The Lives and Opinions of Eminent PhilosophersDiogenes Laertius
Philosophy
The Lives and Opinions of Eminent Philosophers
Diogenes Laertius
Philosophers, Ancient -- Biography; Philosophy, Ancient
And although pleasure is desirable for its own sake, still they admit
that some of the efficient causes of it are often troublesome, and as
such opposite to pleasure; so that they think that an assemblage of
all the pleasures which produce happiness, is the most difficult thing
conceivable. But they admit that every wise man does not live pleasantly,
and that every bad man does not live unpleasantly, but that it is only a
general rule admitting of some exceptions. And they think it sufficient
if a person enjoys a happy time in consequence of one pleasure which
befalls him. They say that prudence is a good, but is not desirable for
its own sake, but for the sake of those things which result from it. That
a friend is desirable for the sake of the use which we can make of him;
for that the parts of the body also are loved while they are united to
the body; and that some of the virtues may exist even in the foolish.
They consider that bodily exercise contributes to the comprehension of
virtue; and that the wise man will feel neither envy, nor love, nor
superstition; for that these things originate in a fallacious opinion.
They admit, at the same time, that he is liable to grief and fear,
for that these are natural emotions. They said also that wealth is an
efficient cause of pleasure, but that it is not desirable for its own
sake. That the sensations are things which can be comprehended; but they
limited this assertion to the sensations themselves, and did not extend
it to the causes which produce them. They left out all investigation of
the subjects of natural philosophy because of the evident impossibility
of comprehending them; but they applied themselves to the study of logic,
because of its utility.
Meleager, in the second book of his Treatise on Opinions and Clitomachus
in the first book of his Essay on Sects says, that they thought natural
philosophy and dialectics useless for that the man who had learnt to
understand the question of good and evil could speak with propriety,
and was free from superstition, and escaped the fear of death,
without either. They also taught that there was nothing naturally and
intrinsically just, or honourable, or disgraceful; but that things were
considered so because of law and fashion. The good man will do nothing
out of the way, because of the punishments which are imposed on, and the
discredit which is attached to, such actions: and that the good man is a
wise man. They admit, too, that there is such a thing as improvement in
philosophy, and in other good studies. And they say that one man feels
grief more than another; and that the sensations are not always to be
trusted as faithful guides.
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