Become a Creator today!Start creating today - Share your story with the world!
Start for free
00:00:00
00:00:01
Why Stoicism is False | Cicero's On Ends IV (Episode 179)
343 Plays11 hours ago
Caleb and Michael break down Book IV of Cicero's "On Ends" - his powerful critique of Stoic ethics.
Discover why Cicero believed the Stoics fell short by prioritizing virtue alone while dismissing external goods.
Is Stoicism just playing word games with what's "good" versus "preferred"? Would the perfect Stoic and the perfect Aristotelian behave the same way? This episode tackles the core tensions in ancient ethics that are relevant for modern life.
(03:22) Cicero's Perspective
(07:51) Weak Arguments
(08:44) Powerful Argument #1 – Stoicism Wasn't New
(16:16) Powerful Argument #2 – We Have A Body
(22:22) Powerful Argument #3 – The Dilemma
(33:27) Defending Stoicism from #3
(48:30) Taking On Argument #2
***
Subscribe to The Stoa Letter for weekly meditations, actions, and links to the best Stoic resources: www.stoaletter.com/subscribe
Download the Stoa app (it’s a free download): https://stoameditation.com/pod
If you try the Stoa app and find it useful, but truly cannot afford it, email us and we'll set you up with a free account.
Listen to more episodes and learn more here: https://stoameditation.com/blog/stoa-conversations/
Thanks to Michael Levy for graciously letting us use his music in the conversations: https://ancientlyre.com/
Recommended
Transcript
Introduction to Hosts and Topic
00:00:00
Speaker
Welcome to Stoa Conversations. My name is Caleb Ontiveros. And I'm Michael Tromble.
Overview of Cicero's On-Ends Series
00:00:06
Speaker
And today we're continuing our series on Cicero's On-Ends.
00:00:11
Speaker
We're at book four out of five, so almost finished. And book four, an excellent one.
Cicero's Books and Their Themes
00:00:18
Speaker
It's Cicero's Attack on the Stoics. So Book one, presentation of Epicureanism.
00:00:25
Speaker
Book two, the knockdown. Epicureanism is refuted. Then book three, we have the, which we discussed, the positive presentation of Stoicism, really a really classic defense of the ethics, especially.
00:00:41
Speaker
And book four is where Cicero says, I'm not a Stoic. Here's why.
Personal Journey with Stoicism
00:00:47
Speaker
Yeah, I thought this was great. I was telling you before we even jumped on, this was the most fun I had reading something a while. I've read this before, but it's just... it It is maybe if studying stoicism is a journey and you like different things at different stages of that journey. Maybe when you start, you you like um introductory texts written by other people that kind of break down stoicism. Then you get to the point where it's like, oh, your first time reading Marcus Aurelius or ah maybe getting to an academic, more academic book.
00:01:18
Speaker
this is
Aristotelian Critique of Stoicism
00:01:19
Speaker
like exactly my level of progress, which is like somebody who's well-read in stoicism has tried to put it into practice in their life and is struggling with it a bit, but not from an Epicurean perspective.
00:01:30
Speaker
We'll get into it. But Cicero, you know they they they talk about the the Aristotelian school, the peripatetics, and their a way to live as this counter to stoicism. And yeah, I just, it was it was great. It was it was like... um exactly the kind of questions that I think about and worry about. And so we'll talk about those arguments today, but I just, I just had a blast reading it and seeing it presented so clearly.
00:01:54
Speaker
And again, very rarely do you get something this clear, knowledgeable that isn't academic, like Cicero still writing from the perspective of somebody who's trying to live it, but comparing these different schools.
00:02:07
Speaker
And I feel like that's almost isolated just to the academics nowadays.
Cicero: Philosophy in Action
00:02:10
Speaker
um So really, really fun to read. Yeah, absolutely. I think Cicero is a great example of the philosopher statesman, really, or which is to say the kind of person who integrates philosophy at a serious level in their life.
00:02:24
Speaker
Whereas, of course, Cicero has a whole other life as an orator. plays a key role in the yeah Roman Republic, really. So I think that's a good, nice and's nice to have that existence proof as well, I think, which is that it's possible to live a life of action while also and taking time when you can to think through some of these, you know, really challenging questions and here's Cicero penning down what he thinks in this format of dialogues, speeches and such.
00:02:59
Speaker
Yeah.
Cicero's Argument Structure Against Stoicism
00:03:00
Speaker
So, I mean, I structured this, I've kind of like a number of smaller arguments against stoicism, maybe like sticks and stones. um And then I think what I broke down to the four substantive arguments against stoicism that kind of build on each other.
00:03:17
Speaker
We could start with, we could go through these one by one or is there, how do you want to tackle the chapter? I think that sounds pretty good. There's a one key point you already hit on, sort of framing a lot of these arguments that's worth discussing first, then we can jump into the ah the arguments you've you've collected, which is that Cicero is sort of coming at this from the standpoint of an Aristotelian, or if not an Aristotelian, someone who's taken...
00:03:50
Speaker
study classical Greek philosophy and noted that a lot of these schools put virtue on a pedestal, but they don't go all the way that the Stoics do. They think virtue is necessary but not sufficient for a good life,
00:04:05
Speaker
um which is to say it's one of the most important goods, if not the most important good that one should be pursuing, but also granting that health, that's good.
00:04:20
Speaker
reputation amongst people who are of strong character that's also good and in a robust way in which the stoics deny so i think that's that's sort of important point to get at the outset which is that's a lot of cicero's arguments come from that starting point where he's like all right we agree that virtue is if not the most important good, good that's powerful enough to eclipse many of the things many people try to pursue in their life.
00:04:56
Speaker
But you know when it comes down to the disagreements between the Aristotelians and the Stoics, the Aristotelians philosophy is just preferred. It's just better, not as absurd, doesn't play with words or what have you. So that's what ah that's just my one introductory remark. what do you think about that?
00:05:12
Speaker
Yeah, no, you're right. it's It's how do we knock down Stoicism? Well, not that Stoicism is bad per se, it's just, it's worse than peripatetic school, the Aristotelian school.
00:05:24
Speaker
And Cicero provides this almost developmental picture of philosophy. So first you had... you know Socrates and Plato, and then you had Aristotle, and then you had the Peripatetic School, and then Xenocytium, the founder of Stoicism, came along, and he did he took up this tradition,
Opportunity Cost of Choosing Stoicism
00:05:43
Speaker
and he deviated. And it's interesting, because Cicero tells this, we we normally tell this story from this...
00:05:49
Speaker
um
00:05:52
Speaker
cynic tradition. You know, Zeno learned from the cynics and Cicero focuses on actually his lineage um with Polamon, who was the the leader of Plato's, the third successor of Plato's Academy.
00:06:04
Speaker
And so does this more of this a life cycle of ideas having stoicism emerge from this tradition, from the Platonic and Aristotelian tradition. And then basically the argument is like, well, it doesn't actually improve things.
00:06:16
Speaker
It confuses things. It makes them slightly worse. And look, I'm not going to say a stoic is a terrible person or it's a incoherent way to live, but you've just taken something and made it slightly worse.
00:06:28
Speaker
And then carved it off as its own school. And it's like, why don't why not just do the original better one, the Aristotelian idea, is is the argument. And that's a really interesting argument. And it's a very compelling argument, right? When somebody comes and says, well, Stoicism's stupid, it's like it's clearly not stupid.
00:06:43
Speaker
but But there's an opportunity cost to practicing Stoicism. It's the way you live. And so I find the much more compelling argument, well, you know that's a great way to live. but there's this slightly better way to live.
00:06:55
Speaker
And so why would you ever choose stoicism? That to me is a much more compelling argument for giving up stoicism.
Virtue Ethics in Modern Philosophy
00:07:01
Speaker
Yeah, I think so. i think it's I mean, it's coming from a more stronger position in a way. you know if you're listening to this podcast, you probably found a lot of value from these Greco-Roman philosophies.
00:07:11
Speaker
And a lot of the arguments for, say, virtue ethics or such might be good against different modern schools of thought, whether it's utilitarianism or which may be modern versions of what we might call Epicureanism, Hedonism.
00:07:28
Speaker
But then i think Cicero is pointing a challenge, which is, all right, we know we agree that these other philosophies are bunk. Now, why don't you just stick with the classics? you know Why don't you just stick with Plato and Aristotle?
00:07:44
Speaker
yeah so and And I think that's where we're at. So we should get into these arguments. I'm interested to see how you how you formulated them. Yeah, well, I so have wrote down, was writing them down as I go, and then I've got like kind of the big four, but there's some weaker ones along the way.
00:07:58
Speaker
which is I've wrote as in short form, stoicism is confusing. Stoicism is not inspirational. I think this one is, is actually has some more weight to it. This idea that it's maybe it doesn't have to do with the actual content of stoic philosophy, more the way that it's presented, which is that they try to convince the intellect, but not the heart.
00:08:18
Speaker
It's not actually a good school for inspiring people or changing the way of acting, which is kind of an interesting argument. mean, obviously we've seen stoics can be inspirational, but yeah, this appeal to the intellect.
00:08:29
Speaker
um There's this criticism that Stoic science is is general, you know, ah whereas the peripatetic school has all this great particular knowledge. he's got stores of facts about animals.
00:08:40
Speaker
um And those I think are kind of weaker points, but um argument number one is that Stoicism derives from the peripatetic school with very minor changes.
00:08:53
Speaker
We've already hit on this a little bit, but I think that's going to set up the rest of the arguments, which is that you're already really, really close to the peripatetics. And so you you you spoke about it a bit already, but the peripatetic school is the Aristotelian school of of thought, and it's a virtue ethics.
00:09:10
Speaker
The idea is the the goal of life is is to achieve euromonia. It's to flourish. And then the question becomes, well, how do you flourish? what What is the good life like?
00:09:21
Speaker
And for the peripatetic, it's, well, it involves virtue necessarily, but then it also involves other things that satisfy are the rest of our nature. So a social connection, a reasonable amount of physical security and comfort, good food, ah place to sleep.
00:09:40
Speaker
These are the kinds of things that you measure up when you're measuring a good life. And so that's argument one is that there's there's a very small difference. it it doesn't knock down stoicism yet, but it
Stoicism vs. Aristotelian Ethics
00:09:50
Speaker
builds the rest. it's that there's a very small difference between the schools.
00:09:53
Speaker
The only ethical difference is the movement of indifference from good things to preferred. Or in other words, the Stoics take what they call indifference, these external things.
00:10:05
Speaker
And they say, no, they're not good things like the Aristotelians would call them. Aristotelians would say, well, money is a good thing. It's just not as good as virtue. And so I shouldn't become a terrible person to make money.
00:10:17
Speaker
But if someone offers me money, yeah, i want that's great. like like i I want money. And they take that they take that good thing and they call it preferred instead. And and then the the other part of that argument also is that that makes no functional difference.
00:10:31
Speaker
um The Stoics end up saying that these things are preferred. And so, you know, if you look at the Stoic walking down the street and you look at the parapatetic walking down the street, the Stoic's going to go around and they're going to select money.
00:10:43
Speaker
They're going to select friendship. They're going to select food. And the Stoic is going to say, well, I prefer these things where the Aristotelian... It's almost like an argument from simplicity. The Aristotelian has this really simple argument of like, well, these things are good, so I want them.
00:10:58
Speaker
And the Stoic has to have this more complex argument of like, well, they're not good, but I prefer them because I select them in this case because nature has deemed that these are selectable in this instance.
00:11:10
Speaker
And the i guess that it's just this this argument of like, you've made this small change. It makes no functional difference to how somebody walks around and lives. It just confuses and complicates things.
00:11:21
Speaker
I would say that that's that's really argument one as I saw it. What do you think about that? Yeah, it's... um
00:11:31
Speaker
probably get into this some more, but in a way, Cicero's arguments have a common theme, perhaps, of saying it's almost like a dilemma. it's The Stoics are either playing with words and making no functional difference to the life of someone who's already a peripatetic or attracted to this philosophy, or they end up saying some kind of things that are absurd. So maybe we'll get to that other issue more in some of the other arguments. But that's one way I've sort of understood the general thrust of Cicero's.
00:11:59
Speaker
case And and to some extent, it is I think it is compelling. And sometimes you might talk like there's more of a difference between, say, Aristotle and the Stokes than there in fact is.
00:12:14
Speaker
Because you know Aristotle says in order to live a good life, you need some amount of bodily health, riches, reputation, and so on.
00:12:25
Speaker
But at the same time, of course, Aristotle... values virtue and doesn't say things like you should sacrifice ah courage in order to become rich or something of that sort.
00:12:37
Speaker
you know It's not that kind of philosophy. And on the other hand, the Stoics often will ah you know and they' agree with there many decision decisions that an Aristotelian might make. So yeah, if you can pursue wealth, then you ought to do it.
00:12:53
Speaker
Or at least it's something you can do if it's not something you ought to do. So I think i think there's there's ah there is that
00:13:02
Speaker
um point. but And then there is something to it, I would say, but ultimately it does seem like there is a substantive difference in how the philosophies view what's required for happiness.
00:13:15
Speaker
And that's going to influence people's how the people think about their lives. you know if you if you see
00:13:22
Speaker
pain as an obstacle to happiness at least a potential obstacle then you might live differently than someone who is more stoic and sees that as you know ultimately something that's how one's control so there certainly is something to it and you know if you're if you meet someone on the street an versatileian you're a stoic you have more in common than like nine percent of humanity perhaps so uh uh
00:13:51
Speaker
and Yeah, I suppose there there there is that. But ah ah in the end, I don't think it's just... ah In the end, there um there are some differences that are kind of coming in how you think about your life.
00:14:03
Speaker
Yeah. When you said that, it reminded me of like whatever the phrases are like, you know, we've got 99.8% of the same DNA as a goldfish or something. we You meet an Aristotelian on the street, just remember, you're 99% the same.
00:14:18
Speaker
Don't focus on the 1%. No, you're right. and And I was thinking about that. i think the difference is whether how stoic you are in like a trivial sense of the term, or not trivial, but like a non-philosophical sense of the term. Because I was thinking, what's well, what's the difference between the person who thinks money is preferable, and I will pursue money insofar as it's available to me, to the person who thinks money is good, but it's much less good than courage, justice, temperance?
00:14:44
Speaker
Well, the difference is that the Aristotelian has a reason to be sad. They have a reason to be angry. They're wronged when someone steals their money. They're harmed when somebody insults them.
00:14:56
Speaker
um And that's going to make a substantial difference, I think, to kind of your emotional life and, as you said, how you think about your life.
Mind and Body: Stoic vs. Aristotelian Views
00:15:02
Speaker
um Agreed. I think Cicero is kind of playing a trick here. Well, in all these cases, he's playing as characters and underselling that difference.
00:15:11
Speaker
Philosophy of emotion is a great example where there's a functional difference. Aristotelians will defend anger and grief in some forms, of course, whereas ah Stoic, know, the Stoic case is ultimately against anger of any sort.
00:15:27
Speaker
And ah against, you know, of course, Seneca is a line, you may weep, but don't wail. But there is a sense which the philosophy is against any kind of avoidable grief, certainly.
00:15:43
Speaker
Yeah, agreed. And I think, well, I'm trying to make the argument that that's for the reason that Yeah, you because the Aristotelians have a reason to be angry. Somebody did a bad thing to them. Somebody harmed them.
00:15:54
Speaker
And the Stoics are just never going to make that claim. And so it's it's it's it's not just, well, the Stoic is different on the torture rack, but the Stoic is and the Aristotelian are the same in the office place or you know at the sporting event.
00:16:07
Speaker
it's the it's It's not the case. they they They do have genuine reasons to be different in how they behave and act, as you called out. Absolutely. That's all put. the other argument The other argument that Cicero goes into, um so we've established there's this small difference.
00:16:23
Speaker
So it's like, why even do the difference at all? Why even bother? Just, you know, why do you go through all this work um when you've got a perfectly good peripatetic philosophy right here? Then the second argument he makes is that there's a poor reason for the difference. So the difference is... is ah has a poor philosophical foundation.
00:16:42
Speaker
And this is the one that I find the most compelling of the arguments. So the, the Stoics downgrade externals to indifference because they downgrade the body. They reduce our identity to the mind.
00:16:54
Speaker
And this is something that I push ah but for. And I talk about a lot is like, It's really important to think about the dichotomy of control, what's in up to us and what's not up to us. This idea that other people can't harm you.
00:17:06
Speaker
It's really important to think about that in terms of identity. People can't harm you, as Epictetus says, because you are not your body. You are your mind. you we we talked We talked about this a lot, Caleb, your decision-making thing. So a good life is one of virtue because that's you fulfilling your function.
00:17:21
Speaker
This is not what the Aristotelians think. The Aristotelians think you are a complex organism that is part mind, but also part body, part social connection. you are they They take a more holistic view of yourself. You are harmed when somebody cuts off your hand.
00:17:36
Speaker
You are harmed when somebody um this deal steals your clothes and you're cold because this is harming your body, which you're also a part of. You're also part of your social community and things like this.
00:17:49
Speaker
But the Cicero's argument, which I think is a good one, or I think one that the Stoics need have at least a good argument for, is like why why? Why reduce the concern to just the mind? um You claim to want to live in accordance with the nature, but nature clearly shows the importance of the body.
00:18:05
Speaker
No other philosophy does this. No other philosophy rejects the body in this way. And even if you take a developmental picture, which is the one the Stoics do, they make this argument of there's different kinds of beings and rationality is the best. So, um you know, the dog the the dog is different than the human. The dog should care about the dog's body.
00:18:28
Speaker
But the humans have an access to divine the divine. We're more intelligent. So we just care about the mind. And he says, why not have this conception where you just add faculties? you you Yeah, you um we can do things that the dog can't, that the animals can't.
00:18:46
Speaker
But we don't lose that animal part of ourselves. We just become a more complex thing, says Cicero, which is the Aristotelian argument. We've got this vegetative aspect to ourselves. We've got this animal appetitive aspect to ourselves. And we've got this rational aspect. But we're not – just because we have a rational doesn't mean we lose the these other parts of ourselves. We've got ah you got to protect them with the mind. Yeah.
00:19:11
Speaker
And I thought that was, a yeah, I'm interested in your response to it because I think this i i think in all of philosophy or in all of at least ancient Greek philosophy, which is most of what I engage with, this to me is my is the most compelling anti-Stoic argument.
00:19:23
Speaker
Why this focus on the mind? Why this rejection of the body? yeah There's a great line that Cicero just states what you summarized. If man consists solely of a reasoning faculty, let it be granted that the end of goods is contained in virtue alone.
00:19:40
Speaker
But if he has a body as well, the revelation of our nature on your showing will actually have resulted in our relinquishing the things to which we held before that revelation took place.
00:19:51
Speaker
At this rate, to live in harmony with nature means to depart from nature. So he's talking about you know the stoic developmental picture where you realize you're a rational being, but then on his view, abandon you know these other things you thought were good, health, pleasure, potentially, and such.
00:20:16
Speaker
So ah the stoics on on this view get human nature wrong, I suppose, is the fundamental critique. you the The body matters, the fact that you're you know, we're reasoning creatures, but we're also reasoning social embodied creatures might be one way to put it.
00:20:32
Speaker
And if you just focus on reason, you'll be missing out on the obvious fact that it's good for us to be healthy. You know, it's good to be embodied and in physical contact with others around us or something like this, you know, we're not just disembodied minds.
00:20:52
Speaker
So, uh, Yeah. He also makes ah I just found the quote, he also makes an argument which I haven't heard before, which I think is a really compelling one. We often talk, the the Stoics talk about pain as being an external, that's an indifferent.
00:21:07
Speaker
And Cicero makes the argument here almost that pain is internal. internal It's like a part of the mind. So I'll try to find the quote here. um, even if we were not seeking the chief good of man, but of some living creature that consisted solely of a mind, even so that mind would not accept the end of yours for such a being would ask for health and freedom from pain and would also desire its own preservation and security for the goods just specified.
00:21:36
Speaker
So I love this idea that even if you had a disembodied mind floating for the world through the world, it would be like, I don't want to be in pain. I don't want to be unhealthy. So this framing of health and pain and pleasure as being somehow external from the mind doesn't even work even if we just identify
Critique of Stoic Indifference
00:21:55
Speaker
just the mind. I don't know if I've heard that argument before. i think that's a really cool one.
00:21:59
Speaker
Yeah, I suppose the thought is if you can experience pain, then it's it's bad for you or something of this sort, which I think makes sense. if you think they they're independently possessed value.
00:22:13
Speaker
Yeah, I think let's get some of the other arguments on the table too. I think this is a good one, but I wonder before we respond to what I think through it, we should get some of the other ones on the table. Well, the so I have two more. the The third is that indifference are conceptually weak.
00:22:28
Speaker
um So they force either ah movement towards ahris Aristo or Aristotelian to make readings, to make them coherent. um There's a lot built in there, but basically it's like you've got a double value system where you've got – Virtue and vice, which is good and bad.
00:22:45
Speaker
And then you've got indifference, which are preferred or dis-preferred. It's better to think of, it's better to either move, which is overly complex and it's kind of incoherent. It's better to either move towards indifference as having a small contribution to happiness that will never, that won't overcome virtue.
00:23:02
Speaker
but But still are a small contribution to happiness nonetheless. Or to think of them as without value, which is the position that Aristo takes. We have an episode on him where he he says basically, no, it doesn't make sense to talk about preferred indifference.
00:23:19
Speaker
You've got every decision is made in the moment. It's an expression of virtue or expression of vice. um And so so that's, I think, argument three is that you neith you need it you you can't sit here with him preferred indifference. You either need to go Aristotelian or you need to get rid of them altogether. And then I think argument four was that the the natural conclusion of indifference is not the one the Stoics want.
00:23:43
Speaker
um You really you end up like aris Aristo. He's basically doing a pro-Aristo argument, which is that if you if you don't accept the Aristotelian position, I mean this is, I guess, a continuation of argument three, but if you don't accept the Aristotelian position, you have, to Aristo is right.
00:24:01
Speaker
You have to go in his direction. And if you do that, you end up with all the reasons you criticized Aristo for, which is that You have no way to make sense of what's right in the world because virtue is supposed to be about selecting between indifference. supposed to be about using indifference as the material of virtuous choice because you understand what nature so sees as preferred and dispreferred.
00:24:23
Speaker
And if you end up going um Aristo's way and the only things that are have any value or virtue and vice, then it's it's like a reductio ad absurdum argument. Like none of it ends up making any sense.
00:24:35
Speaker
And so that's the kind of, I guess the play is Cicero forces you to go, um nothing external has value or things external have value. If you want to be anti, if you want to be anti Aristotelian and go um nothing external has value, then you end up in a risk those position, but you already have really well articulated the criticisms of that position stoic school, and you've already shown why that doesn't work.
00:25:01
Speaker
So you're kind of stuck.
00:25:05
Speaker
Yeah, nice. This made me think that it's a pity we don't have Aristo's writings because it would be fun to read more about. read more about not just his criticism of the Stoics, but how he thought about his philosophy in general. So, of course, we do have it secondhand from several sources, but yeah, it's a pity we don't have that. Not the most charitable sources, even Yeah, that's right.
00:25:29
Speaker
Yeah, they're always using him as, you know, if you were your philosophy is wrong because it's too much like Aristos. Ouch. Yeah.
00:25:38
Speaker
ouch ah Yeah, so I suppose condensing those are two arguments into one, it's it's a dilemma where the indifference, either if they make a difference to you your life, how well they go, you sound like an Aristotelian.
00:25:57
Speaker
If they don't, then you're back in this land of Aristo, maybe some of the cynics. You know they think wealth doesn't matter at all. We talked a little bit about the Aristo option.
00:26:10
Speaker
So... um
00:26:13
Speaker
Maybe like the one way to put the criticism is that from the Aristotle side or from that horn, which is you say health is preferable, what grounds that?
00:26:25
Speaker
what makes it preferable. You know the fact that it, an Aristotelian would say the fact that it has value, that it, and the fact that it has value, ah going back to this second argument, is that, you know, you are ah physical being. it says something about your nature that it serves, that it fulfills.
00:26:45
Speaker
And not to cut you off, but it is the same argument the Stoics make. The Stoics think it's preferred because of its connection to your body. yeah they just think that that connection to the body is of a, is of a different value type.
00:26:59
Speaker
And I just, I'll let you keep going, but it's like, they stoic still, it's still connected
Modern Stoics and Aristotelian Alignment
00:27:03
Speaker
to the body. They just don't think it counts as good. Yeah, that's right. They think that's what makes it performable, but not what makes it good.
00:27:11
Speaker
So, uh, you know, that's, uh, I suppose that's the challenge that he lays at the feet of the stoics. Um, and, uh,
00:27:24
Speaker
it so I think the... Let me see if I want to read some more lines about him that they capture this well.
00:27:37
Speaker
I think another... This is slightly not the exact same argument, but he also has some good lines about... you know The Stoics don't... This line about preferred indifference and such isn't a natural way of speaking...
00:27:50
Speaker
It kind of sounds like playing with words, but perhaps the deeper objection sometimes is that you know we naturally speak like things, ah like exile, receiving a bad diagnosis, or bad for us. So you know why not take that at face value?
00:28:06
Speaker
So he has a a few lines. Could an advocate wind up his defense of a client by declaring that exile and confiscation of property are not evils, that they are to be rejected but not to be shunned?
00:28:17
Speaker
That is not a judge's duty to show mercy. Or supposing him to be addressing a meeting of the people, Hannibal is at the gates and has flung a javelin over the city walls. Could he say that captivity, enslavement, death, loss of country are no evils?
00:28:35
Speaker
which is just to say, you know, I still think in an ordinary life, we act like so many things are evil, good, worth pursuing, worth avoiding. And, you know, the Aristotelian view best captures that because they have some form of value. Whereas the Stoics ultimately almost, you know, parse that language as, oh, it's preferable, dis-preferable. That's it.
00:29:04
Speaker
Uh,
00:29:06
Speaker
But you know what's the what's the motivation for that at the end of Cicero is saying. Yeah, and and just to pile onto the Stoics here with this chance we get, because after this, it's back on the pro-Stoicism bandwagon.
00:29:19
Speaker
But it's like, and this is the school that talks about being natural. This is the school that talks about living in accordance with nature. And so it just makes it a little bit more absurd than if they were like, well, we got this, like, they've got to explain why everybody got confused. Oh, you got confused at some point.
00:29:35
Speaker
thinking Hannibal coming in and enslaving your entire family and killing you terribly was a bad thing. You got a bit, got a bit ah turned around along the way. Let us put you back on the natural path.
00:29:47
Speaker
but And then there's just the, there's a bit of, yeah, as you said, a bit of silliness in, in, in trying to be like, it's very unintuitive, right? um It's very, very unintuitive and for the school that claims to be natural.
00:30:04
Speaker
yeah the so the The Aristotelian position is like, hey, look, that sucks. It just sucks less than being a coward and like running away and leaving your family.
00:30:15
Speaker
So you should probably stay and fight or something along these lines. And you end up with both people staying and fighting. but one person, you're like you're you're accepting the situation as being terrible.
00:30:28
Speaker
um And in Stoicism, you're you're not.
00:30:36
Speaker
Yeah, this reminds me that there's a philosophy professor I know who thinks most modern Stoics are really just Aristotelians and wearing Stoic clothing, I suppose. um Which there's something to that.
00:30:48
Speaker
I think probably some popular Stoic people are Aristotelians. And there is always that. I think that you know Aristotle's got a plausible view. So there's some amount of agnosticism even even the converted have, perhaps.
00:31:07
Speaker
ah But yeah, is this a part where we and defend a Stoicism against Cicero's attack? I mean, we can try.
00:31:18
Speaker
Let's think on that challenge of how we would defend the Stoics.
00:31:25
Speaker
It's tough because these these are what I think are the most compelling arguments. Yeah, I think that second... that Oh, go ahead. Sorry, interrupted. No, what I think are the two weakest part of stoicism. He has other arguments that I think are less – when we call them like substantial versus non-substantial.
00:31:39
Speaker
like Another non-substantial argument which I agree about but doesn't really do any damage to stoicism is he's like, it's kind of stupid you think ah there's no moral progress and that like nobody's – only the sage is virtuous and everybody else is equally wicked.
00:31:54
Speaker
That's just kind of dumb. And he's like, then you'd have to say Plato was just as vicious vicious as, you know, this terrible person. And like, i don't know, that's a fine argument.
00:32:05
Speaker
um Or like, i'm I'm happy to entertain it, but it's not substantive. The two substantive arguments for me in all of Stoicism criticism is the the question of identity Why do we disregard the body in favor of of the mind?
00:32:21
Speaker
and then And then what follows from that is the question of indifference and not giving value to them when we could have this like slightly modified picture where we give them some value but just a proportionate amount of value, right? Like get angry, maybe never angry, but grieve the right amount.
00:32:43
Speaker
You know, be excited the right amount. don't don't Don't grieve in a way that is is disproportional or unrealistic or places too much value on what you've lost, but grieve enough to recognize the bad thing that happened to you appropriately, accurately, and proportionally.
Defense of Stoicism Against Criticisms
00:33:02
Speaker
that That to me, and if that's so if that's the aristocrat team position, those are my those for me are the two biggest things I wrestle with the most. So we were supposed to defend, but I just want to clarify that I think i he he nails, for me, the two biggest issues. And i yeah, I'm not sure if you have a response to either of those.
00:33:19
Speaker
I can always try the the stoic line, but I do want to sit with those a bit longer as being pretty compelling.
00:33:27
Speaker
Yeah, we should. ah i think ah I think the second argument, this argument about identity, and perhaps this related argument we sort of put in the same bucket, which is around emotional, almost like emotional.
00:33:45
Speaker
I suppose it's ultimately the same kind of argument, but. Aristotle thinks your emotions should fit the world in a way, and sometimes grief anger are appropriate because certain facts about the world are tragic.
00:34:01
Speaker
Certain facts about the world are worth getting angry over. And perhaps we know we could bucket those in the same kind of argument because ultimately that comes down to you know what kind of being we are the Stoics are getting that wrong on the Aristotelian account.
00:34:18
Speaker
ah But yeah, I think that this this this argument of identity is a challenging one. The argument about indifference, I'm i generally a little less persuaded by, but we'll see if ah see how you respond. So maybe we could start there and then find our way back to this issue of identity because that is a challenging one.
00:34:40
Speaker
So i think what Stoicism... has going for it is a nice, is really a clean, logical, systematic picture of what we are, what virtue is, and how virtue relates to happiness.
00:34:58
Speaker
And in particular, thinking about virtue just as this character trait about knowing how to manage impressions. which ultimately is you know being knowledgeable, being able to act on that knowledge.
00:35:14
Speaker
And...
00:35:17
Speaker
Indifference are yeah what you're deciding between, of course, is this the stoic line. you know It matters that some are preferred or dispreferred because that's how you make decisions.
00:35:28
Speaker
And what happiness is, what virtue is, is the ability to make excellent decisions over time, act you know act with knowledge and such.
00:35:39
Speaker
few different ways of stating that.
00:35:42
Speaker
But um that's why there's sort of the The goal is just on being able to you know think well, to come to true judgments and make you know good decisions. That's the purpose of human life for the Stoics.
00:36:01
Speaker
And these indifference, they aren't valuable in and of themselves. They're just things that help make a decision good or bad. So to some extent, it almost seems like Cicero forgot or de-emphasized some of what he explained in the previous book about the role in difference plays and their relation to happiness and, and virtue.
00:36:25
Speaker
So yeah what's your, what's your response there? mean, I guess I swing back to the Aristo position, which is something along the lines of, of why do we, i mean,
00:36:42
Speaker
I'm just trying to think of like, what, Why do we assume these things have this kind of like good or bad content to them or what grounds they're good or bad content? You know, if I'm ah if I'm a mind who's supposed to go around seeing things accurately, that makes sense to me from kind of an epistemological perspective. I don't want to be deceived, but how do i yeah. How are we getting the preference there?
00:37:11
Speaker
um
00:37:15
Speaker
And i guess, I mean, I guess is it's no more complicated than how are we grounding the preference if not in the body? And they're going to say something like, well, we are grounding it in the body. It's just not as important as the mind, I guess.
00:37:30
Speaker
mean, it's that gap there of like, where's preference coming from? Yeah, sure. If we're a mind, our goal is to make good decisions. We make good decisions using the material of the things around us. we We decide based on such the situation we're in.
00:37:44
Speaker
How should I treat other people? um you know what should i What should I do with my day? How should I act?
Value of Preferred Indifference in Stoicism
00:37:50
Speaker
ah But yeah what's grounding the value of those of that material you're working with?
00:37:56
Speaker
Yeah, I suppose if so if you say, leave aside the second argument, say you know we are mind, we identify with the hegemonicon or the pro-hyrosis, what have you. That's what we are. and we just we we But we also embodying or making decisions about you know, normal human affairs.
00:38:18
Speaker
And it's, I think this is where the sort of the rules or heuristics or the fact that, you know, it's better for organisms to be happy, not in the sense that it makes them live a happy life or not, but that's what organisms naturally prefer is health.
00:38:41
Speaker
So there is maybe a sense in which the Aristo contrast is interesting because stoic challenge for Aristo, of course, is that if there are no ways in which things are preferable or dispreferable, then on what basis are you making a decision?
00:38:55
Speaker
And I think Aristo is sometimes in modern philosophy, call it particularist. He thinks you size up the particulars of a situation and then just make a decision.
00:39:08
Speaker
And if you are, you're virtuous, you'll know what to do because you are good and you'll identify what the good decision is in that particular situation without making any claims about what's natural or what sorts of rules there are, you know, you'll just know it'll be apparent to you.
00:39:25
Speaker
But, uh, I don't know. i sort of think i think it's natural it's say, Stoics love these game analogies. you know We go to a particular game, in general, it's better to score points in games.
00:39:36
Speaker
But of course, it sometimes you know the sacrifice sacrifice plays are valid strategies, even if in the end, when you're playing a game, you're what you're trying to do is score points. And then I think what Stoics just see our role is to play well, because...
00:39:53
Speaker
winning games, you know, these games of life, that's out of our control. That's something external. So we should play well, but you can make sense of preferred versus dis-preferred facts in games. And that's sort of what what grounds um grounds decision. It's not like the, I don't, it doesn't seem to me like the best basketball player is falling in the footsteps of Arista or something like this. And they just recognize the particulars in this situation is to do this.
00:40:22
Speaker
or because I'm an excellent basketball player. So I don't know, maybe that's ah that's a little bit of long long-winded answer, perhaps, but... No, I mean, then when you give that answer, I just immediately rush back to the Aristotelian side, which is like, well, we we make that heuristic because our lives go slightly better, even if it's a small amount, by doing these things. But that's where the game analogy really is.
00:40:41
Speaker
I'm not like fully convinced, and this is still something I wrestle with or yeah you know struggle to throw wrap my head around. But it's clear and that it's clear nobody on the basketball court thinks putting a ball through a net is actually a good thing.
00:40:55
Speaker
And yet they're still playing their heart out. So it's like, clearly, i think the game analogy is pretty strong because you get people really caught up in doing something that doesn't matter, but it's a context by which to do something that does matter, which is perform.
00:41:11
Speaker
um So it clearly works in a basketball game. As much as it seems, i seem to struggle with the idea of it working in in life too.
00:41:23
Speaker
Yeah, I suppose maybe the Stoics would say it does matter that the ball goes in the net, of course, but it's not something that makes or breaks whether a player is ah excellent. Now, sometimes you just do see these debates about you know famous sportsmen.
00:41:37
Speaker
They are awesome, but they didn't win any championships or something like that. I think that sort of crystallizes, in a way, a disagreement between someone's a Stoic versus Aristotelian type disagreement. Wouldn't have been better if this excellent player had more championship rings? yeah Wouldn't that have cemented their legacy or somehow showed they were a more excellent player?
00:41:59
Speaker
And I think the stoic answer is no, it wouldn't. ah That's just a different... Winning championships is not an input into whether you're an excellent player or not.
00:42:11
Speaker
Which I think in a way sounds like a funny thing to say, but in another way seems kind of obvious where you're excellent player. That's the guy you want in your team. That's the guy who makes it more likely that you're going to win excellent championships perhaps, but it's not a guarantee.
00:42:25
Speaker
Yeah, I think that's a really good example of the Aristotelian versus the conception of sport. um Yeah, okay. I mean, really what we're arguing for is just that it's conceptually possible. Whether it's true or not, is it conceptually possible?
00:42:43
Speaker
And I think I struggle with it, but it seems it seems possible. And then the question is, is it true? And then that comes down to the identity argument. Well, I suppose another
00:42:57
Speaker
ah attack from the Stoics against the Aristotelians would be that the Stoic account is more coherent because it And in a way, almost more simple, because the connection between happiness, virtue is clear.
00:43:14
Speaker
Whereas the for the Aristotelians, they think there are different goods and virtues among those. But, you know, virtue is not sufficient for happiness, but it is a good that eclipses all the others.
00:43:28
Speaker
And then I think there's sort of a question really about how systematic the philosophy is and how that you know what happiness is and how it we know what even is virtue on the Aristotelian picture. And in some ways, I think the some of the answers end up sounding a little bit too stoic in a way and can help you slide into stoicism. but Or they're just not systematic. you know Courage, being able to face obstacles with caution and bravery. you know That's what it is. But that's you know that's not a really a systematic philosophical answer at the fundamental level.
00:44:04
Speaker
So anyway, I think that's maybe that's ah an attack the Stoics might have here, where then it makes the sort of the funny things they say about indifference more plausible. Because
00:44:18
Speaker
although it may not be the most natural way of speaking it, ah you know happiness, virtue are aligned. you It's about that about playing the game of life well, if you will. And it's a clear definition about what it is to be a great – going back to this game analogy, you know there's a clear picture about what it is to be a great player.
00:44:35
Speaker
Whereas Aristotelian, now there's like, how much do cha winning championships count versus their actual – perhaps you know the actual skill in the game or how many points they scored, you know what's the actual picture?
Virtue vs. External Goods: Stoic and Aristotelian Debate
00:44:48
Speaker
Yeah, the Stoics can go – mean, that's a great point. The Stoics can go on the offense –
00:44:55
Speaker
and, you know, give the same for logical fork to the Aristotelians and you know Look, you're trying to get you're you're trying to seem so intuitive by giving all this weight to virtue.
00:45:06
Speaker
But if you give too much weight to virtue, you just end up functionally like a stoic. And if you give too little weight to virtue, you end up looking like something not very appealing at all um or something that is maybe you know epicurean without saying it.
00:45:22
Speaker
And so you end up in this kind of confused middle ground where it's ambiguous about who lived well and who didn't. As you said, who's a good basketball player and who isn't. There's arguments or so ah confusions um where the Stoic has has a much more clear distinction. It's like this is the criteria, virtue.
00:45:40
Speaker
Did you achieve it? Did you not? And you know if you did it and then some bad things happened outside of your control, well, I'm not going to think any less of you.
00:45:52
Speaker
Yeah, yeah, absolutely.
00:45:56
Speaker
Cool. Well, so much for the third argument. I guess the second one is as outstanding.
00:46:03
Speaker
And
00:46:07
Speaker
I think when perhaps we've said a number of things in our conversation that ah that address it in a way, and maybe some of these moves are familiar, but think there is a way in which it's, ah you know, if you're a Stoic, even so, it is natural to almost slide into just Aristotelian picture. And perhaps if you, if the worst you do is slide into Aristotelianism, that's maybe not such a bad place to end up.
00:46:32
Speaker
ah So I guess that's not, and that's just to say that, you know, this picture that values virtue, but also recognizes there's a place for grief, for recognizing that you can be harmed by others, that the body's health fundamentally matters in some way.
00:46:52
Speaker
That's a,
00:46:55
Speaker
Not a bad place to end up, ah perhaps. yeah Well, sometimes I think about that. like I'm not sure who you were. Who was the philosopher who said everybody all the Stoics were Aristotelians? Who was that? Oh, it was a modern fellow. I won't name him. I think it was privacy.
00:47:09
Speaker
Yeah.
00:47:13
Speaker
It was too you know spicy of a take. what a My thought with that is that like I think something similar, or I at least consider something similar, and then maybe it's the case where like if aristotelian Aristotelianism is right...
00:47:28
Speaker
But we're so far from valuing virtue properly that if you shoot for Stoicism, you land in Aristotelianism. Like if you shoot for Stoicism, you value virtue as the number one thing.
00:47:40
Speaker
You take it as more important than these other than these other good things. But you don't ever really give up your – ah you know you don't really ever give up your considerations for your possessions or for pleasure or the body.
00:47:52
Speaker
And so you end up with this really Aristotelian picture where you still value those other things, but you just value virtue the most. And so then maybe there's a picture there where there's this, there if Aristotelianism is the right answer, maybe there's this benefit to practicing Stoicism because we're all so far from it and it's such a difficult challenge even to get there.
Hierarchy of Mind Over Body in Stoicism
00:48:13
Speaker
that gives us, if we shoot there, we we we land halfway and it's not a bad spot to be, as you were saying. Well, do you want to say about anything about the traditional move Stoics might make against this ah this argument?
00:48:26
Speaker
Against the identity argument? Yeah, against the identity argument in a particular. I mean, I think the argument they're going to make is going to be one of hierarchy, right? Like the Cicero appeals to nature.
00:48:37
Speaker
Well, it's natural that we have a body. It's natural that we develop these other faculties, but then should still care about our body. Every school, descriptively, every other school philosophy does this. Why are you being weird?
00:48:51
Speaker
Why are you doing this thing other people aren't doing? And the Stoics, I think, are going to appeal to hierarchy. They're going to say, well, there's this part of you that's better than the other parts. It is more divine. It is more godly. It is more important.
00:49:04
Speaker
And not just a matter of degree, but a matter of type difference. Humans are not like other creatures and in the there's a type difference that comes with being reflective, having the capacity for self-awareness, having the capacity for introspection.
00:49:22
Speaker
And um you know so maybe a lizard is like a cat. And there's not a type difference there, but but once you have intelligence, that that is not the same as ah you know a blind animal gaining the ability to see or something. right like That's a new faculty.
00:49:43
Speaker
that When you gain self-awareness, that's not a new faculty. like A type change has occurred. And so, yeah, you you you should now identify with the top of the hierarchy, right?
00:49:54
Speaker
think I think that's going to be the yeah the argument. Like you are, ah pet as Epictetus would say, you know you're a piece of you're a peace of God in like a body of clay, right? Like he really emphasizes that difference.
00:50:10
Speaker
Yeah, absolutely. I think so. And I think that perhaps to um
00:50:18
Speaker
sort of justify this view about hierarchy more in a way it's sort of following ah kind of philosophical tradition that you know thinks that ultimately human development is about mastering some of these lower appetites what have you so these more animal instincts desires and such and perhaps the Rissian picture sort of you know you want to harmonize different aspects
00:50:53
Speaker
of yourself, roughly put. But the Stoic picture is, no what the reason yeah we advocate this kind of thing is that yeah what you ultimately are is that harmonizing ability, you know that ability to make things intelligible, to make decisions, to see the world and
00:51:17
Speaker
I think that's sort of the problem that I think that picture has some, ah that picture is appealed just because it's connects to what you have control over. It connects to, you know, this picture of, of nature as a whole as being rational.
Egalitarian Nature of Stoicism
00:51:32
Speaker
And, um,
00:51:36
Speaker
and, uh, maybe makes more sense out of the Aristotelian. Yeah. I'm not, I'm actually not quite sure how to put this, but you know this ability, this activity of being, know, this ability to to harmonize different parts of yourself, you know, that's what you are. It's not like there's these three different, you know, you have a trip, tripartite soul going to the yeah the platonic picture.
00:52:00
Speaker
another mean, another, Oh, go ahead. Sorry. No, I, so so, so I suppose, ah you know, there's this argument that the mind is unified and if it's unified, the best way to account for that is that it's the you know the rationing part, the rational faculty that that's what you are. So maybe that's another another kind of argument I was just gesturing at.
00:52:20
Speaker
Yeah. Well, and then, I mean, i think this is getting what you're hitting on, Kayla, is that another way to think about what you are is the kind of thing that you can receive praise or blame for.
00:52:32
Speaker
The kind of thing that you can be evaluated for and judged for. And I think the Stoics, maybe that's another an argument. you know You were referring to the appetitive parts of yourself or the the non-rational parts of yourself and there's There's this view that you can't be judged for these or you think about you know somebody being born with a physical disability and not just being like, oh, that's not just the Aristotelian picture being something like that's unfortunate, but this actual picture of like you're defective in some way, like you're you're you're worse and worse.
00:53:08
Speaker
and That's something that the Stoics are going to reject because that's not you. um and they're like that that's an incorrect way of thinking about things.
00:53:19
Speaker
i know it's I guess it it it doesn't provide an argument for it, but it provides a situation where it seems actually really intuitive. Because Cicero is almost making this argument from it not being intuitive.
00:53:30
Speaker
We all think about ourselves as our bodies. But here's this argument for actually being intuitive to think about ourselves as our mind, which is like, it's pretty weird to judge somebody. Right. ah you know Again, yeah, if they got sick or if something happened to their body, we might do it, but people it seems weird. And also people tend to think that that's like not a good thing to do. It's not a correct thing to do.
Conclusion and Call to Action
00:53:52
Speaker
um And I think that's the case when identifying with the mind seems very intuitive, I guess, when we're when we're like, well, what should we judge people for? What should we evaluate them on? Yeah, I suppose that's where socialism is more egalitarian.
00:54:05
Speaker
yeah Everyone has a chance for happiness. Whereas, you know, the Aristotelian view literally is if you're physically deformed, you're not going to be as happy at the very least.
00:54:17
Speaker
You know, you don't have the same shot at happiness as someone else does. um
00:54:26
Speaker
And I suppose that's sort of the other side of the coin of taking other kinds of good seriously. if you think the health matters, then the lack of it is an obstacle to achieving happiness and that' So that's maybe in some ways that's intuitive. People think, oh, yeah of course I prefer to be healthy rather other than being sick. But in other ways, it's not intuitive just because we find so many people in negative circumstances.
00:54:51
Speaker
who seem to have a kind of happiness to them. I suppose there's that there's that point in addition to the point that perhaps it's a mistake to judge those people as being defective in some way. I think there's also the point that you can read accounts of different people in terrible circumstances or who have physical deformities, but they seem happy nonetheless. So you know what explains but explains that?
00:55:11
Speaker
Perhaps the the Stoics have a better account there.
00:55:16
Speaker
Yeah. I mean, I certainly like the egalitarian one more. That certainly makes me appeals to me more.
00:55:25
Speaker
Awesome. Well, we've gone a bit over. Is there anything else you want to hit on? No, just I think fun fun chapter. good Good questions to think about. Yeah, absolutely. I think it's a great chapter. It really crystallizes of those important challenges with psoicism.
00:55:41
Speaker
So if you're reading along or not there yet, highly we highly recommend ah recommend reading it.
00:55:51
Speaker
Cool. Awesome. Thanks, Gil. Cool. Thanks, Michael. Peace. Thanks for listening to Stoa Conversations. Please give us a rating on Apple Podcasts or Spotify and share it with a friend.
00:56:04
Speaker
If you want to dive deeper still, search Stoa in the App Store or Play Store for a complete app with routines, meditations, and lessons designed to help people become more stoic.
00:56:17
Speaker
And I'd also like to thank Michael Levy for graciously letting us use his music. You can find more of his work at ancientliar.com. And finally, please get in touch with us.
00:56:29
Speaker
Send a message to stoa at stoameditation.com if you ever have any feedback, questions, or recommendations. Until next time.