Stoicism vs Epicureanism - Essay Example

Stoicism and Epicureanism Two of the major philosophical constructs coming out of Hellenistic Greece were Stoicism and Epicureanism. Even all those centuries ago, these two belief systems were considered diametrically opposed, almost canceling each other out in how they saw the world. While one felt the major goal in life should be centered on the pursuit of pleasure, the other felt the ultimate experience was in pursuing wisdom. These two modes of thought are expressed to some degree by the characters Maximus the warrior and Marcus Aurelius the Caesar in the film Gladiator. Although it’s somewhat difficult to tease out of the brief time the two characters discuss their ideas, Maximus emerges as the Epicurean and Marcus Aurelius appears as the Stoic. To gain a firm understanding of these two philosophies in order to compare how these two characters saw the world, it is necessary to understand how they differ from each other, but also how they are similar. Stoicism was founded by three early thinkers – Zeno of Citium in Cyprus (344-262 BC), Cleanthes (d. 232 BC) and Chrysippus (d. ca. 206 BC). “Chrysippus was particularly prolific, composing over 165 works, but we have only fragments of his works. The only complete works by Stoic philosophers that we possess are those by writers of Imperial times, Seneca (4 BC-65 AD), Epictetus (c. 55-135) and the Emperor Marcus Aurelius (121-180) and these works are principally focused on ethics” (Baltzly, 2004). If it hadn’t been made clear by the film, the fact that this emperor was a major contributor to Stoic literature reinforces the concept that he is representing this level of thought among the Romans. On the surface, Stoicism emphasized the idea that the true sage, in his zealous pursuit of wisdom, would find all the happiness he could want in his knowledge and subsequent inner tranquility. The ultimate source of this tranquility is achieved through the fire of the soul as it becomes connected with the fire of God, who permeates everything. Because they felt that the laws of nature were absolute and that the essential nature of humans was reason, they felt people could do no other than ‘live according to nature.’ This is demonstrated by Marcus in the film through his calm acceptance of his daughter’s strength, his son’s weakness and the logical truth that a man with the army at his back could command even the ambitious whims of his male child. His belief that Maximus could change Rome is founded on these Stoic beliefs because Maximus is a warrior who will complete any order he is given. Marcus Aurelius completely discounts external conditions as being a threat to his goals. The Epicureans, on the other hand, felt that the greatest goal in life was to experience pleasure. This concept is seen in Maximus from the beginning of the film as he takes pleasure in feeling the seed heads of the grain in a field and watches with pleasure the flight of a small bird. Founded on the ideas of Epicurus (340-270 BC), Epicureanism centers on the idea that pleasure in moderate amounts as well as an absence of bodily pain was necessary for one to gain a state of tranquility and freedom from fear. This was obtained through the obtaining of knowledge, friendship and by living a virtuous and temperate life. The key to how this philosophy differed from other forms of pleasure-seeking philosophies was in the term ‘moderation.’ Although it was all right to have sex, to become involved in an all-consuming passionate affair or to have sex too often could easily throw one out of balance, making it preferable to simply abstain. In addition, this philosophy was firmly grounded upon scientific, rather than divine, principles presuming that an understanding of the world around us, and a physical understanding of ourselves, would lead to an even greater reduction of fear as we become aware that death is little more than a simple disbursement of atoms that were once associated with each other (class notes). This is also reflected in Maximus’ character in his speech to his soldiers, telling them that everything they do here in this earth will echo into eternity, and in his desire to do nothing after the final battle but to return home to his wife and child. He wants to believe in the fundamental good nature of the people around him, but has seen enough of the city-dwelling Romans, such as Aurelius’ daughter Lucilla, to know that he cannot trust indiscriminately. Although these two philosophies seem glaringly different, there are a surprising number of similarities between them, not the least of which is their emergence in approximately the same time period and in the same area of the world. Both of these philosophies rely on the concepts of ethics and physics as foundational cornerstones in their structure and both seek to provide concrete answers to life’s greater questions. For Aurelius, the big question is how he will be remembered after his death and his desire to save the shining empire he built from the destructive and petty jealousies and greed of the people directly under him. For Maximus, the big question is the joy found upon finally reaching the Elyssian Fields, the Roman’s concept of heaven and eternal life. In seeking these great answers, they both place a great deal of weight upon the information brought to us through our senses, one to deny and the other to accept. Aurelius wants to believe that he can place his highly successful general in power who will achieve the same sort of success in politics as he managed on the battlefield. Maximus, on the other hand, speaks to his men about the sudden discovery they might make upon the battlefield that they are alone in a green field – they have found their way to heaven and can stop worrying and fighting now. Unlike Aurelius, Maximus’ great concern seems to be concerned primarily with living in the moment always acting in keeping with the fulfillment of his greatest wish – to return home. Despite their claims to have conquered any fear of death by explaining its fundamental makeup – a return to God’s fire through the Stoics and a simple disbursement of atoms for the Epicureans – they both acknowledge a vast emptiness – the world outside the cosmos and the space between the atoms respectively. Stocism and Epicureanism are also both focused on finding out what is the greater good for the individual, not necessarily for society as a whole, yet both preach for the limitation of desires in some form. Aurelius acknowledges that the greed of Rome has outgrown any natural proportions and will continue, if unchecked, to tear the Empire he has built into pieces. Maximus obviously has had a strong relationship with Lucilla in the past, but he wishes to return to his wife and child and resists any attempts Lucilla makes to entice him to her comforts despite his philosophical focus of living through the senses. While the Stoics work to deny any kind of material connection to the proper development of a person, the Epicureans struggle to work within the bounds of ‘moderation.’ “Both regard fear as something bad … in that fear is for the Stoics either an excessive impulse disobedient to reason directing one to avoid the feared object or a false opinion that something bad will or might happen to one, and on either analysis it is incompatible with virtue, and therefore an indication of vice, which is the only bad thing” (Hitchcock, 2006). Epicureans, on the other hand, see no reason to fear as what will come is only a moment or less of experience between where one stands now and where they will be tomorrow. With the differences in the way in which the Stoics and the Epicureans viewed the pursuit of happiness, in studied rationalism or moderated pleasure, it is easy to jump to the conclusion that these two philosophies held nothing in common. The aloof removal of deep feelings from the Stoics seems to contrast too sharply with the pleasure-seeking happiness of the Epicureans. While Aurelius seems capable of transcending any emotional feelings expressed by either of his children – the jealousy and possessiveness of Commodus or the passion and ambition of Lucilla – Maximus is very aware of these emotional aspects of Aurelius’ children to the point that he cannot think of them without first considering their emotional construction. Likewise, the material science of the Epicureans that allows Maximus to see why he would not be so successful in Rome seems to be in direct opposition to the Stoics theory of heavenly fire that enables Aurelius to believe Maximus’ soldierly bearing will burn through any opposition. However, because both philosophies are concerned with finding a concrete answer to what is the meaning of life and both settled on it being the personal happiness of the individual, they can be seen to have a great deal of similarities. In comparing the two, it seems neither one has tremendous strengths over the other, yet I still prefer the Epicurean approach. While I acknowledge that people are to some degree born with a certain pattern of thinking, perhaps because of their genetics or their early upbringing, it seems Stoicism’s almost aggressive rejection of physical experience is too drastic. Epicureans have a stronger philosophy because they take physical conditions into account and allow for the enjoyment of this life, but they moderate their responses to keep themselves in balance with the world around them. Works Cited Baltzly, Dirk. “Stoicism.” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Stanford: The Metaphysics Research Lab, 2004. Hitchcock, D.L. “Comparison of Stoicism and Epicureanism.” Philosophy. McMaster University, Faculty of Humanities, 2005. Read More