Some people in Hellenistic society adhered to the school of
philosophy called Cynicism, a school of thought some other philosophers saw as hardly
worthy of the name of philosophy. The founder of Cynicism was Antisthenes, who
was about forty when he watched
Antisthenes' best known disciple was Diogenes -
decades before Alexander the Great. Diogenes disliked his father's profession:
money changing. He rejected chasing after wealth. He found virtue in having few
or no possessions, in simplicity and in modest wants. He rejected fame and
honor, but his demonstrations of asceticism were so novel to his fellow Greeks
that it attracted great attention, and many Greeks came to think of him as
extraordinarily wise. In his old age his fame was enough that Alexander visited
him and asked if there was any favor he wished, and Diogenes, the story goes,
replied that he wanted only that Alexander stand out of his sunlight.
In the Hellenistic times that followed the death
of Alexander, a few philosophers adopted the thinking and style of Antisthenes
and Diogenes. They wandered from place to place, and at town squares they
discussed social conventions and simple virtues. It was with these Cynics that
the word cosmopolitan was coined, a word used to signify that they
belonged to no state. They advocated salvation from worry and conflict by what
some in modern times would call dropping out. They were entertaining to listen
to, but Cynicism would forever remain a small and barely influential movement.
For most people the call to drop out made no sense: they were already barely
able to feed and clothe themselves and their families. The Cynics were little
interested in economic realities. Only a few could go about without working,
living off what was provided by those who labored in the fields or at other
occupations. For most who had to struggle to get by the Cynics must have
appeared as much the intellectual babblers that Antisthenes thought other
philosophers to be.
Another philosophy that focused on how one should
live was Epicureanism. Like the Cynics, Epicureans believed it best to purge
oneself of the appetite for power or fortune, and they too favored withdrawal
from the corruptions of society. Nevertheless, they wished to keep the wealth
and possessions that helped make life pleasant, and most Epicureans were people
who had accumulated some wealth.
Epicurus was from an Athenian family from the
Epicurus was influenced by the materialism of
Democritus. He believed that humanity created its destiny without interference
from capricious spirits. Religion, he complained, unnecessarily frightened
people by describing them at the mercy of gods and demons. He escaped from the
unpopularity of atheism by speaking of gods as if they were nature rather than
nature's creators. The gods, claimed Epicurus, should be worshiped with neither
fear nor hope. And do not fear death, he said, for death
is but eternal sleep and the dead feel no pain or torment.
Epicurus addressed the ultimate question about
life by claiming that life was worth living. He saw life as possibly joyous –
if one had an adequate sensitivity to the world of beauty and good friendships,
good health and freedom from drudgery. He believed in the pleasures of
contemplation, physical beauty and attachments to others.
Epicurus believed that the driving force of life
is the avoidance of pain. He believed that the essence of virtue is avoiding
inflicting pain upon others. He believed that the avoidance of pain for oneself
and for others should take precedence over the pursuit of pleasure. He
advocated self-control to avoid painful consequences. Pleasure, he said, should
be adjusted to the equilibrium in one's body and mind. Excessive devotion to
the gratification of appetites, he said, produces misery rather than happiness
and should therefore be avoided.
Unlike the Cynics, Epicurus and his followers
believed in community. Epicurus was political insofar as he saw that it was in
the best interest of society that people carry out agreements that promote
fellowship. This implied a contractual form of government. But Epicurus and his
followers did not advocate group action for social change. They saw political
struggle as creating a distress that should be avoided. They advocated civic
tranquility and a search for peace of mind. They advocated living unnoticed,
abstaining from public life and from making enemies – an
approach to politics that suited those living under authoritarian rule
who wished to continue living comfortably.
Epicureans questioned various methods of arriving
at truth, and in keeping with their basic godlessness the championed an
empirical approach, a process of confirmation and disconfirmation. For example,
when a person far from you comes closer and closer, you confirm or reject that
it is the person you expected it to be. (Humanity would have closer perceiving
to do with microscopes and telescopes.)
Epicureanism was to be the avowed philosophy of
Thomas Jefferson, who must have found Epicureanism compatible with the Deism
popular in his day, which also placed God outside of human affairs.
The Stoics rejected Epicureanism, including the
belief that one's purpose in life should be to seek happiness. The purpose in
life, they held, was to serve God's plan.
At the heart of Stoicism was the phrase "thy
will be done." The Stoics believed that God worked in mysterious ways,
that humanity was able to see only a tiny portion of God's plan. They explained
the existence of evil within this master plan as God exercising people for
virtue.
Central to their ethics was the belief that people
had to choose between God's purpose and error. The Stoics believed that people
exercised virtue by freeing themselves from conceit, by adhering to a humility
that would better open them to follow what God had destined for them. This
included indifference toward worldly success,
rank or status.
The founder of Stoicism was Zeno of Citium, who was seven years younger than Epicurus. On a
business trip from his native
The god of Zeno and the Stoics was a Supreme
Being, a divine fire from which came all that exists in heaven and earth, a god
the Greeks called Zeus. Stoics tried to explain various gods as one god. And
they attempted to explain the myths of various religions as representations of universal truths.
Zeno believed that all humanity had a soul – a
divine spark – that eventually returned to divine eternity. The universe, he
believed, was in essence a manifestation of godly reason. He
saw passion as detrimental to reason and therefore ungodly.
Seeing life as planned by God, Zeno and his
followers believed in facing all circumstances with resignation. They believed
that one should accept and compose oneself for whatever came one’s way. The
Stoics believed that self-discipline was the starting point of virtue and
necessary in their contemplation of God. They saw freedom as a state of mind.
An individual, they believed, could be free whatever his circumstances,
including imprisonment, if he contemplated God. For the Stoics, poverty and
slavery affected only the body, and what affected only the body was a matter of
lesser importance than that of attitude. The poorest slave, they held, could be
a king in his own soul.
Some Stoics actively opposed slavery, and some opposed
the power of the wealthy, while others were advisors to kings and saw monarchs
as noble servants and as a part of the Divine Plan. Most Stoics believed that
the violence that would be involved in overthrowing existing institutions would
be worse than existing injustices, and some of them believed that society would
improve if people would only obey their rulers. And, in keeping with their
belief in the brotherhood of man, some favored change through reason and
agreement – as if conflicting interests and conflicting views could be overcome
by education or collective revelation.
Among
the Hellenized, where freedom to speak and variety in ideas was extensive, one
more school of philosophy was bound to emerge. This was Skepticism. The founder
of Skepticism was Pyrrhon, who, while campaigning as
a soldier with Alexander, had come into contact with a great variety of
conflicting beliefs. He saw contrary belief as a source of trouble in the
world. He established himself as a teacher in the city of
Not
believing in conclusions, Pyrrhon believed that one
should live according to one's circumstances and desires. What mattered,
concluded Pyrrhon, was living well and living
unperturbed. But the imperturbability that Pyrrhon
sought eluded him. He made much money teaching his doctrine of Skepticism, and
he spent much time attacking a philosopher named Arcesilaus,
whom he believed had copied his ideas and was endangering his source of wealth.
A few followers of Pyrrhon supported
Skepticism by trying to demonstrate inconsistencies and contradictions in the
conclusions of others. They examined the logic of Aristotle and concluded that
people could not deduce their way to truth from a self-evident premise. They
examined materialist philosophy and concluded that the senses were unreliable
and an invalid source of knowledge.
The Skeptics were drawing conclusions about humanity’s inability
to draw conclusions, and they were viewing knowledge as absolute rather than as
approximation.