Knowledge, Theory of -- Early works to 1800; Philosophy -- Early works to 1800
§§129--141. Summary. What contention is there among philosophers about
the ethical standard! I pass by many abandoned systems like that of
Herillus but consider the discrepancies between Xenophanes, Parmenides,
Zeno of Elea, Euclides, Menedemus, Aristo, Pyrrho, Aristippus,
Epicurus, Callipho, Hieronymus, Diodorus, Polemo, Antiochus, Carneades
(129-131). If I desire to follow the Stoics, Antiochus will not allow
me, while if I follow Polemo, the Stoics are irate (132). I must be
careful not to assent to the unknown, which is a dogma common to both
you, Lucullus, and myself (133). Zeno thinks virtue gives happiness.
"Yes," says Antiochus, "but not the greatest possible." How am I to
choose among such conflicting theories? (134) Nor can I accept those
points in which Antiochus and Zeno agree. For instance, they regard
emotion as harmful, which the ancients thought natural and useful
(135). How absurd are the Stoic Paradoxes! (136) Albinus joking said to
Carneades "You do not think me a praetor because I am not a _sapiens_."
"That," said Carneades, "is Diogenes' view, not mine" (137). Chrysippus
thinks only three ethical systems can with plausibility be defended
(138). I gravitate then towards one of them, that of pleasure. Virtue
calls me back, nor will she even allow me to join pleasure to herself
(139). When I hear the several pleadings of pleasure and virtue, I
cannot avoid being moved by both, and so I find it impossible to choose
(141, 142).
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account