STOICS
STUICS
The teaching of Plato and Aristotle had waned in populiirily, the Epioiiicuiis sulli-ied from an evil reputation, while Stoicism cliiiiiied to oiiahle men to enihire tho prevailing,' hardships of thoMj;ht and life. Its cultivation of hiyh ideals, thu nobility of its foremost adherents, its repression of the coarser and insistence on the nobler elements in human natuit, won esteem and admiration. Though its unrelenting .severity preventeil it from ever be- coming the creed of the multitude and restricted it to the select few. Stoicism has alwaj's been a potent inllucnce among serious men far beyond the limits of its actual disciples.
1. Circumstances which favoured its growth. — («) The lUsiijiptarantc nf the riti/-S/iites. — Earlier Greeks bad rejoiced in their citizen-life, and gladly identihed their indivi<lual lives with the life of the city. ]?ut evil days arrived, and internal quarrels led to the intervention of the Macedonian power and the consequent loss of self-government. Later still came the all-conquering liomans, sweeping them all into the Imperial net. Now, bereft of all interest in civil allairs, the more serious-minded turned for relief to those deeper human considera- tions in which they could think as they would, and adulation ami syco]ihancy would not be rc(]uired. It was in part, therefore, a movement of despair.
(6) Loss of faith in the traditional relifjion. — The old mythologies and pagan practices had now lost their power over the Greek mind.
(c) Influx of Oriental ideas. — This was due to that; intermingling of peoples which followed the Alexandrian conquests. Comparison with the be- liefs of others showed how abstract, improbable, and unpractical were their own philosophies in face of the new needs.
2. The founders of Stoicism were not pure Greeks, although the chief centre of instruction was Athens, nor was the system a product of the true Greek spirit. As its later history shows, it was much more congenial to the sterner Roman temperament, and it was at Rome that it achieved its greatest triumphs. The earliest teachers came from Cyprus, Cilicia, Babylon, Palestine, Syria, and Phrygia, and the universities of Tarsus, Rhodes, and Alexandria were its strongholds. The founders of Stoicism were Zeno, Cleanthes, and Chrysippus. Zeno (c. 342-270 B.C.) came to Athens from Citium in Cyprus. He seems to have visited all the exist- ing schools of philosophy before settling down among the Cynics. And even the}' did not entirely satisfy him. The Cynics banned speculation ab- solutely, despised all human delights, and welcomed hardships with open arms. In the end Zeno for- sook them, and became a teacher himself in the 'painted porch' (t; roiKi\ri arda, hence the name 'Stoic'). Of his earnestness, poverty, and content- ment there can be no doubt. Cleanthes (c. 8(10- 220 B.C.), the master's successor, is known best for his famous Hymn to Zens, a remarkable jiroduction. Chrysippus (c. 280-206 B.C.) is usually regarded as the second creator of this system. ' Had there been no Chrysippus, there had been no I'orch ' (Diog. Laertius, VII. vii. 18;!). He collected an<l systematized the earlier doctrines, but, while con- tributing to its logic, psj'chology, etc., made no addition to its ethics. At Rome Stoicism came to its own, and Seneca, Epictetus, and M. Aurelius Antoninus stand pre-eminent among its adherents. Seneca (4 b.C.-a.d. 6.')), a contemporary of St. Paul, was the tutor and later the coun.sellor of Nero. Between his professed devotion to placid Stoic principles and liis actual life a strange contradiction exi.sts (see T. B. Macaulay, Lord Bacon, London, 1852). An advocate of noverty and self-abnegation, he became wealthy and maintained his position at Covtrt by abject tiattery and l^erbaps worse. In Epictetus (11. c. A.D. 100), the poor lame slave of
Epaphroditus afterwards freed, we meet a kindlier, humbler, and altogether more beautiful cbariicter. He taught the Fatherhood of God and the Brother, hood of man. Laughing at misfortunes or even denying their very existence, hi^ bore all hanlHliipH cheerfully and regarded even death a.s u mere in- cident to be left complacently in the hands of God. jV. Aurelius (A.D. 121-lsu), the Stoic Emperor, would have been happier as a private citizen. Confronted with distasteful duties both without and within his Empire, he proved no great success as a monarch. Me<litation was more to his liking than activity, and bis literary remains areatrcasure- house of line sayings. The persecution of the Christians, to which he lent himself, must have appeared to him a pnlitiial necessity.
3. The teaching of the Stoics miiy be divided into the follow ing bram lies : Logic, Physics, Ethics, ami Religion. Iniliviilual dill'erences will here be ignored, and indeed they are not always ea.sy to determine. On the whole. Stoicism laid emphasis on the requirements of practical life, and every- thing was subordinated to this aim.
(a) Lofiic. — This term was chi ployed somewhat vaguely and included Dialectic, Rhetoric, and Logic properly .so called. Its comparative unimportance in the system may be gatiiered from two well- known illustrations which were employed. Ethics was likened to the yoke of an egg, jihysics to the white, and logic to the shell. Again, physics was said to resemble the trees in a field, ethics the fruit which the trees ))roduced, and logic the fence anmnd the field. It need only be said, therefore, that the Stoics' chief aim was to reach a ciiterion of truth ; an<l this they found in the feeling of certainty. The mind is at first a complete blank and depends on inipres.sions received from the out- si<le world. These impressions are either confirmed or rejected by the reaction of the mind's own reasoning powers. Certainty is reached when the impressions become <listinct and overwhelming.