Gladiator - the Difference between the Stoic and Epicurean Perspective of Happiness - Movie Review Example

Moral and Social Problems One of the central questions relating to moral and social problems has been the meaning of happiness and the means to achieve it. Several well-known moral philosophies and philosophers have attempted to give a logical explanation to the concept of happiness but it remains an ambiguous concept yet. Two of the most dominant philosophies of the Greek and the early Roman periods concerning the meaning of happiness have been Epicureanism and Stoicism. Academic philosophers as well as common people recognize the relevance of these two philosophies in giving a significant guideline toward how to lead a happy life. Epicureanism and Stoicism are the most popular schools of thought developed subsequent to Plato and Aristotle and their central outlook on life relating to happiness or well-being of human beings has been greatly individualistic and cosmopolitan. Both Epicurean perspective and Stoic perspective aimed at individual self-sufficiency notwithstanding the involvement of society. According to these philosophical views, every individual needs to create a new form of social union unlike the city-state and be trained to dwell in it. “Both the schools agreed in making individual happiness the aim of life. They differed in defining happiness and in the method by which it might be secured. The Epicureans advocated the temperate satisfaction of every desire, sensual and intellectual; the Stoics taught the suppression of the emotions and the subordination of immoral desires to demands of reason.” (Jayapalan, 41) Therefore, both the Epicureanism and the Stoicism were concerned with the meaning of happiness in individual life and they sought to offer explanation of how to secure happiness in life. The major similarity between the two perspectives is that both the schools of thought considered individual happiness as the aim of life. However, they differed in the definition as well as the methods of achieving happiness and well-being in individual life. In this paper, an insightful exploration of the conversation between Marcus Aurelius and Maximus in the film Gladiator from the Stoic perspective and the Epicurean perspective has been done in order to distinguish the basic concepts of the two moral philosophies to the problem of how to reform the moral condition of the Roman Empire. In order to comprehend the the general conception of happiness developed by each philosophy, it is fundamental to realize the history of origin of both the philosophical schools and the basic ideas purported by them. Founded by Epicurus (306 B.C.), Epicureanism maintains that the most essential aim of human life is the greatest happiness, which refers to the absence of pain or anxiety in individual life. In other words, Epicurean philosophers define happiness as pleasure, or the absence of pain and agitation. Individuals need to avoid peripheral agitations (i.e. the physical pain) as well as the central agitations (i.e. the mental suffering) in order to secure happiness and well-being in life. Epicurus maintained that pleasure is the goal of every individual life and happy life exists where there is most pleasure and least pain. “For Epicurus, the limit of pleasure is the removal pain – both physical pain and mental anxiety. Once pain has been removed, anything further can only be a ‘variation’ (poikilmos) – a ‘seasoning’, as it were – of pleasure; it cannot increase it, and it cannot be dispensed with.” ( Sharples, 84-5) According to the Epicurean perspective, human beings should make themselves free of the involvement of the state in the individual life so as to secure maximum happiness. For this, it is essential to withdraw from the cares of public life, because the society causes development of desires and ambitions in human beings. Epicureanism suggests that individuals should depart from public life and create alternative forms of community to dwell with a group of like-minded people so as to enjoy welfare and happiness in life. Founded by Zeno of Citium (333-262) in Cyprus, Stoicism is another popular school of thought relating to the notion of happiness, according to which absence of passions is the central component of happiness. Compared to Epicureanism, this philosophical school of thought was more popular and assumed greater influence on the development of political theory. Like Epicureanism, Stoicism also regarded happiness as the essential aim of human life, but the Stoics, unlike the former philosophy which allowed moderate indulgence in physical as well as intellectual desires, emphasized intellectual pleasure based on reason rather than feelings. Similar to the principles of the Cynicism, Stoicism also emphasized perfect self-control, independence of circumstances, self-sufficiency and life consistent with Nature, etc as the basic components of happiness. Nature, including human nature, is the pure expression of the divine mind and, according to Stoicism, virtuous life is fundamental to the enjoyment of happiness. “True happiness, for Stoics, lay in virtue, which was nothing that following the law of nature, which was definite, unchangeable and based on reason. Thus, life according to law of nature was to live according to reason. But an individual was not to follow such individual reason, but the reason as shown by natural approval or judgment.” (Jayapalan, 42-3) Therefore, the Stoics purport that wise or virtuous decision and action is the basic factor determining happiness in individual life. The Stoics were concerned with the reformation of the public-political order of the state in an attempt to make virtue and wisdom as the essential components of public policy. The conversation between Marcus Aurelius (the Stoic) and Maximus in the film Gladiator can be realized in this background. In a reflective analysis of the film, it becomes lucid that Marcus Aurelius, based on Stoic perspective, poses a serious challenge to the principles of the Epicureans when he argues with Maximus, who is an Epicurean, regarding the ways to reform the moral condition of the state. In a critical analysis of the conversation between Marcus Aurelius and Maximus in the film Gladiator, one comes to recognize the basic concepts of the Stoicism and the Epicureanism. Whereas both the schools of thought emphasize on the importance of happiness in the individual life of the people, they had differing views on the meaning of happiness and the ways to secure it in life. Significantly, the Stoic perspective of happiness was that people should lead a virtuous life to attain happiness and the public policy of the state should reflect these perspectives. According to the Stoics, the public policies based on virtuous life should be introduced in order to reform the moral condition of the Roman Empire. In the film Gladiator, Marcus Aurelius (the stiff Stoicphilosopher-king) engages in a conversation with Maximus (the Epicurean) and challenges the utility of the Epicurean philosophy concerning happiness and moral reformation of the empire. In his celebrated film Gladiator, Ridley Scott deals with the renowned period of transition in the moral condition of the Roman Empire and this transition is aided by the principles of Stoicism. A close analysis of Marcus Aurelius’ challenge to Maximus’ Epicurean views confirms that the Stoicphilosopher-king is effective in establishing the merit of the Stoic perspective over the Epicurean perspective in reforming the moral condition of the Roman Empire. Although not consistent with the historical facts, the film Gladiator presents the philosopher-emperor Marcus Aurelius as preferring “the restoration of the republic to the succession of his deranged and despicable son Commodus…” (Nussbaum, xxii) and the treatment of the matter by Ridley Scott has been more consistent with Marcus Aurelius’ Stoic principles. The clash in the ideologies of the two moral philosophies becomes palpable to the careful viewer of the movies as Marcus Aurelius poses challenges to the Epicurean perspective of Maximus concerning the reformation of moral reformation of the Roman Empire. In this conversation, the Stoic philosopher-king lucratively persuades Maximus on the importance of the Stoic ideology as a means to achieve happiness. Therefore, it is obvious that the Stoic perspective of Marcus Aurelius gains a superior treatment in comparison to the Epicurean perspective of Maximus and the former is effective in convincing the latter regarding the usefulness of Stoic philosophy in reforming the moral condition of the Roman Empire. In conclusion, the film Gladiator effectively deals with the difference between the Stoic perspective and the Epicurean perspective concerning the meaning of happiness and the ways to secure happiness and well-being in individual life. The conversation between Marcus Aurelius and Maximus in the film about how to reform the moral condition of the Roman Empire brings out the basic conception of happiness as developed by each philosophy. Marcus Aurelius establishes his Stoic views regarding the role of public policy relating to virtuous life in order to ensure happiness in individual life. Works Cited Nussbaum, Martha Craven. The Fragility of Goodness: Luck and Ethics in Greek Tragedy and Philosophy, Part 2. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. 2001. P xxii. Jayapalan, N. Comprehensive History of Political Thought. Atlantic Publishers & Distributors. 200. P 41. Sharples, R. W. Stoics, Epicureans and sceptics: an introduction to Hellenistic philosophy. London: Routledge. 1996. P 84-5. Read More