Chapter 1: The Essence of Stoicism

The human psyche often functions “in harmony with Nature,” meaning as it was naturally designed to do, despite Nature lacking actual intentions.

Occasionally, I am requested to summarize Stoicism succinctly—whether as a catchphrase or a brief overview. It's remarkable how many expressions exist in American English to denote "boiling down to the core." Yet, there are instances where ideas are too intricate to condense into a simple phrase or a brief exchange.

The notion of "living in accordance with Nature" is one such idea. As Diogenes Laertius states, this is the fundamental motto of the Stoics: “Zeno asserted that our aim is to live in harmony with Nature, which signifies living virtuously; for Nature guides us toward virtue.” (Lives of the Eminent Philosophers, 7.87)

In my experience, this concept is both immensely powerful and frequently misinterpreted. Even among those who embrace Stoic philosophy, there seems to be a lack of understanding. I have addressed this before, but let me attempt a different perspective.

Many people conflate the Stoic principle of living according to Nature with the informal logical fallacy known as the appeal to Nature. If Stoics truly believed that anything natural is automatically good, they would indeed rank among the worst philosophers and logicians. The fact that Chrysippus, a prominent logician of his time, alongside Zeno, advocates following Nature suggests that the Stoics had a different meaning in mind.

Recently, while reading Ward Farnsworth's insightful work, The Socratic Method: A Practitioner’s Handbook, I stumbled upon an intriguing dialogue from Epictetus. In this exchange, he speaks with a father distressed by his sick daughter, who had left her with her mother. Epictetus questions the father's actions:

“Well then, do you think you were right to have acted in that way?” The father responds, “I was behaving naturally.” But Epictetus counters, “You must convince me that you acted in accordance with Nature, and then I will show you that actions aligned with Nature are justly done.”

The father admits, “That’s how all fathers feel, or at least most do.” Epictetus acknowledges this, yet he emphasizes that the crux of the matter is whether those feelings are justified. If that were the case, one could argue that tumors form for the body's benefit simply because they occur, and that errors in reasoning are natural because many of us err. (Discourses 1.11.4–7)

This example is often analyzed within the context of Epictetus's ethics of roles, as the father is encouraged to consider his responsibilities as a parent. However, my focus is different.

Epictetus clearly differentiates between acting according to Nature and making an appeal to Nature. He asserts that he must be convinced of the father's alignment with Nature before validating the righteousness of his actions. The father’s response exemplifies a common sentiment, yet Epictetus challenges the legitimacy of such feelings, highlighting a crucial point that is often deemed unacceptable today.

The modern tendency is to avoid questioning someone's feelings, viewing it as disrespectful. However, this questioning can be crucial for personal growth. Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT), which draws inspiration from Stoicism, often engages in this very practice.

The idea is that our emotions stem from our thoughts. By altering our thinking patterns, we can influence how we feel.

Consider a scenario where you find yourself in a tense environment, feeling increasingly frustrated by a relative’s annoying remarks at dinner. Suddenly, another person lightens the mood with a joke, leading you to realize that the relative's behavior wasn't intended to irritate you, allowing you to relax. Both Stoicism and CBT employ this technique of reframing situations.

Epictetus concludes his point with a powerful statement:

“For then, one would have to argue that tumors develop for the benefit of the body simply because they occur, and that making mistakes is natural just because many of us do.”

The examples he provides—tumors and reasoning errors—illustrate phenomena that are natural but not aligned with Nature. Tumors arise from cells behaving erratically (though Epictetus lacked this biological knowledge), meaning they act contrary to their intended purpose. Similarly, reasoning errors indicate that our cognitive functions are not operating as they should.

To illustrate further, the heart is designed to pump blood when functioning correctly. Yet, malfunctions can lead to heart attacks—events that are natural but not in accordance with Nature.

The fallacious appeal to nature implies that all things natural are inherently good, which is clearly flawed. In contrast, living according to Nature means acting in alignment with its intended purpose.

Historically, the Stoics believed that Nature had purpose, as they viewed it as a rational entity (the Logos). While many today may not subscribe to a belief in a purposeful universe, the logic remains intact.

In evolutionary biology, we still refer to the functions of organs as if they result from intelligent design. However, they arise from natural selection processes. Yet, it remains valid to assert that a heart's purpose is to pump blood or that eyes exist to see.

Biologists often use anthropomorphic language, which is acceptable as long as we recognize it as shorthand for more complex explanations. We can similarly adopt this approach in modern Stoicism, discussing Nature or Fate as if they have intent, while understanding this is a simplification.

Ultimately, advocating for a life in accordance with Nature is both meaningful and distinct from the fallacious appeal to nature. The Stoics, as evidenced by Epictetus, recognized this distinction and effectively applied it in discourse and daily life.

Section 1.1: Epictetus and the Socratic Method

The method employed by Epictetus represents a twist on the traditional Socratic approach. While Socrates often aimed to create confusion to challenge his interlocutors' knowledge, Epictetus guides the student towards a specific conclusion through strategic questioning, encouraging them to reach insights independently.

Subsection 1.1.1: The Role of Emotions in Stoicism

Chapter 2: Clarifying Misconceptions

The first video titled "The Appeal to Nature Fallacy" delves into the common misunderstandings associated with the appeal to Nature, clarifying why this notion is flawed and how it contrasts with Stoic philosophy.

The second video, featuring William Lane Craig's talk "Is God a Delusion?" from the Sheldonian Theatre in Oxford, explores philosophical inquiries that resonate with Stoic thought, offering insights into the nature of belief and reason.