The way for Stoicism was more directly paved by the Aristotelian
speculations as to the origin of notions and conceptions. Here the
Stoics did little more than omit (in conformity with their principles)
what their predecessor had said as to an original possession and
immediate knowledge of truth. It has been remarked on an earlier
occasion how closely their formal logic followed that of Aristotle;
they contented themselves with building on Aristotelian foundations,
and even their additions have more reference to grammar than to logic.
The actual influence of Peripatetic views on those of the Stoics
appears to have been least in the province of ethics. Here the crudity
of the Stoic conception of virtue, the entire suppression of emotions,
the absolute exclusion of everything external from the circle of moral
goods, the distinction between the wise and the foolish man, the
attacks on a purely speculative life, present a sharp contrast to the
caution and many-sidedness of Aristotle’s moral theory, to his careful
weighing of current opinions and their practicability, to his
recognition of propriety in every shape and form, and to the praise
which he lavishes on a purely speculative life. What the Stoics chiefly
owe to Aristotle is the formal treatment of the materials and the
psychological analysis of individual moral faculties. On the other
hand, the province of ethics must be looked to for traces of the
teaching which Zeno received from Polemo, perhaps even from Xenocrates.
[(4) Connection with Plato.]
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