I have had people criticize the Stoic way of
life by saying that it seems that is that it is essentially passive. Many critics have thought that if we are
taught not to desire any external objects that life will lose its
challenge. I must admit that there would
seem to be an element of truth to this observation. Without the desire for fame and glory, would
Alexander the Great have conquered his empire?
Would any of the great explorers have accomplished anything had it not
been for the desire for fame and wealth?
The great captains of industry, the most successful military commanders,
and probably many of our best scientists are often motivated by goals that
Stoics would dismiss as improper. If the
majority, or even the “best and brightest,” adopted the Stoic way of life,
isn’t it likely that society would stagnate?
The Stoic life may be one of peace and tranquility, but is it the peace
of inactivity and withdrawal?
This is, of course, a totally inaccurate picture
of the Stoic life. Some of the
misunderstanding comes from its similarities to early Buddhism. Buddhism, however, teaches its followers to
renounce all desire. This is the only
way to end the cycle of death and rebirth.
In its earliest forms, only those who became monks or nuns could expect
to achieve enlightenment, because only they could renounce all forms of
desire. A family life is not compatible
with the goal to completely eliminate all desire. While there are religious rules for the
layman in society, the best that most men or women can hope for is to be reborn
as a monk or nun in the next life.
Stoic teaching is quite different in several
important ways. There is nothing
otherworldly about the Stoic ideal.
Stoic teachers paid little attention to the afterlife, focusing instead
on happiness and duty in this life. For
us, happiness is to be found in the knowledge that we can always achieve our
goals, because we have chosen goals that are within our control. No one can prevent me from affirming a true
statement, from denying a false one, or from following my moral purpose. Results might be outside of my control, but
efforts are not. I do admit that,
sometimes, Epictetus does come off as a little fatalistic; he advises people to
avoid public office, saying it is not worth the trouble. Of course, he lived in a time when the Empire
was ruled by a despot. Sure, sometimes a
beneficent one, sometimes an evil one.
Every Emperor, though, was a tyrant, and the only way to get ahead in
public life was to curry favor with the tyrant or with his toadies.
We get a completely different picture when
we read the works of men who lived in a free republic, however. Cicero
extolled the public servant who lived his principles. In the world of Cicero or Cato, political
life was still free, and the individual could make a difference, or, at least,
could attempt to make a difference.
How can this work in day to day
life? Well, I cannot guarantee that my
family will be wealthy; that is beyond my control. I can work hard and invest properly, but
things can go wrong. I can do my best be
a responsible husband and father, to carry out those duties that come with
those roles. I am morally responsible
for my actions, but not for the final results, because those are outside my
control. I am responsible for doing my
best for my family, but not for how those efforts turn out. I am wrong only if I fail to attempt to do
what I should.
Look back at the story Epictetus relates of the woman who sent
packages to her exiled friend. Her
friend never received them because the Emperor’s soldiers took them, but was
the effort really wasted? What did this
woman really accomplish? The most
important thing is that she did the right thing in trying to help her friend. Too many of us would take the easy way out
and decide that we should not waste the money and effort. However, we know that we would be simply
rationalizing a moral failure. If this
woman ever had the opportunity to meet her friend later, she could state
truthfully that she had done the right thing.
What could she say if she had decided that the effort was wasted? “Oh, sorry, but I gave up on you?” Even if they never met again, the woman could
look herself in the mirror without any self-reproach. In this case it is certainly true that
concern about results would more likely lead to inaction than concern over
actions.
There is another way in which the Stoic
emphasis on efforts helps us live an active rather than passive life. Since it is actions, not results that matter,
I have NO excuse for not acting, ever.
Not every decision we will make is a moral one, of course. Do I want baked potatoes or mashed potatoes
with dinner? Do I want maple syrup or
strawberry syrup with my pancakes? Who
cares? So what?
BUT…many decisions we
make do have moral consequences, and these impel us to act. It is not enough to say that I am but one
person, what can I do? You can do
whatever is at hand at the time, can’t you?
No comments:
Post a Comment