Abstract
While Epictetus’ Diatribai are not an ethical treatise, but aim chiefly at urging and training pupils to practice philosophy, they can also be used to reconstruct Epictetus’ positions about some of the questions raised within the Stoa after Zeno. This paper focuses on the problem of the contribution of indifferent (external or bodily) things to happiness and of the relationship between virtue and these indifferents. Against scholars claiming that Epictetus shared Aristo of Chios’ heterodox indifferentism, it is shown that Epictetus upholds Chrysippus’ ethical doctrine of the telos and acknowledges that some indifferents are natural or have ‘value’ (axia) and should not be despised or ignored. In making this point, Epictetus uses the concept of ‘good reasonning’ about value which can be traced back to Diogenes of Seleucia (and Antipater of Tarsus). Moreover, when he describes how we can reach the goal of life through our natural faculties, Epictetus might also borrow Panetius’ explanation of the telos.
Références
Alesse, F. 1994. Panezio di Rodi e la tradizione stoica, Napoli, Bibliopolis.Search in Google Scholar
Alexandre, S. 2014. Evaluation et contre-pouvoir. Portée éthique et politique du jugement de valeur dans le stoïcisme romain, Grenoble, Jérôme Millon.Search in Google Scholar
Annas, J. 1993. The Morality of Happiness, Oxford, Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Bénatouïl, T. 2003. La pratique du stoïcisme : recherche sur la notion d’usage de Zénon à Marc Aurèle, thèse de doctorat, Université Paris XII-Val de Marne.Search in Google Scholar
Bénatouïl, T. 2006. Faire usage : la pratique du stoïcisme, Paris, Vrin.Search in Google Scholar
Bénatouïl, T. 2009. Musonius. Épictète. Marc Aurèle (Les Stoïciens III), Paris, Belles Lettres.10.14375/NP.9782251760643Search in Google Scholar
Billerbeck, M. 1978. Epiktet vom Kynismus (iii. 22), Leiden, Brill.10.1163/9789004320550Search in Google Scholar
Bonnhöffer, A. 1968a. Epictet und die Stoa : Untersuchungen zur stoischen Philosophie, Stuttgart, Frommann (1890).Search in Google Scholar
Bonnhöffer, A. 1968b. Die Ethik des Stoikers Epictet, Stuttgart, Frommann (1894).Search in Google Scholar
Colardeau, T. 1903. Étude sur Épictète, Paris, Fontemoing, New edition : La Versanne, Encre Marine, 2004.Search in Google Scholar
Cooper, J. 2007. “The Relevance of Moral Theory to Moral Improvement”, in The Philosophy of Epictetus, edited by T. Scaltsas and A. Mason, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 9–19.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199233076.003.0002Search in Google Scholar
Decleva Caizzi, F. 1977. “La tradizione antistenico-cinica in Epitteto”, in Scuole socratiche minori e filosofia ellenistica, a cura di G. Giannantoni, Bologna, il Mulino, 93–113.Search in Google Scholar
Delattre, J. 2010. “Qui sont les rustres ?”, in Miscellanea Papyrologica Herculanensia, edited by A. Antoni, G. Arrighetti, M. I. Bertagna, D. Delattre, Pisa-Roma, F. Serra, 81–99.Search in Google Scholar
Dobbin, R. F. 1998. Epictetus, Discourses Book I, Oxford, Clarendon Press.Search in Google Scholar
Fedech, P. 1964. La méthode historique de Polybe, Paris, Belles Lettres.Search in Google Scholar
Frede, M. 2007. “A Notion of a Person in Epictetus”, in The Philosophy of Epictetus, edited by T. Scaltsas and A. Mason, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 153–168.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199233076.003.0011Search in Google Scholar
Fuentes González, P. B. 2000. “Épictète”, in Dictionnaire des philosophes antiques III. D’Eccélos à Juvénal, édité et dirigé par R. Goulet, Paris, CNRS-Éditions, 106–151.Search in Google Scholar
Gourinat, J.-B. 2005. “La « prohairesis » chez Épictète : décision, volonté ou « personne morale » ?”, Philosophie antique 5, 93–133.Search in Google Scholar
Hadot, P. 1997. La citadelle intérieure. Introduction aux Pensées de Marc Aurèle, Paris, Fayard.Search in Google Scholar
Inwood, B. 1986. “Goal and Target in Stoicism”, Journal of Philosophy 83, 547–556.10.2307/2026429Search in Google Scholar
Ioppolo, A.-M. 1980. Aristone di Chio e lo stoicismo antico, Napoli, Bibliopolis.Search in Google Scholar
Johnson, B. E. 2014. The Role Ethics of Epictetus: Stoicism in Ordinary Life, Lanham, Lexington Books.Search in Google Scholar
Lévy, C. 1980. “Un problème doxographique chez Cicéron : les indifférentistes”, Revue des études latines 58, 238–251.Search in Google Scholar
Long, A. A. 1976. “The Early Stoic Concept of Moral Choice”, in Images of Man in Ancient and Medieval Thought. Études pour Gérard Verbeke, edited by F. Bossier, Leuven, Leuven University Press, 77–92.Search in Google Scholar
Long, A. A. 2002. Epictetus. A Stoic and Socratic Guide to Life, Oxford, Clarendon Press.10.1093/0199245568.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Long, A. A., and Sedley, D. 1987. Hellenistic Philosophers, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511808050Search in Google Scholar
Pohlenz, M. 1948. Die Stoa. Geschichte einer geistigen Bewegung, Göttingen, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.Search in Google Scholar
Prost, F. 2001. “La psychologie de Panétius”, Revue des études latines 79, 37–53.Search in Google Scholar
Reydams-Schils, G. 2010. “Philosophy and Education in Stoicism of the Roman Imperial Era”, Oxford Review of Education 36 (5), 561–574.10.1080/03054985.2010.514435Search in Google Scholar
Reydams-Schils, G. 2012. “Marcus Aurelius’ Social Ethics”, in Selbstbetrachtungen und Selbstdarstellungen. Philosoph und Kaiser Marc Aurel in interdisziplinären Licht/Meditations and Representations. The Philosopher and Emperor Marcus Aurelius in an interdisciplinary light, edited by M. van Ackeren and J. Opsomer, Wiesbaden, Reichert, 112–132.Search in Google Scholar
Reydams-Schils, G. 2016. “Review of Brian E. Johnson, The Role Ethics of Epictetus. Stoicism in Ordinary Life (Lanham, Lexington Books, 2014)”, Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 98 (3), 364–368.Search in Google Scholar
Roskam, G. 2005. On the Path to Virtue: The Stoic Doctrine of Moral Progress and its Reception in (Middle-) Platonism, Leuven, Leuven University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Roskam, G. 2012. “Siren’s Song or Goose’s Cackle ? Marcus Aurelius’ Meditations and Ariston of Chios”, in Selbstbetrachtungen und Selbstdarstellungen. Philosoph und Kaiser Marc Aurel in interdisziplinären Licht/Meditations and Representations. The Philosopher and Emperor Marcus Aurelius in an interdisciplinary light, edited by M. van Ackeren and J. Opsomer, Wiesbaden, Reichert, 87–109.Search in Google Scholar
Sandbach, F. 1975. The Stoics, London, Chatto and Windus.Search in Google Scholar
Schofield, M. 2007. “Epictetus on Cynicism”, in The Philosophy of Epictetus, edited by T. Scaltsas et A. Mason, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 71–86.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199233076.003.0006Search in Google Scholar
Sedley, D. 2008. Lucretius and the Transformation of Greek Wisdom, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Souilhé, J. 1943. Épictète, Entretiens Livre I, Paris, Belles Lettres.Search in Google Scholar
Stephens, W. O. 2007. Stoic Ethics: Epictetus and Happiness as Freedom, London, Continuum.Search in Google Scholar
Striker, G. 1996. “Antipater, or the Art of Living”, in Ead., Essays on Hellenistic Epistemology and Ethics, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 298–315.Search in Google Scholar
Tieleman, T. 2007. “Panaetius’ Place in the History of Stoicism with Special Reference to His Moral Psychology”, in Pyrrhonists, Patricians, Platonizers. Hellenistic Philosophy in the Period 155-86 BC. Tenth Symposium Hellenisticum, a cura di A. M. Ioppolo e D. Sedley, Napoli, Bibliopolis, 105–142.Search in Google Scholar
Veillard, C. 2015. Les stoïciens II, Paris, Belles Lettres.10.14375/NP.9782251760803Search in Google Scholar
Voelke, A.-J. 1973. L’idée de volonté dans le stoïcisme, Paris, Presses Universitaires de France.Search in Google Scholar
Des versions antérieures de cet article ont été présentées lors d’un séminaire à la Sapienza Università di Roma, le 18 avril 2008, et dans le cadre du séminaire du Centre Léon Robin (Sorbonne Université/ENS/CNRS), le 18 décembre 2009. Je remercie les participants à ces séminaires, ainsi que les deux experts anonymes de la revue Elenchos, pour leurs nombreuses questions, objections et suggestions pertinentes.
© 2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
