Discussion Starter: Epictetus

While Epictetus, similarly to Plato and Aristotle, focuses on providing guidelines for proper and righteous human behavior, I felt he did so with the goal of improving the individual qualities of life of his readers, rather than to describe an “ideal citizen” or member of the public polity. While Plato and Aristotle both wrote at length about what it meant to be “good men” (Politics, Book I, Ch VI), they wrote from a distance, seeming more interested in describing the systems that humans create and the ways humans are meant to function within those system than exploring the inner lives of humans as they navigate those systems  (as well as the emotional parts of life, such as grief over the passing of a loved one) with all of their own flawed, ordinary, and striving qualities. Epictetus seems a lot more interested in these parts of the human experience that can be considered separate, in part, from the state. This different perspective is reflected in his language; whereas Plato and Aristotle refer to human beings as “men”, writing as if they’re mimicking the perspective of Gods, Epictetus writes as if he is speaking directly to the reader, beginning every small chapter with a brief imperative or a question directed towards the reader, the “you”. Beyond the language he uses, his attention towards human behavior for the sake of understanding and directing it is apparent in his writing’s content, as well. Whereas Plato and Aristotle seem to mainly understand human behavior, thoughts, and actions as pure, almost mechanical functions of a larger communal system (with Aristotle, for example, linking his writing in the Ethics to the role of citizens in different forms of government), Epictetus instead centers his guidelines on emotional and cultural relationships between humans, and rarely discusses politics. For example, in section 42, he discusses at length how he believes a person should respond to another when they hear themselves being criticized; rather than justifying his response with any reference to the way a state or community functions, Epictetus is interested in finding a solution that focuses on interpersonal human relationships, and also comes to some sort of more absolute truth. Moreover, he is also interested in the inner workings of human emotions for their own sake; for example, when Epictetus discusses how humans should understand their own responses to pleasure in section 34, he does not justify his response by claiming that the moderate approach to experiencing pleasure he recommends creates better citizens (functions of the state) or create more functional communities (relationships between people) — instead, the victory he sees in his approach to pleasure is mainly internal, and comes from a sense of self-understanding and a new way of seeing the world. I wonder what sorts of social shifts created the intellectual and philosophical movements Epictetus’ writing represents; I wonder how much of his experience of being born into slavery and of being part of a conquered community play into this.