baltzly - stoic pantheism

8/12/2019 Baltzly - Stoic Pantheism

1/31

Sophia, Vol. 42, No . 2, Oc tober 2003. Copyright 9 2003 Ashgate Publishing Limited.

STO IC P NTH EISM

D I R K B A L T Z L YS c h o o l o f P h i l o s o p h y a n d B i o et h ic s

M o n a s h U n i v e r s i t yC lay ton V ic to r ia Au s t ra l ia

d i r k . b a l t z l y @ a r t s . m o n a s h . e d u . a u

This essay argues the Stoics are rightly reg arded as pantheists. Theirv iew differs from ma ny form s o f pantheism by accepting the notion o fa per son al god wh o exercises divine providence. Moreover Stoic pa n-theism is utterly inimical to a deep ecology ethic. I argue that thesefeatures are nonetheless consistent w ith the claim th at they are pa nthe -ists. The essay also considers the arguments offered by the Stoics. Theythought tha t their pantheistic conclusion was an extension o f the bestscience o f their day . So m e o f their m ost interesting argum ents are thu sa posteriori

T h e p u r p o s e o f t h is e s s a y is t o e x a m i n e a s p e c i e s in th e z o o l o g i c a l g a r d e no f t h e is t ic v i e w s th a t h a s n o t h a d t h e s t u d y i t d e s e r v e s - S t o i c p a n t h e i sm .S t o i c p a n t h e i s m i s in t e re s ti n g i n p a r t b e c a u s e i t i s a ll o f th o s e t h i n g s t h a tM i c h a e l L e v i n e c l a i m s n o p r o m i n e n t f o r m o f p a n t h e i s m is . l I t a t l e a s t p u r -p o r t s 1 ) t o i n v o l v e a p e r s o n a l g o d 2 2 ) w h o e x e r c i s e s d i v in e p r o v i d e n c e ?N o n e t h e l e s s , 3 ) t h is p r o v i d e n c e i s a n t h r o p o c e n t r i c a n d w h o l l y in i m i c a l t o ad e e p e c o l o g y e t h i c . 4 F i n a ll y , 4 ) i t i s a c o n c l u s i o n t h a t I b e l i e v e t h e S t o i c sr e a c h e d l a r g e l y a p o s t e r i o r i o n t h e b a s i s o f t h e ir s c i e n ti f ic u n d e r s t a n d i n g o ft h e w o r l d . 5 T h e y t h o u g h t t h a t i t w a s n o t m e r e l y c o n s i s t e n t w i t h s o m e o f th eb e s t s c i e n c e o f t h e ir d a y , b u t a n a p p l i c a t i o n o f s u c h s c i e n c e t o a n e w d o m a i n .

O n e r e s p o n s e t o t h i s i s t o s a y s im p l y t h a t t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t I s u c c e e d i ns h o w i n g t h a t t h e s e t h in g s a r e t ru e o f t h e S t o i c v i e w o f go d , to t h a t e x t e n t Is u c c e e d o n l y i n s h o w i n g t h a t t h e t h e S t o i c s w e r e n o t c o n s i s t e n t p a n t h e i s ts a ta ll - t h e y m i x e d p a n t h e i st i c v i e w s t o g e t h e r w i t h i d e a s s u c h a s a p e r s o n a l ,p r o v i d e n t i a l g o d , w i t h w h i c h p a n t h e i s m i s s t r i c t l y i n c o n s i s t e n t .

I th i n k t h i s o b j e c t i o n i s a b i t t o o q u i c k . I n t h e n e x t s e c t i o n I o f f e r a v e r yg e n e r i c d e f i n i t io n o f p a n t h e i s m . I t h a s m u c h s u p p o r t i n t h e l i te r a tu r e a n d i ts e e m s t o m e t o c a p t u re s o m e t h i n g i m p o r t a n t a t t h e c o r e o f v i e w s th a t h a v e a l lb e e n l a b e l e d p a n t h e i s t i c b y h i s to r i a n s o f p h i l o s o p h y . I t h i n k t h a t t h is i s a l l a n yd e f i n it io n o f p a n t h e i s m s h o u l d d o , s i n c e I s u s p e c t t h a t o u r c o n c e p t o f p a n t h e -i s m i s a r a th e r v a g u e o n e . W e c o u ld , o f c o u r se , d e f i n e p a n t h e i s m m o r en a r ro w l y t o m a k e L e v i ne s c la i m s a b o u t w h a t i s tr u e o f p r o m i n e n t f o r m s o f


2/31

DIRK BALTZLY

p a n t h e i s m a n a l y ti c a ll y tr u e o f a n y f o r m o f p a n t h e is m . B u t th is , I th i nk , w o u l db e a m i s t a k e . T h e w a y t h e S t o i c s r e g a r d g o d i s i n c o n s i s te n t w i t h , s ay , S p i n o z a st r ea t m e n t o f g o d. B u t t o s u p p o s e t h a t t hi s m e a n s t h at t h e S t o i c s a r e n o t p a n -t h e i s t s i s t o m a k e S p i n o z a n o t m e r e l y a h i g h l y v i s i b l e representative o fp a n t h e i s m , b u t r a t h e r p a r a d i g m a t i c o f p a n t h e is m . E v e r y o n e i s e n t it le d t o u s et e r m s l i k e p a n t h e i s m a s h e s e e s f it , b u t I t h in k t h at b e i n g t o o n a r r o w a b o u tw h a t c o u n t s a s a p an t h e is t v i e w p r o b a b l y i n v e st s t h e c o n c e p t w i t h m o r e p r e -c i s i o n t h a t i t h a s h i s t o r i c a ll y h a d . I f, h o w e v e r , y o u c o n s u l t y o u r i n t u t io n s a b o u tt h e n e c e s s a r y a n d s u f f ic i e n t c o n d i t o n s f o r x i s a p a n t h e is t v i e w a n d f i n d t h a tt h e s e i n t u i t io n s r u l e o u t c a n d i d a t e s t h a t i n v o l v e p r o v i d e n c e o r a p e r s o n a l g o d ,t h e n r e a d t h is p a p e r a s a n e s s a y o n s o m e t h i n g a b i t l ik e p a n t h e i s m i n S t o i c p h i -l o s o p h y . P e r h a p s y o u w o u l d p r e f e r t o l a b e l i t p a n e n t h e i s t i c , I w o n t m i n d : I l lj u s t e n v y y o u y o u r f i n e l y a rt ic u l a te d i n tu i ti o n s o n w h a t c o u n t s a s p a n t h e is m .

I T h a t t h e S t o i c s w e r e P a n t h e i s t s

I n th i s s e c t io n , I a r g u e t h a t th e S t o i c v i e w i s c o r r e c t l y d e s c r i b e d a s a k i n d o fp a n t h e i s m . I a d o p t a d e f i n i t i o n o f p a n t h e i s m s p e c i f i c a l ly a r ti c u l a te d b yO p p y , b u t c o m m o n t o m a n y w r i te r s o n t h e s u b j e c t. 6 A c c o r d i n g t o h im , a n yf o r m o f p a n t h e i s m i s c o m m i t t e d t o an o n t o l o g i c a l t h e si s a n d a n i d e o l o g i c a lt h e s i s :

1 . T h e O n t o l o g i c a l T h e s i s : i n s o m e s e n s e t o b e e x p l a in e d , e v e r y -t h i n g t h a t e x i s t s c o n s t i t u t e s a U n i t y a n d2 . T h e I d e o l o g i c a l T h e s i s : t h e U n i t y i s d i v in e i n s o m e s e n s e t h a tm a k e s i t a p p r o p r i a t e t o t a k e u p a r e l i g i o u s a t t i t u d e t o w a r d i t .

T h e s e t w o t h e s e s a re , o f c o u r s e , r e la t e d . T h e s p e c i f i c s e n s e i n w h i c h t h e t o t a l -i t y is a u n i t y t y p i c a l l y e x p l a i n s w h y i t w o u l d b e c o r r e c t t o r e g a r d i t a s d i v i n e .S u p p o s e w e w e r e fr ie n d s o f u n r e s t ri c t ed m e r e o l o g i c a l c o m p o s i t i o n . W ew o u l d t h e n a g r e e t h a t th e r e is a t h i n g - c a l l it T h e B i g T h i n g - t h a t is t h e m e r e -o l o g i c a l s u m o f a l l t h in g s . T h i s w o u l d b e a s o r t o f u n it y I s u p p o s e . B u t i ts e e m s i m p l a u s i b le t o re g a r d t h is U n i t y a s s o m e t h i n g d i vi n e. I s u p p o s e y o uc o u l d a r g u e t h a t T h e B i g T h i n g i s t h e m o s t p o w e r f u l th i n g t h a t t h e re i s 7 ( A f t e ra l l, i t c o n t a i n s a s p a r t s a l l t h e b i l l i o n s o f su n s , s t a c k s o f n u c l e a r w a r h e a d s ,s t ro n g s m e l l i n g F r e n c h c h e e s e s o f e v e r y k i nd , e t c .) Y o u c o u l d s i m i la r ly a r g u et h a t i t i s w i s e s t t h i n g t h a t e x i s ts . ( A f t e r a ll , i t c o n t a i n s S t e p h e n H a w k i n g a n dl o ts o f o t h e r v e r y s m a r t p e o p l e a s p a r ts . ) B u t a l l t h is s e e m s a f a r c r y f r o ms h o w i n g t h a t T h e B i g T h i n g i s o m n i p o t e n t a n d o m n i s c i e n t o r a n y o f t h e o t h e rt ra d i ti o n a l q u a l it ie s a t t a c h e d t o t h e c o n c e p t o f g o d . T o s u m u p , i f t h e k i n d o f


3/31

STOIC PANTHEISM 5U n i t y t h a t th e p a n t h e i s t c la i m s e x i s ts i s m e r e l y t h a t o f a m e r e o l o g i c a l s u m , i ts e e m s p r e t t y i m p l a u s i b l e t o c l a i m t h a t t h i s U n i t y i s d iv i n e . T h i s e x a m p l e i l l u s-t r a te s t h e g i v e a n d t a k e b e t w e e n t h e o n t o l o g i c a l a n d i d e o l o g i c a l th e s e s . W ew i l l c o n s i d e r th i s g i v e a n d t a k e w i t h s p e c i f i c r e f e r e n c e t o th e S t o i c th e o r y i ns e c t i o n I~ . A t p r e s e n t I w i s h t o r e t u r n t o t h e q u e s t i o n o f w h e t h e r t h e S t o i cp o s i t i o n s h o u l d c o u n t a s p a n t h e i s t g i v e n t h i s d e f i n i ti o n .

T h e S t o i c s c a l l t h e e n t i r e c o s m o s a g o d , b u t i t h a s a k i n d o f u n i t y t o i tt h a t g o e s b e y o n d t h e ' u n i t y i n t h o u g h t ' h a d b y a n y m e r e o l o g i c a l s u m t h a t w ec o n s id e r . D i o g e n e s L a e r t i u s r e p o r t s t h e f o l l o w i n g o n t h e u s e o f t h e w o r d s

k o s m o s a n d ' g o d ' b y t h e S t o ic s .They use the word 'wor ld ' [ k o s mo s ] in three ways: of god himself , thepecu liarly qualified individual consisting o f all substance ( o u s i a s ) , w h ois indestruct ible and ingenerable , s ince he is the manufacturer( d e m i o u r g o s ) o f the world-order; th ey also describe the wo rld-orde r( d i a k o s m~s i s ) a s 'wo r ld ' and thirdly, what is com posed ou t of both [ i.e.god a nd the world-order]. (D L VII.137 = LS 44F)8

A ' p e c u l a r i l y q u a l i f i e d i n d i v i d u a l ' i s a s u b s t a n c e i n t h e A r i s t o t e l i a n s e n s e -a n i n d i v i d u a l t h i n g , li k e y o u o r m e . S u c h q u a l i f i e d i n d i v i d u a l s a r e c o n t r a s t-e d w i t h m e r e c o l l ec t io n s l i k e p i le s o f s a n d o r f lo c k s o f s h e e p. 9 T h e k o s m o sh a s t h e k i n d o f u n i t y t o i t t h a t a n i n d i v i d u a l b i o l o g i c a l t h i n g h as , a s i s s h o w nf r o m t h i s r e p o r t:

They [ the Stoics] say that god is an animal which is immorta l andrational or intelligent, per fec t in happiness, no t adm itting any evil,prov ident toward the w hole w orld and its occupants, b ut not anthropo-m orphic . H e is the creator of the w orld and, as i t were , the fa ther o f al l,bo th generally and in par ticular , th at par t o f him which pervad es a l lthings, w hich is called by m an y descriptions acco rding to his powers.(DL VII .147 = LS 54A)

W h y d o t h e y t h i n k t h a t t h e w o r l d i s a b i o l o g ic a l i n d iv i d u a l li k e e a c h o f u s ?T h e k o s m o s i s a q u a l i f i e d i n d i v id u a l b e c a u s e g o d - t h e f i rs t t h i n g d e n o t e db y k o s m o s - i s t h e p r o d u c e r o f a n o r d e r w i t h i n i ts el f. T o u n d e r s t a n d w h yt h i s i s so , w e n e e d t o c o n s i d e r t h e S t o i c d o c t r i n e o n t h e p r i n c i p l e s o f t h i n g s .

A c c o r d i n g t o t h e S t o i c s , t h e r e a r e t w o a r c h a i o r u l t i m a t e e x p l a n a t o r yp r inc ip l e s f o r a l l t h ings .

T he y [the Stoics] think that there are tw o principles o f the universe, thatwh ich acts and that w hich is ac ted upon. That which is ac ted upo n isun qua lified substance, i .e . matter; that wh ich acts is the reaso n [logos]in it, i.e. god. Fo r this, since it is everlasting, constructs (d niourgein)every single thing through out a l l matter. (DL V II. 134 = LS 44B )


4/31

6 DIRK BALTZLYT h e q u e s t io n o f h is to r ic a l i n f lu e n c e b e t w e e n P l a t o n i sm a n d S t o i c is m i s a

d i f f ic u l t one . ~~B u t i t w i l l d o n o h a r m t o explain w h a t th e S t o ic s a r e d o i n g b yre fe rence t o P l a to s l~maeus. In the l a t t er , we might locate severa l u l t imateexp l ana to ry p r inc ip l es : t he F o rms , t he Demiurge , t he W or ld S ou l , and t heR e c e p t a c l e i n w h i c h t h e c o p i e s o f th e F o r m s c o m e t o b e . O f th e s e f o u r , t h r e ea r e a c t i v e i n t h e s e n s e t h a t t h e y e x p l a in w h a t e x is ts a n d w h a t h a p p e n s b y t h e i rac t i v i t y a s agen t s o r a s pa rad igms . The Recep t ac l e i s pas s ive and i t w as c om -m on in t he pe r iod a f t e r P l a to t o a s s im i l a te i t to Ar i s t o te l i an mat t e r, n W e c anth ink o f t he S to i c ac t ive an d pas s ive p r inc ip les a s co l l aps ing the v a r ious ro l eso f th e F o r m s , t h e D e m i u r g e a n d t h e W o r l d S o u l i n to a s i n g l e im m a n e n t s o u r c eo f o r d e r a n d c h a n g e w i t h in t h e c o s m o s . T h i s a c ti v e p r in c i p le t h e y c a l l g o d .

God , however , i s a l so r e l a t ed t o fu r the r fo rces wi th in t he S to i c phys i ca lt h e o r y . T h e y a l s o u s e t h e t e r m g o d t o d e s c r i b e t h e d e s i g n i n g f i r e a n db r e a t h t h a t p e r m e a t e s e v e r y t h i n g .

Th e Stoics mad e god o ut to be intelligent, a designing fire pu r tech-nikon) which methodically proceeds towards the creation o f the w orld,and encom passes all the seminal principles according to which every-thing com es about according to fate, and a breath pneuma) pervadingthe w hole world, which takes on different names owing to the alter-ations o f the m atter throu gh wh ich it passes. (A~fius, Placita 1.7.33 =LS 46A)

D e s i g n i n g f u -e i s d i s t in g u i s h e d f r o m t h e p h e n o m e n o n w e o r d i n a r il y c a l l f h ebeca use t he l a t te r cons um es fue l , t r ans fo rm ing i t i n to f l u e , w h i l e t he l a t t e rcause s t he g ro w th and p rese rv a t i on o f tha t i n wh ich i t ex i s ts (S tobaeus 1 .213,15 -2 1= LS 46D ) . Thu s des ign ing f i r e is a theo re t i ca l pos i t t ha t i s s o m e w h a tl ike the e l e m e n t F tre . T h e c o n n e c t i o n b e t w e e n d e s i g n i n g f i r e a n d b r e a t h o rp n e u m a i s no t easy t o a sce r t a in . Th e l a t te r is cons t i t u t ed by a b l end o r mix -t u r e o f h e a t a n d c o ld . ~2 G i v e n t h a t b o t h a r e r e f e re n t s o f t h e t e r m g o d , w em i g h t s u p p o s e t h a t th e h e a t in p n e u m a i s s o m e h o w a s s o c i a te d w i t h d e s i g n -i n g fh -e , t h o u g h n o t e x t s a y s e x a c t l y th i s. W h a t e v e r t h e r e l a t io n b e t w e e n t h eh e a t i n p n e u r n a an d t he des ign ing f i r e , t he cons t i t u t en t s o f p n e u m a a re b l e n d -e d t h r o u g h a n d t h r o ug h . B l e n d i n g i s th e k i n d o f m i x t u r e th a t o c c u rs w h e n t h ei n g r e d i e n t m a t e r i a ls a r e b o t h p r e s e n t e v e r y w h e r e w i t h i n t h e b l e n d :

w hen certain substances a nd their qualifies are m utually co-extend-ed through and through, w ith the original substances and the ir qualit iesbeing preserved in such a m ixture; this kind of mixture he [sc. the StoicChrysippus] calls specifically b le n di n g ; . . . for the capaci ty to be sep-arated again fro m one another is a peculiarity o f blended substances,and this on ly occurs i f the y preserve their ow n natures in the m ixture.(Alexander Aphrodisias, On M ixture 216, 25-217 , 2 = L S 48C4)


5/31

STOIC PANTHEISM

T h e S t o ic s i ll u s tr a te t h e b l e n d i n g r e l a t i o n b y t a lk i n g a b o u t m i x t u r e s o f w i n ea n d w a t er , t h e f i r e i n a r e d - h o t p o k e r a n d t h e m i x t u r e o f s o u l a n d b o d y . T h i sm a k e s i t c l e a r t h a t b l e n d i n g i n v o l v e s t h e p r e s e n c e o f bodies in t h e s a m ep lace .

A t leas t on e sou rc e r epo r t s t ha t god - i n h i s gu i se a s ac t ive p r i nc ip l e - i sb l e n d e d w i t h t h e p a s s i v e p r in c i p l e o r m a t te r :

The y [ the Stoics] say that go d is mixed memichthai)w ith matter, per-vading all o f i t and so shaping it , structuring it , and m aking it into theworld. (Alexander Aphrodisias, On Mixture225, 1-2 = L S 46H)I t is i m p o r t a n t t o a p p r e c i a t e t h a t t h o u g h t h e a c t i v e p ri n c ip l e p l a y s t h e r o l e o ft h e s o u l o f t h e c o s m o s , i t is n o t i t s e l f l ik e o u r p o s t - C a r t e s i a n c o n c e p t i o n o fsou l . The ac t i ve p r i nc ip l e , l i ke mat t e r , i s corporeal. 13 Thus the r e l a t i o nb e t w e e n t h e a c t iv e a n d p a s s i v e p r in c i p l e s w i t h i n th e c o s m o s i s s u p p o s e d l yl ik e t h a t b e t w e e n t h e b l e n d e d w i n e a n d w a t e r in L S 4 8 C .

T h e t e x ts c o n s i d e r e d s o f a r s h o w th e S t o ic s u s i n g t h e t e r m g o d t or e f e r to s e v e r a l t h in g s : a ) t h e w h o l e c o s m o s ( 4 4 F ); b ) t h e a c t i v e p r i n c ip l e( 4 4 B ) ; c ) i n t e l li g e n t d e s i g n i n g f i r e ( 4 6 A 1 ) a n d d ) b r e a t h o r pneuma( 4 6 A 2 ) . T h e l a s t t h r e e a r e p r o b a b l y s o m e h o w r e l a t e d s in c e t h e d e s i g n i n gf i r e a n d pneuma s e e m t o d e n o t e v a r i o u s m o d e s o f t h e a c t i v e p r i n c i p l e sa c t iv i ty . H o w e v e r , o u r s u r v i v i n g t e x t s a n d t e s t i m o n i a d o n o t p a i n t a v e r yc l e a r p i c t u re o f t h e e x a c t r e l a ti o n s b e t w e e n g o d qua a c t i v e p r i n i c i p le , t h ed e s i g n i n g f i re , t h e e l e m e n t f i re , a n d w h a t e v e r t h e h e a t i n pneuma m i g h tbe . ~4 T he re should b e a g e n e t i c a c c o u n t t h a t t e a s e s t h e m a p a r t , s i n c e t h ee a r l y S t o ic s h e l d a t h e o r y o f e t e r n a l r e c u r r e n c e a c c o r d i n g t o w h i c h t h es a m e s t o ry o f th e w o r l d p la y s i t se l f o u t b e t w e e n p u n c t u a t i o n s o f t o t a l c o s-m i c c o n f l a g r a t i o n . 15 B u t o u r t e x ts a r e n o t p a r t i c u l a r ly h e l p f u l o n t h i ssub j ec t .

God, intell igence (nous), fate and Zeus are all one, and many othernames are appl ied to him. In the beginning all by h im self he turn ed theentire substance throug h air into water. Just as the sperm is envelopedin the sem inal fluid, so god, w ho is th e seminal principle o f the w orld,stays beh ind as suc h in the moisture, m aking matter serviceable to him -se lf for the successive stages o f creation. (D L VII.135-6 = L S 46B)T h o u g h t h is t e x t d o e s n o t c l a r i f y t h e r e l a ti o n s b e t w e e n t h e v a r i o u s s e n s e s o fg o d d e l i n e a t e d so f a r, i t d o e s i n t r o d u c e a f u r t h e r e q u a t i o n o f g o d w i t h Fa t e.A s n o t e d , t h e S t o i c s a re c a u s a l d e t e r m i n i s ts w h o e m b r a c e a d o c t r i n e o f e te r -n a l r e c u r re n c e . T h e y c a l l t h e c h a i n o f c a u s e s a n d e f f e c ts F a t e


6/31

DIRK B LTZLY

By ' fa te ' I m e a n . . , an ordering and sequences of causes and effect s .9 . . Nothing has happened which was not going to be, and likewisenothing is going to be of which nature does not now contain causesworking to bring that ve ry thing about. This makes it intelligible thatfate should be, no t the 'f ate ' of superstition, but that of physics, an ever-lasting cause o f things - w hy past things happened, wh y present thingsare now happening, and why future things will be. (Cicero, On Div-ination 1.125-6 = L S 55L)

S t o b a e u s t e l ls u s t h a t t h e t h i r d h e a d o f th e S t o a, C h r y s i p p u s , i d e n t i f i e d t h eb r e a t h o r p n e u m a w i t h t h e s u b s t a n c e ousia) o f f a te Anthology 1.79 .1 = L S5 5 M ) . C i c e r o t e l ls u s t h a t C h r y s i p p u s a l so s p o k e o f g o d a s ' t h e f o r c e o f f a t efatelem vim) a n d t h e n e c e s s i t y o f f u t u r e e v e n t s ' On the na ture o f the gods1 .3 9 = L S 5 4 B ) . T h e o r d e r o f t h e c o s m o s i s t h is c h a i n o f c a u s e s a n d e f f e c t st h a t is w o r k e d o u t th r o u g h t h e p r o x i m a t e a g e n c y o f in t e l li g e n t d e s i g n i n g f i r ean d b rea th .

S u m m i n g u p t h e n , t h e S t o ic s u s e t h e t e r m ' g o d ' t o re f e r t o th e c o s m o s a sa w h o l e a n d r e g a r d i t a s a s i n g l e , b i o l o g i c a l in d i v id u a l . B u t t h e y a l s o u s e t h et e r m t o r e f e r to t h e m e a n s b y w h i c h g o d e n a c t s t h e l i fe o f th e c o s m o s 9 T h e s em a n i f e s t a t io n s o f g o d ' s c r e a t iv e a c t i v i t y w i t h i n t h e c o s m o s a r e d e s c r i b e d a st h e a c t i v e p r i n c i p l e , d e s i g n i n g f i r e , a n d pneum a . T h e s e c o m p l e t e l y i n t e r -p e n e t r a t e t h e c o s m o s , s o t h a t g o d i n th e s e g u i s e s is p r e s e n t e v e r y w h e r e . T h ei d e n t i f i c a t io n o f g o d w i t h f a t e - t h e s e q u e n c e o f c a u s e s a n d e f f e c t s t h a t c o n -s ti tu t e t h e h i s t o r y o f t h e w o r l d f r o m c o n f l a g r a t i o n t o c o n f l a g r a t i o n -h i g h l i g h t s t h e f a c t th a t th e w o r l d - o r d e r p r o d u c e d b y g o d ' s a c t io n u p o n h i m -se l f is pe r fec t l y r a t i ona l .

I t h i n k a n y o n e w h o h o l d s s u c h a t h e o r y a b o u t g o d i s r i g h t l y d e s c r i b e d a sa p a n t h e i st . T h e U n i t y T h e s i s i s n o t i m p l a u s i b l y t h o u g h t to b e s a t i s f ie d i nv i r tu e o f th e f a c t t h a t t h e w h o l e c o s m o s i s a l le g e d t o b e a s i n g le b i o l o g i c a li n d i v i d u a l w h i c h i s a li v e , s e lf - c r e at iv e a n d i m m o r t a l . T h e I d e o l o g i c a l T h e s i sm i g h t b e t h o u g h t t o b e s a t i s f ie d b e c a u s e o f t h e q u a l i ti e s o f t h is i n d i v i d u a l .T o s e e t h a t t h is i s s o , c o n t r a s t t h e S t o i c p i c u t u r e w i t h t h e a r g u m e n t f o r t h ed i v i n i t y o f t h e m e r e o l o g i c a l s u m o f a l l t h i n g s . T h e l a t t e r i s u n c o n v i n c i n gb e c a u s e t h e r e i s , a s i t w e r e , n o i n t e rn a l c o n n e c t i o n b e t w e e n H a w k i n g ' s i n te l -l ig e n c e a n d t h e p o w e r o f n u c l e a r w e a p o n s - t h e se p o w e r s a r e h a d b y t h ea g g r e g a t e s i m p l y i n v ir t u e o f it s p a r ts . B u t o n t h e S t o ic v i e w , t h e w o r l d i s n om e r e a g g r e g a t e a n d t h e p o w e r s e x h i b i t e d b y v a r i o u s p a r ts o f it a re t o b eexplained u l t i m a t e l y b y r e f e r e n c e t o g o d ' s a c t i v it y : t h e w o r l d - a n d s o g o d -i s t h e o r d e r o f c a u s e s a n d e f f e c t s w h i c h m a k e i t u p .

B u t i s g o d all there i s f o r a S t o i c ? O r w o u l d i t b e m o r e a c c u r a t e t od e s c r i b e t h e i r v i e w aspanentheis t ic? - t ha t i s , the t hes i s t ha t t he un ive r se i sp a rt , b u t n o t th e w h o l e o f G o d J 6


7/31

STOIC PANTHEISM

In a s ense , the re a r e o the r th ings in the S to ic on to log y apar t f rom thecosm os . There i s the in f in i te ex t r a -cosmic vo id in wh ich i t i s s i tua ted . Bu tbecause empty space can ne i the r ac t no r undergo any th ing , the S to ics s aytha t i t does no t exist, b u t r a t h e r m e r e l y subsists huphistasthaO. A c c o r d i n gto the S to ics, on ly bod ies ex i st o r a re - hence the s ca re -quo tes a round thecopu la in the p rev ious s en tences . S imi la r r emarks a pp ly to lekta. Rough ly ,these are ent i t ies l ike propos i t ions . Time is another subs is tent according tothe S to ics . Al l these i tems , whether ex is tent or subs is tent , a re nonethelesspar t icu lars . As the S to ics say , each is a som ething ( t/ ). W ha t w e m ay no t say ,however , i s tha t the re / s some th ing o the r than god , fo r acco rd ing to them the' some th ings ' o the r than go d f a il to be.

I t w i l l be ob jec ted tha t th is i s spec ia l p lead ing . Ph i losopher s w ho a t t emptto d raw a d i s tinc t ion be tw een ex i s t ence and subs i s t ence a re genera l ly mis -gu ided . W e shou ld r egard the S to ics a s mean ing b y the ir u se o f ' s om eth ing 'w h a t w e m e a n b y ' e x i s te n t '. S o t h o u g h t h e S t o i c s m i g h t a v o i d t h e sentence'There a re be ings o the r than g od ' , t hey can ' t avo id t he f ac t tha t th ings o therthan god ex i s t on the i r theory . Th ey jus t s ay th is in a m is lead ing way .

In r ep ly to th is , l e t me t ry a b o ld m ove . I sugges t tha t panen the i sm in thesense de f ined b y For res t shou ld no t be r egarded as incons is t en t w i th pan the -i sm. Cons ide r a pos s ib le wor ld in wh ich ju s t the S to ic cosm os ex i st s , andn o n e o f t h e lekta or o the r subs is tents o f thei r theory . Th is i s a w or ld in w hichw e wo u ld a l l s ay pan the i sm i s true . N ow, imag ine a wo r ld ju s t l ike th i s one ,exc ept that in i t nu m be rs exis t. Is this world, un like the f 'u-st , not a wo r ld inwhich p an the i sm i s t rue? B efo re yo u answer, cons ide r th is . G iven the k indso f th ings numbe rs a r e w id e ly be l i eved to be - neces sa ry ex i s t en ts - the f 'u 's tw o r l d y o u s u p p o s e d y o u i m a g i n ed really w as the second w or ld a l l the t ime .I th ink that the universa l quani t i f ier in the Uni ty requ ireme nt i s rea l ly impl ic-i t ly r e st r ic t ed in s cope . W hen we s ay tha t pan the i sm requ i r es tha t all thingsform a uni ty , we do no t have in m ind abs t rac t objects . Rather, w e have in mindthe k inds o f th ings that w e sup pos e cons t i tu te ou r phys ical universe . This i swh y I th ink tha t ' pan the i sm ' co r r ec t ly desc r ibes the v iew tha t P la to has in theT[maeus wh en he s ays tha t the s ens ib le wor ld i s i t s e l f a god . Pan the i sm i s con-s i st en t w i th the o dd P la ton ic Form o r num ber tha t i s no t s t r ic t ly a pa r t o f god .

Bu t the re i s ano the r g roun d on w h ich i t migh t be c la im ed tha t the S to icswere mere ly panen thei s ts , no t pan the is t s. W e migh t m ean b y the fo rm er t e rmthe v iew tha t the un ive r se i s god , bu t tha t the re a r e th ings o the r than godwithin the universe. The seco nd o f the two p r inc ip les - m a t t e r - looks as i fi t is some th ing o the r than god . S ince mat te r i s tha t w h ich pas s ive ly under -goes e f f ec t s th rough the ag enc y o f god , m a t te r i s a body . (B od y fo r the S to icsi s de f ined as tha t wh ich ac t s o r undergoes . ) I f it is a bo dy n um er ica l ly d i s -t inc t f rom god , then the re i s someth ing w i th in the cosmos tha t i s no t god .


8/31

1 DIRK BALTZLY

That m a t te r is such a b od y i s s t rong ly sugges ted by the quo te f rom A lexan-d e r A p h r o d is i a s a b o v e On Mixture 225 , 1 -2 = L S 46H ) in wh ich i t i s s a idtha t god i s eve ryw here mixed w i th mat te r. The S to ic theo ry o f b lend ingd e s c r i b e s b l e n d s a s c a s e s w h e r e t w o b o d i e s a r e e v e r y w h e r e e x t e n d e dth rough an d th rough (A lexander Aphrod i s i a s, On Mixture 2 1 6 , 2 5 - 2 1 7 , 2 =LS 48CA). There fo re , m a t t e r i s a bo dy d i f fe ren t f rom go d and the S to ics a r epanen theis ts ra ther than p antheis ts .

I r ep ly tha t we sh ou ld r e jec t the v iew tha t ma t t e r and go d a re two num er -i ca l ly d i st inct bod ies . Ra the r, ma t t e r and go d a re two w ays o f th ink ing abo u to n e a n d t h e s a m e b o d y 17 That th i s is so can be a rgued in a num ber o f ways .F ir st, m a t t e r i s no t a b od y numer ica l ly d i st inc t f rom god bec ause m at te r quam at te r has no qua l i ti e s (DL V I I . 134 = LS 44B) . B u t fo r the S to ics, non- iden-t i ty i s gro und ed in qual i ta t ive d i f ference . I s Th erefore qual i ty less m at tercanno t be d i s tinc t f rom god . Second , ma t te r is no t sub jec t to genera t ion o rdes t ruc t ion (Ca lc id ius 292 = L S 44D) . Bu t a t the conf lag ra t ion , the r easono r c o m m a n d i n g f a c u l t y hggernonikon) of god i s desc r ibed as ex i s t inga l o n e ) 9 M a t t e r m u s t n o n e t h e l e ss b e p r e s en t e v e n w h e n o n l y th e c o m m a n d -ing f acu l ty o f god ex i s t s a lone , e l s e i t wo u ld have to be g enera ted in the nex twor ld -cyc le . The conc lus ion m us t the re fo re be tha t god and m at te r a r e m ere -ly d i ff e ren t a spec t s o f one and the s am e body . F ina lly, the pas sage tha timpl ies tha t god and m at te r fo rm a mix tu re in wh ich two (d i f f e ren t ) bod iesa re b lended th rough a nd th rough (A lexander , On Mixture 216 , 25 IT) sho uldbe d i s coun ted . A lexander i s an Ar i s to te l i an c r i t i c o f S to ic i sm who a rguestha t even the mix tu re o f w ine and w a te r - in te rp re ted as the S to ics in te rp re ti t - i s incoheren t . I f it can be sho wn tha t the absu rd i ty invo lved in the c o -loca t ion o f two bo d ies i s g loba l , and no t m ere ly loca l , fo r the S to ics , thenth is s e rv es A lexander s po lem ic pu rp oses we ll .

I conc lude tha t the S to ic v iew shou ld be c las s i f i ed as a fo rm o f pan the -i sm. The cosm os fo rms a s ing le ind iv idual . Th i s is god . The t e rm go d i sa l so used to r e f e r to the means by wh ich th i s g loba l ind iv idua l ac t s uponi t s e l f in b ring ing abou t i ts ow n per iod ic h i s to ry -cyc les . God in th is s ense i sto be ident i f ied wi th the ac t ive pr incip le , pneuma a n d t h e c h a i n o f c a u s e sand e f f ec t s tha t is te rm ed f a te .

I I S t o i c P a n t h e i s m I n v o l v e s a P e r s o n a l G o d

A. The Historical EvidenceThe S to ics t rea t god as a pe r son . Th i s i s ju s t w ha t we shou ld e xpec t g ivenwh a t was s a id abou t god in DL VI I . 147. God i s a r a tiona l an imal - j u s t l ike


9/31

STOIC PANTHEISM

m e - b u t i n a d d i ti o n h e i s i m m o r t a l a n d b l es s ed . I f I a m a p e r s o n , h o w c o u l dg o d b e a n y l e ss a p e r so n 7 L i k e t h e o t h e r p e r s o n s w i t h w h o m w e a re a c q u a in t -e d , t h e S t o i c g o d i s a s o u l - b o d y c o m p o s i t e . T h e e n t i r e w o r l d i s g o d s b o d y .

Th e Stoics h old the view that the universe is a bo dy and think that thissens ib le cosm os is a god . . . . And they de f ine god to be mind (nous)in as m uch as he is the soul o f the wh ole existing vau lt of heaven andearth. (J oh n Damascene, On heresies 7 = SV F II .1026) 2~[The Stoics say] that god is the m ind o f the world, and that the w orldis the b od y of god . (Lactantius, Divine Ins t itutes VII.3 = SV F II . 1041)I s u s p e c t t h a t s o m e p a n t h e i s t s r e s i s t t h e i d e a t h a t g o d i s a p e r s o n b e c a u s et h e y t h i n k t h a t a d i v i n e b e i n g t h a t c o n s t i t u t e d t h e e n t i r e c o s m o s c o u l d n o tp o s s i b l y b e a s u b j e c t o f e x p e r i e n c e o r h av e a u n i f i e d c e n t r e o f c o n s c i o u s -n e s s . T h e S t o i c s d i s a g r e e t h a t th e c o s m o s i s n o t a t h i n k er . A t l e a s t d u r i n g t h ec o n f l a g r a t i o n w h e n a l l t h i n g s b e c o m e t h e d i v i n e d e s i g n i n g f i r e , g o d h a sthough t s .

W hat kind o f l i fe wil l a wise m an have if he is abandon ed by his f r iendsand hu r led into a pr ison o r isolated in som e fore ign coun try or detainedon a long vo yage or cast out onto a de ser t shore? I t wil l be l ike the l i feo f Zeus, a t the t im e a t which the w orld is dissolved and the gods havebeen blended together into one, when nature comes to a s top for awhile ; he rep oses in him self given over to his thoughts . Th e wise m an sbeh avio ur is jus t like this. (Seneca, Letters IX.16 - - LS 4 60 )B u t t h o u g h g o d i s t h e s o u l a n d m i n d o f t h e w o r ld , h e i s n o t m a n i f e s t e dt h r o u g h o u t h i s b o d y i n e x a c t ly th e s a m e w a y.

This view [ that the soul is mixed w ith everything] perhaps agrees withthat o f Zen o wh en he lays i t dow n that god is man ifest throug h a ll sub-stance, at one p lace as intellect, at ano ther as soul, at ano ther as nature,and elsewhere as w hat hold s things toge ther (hexis). (Themistius, Epit-om e o f A r is to t le s D e A n i m a 35, 33 = SVF I. 158)T h e s e f o u r c a te g o r i e s - i n t el l ec t , s o u l , n a t u r e a n d he x i s - a r e t he f o u r g r a -d a t io n s o f b r e a th o r p n e u m a d i s t i n g u i s h e d b y t h e S t o i c s . T h e f i r s t i s t h eg r a d e o f p n e u m a t ha t i s f oun d in r a t i ona l t h ings . S ou l i s t he p n e u m a i n s e n -t i e n t c r e a tu r e s , n a t u r e t h a t i n l i v i n g b u t n o n - s e n t i e n t c r e a tu r e s . H e x / s i s w h a tm a k e s a n i n a n i m a t e t h i n g a n o b j e c t o f t h e k i n d t h a t i t i s. T h e v a r i o u s k i n d so f p n e u m a d i f fe r f r o m o n e a n o t h e r q u a li ta t iv e l y in v i r t u e o f t h e d e g r e e o fi n n e r t e n s i o n ( t onos ) p r e s e n t i n t h e h o t a n d c o l d e l e m e n t s f r o m w h i c h p n e u -m a i s b l e n d e d . T h e s e g r a d a t io n s o f p n e u m a a ls o e x p l a i n th e p l u r al r e f e r e n c et o g o d s i n t h e p r e v io u s p a s s ag e . T h e S t o ic s c l a i m t h a t t h e h e a v e n l y b o d i e s


10/31

2 D I R K B A L T Z L Y

a re g o d s o n t h e g r o u n d t h a t th e y m u s t b e c o m p o s e d o f t h e d iv i n e d e s ig n i n gfire.S o f a r I h a v e a r g u e d t h a t g o d f o r t h e S t o i c s m u s t b e a p e r s o n s i n c e h e i sa b o d y w i t h a m i n d j u s t l i k e m e . I s i t a b s u r d t o t h i n k o f th e r e l a t io n s h i pb e t w e e n t h e w o r l d a n d g o d a s li k e t h e r e la t io n s h ip b e t w e e n m y s e l f a n d m yb o d y ? R e m e m b e r t h a t th e S t oi c s ha v e a m a t e ri a li s t c o n c e p t i o n o f a l l k in d so f s o u l - b o t h o u r s a n d t h a t o f g o d . T h u s i t m a k e s m o r e s e n s e , p e r h a p s , toc o m p a r e w h a t t h e y s a y a b o u t th e m i n d o r s o u l o f t h e w o r l d a n d i ts b o d y t ow h a t w e m o d e r n m a t e r ia l i st s m i g h t s a y a b o u t o u r s e l v e s a n d o u r b o d i e s . I t i sn o t o b v i o u s l y a b s u r d t o t h in k t h a t m y a g e n c y i s m a n i f e s te d i n d i f f e re n t w a y si n d i f fe r e n t p a r ts o f m y b o d y . I p e r f o r m s o m e a c t io n s b y m o v i n g d i f fe r e n tp a r ts o f m y b o d y i n d i f fe r e n t w a y s . T h e s e d i f fe r e n t w a y s c o r r e s p o n d t o t h ed i f f e r e n t g r a d a t i o n s o f p n e u m a f o u n d i n d i f f e r e n t p a r t s o f th e c o s m o s .

N o t o n l y is t h e S t o ic g o d a n i n d iv i d u a l w h o s e b o d y i s th a t o f th e c o s m o s ,t h e i r g o d i s a v i r t u o u s a g e n t . A c c o r d i n g t o t h e S t o ic s , g o d i s e n t i r e l y l a c k i n gi n an g e r. H e h a r m s n o o n e a n d i s a m i ld , c a l m , b e n e f i c e n t sa v i o r ( L a c t a n -t ius , On Div ine Anger ch . 5 = S VF I I . 1120) . Indeed , such i s t he mora lp e r f e c ti o n o f g o d t h a t e v e r y w r o n g a c t io n i s a n i n st a n ce o f i m p i e ty :

It is their view that every wro ng act is an impious act, Fo r to do some-thing against the wish o f the g od is proo f o f impiety. For the go ds havea natural af finity w ith virtue an d virtuous actions; an d they have a nat-ural relation o f alienation fro m vice and w hat results fro m it . No w sincea wrong action is doing something in accordance with vice, everyw ron g action is revealed as displeasing to the gods - that is, somethingimpious. With every wrong action, the worthless person does some-thing that is displeasing to the gods. (Arius D idym us, Epitome o f StoicEthics 1 k = SVF III.661)T h i s i m p r e s s i o n o f g o d a s p e r so n a l b e i n g i s f u r th e r r e in f o r c e d b y C l e a n t h e sl o n g e s t s u r v i v i n g f r a g m e n t , h i s Hym n to Zeus In the Hym n C l e a n t h e s a )a d d r e s s e s Z e u s a s a n a g e n t w h o i s r e s p o n s i b le f o r t h e f u n c t i o n i n g o f n a t u re ;b ) r e i n f o r c e s th e i d e n t i f ic a t i o n o f Z e u s w i t h F a t e - t h e s e r ie s o f c a u s e s a n de f f e c t s r u n n i n g t h r o u g h e a c h q u a l i ta t iv e l y id e n t i c a l c y c l e o f e t e r n a l r e c u r -r e n c e ; c ) e x e m p t s Z e u s f r o m r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r w h a t w i c k e d p e o p l e d ot h r o u g h t h e i r i g n o r a n c e ; d ) b e g s Z e u s t o r e d u c e h u m a n i g n o r a n c e a n d e )n o t e s th a t h u m a n s a l o n e a m o n g a l l t h e c o s m o s b e a r a r e s e m b l a n c e t o g o d(S tobaeus , Anthology 1 . 1 . 12 = LS 54 I ) . The c l a ims i n ( c ) and (d ) wi l l bee x a m i n e d m o r e c l o s e l y i n t h e n e x t s e c ti o n o n g o d s p r o v i d e n c e . T h e p o i n tt h a t n e e d s t o b e m a d e h e r e , h o w e v e r , i s t h a t C l e a n t h e s s e e m s t o s i n c e r e l yb e l i e v e th a t h is h y m n i s a d d r e s s e d t o a b e i n g t h a t i s a n a g e n t , a n d a m o r a l l yv i r t uous o ne a t t ha t .


11/31

STOIC PANTHEISM 3

B Can Pantheists Have a Personal God?C l e a n t h e s i d e n t i f i e s Z e u s w i t h f a t e , a n d f a t e in t u r n w i t h t h e c a u s a l o r d e r o ft h e c o s m o s , a n d g i v e n t h a t h e a d d r e s s e s Z e u s a s a p e r s o n , i t s e e m s t o m ec l e a r t h a t th e S t o ic s h e l d a f o r m o f p a n t h e i s m i n w h i c h g o d i s p e r s o n a l. T h i si s j u s t w h a t w e w o u l d e x p e c t g i v e n t h e i r c l a i m t h a t t h e e n t i re c o s m o s c o n -s t it u te s a s i n g l e r a ti o n a l l iv i n g b e i n g w h o i s i m m o r t a l , m o r a l l y p e r f e c t a n dhappy .

N o w , s o m e o n e m i g h t c o n c e d e t h e h i st o r ic a l p o i n t t h a t t h e S t o i c s h a d ac o n c e p t o f a p e r s o n a l g o d , b u t n o n e t h e l e s s i n s is t t h a t th e y w e r e s i m p l y c o n -f u s e d i n t h is r e s p e ct . P a n t h e i s m i s j u s t i n c o m p a t i b l e w i t h a p e r s o n a lc o n c e p t i o n o f g o d . I t h i n k th a t t h e S t o i c s a r e n o t c o n f u s e d - o r a t le a s t n o ts u b s t a n t ia l l y m o r e c o n f u s e d t h a n o t h e r t h e is t s. T h e i r i d e n t i f ic a t i o n o f Z e u sw i t h f a te - o r t h e w o r l d - o r d e r, o r t h e pneuma by m e a n s o f w h i c h t h e w o r ld -o r d e r i s b r o u g h t a b o u t - i n v o lv e s t h e r e i f i c a t i o n o f s o m e t h i n g th a t h a s ana r ra t i ve s t ruc tu re . P e r sons a nd t he i r thou gh t s have a s im i l a r na r ra t i ve s t ruc -t u re : w e s a y a n d d o n o w o n e t h i n g , n o w a n o t h er . I t m a k e s s e n s e t o ta l k a b o u tw h a t g o d , in t h e i r s e n s e , i s g o i n g t o d o a n d w h a t h e h a s d o n e .

I s t h is e n o u g h f o r a p e r s o n a l p a n t h e i s t ic g o d ? I t m i g h t b e o b j e c t e d t h a ta n y s e r i e s o f e v e n t s w i t h i n t h e h i s t o r y o f t h e w o r l d h a s a n a r r a t iv e s t r u c t u rew i t h i n w h i c h c a n s a y , T h i s h a p p e n s n e x t . Y e t n o s u c h s e r i e s o f e v e n t s isr i g h t l y d e s c r i b e d a s a p e r s o n . T h e r e f o r e t h e s u m t o t a l o f a l l t h e e v e n t s a n dt h e w o r l d t h a t t h e y c o n s t it u t e c a n n o t b e a p e r s o n . I t is r e q u i s it e f o r a p e r s o n a lg o d , th a t g o d h a v e a m e n t a l l i f e w i t h i n t e n t io n a l s ta t e s a n d t h e c a p a c i t y t om ak e dec i s i ons . 21

I t i s t r u e t h a t t h e S t o i c s u s e t h e w o r d g o d i n r e l a t i o n t o f a t e a n d t h ew o r l d - o r d e r a n d t h e s e m a y p l a u s i b ly b e i d e n t i f i e d w i t h a s e r ie s o f c a u s e s a n de f f e c t s o r t h e e v e n t s t h a t m a n i f e s t t h e s e c a u s a l r e l a t i o n s . S o i t m i g h t b et h o u g h t t h a t t h e y a r e v u l n e r a b l e to t h e o b j e c t i o n j u s t c o n s i d e r e d . B u t t h e ya l so d e s c r ib e t h e w o r l d a s g o d s b o d y a n d g o d a s th e m i n d o f t h e w o r ld .G i v e n t h e i r v i e w s a b o u t th e m i n d - b o d y r e la t io n , th i s i s s o m e t h i n g th a t t h e yc a n s a y i n f u l l s e r io u s n e s s . R e c a l l t h a t o n t h e S t o i c v i e w i s th a t t h e pneumat h a t in t e r p e n e t ra t e s m y b o d y a n d m a k e s m e a ra t i o n a l c r e a t u re i s o n e g r a d a -t i o n o f t h e pneuma t h a t i s i d e n t i f i e d w i t h g o d s p r o x i m a t e a c t i v it y i nc o n s t i t u ti n g t h e w o r l d . 22 T h i s m a t e r ia l s t u f f i s e v e r y w h e r e c o - l o c a t e d w i t hp a s s iv e , q u a l i ty - l e s s m a t t er . C e r t a i n l y w h e n i t i s c o n d e n s e d a n d p u r e a t th ec o n f l a g r a t i o n , g o d w i l l t h e n h a v e a u n i t a r y m e n t a l l i fe , j u s t a s S e n e c a s u g -g e s ts i n t h e p a s s a g e q u o t e d a b o v e .

D o e s i t m a k e s e n s e t o t a lk a b o u t a p e r s o n a l r e l a ti o n s h i p w i t h t h is p a n -t h e is t ic g o d ? I t m i g h t b e t h e c a s e t h a t e v e n i f th e S t o ic g o d i s li k e a p e r s o ni n s o m e w a y s , it is n o t p e r s o n a l i n t h e s e n s e t h a t w e c a n n o t h a v e a p e r s o n a l


12/31

4 DIRK BALTZLY

r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h i t . P a r t o f t h e w o r r y i s t h a t Z e u s o r F a t e m i g h t s t i l l b et h o u g h t to b e m o r e l ik e a b o o k t h a n a n a u t h o r , in s p i te o f m y a t t e m p t s t o e a s et h e s e w o r r i e s i n t h e p r e c e d i n g p a r a g r a p h : F a t e c o n t a i n s o r d e t e r m i n e s a nar-rative o f e v e n t s , b u t i t i s n t i t s e l f a narrator. Thus s o m e o n e m i g h t s ay , w eca nno t hav e a pe r son a l r e l a ti onsh ip w i th it.

I t h i n k th i s l i n e o f t h o u g h t m a y b e m i s ta k e n . C o n s i d e r y o u r fa v o u r i ten o v e l . T h e r e i s a s e n s e i n w h i c h y o u h a v e a p e r s o n a l r e l a t io n s h i p w i t h i t: y o ur e a d i t f ir s t a t a f o r m a t i v e t i m e i n y o u r li fe ; it m a d e y o u r e f l e c t o n y o u r f a i le dm a r r i a g e ; i t i s s o m e t h i n g t h a t y o u r e a d a g a i n w h e n y o u n e e d t o f e e l b e t te ra b o u t lo v e , a n d s o o n . I t m i g h t b e o b j e c t e d t h a t w h a t I a m c a l l in g a p e r s o n -a l r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h t h e book i s a c t u a l l y a m e d i a t e d r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h t h eauthor. B u t t h i s c a n t b e r i g h t , f o r y o u r r e la t i o n s h ip w i t h t h e b o o k w o u l d s t il ls u r v i v e e v e n i f y o u d i s c o v e r e d th a t t h e r e w a s n o a u t ho r . S u p p o s e t h a t Catch-er in the Rye w a s r e a l l y t h e r e s u l t o f a r a t h e r e x t r a o r d i n a r il y i m p r o b a b l ee x p l o s i o n i n t h e t y p e - s e t t i n g r o o m . I th i n k t h a t y o u c o u l d n o t r e f r a i n f r o mt a k i n g t h e i n t e n t io n a l s t a n c e t o w a r d t h e n o v e l i n s p i t e o f t h i s k n o w l e d g e -y o u r r e l a t io n s h i p i s w i t h t h e b o o k , n o t i ts a u t h or . A g a i n , i t m i g h t b e o b j e c t-e d t h a t y o u r p e r s o n a l r e l a t i o n s h i p i s w i t h characters i n t h e b o o k , n o t t h eb o o k i t se l f. T h i s m a y b e t r u e t o o - s o m e t i m e s w e d o h a v e s u c h p e r s o n a l r e la -t i o n s h i p s w i t h f i c t i o n a l c h a ra c t e rs . B u t t h is d o e s n o t s h o w t h a t w e d o n t a l s oh a v e s i m i l a r re l a t io n s w i t h n a r r a t iv e s r a t h e r t h a n c h a r a c te r s . B u t e v e n i f w ew e r e t o c o n c e d e t h is p o i n t, a g o o d S t o ic w o u l d s a y t h a t th e v a r i o u s n a t u r a lf o r c e s d e i f i e d i n t h e i r p a n t h e o n a r e l i k e c h a r a c te r s i n a n o v e l . H e r a , t h e p e r -s o n i f i c a t i o n o f t h e a ir , p l a y s a c e r t a i n r o l e i n t h e w o r l d s n a r r a ti v e , j u s t l ik eH o l d e n C a u l f i e l d d o e s i n S a l i n g e r s n a r ra t iv e .

W h a t a b o u t o t h e r a s p e ct s o f t h e n o t i o n o f a p e r so n a l r e l a ti o n sh i p ? C a nw e m a k e s e n se o f th e i d e a t h a t a S t o i c p an t h e is t ic g o d c a r e s f o r e a c h o f u s ?C a n w e m a k e s e n s e o f t h e i d e a th a t o n e m i g h t p r a y t o i t, a s C l e a n th e s d o e s ,a n d a s k i t t o s a v e u s f r o m o u r o w n i g n o r a n c e ? W i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e l a st q u e s -t io n , i t s e e m s t o m e t h a t th e p a n t h e i s t f a c e s n o g r e a t e r d i f f i c u l t y t h a n a n yt r a d it io n a l t h e i s t w h o b e l i e v e s i n G o d s i m m u t a b i li ty . T h e s e c o n d q u e s t i o n i so n e t h a t w i l l b e a d d r e s s e d i n th e n e x t s e c t i o n o n p a n t h e i s t i c p ro v i d e n c e . Iw i l l a r g u e t h a t t h e S t o ic s c a n s ay , c o n s i s t e n t l y w i t h t h e i r t h e o r y o f v a lu e , t h a tt h e w o r l d d o e s a l l t h a t it c a n i n o r d e r t o e n a b l e a h a p p y l if e f o r e a c h o f u s .

l l I S t o ic P a n t h e i s m a n d P r o v i d en c e

T h e S t o i c s ar e a d a m a n t t h a t g o d e x e r c i se s d i v i n e p r o v i d e n c e . I n f a c t , t h e yth ink t ha t i t i s a conce p tua l t ru th abo u t go d t ha t he i s p rov iden t .


13/31

S T O I C P A N T H E I S M 5

Moreover, they themselves [the Stoics] are unceasingly busy cryingw oe against Epicurus fo r ruining th e preconception prolgpsis) of t hegods b y abolishing providence. For, they say, god is preconceived andthou ght of not on ly as immo rtal and blessed bu t also as benevolent, car-ing a nd beneficent. (Plutarch, On common conceptions 1075E = L S54K)

Moreover , god exerc i s es p rov idence i n r e l a t i on t o r a t i ona l c rea tu res : eve ry -t h i n g i n th e w o r l d i s f o r t hem:

Suppose someone asks for whose sake this vast edific e has been con-structed. For the trees and plants, which although not sentient aresustained b y nature? No , tha t is absurd. For the animals? Not, i t is nom ore plausible that the gods should have don e all this work for the sakeo f dum b, ignorant animals. Then for wh ose sake will anyone say thatthe w orld was created? Presumably for those animate creatures that usereason: that is, for gods and men. N othing is better than them, for rea-son is the suprem e gift. Thus it becomes credible tha t i t was f or the sakeo f gods and m en that the world a nd everything in i t was made. (Cicero,N D 11.133 = LS 54N )S o , f a r f r o m b e i n g c o n g e n i a l t o a d e e p e c o l o g y e t h i c th a t l o c a te s d i v i n i ty a n dt h u s v a l u e i n n a t u r e , S t o i c p a n t h e i s m i s b r e a t h - t a k i n g l y a n t h r o p o c e n t r i c .T h i s h a s n o t p r e v e n t e d s o m e m o d e r n i n te r p re t er s f r o m t r y i n g t o r e c ru i t t h e mt o t h e g r e e n c a m p , b u t i t w o n t w o r k . 23

A m o d e r n r e a d e r m i g h t b e w i l li n g to c o n c e d e t h e h i s to r i c a l p o i n t th a ts o m e p a n t h e i s t s d i d s u p p o s e t h a t g o d e x e r c i s e s a p r o v i d e n c e t a i l o r e d t oh u m a n s . A s J o h n B i g e l o w s a y s, T h e r e i s a lm o s t n o v i e w s o c r a z y t h a t y o uc a n t f i n d s o m e G r e e k p h i lo s o p h e r w h o h e l d i t. A n d w e m i g h t th i n k th a tp rov ide n t i a l pan th e i sm i s thoro~agh ly c razy . W hi l e I d on t be l i eve i n t h i sv i ew, I t h ink t ha t t he S to i cs a re ac tua l l y in a be t t e r p o s i t i o n t o d e f e n d t h e i d e ao f a p r o v i d e n t ia l p a n t h e i s ti c g o d t h a n m o s t o t h e r t h e i st s a re . T h e k e y l ie s i nt h e i r th e o r y o f v a lu e .

A c c o r d i n g t o t h e S t o ic s , t h e r e i s o n l y o n e t h i n g t h a t i s g e n u i n e l y g o o d :m ora l v i r t ue . Th ere i s on ly one t h mgd laat is ge nu ine ly bad : m ora l v i ce . O therth ings such as he a l t h o r w ea l t h a re , s t ri c t l y speak ing , i nd i f fe ren t . W e d i s t in -g u i s h a m o n g t h e i n d i f f e r e n t t h i n g s a n d c a l l s o m e o f t h e i n d i f fe r e n t sp r e f e r r e d b e c a u s e t h e y k e e p u s a l i ve a n d i n a n a tu r a l s ta t e o f f u n c t i o n in g .

U n l i k e t h e C y n i c s w h o t h o u g h t t h a t th e r e w a s n o w a y o f ra t io n a l ly d e c id i n ga m o n g i n d i f f e r e n t t h i n g s , t h e S t o ic s w i l l s a y t h a t i t i s r a t i o n a l f o r m e t o p r e -J b r w e a l t h t o p o v e r t y u n d e r m o s t c i r c u m s t a n c e s . I t w o u l d , o f c o u r s e , b e am i s t a k e to r e g a r d m y a c h i e v i n g w e a l t h a s a g o o d t h i n g .


14/31

16 DI RK BALTZLYT h e a r g u m e n t t h e S t o i c s p r e s e n t f o r t h is v i e w i s f a m i l i a r f r o m a r a t h e r

d i f fe r e n t c o n t e x t. C o m p a r e :T h e y [ t h e S t o i c s ] s a y t h a t s o m e e x i s t i n g th i n g s a r e g o o d , o t h e r s a r e b a d ,a n d o t h e r s a r e n e i t h e r o f t h e s e . T h e v i r t u e s - p r u d e n c e , ju s t i c e , c o u r a g e ,m o d e r a t i o n a n d t h e re s t - a r e g o o d . T h e o p p o s i t e s o f t h e s e - f o o l is h -n e s s , i n j u s ti c e a n d t h e r e s t - a r e b a d . E v e r y t h i n g e l s e w h i c h n e i t h e rh a r m s n o r b e n e f i t s i s n e i t h e r o f th e s e : f o r i n s ta n c e , l i f e , h e a l t h , p l e a s -u r e , b e a u t y , s tr e n g t h , w e a l t h , r e p u t a t io n , n o b l e b i r th , a n d t h e i r o p p o s i t e s. . . . F o r j u s t a s h e a t i n g , n o t ch i l li n g , is t h e p e c u l i a r c h a r a c t e r is t i c o fw h a t i s h o t , s o to o b e n e f i t i n g , n o t h a r m i n g , i s t h e p e c u l i a r c h a r a c te r i s -t i c o f w h a t i s g o o d . B u t w e a l t h a n d h e a l th n o m o r e d o b e n e f i t t h a n t h e yh a r m . T h e r e f o r e w e a l t h a n d h e a l t h a r e n o t s o m e t h i n g g o o d . F u r t h e r -m o r e t h e y s a y : t h a t w h i c h c a n b e u s e d w e l l o r b a d l y i s n o t s o m e t h i n gg o o d . B u t w e a lt h o r h e a lt h c a n b e u s e d w e l l o r b a d ly . ( D i o g e n e s L a e r -t iu s V I I . 1 0 1 - 3 = L S 5 8 A )

w i t hT h e r e i s n o p o s s i b i l it y o f t h i n k i n g o f a n y t h i n g a t a ll in t h e w o r l d , o re v e n o u t o f it , w h i c h c a n b e r e g a r d e d a s g o o d w i t h o u t q u a l i fi c a ti o n ,e x c e p t a good will9 n t e ll ig e n c e , w i t, j u d g e m e n t , a n d w h a t e v e r ta l e n tso f t h e m i n d o n e m i g h t w a n t t o n a m e a r e d o u b t le s s in m a n y r e s p e ct sg o o d a n d d e s i r ab l e , a s a re s u c h q u a l it ie s o f t e m p e r a m e n t a s c o u r a g e ,r e s o lu t i o n , p e r s ev e r a n c e . B u t t h e y c a n a l s o b e c o m e e x t r e m e l y b a d a n dh a r m f u l i f t h e w i l l, w h i c h i s to m a k e u s e o f t h e s e g i R s o f n a t u re a n dw h i c h i n i t s s p e c i a l c o n s t i t u t i o n i s c a l l e d c h a r a c t e r , i s n o t g o o d . T h es a m e h o l d s w i t h th e g i f ts o f f o r tu n e ; p o w e r , r ic h e s , h o n o u r , e v e n h e a l th. . . ( K a n t , Groundwork3 9 3 )

T h e r e a r e o f c o u r s e s o m e i m p o r t a n t d i f fe r e n c es . K a n t s e e m s to im a g i n e t h a tw h a t t h e S t o i c s w o u l d r e g a r d a s a v i r tu e - c o u r a g e - c o u l d b e u s e d b a d ly .T h e S t o ic s , h o w e v e r , a re l ik e S o c r a t e s a n d h o l d a s t ro n g u n i t y o f t h e v i r t u e st h e si s : a n a g e n t w h o i s b o l d i n th e p u r s u i t o f e v i l e n d s i s n o t r e a l l y c o u r a -g e o u s - j u s t b o l d a n d i g n o r a n t o f t h e g o o d .

T h e m o r e i m p o r t a n t d i f fe r e n c e i s t h a t t h e S t o i c s , u n l ik e K a n t , a r e eudai-monists ( t h o u g h p e r h a p s K a n t h i m s e l f r e g a r d e d t h e m m o r e a sp e r f ec t io n i s t s ) . T h e y t h i n k t h a t t h e d o i n g o r h a v i n g o f th a t w h i c h i s g e n u i n e l yg o o d i s s u f f i c i e n t f o r h a p p i n e s s o r w e l l -b e i n g . K a n t s u p p o s e s t h a t h a p p i n e s si s s o m e t h i n g a d d i t i o n a l a n d o n l y c o n t in g e n t l y c o n n e c t e d w i t h t h e g o o d w i l l.T h e p a s s a g e f r o m K a n t q u o t e d a b o v e c o n t i n u e s b y e n u m e r a t i n g h a p p i n e s sa s a m o n g t h e g o o d s o f f o r t u n e

9 a n d t h a t c o m p l e t e w e l l -b e i n g a n d c o n t e n t m e n t w i t h o n e s c o n d it io nw h i c h i s c a ll e d h a p p i n e s s m a k e f o r p r i d e a n d o f t e n h e r e b y e v e n a r r o -


15/31

STOIC PANTHEISM 7

gance, unless there is a good will to correct their influence . . . . Thesight of a being w ho is not graced b y an y touch o f a pure and goo d willbut who yet enjoys an uninterrupted prosperity can never delight arational and im partial spectator. Thus a g oo d will seems to constitutethe indispensable condition o f being even worthy o f happiness. (Kant,Groundwork 393)

I n o r d e r f o r K a n t s G o d t o e x e r c i se d i v i n e p r o v i d e n c e t o w a r d h u m a n - k i n d ,H e w o u l d h a v e t o b r i n g i t a b o u t t h at t h o se w h o m a n i f e s t t h e g o o d w i l l a n dt h u s a r e worthy o f h a p p i n es s a ctu a lly f i n d i t - i f n o t i n t h i s l if e t im e , p e r h a p sin t he nex t .24 F or t he S to i c , how ever , mu ch l e s s i s requ i red . A l l t ha t g od ne edd o i s p r o v i d e t he c o n d i ti o n s u n d e r w h i c h p e o p l e c a n b e c o m e v i r t uo u s . H et h e r e b y m a k e s i t p o s s i b le t h a t a l l c a n b e h a p p y .

W h a t i s r e q u i r e d f o r h a p p i n e s s a n d v i r t u e a c c o r d i n g t o th e S t o ic s ? T h eS t o i c s s a y th a t h a p p i n e s s o r eudaimonia c o n s i s t s i n l i v i n g i n a c c o r d a n c ew i t h (kata) virtue, in l iv i n g i n a g r e e m e n t (homologia), o r, w h a t i s t h e s a m e ,l i v in g in a c c o r d a n c e w i t h n a t u r e ( S t o b a e u s , Anthology I1 .77 , 16-27 = LS6 3 A ) . H o w d o w e l iv e in a c c o r d w i t h n a tu r e a n d v i r tu e ? W e p a y a t t e n ti o n t ow h a t n a t u r e h a s to t e a c h u s a b o u t w h a t i s g o o d ( S e n e ca , Let ters 120 . 3 -5 ;8 --1 1 = L S 6 0 E ) . T h i s m e a n s b e c o m i n g a c q u a i n t e d w i t h a n d a d m i r i n g v i r-t u o u s a c t i o n s a n d t h u s b e i n g l e d t o lo v e a n d p u r s u e a s o u r f i n a l g o a l th e k i n do f c h a r a c t e r f r o m w h i c h s u c h a c t i o n s c o n s i s t e n t l y f lo w . In o r d e r t o l iv e i na c c o r d a n c e w i t h n a tu r e , w e m u s t a l s o g e t c l e a r a b o u t w h a t is u p t o u s a n dw h a t i s n o t. I t is n o t u p t o u s w h a t w i l l h a p p e n i n m a n y c i r c u m s t a n c e s . I t iso n l y u p t o u s h o w w e w i l l re a c t. I t i s u p t o u s h o w w e w i l l a ct , b u t n o t w h a tw i l l e v e n t u a t e f r o m o u r a c t io n s . A l l m y a c t i o n s h a v e a s t h e i r p r i m a r y a i mt h a t I s h o u l d a c t v i r tu o u s ly . I m a y pre fe r t h a t I s h o u l d s u c c e e d in a c c u m u -l a ti n g e n o u g h m o n e y t o b u y a h o u s e t h r o u g h m y v i r tu o u s a c t io n s . B u t i f Id o n o t , th e n I c a n r e v i se m y p r e f e re n c e s i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h m y g r o w i n gk n o w l e d g e o f w h a t t h e c o u r se o f n a tu r e h o l d s f o r m e .

Th e S toics say that the happy person (ho spoudaios) experiences noth-ing contrary to his desire or impulse or purpose on account o f the fac ttha t in all such cases h e acts-vCfth reserve (met hupexairese~s) andencou nters no obstacles which are unanticipated. (S tobaeus, AnthologyII .155, 5-8 = L S 65W)T h e g o o d p e r s o n n o t o n l y r e v is e s h i s c o n d i t io n a l p r e f e r e n c e f o r g e t t i n g th o s es t ri c tl y i n d i f f e r e n t t h i n g s t h a t th e f o o l i s h c a ll g e n u i n e g o o d s - t h i n g s l i k en i c e h o u s e s o r l if e i t s e l f - w h e n i t b e c o m e s a p p a r e n t t h a t h i s v i rt u o u s e f f o rt st o a t t a in t h e m w i l l n o t s u c c e e d . H e a l s o c o m e s t o p r e f e r t h o s e t h i n g s th a t o n em i g h t n o r m a l l y d is p r e fe r w h e n i t b e c o m e s c l e a r t o h i m t h a t t h e y w i l l c o m ea b o u t . A s C h r y s i p p u s s a y s :


16/31

8 DIRK BALTZLY

A s l o n g a s t h e f u t u r e i s u n c e r t a i n t o m e I a l w a y s h o l d t o t h o s e t h i n g sw h i c h a r e b e t t e r a d a p t e d t o o b t a i n i n g t h e t h i n g s i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t hn a t u r e [ i. e. t h e i n d i f f e r e n ts i t is r a t i o n a l t o p r e f e r ] ; f o r G o d h i m s e l f h a sm a d e m e d i s p o s e d t o s e l e c t t h es e . B u t i f I a c t u al l y k n e w t h a t I w a s f a t e dn o w t o b e i l l , I w o u l d e v e n h a v e a n i m p u l s e t o b e i l l . F o r m y f o o t t o o ,i f i t h a d i n t e l l i g e n c e , w o u l d h a v e a n i m p u l s e t o g e t m u d d y . E p i c t e t u s ,iscourses I I . 6 .9 = L S 5 8 J )

We are to god as Chrys ippus ' foo t i s to h i s body . So long as god g ives ussu f f i c i en t fo rewarn ing tha t we a re abou t to ' ge t m ud dy ' , th ings like canc ero r ea r thquakes need have no im pac t on ou r happ iness . Th i s fo rewarn ing godd o e s b y b e i n g a s e q u e n c e o f c a u s es a n d e f f e c ts t h a t c o n f o r m s t o t h e p r in c i -p le o f su f fi c i en t r eason . In sho r t, a t i t s mos t m in imal , god ' s p rov idence fo rhum ans cons i s ts in be ing and b r ing ing abou t a r at iona lly in te ll ig ib le w or ldord er. 25

The S to ics , however , axe no t con ten t to r e s t on th i s min imal s ense inwh ich god exerc i ses p rov idence . In add i t ion to p rov id ing us w i th a ll tha t i snece s sa ry fo r happ ines s , go d p rov ides a su r fe i t o f ind if f e ren t th ings o f thesort that i t is rat ional to prefer . In Cicero 's On the nature o f the gods, hisspokesman fo r the S to ic v iew ca ta logues the advan tages tha t de r ive f romplants and anim als , rivers and seas , and f rom div inat ion . He inclu des the caretha t the go ds exerc i s e w i th r espec t to ind iv idua l s - Od ysseus , fo r exampleN D I I. 154-67 ) . The an th ropocen tr i c na tu re o f som e S to ic exam ples o f p rov-idence i s qu i te amaz ing . Accord ing to Porphyry , Ch rys ippus c la im ed tha t thean imate na tu re o r sou l o f the p ig func t ions l ike s alt , p r ese rv ing the t a s ty m ea tun t i l i t is r eady to be ea ten by hum ans On abstinence III .20.1 = LS 54P).I suspec t tha t the S to ics he re de fen d a pos i t ion tha t i s s t ronger than the onetha t they need to de fend . C ice ro ' s S to ic spokesman says tha t god ' s p rov i -dence m eans tha t the wor ld is governed and a r r anged in the f ines t o r m os tb e a u t if u l w a y omniapulcherrume geri, N D I I.75). G iven the analy t ica l con-nec t ion be tween the f ine and the good , I th ink th i s r equ i r emen t en ta i l sm in imal ly tha t ou r wor ld is suscep t ib le o f the r a tiona l under s tand ing wh ichal low s v i r tuo us l iv ing .

I t w i l l be ob jec ted tha t the ac t ions o f the v ic ious p resen t a p rob le m fo rthe S to ic doc t r ine o f p rov idence . P ropon en t s o f a more t rad i tiona l, t ran -scenden t d e i ty can invoke the (pu rpor ted ly ) g rea t go od o f f r ee w i l l in the i rtheod icy - G od pe rm i t s mora l ev i l bec ause th i s is the p r i ce o f c rea t ing awo r ld w i th f r ee agen t s . I t migh t b e d oub ted tha t the S to ics can do l ikew iseand th is do ub t can have two grounds . F i rs t, th e S to ics are st r ic t causal deter -min i s t s . Thus the v ic ious ac t ions tha t t ake p lace cou ld no t f a i l to happeng iven the h i s to ry o f the wo r ld p r io r to the ac t ion . Second , the v ic iou s agen ti s a pa r t o f god fo r a S to ic pan thei st . To main ta in the image o f god an d h i s


17/31


18/31

2 D I R K B A L T Z L Y

I conclu de that , as a m at ter o f h is tor ica l fac t , the S to ics we re pantheis tsw h o a l s o b e l i e v e d i n d i v in e p r o vi d e n ce . W h e n w e c o n s i d e r t h e c o h e r e n c e o fth i s c la im aga ins t the bac kdrop o f the i r v iews in e th ics , it emerges tha t the yare no t s ign i f i can tly mo re ba d ly p laced to d e fend the i r pos i t ion than tho sew ho advoc a te more t r ad it iona l , non-pan the i s t concep t ions o f god .

IV T h e S t o ic A r g u m e n t s f o r P a n t h e i s mIn the p rev ious s ec t ions o f the pap er I have a rgued tha t the S to ics accep teda fo rm o f pan the i sm wi th f ea tu res tha t a r e a t odds w i th Lev ine s cha rac te ri -za t ion o f th is v iew. I have a rgued that the y are not in a subs tant ia l ly wo rsepos i t ion to de fend the i r fo rm o f pan the i sm than a re o the r more t r ad i t iona lthe is t s. B u t to show tha t the a rgum en ts against a pos i tion a re no wo rse thanthe arguments agains t i t s compet i tors i s pre t ty smal l beer . How in teres t ingare the po s i t ive arguments or Sto ic pan the i sm ?A Argu ment StrategiesHow , in the m os t genera l o f te rms , d oes one go abo u t a rgu ing fo r pan the -i sm? I l l cons ide r two ve ry genera l a rgm nen t s t ra teg ies. The S to ics em plo ythe s e con d o f these .

O n e k i n d o f a rg u m e n t s t r a te g y m i g h t b e c a l le d t o p d o w n . Y o u c o u l ds ta rt f rom an independen t a rgum en t tha t god ex i s t s and then show tha t the rei s no th ing o the r than god . I th ink Sp inoza s a rgum en t fo r pan the i sm i s o f th i sform. I t i s in teres t ing to contras t i t wi th the S to ic arguments s ince I th inkSp inoza s a rgum en t fo r pan the i sm invo lves p remises tha t co u ld no t b eshared by an y anc ien t Gree k ph i losopher p r io r to P lo t inus . Sp inoza s D ef i -n i t ion 6 c la ims tha t Go d poss es se s in f in i t e a t t ribu tes (i.e . e s sen t i a lp roper t ie s ) . B u t p r io r to P lo t inus , no G reek ph i losopher qu es t ions the co r -r e la tion o f be ing w i th tha t wh ich i s limited and thus capab le o f de f in i t ion .Th e in f in i t e num ber o f Go d s a tt r ibu tes a re e s sen ti a l to S p inoza s a rgum en tfo r pan the i sm. N o tw o subs tances can sha re the s am e a t t r ibu tes ( I, p rop 5 ).S ince G od ne ces sa r i ly ex i s ts ( I , p rop 11) , the re can be no o the r subs tance .The ex i s tence o f one subs tance w i th in f in i t e a t tr ibu tes p rec ludes the pos s i -b i l i ty o f any o the r subs tance s ince the re a re no a tla ibu tes i t cou ld pos s ib lyhave . So Sp inoza a rgues tha t Go d ex i s t s and then a rgues that the re i s no th -ing s epara te f rom God .

I t m us t be ob serv ed that, l ike the top do wn s t ra tegis t, the S to ics pres enta rgume n ts fo r the ex i s tence o f god tha t a re no t spec i f i ca l ly pan the is t ic . I fthese a rgumen ts show any th ing , they show tha t a gener ic go d ex i st s . Un l ike


19/31

STOIC PANTHEISM 2

Spinoza , they do no t ex tend th i s conc lus ion in to a spec i f i ca l ly pan the i s t icve r s ion o f the i sm b y a rgu ing tha t the re i s no th ing add i tiona l to the go d tha thas be en sho wn to ex i s t.

A n a l te rna tive a rgumen t s t r a t egy fo r pan the i s ts migh t be ca l l ed bo t tomup . Supp ose tha t in some sen se the un ive r se i s a un ity. N ow a rgue tha t so m efea tu re o r f ea tu res o f th i s un i ty m ake s i t coun t a s d iv ine . Bu t i f the un i f i edunive rse i s d iv ine , then panth eism is t rue . The argum ent g oes f rom uni ty , tod iv in ity, to pan the i sm. P re t ty obv ious ly , however , the m ove f rom un i ty tod iv in i ty i s go ing to depen d on w ha t k ind o f un i ty we a re t a lk ing abou t .

I a r g u e d a b o v e t ha t t h e s o r t o f u n i ty h a d b y t h e m e r e o l o g i c a l s u m o f a l lth ings i s no t a p romis ing s ta r t fo r e s tab l i sh ing the d iv in ity o f The B ig Th ing .In wha t o the r way s cou ld the On to log ica l Thes i s be s a t i s f i ed? You migh t sup -pos e tha t eve ry ex i st ing th ing i s com po sed ou t o f the s ame k ind o f thing . I llc a ll th is v i e w C o m p o s i ti o n a l M o n i s m . S t o ic m a t er ia l is m w o u l d b e a f o r m o fC o m p o s i ti o n a l M o n i s m . I f C o m p o s i ti o n a l M o n i s m w e r e tr u e , th e n t h e r ew ou ld be a s ense in wh ich eve ry th ing tha t ex i s ts fo rms a un ity. The s ense inw h i c h t h er e i s a U n i t y w o u l d b e a n a l o g o u s to t h e s e n s e i n w h i c h w e s a y t h e reis o n e e l e m e n t wh ose a tomic num ber i s one . A l l the hydrogen the re i s fo rm sa k ind o f un ity. A t the ve ry l eas t, we d i s cus s i t in way s that m ake i t sound asi f i t i s a un i f i ed sub jec t o f p red ica tion .

B u t a s i n th e c a s e o f T h e B i g T h in g , t h e p a t h f r o m t h e k i n d o f u n i t yimpl ied by Com pos i t iona l M on ism to i t s s t a tus a s d iv ine i s no t a t a ll obv i -ous . A wo u ld -be pan the i s t cou ld po in t to the f ac t tha t eve ry ex i st ing th ingdepen ds on matte r, a s t rad i tiona l the i s ts s ay every th ing depen ds on g od . H em igh t even c la im tha t i t i s no t ju s t tha t the ex i s t ence o f eve ry ob jec t dependson the ex i s t ence o f matter, bu t tha t the na tu re o f ma t te r de te rmines the p rop -e r t i e s and charac te ri s ti c s o f each ind iv idua l o b jec t com po sed ou t o f it . Thel imi t s o f m a t te r e f fec t ive ly de te rmine wha t p roper t ie s th ings can and canno thave . Th i s i s pe rhaps s l igh t ly more compel l ing than the a rgumen t fo r thed iv in i ty o f The B ig Th ing , bu t no t m uch . Fortuna te ly , Com pos i t iona lM onism i s no t the S to ic a rgumen t s t r a tegy fo r pan the i sm.

I th ink tha t the S to ic a rgum en ts fo r a spec i f i ca l ly pan the i st i c g od p roc eedf rom a pos i t ion I l l ca l l Pan - subs tan t i a l ism . The S to ics suppo sed tha t the rei s an impor tan t d i f f e rence be tw een a th ing an d a heap o f s and . A pe r son , anan imal o r even an ind iv idua l p lan t a r e exam ples o f th ings tha t have a spec ia lk ind o f un i ty abou t them tha t m ere co l l ec t ions l ack . I l l u se Ar i s to t l e s t e rmfor an ind iv idua l un i t a ry th ing , subs ta nce o r o u s i a though th i s t e rmino lo -gy p resen t s some po ten t i a l fo r confus ion s ince l a t e r ph i losopher s usedsubs tance o r the subs tance o f a th ing to ind ica te the s tu f f f rom wh ich i t i s

c o m p o s e d . ( I n d e e d , s o m e o f o u r r e p o r t s a b o u t t h e S t o i c s s o m e t i m e s u s es u b s t a n c e i n t h is w a y , t h o u g h o t h e r s u s e t h e t e r m s u b s t r a t e


20/31

DIRK BALTZLY

(hupokeimenon) to indicate the m at ter that com po ses a th ing . ) I l l ca l l thev iew tha t c l a ims tha t everything tha t exis ts form s a un i tary thing P a n - s u b -s tan ti a l ism . Th i s m us t no t be con fused w i th ano the r c lose ly r e la ted pos i t iontha t I l l ca l l Subs tance M onism . Subs tance M onism i s the thesi s tha t thereis only o ne subs tance - tha t i s , only on e uni tary th ing - and i t i s the universe .

To s ee the d i ff e rence , r e f l ec t on the ques t ion o f wh e the r one subs tancecan b e a par t o f another. In the Categories Aris to t le c la ims that a par t l ike ahand o r a head i s a subs tance . Thu s he th inks tha t subs tances can have o the rs u b s ta n c e s a s p a rt s. B u t y o u c a n i m a g i n e s o m e o n e w h o m i g h t d i s a g r e e w i t hAr i s to t l e on th i s po in t and c la im tha t no un i t a ry th ing has o the r un i t a ryth ings o r sub s tances as i t s pa r ts . I f you though t th i s , then yo u w ou ld th inktha t Pan- subs tan t i a li sm impl ies Sub s tance Mon ism. I f the un ive r se i s i t s e l fa subs tance and i f no subs tance has ano the r subs tance as a pa r t, t hen the reex i s t s on ly one subs tance . I th ink S p inoza was a Sub s tance Monis t . Bu t onecou ld a l so r e jec t th i s p r inc ip le abo u t subs tances and the i r pa r ts , a s Ar i s to t l ed id , and then Pan- subs tan t i a l i sm wou ld no t imp ly Subs tance Monism. Ith ink th is i s the S to ic pos i t ion .

The pa th f rom Pan- subs tan t i a l i sm to pan the i sm looks l e s s p rob lemat icthan in fe rences f rom un i ty to d iv in i ty tha t we have cons ide red . Pa r t o f wh a tm akes i t s eem implaus ib le to c l a im tha t The B ig Th ing o r the to ta l i ty o f ma t -t e r i s god i s the f ac t tha t these en t i t i es do n t s eem to be a s ingle thing in qu i tethe wa y tha t we sup pose go d oug h t to be . M oreover , i f the un ive r se i s a un i -f ied th ing analog ous to a l iv ing th ing l ike a p lant or an imal , the n i t is pre t tymarve l lous . One migh t even s ay d iv ine . The S to ics a rgue fo r Pan- subs tan -t ia l i sm by t ry ing to sho w that the unive rse i s a l iv ing , in te l ligent an d ra t ionalbe ing . In add i t ion to showing tha t the un ive r se i s the re fo re a subs tance inm uch the s am e w ay a pe r son is , it a l so p rov ides ev idence o f the d iv in i ty o fthe u nive rse - i t is al ive, rat ional an d intell igent.B. Stoic Argum ents fo r Generic G odTh e S to ic a rgum en ts fo r the ex i s t ence o f a go d tha t i s no t sp ec i f i ca l ly pan -theis t ic are in teres t ing in thei r own r ight . Our fu l les t source for thea r g u m e n ts o f Z e n o , C l e a n t h e s a n d C h r y s i p p u s i s b o o k I I o f C i c e r o s On thenature o f the gods . We f ind the re a rgum en ts f rom 1 ) the un ive r sa l consen-sus that god exis ts ( I I .5) ; 2) f rom div inat ion ( I I .7-12) ; 3) f rom then a t u ra l n e ss o f t h e c o n c e p t o f g o d ( I I. 1 2 - 1 5 ); 3 ) a v e r s io n o f th e a r g u m e n tf rom des ign ( II . 16 -18) , tog e the r w i th an a t t ack on E p icu rean v iew s tha t thena tu re o f the wor ld can be exp la ined w i thou t r e f e rence to a d iv ine c ra f t sman( I I .93 -5 ) ; and 4 ) an ax io log ica l a rgumen t a t t ribu ted to Ch rys ippus tha t the rem us t be a g od s ince, i f the re were no t , humans wo u ld be the g rea test th ing


21/31

STOIC PANTHEISM 3

in the un ive r se . B u t s ince the l a t te r i s a r rogan t madnes s , the re m us t b e go ds( II . 16 = L S 54E) . S ex tus Em pi r i cus r epor t s a sy l log i sm o f Ze no s tha t migh tbe m os t cha r i tab ly desc r ibed as a c rude fo rm o f the on to log ica l a rgumen t(adv M ath IX . 1 3 3 - 6 = L S 5 4 D ) .

These a rgumen ts have been e xam ined in de tai l by o the r s and fo r the pu r -p o s e s o f t h is p a p e r I w i ll p a s s o v e r t h e m w i t h o u t c o m m e n t . 29 I f a n y o f t h e mwere conv inc ing , the y wo u ld es tab l ish on ly the co nc lus ion tha t go d ex i s ts .Th ey wo u ld no t sho w tha t the en ti re c osm os i s a s ing le l iv ing c rea tu re tha tis rat ional , intel l igent and eternal .C. Cleanthes Argum ents fro m PhysicsTh e argum ents that C icero a t t r ibuted to Clean thes 3~ in On the nature o f thegods seek to e s tab l i sh tha t the cosmos i s a s ing le , an imate o rgan i sm. Theargum ent i s largely aposteriori and I be l i eve it r e l ie s on an ex tens ion o f wha ti s the bes t s c ien ce o f the day.

L e t u s b e g i n w i t h a s h o r t s u m m a r y o f t h e f o u r a rg u m e n t s d i s c u s s e d i nN D 11.23-32A. Every th ing tha t g row s con ta ins w i th in i t s e l f a sup p ly o f hea twh ich i s the causa l sou rce o f it s g rowth and deve lopm en t . Th i sis shown by, inter alia, the f ac t tha t pe r i sh ing co inc ides w i thcoo l ing . There fo re hea t pos se s ses a v it a l fo rce . Bu t hea t pe rm e-ates the wor ld . I t i s found in ear th , s ince (e .g . ) rocks s t rucktoge the r p rod uce spa rks , so i l s t eams w hen on e d igs in the w in -ter , e tc . The re are s im i lar pro ofs that heat i s prese nt in the o the rfou r e lemen ts . S ince the w or ld i s m ade up o f these fou r e l e -men ts , the wo r ld s con t inued ex i s t ence i t s e l f depen ds on thep resence o f the s am e o r s imi la r subs tance th roughou t i t. Thus ,Cleanthes concludes that there exis ts a hot , v i ta l force that per -m e a t e s t h e w h o l e ( 2 3 - 2 8 ) .B . The v i ta l e l emen t tha t ho lds the wo r ld toge the r and p rese rvesi t i s pos sesse d o f sensat ion and intel ligence. Ev ery natura l obje cttha t is com plex and n o t hom ogen eous con ta ins w i th in i t s e l f a ru l -ing principle. 31 In plants , fo r exa m ple, the thing th at play s the roleo f t h e h~gemonikon or ru l ing pr incip le i s in the roots . S ince thewo r ld as a wh ole i s super ior to everyth ing in i t, tha t in wh ich i t sru ling p r inc ip le i s loca ted mus t b e the bes t th ing and w ha t i s mos tdese rv ing o f au tho ri ty and ru le o ver a ll . S ince som e par t s o f thewo r ld conta in sensat ion and reason, that par t w hich conta ins theru l ing p r inc ip le o f the wor ld m us t con ta in s ensa t ion and r eason


22/31

4 DIRK BALTZLY

t o a n e v e n g r e a t e r d e g r e e. T h e r u l i n g p r i n c ip l e o f th e w o r l d i s th ev i t a l hea t and i t pos ses se s s en sa t i on and i n t e l l i gence (29 -30 ) .C . F u r t h e r p r o o f th a t t h e h e a t w h i c h c o n s t i tu t e s th e r u l i n g p a r to f th e w o r l d i s s u p e r i o r t o u s i n s e n s a t i o n a n d i n te l li g e n c e . T h e r ei s n o t h in g o u t s i d e t h e w o r ld w h i c h c a n m o v e t h e e n t ir e t y o f i tsr u l i n g f a c u l t y , s o i t m u s t b e s e l f -m o v i n g . T h i s i s n o w i d e n t i f i e da s t h e s o u l o f t h e w o r l d o n t h e b a s i s o f P la t o s c l a i m t h a t w h a t i ss e l f - m o v i n g is s o u l. H e n c e t h e w o r l d is a n i m a t e . ( 3 2 - 3 2 )D . I f th e w o r l d h e a t w e r e n o t a l s o s u p e r i o r to u s i n i n t e l li g e n c e ,i t w o u l d n o t b e a s g o o d a s t h e p a r ts w h i c h m a k e i t u p . B u t e v e r yp a r t o f o u r b o d i e s i s in f e r i o r t o u s t a k e n a s a w h o l e . S o i t i s w i t hthe sou l o f t he w or ld . I t is sup rem ely r a t iona l an d i n t e l li gen t . (32 )

T h e v i t a l h e a t i n q u e s t i o n i s p r e t t y c le a r l y th e pneum a - o n e o f t h e t h in g st h a t t h e S t o ic s u s e t h e w o r d g o d t o d e n o t e . R e c a l l t h a t p n e u m a in i t s var i -o u s g r a d a t i o n s i s t e n o r hexis), the s u s t a i n i n g a n d u n i f y i n g c a u s e o fi nan im ate ob j ec t s ; 32 na tu re physis) the i n te r n a l so u r c e o f g r o w t h a n d c h a n g ein an imate ob j ec t s ; sou l psych~) in v i r t u e o f w h i c h l i v i n g t h i n g s a r e s e n -t ien t ; 33 an d t he ru l i ng p r i nc ip l e hggemonkon) o f ra t io nal creatu res . 34T h e r e s em b l a n c e o f p n e u m a i n t hese va r i ous g u i ses t o wh a t Ar i s t o t le ca l l ssubs t an t i a l fo rm Metaphys V I I . 1 7 ) i s n o t c o in c i d e n ta l . J u s t a s f o r m m a k e se a c h o b j e c t b o t h s o m e t h i s a n d w h a t it i s , s o i n a l l t h e s e c a se s t h e p n e u m am a k e s e a c h k i n d o f th i n g w h a t i t i s. W h e n C l e a n t h e s s a y s t h a t e a c h t h i n g h a sa ru l i ng p r i nc ip le o r h~gemonikon, h i s r em arks pa ra l l e l Ar i s t o t l e s i l lu s t r a t ioni n D e An i m a I I .1 : i f an axe w ere a l i v ing t h ing , i ts sou l wou ld be t he p ow er t ocu t . A dap t ed t o t he S to i c theo ry , t he i dea i s t ha t t he ro l e t ha t r a t iona l sou l p l aysin u s i s pa ra l l e l t o t he ro l e p l aye d by t he o the r fo rm s o f pneum a in n o n - r a t i o n -a l th ings . Ag a in , l i ke A r i s t o t l e an d i n o ppos i t i on t o t he Ep i cu reans , t he S to i cst h i n k th a t y o u c a n n o t e x p l a i n t h e p o w e r s o f n a tu r a l o b j e ct s - l ik e t h e p o w e r so f e n s o u l e d t h i n g s t h a t a re a n a l o g o u s t o th e p o w e r o f t h e a x e t o c u t - s i m p l yb y r e f e r e n c e t o th e m a t t e r f r o m w h i c h o b j e c ts a r e c o m p o s e d .

Clear ly , then , p n e u m a i s p re t t y spec i a l s t u f f. W hy d id t he S to i cs th ink t ha tt h e r e w a s s u c h a t h i n g ? I t h i n k th a t t h e y h a v e ta k e n a c o n c e p t f r o m t h e b e s tm e d i c a l s c i e n c e o f th e i r d a y a n d a d a p t e d i t t o a c o s m i c p u r p o s e . T o s e e th a tt h is i s s o, w e n e e d t o s a y s o m e t h i n g a b o u t t h e h i s t o r y o f t h e i d e a o f p n e u m a .D. The Pneum a an d Cutt ing Ed ge Science in the Hellenistic P eriodPneum a as i t a p p e a r s i n S t o i c i s m i s a n o t i o n d r a w n f r o m t h e m e d i c a l t ra d i -t i o n o f t h e e a r l y H e l l e n i s ti c p e r io d . 35 T h e t e r m o c c u r s i n A r i s t o tl e , b u t o u rs u r v i v i n g t e x t s d o n o t m a k e i t e a s y t o d e t e r m i n e e x a c t l y w h a t A r i s to t l e s th e -


23/31

S T O I C P A N T H E I S M 5

ory o f it was . In par t icu lar, i t is unclear whetherpneuma i s a subs tance w i thdis t inct ive , in tr ins ic causa l pow ers or wheth er i t is som e mixtu re o f a i r andheat the p lay s a ca usal ro le w i th in the contex t o f liv ing beings . 36

Praxagoras o f Cos , a p hys ic ian o f the l a t te r ha l f o f the fou r th cen tu ry BC,p ropoun ded a theo ry tha t gavepneuma a ve ry spec ia l ro le in the hum an bo

baltzly - stoic pantheism

Documents