>>Linda Zagzebski: The Stoics differed from Aristotle on the place of human beings in
nature and the relationship between virtue and happiness. Aristotle thought that happiness
(or eudemonia) requires some good fortune in addition to virtuous living. But the Stoics
held that only virtue is good and contributes to happiness. And only vice is bad and contributes
to unhappiness. Everything else is indifferent. Health, wealth, beauty, the flourishing of
your friends, all of these things are neither good nor bad, and make no difference to your
happiness. A truly virtuous person will always find a way to be happy. The Stoics also differed
from Aristotle in their account of what a virtue is. To Aristotle a virtue is a disposition
to feel and act in certain ways. The Stoics identify all of the virtues with knowledge
of some kind. Practical wisdom is knowledge of what to do. Temperance is knowledge of
how much of a good thing to choose. Justice is knowledge of the right distribution of
goods to persons. Courage is knowledge of what is terrible and what is not. Notice that
the Stoics accept the four cardinal virtues even though they give a different interpretation
of them. A third way in which the Stoics differed from Aristotle, is in their account of nature.
They thought to live virtuously we should not just live in a distinctively human way
as Aristotle said. But we should live through the knowledge all of nature. The core of human
reason is identical with the reason of Zeus. Zeus governs the entire Cosmos. And a virtuous
person aims to take on the perspective of cosmic nature. When you do so you will be
able to appreciate the fact that your disease is not a bad thing nor is the death of your
friend, nor is the loss of your wealth. You will also appreciate the great beauty of virtue.
Something that sometimes requires the broader perspective of the governance of the universe.
The virtuous person then does not just see things from her own point of view, or from
the point of view of her community, or even from the human point of view. She sees from
the cosmic point of view. Do we control our own happiness according to the Stoics? In
a sense, yes and in a sense, no. Yes we control our happiness and that our happiness is up
to us, it is up to our own choices. The winds of fortune do no affect the happiness of the
virtuous person. But in another sense we do not control anything because every event is
fated to occur. The wise person accepts fate that is the secret to happiness. Seneca was
one of the later Stoics living in Imperial Rome and writing in Latin. His writings are
usually addressed to someone… someone who may be plagued by the sickness of the soul
and in need of therapy. He does not give philosophical arguments in the familiar way of philosophers.
But he writes in a dynamic way in a conversation with someone seeking wisdom, as he is himself.
He makes the reader an active participant in philosophical thought. And when you read
Seneca’s letter imagine that he is writing to you and that you will write back. Seneca’s
own life was dramatic and ended tragically. He was accused of adultery with the sister
of the Emperor Caligula and exiled to Corsica in the year 41 for several years. He became
an advisor to Nero but fell out of favor. And in the year 65, Seneca was accused of
conspiring to kill Nero, who ordered Seneca to commit suicide. Seneca followed tradition
by severing several veins in order to bleed to death. And according to the account of
Tacitus, Seneca’s age and diet slowed the loss of blood and extended his pain rather
than leading to a quick death. He then took poison, but it didn’t work. He dictated
his final words to a scribe and then with a circle of friends around him, he immersed
himself in a warm bath, which was expected to speed the flow of blood. Tacitus says he
suffocated to death from the steam and his body was burned without the usual funeral
rights.