Philosophical
Background of the Hellenistic Age
Hellenistic1
philosophy in contrast with the philosophy of Plato,
which focused on the affairs of the polis, concentrated on the
individual and his personal welfare. In general, Hellenistic
philosophy recommended that the individual, in order to attain
happiness, attempt to manage only what was for him personally
manageable, his own character and thoughts. Man must become self-sufficient
and not rely on anyone or anything outside himself for his well-being.
Also, he must adopt an attitude toward external events which
will result in attaining ataraxia 'imperturbability' (i.e.,
'peace of mind'), the goal of most Hellenistic philosophies.
1The
word "Hellenistic" comes from the verb hellenizein,
which means 'to speak Greek' and also 'to Hellenize', that is,
to make a non-Greek Greek. Because Alexander
the Great had conquered the non-Greek East as far as India
and had introduced Greek culture into that area, modern scholars
have given the name 'Hellenistic' to the period of Greek history
and culture following his death in 323 B.C. extending down to
146 B.C. when begins the period of Roman domination.
In the Hellenistic
period various philosophies were devised in order to help man
achieve happiness. The most popular was Stoicism.
The founder of Stoicism was a Cypriot named Zeno (335-263 B.C.)
who came to Athens in 313 and taught in a public colonnaded hall
called the Stoa Poikile 'Painted Porch', from which his
philosophy acquired its name. The doctrines of Zeno's philosophy
aimed at the typically Hellenistic ideals of peace of mind and
self-sufficiency and viewed man first and foremost as a member
of the human race and secondarily a citizen of a particular polis.
Stoicism adopted
a physical theory of the universe in part derived from that of
the Presocratic Heraclitus. The basic stuff of the universe is
not inert matter, but a living creative fire which contains the
seeds of all creation. This fire pervades the whole universe
in greater and smaller amounts. Higher forms of existence have
more of it while lower forms, less. In its purest form it is
identified with Reason and God, who is sometimes called Zeus
or Jupiter, his Roman counterpart. Although Stoicism uses these
traditional names which usually designate an anthropomorphic
divinity, its concept of divinity is entirely non-anthropomorphic.
The existence of the other gods is not denied, but they are often
interpreted symbolically as natural phenomena (e.g., Apollo
= the sun), as natural substances (Hera
[Juno] = air; Poseidon
[Neptune] = the sea) or as human feelings (e.g., Aphrodite
[Venus] = sexual urges).
The divine rational
fire of the universe is also identified by the Stoics with Fate.
Under the influence of Babylonian astrology Stoicism adopted
the idea of the sympathy of the universe. According to astrology,
what happens in one part of the universe affects what happens
in another part. Man as a microcosm of the universe is affected
by what happens in the heavens. This suited well the Stoic doctrine
that man, whose soul consisted of a portion of the divine fire,
was governed by the universal divine fire, which plotted out
in advance human events. The most important difference between
astrological fate and Stoic fate, however, is that the former
is viewed pessimistically while the latter is seen optimistically
as a rational and providential principle. Stoic providential
fate is best summed up in the modern saying: "Everything
turns out for the best". Thus, human events which seem bad
are only apparent evils; if the ultimate purposes of God were
known, they would be seen as leading to some good. Man must learn
to adjust to and accept what happens; to resist divine providence
(i.e., whatever happens) is wrong and useless. The only result
of such resistance is loss of peace of mind. Willing cooperation
with the Divine Will is the only sensible course of action and
the essence of Stoic virtue.
The teachings of
the early Stoics emphasized that man must learn to deal with
whatever happens to him, whether good or bad, by eliminating
the passions which disturb his soul, such as fear, greed, grief
and joy. He must attain a state of apatheia 'a complete
lack of feeling' in order to achieve peace of mind. This unrealistic
demand on human nature was characteristic of the extreme idealism
of early Stoicism, which aimed at creating a limited utopian
community of perfect wise men who alone could achieve these high
ideals. The Greek Stoic philosopher Panaetius (c.185-109 B.C.),
however, made Stoicism a less exclusive philosophy embracing
the whole human race by rejecting the doctrine of apatheia
without diminishing the importance of self-control and by emphasizing
the equality and brotherhood of all men on the basis that every
man's soul is derived from the divine rational fire. On a visit
to Rome Panaetius became friendly with Publius Scipio Aemilianus,
the conqueror of Carthage, who was at the head of a group of
prominent philhellenic Romans known today as the Scipionic Circle.
In this way the more humane values of Panaetius's version of
Stoicism became popular among the Romans, who as a pragmatic
people had little use for Greek philosophical idealism. Stoicism
remained the dominant philosophy at Rome until the arrival of
Christianity and even had a strong influence on the new religion.
Second only to Stoicism
in popularity was the philosophy of Epicurus (341-270 B.C.),
the son of an Athenian schoolteacher, who established his school
at Athens in a garden attached to his house. For this reason
Epicureanism was often referred to as the philosophy of "the
Garden". Epicurus's associates (including women and slaves)
lived together in his house in a philosophical community linked
by close friendships isolating themselves from civic affairs
and sharing an almost ascetic way of life. Epicurus was a prolific
writer, but most of his works are lost including his major work
On Nature.
Epicureanism shared
with other Hellenistic philosophies the emphasis on the individual
rather than the state, peace of mind, and self-sufficiency, but
what set it apart was its common-sense approach to life. Since
man naturally seeks pleasure and avoids pain, Epicurus
identified man's chief good as pleasure. This emphasis on pleasure
earned Epicurus a bad reputation both in ancient and modern times,
which survives in the archaic meaning of the word 'epicure' as
a person devoted to the pleasures of the senses and to luxury.
This is a misunderstanding of Epicurus's teachings; he was not
a hedonist in the pejorative sense of the word. He saw pleasure
as the absence of pain and pain as an unsatisfied desire for
pleasure. But not every desire had to be satisfied. Epicurus
divided bodily pleasures into three categories: 1) physical and
necessary (e.g., food, drink, clothing, shelter) 2) physical
and not necessary (e.g., sex) 3) neither physical nor necessary
(e.g., luxurious clothing or any luxury): #1 must be satisfied,
#2 must be enjoyed prudently and #3 must be avoided. Pain, therefore,
will only result when desires for pleasures of the first category
are not satisfied. But perhaps even more critical to human happiness,
according to Epicurus, is the avoidance of mental pains, which
typically ruin human happiness: anxiety caused by involvement
in public affairs, remorse brought about by a guilty conscience
and the fear of the gods and of death. To avoid these pains is
to experience pleasure of the mind and thus achieve ataraxia.
Epicurus supported
his moral teachings with the physical theory of atomism, which
he borrowed from the Presocratic
philosopher Democritus of Abdera. His interest in atomism is
not at all speculative but quite pragmatic. Epicurus saw in atomism
an explanation of the origin of the universe that eliminated
the gods from the world2 and proved that the soul
was mortal. If man accepted atomism, then he would not be subject
to those two great fears, which are most destructive of human
happiness: the fear of the gods and of punishment in the afterlife.
2But
this is not to say that Epicurus was an atheist. He believed
that the gods exist in the interspaces between the innumerable
worlds and, because they have no involvement with the world and
the troublesome life of mankind, are models of Epicurean ataraxia.
Epicurus takes a
purely utilitarian view of virtue, which he sees as secondary
in importance to the avoidance of pain. Any virtue which brings
pain is not to be practiced. On the other hand, we can most often
avoid serious mental pain by being virtuous, because when we
do wrong, we are tortured by remorse. In Epicurean ethics justice
is not the all-encompassing moral principle presented by Plato,
but a simple agreement among men not to harm or be harmed. In
this light, justice is basically an effective means of diminishing
the possibility of pain by agreeing not to inflict pain on others
in return for not suffering pain.
Despite the Roman
poet Lucretius's attempt in his poem On the Nature of the
Universe to win his fellow citizens over to Epicureanism,
this philosophy did not gain a large number of adherents at Rome.
The Romans were a very religious people and religion was an essential
part of the political structure at Rome. The political process
with its extensive use of augury was predicated on the assumption
that the gods were involved in the affairs of the Romans. The
generally puritanical Romans also regarded with suspicion a philosophy
which was so concerned with pleasure. Finally, Epicurus's recommendation
of withdrawal from public life was not likely to earn his philosophy
wide acceptance among an aristocracy which saw politics as a
worthy and noble endeavor. With the advent of Christianity, Epicureanism
met with even more hostility. Epicurus's teachings that the soul
is mortal, that the world is the result of a chance combination
of atoms, that there is no providential god and that the chief
good is pleasure were totally at odds with Christian doctrine.
