This relationship is more strikingly seen in the way in which they deal
with the practical problem. The Epicurean imperturbability is akin to
that of the Sceptics; both resemble the Stoic apathy. All three Schools
are agreed that the only way to happiness consists in peace of mind,
and in avoiding all those disturbances which sometimes arise from
external influences, at other times from internal emotions; they are
only divided as to the means by which peace of mind may be secured.
They are also agreed in making moral activity independent of external
circumstances, and in separating morals from politics, although only
the Stoics set up the doctrine of the original unity of the whole human
family, and insist on being citizens of the world. Through all the
Schools runs the common trait of referring everything to the subject,
and constantly falling back on man and his own inner life, one
consequence of which is the prominence given to action in preference to
speculation, and another that action is determined by personal
certainty, and a mental equilibrium which must be attained by the
exercise of will and the cultivation of the intellect.
[(3) Their peculiarities illustrated by subsequent philosophy.]
The same character belongs to philosophy in the centuries succeeding
the rise of these three Schools; during which the circumstances which
produced that character were not materially altered. In addition to the
followers of the old Schools, Eclectics are now met with, who gather
from every system what seems true and probable. In this process of
selection their guiding principle is regard for the practical wants of
man. Hence the ultimate standard of truth is placed in personal
consciousness. Everything is referred to the subject as its centre. In
ethics and natural theology the Eclectics were mainly indebted to the
Stoics. A new School of Sceptics also arose, not differing in its
tendencies from the older one. Neopythagoreans and Platonists appeared,
not satisfied with human knowledge, but aspiring to higher revelations.
Professing to appeal to the metaphysics of Plato and Aristotle, these
philosophers betray their connection with the later post-Aristotelian
Schools, not only by borrowing largely from the Stoics for the material
for their theology and ethics, but also by their general tone;
knowledge is for them less even than for the Stoics an end in itself,
and they are further from natural science. With them philosophy is
subservient to the interests of religion; its aim is to bring men into
proper relation with God; and the religious needs of mankind are the
highest authority for science.
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account