Epicurean Vs Cradle Argument

1716 Words7 Pages
The epicureans, and stoics are renowned schools of thought during the Hellenistic era; both schools argue back and forth on many topics, and one among them is the cradle argument. However, both sides possess different conclusions to this argument. The cradle argument in itself is how humans ought to attain happiness in their lives, through the analysis of what brings pleasure and displeasure to infants in their purest form before becoming ‘corrupted’. Analyzing both arguments and their key components in what makes the two distinctively different, and then which of them is better suited towards approaching pleasure/happiness, based on the practicality of the two. The Epicureans conclusion of the cradle argument is that we ought to live a lifestyle…show more content…
For the stoic’s hold that virtue is rational and humans are derived from nature making them intrinsically rational. Their claim that “humans by nature are rational” is based on the account of nature being the concept of rationality itself, because of its machine like customs (ecosystem) [II-94 (85)]. Where everything in nature works in harmony to better and sustain itself, and if humans can adopt these customs and adapt it to our own lifestyle we too can live in harmony with one another, and ourselves. To live with one’s own nature, rather tame it is similar to Aristotle thought of finding the mean to our individual virtues. The stoics oppose the epicurean’s view of obtaining bodily pleasures, since it’s not satisfying to the soul, and argue against their view that virtue is a tool towards happiness, rather a principle in our life [ibid (86)]. They claim we shouldn’t indulge in something for the purpose of pleasure because, negative consequences will follow; to them, what was once pleasurable may become a vice due to excessive indulgence of it. To seek out and obtain virtue for the sake of pleasure is contradictory to its purpose. Nevertheless there is an issue’s with the stoic view of virtue; on the account of they’re being multiple ideas of what virtue is total four, yet they focus more so on two thinkers [ibid 90]. The two of the major concepts they adopt is similar to Socrates’ and Aristotle; the concept that is similar to Socrates’ claims that virtue, as a whole is a type of prudence, which is similar to his idea of all virtues deriving from wisdom. They also take the Aristotelian approach to virtue in how there is several characteristics that better us. Nevertheless the issue that arises from this is, if they don’t have a concrete idea of what virtue, they cannot

    More about Epicurean Vs Cradle Argument

      Open Document