Classical Philosophy after Aristotle Essay Sample

After Aristotle had completed his great bad system. doctrine moves toward a new accent. Four groups of philosophers helped to determine this new way. viz. . the Epicureans. the Stoics. the Skeptics. and the Neoplatonist. They were. of class. greatly influenced by their predecessors. so we find that Epicurus relied upon Democritus for his atomic theory of nature. the Stoics made usage of Heraclitus’ impression of a ardent substance pervading all things. the Skeptics built a method of enquiry upon the Socratic signifier of uncertainty. and Plotinus drew to a great extent upon Plato. What made their doctrine different. nevertheless. was non so much its capable affair as its temper and its accent. Its accent was practical. and its temper was egoistic. Doctrine became more practical by stressing the art of life. To be certain. each of these new motions of idea did affect bad descriptions of the construction of the existence. But alternatively of working out designs for the ideal society and fitting persons into big societal and political organisations. as Plato and Aristotle had done. these new philosophers led people to believe chiefly of themselves and how they as persons in a strategy of nature could accomplish the most satisfactory personal life.

These new waies in moralss were brought approximately to a great extent by the historical conditions of the times. After the Peloponnesian War and with the autumn of Athens. Grecian civilisation declined. With the dislocation of the little Grecian city state. single citizens lost the sense of their ain importance and their ability to command or hone their societal and political fate. Persons progressively felt this loss of personal control over corporate life as they were absorbed into the turning Roman Empire. When Greece became a mere state of Rome. work forces lost involvement in pursing the bad inquiries refering the ideal society. What was needed was a practical doctrine to give life way under altering conditions. And at a clip when events overwhelmed people. it seemed idle to seek to alter history. But if history was beyond humanity’s control. at least a person’s ain life could be managed with some success.

Doctrine. therefore. shifted to this practical accent in a temper of increasing concern for the more immediate universe of the person. The Epicureans turned in the waies of an ideal for populating through what they called ataraxia. or repose of psyche. The Stoics sought to command their reactions to inevitable events. while the Skeptics sought to continue personal freedom by forbearing from any basic committedness to ideals whose truth was dubious. and Plotinus promised redemption in a mystical brotherhood with God. They looked to philosophy for a beginning of intending for human being. and it is no admiration that their doctrine. peculiarly Stoicism. was subsequently to vie with faith for the commitment of humanity. They sought to detect ways in which single individuals could successfully accomplish felicity or contentment in a universe that was non wholly friendly and filled with many booby traps.

Epicurus
( 341-271 B. C. E. )
The Pleasant Life

Epicureanism was one of the doctrines that arose during the diminution of ancient Greece as a beginning of alleviation from the increasing societal disorganisation. Of these “salvation doctrines. ” which flourished until the Classical civilization was superseded by the Christian. Epicureanism was distinguished for the stability of its philosophy. Epicurus teaches us that felicity involves repose and is achieved through the simple pleasances that preserve bodily wellness and peace of head. To recognize their ideal. the members of the Epicurean community refrained. insofar as possible. from engagement in the personal businesss of the troubled universe. passing their clip in philosophical conversation. Epicurus. Inheriting Athenian citizenship from his parents. was born and educated on the island of Samos. in the Aegean Sea. where he spent the first two decennaries of his life. When. following the decease of Alexander the Great in 323 B. C. E. . the Athenians were driven out of Samos. Epicurus went to Asia Minor. After learning at that place for several old ages. he moved to Athens ( 306 B. C. E. ) and until his decease taught in his celebrated garden.

The Garden of Epicurus served as a sanctuary from the convulsion of the outer universe for a choice group of work forces who applied in their day-to-day lives the principles of their wise man. Epicurus’ Garden ranked as one of the great schools of antiquity. along with Plato’s Academy. Aristotle’s Lyceum. and Zeno’s Stoa. It is a buffoonery of history that the word gourmet is often used to denote a epicure of a fastidious sybarite. Epicurus’ enemies in fact accused him of sensuality. but his philosophical instructions and the frugalness and simpleness of his life efficaciously refuted their charge. It was the aristocracy of his character that accounted for his great popularity.

Indeed. the biographer of ancient philosophers. Diogenes Laertius ( 3rd century C. E. ) . eulogized him in the undermentioned mode: Epicurus has informants plenty and to save of his unexcelled kindness to all work forces. There is his state which honored him with bronze statues. his friends so legion they could non even be reckoned by full metropoliss. and his adherents who all remained edge for of all time by the appeal of his instruction. except Metrodorus. . . overweighted possibly by Epicurus’s inordinate goodness. There is besides the lasting continuation of the school after about all the others had come to an terminal. and that through it had a infinite sequence of caputs from among the adherents. There is once more his thankful devotedness to his parents. his generousness to his brothers. And his gradualness towards his retainers. . . in short there is his benevolence to all. The Stoics:

Stoicism: Distinguishing Between What We Can and Can non Control Stoicism as a school of doctrine includes some of the most distinguished intellectuals of antiquity. Founded by Zeno ( 334-262 B. C. E. ) . who assembled his school on the Stoa ( Grecian forporch. hence the term Stoic ) . this philosophical motion attracted Cleanthes ( 303-233 B. C. E. ) . Aristo in Athens and subsequently found such advocators in Rome as Cicero ( 106-43 B. C. E. ) . Epictetus ( 60-117 C. E. ) . Seneca ( 4 B. C. E. – ? -65 C. E. ) . and the Emperor Marcus Aurelius ( 121-180 C. E. ) . Zeno had been inspired as a young person by the ethical instructions and peculiarly by the brave decease of Socrates. This influence helped to repair the overpowering accent of Stoic doctrine upon moralss. although the Stoics addressed themselves to all three divisions of doctrine formulated by Aristotle’s Lyceum: logic. natural philosophies. and moralss. Wisdom and Control versus Pleasure

In their moral doctrine. the Stoics aimed at felicity. but unlike the Epicureans they did non anticipate to happen it in pleasance. Alternatively. the Stoics sought felicity through wisdom. a wisdom by which to command what lay within human power and to accept with dignified surrender what had to be. They were deeply influenced by Socrates. who had faced decease with repose and bravery. This illustration of superb control over the emotions in the face of the supreme menace to one’s being. a menace of decease. provided the Stoics with an reliable theoretical account after which to model their lives. Centuries subsequently the Stoic. Epictetus. said that “I can non get away decease. but can non I escape the apprehension of it? ” Developing this same subject in a more general manner. he wrote. “Demand non that events should go on as you wish ; but wish them to go on as they do go on. and you will travel on good. ” We can non. that is. command all events. but we can command our attitude toward what happens. It is useless to fear future events. for they will go on in any instance.

But it is possible by an act of will to command our fright. We should non. hence. fright events—in a existent sense we have “nothing to fear but fear itself. ” There is an elegant simpleness to this moral doctrine. and yet it was a doctrine for an rational elite. The decision was simple plenty. to command one’s attitudes. but how did the Stoics arrive at this decision in a philosophical manner? They did it by making a mental image of what the universe must be like and how adult male fits into this universe. The universe. they said. is an orderly agreement where worlds and physical things behave harmonizing to rules of intent. They saw throughout all of nature the operation of ground and jurisprudence. The Stoics relied upon a particular thought of God to explicate this position of the universe. for they thought of God as a rational substance bing non in some individual location but in all of nature. in all things. It was this sort of God. a permeating significant signifier of ground. that controls and orders the whole construction of nature. that the Stoics said determines the class of events. Herein lay the footing for moral doctrine. but the way in which Stoic thought moved on these affairs was set by their theory of the nature of cognition. Ethical motives and the Human Drama

Moral doctrine in Stoic thought rested upon a simple penetration. wherein each individual was viewed as an histrion in a play. What Epictetus meant when he used this image was that an histrion does non take a function. but on the contrary it is the writer or manager of the play who selects people to play the assorted functions. In the play of the universe. it is God. or the rule of ground. who determines what each individual shall be and how he or she will be situated in history. Human ground. said the Stoics. consists in acknowledging what one’s function in this play is and so executing the portion well. Some people have “bit parts. ” while others are cast into taking functions. “If it be [ God’s ] pleasance that you should move a hapless individual. see that you act it good ; or a cripple or a swayer. or a private citizen. For this is your concern. says Epictetus. “to act good the given portion. ” The histrion develops a great indifference to those things over which he or she has no control. as. for illustration. the form and signifier of the scenery every bit good as who the other participants will be. The histrion particularly has no control over the narrative or its secret plan. But there is one thing the histrion can command. and that is his or her attitude and emotions.

The histrion can pout because of a spot portion. or be consumed with green-eyed monster because person else was chosen to be the hero. or experience awfully insulted because the make-up creative person has provided a peculiarly ugly nose. But neither pouting nor jealousy nor feeling insulted can in any manner alter the fact that he or she has a spot portion. is non a hero. and must have on an ugly nose. All these feelings can make is rob the histrion of felicity. If he or she can stay free from these feelings. or develop what the Stoics called apathy. a repose and felicity that are the grade of a wise individual will be achieved. The wise individual is the 1 who knows what his or her function is. Epicureanism. in a rigorous sense. the doctrine taught by Epicurus ( 341–270bce ) . In a wide sense. it is a system of moralss encompassing every construct or formof life that can be traced to the rules of his doctrine.

In ancient polemics. as frequently since. the term was employed with an even more generic ( and clearly erroneous ) significance as the equivalent of hedonism. the philosophy that pleasance or felicity is the main good. In popular idiom. Epicureanism therefore means devotedness to pleasance. comfort. and high life. with a certain justness of manner. Incredulity or agnosticism is by and large any oppugning attitude towards cognition. facts. or opinions/beliefs stated as facts. or uncertainty sing claims that are taken for granted elsewhere. Philosophic incredulity is an overall attack that requires all information to be good supported by grounds. Classical philosophical incredulity derives from the ‘Skeptikoi’ . a school who “asserted nothing” . Disciples of Pyrrhonism. for case. suspend judgement in probes. Skeptics may even doubt the dependability of their ain senses. Religious incredulity. on the other manus is “doubt refering basic spiritual rules ( such as immortality. Providence. and disclosure