Letters from a Stoic

Seneca says that he is staying at a house that once belonged to the Roman general Scipio Africanus. Seneca believes Scipio is in heaven not because of the important victories he won but because of his self-restraint and sense of duty. This was most evident when he left Rome to preserve the Republic: His stature was such that leaving was the only way to preserve the constitutional structure. Seneca commends this self-restraint and thinks Romans should have been as thankful to Scipio for choosing to leave as they were for him forcing the enemy general Hannibal to leave Italy.

Seneca then describes Scipio’s house, which he says is modestly made and suitable for military purposes. Comparing this to modern Roman buildings, Seneca highlights the extravagance of his age and the obsession of his contemporaries with novelty over purpose.

Following his disapproving assessment of Roman morals, Seneca mentions conversations he had with Aegialus, the present owner of the estate. From this conversation, he derives botanical advice for Lucilius and the message that they must focus on doing work for the benefit of future generations, as olive trees may be planted only to be appreciated later.

This letter is a response to Lucilius asking about Seneca’s opinion of liberal studies (the standard subjects a free Roman citizen was expected to learn). Seneca believes that studies with the purpose of making money are unworthy and that a person should spend time on them only if they cannot study philosophy. Calling these subjects “liberal studies” is a misnomer, as it is only through philosophy that a person can truly be liberated. Among those who teach liberal studies are “reprehensible and worthless characters” (152), and the ability of this sort of person to teach a subject shows its inadequacy compared to philosophy.

Seneca states that some have questioned whether liberal studies make someone a better man, which he argues it neither does nor sets out to do. Seneca asks what the point is of investigating where Odysseus might have sailed when one could instead question how his undiminishing love for country, father, and wife may be obtained. Similarly, he questions why geometry should teach one how to avoid losing any part of an estate; what is worth learning is how to lose all one’s land and still smile. Using this reasoning, Seneca considers literary studies, history, geometry, music, and astrology, dismissing each. He then digresses into a dismissal of painting and other subjects that put one at the service of others before moving onto physical training. This he commends for combatting laziness, but he still believes it is not as useful as philosophy.

While Seneca believes that liberal studies cannot develop a good character, he does admit they are useful for other goals and prepare the mind for moral values. He compares liberal studies’ relation to philosophy to learning grammar; grammar is the necessary ground from which higher learning may be pursued. However, bravery, loyalty, self-control, and humanity (empathy) are key virtues that liberal studies have no ability to teach.

Responding to the criticism that it is nonetheless good to be familiar with many subjects, Seneca says that a person should only retain the subjects that are most necessary. It is silly to waste time on superfluous learning when wisdom should be the only goal of study. Philosophers too should take this advice to heart, as they waste time on useless debates instead of focusing on the most important questions. Seneca condemns the philosophers Protagoras, Nausiphanes, Parmenides, and Zeno of Elea, as well as the Pyrrhonean, Megarian, Eretrian, and Academic schools for their focus on unimportant questions such as what is certain in the universe. Seneca is uncertain which of their views annoy him the most.

Seneca asks Lucilius who can doubt that while life is the gift of the gods, living well is the gift of philosophy. People would in fact owe philosophy more than they do the gods if not for the fact that the capacity to understand philosophy was also a gift from the gods. Seneca praises the fact that one must study to gain philosophical wisdom, as wisdom would not be worth admiration if everyone had it.

The “single task” of philosophy is discovering the truth of the divine and human worlds. Related to this goal are the virtues displayed by philosophers, as the study of philosophy teaches “men to worship what is divine, to love what is human” (162).

According to Seneca, humans once lived according to these natural precepts. The first humans followed a single leader of superior merit. The concentration of power in one person’s hands was not dangerous, as rulers uses their power only to fulfill their duties. A philosopher called Posidonius dubbed this the “Golden Age,” during which government was in the hands of the wise, who governed peacefully and with foresight. However, eventually vices came into the world, which led moral kingships to turn into tyrannies. Laws, initially drafted by the wise, arose to prevent this.

Seneca agrees with Posidonius up to this point but then diverges from his views. Posidonius apparently believed that philosophers were responsible for developing a variety of technological advancements, including building methods, tools, mining, weaving, farming, the wheel, and advanced stone working. Seneca describes each of these developments as in large part harmful, encouraging vices and taking humanity further away from living in accordance with nature. Philosophers would thus not have invented them. Furthermore, a philosopher who did so would be acting outside their role as a philosopher. Philosophy is entirely concerned with the advancement of truth, so anything not discovered by pure reason cannot have been the product of it. Seneca compares the situation to that of a philosopher who can run well; he does not win races because of philosophy but because of his other gifts. Seneca compares Daedalus (creator of the Minotaur’s Labyrinth) and Diogenes (a famed philosopher), favoring the latter.

Seneca maintains that humans can find enough shelter, clothing, and food in nature to satisfy their basic needs; it was seeking luxury that led people to ruin. Seneca refers to the Scythians (a nomadic group from the Eurasian Steppe) to prove that living in harmony with nature is still possible. However, Seneca does not think those that lived in the Golden Age were wise men in the Stoic conception. They lived in accordance with nature because this was the only option. Those in the modern age who, through wisdom, have chosen to live in accordance with nature demonstrate virtue in pursuing this path despite the accessibility of vices.

Seneca says that his friend Liberalis is distressed because of a fire that destroyed Lyons, his home city. Liberalis’s surprise at the tragedy increased his grief, as unexpected things have a larger impact. Seneca’s advice is to avoid surprise by realizing that anything could happen at any moment. Imagining personal tragedies of all forms is useful; Seneca advises Lucilius to consider how often Eastern cities are destroyed in earthquakes and then to realize the same damage can be done to any city. Given that all cities will eventually disappear, the destruction of one at any given time should be met with resignation.

Seneca says that this is the advice he would wish Liberalis to hear so that he might overcome his sadness about the loss of Lyons. He comments on the possibility that Lyons will be rebuilt greater and come to benefit from its destruction. Following a slight divergence into the history of the city, Seneca stresses the need for spiritual training to accept fate. Like cities, men can disappear at any time, so a person must either accept this truth or “get out, whatever way [they] please” (182).

Finally, Seneca discusses people’s fear of hardship and death. He argues that this fear only comes from popular opinion that death is an evil, when in actuality all suffer it as part of nature. Allowing the opinions and fears of others to cause one to worry about death is foolish, while accepting death demonstrates powerful self-control: “[N]o one has power over us when death is within our power” (183).

Seneca reveals that he is currently at his residency in Nomentum (a town just outside of Rome) while recovering from a fever. A doctor’s diagnosis of an irregular pulse led to Seneca traveling to this house, believing the illness to be a result of his location. Paulina, Seneca’s wife, ordered him to take care of his health because her way of life depends on his survival. This led to Seneca becoming concerned about his own health and seeking to ensure he recovered. He tells Lucilius that one must make concessions to others’ legitimate emotions; one might even need to postpone one’s dying breath if doing so would help others. The good man should live as long as he needs to, not as long as he likes. Seneca says that his health has improved and that he has been working on philosophy within his villa.

Despite his relative seclusion, Seneca stresses that physical isolation is not a prerequisite to work; a wise man must be able to seclude himself wherever he is. Movement from place to place will not help concentration, as whatever is causing the loss in concentration is internal and so always present. Comparing philosophy to medicine, Seneca argues that just as an injury is not healed without a doctor’s visit, mental turmoil is not healed without philosophy. Philosophical studies curb cravings and remove evil from the mind.

Nature gave noble aspirations to people, so searching for a good life satisfies the spirit. Through living as a Stoic, a person will be able to overcome obstacles they previously did not believe possible (including the fear of death). The suicides of Socrates and Cato the Younger are examples of a Stoic’s ability to accept death well. By doing the same, a person can become free, and freedom “cannot be won without sacrifice. If you set a high value on her, everything else must be valued at little” (194). In other words, pursuit of freedom must come at the cost of seeking worldly advancement.

Seneca responds to a request to provide rules for living with greater safety. He lists what most often destroys men: the hope, envy, hatred, fear, and contempt of others. Of these, Seneca views contempt as the least dangerous because any violence that arises from it is unlikely to be pursued far. One can avoid the envy of others by possessing nothing out of the ordinary. Hatred comes from giving offence, which one can avoid through tact. To avoid fear, Seneca advises possessing only a moderate fortune and an easygoing nature, as nothing about this will provoke fear. Finally, returning to contempt, Seneca argues that having influential friends and a good character will avoid any danger from this, as will simply keeping quiet.

Seneca tells Lucilius that by not wronging anyone else he can go a long way toward peace of mind. It is a lack of self-restraint that often leads one to harm others, which in turn leads to retribution. Furthermore, by harming others a person becomes guilty, and guilty people live in fear of punishment. Through self-restraint, personal danger and fear can therefore be avoided.

Seneca tells Lucilius not to be upset about the flight of some enslaved members of his household. Their leaving has freed him from spending time on those who would not have been worth building a relationship with. While this may be disappointing, Lucilius should learn that disappointments are inevitable in life. Seneca compares life to a journey during which companions may part ways or die and tragedy is inevitable; however, the acknowledgment that hardships will happen allows one to scorn them.

Seneca further says that things worse than Lucilius’s situation happen very often. That hardships happen to everyone shows that there is no reason to complain about them. Seneca details various misfortunes that can occur and emphasizes that they cannot be avoided: “One can do nothing better than endure what cannot be cured and attend uncomplainingly the God at whose instance all things come about” (199). Cheerful compliance with fate is the most noble way to approach life, while complaining about what life brings is the mark of low character.