. goocl- From this it cannot but be undclstood that moralitl has a higher r alue than those intcrmecliate objccts which it procurcs. \1.e also sav th;rt lixrlishncss, coualdice, irjusticc and intemperance are to be ar oi<lcd because of\hat results from them. But this is not a stirtcmcnt shich should gi\c the imprcssion ol'conflictinpl sith thc proposition that s hrt is immoral is thc onll o il. Thc results l e are t:rlkingl irbout arc not bodih damagc but the immoral acts t'hich florv from the viccs (these the Grecks cnll *a,liai; but I prefer to call them "\'iccs" rather than "bad things"')-' (4o) 'Hor lucidll-loul l:rnguage conrels lour cract meaning, Cato', I cxclaimcd. 'Ybu scem to mc to bc tcirching philosophl Latin and, irs it lere, grantinli her Rom:rn citizcnship Pro iousll shc had lookecl like a mcrc risitor' to Romc, unable to e\prcss hcrself in our idionrs, palticularll in the crse of Stoic doctrinc n ith its claboratc and subtle usc ofboth idcls and tcrminologl: (I lcalize that somc philosophers could erprcss thcir docttines in rn1 languagc. This is bcclusc thct ha\ e no usc for dir:ision ol dcfinition. Rather, tho declale that thc\. onlr lvish to commencl ric$s to \rhicit uirturc rrruld girc
as a

rr Cato cl:rims that

'

rhc cldcr. sec booli x notc lr, nnd iir rhc rounqcr. sec b(,ok r norc rr. l he tlbrus \1.\;tttus frmilr protluccd nrnnr consuls rrnd gencrals in thc third lnd sccrnd ccnturics. thc nxt frnous bcing (luinrus Frbius tl,rrinn's \crrucosus (irnctator. consul 2j3 trtrd 2r8, died .zo-1, \\ho met llirnnibrl's in\ sion of Itih l\i1h delaring tactics lhich crenrurlh produccd Romrtn rictorl: 'l hr Grcek ldldt is plurrl of r(alra.litcr.rlh 'brdness .

rrll rccognize t hc Stoic notion of \ irtuc in c!c.\ di\ lilc. though thc Sn,irs follon up thc inplicrtions morc r;Sorousl\r Ciling \isdon rnd c(,urrgc rs crrrnplcs, he uscs Ronrin cumples fi)r thc lattcr: Rrr Clato .rnd his firnril\. sec Introdrcrion, p. \\ i. li)r Scipi,'

'\tiic.rnus

77

On

Moral Ends

silent assent. Exposition of such simplistic ideas is hardlv a mattcr of great effort for them.) 'l am concentrating closcly on rvhat you sa1', and committing to memorl all of the vocabulary "lou arc using to exprcss youl themes. It may lell be that I shall have to make usc of it myself.22 In ml view your choice of "vices" as the contrary of "r'irtues" is absolutely right, and in the idiom of our language. Whatever is "vitupcrable" in its orvn right is thereby called "vice", or perhaps "to bc vitupcrated" is delived from "vice". If 5'ou had rendered "huhia" as "badness", Latin idiom would have pointed us towards one particular vice.d As things are, vice is the correct contrary for lirtue in general.' (4r) Cato then continued: '\(ith these principles establishcd, thcrc follo$'s a great controyers]-. It was handled rather ueaklr by the Peripatctics, s'hose ignorance of dialectic makes their usual way of arguing somethat less than acutc.ll Your beloved Carneades, holvevel with his cxceptional proficienc5' in dialectic and his porvcrful cloqucncc, brought the matter to a real hcad. Hc lould tirelessly contend that on the $,hole issue knorvn as "the problcm of good and evil" there lvas no dispute betl,een the Stoics and the Peripatetics
other than a verbal one.

'To m"r' mind nothing could be more oblious than that thc disputc bcts,cen these schools is substantial rather than verbal. The difference, I assert, between Stoics and Peripatetics is far more a matter of ideas than language.rl Aftcr all, thc Pelipatetics claim that the whole range ofthings thich, as far as they are concerncd, arc to be called good, contribute to a happy lifel lvhercas rve Stoics denl' that a thing's having some valuc makes it constitutir,e of such
a

life.

(42) 'The theory that regards pain as an evil has this certain consequence: thc $,ise person cannot be happl \l'hen bcing toltured on the rack. The theorl that docs not consider pain an evil carries the cqually inevitablc conclusion
?:

rr rr

Chronology He rlso sneers rt thc st\le ofrhe Epicureans. Cato can hardly be refcrring to Aristotle, Nho inlenred logic, or.ro his pupil ThcophrNsrus, \rho cxtcnded it; he must htc in rrind later heads of rhc school, $ho losr intcrcst in logie

In cr-rmplimcnting Cato on his excellent uanslarions, Ciccro is of cour.se congnrularing himsell In tbe nronths filllo$ing hc $as to $rite several more philosophical ro.ks - scc

book \, r3-r.t. Cato nor mccts hcad-oD theargumcnr rhrtStoicand Aristotclian thcorics differonlv lcrbalh:

cl

IhckinJol\alue,h<(him,,rh:lr\cSroi.\.r,. hr1,,\ilu<is,li,Ierenr tronrhet,nrtoi'rt'n.

that Aristotcl;ans think it hrsi hence rhere is x rell dilTcrencein thc war cach school rhints rhat
ness, sincc

rll

good ;n r suHicientlt similar $ar for.rhc lattcr.to bc added ro lirtue to make a tifc bcrrci 'lhe Stoics claim that rirtuc is suflicienr lor hrppiness, and thar'e\ternal goods', Ihich tjre\'

\iflueiskla-cJ ,'hrppin(\\'lh( \risrni(lirnsrlinl rlur rirnr, i.nor sL i}l(r<nr torhanpi rc also nccd'cxtcrnrl goods'; rhus rhel accept thar \irtuc aDd crtcrnnl goods rrc

crll'things according to nature'or (in 53)';ndilTcrents', haringa d;$eLent kimt of|atuc, cann.,t bc iddcd on to rirtue rnd do not contributc to happiness in thcir o$n rieht. Ir is onlr the \r tuous use ofthcm that contribures to happincss- C.to males this point alter establishing thrr Stoics do halc a use for and rrtion.rl concern 1\irh rhesc rhings.

d lhe Latin word Nhich

Cicero hre rjecrsas rtrnnslation is rri /i/tu, the more spccific'mrlice'.

lircralli ,badnesJ, butalso

78

Buolt

III

ihit the \\isc

pcrson's life rcmains happr $hateler the tormcnts. Thc samc

]r'rin is bornc morc casill shcn cndured for the srkc ofone's countrl thrn fol .ome lcss rvorthl cause. This sho\\'s thrt it is one's attitude, not its o\\ n nlturc,

rrhich makes pain more or less intcnse.2s (43) 'Thc Pcr'\ratctic r-ie$ is that thcrc xlc thrcc kinds of goods, :rnd thirt rhe richer one is in bodil-r or erternal goods, the happicr But it is hardh con\istent for us Stoics to agrec that posscssion of $'hat is grcatl\' \'.lucd \\'itll rcg-ard to the bodl mikes one hxppicr. Thc Periparetics think that no life is complctell' happr rrithout bodill ucll-bcing. \\'c Stoics could not agrce lcss. In oul opinion it is not an abundrncc evcn of those gioods s hich tre rcrlll do crll good that makes ir diffcrcncc to thc hlppincss, dcsir.rbilitl or ralue of one's life. So shcn it comes to a happl life, thc amount of bodilr advrntages hls no relcr-lnce at all. (44) 'If l isdom and health are both rvorth sccking, thcn the t\\o togcther .lrc more \\'orth sceking than uisdom alonc. But if cach commancls sontc r alue, it does not fbllon that thc trro tugethcr are North morc tban $ isdom on its oln. In judging thlt health comnlnds i ccrtilin virhe, but not dccming it a good, rre thelcbr considct that thcrc is no r rluc grcat cnoug5h to takc prcccdcncc ovcr r-irtue. 'l'his is not the Pclipatctic position. 'Ihel have to sirl thrrt nn act that is both r irtuous rnd painlcss is morc \\orth sccking than ir \ irtu-

lct accompuied br pain. \\'e think difTcrentll. \\rhcthcl rightll or' nlongll is lr qucstion to be considelcd hter. liut thcre could hrrdll be a greatcr dillcrencc bet\een the t\o |icNs. (45) 'It is like thc light of n lamp eclipsed ancl oblitcrated bl thc r;r1s of the
ous
sun; likc a d|op 0f hone\ lost in thc rirstncss of thc -\cgean sca; a pcnnr addcd to thc richcs of Croesus, or l singlc stcp on the roird fi om hcre to Indil. Such is the r aluc of bodill goods that it is unaloiclabll eclipsed, ovcrl helmcd irnd destrorccl l-rl thc splcndour and grandcur of virtuc ls the Stoic canditlrte lilr

thc highcst good.16 'Ripcness (this is ho* I trrnslirtc rirl'ai).ia) does not incrcirsc sith length of timc, bcci,ruse sirat is cllled "r'ipe" hirs rcirched its full mersure. In thc slmc

nar riglht conduct (this is ho* I trlnslate Latorthisis, ftoto]thinu berng f,i'l indilidual right act) - dght corcluct, irs I sr1, consistcncl likel ise. and gooclness

itsclf, r'hich is fcrund in one's being in harmonl

ith nlture, do not admit

of cumullti\c enlnrgcmcrt. (46) LiLe ripencss, theiic fcNtures lhich

am

r: \risrotlctsiccdismissesth.idrithin\;rtucissutlicicnrli,rhippincss(.\io tu,h ttht'tt.

llnd 7. r t)since rhis $olrld irnph rhri the \ irtuolrs person on tbc lacl roLrld bc btrpp\', { hich drcorl thrt rrs obrioush absurd. Gro hcre rcgards ir rs;r prinu lircie obiection to 'r it cloes rar hold thar thc rir mrLrs pcrsor on thc rack is hnpp\. I le thiilis it ob\ idrs rlrrr piin ;n ;rsclf is nor significxnt; it depcnds on the pcrwrn\ rtrirude ro it and the rolc iI plx\ s in his
5

hc rcganls

r" tbrthcSroics\;riuerndcon\entionrl'goods'areinvmcralinconnrcnsulrblc.'fhe.rnalo

lite

girs hcrc nrnl,e ii sccn1 trs thouuh $ htu this conrcs to is rh thcl ire inc(,mpartrble in quanrir\ l.rrhcr rlin difiercnt nr kind. rlthough tbe prc\ioLrs account ol ho\ \c conre to icqLrir! the conccpt ol rinue suggrsred thc lattcr'.

/'9

On.l,lorul Enls
spcxking of do not bcconc grertcr'orcl timc. That is u,h11 firt thc Stoics, a happr lifc is no morc dcsirablc or $orth sceking if long than if shom. 'lhe] use thc follovinei comprrison: a shoc is iudgcd b1 horv ucll it lits thc fbot. N{an1 shoes iuc no better thxn fc\1, ltreiel no bcttct th:rn smallcl. So t<lo s herc goods arc dctelmincd solell bl theil consistcncr and ripencss, molc of thcm arc no bettcl thar lcss, n(r'thc long-lnsting bctter than thc b|iefi (47) "l'hc follos ing argument is lcss than incisir c: good health is molc lal uable the longcr its durltion; so the sisdonr nhich is crcrcised over thc longcst pcriod :rlso has thc highest r alue. 'l'his argument liils to gmsP that, rr hile thc laluc of grxrd hc:rlth is jutlgcd bl its duration, tlre \-alue ol r'irtue is judgcd b1 its lipencss. One might supposc thitt the proponents of rhis irrgument sould go on to sal that x long-dral n-out delth or childbirth is bcttcr' than a spcedl'onc! 1'hev fiil to see thnt sonrc things arc of mole va!uc ifbricf, othcrs if long-lasting.rt (48) 'Consistcnt l'ith thc thcorl rlhich states that the highest good (rr hat lc clll the "lin:rl" or "ultimirte" goocl) is capable of increase is thc rior that one pcrson mll halc morc n isdorn than lnothcr; and likcl isc thxt one person ma\- act nrore l longll ol rightlr thln anothcr. \\t c:rnnot si) this, sincc \rc rulc out:tnr increasc in thc highcst good. \\'hcn submcrlicd in l\'atcr one can no morc bre:rthc if one is just beftrl the surlircc :rnd on the vcrge of gctting out, than onc clln in thc dcpths. -{ puppl'that hirs rlnrost lorched thc point of opcning its clcs can no mor-e scc than onc nelll born. In thc samc sal-onc rrho has mirdc some progrcss tol irrds the acquisition of lirtue is ;'ust..rs unll:lppl ils onc \\ lto has nade no progress at irll.ls 'I rcirlizc thlt all this sccms strange. But our carlicr conclusions lrre certainll sccurc and tluc, nr(l thc prescnt thcses firllos log;icllh from them. So thcir tluth ought not to be doubtccl eithcr'. II<ller-cr', though the Stoics dcnl iln\ inclcrse to rirtue or ricc, thcl ckr nonc tlte lcss holcl that clch in a scnse nri] spl-cild irtd c\PilDd.l') (+q) 'As lor mirtcrixl \reirlth, Diogcncsilr considcrs it it po\\ er not mcrel\ conducir c to lchier ing plclsulc irncl good hellth, but csscnti:rl. llut he clcnics it hirs thc sanrc firrce l hcn it cones to \ irtue or crcn thc othcl uts. \Lrne1 mir\ be conducile ft) thcil irttirinnrcnt, but it is not c'sscntitl. Hencc, if plclsr.u c or hcllth counr rs goods, \\'eillth must:rlso bc so r'cgardccl, lheleits if s isclon is x g(x)d, \\e alc not committc(l to c,rlling rrellth l g^oocl. Nothing

ri

I'

r" 1i,rrheSt,,ics.{hcrhcr'::n.rctirrirtLrousorrothu\n{)rhinSr,)do$iLhlherumbcrol
ir rEalrs, or

One inrl)(n tinr corollir\ ol rhc .ltriDr thit \ ir rrrc does not posscss rhc t irtl ol grrxlncss rhrr thcrc is mort o| lcss oll r \ irtuous lili is not bellcr iusr b\ belns l('rgcr llcc,rusc rhcrc rle no rlcgrces ol rirtuc, rherc is no prosrcss ir hecon g rirtuous (hcncc. strictlr:rc;rrcrllbad.iin..nol)od\is\nruous). |'hcrc is. ho\c\er. prosrcst(t)tutttt) 1o ! beconing riltiuns. so thcSr,)icsd,, DoI h(td rhri il ispointless ton-\ ro inprorc. though rhcr r crc oiien misundcrsrood. (;(mpirr bo{)l r\,6.+ iirrn(lnote.j6. hcrhcr ir is \uce<\nirl in xchic\ n)S i tir.jlr $ ith scl.cti\ c \ tr[re. I l,^1c\tr. rhc\ c.rn notc rhir r (lifiarcncc is nrrdc br such lrrtots rs rhcthcr m:rnr peoplc rre bcuelitcil. rnd !,, on, rn(l rhis mi\ irselt bc r dill(rcncc $irh sclc.ri\c \rlu(. (hoLrgh rI (locs n,,r rendcr the rlli()n bcttcr. l.( Jndrc \irrLrous I Drogcrtsof Brbrlonq \cc b(r)l r r,)tc 7.
pcople

Eo

Brnl'lll
rhirt is not
N

good can be csscntirl fbr an] thing

thlt is a good. r-orr thought

lnd unclc|standing iue thc b:rsis o1'elel\ art rnd stinlulatc our desile. IJtLt jincc \\eilth d()cs not count ils ir g)od, it cannot bc csscntinl fol iln\ illt. (5o)

fllcn if this point t elc conccdcd fur the othel arts. thc case of \ irtuc \\oulcl
'tillbedifiercnt.\'iltuercqlLircsx\rstalnountofstudJirnde\pcricncc,$hich
rhc other arts do not. -\ Lrcor cL r irtuc dcmancls Iifc long sterdiness, lirmncss of purposc lnd consistencl, s hich is er iclentll not so l ith thc othcr arts. 'Nest I shall crpound our p: inciple of rtnking. If nothing ranLecl above .ln\ thinsi eisc, the \\ holc of lifc rrluld bc thr o$ n into chaos, as it is b1 .\risto.il \\'isdom tould ltlre no tolc oL function. since tl'tcte srruld be:ro dill-elencc \ hatsocler bctNecn anl of the things thirt pertain to thc conduct of lifc, and \o no mctlrod of ch(rrsing coulcl prt4rclll bc applied. It bas been $cll estlb lishccl that sh:rt is mrlral is the onh good ancl shirt is immorll thc onll oil, but :rs lirr those itcms rhich hu e no bcirring on s hcther one lir es haltpih or misclrrbll, thc Stoics thcr dctclmincd r certain lankittg lnt)nli thenr. Somc hlr e positile r irluc, some thc opposjtc. othcr$ :ue ncutral. (5r ) 'Fbl somc. though not all, of the itcms s hich arc r irluitblc, therc is giood renson to prefcr thcn to othcl things. ns is the cisc \\ith hcalth, $cll-functi(lnin!i scnscs, ticcdom firrm pain, honour, le:rlth and so on. Likcrr isc, u ith thc itcms \\'hich lrrc not dcser'\'ing of lillue, somc offer good rcison to rcject tlrcm - fbl erlmplc plin. illncss, Joss {)f a scnse, polclq, iginonrinl ancl so firrth - n lrile othcrs clo not. This is the sourcc of Zcno's ternr prori{nenon, and its contr:r11 a2alioeglrrrral. Rx all the irbunclancc of thc Greek langu,rge, he still arailetl himself of ncrr arcl :rltificial lrlds, somcthing not irlkrl'ed us, dcspitc our thrcidblte Littin tongue though \r)u :uc in the habit of sal in5 that Lrtin is actualll mole rbundlnt than G:'eck. Nonc the less, it s ill not bc out of pllcc tcr crplirin Zeno's rcason fol ldopting thc tclm 2 tuili e o , since

reg:rld to r;rnk, irs being "pr-cfenecl" (that is uhrrt l/"l3rtrrra mcans). l'he tetm is appliccl to those \ho holcl irn oliice thich, shile loscr in otdcr, lpproaches ncrrest to thc pre-emincncc of a king. So roo in life, it is not thc itenrs thrrt occupl thc lir st llnL, but rnthcr thc sccoud, n hich shor,rld bc crllecl 2r'ar'.9rtrra - that is,

thislill mirke its mc:rning more rcldill undcrstood. (52) !\t coult. say s Zenu, no onc spcaks of the kiny,.., nith

"prcferrccl". (1'his is thc tcrn lc mat usc - it is litcrll. \lternrtilc)1, "lrto motcd" ind "dcmotcd", or as l e har e long sirid, ":rcllirntlgeous" or' "supcrior'", and "to bc rejcctcd" lor the opposite. lf the rncirningi is undcrst<tod, le should bc rclarcd lbout thc \'ords we usc.) (53) 'No$ cr erytiring thrt is goocl, \\'c srJ', occupies the lirst rlnk. So \\ hat ir tlc|c
Crro prcscnrs nrr;nrn'ein Stoicisrii:rs rcjcctins \risto (scc bor,li II nole
-ro

nnd.bo\e.

noici).ltirtherltcinthe\position.heintroducesdrcnoliurolrrifli"rrinthespccialStoic

scnsr (in 5i). sortething \rhich. $ hilc htr\;ng r \rluc dificrcnt iun rhit ol \ irtue. cxn hc pre Itrrld or r(jectcd thrt is. rrntctl on a scalc ol \xluc thrr gi\as I rdti0nrlb:r5is tbr sclecrron. Thcxnilo$\ of thc kingrn(l hiscourt Drl!sus8cst cither thc killgofPcrsirrn drc IIellenlstie

kings $ho ntl(^\cd

\lc\an

cr.

IJr

On Moral

Enlt

antlgeous ur supclior must be s hat is neithcr goocl nor bad. I Ience as "indiffcrent" (it occuls to me thit I should render thcil term uliutrhoron x "inclift'erent") but *ith r modcrlte value. It hrrd to be the cirsc that thcre \\.clc somc things left in the middlc that rould bc eithcr in accor'dancc $ith niltul'c ol not. 'fhis being so, thcrc $ere bouncl to be incluclcd irmonli thc former carcgor| items of somc raluc. And givcn this, thc|c had to be somc things th:rt Ncrs xdrantirgcous. (5.1)'Thus thc distinction rrc arc discussing is a corrcct onc, rnd thc Stoics offcr thc follorr ing analogr to facilitate comprchension: assumc (thcr sa\) thlt
rve call adr

nc definc this

our'6nll cnd \as to thro$: the Lnucklc-bonc so thit it sttled upright. -\ knucllc-bone thro$n so as to lunl uplight will halc some advantagc lith
son'rc disadr,:rntrgc. But the "adr antirgc" of tl'rc knuckle-bonc t ill not constitutc the cncl I hnre mentioncd. In the samc \\"n\, the actuirl ird\ilntagcous itcms ilrc certirinll relcrirnt to achic\ ing the end, but do not constitute its csscnce and n.lturc.rl (55) '\.-e\t comcs the fbllos ing dir ision: somc goods ;rre "constitutir c olthc li nal cnd" (this is hol l rcndc: rr hat thcr- call lc,/ilr. Hele rr c mlv dccidc. as agreed firr the sake of intelligibilit\, to use selerill \\'ords \!herc one qrnnor scrle); somc arc "productilc" (the Greck2alllr,{,a), ancl others arc both.ii Thc onll constitutirc goods:ue noral acts; thc onl\ procllrctir.e good is a fiicntl. But sisdom thel tlcclare to be both constituti\e tDCl plocluctirc. \\iisdom ir harmonious action. rnd so is includcd in the constitutir c chss that I mclrtioncd. But, in so litr ls it occasions and produces morirl acts, it can tre srid lo

regud to rrchicling this cnd; onc thros-n othcruisc

be productirc.

(56) "I'hosc items shich le cirll adrlntageous.;tre in somc cascs rd\lntil ltcous in their os'n tight, in somc cascs instrumentilllr so, ancl in othcrs both. In thc first cirtegor') $ill bc a certain qunlitl of countcnancc and cripressioD. r certlin beirring, 4 certnin \\ irJ of mor ing - thesc irrc fcitures thnt might br advantageous or disadlantirgeous. Othel things, for crlmplc monc1, are clllccl aduntalieous becirusc thcl bling about somcthing else. Still others, tirr cxamplc scll functioning scnses ol good health, arc so callcd on both tccounts. rr Thc knuctlrbonc
cranr plc is non rrr hclp lirl. Thc point is clcar, h o\ c\ cr': prctcrrcd in d ifl ( r cnts are rclcrrnt k, thc rchic\cnrcnt ol h.rppincss (in rnorher Stoic imlog\'. rhe\ xrc tl. mntcrill for it). but clo n()l forln ptirt ol $h,rl hxtpincss (ssenri.rllr is (it is ichie\ cd b\' \ iriu. Nhich is thc skillofputting nrrtcriils ro !rsc). Ilappincss consists in hr\ing Sood things. sincc thcse bcnetit us. Onlr \iftuc is good iD rl:. propcr scnsci hencc r-rnlr \irtttc bcDclits us irnd rendcrs us h.rpp). Ho$ercr, the Stoics rrt ' retain, and to trrnslbrn in thcir osn lcrms. distinclions orclinarilt dr:r\D bcr\rcc'r ri\\

rr

Somcthins ern bo good as i nreans to our linrl cnd or ns constiturinc iL \ irluous icridrs .i , tlle onlr good thrt constitutes our linnl cnd (s;ncc that is a Iile ol rirtuous.rctilitr)i \is!t,': con*itutcs our 6nal cnd ind is also the nrerns to it, since it produccs choiccs ol \ir!u,,i. rcrions. I'hc onh rhing borh g('od. i.e. \ irt(,us. rnd prod ucti\ e ol \ ou'' Gn il cncl \rirhou r r . constituring it. is anothel person (rinuous, it is assumcd) $ hosc rclxtionship rr itlr rou gir,. \ou thc occision tbr !irruous cri\in.

hcinggoodrnd$pcsofCood.('Ihcritthcrrcadcmicmtrtcr;:rlofNhichthisistlne\an+l(. much fuller in 1)iogcncs Laertius ud .\ius Didr mus, our odrcr t$o sourccs for Stoic cthi..

8u

Baok

III

(57) 'As tar as good reputation is conccrned (nhat thel call udoit: ir ts rlore suitablc in thc prescnt context to tl'anslatc it as good reputation thtn as ronour), Chrl'sippus himsclf and Diogenes uscd to sa1- that, asidc from lnl instrumcntal benefit it mal havc, it \\as not [orth lifting a linger for'. I rbsoiutell'agrce. But thcir succcssors, unablc to handle Carncades, declirrecl th:rt : good reputation is advantagcous and sorthl of adoption in its onn right. Onc tho is fi'ec-born and * ell educated s ould rr ant to bc rvell thought of b1 |irents, rclirtires, and good people in general, and this f<ll its os-n sake, not instrumentalll. \\'c are conccrncd, thel'add, lor thc intcrcsts of our children tbr their sakc, cvcn if thel outlile us. So, too, rvc should bc conccrncd fot tlur posthumous rcputation on its os,n account, cvcn uith all instrumental bcnefit gonc.ll (58) 'Non although \1'e sr{ thrt \\'hat is mor:rl is thc onll glood, it is still consistent to pcrform irppropriatc irctions despitc thc f'?rct that $c rcgaltl rhem irs neithcr good nor cvil.'lhis is bccruse rcasonrbleness is foutrd in rhis areir, such that a lationirl e\planation could bc giren of the action, irnd so of an action reasonabll pcrlbrmccl. Indced an appropliatc action is an1' irction such that :r rcasonablc crplaniltion cottld bc given of its perfurmancc.li Hcnce onc carr sce that irl]propriatc lction is somcthing intcrmcdiatc, falling into the category ncither of goods nor their oppositc. Since thcre ma.,- 1et be something uscfill about s hirt is ne ither a r irtue nor'.t vicc, it should not bc rejectcd. Included in this catcgotl is also a celtrin kind of rction, such that reason demands that onc bring about or create onc of the intermediates. \Vhat is donc rvith rcason $'e cirll an appropriate action. I{ence appropriate action f'alls under the catcgol1' of l hat is ncither good nor thc opposite. (59)'It is evidcnt that clen thosc uho arc tisc xct in thc sphcre of these intermcdiates, and so judge such action to bc appropriatc action. -A.nd, sincc thcir ludgement is flaslcss, appropriatc irction \\'i1l bclong to the spherc of thc intcrmcdiatcs. Thc same conclusion is reachcd bl thc follor inet:lrgument: \\'e sce something that $e call right action, and that is complctc appropliatc action. So there \l'ill also be incomplcte appropriate action. If rcturning il dcposit dull is a right action, thcn returning a deposit will be an appropriatc action. Tbe addition of "dul-r"" mnkcs it right; so in itsclf thc rctur n of thc
clcposit is mcr cl1' appropriate.

'No*. it cannot bc doubtccl that some of thc intcrmcdiates should

r{

be

\\t

ri

hrre no othcr clidencc ofthis slight chrngc in Sto;c idcis, forccd on somc b\ Crrncrdes' rrrguments. It is of intetcst thrt thcrc coukl bc diligtecmcnt is to \\hcther goo.l reputation (n,mcthing p:rrticul:rrlt imporrant to Romans) hatl no sclecti\e raluc (ap,rrr lrom ils conlribution ro othcr cnds) or hrd prxitn c selcctire r rltrc in its os n right. \ppr,rpriarc acrion ll:arlilor, oflicium), tlh;ch crn bc reasombl! dctcndcd, h.rs ilrcadl 6gured at thc 6rst sragc ol moral derelopmcnt (;u o iborc)- It is conrmon tu lhc rirtuous rnil non-r irtuousi it beco'ncs r \ irtuous action (lz rr,-/r/n,, ) whcn perfbrned b\ a r irtuous pcrson

\ith the ight inrentions and.JIl othcr rcquircmcnts ol rirtuc. App|opliate action can be rationallr asscssed bcsusc thcr .rrc ditrercnccs of selcctirc laluc among non mortrl itcnrs.
83

Ou Moral Ends

adoptcd, and others rejectcd. So whatcrcr one does or says in this fashion rs included under appropriate action. This shols, sincc everyonc b"\ nature loves thcmselves, that the foolish no less than thc \aisc will adopt $hat is in accordancc tith nature and reject rvhat is contraly. This is holv a certain kind of appropriatc action is common to both wisc and foolish, and it is hcrc that its involvcment in $'hat \re call intermcdiates arises. (6o) From the latter all approp ate actions procccd; and so it is rrith good reason that all our delibel ations arc said to be dirccted at thcm, including thc clucstion of our dcparting from life ol remaining alive. 'It is the appropriate action to live when most of rvhat one has is in accordance n ith naturc. \\rhcn the opposite is the case, or is envisaged to be so, then thc appropriate action is to depart from life. This shou,s that it is sometimes the approp ate action firr thc wise person to depart from life though happlt and the fool to remain in it though miserablc. (6r) Stoic good and cvil, rvhich I have now often mentioned, is a subsequent development. But the primarl objccts of nature, n hether thel are in accordance t ith it or against, fall undcr the judgemcnt of thc rvise person, and arc as it rvcrc thc subjcct and matelial

of llisdom. 'Thus the rhole rationale for either remaining in or departing from lif-c is to bc mcasured bl rcfclence to those intermediates that I mentioned abolc. One who is endorved q'ith virtue need not be detained in life, nornccd those \rithout virtue seek death. Often the appropliate action for a $isc person s'ill bc to depart from life u.hcn utterl5' happ1,, if this qn be donc in a timely wal'. Thc Stoics hold that living happill that is, living in harmonr l'ith nature - is a mattcr of timcliness.'And so thc lr'isc pcrson is instructed bl wisdom to rclinquish lisdom herscll ifit is opportune. No vice, then, is potent enough to give a good reason for killing oncsell So cvidcntll', eren the foolish, despitc bcing unhappl',lill act approprirtely by remaining alire. so long as they havc a prepondcrancc of l.hat we call things in accordance $ ith nature. 'l'he fool is equall-r' unhappy dead or alivc - prolongation docs not make his life more undesirable. So thele is good reason for the riew thal one who can enjoy a b:rlance of natural advantages should stay alive.36 (62)'Nolv the Stoics consider it important to realize that parents' lorc for their children arises naturalll'.37 From this starting-point we fface thc dcl cl
'r'
Although lirtue is the onll good .rnd vice the onll elil, it c.rn bc rcasonablc fbr thc riruou. pcrson to conrflit suicidc in sufiicientl_! unf ourablc circumstalces, \hich preclude a lilr,'. lirtuous rctitit\r'l'he topic is p,uticulrrl) .rppropri.rtc for Cato, lho committcd suicid. himsclf (sce Introduction, p. \ri). Scc IL Griffin, 'Philosophl Cato and Roman Suicidt.

Cn.t.'rd nnr, JJ (rrq6) 6--77. L): :o:. r; Abricfaccountof'social,r'tcirr'.$t.]lcborn{irhan.riur:

rll
r'.rtion.rl bcings.
(a

instinct to lore our childrcr:. $ho are other hum.ms \t ho rrc'ouls'. As $e mrtule rs rr tion.rl bcin gs, rc cxtcnd this conccrr morc \\ idclr', ;n $aJ-s Nhich trrnsform it in the process into an rttitudc of rrtionil corcern tl :
inrelincss' hcrc transhtes the same Latin $old t rott

" "l

itus)

^s

'tiperess' did in

paragr

.r

;''

84

]]oole

III

opmcnt of all human socict]'. It should be immediatell ob\ ious fi om the shiPe rnd thc parts of the hun]an bodt that procrcation is pirrt ofnaturc's plirn. .{Dd ir lrruld h:rrdll be consistent for mturc to \\'ish us to plocreate I et bc indillcr ent trs to $ hethcr' $c lor c our oft.spling. Er cn lrmon!i non-humrn irnimirls the lo\\el of nature is cvidcnt. \\ihcn sc obser\c the cffort thcl' dcvotc to brceding and rerrring, it is is if \\'c hear nature's lerr oln loice. 'fhus oul impulse ro lovc lhat rc havc generated is gilcn b1 naturc hcrsclfas rnanif'estll as our' irr ersion to pain. (63)'This is llso the sourcc of thc muturl ancl n:ltural s\mpirthJ bct\\een humans, so that thc lelv lact of being human rcquires that oo humiln bc considcrcd a strangier to irnv other. Somc of orrr botlill pilrts - fbt esirmple our cr cs ancl ears - aLc as it Ncre creited iust fbr themselr es. Othcrs - lbr crample lcgs rrnd hands - llso enhancc the utilitl of thc othel plrts. In the srmc rirl; celtain animrls of grclt size trc crc:ltcd mcreh frrr thcmsellcs. l3ut tlke the

so-callccl "scir-pine",

tidr its broail shcll, iuld the creaturc knosn ls

thc 'trinc-glurd", bccruse it \\:rtches orer the sea-pinc, s$ imning out of thc latter's shcll rrnd bcing shut up insidc it \hcn it rctrcats, i'rs if apprrentll har ing l irrnc<l thc scir-pine to bc1\ale. C)r tlrke ants, becs incl storlis - thcl too rct rltruisticalh. \ct ttrc ties tret$ccn httmln bcings arc firr closer. IIcnce $e Lu-c fittcd b1 rltulc to form associations, assemblies irnd statcs. (64) '1'hc Stoics hold thrt thc unirersc is lulcd b1 divinc nill, ancl thrtt it lirtualh is a single citl ancl state sh:uccl by humans rnd gods,rs lirch onc of plrt oi'this univcrse. It follo[s naturalh ft.trm this thnt \e rirlue the us is a common good morc than our oln. Lirus \illuc the \\clf:uc of lll abolc thc rr clfrl c of inclir iduals. In thc srmc s ar onc l ho is p;oocl irncl l isc, lntr -abiding '.rnd mind firl of cir ic dutl, considcrs thc gtxrcl of rll morc than thlt of tn\ par ticulxl person including oncselfi Er en to bctri\ onc's countrv is no motc des picablc thln to neglect common adr rntage irnd l clfruc lbr the sake of one's oln.'l'hat is sh1 a prcparcdness to dic fbr onc's countr'1 is so laudablc - it is light ud propcl that we lole our homclrrntl mrlre than our lerl selr cs. It is thought l ickcd and inhum:n to profcss indiflercncc about l'hethcr the uolld r.r ill pio up in fl:rmes oncc onc is derd (thc scntimcnt is usurll) irticuhtetl in r lirmilial Greck tersc). And so it is uncloubtcdll true th:rt Ne must consiclcr on thcir own account thc intcrcsts of thosc l'ho rr ill onc drrl comc
afte:' us(65) "1'his human alTcction is the rc.rsoD $ hr pcoplc nrahe rtills rrnd rppoint
jN
rhrrt thr rirruous pcrson crrcnds mtion.rlconcern to.rllothcr rltiomlbcings is oltcn c\presscd b\ Ihc idclt thrr rational beings tirrm r communit\. constilutcd b) humrns in so lir rsthcl xrtru;onil.rnd bi qods, undcrstood as thecliriDc rc,rson pern crtin g rhe cosnn)s. ('l hc g(ds ofpopular rcligion itrc sccn bl thc Stoics rs.r conlirscd c\tress;(n ofihis;dcr.) \ humrn.

1hc poinr

insolirrsshcis'iti{)nrl,rvillthnrkofhcrseliasPartofarationrlconmun;1\ rfihcr rl nr\ prnr)rrih tr promotcr of her oNl] intcrcsts. t]unrrn commLrnities c:rD chim r \ crsion of rhis conrmirmcnt to thcertcrrr rhil the! cmbodl idcrlrrtionrl;tt lhcdenlrndsofrhisnrorrlcomnruritl rrc secn rs h ring thc Lind o1 {brcc that l.l\r h s; hencc thc Stoic docflinc ol 'nxlur.rl
lrrr', r hich (iiccro crpounds in hoot r oi his O/
8.;

,tr\

D. Luthu!).

On .\Ioral Enls

gudrdians for thcir children shen dring. And thc fact that no one {'ould choose to live in splendid isolation, however *ell sr,rpplied rvith pleasurcs, shots thrt \\'c are born to join togethcl rnd associatc \rith one another and form natur;rl communitics. Intlecd \\e rre naturall] drilen to r.tant to hclp as mlnl people as possiblc, especialll b1-. tcaching and handing on thc pdnciplcs of practical rcason. (66) It is hald to frnd anlone l'ho docs not pass on u-hat thel know to somcone else. 'fhus ue hl\ c a propensitl for teaching as much as for learning. Naturc has gircn bulls the instinct to defcnd thcil calres against lions sith immensc passion and folcc. In the samc \\'aJ; those sith great talcnt and the capacitl for achicremcnt, as is said of Hclcules and I-iber,le have a natural inclinirtion to hclp the hum:rn rircc. 'Norr se also gir-eJupitcr thc names of "Greatcst" and "Highest"; le call him our Saviour, our Sheltcr, our Defcntlcr lll this lc mean that oul securit1-as humirns rcsts r.ln his plotcction. But it is harclll consistent to ask for thc cirre and lovc of the immortal gods thilc despising and neglecting cach other! \Vc usc thc parts of our bodt bcfore *c har-e lcrrrnccl thc actual rcasons n'h1 vc lraYe thcm. In the same $ir1-it is b! nirture that re harc gathcred togethet and formcd ourscllcs into ciril societics. If things uclc not thrt \ral', therc lould bc no phcc firr justicc or bcnerrrlence. (67) 'Bur though thcv hold that thcrc is ,r codc of las n hich binds humans togcther, the Stoics do not consicler thrt an_r such cocle cxists bctr,ecn humans and othcr animals.+rr (ihrl sippus made thc fimous lemark that all other things \rerc created for the sakc of humans and gods, but that humrns and gods lere crcated for the sake of thcir os n communitl itnd socictl; ancl so humans can use animals for their o*n bcncfit nith impunity Hc addcd that human nature is such that r kind of cilil code mediltes the indilidurl lnd thc human race: uhoever abidcs b1' this codc *ill bc just, thoevcr
breaches

it unjust. 'Nor although a theatrc is communal, it can still rig;htlr be said that the scat lhich one occupics is oners own. So, too, in citl or univcrsc, though these iuc communalj thcre is no brcach of lan in an individurl olning plopettl:ar (68)
Aiso, since \\'c obscrrc that humans rre born to protect and dcfcnd onc another, it is consistcnt sith human natulc lol the tise person to 1\-ant to take part in

i" \lorrlizcd
1"

s.rs an ancicnt Roman

\ersions of Grcel and Roman nrrthrnogr. l'or Ilcrculcs sec bool x norc ?9. Ljber lcrt;lit! god, regarded is r beneticto' for bringiDg ercps and Ninc n)

Ihc Stoic mor:rl communitl, basctl on sharcd rc.rson, c\clLrdcs non-humin inimrls. Chqsipp s d re$ rhc s)nclusion rha t humans ha. c no dutics toN rrds n on-h umm nnturls. rnd
ma\

1r

'Ihe S toics

im tha t thc mor.rl com munin of rational bcin gs is conr pitible \ ith sone socirl conrcntions, including prir:rte prrpcrtr; although ;t is not clcxr \hcthe' thel hold rhis m be mcrell pcrmissiblc, cr to ha\c posific (sclcctire) \trluc. SccJ. Annis, 'Cicero on Stoic Nloril Philosoph] ind Pd\xrePrcpcttt', Phih^athk! Tos,/d t J. Brrnes rnd \1. Grillin (eds.) Orford r 989, r 5 r 7.1 . 'l hc trntr logy of thc dre,rtre seat has r clkcr conr cn tional implicirtions in thc Grcck thc.tre thrn in thc Roman thertrc, $ hich rlas i,h\ sicrllt d ilided br social cliss.
cla

usc thcm for

thcir o$n

nceds.

86

Boole

II

thc busincss of gor,crnncnt, and, in liling br nature, to takc il spousc imd to ish to har e children.+l Not clcn scrurrl plssion, so longJ as it is purc, is considcred to bc incompatiblc *ith bcing s isc.{j Somc Stoics sal that thc C-r nics' philosophl and l ar of lit'e is suitablc for the \ ise pe! son, should circumstances lrisc conducire to its prircticc. But othels rule this out altolicther.l+ (69) ''lb plcserrc socictr', unitl and aft'ection bctl ecn all human beings, thc Stoics dcemed both "bcne6ts" irnd "losscs" (r'hat thcl crlled iphtllnatt and hlanuotu) to be sharcd, the formcr being hclpful, thc lxttcr harmful. Nor \\cre thc\ rlcrelr shlucd, but sithin each cltcg;on-equll to one another. ''Conrcnienccs" ancl "inconvcniences" (this is hot l ttrnsl,{e euchistiuuttt nd ltxhrtstitrtrrtu) thel dccmccl to bc shrrlcd but not cqual. l\'hat is helpful or hlrmful is good orbad respectir elr; irnd so nrust bc equal. But conlcnicnces ind inconrelricnces f-all under the catcgon of lhirt is adlirntrgcous or to bc rejectcd, ancl thc nenrbers ol each ol'thcsc categories ncccl not be equal. Flouerer, tlrough bcnefits lnd losscs rrc hcld to bc sharcd, r'ight and trong ilctions iue not so rcliarded.r: (7o) 'Stoics consider thrt fiicndship should bc cultilatcd, since it fblls Lrrdcr thc citcgorJ of rhlt is hc\rful.+i'Sonrc sirl that in rr friendship the intcrcst ofone's fiiend till be as prccions to the $ise pcrson irs one's o\rn, though othcrs clxim thtlt one's o\\'n $ill bc morc prccious. l3ut elcn thesc littcr dcclue that it is incomprtible rrith justicc, f<rr shich se scem to be Ito.n, to take somethins flom lnother lbr thc purposc of enriching oncself. Indced thc school that I rn discussing rcjects tbsolutcll the rdoption or' irpplobation of justicc ol friendship fbr utilitl's sake, since thc samc utilirS night ruin or corlupt thesc. -l'hcre cirn bc no justice <lr fliendship rrt all e\cept \\'hcrc sought for their rl$n sake. (7r) \o$ $h:rtc\.cr crrn be dcscribed irs or cirlled l "las'' is so br nlture; and it is forcign to the \\ ise person not

1r {n ordinarr f.rnrilr lili can, accurding ro the Stoics, bc li\ed \irruourh;so. more rcm.uktrbl\; crn sonrc forns ol politicirl lil'c. C.rt(' is not c\plic;t hcre,,rnd Sbics \clc diridcd o\,er $hrr lill.l ofpoliticrlparticipirtion could bc c\eLcised rirtUoush. bur clcirrl\ Romrn Stoics felt thc pull oi Rornxn r.il;tions (n public scr\ic(. rr Sornc c,rrtr Stoics thorighr. likc Plx to in d i:rlogue\ likc t he .S'l ,/r',i?rd ,rncl Pr,r, ,r?I. rhr r lolc bot\1ccn.rn oldcr rnd \ounger Drn could. it n(,n scrual rnd cducrtire. suide rhe \o'rnscr to\rrds \ir1u Sec ll.rrdr.r \ussbrrum. 'l.lros and thc \1isc: the Sroic Rcsponsc to r Cuitur l Dilcnrnrr'. /)r /arrl .9tral;r t in ltnitlt Philosopht rr (r99S). 2rr 67. rr S()icism hrd rn uncomforirblc reliltioD to C\nicism, a moremcnr inspircd by Socrates'pupil \nlisrhcnes, bur gencrtrlh sccn as stcnlmir}r liorn DiogcDcs ol Sinopc (, +ro ,.::o), slro lired r lile'accordhg tu mlurc'b\ rcjecting socirl rnd culilLral conrrntions rnd liring r shimclcsslr doslikc l;fe ('Ctnic'comcs tron rhc Grccl \!ord fi,r dog.) l hc Stoics rdmired thc Cr nics' unconrplomising |cjection olconrentioral r ar s ofthinting. but $crc also rcpellcd b\ thcir mti-intcucctu.rl strncc rnd lcfirsnl ro allN th.rt rirtue could be crcrcised rrirhin con-

ji

lcntion{l social

roles.

This pruagrrph scens to bc out ol flicc. and \rulcl lit bctter somcrhcrc anong rhc carlicr tcrninological dkcussions (scc prrr.ii ind notc r-t abo\c). 1" For dre Stoics ,r friend unn|oidabh'has thc rolc ofa rood nhich ir )roducti\c'ol rour o$n hrppincss (scc p .r. ii inrl notc lr abore), bur the\ lso insist rhat x fr icnd should be lo\cd

87

On

llotaI

Enls

onlv to llonpi, but cvcn to harm,:rnothcr. \ol cirn onc conspirc or colluclc in a rrong sith onc's li'iencls rrr lrencfactors. Inclecd it is maintainecl lith utter selcritl rntl truth that lairness and utilitl ncccssxrilJ go hrrnd in hrnd. \\'hatcr cl is firil ancl just is irlso gxrd, rnd rpilin s hatelcl is piood is also just
and fiir.l (72) ''[ir thosc riltucs tr-e hare discusscd thcl aclcl logic rrnd phr sics.+t'Ihcl crrll thcm each rr r-irtr,lc: thc lirsf bcciruse it providcs ir mcthod 0fretsoning thrtt gu:rrcls rg'rinst our irsscnting to tnl thing filsc an<l bcing dcccirecl b1 thc captiousncss of plobirbilitl. It also cnablcs us to protcct ilnd ptescrlc irll lrc halc lc:unt about goocl ancl eril. \f ithout this skill, thcr think thNt anlone might bc lctl asal fi'onr truth ancl into error. Giren thrt in all clscs l'ishness and ignor:lncc is ir lice, it is right thrt thcl call thc rrt that lemo\ cs thcm r \-irtue. (73) "fhc srrnre honour is bcstorecl upon phlsics, with good cause, 'I'he starting-point fi)r irrlone \\ ho is to lir e in accorclance $ ith nirturc is thc unir'crsc as:r s ltolc itnd its golcLn:tncc. \Itltcorer onc c:rnnot mikc coi_rcct judgcments al-nut good irnd cr il unless onc r,rndcrstirnds thc l holc slstem ofnltute. irnd eten ol thc lil'c of the gods, ls sell as the qucstion of lhcther ot nttt human nirtulc is jn halmonl l ith that of thc unir crse. 'l'hose irncicnt prccepts of the l isc thxt bi.l us to "respect the right moment", "follol pgod", "knorr

onesclf" ancl "clo nothing to ctccss" cannot bc grlspecl in thcir full folcc lithout l knos ledgc ol phr sics. 'l'his onc scicncc alonc crn tcrcll thc polcr of nirture to foster justicc irnd prescr|c fiicndship rnd othcr bonds of affec tion. .{s fbr pietl to\irrcls thc gods, and thc proPcr rmount of gt,rtituclc \e o$,c then, therc can bc no unclerstancling of such mittcl s \\ ithout an expl',tnatior of the nirturrl \\'otld. (74) 'Hos,e\cr, I fcirr thirt I lm nos being calriecl beloncl the scopc of nrr odginal plan, dmtn nlong bl the m.rr\ellouslr srstematic sirl in shich Sr,i. phikrsophr'scts out its drrctrincs. Hcarens ibove, does it:rot lill lou \\ith ldmilation? Surelr no lorli of n,rturc (though nothing is motc iincll rrrrnBcd thin nrtulc) or manuiactutccl product can rcrcal such orgirniz:rtion. such a firml1. l cldccl structurci Conclusion unliilingh fbllos s lirrm prcmi... hter delelopment liom initial idca. C,rrn 1.ou im:rgine rnl othcr slstcn whcrL thc [eno\.ll ofr single lettcr, likc an intcr-locling picce, sould cause rh.
r; C,rto indiures the relatir)r ol crhics k) thc orhcr t$o |:lrts ol Stoic philoroph\. b$ic.r:r.

phrs;cs. \listerl of thcsc is requircd lir| sorneone rvho hr-rpcs to urrlcrstand Stoic cthic. r dcpth. sincc losic ((x di.rlcclic)cnrblcs \ou to dctcnd )our posid('n iDd mcet tltc rrgutt,.tr'ol others, rnd phrsics pri,\idcs thc mtrrphtsicrl brckground sbich cn.rbles thc ltrrncr to 5a betrcr unclefst.rnclirg ol thc dcnrxnds ol ethics Ulrinrrtch nll threc p.rrts hrng togcthet ' rn orgt$icrll\ unilicd sholc. Cdro;s,t\ire of htr\ing pur lbrrh coDsi.lcrat;ons onh llnm : crhicrlparl ofphilo\ophrI this is lhat is rcquircd nr C;m ls prcicc. Irlmeh toapprcc,::. rhc pflx rnrl cons of diltcrcnr ethicri theorics in conlionrition $ilh one anolhcr.

''lhc\\or.lo.ulshrcd.\\ithmisgniDss.is goo.l in this stn tencc is /na rrrar. rrhosc rcn er. ns cithcr 'nn)rrl or 'honoLrrdblc' (scc l rtrnslator's \(,tc, p. \\\!iii) \rould nhkc the scntr . \ iltuxll\ Iiurok)$ous. But a sensc ol 'grxrd' .rs 'usclul', 1\ hich \ ould Sne thc \cnrcnce poitl:
firlloi\;ng on lrom its frcdcccssor,
is n,-rt ,r rccosnized mernirrg

of/r,rasarrr.

lJ8

BarL

III

s holc edificc to comc tumtrling dol n) N(,t that thcrc is anl thing here l hich could possibll be altcretl.rs (75) 'Hol dignilicd, hos notrle, ltol constant is rhc chalactcl of rhe l ise pe|son drl$ n bl the Stoics! Rclson has sho$ n th:rt mor:rlin is thc onll goocl. 'fhis bcing so, the s isc pcrson nust als irr s bc hlppl; rnd the truc posscssor' of all thosc titles l hich thc ig^nolant lor c to delidc: molc rightll "king" tban

'l-alquinius, rlho

las unable tr) rLLIe either himself or his subjccts; molc lightll 'hastcr of the pcople " ( for that is n hrt a dictirtor is) than Sullrt, n ho

Nrs in fnct mistel of thlce lbul liccs lururlq grced Ltnd crue)t1; lnd richcr thrn Crissus, t-ho ttulcl nerer hr\e crossccl the llLphratcs sithout irnl prctc\t for \\'ir h:ld hc trull lacked nothing.+'l "fhe onc lho irlrne knots hot properll to use all things is the orrncr o1' Lrll things. Such a person uill lightlr be callcd beautiful too, sincc thc soul's f-eatures iue morc bqrutifirl thirn those of the bodl; and uniquell fiec, thc serllnt of no n:rster, the sllr e of no appctite, tl ulJ unconquelablc. Thc s isc mal halc thcir bodl put in chrinst but rou lill nelcr chirin thcil soul. (76) The n-isc do not harc to s,ait rrnr-timc at all bcforc it can bc determincd shcthcr ther :rrc happl; ancl ther ccrtiliil\ hr\e no necrl to uait until dcath clo\{ns the llst clal of theil lifc, ls Solon, one ol the Scren \\'ise }Icn, unuisell adliscd (lrocsr.Ls. If Crocsus hld erer bcen happr, he soulcl hare calricd his hlppr lifc right thlough to the funcr;rl p1r'c thlt (i r us built.il)So if it is thc case thlt no onc is hrppl c\ccpt thc !{ood, irnd that ill thc g-ood xrc hrrppr, then philosophl is to bc cultiratcd irbole irll clsc, ancl r ittuc is thc most cliline of all lrcsscssions.'

lr

lr

Stoic phikxophr is hollstic in srr ucrurc; cach posirion crn ulrim.rtch bc undersrood (rrlt ir rhc light of thc r holc sr sren. (l tenee thc Stoics .rc un:rli:rid to pur li,nurd chinrs r hich in isohiiur soLrnd odd; rhc\ rre eoniitlcnt rlrur rlithin rhc rlrcor\ ;rs r \rholc rhc\ $ill be secn ro b( rruc trnd supportcd.) 'lhc Si(,ic positio| rhrt onlr the $isc, \inuous pcrson c.rn righth htr\c rscribc(l to him rhc tttrcls rc nolnullt usc ofnon \irtu s Pcoplc; he is rhc onlr pcrsor rho is tich. rt king, rt househ,)lder ind $)on. lhis i(ler ((lc\eloped rt lcngth in othcr sourccs) isroshoclusinto ,$:r'!Dcss ol ho$ nnrch \e hil ro lrc r\,rrc of the distrncc ber\rccn thc icturl rnd the idr.rl: se crll $rcone r ling. ti,r e\irmplc, c\ en rhough he tirlls lhr sb(n t ol the rjrtues of .l good kirg. Hcrc ()to claims thrt rhc S()ic \irtuous pcrron is bencl cntitterl to bc callc(l r k;ng rh,rD

\\\r-\r\\ i). Sull,r \.rs notofn,us iir the r iccs (:iro ntrnrcs hcre. rnd his reti)rnN serc not loDg hsting.'l hc \irruous Sll,ic;s nrorc cnritlcd ro bc ctrllrd rich rhttn drc poliriciJD Ihrcus I-iciniLLs Cr.usus.l ho r ls notorious lbr his rc.rlth. iDd lbr lis rmbiti('n \ hich lccl to his rlcrtth in bdttle in ii (Scc bool, r' i7 ind norc {2 rbo\c.) i'r \ r'cfclcncc to tlic nrain points ofrhe stolr of(lroesus in Hcrotloms' 1lr/,, rr,r bool r. Sok)n. orc ol thc l:rblcd Sc\ cn \\ isc \lcn, \ri'rned Ci ocsus, Ihg of L1dia. not ro r:r,nsidcr himsclf
pf. hLrppluDtilhislilihadrcnchcditsrnd.Hcrc(litorcgrr-dsthis.rtlricrrshclpingtrrbringrbout
rccklcss ch.rllcnge to the I'ersi.rns untlcr (l\r s, $ho dclelrcd hirn xncl rrs rbout ro burn hin rlire s hen Or)esus' tclling ol his o$ D sior\ nrndc him rhinl belter of it.

L!cius larquiniusSupclbus(5.1+ iro),rlrcLrstlinsoll{r,nrc,\horrccordingtutrrdiri(,n\\,rs rhircnoutnrrhispridelDdcruelt\. lhc \irtuous Stoic is morc cnr;rlcd to bctlllcd'nrisler of thc pcoplc'thin the acnr l dicr.rtor Lucius (inrclius Sulli Ir.lir (r-18 79). riho rulcil Ronte rltcr r pe xl ofciril turnroil. inposing :rutoct:rric politic,rl ,rnLl rdminist|rtirc ct,Dscs (scc

Oocsui

{19