| 
			  
			
 
  by W.D. James
 teaches philosophy in Kentucky, USA.
 January 26, 2024
 from 
			WinterOak Website
 
 
 
 
 
  
			
			Epictetus
			
 
 
 Life can be so easy
 Life can be so hard
 Make you wanna cuss and fuss
 Make you wanna tear things all apart
 You try to stay calm and not act a fool
 Cedric Burnside,
 
			Hard to 
			Stay Cooli 
			
 
 Epictetus (roughly 50-135 AD), was born into slavery in a 
			Greek colony in modern-day Turkey, which was part of the Roman 
			Empire at the time.
 
			  
			His name is not in fact a proper name. It means 
			'acquired'. So, the name by which he was known simply denoted his 
			status as property. How ironic (and apropos) then that he became a 
			preeminent philosopher of freedom.  
			  
			We don't know the circumstances, but he gained 
			his freedom sometime around midlife. He set up as a philosopher in 
			Rome, but was banished along with all the other philosophers by the 
			Emperor Domitian in the 90s and relocated to northern Greece and 
			opened a successful school of philosophy.  
			  
			Later in life he may have had more positive 
			contacts with Roman Emperors.  
			  
			In the next century, the Emperor Marcus 
			Aurelius, known as one of the 'Five Good Emperors,' would 
			recognize his intellectual debt to Epictetus. Aurelius himself was a 
			student of Stoic philosophy and his Meditations is considered a 
			classic text in the Stoic tradition. ii
 As with Diogenes, we have no writings of Epictetus 
			that come directly from him. However, his student, Arrian, copied 
			down lectures and exchanges he had with students in the book known 
			as The Discourses.
 
			  
			Further, a summary was made by taking key 
			passages from the Discourses and condensing them into a handy little 
			summary of Epictetus' teaching known as the Enchiridion or 
			Handbook. iii  
			  
			So, our source material is better than with 
			Diogenes' scattered fragments.
 Epictetus was known for his resilience and ability to help build 
			resilience in others. A famous story has his owner wrenching 
			Epictetus' leg, Epictetus telling him that if he keeps doing that 
			the leg will break.
 
			  
			When the snap is heard, Epictetus says, 
				
				"I told you that would happen."  
			Of course, there are no images of Epictetus from 
			his own day, but in later ages it was customary to present Epictetus 
			with a crutch as he walked with a limp for the rest of his life.
			 
			  
			In the modern era, Admiral James Stockdale, 
			best known as the Vice-Presidential running-mate of the populist 
			independent candidate Ross Perot in the U.S. Presidential Election 
			of 1992, is an exemplar of Stoic fortitude.  
			  
			Earlier in life (but at 42, he was no young man), 
			in 1965, he was a fighter pilot in the U.S. Navy and was shot down 
			over North Vietnam.  
			  
			He ejected from his plane, but broke both of his 
			legs (Stockdale too would be 'lame', walking with two canes for the 
			rest of his life) and was captured by the North Vietnamese.  
			  
			He was kept, shackled, in a very small and 
			unhygienic cell for nearly 8 years. He and his fellow prisoners 
			would be physically and psychologically tortured on a routine basis 
			for the duration of those years.  
			  
			Stockdale attributed his ability to hold up under 
			these circumstances to the teaching of Epictetus.  
			  
			In college, a professor had turned him on to the 
			Enchiridion and he had memorized some of the key passages and 
			principles in the work and relied on practicing these while a 
			captive. iv
 
			  
			  
			Stoicism
 
 The Stoic school of philosophy was founded by Zeno of 
			Citium around 300 BC in Athens.
 
				
				'Stoic' means 'porch.'  
			The first Stoics taught while walking along a 
			covered and columned walkway which ran along one side of the 
			marketplace in Athens.  
			  
			It rose to prominence as the self-sufficient 
			Greek city-states gave way to empires, first that of Alexander 
			and then to that of Rome. It is well suited to people who have lost 
			the relative freedom and agency that come with residing in small 
			communities and find themselves very small and very powerless in an 
			imperial setting.  
			  
			All of the most prominent Stoics were actually 
			later Romans, as was Epictetus.  
			  
			Other prominent Roman Stoics include Epictetus' 
			teacher Musonius Rufus and Seneca. In many ways, 
			Stoicism became the unofficial philosophy of the Roman Empire with 
			numerous adherents and academies all over the Roman world.  
			  
			This may also account for why Stoicism is 
			experiencing a real revival in our own day as the individual is 
			increasingly subsumed into a global regime he or she can do little 
			to control.
 In terms of its strenuousness, Stoicism can be situated between 
			Cynicism and Aristotelianism. As noted in a previous 
			essay, the Stoics held great respect for the Cynics, but felt they 
			had overdone it on the asceticism and break from society.
 
			  
			However, they felt Aristotle was not strenuous 
			enough. He had famously argued that happiness, or flourishing 
			(eudemonia), required virtue, but that virtue was not sufficient: 
			one also needed certain external goods like a measure of wealth, the 
			ability to participate in political self-governance, and to some 
			extent just good moral luck.  
			  
			The Stoics wanted to return to what they saw as 
			the Socratic doctrine that virtue (moral excellence) was sufficient 
			for happiness.  
			  
			In a 1915 address, which I think is still one of 
			the best and most helpful explications of Stoic thought, 
			Gilbert Murray put it like this:  
				
				"Rank, riches, social distinction, health, 
				pleasure, barriers of race or nation - what will these things 
				matter before the tribunal of ultimate truth?    
				Not a jot. Nothing but goodness is good. It 
				is what you are that matters..." v  
			That fierce logic, goodness is good, and 
			nothing else is, is at the heart of the existential hardiness of 
			a life lived according to Stoic principles.
 In this and the next essay, we will look more closely at the 
			teaching and practice of Epictetus.
 
			  
			Here we will look at his focus on freedom. 
			In the next essay we will look at his teaching on Natural Law and 
			virtue. For the Stoics, it is reason that links all of those things 
			together.  
			  
			It is, however, a very expansive and holistic 
			conception of reason.  
			  
			As Hadot explains: 
				
				For the Stoic, the same Reason was at work in 
				nature (and physics), in the human community (and ethics), and 
				in individual thought (and logic).    
				The single act of the philosopher in training 
				for wisdom thus came to coincide with the unique act of 
				universal Reason, which is present within all things and in tune 
				with itself. vi 
			This points to the three-legged stool (the Stoics 
			also used a garden and an egg as analogies) of the components of a 
			comprehensive Stoic philosophy:  
				
			 
			  
			
			 
			  
			  
			With the Romans, ethical reflection came to take 
			center stage while the other components drifted into the background.
 The Stoic path is one of self-possession, moral striving, a 
			resilient freedom...
 
 
			  
			  
			Philosophic Practices
 
 As with Diogenes, we will begin the exploration of each 
			practice with a set of quotations.
 
			  
			We will then develop what the spiritual exercise 
			behind them involved and, finally, extrapolate practices of 
			resistance.
 
				
				Practice 1: 
				The dichotomy of control 
					
					Happiness and freedom begin with a clear 
					understanding of one principle:  
						
						Some things are within our control, 
						and some things are not.  
					It is only after you have faced up to 
					this fundamental rule and learned to distinguish between 
					what you can and can't control that inner tranquility and 
					outer effectiveness become possible.    
					Within our control are our own opinions, 
					aspirations, desires, and the things that repel us. 
					   
					These areas are quite rightly our 
					concern, because they are directly subject to our influence. 
					We always have a choice about the contents and character of 
					our inner lives.    
					Outside our control, however, are such 
					things as what kind of body we have, whether we're born into 
					wealth or strike it rich, how we are regarded by others, and 
					our status in society.    
					We must remember that those things are 
					externals and are therefore not our concern. Trying to 
					control or to change what we can't only results in torment.   
					Remember:  
						
						The things within our power are 
						naturally at our disposal, free from any restraint or 
						hindrance; but those things outside our power are weak, 
						dependent, or determined by the whims and actions of 
						others. (3) vii 
					In knowing and attending to what actually 
					concerns you, you cannot be made to do anything against your 
					will; others can't hurt you, you don't incur enemies or 
					suffer harm. (4)
 If...you avoid only those undesirable things that are 
					contrary to your natural well-being and are within your 
					control, you won't ever incur anything you truly don't want. 
					(6)
 
 Don't demand or expect that events happen as you would wish 
					them to. Accept events as they actually happen. That way 
					peace is possible. (15)
 
 People don't have the power to hurt you. (27)
 
 
				With the first extended quotation, we get 
				Epictetus' presentation of what later philosophers termed 
				'the dichotomy of control'...   
				Things are either in our control or they are 
				not. This is the strict logic that everything in existence is 
				either 'A' or 'not A'.    
				The logic is solid, but it probably strikes 
				us as too black and white. Yes, some things I control. Yes, some 
				things I do not control.    
				But aren't some of the things in the list 
				under 'don't control' things I have some control over (like my 
				body or my reputation)?    
				Contemporary philosopher William B. Irvine, 
				in A Guide to the Good Life: the ancient art of stoic joy 
				(Oxford, 2009), develops Epictetus' idea into a 'trichotomy of 
				control.'    
				Things are either in our control, not in our 
				control, or somewhat in our control. This preserves Epictetus' 
				logic and the moral implications of the teaching however. 
				   
				Those things which are somewhat in our 
				control really have two facets, one of which is in our control 
				and one which is not: it just helps us apply Epictetus' logic in 
				ways that fit with our common sense better.    
				For instance, to take an example Irvine uses, 
				I might want to win a tennis match.    
				Since this involves externals, Epictetus 
				would have counseled this should remain indifferent to us:
				 
					
					we should not really desire it (though 
					perhaps we could prefer it).  
				Irvine analyses this in terms of what is and 
				is not in our control when it comes to winning a tennis match.
				   
				How good the other player is, what the court 
				conditions will be, etc... are not really up to us.    
				That I intend to practice hard (the actual 
				practice might get interrupted by circumstances beyond my 
				control, but the intention is mine to determine), that I attempt 
				to follow my coach's advice, that I do my best on the day of the 
				match:  
					
					these are up to us and will influence the 
					outcome of the match.  
				Irvine says there is nothing wrong, from a 
				Stoic perspective, in wanting to practice hard, follow my 
				coach's instruction, and playing hard.    
				That is where I should focus my attention and 
				desire.    
				Nothing can prevent me from that and they 
				will increase the chances of victory. Nevertheless, having done 
				all that, I should tranquilly accept the outcome of the match.
 Freedom can be understood in a rudimentary fashion as being able 
				to do what I want to do.
   
				We moderns focus on making the world such 
				that I can have as many 'wants' as possible and the world will 
				oblige me in fulfilling as many of them as possible.    
				The ancients focused on what the Stoics would 
				have called the other 'handle'. I can seek to discipline my 
				'wants'. If I only want what is in my control, I will always be 
				free (though possibly externally in chains).    
				The teaching is simple:  
					
					desire what is in your control 
					(primarily, desire to be good) and you will be free, 
					unimpeded, and happy.    
					Desire what is not in your control and 
					you will not be free, others and the world will thwart your 
					desires, and you will be frustrated.   
				 
				
 Morally this is rooted in the Socratic dictum that.
 
					
					'A bad man cannot harm a good man.'
					 
				If our true good rests solely on being good, 
				nothing external can diminish that. Yes, a bad man might kill 
				you, enslave you, cause you pain, and take your possessions.
				   
				Epictetus certainly knew that and experienced 
				that. However, Socrates and Epictetus would insist these do not 
				constitute 'harm.'    
				The only essential thing is to be good.
				   
				Genuine harm would come from becoming bad. 
				That is not in the power of others, but only in our own power. 
				We may choose to become bad but no one can make that choice for 
				us. If my fundamental desire is to be good, I remain free to do 
				that.    
				If I choose to do that I am also happy (the 
				choice itself constitutes me as good), though externally I may 
				have many disadvantages. This establishes what later Stoics 
				called 'the inner citadel.'    
				With this worldview and this discipline I 
				establish an impregnable inner source of strength.
 Cedric Burnside, in the song quoted above, is dealing 
				with the same reality. It's hard to stay cool. Maybe you won't. 
				But that remains the goal.
   
				The Blues can be seen as an extended 
				meditation on how to maintain your 'cool' in adverse 
				circumstances.
   
				Practice 2: Negative 
				visualization
 
					
					As an exercise, consider the smallest 
					things to which you are attached.    
					For instance, suppose you have a favorite 
					cup. It is, after all, merely a cup; so if it should break, 
					you could cope. Next build up to things - or people - toward 
					which your clinging feelings and thoughts intensify. 
					   
					Remember, for example, when you embrace 
					your child, your husband, your wife, you are embracing a 
					mortal.    
					Thus, if one of them should die, you 
					could bear it with tranquility. When something happens, the 
					only thing in your power is your attitude toward it... (7) 
				We come to what may be the hardest Stoic 
				practice or spiritual exercise.    
				In a mild version we call it 'negative 
				visualization.' The practice would consist of thinking of all 
				the negative things that might happen to you.    
				Imagine them. Then think along Stoic lines to 
				try to put them into perspective.    
				Finally, think of how you would and should 
				respond if that negative thing came about. If the universe is 
				kind to you and the thing does not happen, be grateful. If it 
				does, at least what might have been a crushing blow will be 
				something you are better equipped to handle.
 Epictetus is actually pushing this point a bit further though. 
				It starts with clearly recognizing and accepting what things 
				actually are. Cups are fragile articles. Humans are mortals. The 
				former will eventually be broken and the latter will eventually 
				die.
   
				That doesn't mean we can't enjoy cups and 
				love people. It does mean we can't reasonably expect cups to 
				never get broken and people to never die. We should not desire 
				this but we also should not desire the opposite.    
				If we do, our desires are out of alignment 
				with what things are and how existence is. You will be unhappy 
				if your desires are out of alignment with reality.
 It is from teachings like this that Stoicism gets its reputation 
				for being cold, a reputation I think that is not really 
				deserved.
   
				The Stoics would say it is perfectly 
				reasonable to love your child. In fact, they say that as we are 
				all children of God (meaning something like a panentheistic 
				universe) we should love everyone.    
				Also, it is natural to be sad when a loved 
				one dies. But there are limits. We are not to be destroyed when 
				this happens. We are to mourn and then to accept this is how 
				things are (trusting in what they see as an ultimately 
				providential order).    
				What healthy alternative, is there really?
 
   
			Practices of 
			Resistance
 
				
				The 
				dichotomy of control 
					
					
					We can easily be overwhelmed with all the 
					problems and malevolence we see around us.  
					
					First, sort out what is within your 
					control and what not.  
					
					Prefer the good. Prefer truth to 
					propaganda, justice to oppression, virtue to vice, etc....     
				   
					
					
					However, desire what you can control: to 
					come to know the truth, to love justice, to acquire virtue. 
					This is where Stoicism yields its practical effectiveness.  
					
					In this way, you will form an inner 
					citadel that the malevolent forces of the world cannot 
					assail.  
					
					You will remain free.  
					
					Influence the world and those around you 
					within the bounds of your power.  
					
					We may still lose. That is possible.  
					
					We may win. That is possible.  
					
					We will marshal our power most 
					effectively if we are not depressed and downtrodden because 
					it is a hard struggle or one that is not solely up to our 
					actions.  
					
					The virtuous defeated remain virtuous. 
					For the Stoics, that was a sufficient basis from which to 
					live and enjoy happiness.  
					
					The virtuous victorious remain virtuous 
					and the world is made better. Be grateful. Providence favors 
					this outcome.   
				Negative visualization
 
					
					
					It is a good world, but it is not an easy 
					world.  
					
					Love the truth.  
					
					Do not accept lies, and by all means do 
					not impose wishful lies on yourself.  
					
					Understand reality; what the natures of 
					things are.  
					
					Do not expect nature to be other than 
					nature is.  
					
					Experience and feel natural sentiments, 
					but balance these with a reasonable understanding of how 
					things are.  
					
					Injustice and oppression have their day, 
					but they are not within the nature of things.  
					
					Imagine trials and tribulations you will 
					encounter if you put yourself on the side of justice and 
					freedom. Prepare in advance to meet those head-on.  
					
					Realize there could well be costs. Weigh 
					those. Decide how you will respond if those costs are 
					imposed.  
					
					Remember Epictetus when his cruel master 
					was breaking his leg and Stockdale in his cell and under the 
					torturer's power. They persevered. You have the same nature 
					they did.   
					
					They, not their adversaries, became the 
					inspirers of future generations.       
			References 
				
					
					
					Listen to the whole song here:
					
					Cedric Burnside- "Hard to Stay Cool" 
					(OFFICIAL VIDEO) - 
					YouTube
					
					As an historical and pop culture 
					footnote, Aurelius shows up in the film Gladiator (2000), 
					played by Richard Harris. He is the good but very old 
					Emperor who dies early in the film.
					
					As with Diogenes, I have opted for a 
					non-literal but more flavorful translation that seeks to 
					capture Epictetus' meaning:
					
					Epictetus, The Art of Living: The 
					Classic Manual on Virtue, Happiness, and Effectiveness, 
					translated and interpreted by Sharon Lebell, 
					HarperSanFrancisco, 1995. This contains the whole of the 
					Enchiridion as well as a few supplemental passages from
					The Discourses.
					
					See James Bond (honestly, that's his 
					name) Stockdale, Courage Under Fire: Testing Epictetus's 
					Doctrines in a Laboratory of Human Behavior, Hoover 
					Institution on War, Revolution, and Peace, 1993.
					
					Gilbert Murray, The Stoic Philosophy, G.P. 
					Putnam's Sons, 1915, pp 30-31.
					
					Pierre Hadot, What is Ancient 
					Philosophy?, translated by Michael Chase, Belknap Press of 
					Harvard University Press, 2002 (original French edition, 
					1995), p. 139.
					
					For the sake of simplicity, I will not 
					separately footnote each quote from Epictetus. I will just 
					note the page number on which the quote occurs in the Lobell 
					text.
 
			 
			
			 |