*33* VII. It is subjects of this sort that I believe Panaetius would
have followed up, had not some accident or business interfered with his
design. For the elucidation of these very questions there are in his
former books rules in plenty, from which one can learn what should be
avoided because of its immorality and what does not have to be avoided
for the reason that it is not immoral at all.
We are now putting the capstone, as it were, upon our structure, which
is unfinished to be sure, but still almost completed; and as
mathematicians make a practice of not demonstrating every proposition
but require that certain axioms be assumed as true, in order more easily
to explain their meaning, so, my dear Cicero, I ask you to assume with
me, if you can, that nothing is worth the seeking for its own sake
except what is morally right. #Moral Right the only good or the chief
good.# But if Cratippus[BE] does not permit this assumption, you will
still grant this at least--that what is morally right is the object most
worth the seeking for its own sake. Either alternative is sufficient for
my purposes; first the one and then the other seems to me the more
probable; and besides these, there is no other alternative that seems
probable at all.[BF]
#Vindication of Panaetius: nothing can be expedient that is not morally
right.#
*34* In the first place, I must undertake the defence of Panaetius on
this point; for he has said not that the truly expedient could under
certain circumstances clash with the morally right (for he could not
have said that conscientiously[BG]), but only that what _seemed_
expedient could do so. For he often bears witness to the fact that
nothing is really expedient that is not at the same time morally right,
and nothing morally right that is not at the same time expedient; and he
says that no greater curse has ever assailed human life than the
doctrine of those who have separated these two conceptions. And so he
introduced an apparent, not a real, conflict between them, not to the
end that we should under certain circumstances give the expedient
preference over the moral, but that, in case they ever should get in
each other's way, we might decide between them without uncertainty. This
part, therefore, which was passed over by Panaetius, I will carry to
completion without any auxiliaries, but fighting my own battle, as the
saying is. For of all that has been worked out on this line since the
time of Panaetius, nothing that has come into my hands is at all
satisfactory to me.
[BE] As a Peripatetic, Cratippus insisted that there was
_natural_ good as well as _moral_ good; thus health, honour,
etc., were good and worth seeking for their own sake, though
in less degree than virtue. But the Stoics (and Cicero is now
speaking as a Stoic) called all those other blessings not
"good" nor "worth seeking for their own sake," but
"indifferent."
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