Epicureanism and
Stoicism were two philosophical schools of the Hellenistic period that were
active at the same time. Although their founders, Epicurus (see image above) and Zeno, were
contemporaries who settled in Athens within a few years of each other, the
doctrines of Epicureanism were fixed once and for all by their founder, whereas
those of Stoicism had a long development.
Epicurus and
his philosophy
One problem
we have in determining the facts of Epicurus’s life is that his story has come
down to us, in part, via the writings of Stoics who were all too willing to
discredit his philosophy. However, we can be fairly certain that he was born
around 342 BC and died in 270 BC. He came from the island
of Samos , started teaching his
theories in 311 BC and established his school in Athens in 307 BC.
He suffered
from ill health for much of his life, and his personal habits were extremely
frugal, his diet consisting mainly of bread and water. However, he based his
teachings on the view that pleasure is the beginning and end of life, and the
pleasures of the body must precede those of the mind. You cannot think happy
thoughts on an empty stomach.
He held that
static pleasure is better than dynamic pleasure. In other words, the state of
being free of pain is more desirable than the process of achieving pleasure. It
is better to eat moderately, and never suffer hunger, than to build up an
appetite and eat a huge meal to satisfy that appetite.
Likewise,
sexual passion is not a good thing, because it is a pursuit of dynamic pleasure.
Curiously, he was fond of children, so he relied on others not to follow his
advice.
The goal of
life, according to Epicurus, is therefore to avoid pain and fear. He saw
religion as a source of fear, and therefore to be rejected. This led him to
materialism, and the belief that the soul dies with the body.
He and his
followers had no interest in science or in finding explanations for natural
phenomena. The course that caused least pain was the wise one to follow,
whatever its scientific foundation.
Although
Epicurus had a number of followers, the very nature of Epicureanism’s somewhat
laid-back approach to life meant that they were restricted to a cultured elite
who had only a moderate impact on the lives of their fellow human beings. It is
important not to confuse them with Hedonists, for whom the active seeking of
pleasure, as opposed to the avoidance of pain, is the main aim of life.
Zeno and
Stoicism
Zeno the
Stoic was a Phoenician from Cyprus ,
born during the latter half of the fourth century BC. On arriving in Athens he
studied philosophy, particularly that of Plato, through which he came to admire
the attitude of Socrates towards bodily discomfort, an attitude that would have
been anathema to Epicurus. However, he rejected much of the rest of Plato’s
philosophy.
Incidentally,
the name “Stoic” comes from the Greek “stoa”, meaning “porch” and referring to
the Painted Porch in Athens
where Zeno taught. He founded his school in around 308 BC.
For Zeno, what mattered most was the pursuit of virtue, and science and philosophical thinking
only had value insofar as they contributed to making a man virtuous.
The Stoics
held that the universe was deterministic, everything being determined by
natural laws. There was a Supreme Being who ordained everything that happened,
which was always for the ultimate benefit of human beings. Even bed bugs are
useful, for reminding us not to stay in bed too long! (But what about wasps?
Has anyone ever worked out what they are for?!)
The Stoic
universe was cyclical. Everything would end in a huge, pre-determined
conflagration, but then be born anew, to repeat the same cycle, over and over
again.
Virtue
consists of having a will that is in agreement with Nature. Wicked people obey
God’s law, because they have no choice, but they do so involuntarily. The
virtuous do so out of their own choice.
To the modern
mind, Stoicism is a barren and unattractive philosophy, because a man’s virtue
is an end in itself, not the action he performs as a result of being virtuous.
It is also a cold philosophy; the death of a wife is not to be regretted as
long as it has no effect on the virtue of the husband.
Epicurus
valued friendship, but the Stoic would say that a friendship must end if the
friend’s misfortune threatens to destroy your state of calmness.
The Stoic is
not virtuous in order to do good, but he does good in order to be virtuous.
Stoical
thinking was far more influential in the Greek world, and in the Roman world in
later years, than was Epicureanism. This may sound strange to us, given the
apparent relative unattractiveness of Stoicism, but the later history of
Christianity may give us some clues as to why this may have been.
There has
always been a certain strain in Christianity that is “holier than thou”. The
prig has always been assured of his own virtue, and delights in pointing the
finger at those he considers less virtuous. Many religious sects maintain that
strict adherence to a set of rules is of greater importance than any harm
caused to individuals as a result of so doing.
This would
appear to reflect a strong tendency that goes back many centuries and which is
found in many societies. The Pharisees of ancient Israel
clearly had their counterparts in the Stoics of ancient Greece .
There is much
that is unsatisfactory about both Stoicism and Epicureanism, and neither
philosophy is a sound basis for modern living. However, elements of both can be
seen in the way many people have conducted themselves in the centuries since
Epicurus and Zeno.
© John
Welford
Very Nice Good Read. Informational and Enjoyable. Thanks 🙂
ReplyDelete