Stoic Ideal Agency.

Years back I took a graduate course in Moral Theology and I
learned that ethics are generated by the community (of a given
people or culture). There's seemingly an innate recognition
that there is a need for rules of conduct if a given society is to
survive and thrive. In archaic societies more than often these
rules of conduct were mythologized into their religious creeds.
The rules were endowed with "divine authority," thus propa-
gating their adherence amongst the populace.

In Stoicism, however, there is this idea of the "Perfection of
Agency" or "Ideal Agency." What this means is as follows:
the means to the optimal integration and realization of our
ends. It is about virtuosity, that of "an ability developed to
the limit of human capability, and not merely to the limit of a
given agent's capability."
[Lawrence C. Becker, A NEW STOCISM, Princeton University
Press, 1998, pp. 107, 133-134.]

As Professor Becker puts it: "Virtuoso agents are made, not born,
and they are made by having to learn to cope with passion, fear,
pain, loss, depression, disappointment, malevolence, failure, and
so on as well as the opposites." And "they must know as much as
is humanly possible about things relevant to integrating all of the
endeavors that they themselves might have, and optimizing their
success in the entire range of circumstances they might possibly
face." [Ibid, p. 108.]

The ancient Stoics were well-known for their stable character
traits. And they stressed benevolence, persistently so! And though
cooperative, they remained "committed to their own agendas,
principled but not rigoristic." [Ibid, 110.]

So what we are talking about above is the highest Virtue for the
Stoic, the perfection of that *ideal* one holds of oneself. Coming
to know what that ideal might be for yourself must be the single
focus around which all other, more communal forms of virtue
must circulate. These other virtues are the foundational edifice
for making the "ideal" in you "real."

These ancient Stoics, however, believed that we simply did not
approach this foundational edifice from a base utilitarian perspective.
These other virtues were not to be used just only as props, but they
were to become *traits* of Ideal Agency.

As for their foundational edifice, the ancient Stoics fell back on an
even older ethical set of virtues called traditionally the "Cardinal
Virtues."

The ancient Cardinal Virtues are as follows: Justice, Wisdom,
Bravery, and Moderation. And there are also the "Three Treasures"
that undergird the Cardinal Virtues: Beauty, Truth, and Love.

Once I did a dictionary hunt into the finer meaning of the Cardinal
Virtues, and I found this effort quite helpful. So if I may, I'll present
such.

JUSTICE: the Quality of being Righteous; Impartiality; Fairness;
Sound Reason; Reasonableness; Rightfulness; Validity; and Lawful.
WISDOM: the Quality of being Wise--sound judgment, judging rightly
and following the soundest course of action, based on knowledge,
experience, and understanding; Discretion--careful about what one
says or does; Sagacity--penetrating intelligence, perceptive;
Erudition--having wide knowledge, learned, scholarly; and Wise
Discourse or Teaching.
BRAVERY: Gallantry--nobility of behavior or spirit; Brave--
Fearlessness in meeting danger or difficulty; Courage--stout-
hearted; and Valor--a heroic quality in the courage or fortitude
shown.
MODERATION: Moderate--within reasonable limits, avoiding
extremes; Mild, calm, gentle; and Temperate-- deliberate
self-restraint.

Besides the Cardinal Virtues, the later Stoics of the Roman Period
surely also concentrated on the practice of what is commonly
called the "Roman Virtues."

The "Roman Virtues" were those qualities of life to which every
Roman citizen should aspire. They are the heart of the Via
Romana--the Roman Way. They are rods, standards by which
we can measure our own behavior and character.
AUCTORITAS; "Spiritual Authority," the sense of one's social
standing, built up through experience, Pietas, and Industria.
COMITAS: "Humor;" ease of manner, courtesy, openness, and
friendliness.
CLEMENTIA: "Mercy," mildness and gentleness.
DIGNITAS: "Dignity." a sense of self-worth, personal pride.
FIRMITAS: "Tenacity," strength of mind, the ability to stick to
one's purpose.
FRUGALITAS: "Frugalness," economy and simplicity of style,
but not to be miserly.
GRAVITAS: "Gravity," a sense of the importance of the matter
at hand, responsibility and earnestness.
HONESTAS: "Respectability," the image that one presents as a
respectable member of society.
HUMANITAS: "Humanity," refinement, civilization, learning.
and being cultured.
INDUSTRIA: "Industriousness," hard work.
PIETAS: "Dutifulness," more than religious piety: a respect for
the natural order socially, politically, and religiously. Includes
the ideas of patriotism and devotion to others.
PRUDENTIA: "Prudence," foresight, wisdom, and personal
discretion.
SALUBRITAS: "Wholesomeness," health and cleanliness.
SEVERITAS: "Sternness," gravity, self-control.
VERITAS: "Truthfulness," honesty in dealing with others.

So--perhaps old, ancient--the combination of the Stoic's "Ideal
Agency" along with the Cardinal Virtues and the Roman Virtues
might serve today as an acceptable ethical system for not only
the evolution of the community but for the personal development
of the individual.

And none of these perspectives of Virtue/virtues have ever been
mythically clouded. They are innately universal-- presented as
such in the Hellenistic World, and just as easily could be employed
in the Modern World.

In the end, however, it's all a matter as to whether we truly believe
in and honor the Virtuous Life.
[This essay was originally posted in my "Stoa del Sol" website.]

StoicSpirit: (25) Ideal Agency

I was thinking that the explanation of the Via Romana might intrigue my Catholic friends on hispanismo. :)

A very interesting article. I admire to romans because they were very organized, the principles of their legislation had a lasting effect in western civilization. I remember that when I studied Roman law at the university I read that the stoic philosophy also influenced Roman law. Regards

Cita:

---

Iniciado por Esteban

A very interesting article. I admire to romans because they were very organized, the principles of their legislation had a lasting effect in western civilization. I remember that when I studied Roman law at the university I read that the stoic philosophy also influenced Roman law. Regards

---

I can only think of a few Roman politicians who were active in Stoic philosophy during the Republic: Cato the Younger and Cicero. Stoicism was adopted by the Romans for its moral practicality and Stoic sages (i.e. Posidonius being the best example that I can think of; he was one of Cicero's teachers) routinely studied a variety of topics, morals and law being two of them. That Stoicism influenced Roman legislation isn't surprising; aspects of it that Christianity found to be compatible with the faith were also highly influential there (such as the Stoic idea of the "cosmopolis"- or City of gods and men).

"Epicurus had been in Athens for five or six years when (about 300 B.C.) another philosopher there began to expound views that in some respects were diametrically opposed to his. This was Zeno of Citium. Not pleasure, but virtue, Zeno said, is the highest good; and not random combinations of atoms, but God's holy ordinance is what forms and sustains the world. Thus began the Stoic school of philosophy, so called because Zeno delivered his lectures in a colonnade known as the Stoa Poikile, or Painted Porch (which the artist Polygnotus had decorated with a fresco of the fall of Troy).
"Zeno [340-265 Marietta] was born in Citium on the island of Cyprus sometime around 336 B.C. He went to Athens in his early twenties, conceived a deep admiration for the Socrates of Xenophon's Memorabilia, and fell under the influence of first one and then another of the city's philosophers. Two of these made a particularly strong impression upon him. From Crates, a Cynic, he learned that even the penniless are kings if (like Socrates) they virtuously reign over their own passions, and that all persons, owing to their common humanity, are citizens of a city that encompasses the cosmos--a cosmopolis--where wisdom is the only law. Under Stilpo, a Megarian, he became acquainted with techniques of logic and with problems of knowledge, and he began to work out his own views on these subjects. Zeno's thoughts were shaped most of all, however, by the writings of a philosopher long dead, Heraclitus of Ephesus, who had said that the cosmos is sustained by an eternal fire in which there is a rational principle that governs the perpetual flux of events. This constituted for Zeno the metaphysical perspective from which he coordinated and developed the lessons of his teachers in Athens.
[Marietta mentions Crates (a Cynic), Xenocrates (head of the Academy 339-314BC), Polemo (Xenocrates successor at Academy), Diodorus Cronus (taught eristic dialecti )]
"In his personal life Zeno seems to have followed the Cynics in emulating to a fault the simple habits of Socrates. We are told that he wore a thin cloak in all seasons, dined upon water and uncooked food, was oblivious to illness, and so forth. He is said to have been swarthy in appearance and to have had a slightly twisted neck. Despite a harshness of manner for which he was notorious, or perhaps because of it, he was honored highly by Athenian officialdom as a beneficial influence upon the young. The consistency of his personal practice with his philosophical theory excited general acclaim. This included his death by suicide (in about 265 B.C.), a practice which, as we shall see, his theory by no means discouraged. The story is that Zeno, having tripped and broken a toe, interpreted the incident as a sign that God wished his life to end, and so hobbled home and killed himself" (Jordan 195-6).

"...But aside from a poem of Cleanthes' and a few fragments from Zeno and Chrysippus, none of the writings of these `Old Stoics' has survived. Information about them must be pieced together from scattered references in works of a later date, and it is usually impossible to tell from these who among Zeno, Cleanthes, and Chrysippus is to be credited with a given idea. Here the usual practice of referring to the early phase of Stoicism as if it were their joint production will mostly be followed. In Stoicism's last phase, during the first two centuries of the Roman Empire (from about 30 B.C. to 180 A.D.), it surpassed Epicureanism in popularity and attracted some gifted expositors whose works still exist" (Jordan 196).
II.LOGIC: The most important question for the Stoics is, “How do we arrive at truths of which we may be perfectly certain?” By logic the
`wise can protect himself from mere opinions. “The wise man never opines, never regrets, never is mistaken, never changes his mind” (Jordan 196).
"Knowledge begins with impressions (phantasiae of the senses, whereby the soul is imprinted with resemblances of objects--trees and horses, ships and people--in somewhat the same way as wax may be imprinted with a seal. Impressions to which the soul gives spontaneous `assent' as accurate resemblances of objects are called `apprehensive' (cataleptic) impressions--`apprehensive' in the sense that by grasping or apprehending them, the soul also grasps the objects from which they derive. These apprehensive impressions constitute the all-important criterion by which we may determine what truly exists and what does not. All our general concepts are built up, directly or indirectly, from apprehensive impressions; and all our knowledge consists of truths incorporating these concepts. One learns many concepts by being taught them, and others are formed by one's conscious effort; but there are concepts that every soul is naturally stimulated by sense impressions to form will-nilly--concepts for which Chrysippus borrowed the name `anticipations' from Epicurus--for example, the concepts of goodness, justice, and God. Wisdom, which alone is knowledge in the strict sense, entails a systematic ordering of propositions concerning apprehensive impressions, by which the propositions gain such force and clarity from being connected with one another that one's conviction of their truth becomes absolutely unshakable....
"The propositions that are systematized into knowledge are meanings (lekta) expressed by signs such as vocal sounds and written words....
"`This table is square,' expresses, to be more precise, a completemeaning, a meaning that may be either true or false and must be one or the other. `This table' and `square,' taken separately, express what the Stoics call incomplete meanings because by themselves they can be neither true nor false. The simplest complete meaning is a simple proposition, such as `this table is square,' which contains, as Aristotle said, just one subject term (`this table') and one predicate term (`square'). Complex meanings are formed when two different propositions, or two occurrences of the same proposition, are joined to make a compound proposition, for example, `this table is square, and this table is wooden.' SUMMARY:
A. impressions ("presentations")= beginning of knowledge when the soul is imprinted with the resemblance of objects B. apprehensive impressions = the soul "assents" to certain impressions as accurate They have a "peculiar mark": you know it when you see it.C. "anticipations" (Chrysippus borrows term from Epicurus)- concepts stimulated by sense impressions to form the foundation of knowledge (justice, goodness, God, etc.) D. From anticipations humans create lekta ("sayings," "meanings") in the form of symbols or words.E. Complete lekta are simple propositions. F. Complex lektaare compound propositions: conjunctive, disjunctive, and conditional propositions. It is with these compound propositions that Chrysippus would further the development of logic.III. PHYSICS

A. "In the infinite void of the universe there is a solitary ball of matter. The outer layer of the ball is a fiery aether which contains stars. Inside the aether there is a sphere of planets, then a sphere of air and another of water, and then the earth, which is at the center of everything. The world is NOT the product of chance (Epicureans) but of an ordering mind, or reason! Only matter exists. Its permanent form is fire. Fire ("god," "Zeus," "Providence," "Nature," "King of Kings," or the "Divine Logos") modifies itself so that it has an active and passive self. This is pantheism!

B. Human souls are matter (fire). Spermatikoi logoi (“seminal reasons" "rational seeds") are the seed ideas that give rise to the things of the world and a rational order to the world and is the substance of the world (Marietta 154). “God is the substance of the world as well as the divine providence that makes all things work out for the good” (Marietta 154).
NOTE: The Stoics disagreed about whether the soul survived death or not: Marcus Aurelius did not (the spark of the divine reunited with the Divine Logos) while others thought they did survive until the great conflagration that ended that particular world.IV. ETHICSA. apathia avoidance of useless agitation over what one cannot prevent and useless longing for what one cannot count on (Marietta 151): health, pleasure, beauty, strength, wealth NOR death, disease, pain, poverty. The goal is indifference, or apathia, to what one cannot change; i.e., what counts is the person’s attitude toward things. Motivation alone is of moral significance” (Marietta 151). Good (virtue) = justice, prudence, courage, temperance; bad (vice) = injustice, foolishness. (“Some of the Stoics said that certain morally indifferent things can be preferred. If circumstances allow, one prefers health to illness” (Marietta 151). B. autárchia: independence, self-sufficiency=goes along with concept of apathia.
C. proficients Between the foolish and the wise are “proficients,” persons who are making progress toward wisdom and who thereby merit the title of “proficients.” Proficients cannot attain virtue, but "appropriateness," i.e., they can follow the advice of the wise. So Stoics wrote a vast literature of detailed moral advice. Achieving wisdom is a conversion experience: it happens with suddenness when the only concern becomes living in harmony with the Divine Logos.
D. Bad emotions v. good emotions One should avoid irrational passions such as appetite (anger, intense sexual desire, craving, love of riches and honor), fear (shame, superstition, dread), distress (malice, envy, jealousy, pity, grief, sorrow, worry), and pleasure. Good emotions include kindness, generosity, warmth, affection, respect, cleanliness, delight, sociability, cheerfulness. “Problems of personality, such as proneness to illness, irascibility, malevolence, and a quick temper, are the effects of wrong beliefs about what is important, what should and should not be sought. They are related to faulty judgment. Epictetus said that it is not things themselves that disturb people, but their judgments about things” (Marietta 153).
E. Monotheism and popular morality Stoics used the allegorical method to sanction myths of the people. They were monotheists but thought the masses needed to believe in the gods to sanction popular morality (cf. the deist founding fathers of America).
F. Fate & freedom: Everything is the result of an infinite series of causes. This led some to believe in astrology, augury, dream interpretations ecstatic prophesies, and divination. Yet freedom still exists. Fate is an auxiliary cause: “A person’s own nature and actions affect the results of external causation” (Marietta 157). “Freedom, therefore, is not the power to alter our destiny but rather the absence of emotional disturbance” (Stumpf 114). Actions are fixed, emotions are not.
G. Evil: What is the cause of evil in a universe supposedly ruled by a benevolent Divine Logos? For Cleanthes evil is caused by humans choosing fame, riches or the joys of the flesh, so God doesn't really control everything; He just oversees the general stuff. For Chrysippus good and evil are contraries –can’t have one without the other; many good things necessarily have some features that aren’t advantageous (e.g., delicate construction of the head that makes us easily injured).
H. suicide considered it a duty in circumstances that prevented living a virtuous life, as in situations in which the bulk of one’s circumstances are not in accord with nature. There was some approval of suicide on behalf of one’s country or friends, or if one falls victim to unduly sever pain, mutilation, or incurable illness….R. D. Hicks thinks that the tradition that Zeno, Cleanthes, and Chrysippus committed suicide might account for the impression that the Stoics were generally supportive of suicide” (Marietta 154).
I. Natural Law Theory: nature is not only ruled by physical laws but it is permeated by a moral order as well. Our human civil codes are valid and just only if they conform to the natural law (reason).
J. Duty Romans developed Stoic concept of duty: "...Greek ethical theory placed very little emphasis on the notion of duty. Generally, even the most exalted, altruistic ethical advice was intimately tied up with one's own self-interest and the pursuit of the good life. The Stoics, however,....taught that we must do some things simply because they are right" (Lawhead 98).SUMMARY: Happiness is the good flow of life, harmony with the Divine Logos (nature, reason, natural law). Humans always do what they think is right; therefore knowledge is virtue. Contrary to Aristotle, no one is a slave by nature: brotherhood of man.

STOICISM

Cita:

---

Iniciado por Annuit Coeptis

"
I. Natural Law Theory: nature is not only ruled by physical laws but it is permeated by a moral order as well. Our human civil codes are valid and just only if they conform to the natural law (reason).
J. Duty Romans developed Stoic concept of duty: "...Greek ethical theory placed very little emphasis on the notion of duty. Generally, even the most exalted, altruistic ethical advice was intimately tied up with one's own self-interest and the pursuit of the good life. The Stoics, however,....taught that we must do some things simply because they are right" (Lawhead 98).SUMMARY: Happiness is the good flow of life, harmony with the Divine Logos (nature, reason, natural law). Humans always do what they think is right; therefore knowledge is virtue. Contrary to Aristotle, no one is a slave by nature: brotherhood of man.

---

The concept of natural law was very important to Roman jurists, is one of the great contributions of Stoicism to Roman law.
Also influenced a legal theory called iusnaturalism.

Sadly at present exerts much influence a legal theory called Legal positivism, which seeks to establish a separation between morality and law.

Regards

Cita:

---

Iniciado por Esteban

The concept of natural law was very important to Roman jurists, is one of the great contributions of Stoicism to Roman law.
Also influenced a legal theory called iusnaturalism.

Sadly at present exerts much influence a legal theory called Legal positivism, which seeks to establish a separation between morality and law.

Regards

---

This is a misrepresentation of Stoic natural law, which like its Christian counterpart, is only understandable when it's placed in relationship to the divine. An ideal example would be a line from Cleanthes' hymnal to the Stoic God:

Zeus, the First Cause of Nature, who rules all things with Law.

In both cases natural law exists and is effective because of of its ultimate source: God. Modern attempts to separate morality from God only result in moral subjectivity and depravity. Stoic natural law is a counterpart to Christian natural law and is properly understood in the light of Christian Tradition.

I wrote about the influence of the concept of natural law and also refer to the bad influence now exercised by legal positivism, the opposite of natural law.

I agree with you, Stoic natural law as Christian natural law is understandable only in his relationship with God.

Sadly in the present prevailing legal theories (positivism, legal realism,etc) are contrary to Christian natural law.

Regards

Cita:

---

Iniciado por Esteban

I wrote about the influence of the concept of natural law and also refer to the bad influence now exercised by legal positivism, the opposite of natural law.

I agree with you, Stoic natural law as Christian natural law is understandable only in his relationship with God.

Sadly in the present prevailing legal theories (positivism, legal realism,etc) are contrary to Christian natural law.

Regards

---

Stoicism comes to its full understanding via Christian interpretation and I might conjecture that, even moreso than the intellectual influence of Plato and Aristotle, Stoicism is far more important than it seems. Stoicism became a purely moral and ethical philosophy like its earlier counterpart Cynicism; it was meant to be practiced rather than purely for speculation (i.e. Platonism). The classical Roman legalists, i.e. Cicero, were affiliated in some degree to Stoicism- just as later Roman jurists were trained in Christianity, which itself inherited the legacy of the philosophical schools.

The dividing line between an eternal natural law and a subjective natural law began beginning in the Renaissance period and its humanism; previously the was a pyramidal structure to the universe and its laws: God at the top with everything else in an inferior relationship due to a dependency on God and his laws (be they laws of nature or laws of revelation and teaching, which themselves are merely a re-iteration of eternally-existing principles). Humanism in the Christian sense is to recognize man as being the image and likeness of God (Christ being the perfect example of this idea of image and likeness); humanism in the sense of the Renaissance merely rejects God's importance and raises man to the level of a deluded, self-professed god (i.e. the error that Lucifer made).

In the traditional Christian sense science was the study of nature and its laws- merely corollaries of Christian belief and religion. Stoicism predicted this sort of holistic relationship between God and Man, i.e. man's ethics are guided by eternal principles which're easily proven via an application of sound reason and common sense.