Content area
Full Text
I. Introduction
Of all the mainstream ancient philosophies, Stoicism, it may seem, has the least to offer a contemporary student of political thought. Set against the massive contributions of Plato and Aristotle, or the self-consciously antinomian stance of the Cynics, or even the emphatic political disengagement of the Epicureans, Stoicism invites assessment as a philosophy quite indifferent to the actualities of power and social organization. The question "Who should rule?"--the paramount political question raised by Plato and Aristotle--appears to receive an evasive, or at least thoroughly unhelpful, answer from the founding fathers of Stoicism: the only authentic ruler or monarch is the so-called "wise man" (sophos ), while everyone else, of whatever social status and rank, is a slave. As to the wise man's domain, it is no body politic, but self-mastery, signifying a mind-set that would give this paragon internal freedom even when shackled and awaiting torture or execution. Supposing that such a conception of freedom--not freedom to act, it should be noted, but freedom from subjection to another's will--supposing that such freedom had institutional or practical value, it remains, according to Stoic authorities themselves, a mere ideal, not fully exampled as yet by any actual human being. Neither life nor liberty nor even the pursuit of happiness (as that slogan from the United States founding fathers is typically construed) falls within the strict Stoic formulation of authentic goodness. That condition is reserved for excellence of mind and character, meaning the perfection of the rationality that is supposedly distinctive of normative human nature. Everything else, except a faulty character, is indifferent--neither good nor bad.
The seeming irrelevance of Stoicism to political thought, or at least political realities and interventions, might also seem to be essential to its vaunted capacity to serve as the only way of life suitable to every possible set of circumstances. At the limit, when you can literally do nothing, Stoicism may serve you as the appropriate fortress mentality. As a Hungarian journalist once said to me during the Cold War, Stoicism is the "philosophy for our time." What he meant, of course, was not that Stoicism mandates an activist political stance. He found Stoicism relevant, under his country's then-authoritarian government, because the virtues of a Stoic mind-set (especially its...