Table Of ContentTHE STOICS
MAJOR THINKERS SERIES
General Editor
Amélie Oksenberg Rorty
1. John M. Rist (editor). The Stoics
THE STOICS
Edited by John M. Rist
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PRESS
Berkeley Los Angeles London
University of California Press
Berkeley and Los Angeles, California
University of California Press, Ltd.
London, England
ISBN 0-520-03135-0
Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 75-27932
Copyright © 1978 by The Regents of the University of California
Printed in the United States of America
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 90
Contents
Preface vii
Abbreviations viii
1. An Introduction to Stoic Logic 1
Ian Mueller, University of Chicago
2. Principles of Stoic Grammar 27
Michael Frede, Princeton University
3. The Stoic Theory of Meaning 77
Andreas Graeser, University of Berne
4. Dialectic and the Stoic Sage 101
A. A. Long, University of Liverpool
5. What Does the Wise Man Know? 125
G. B. Kerferd, University of Manchester
6. Monism and Immanence: The Foundations of
Stoic Physics 137
Robert B. Todd, University of British Columbia
7. Stoic Cosmology 161
Michael Lapidge, Cambridge University
v
vi Contents
8. Necessity and Fate in Stoic Philosophy 187
Margaret E. Reesor, Queen's University,
Kingston, Ontario
9. Stoic Determinism and Moral Responsibility 203
Charlotte Stough, University of California,
Santa Barbara
10. Emotion and Decision in Stoic Psychology 233
A. C. Lloyd, University of Liverpool
11. Moral Actions and Rules in Stoic Ethics 247
/. G. Kidd, University of St. Andrews
12. The Stoic Concept of Detachment 259
John M. Rist, University of Toronto
13. Zeno on Art: Anatomy of a Definition 273
F. E. Sparshott, Victoria College,
University of Toronto
Bibliography 291
Preface
Philosophers and logicians now take the Stoics, particularly
Chrysippus, seriously. This is not the place to explain the mechan-
ics of such a change from the view of most historians of philoso-
phy only a few years ago. In compiling this collection of new
essays, I have attempted to secure papers that both sum up our
new knowledge about the Stoics and also break new ground. Most
of the main themes of Stoicism, in logic, ethics, physics, and philo-
sophical psychology will be found here, at least in passing. Natu-
rally some of the essays are bolder than others, and none of the
contributors should be held responsible for the views of his col-
leagues. But it is to be hoped that they will be of some philosophi-
cal interest and will help to confirm the revised attitude to the
Stoics and to spread the good news more widely. Although some
readers may wish to limit themselves to particular essays that deal
with topics in which they have a special interest, I hope that the
book can also be read as a whole, for although the collection does
not purport to provide a full-scale description of the Stoic system,
such a description, at least in its broad outlines, should become
apparent.
J.M.R.
vii
Abbreviations
The following abbreviations are used to refer to philosophical and
classical periodicals:
AGP Archiv für die Geschichte der Philosophie
AJP American Journal of Philology
AUMLA Journal of the Australasian Universities Modem
Language and Literature Association
BICS Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies of
the University of London
CQ Classical Quarterly
DK Die Fragmente der Vorsopratiker®
ed. H. Diels and W. Kranz. Berlin, 1960
JHI Journal of the History of Ideas
JHS Journal of Hellenic Studies
PAS Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society
PQ Philosophical Quarterly
PR Philosophical Review
SVF Stoicorum Veterum Fragmenta,
ed. H. von Armin. Reprint Stuttgart, 1964
TAPA Transactions of the American Philological
Association
viii
1
An Introduction to Stoic Logic
Ian Mueller
In the first comprehensive history of western logic Prantl1 de-
scribed Stoic logic as "dull," "trivial," and "pedantic." Prantl's dis-
missal of Stoic logic was accepted by most interpreters of Stoicism
for three quarters of a century. However, since the publication of
Lukasiewicz's article, "On the History of the Logic of Proposi-
tions" in 1934,2 Prantl's evaluation has been largely abandoned.
Bochenski's remark, 'The development of formal logic in antiquity
reached its peak in the works of the thinkers belonging to the Me-
garic and Stoic Schools," exemplifies well the radical rehabilita-
tion of the Stoics as logicians.3 The cause of this rehabilitation is
not the discovery of new texts, but rather the twentieth-century
revolution in the subject of logic itself. Lukasiewicz and others,
working with a full understanding of modern logic, have suc-
ceeded in retrieving from the ancient texts a Stoic logical theory of
startling originality which rivals the achievement of Aristotle, the
founder of logic. The failure of Prantl and his successors to accom-
plish this retrieval stems not from their obtuseness or stupidity but
from the fact that the background scientific knowledge needed to
understand the Stoic achievement was not available to them.
A factor contributing to Prantl's low opinion of Stoic logic was
the character of the ancient texts themselves. There are no primary
1
2 Ian Mueller
sources for Stoic logic analogous to Aristotle's Prior Analytics,
and the ancient secondary sources are brief and usually hostile in
their treatment of the subject. In many cases Prantl's evaluations
simply repeat or develop remarks in the sources themselves. The
unsatisfactoriness of the sources (on this see Mates, Stoic Logic
8-10) makes any but a tentative reconstruction of Stoic logic im-
possible. Unless an indication is given to the contrary, what I
describe will be the most certain features of the theory.
One of the uncertain features is chronology. The history of Sto-
icism proper covers five centuries during which the logical theory,
like other doctrines of the school, underwent modification and
development. In the case of logic we know of some disagreements
within the school and some ideas that can be ascribed to individ-
uals, but most of our sources refer simply to "the Stoics," as if
there were a single, unambiguous Stoic logical theory. Commenta-
tors have tended to assign the major Stoic achievements in logic to
Chrysippus (c. 280 B.C.-C. 206 B.C.), the third leader of the Stoa, of
whom it was said, "If there were a dialectic among the gods, it
would be none other than the Chrysippean one." (D.L. 7.180. At
7.198 Diogenes mentions that Chrysippus wrote 311 books on
logical matters.) In general I shall not attempt to assign logical
doctrines to specific persons, but simply speak of "Stoic logic."
Occasionally, however, it will be necessary to refer to possible dis-
agreements within the school.
From the modern point of view, the core of Stoic logic is the
analysis of arguments. To understand this analysis it is helpful to
compare and contrast it with its predecessor, Aristotelian syllogis-
tic. Aristotle considers the following argument at P.A. 2.24.
69a5-7:
I. Since then [war] against neighbors is bad, but [war by
Athens] against Thebes is against neighbors, it is evident
that war [by Athens] against Thebes is bad.
Leaving out of account here the difference between an argument
and a complicated inferential sentence of a form such as 'Since this
therefore that' or 'If this then that,'4 we may restate this argument
as
