The Teaching of Epictetus: Being the 'Encheiridion of Epictetus,' with Selections from the 'Dissertations' and 'Fragments' — John Shaqi
The Teaching of Epictetus: Being the 'Encheiridion of Epictetus,' with Selections from the 'Dissertations' and 'Fragments'Epictetus
Philosophy
The Teaching of Epictetus: Being the 'Encheiridion of Epictetus,' with Selections from the 'Dissertations' and 'Fragments'
Epictetus
Philosophy, Ancient
The reader who desires to gain a thorough knowledge of Hellenistic
philosophy, and of the social and political conditions in which it
throve, will find what he seeks in two works to which I have to express
my large indebtedness. One is Zeller’s _Philosophie der Griechen_
(_Epikureer_, _Stoiker u. Skeptiker_),[4] a monument of German research
and erudition, in which vast masses of original material for the study
of this most interesting, but neglected, epoch of the development of
European intellect have been brought together, and interpreted with more
than German lucidity and method. The other is Professor Mahaffy’s recent
volume, _Greek Life and Thought_, a study of the Hellenistic period in
various aspects, which the scholar will not read without profit, nor the
lay-reader without pleasure.
We turn now to that department of the Stoic philosophy with which the
reader of Epictetus is most concerned—its Ethics.
The ethical question resolves itself into a search for the supreme
object of human endeavor, the _Summum Bonum_, the absolute and essential
good. This, for the Stoic, embodied itself in the formula, “to live
according to Nature.” But what is Nature? The will of God, as revealed
in the heart and conscience of those who seek to know it, and
interpreted through the observation in a reverent and faithful spirit of
the facts of life.
Going into the subject more precisely we find certain criteria of moral
truth established, προλήψεις, as they were called, that is, primitive,
original conceptions, or, as I have rendered them in my translation,
“natural conceptions,” dogmas by which all moral questions can be tried.
If we inquire into the source of these προλήψεις, we shall find
ourselves mistaken in our disposition to think that the Stoics regarded
them as innate ideas. Innate they are not, for the Stoics held the soul
at birth to be a _tabula rasa_, or blank page, which only experience
could fill with character and meaning. But as Seneca says in his
inquiry, “Quomodo ad nos prima boni honestique notitia pervenerit,”[5]
although Nature alone could not teach us these things, could not equip
us with the knowledge of them before we entered upon life, yet the
“seeds” of this knowledge she does give us; the soul of every man has
implanted in it a certain aptness or, indeed, necessity to deduce
certain universal truths from such observation and experience as are
common to all mankind; and these truths, the προλήψεις, though not
strictly innate, have thus an inevitableness and dogmatic force not
possessed by those which one man may reach and another miss in the
exercise of the ordinary faculties, by argument, study, and so forth. By
these natural conceptions the existence and character of God, and the
general decrees of the moral law, are considered to be affirmed. If we
inquire further how the Stoic explained the fact that some of these
so-called inevitable and universal conclusions are denied in all
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