If you have a mind to know it, read Zeno, and you will see.1 For what prolixity is there in saying, Our end is to follow the gods; and, The essence of good consists in the proper use of the appearances of things? Indeed, if you say, What, then, is God? What is an appearance? What is particular, what universal nature?—here the affair becomes prolix. And so, if Epicurus should come and say, that good must be placed in body; here, too, it will be prolix: and it will be necessary to hear what is the principal, the substantial and essential part in us. It is unlikely that the good of a snail should be placed in the shell: and is it likely that the good of a man should? You yourself, Epicurus, have something superior to this. What is that in you which deliberates, which examines, which forms the judgment concerning body itself, that it is the principal part? And why do you light your lamp, and labour for us, and write so many books? That we may not be ignorant of the truth? What are we? What are we to you? Thus the doctrine becomes prolix.

| Go to Table of Contents |

Chapter XXI

Of the Desire of Admiration

WHEN a person maintains his proper station in life, he doth not gape after externals. What would you have, man?

"I am contented if my desires and aversions are conformable to nature: if I manage my powers of pursuit and avoidance, my purposes and intentions and assent, in the manner I was formed to do."

Why, then, do you walk as if you had swallowed a spit?

"I could wish, moreover, to have all who meet me admire me, and all who follow me cry out, What a great philosopher!"

Who are those by whom you would be admired? Are they not the very people who you used to say were mad? What, then, would you be admired by madmen?

| Go to Table of Contents |

Chapter XXII

Of Pre-Conceptions

§ 1. PRE-CONCEPTIONS1 are common to all men; and one preconception doth not contradict another. For, who of us doth not lay it down as a maxim, that good is advantageous and eligible, and at all events to be pursued and followed; that justice is fair and becoming? Whence, then, arises the dispute?—In adapting these pre-conceptions to particular cases. As when one cries: "Such a person hath acted well, he is a gallant man"; and another: "No, he hath acted like a fool." Hence arises the dispute among men. This is the dispute between Jews and Syrians and Egyptians and Romans, not whether sanctity be preferable to all things, and in every instance to be pursued; but whether the eating swine's flesh be consistent with sanctity or not. This, too, you will find to have been the dispute between Achilles and Agamemnon. For, call them forth. What say you, Agamemnon? Ought not that to be done which is fit and right?—Yes, surely.—Achilles, what say you? Is it not agreeable to you, that what is right should be done?—Yes, beyond every other thing. Adapt your pre-conceptions, then. Here begins the dispute. One says: "It is not fit that I should restore Chryseis to her father." The other says: "Yes, but it is." One or the other of them certainly makes a wrong adaptation of the pre-conception of fitness. Again, one says: "If it be fit that I should give up Chryseis, it is fit, too, that I should take some one of your prizes." The other: "What, that you should take my mistress?" "Ay, yours." "What, mine only? Must I only, then, lose my prize?"

§ 2. What, then, is it to be properly educated? To learn how to adapt natural pre-conceptions to particular cases, conformably to nature; and, for the future, to distinguish that some things are in our own power, others not. In our own power are choice, and all actions dependent on choice; not in our power, the body, the parts of the body, property, parents, brothers, children, country, and, in short, all with whom we are engaged in society. Where, then, shall we place good? To what kind of things shall we adapt the pre-conception of it? To that in our own power.

§ 3. What, then, is not health, and strength, and life good? And are not children, nor parents, nor country? Who will have patience with you?

Let us transfer it, then, to the other sort of things. Can he who suffers harm and is disappointed of good things be happy?

He cannot.

And can he preserve a right behaviour with regard to society? How is it possible he should? For I am naturally led to my own interest. If, therefore, it is for my interest to have an estate, it is for my interest likewise to take it away from my neighbour. If it is for my interest to have a suit of clothes, it is for my interest likewise to steal it wherever I find it.2 Hence wars, seditions, tyranny, unjust invasions. How shall I, if this be the case, be able any longer to preserve my duty towards Jupiter? If I suffer harm and am disappointed, he takes no care of me. And what is Jupiter to me if he cannot help me, or again, what is he to me if he chooses I should be in the condition I am? Henceforward I begin to hate him. What, then, do we build temples, do we raise statues to Jupiter, as to evil demons, as to the goddess Fever? How, at this rate, is he the preserver, and how the dispenser of rain and plenty? If we place the essence of good anywhere here, all this will follow.—What, then, shall we do?

§ 4. This is the inquiry of him who philosophises in reality and labours to bring forth [truth]. "Do not I now see what is good and what is evil?" Surely I am in my senses. Ay, but shall I place good anywhere on this other side; in things dependent [only] on my own choice? Why, every one will laugh at me. Some grey-headed old fellow will come with his fingers covered with gold rings, and shake his head, and say: "Hark ye, child, it is fit you should learn philosophy, but it is fit too you should have brains. This is nonsense.