Phil 303 Alcuin: Reason in Service of Revelation

Alcuin: Reason in Service of Revelation

At the time of Charlemagne, the Roman Empire was fragmented between East and West, with the power residing in the East in Constantinople.  The balance eventually shifted with Charlemagne assuming power.  When he was coronated as the Holy Roman Emperor by Pope Leo III, there was a “transferral of the imperium Romanum from the Greeks [in the East] to the West” (Lamers).   Leading to his coronation, Charlemagne consolidated power and ensured “the acceptance of orthodox doctrine as well as a uniform liturgy throughout the empire” (“Charlemagne”).  As part of instituting a uniform liturgy, he recruited clergy and scholars throughout Europe.  One of the key individuals was Alcuin.

Born around 735, Alcuin of York had the mental acumen to be noticed at a young age and was appointed as “master of the cathedral school” in 766 (Ruud).  As schoolmaster, Alcuin worked on establishing a significant library and would travel to continental Europe to acquire or copy manuscripts.  Through these and other types of travels, fate would bring Charlemagne and Alcuin together; and in 781, Alcuin accepted Charlemagne’s invitation to live in Aachen and assume responsibilities of schoolmaster (Burns).

Alcuin was more of a “teacher rather than a thinker” and therefore was not an “originator of knowledge” (Burns).  However, three of Alcuin’s key philosophical beliefs were centered around, subjecting philosophy and liberal arts to revelation, the applied use of logic to strike down heresies to unite diverse and competing cultures, and lastly, structuring and reforming a system for a liberal education.  Foremost in his mind was ensuring all studies and application of education only served revelation.  Keeping this priority in mind, Alcuin applied rhetoric and logic to convince various archbishops and students to abandon unorthodox ideas such as Adoptionism (Alberi).  While the importance of arguing against Adoptionism may not be a critical task to modern students, the framework of learning and promoting a classical liberal education remains significant today.  This third key philosophical belief focused on the structure of a classical liberal education and was part of a larger effort in a first attempt at a European renaissance.  However, the Carolingian renaissance did not endure.  What endured and still remains viable today was Alcuin’s efforts in the promotion of education and the use of logic.  Perhaps what does not remain as practical today is the philosophical concept of revelation taking priority over reason.

At Charlemagne’s behest, Alcuin continued his work of training the clergy and “accurately translating ancient literature” as well as creating programs of learning at the school in Aachen (Brooks).  As he established curriculum for liberal arts, Alcuin never forgot to keep the priority of God and revelation first.  While it may seem that Charlemagne was endeavoring to create a ‘new Athens,’ in actuality, the prevailing perspective was Aachen already “possessed in Christ’s teaching the key to wisdom superior to ‘all the wisdom of academic exercise’” (Alberi, 36).  For Alcuin specifically, he “preferred to advocate reform of politics and scholarship according to the standards of the Bible and the Fathers” (41).  The real power of a liberal arts education was in its application to strike down heresies which ensured Charlemagne’s kingdom remained unified and aligned with the Pope.  By aligning with the Pope, Charlemagne ensured a successful consolidation power in the western empire.

Always mindful of the power of logic and rhetoric, Alcuin was vigilant in ensuring liberal arts supported the word of God.  As long as reason was advised by “the Bible and the Fathers” then the use of logic and rhetoric to tear down heresies was appropriate (Alberi, 37).  One example of using logic to tear down a heresy was Alcuin fighting the idea of Adoptionism. Adoptionism was the revival of “Nestorian ideas about the dual substance of Christ (i.e., Christ was ‘adopted’ as the son of God) [and] was declared anathema by the papacy” (Carlson).  It was of great import for this heresy to be eradicated as it threatened Charlemagne’s “military and political control” in the regions where this idea was being propagated (Alberi, 39).  Alcuin leveraged his rhetorical skills and “composed a number of treatises against the Spanish Adoptionists, including a small book” (Carlson).  In these writings, he defined terms and constructed syllogisms and successfully proved the “logical impossibility” of Adoptionism (Carlson).  One supporter of Adoptionism was still not convinced of his errors and was subsequently summoned to Aachen to argue with Alcuin before Charlemagne and the bishops.  Alcuin’s excellent skills were too much for this advocate and he subsequently was forced to make a “public ‘confession’” (Carlson). 

Alcuin’s motto in life was “disce ut doceas (learn in order to teach)” (Burns).  To this end, Alcuin and his peers tirelessly worked to attend to, safeguard and expand the libraries in York and Aachen.  He often traveled Europe acquiring or copying books.  This work laid the foundation for the real Renaissance.  As Burns notes, Alcuin was pivotal in “the revival of learning which distinguished the age in which he lived, and which made possible the great intellectual renaissance of three centuries later.”  Because of Alcuin’s efforts, western civilization’s Renaissance possessed libraries from which it would bloom.  And because of the Renaissance, modern society’s higher institutions of learning enjoy continued success in educating today’s students.

The institutionalization of the study of liberal arts endures today, thanks to the work of Alcuin.  One modern-day Master of Theological Studies described the “classical modes of learning,” which were divided into two groups: trivium and quadrivium (Brooks).  The trivium was comprised of grammar, logic and rhetoric; and the quadrivium was comprised of arithmetic, geometry, music and astronomy.  These seven areas of study formed a liberal arts curriculum and were the basis for further studies in theology and medicine, as examples.  Alcuin “popularized the liberal arts and paved the way for the later creation of the universities by the Church in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries” (Brooks).  Because of Alcuin’s promotion of libraries and a curriculum, society today enjoys the benefits of higher learning.

Are Alcuin’s philosophical ideas regarding revelation trumping reason, the application of logic to strike down heresies, and the promotion of education still practical today?  Because of his efforts in promoting education, many today enjoy a strong foundation from which to apply reasoning and critical thinking, therefore his idea of promoting education remains viable.  Critical thinking and logic go hand in hand.  In the age of misinformation, one must have all the reasoning skills at one’s disposal to not be led astray by extremism.  While capable of sound reasoning, humans often are sluggish in decision making.  In his book The Righteous Mind, Jonathan Haidt noted a research study which demonstrated humans have the capacity for sound reasoning, but when not held accountable (i.e., “know in advance that they’ll have to explain themselves”), they devolve into “errors, laziness, and reliance on gut feelings” (Haidt).  In a related way, humans ought to be mindful of how much faith they place in revelation.  Is it practical to subjugate our reasoning to revelation?  One science fiction author bluntly cautioned when he wrote, “One of my most valued friends believes in astrology; I would never offend her by telling her what I think. The capacity of humans to believe in what seems to me highly improbable—from table tapping to the superiority of their children—has never been plumbed. Faith strikes me as intellectual laziness” (Heinlein, 249).  Today, Alcuin may not find himself in familiar territory, as appeals to unproven varying opinions, including revelation, are widely not seen as viable.

In sum, Alcuin’s key philosophical beliefs were centered around, subjecting the study of philosophy and liberal arts to revelation, the applied use of logic to strike down heresies, and structuring and reforming classical education.  Alcuin applied the use of rhetoric and logic in the service of revelation to defeat heretical ideas.  He also ensured a strong framework for classical education endured, and today, modern society enjoys the fruits of his labors.  While the viability of revelation over logic may not exist today, his other ideas around the practical use of logic and education endure in a society which appreciates their value. 

Works Cited

Alberi, Mary. “Alcuin and the ‘New Athens.’ (Intellectual Life in Charlemagne’s Court).” History Today, vol. 39, no. 9, 1989, pp. 35–41.

Brooks, Tyler. “If You like Philosophy, Thank This Guy.” Catholic Answers, 22 Dec. 2021, www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/if-you-like-philosophy-thank-alcuin-of-york.

Burns, James. "Alcuin." The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 1. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1907. 17 Sept. 2022 <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01276a.htm>.

Carlson, Laura M. “Carlson—the Rhetoric of Heresy: Alcuin, Adoptionism, and the Art of Language.” Heroicage.org, 2015, www.heroicage.org/issues/16/carlson.php.

"Charlemagne." Gale Biographies: Popular People, edited by Gale Cengage Learning, 1st edition, 2020. Credo Reference, https://search-credoreference-com.ezproxy2.apus.edu/content/entry/galegbpp/charlemagne/0. Accessed 17 Sep. 2022.

Haidt, Jonathan. The Righteous Mind. Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group, 2012.

Heinlein Robert A. Stranger in a Strange Land. Ace Books 1961.

Lamers, Han. Greece Reinvented : Transformations of Byzantine Hellenism in Renaissance Italy, BRILL, 2015. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/apus/detail.action?docID=4397567.

Ruud, Jay. "Alcuin of York." Encyclopedia of Medieval Literature, Jay Ruud, Facts On File, 2nd edition, 2014. Credo Reference, https://search-credoreference-com.ezproxy2.apus.edu/content/entry/fofmedieval/alcuin_of_york/0. Accessed 17 Sep. 2022.

Philosophy 101 - Week 6 - Ethics and Moral Philosophy

While listening to the audio book version of The Coddling of the American Mind by Jonathan Haidt and Greg Lukianoff, one phrase caught my attention and has remained with me ever since.  The phrase was, "Prepare the child for the road, not the road for the child" (Lukianoff).  Implied in this bit of advice is an ethical framework for navigating the world and preparing oneself for the multifaceted experiences and interactions.  This ethical mindset places the locus of control in the individual, rather the environment.

Our situation in this existence is not singular; meaning, as individuals, we are not the only person on a planet with unlimited resources.  Rather, existence is such, that we live on a planet with billions of other people and therefore, our actions can and often do impact others.  We cannot demand the world conform to our desires and aversions in order to achieve the summum bonum or the ultimate good.

Regarding the definition of the ultimate good, one author wrote, "Aristotle claims that all the things that are ends in themselves also contribute to a wider end, an end that is the greatest good of all" (Athanassoulis).

Furthermore, the ethical framework ought to provide a lifetime motivation for the individual, so he has a reason to want to continue to adhere to the framework for the duration of his life - it must have a catalyst and a sustaining force.

The virtue ethics of ancient Greek schools sought to marry the multi-fold aspects of living, while attempting to persuade the individual to live a certain way, which would not only promote the common welfare of the social structure, but also that of the individual.  One author observes this connection.  The Platonic, Aristotelian, Stoic and Epicurean "Schools of philosophy associated happiness not so much with feeling a certain way about how one’s life was going, but rather with the behaviour resulting from one’s cultivation of an excellent or virtuous character. This crucial linkage by these Schools of happiness with virtue is called eudaimonism, and is based on the principal Greek word for happiness, eudaimonia. Binding the pursuit of happiness with the cultivation of an excellent or virtuous character framed within an overarching philosophical view of reality was central to the development of the Graeco-Christian apophatic tradition" (Cook).

By cultivating one's character to be virtuous, one can achieve happiness and flourishing for himself, while also being a benefit to those around him.  The person would not only be concerned about how to live well as an individual, but also how to live well as a father, employee, neighbor, or citizen.

One failing of this ethical framework is the requisite education and rigor needed to learn and pursue a virtuous life.  Because of humanity's primal urges for survival, many of our motivations and desires stem from our non-rational human instincts, and less educated people, who come from less 'lucky' circumstances are never afforded the opportunity to learn how to flourish.  To put it differently, we could ask "is it fair to praise the virtuous (and blame the vicious) for something that was outside of their control? (Athanassoulis).  This leaves open the possibility that virtue ethics is subject to moral luck.

If, however, humanity is able to devise a large-scale method for promoting the framework of virtue ethics, then perhaps moral luck is minimized, and as it flourishes, the framework and way of living becomes self-sustaining on the grand social scale.

References

Athanassoulis, Nafsika. “Virtue Ethics | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.” Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, iep.utm.edu/virtue/#SH3a.

Cook, Brendan. Pursuing Eudaimonia : Re-appropriating the Greek Philosophical Foundations of the Christian Apophatic Tradition, Cambridge Scholars Publisher, 2012.

Lukianoff, Greg. CODDLING of the AMERICAN MIND : How Good Intentions and Bad Ideas Are Setting up a Generation For... Failure. S.L., Penguin Books, 2019.

Letters from a Stoic 13 - On Groundless Fears

On Groundless Fears

Not everyone does it, but there are many who catastrophize things.  We may think the worst is going to happen, that we are going to die young, or our child will be mangled to death in a car wreck, or we'll contract the corona virus while shopping or that our child will be kidnapped while walking to school.

It's exhausting; thinking of all the possible things that could end up happening to us or our loved ones.  But the truth is, we are all dead in the end anyway.  Which is why, I think, the Stoics advocated practicing memento mori.  If you can get comfortable with death, then everything else should be a bit easier to deal with, emotionally speaking, and you can get on with life.

And once you get on with life and start taking your licks, you can begin to be truly tested and learn from adversity.

It is only in this way that the true spirit can be tested, – the spirit that will never consent to come under the jurisdiction of things external to ourselves.  This is the touchstone of such a spirit; no prizefighter can go with high spirits into the strife if he has never been beaten black and blue; the only contestant who can confidently enter the lists is the man who has seen his own blood, who has felt his teeth rattle beneath his opponent's fist, who has been tripped and felt the full force of his adversary's charge, who has been downed in body but not in spirit, one who, as often as he falls, rises again with greater defiance than ever.

Besides, even if you decide to engage in doubting and fear-mongering about your future and thinking the worst might happen, vastly more often than not, the worst you feared does not come to pass.

There are more things likely to frighten us than there are to crush us; we suffer more often in imagination than in reality. ... some things torment us more than they ought; some torment us before they ought; and some torment us when they ought not to torment us at all. We are in the habit of exaggerating, or imagining, or anticipating, sorrow.

Since I am prone to catastrophizing things, I've made it a habit to note, every day, the worst things that could happen.  Sometimes I write down things that might happen that very day and other times I write down things that may happen at any time or far into the future.  Then at the end of the day, I make sure to ask myself if the catastrophe happened.  So far, the catastrophes I've dreamt of have not happened.

On some of the catastrophes I think if, I will pivot into a premeditatio malorum and assume that they legitimately will happen.  I then let my mind process the emotions and then I begin to think of the wise reaction.  From there, I outline the next few actions I would take.

Often, especially in today's uber-safetyism society, we allow ourselves to be carried away with fear and panic, when it is not warranted.  In the 1990s, when I was in high school, the fear of children being kidnapped was exceptionally high.  I remember when every kid I knew, would often wander my city, on his or her bike, with no adult supervision.  We would be gone for hours and hours, before returning home in time for dinner.  But then that all changed with the introduction of John Walsh's crusade, after his son was kidnapped and murdered.  Every kid who grew up in the 1980s and 90s remembers the pictures of kids on milk cartons.

Eventually, parents everywhere, were uber-cautious about letting their child walk or ride their bike alone.  Kids were told to walk in packs and never to take candy from strangers.  To be sure, all of these are wise practices.  But have parents gone too far?  Have they, for the sake of safety, not allowed their kids to spend hours and hours outside, playing and riding bikes?

Jonathan Haidt and Greg Lukianoff, think we have let safetyism (another form of catastrophizing) run amok.  Consider this passage on kidnapping statistics:

The abduction and murder of a child by a stranger is among the most horrific crimes one can imagine. It is also, thankfully, among the rarest. According to the FBI, almost 90% of children who go missing have either miscommunicated their plans, misunderstood directions, or run away from home or foster care, and 99.8% of the time, missing children come home. The vast majority of those who are abducted are taken by a biological parent who does not have custody; the number abducted by a stranger is a tiny fraction of 1% of children reported missing—roughly one hundred children per year in a nation with more than 70 million minors. And since the 1990s, the rates of all crimes against children have gone down, while the chances of a kidnapped child surviving the ordeal have gone up. (Haidt, Lukianoff, The Coddling of the American Mind, in the section entitled "A Parent's Worst Fear")

After I read the above paragraph, I was in a state of shock about how astronomically over-protective and worried I've been with my kids!  There are far many more things to be worried about than having my child be kidnapped.

At the time of this writing (August 2020), America and the world are in the grip of fear about the corona virus.  So much is not known about the virus and people are so fearful of death, that we have effectively shutdown society.  Many wonder if we have over-reacted.  Just yesterday, I pulled the statistics on COVID-19 deaths and found that the vast majority of deaths related to COVID-19, occur in people who have retired.  Well over 95% of the deaths are age 55 and older.  The younger a person is, the death-rate drops off significantly.  Yet, we act as though the virus is killing both the old and young on a grand scale.  We have not heeded the advice of Seneca.

Yes, my dear Lucilius; we agree too quickly with what people say. We do not put to the test those things which cause our fear; we do not examine into them; we blench and retreat just like soldiers who are forced to abandon their camp because of a dust-cloud raised by stampeding cattle, or are thrown into a panic by the spreading of some unauthenticated rumour. ... that which arises from uncertainty is delivered over to guesswork and the irresponsible license of a frightened mind. That is why no fear is so ruinous and so uncontrollable as panic fear. For other fears are groundless, but this fear is witless.

Seneca goes so far as to argue, "life is not worth living, if we indulge our fears to the greatest possible extent."  Many senior citizens I've talked to, have said as much.  Sitting in a locked-down home and city and state and world is no way to live.  While temporary lockdowns may be prudent, the seemingly endless threats of lockdowns and shutting of stores and economies makes monks of us all.  While sad, I was yet impressed with a recent headline of a loving couple who refused to be separated in the twilight of their years.  She contracted corona virus and was quarantined, yet he was told to stay away.  He refused, and spent time with his bride.  He too contracted COVID-19 and they both died.  From a news article, their daughter is quoted, “he knew the risks,” she said. “There wasn’t anything any of us could have done to have talked him out of that. He would have gotten himself there one way or the other to see her. I do believe that.”

Now, lest you think I'm a cold-hearted bastard who cares nothing of life - I agree that we need to socially distance ourselves where appropriate; that we should wear masks where appropriate; that we should follow guidance where and when it is wise.  But we need to be mindful of over-doing the fear and anxiety.

Accordingly, weigh carefully your hopes as well as your fears, and whenever all the elements are in doubt, decide in your own favour; believe what you prefer. And if fear wins a majority of the votes, incline in the other direction anyhow, and cease to harass your soul, reflecting continually that most mortals, even when no troubles are actually at hand or are certainly to be expected in the future, become excited and disquieted ... We let ourselves drift with every breeze; we are frightened at uncertainties, just as if they were certain. We observe no moderation. The slightest thing turns the scales and throws us forthwith into a panic.

And in closing, Seneca reminds us to get busy living.  It is the foolish man, who in old age is getting ready to live.  The order should be reversed.  The young man should be getting ready to live and then get on living with life.

Letters from a Stoic 9 - On Philosophy and Friendship

On Philosophy and Friendship

In sum, the Stoic sage is self-content.  He or she can derive eudaimonia with or without friends - there is no need, for the sage, to achieve eudaimonia by looking towards externals to grant them.  Now, with that stated, the Stoic would prefer to have friends and be a friend.

To begin, Seneca discusses a nuance between the Epicureans*  Cynics and the Stoics.  I'm still trying to digest it to ensure I fully understand it.  But here is the passage:

There is this difference between ourselves and the other school*: our ideal wise man feels his troubles, but overcomes them; their wise man does not even feel them. But we and they alike hold this idea, – that the wise man is self-sufficient

I understand Seneca to mean that the Stoic sage feels emotions, but learns to deal with them with a rational response.  While the Epicurean* Cynic sage achieves a state of experiencing no emotions.

Seneca goes on to note that while the Stoic sage is self-content, even without friends, he still would prefer to have friends.  He compares this to other losses a Stoic might experience and how he would react.

If he lose a hand through disease or war, or if some accident puts out one or both of his eyes, he will be satisfied with what is left, taking as much pleasure in his impaired and maimed body as he took when it was sound. But while he does not pine for these parts if they are missing, he prefers not to lose them.

This passage reminds me of a phrase I recently heard while listening to the audio book The Coddling of the American Mind by Haidt and Lukianoff.  As a father or mother, the proper parenting mindset to have is to prepare the child for the road, not the road for the child.  In this mindset, the child represents the human will and attitude, and the road is symbolic of the world and everything in it.  If you want to achieve eudaimonia then you can achieve it with Stoic philosophy.  But if you think you'll achieve eudaimonia by trying to change the world to your expectations and will,  you will fail.

So in the event that you are unjustly accused or exiled or get cancer or you lose a friend or child to death, you can adapt yourself to the circumstance instead of getting stuck in a mental trap of thinking that circumstances and the universe should conform to your preconceived expectations.

And bringing the topic back to friendship, Seneca makes the excellent point that even in the event you lose a friend, there is much to be said in the pleasure it brings to acquire new friends.  Just as the Stoic learns and masters the art of achieving eudaimonia, so too can he learn and master the art of making new friends.

Now there is great pleasure, not only in maintaining old and established friendships, but also in beginning and acquiring new ones. 

He also makes the observation that it is the process of making new friends that is fulfilling and he supports this with the idea that parents love to be parents when they are actively parenting.  And when the child is fully grown, the opportunities of parenting are less and they may miss those times when they were raising their children.

In the case of our children, their young manhood yields the more abundant fruits, but their infancy was sweeter.

On the topic of practicing friendship, Seneca notes that this is the area where the Stoic has the opportunity to demonstrate virtue.  A Stoic will look for a friend in order to have opportunities to practice virtue.  While some people will want friends, so that when they are in a bind, their friends can help them out, Stoics will want friends so that when their friends are in a bind, the Stoic has opportunities to practice virtue.

The wise man, I say, self-sufficient though he be, nevertheless desires friends if only for the purpose of practising friendship, in order that his noble qualities may not lie dormant. Not, however, for the purpose mentioned by Epicurus in the letter quoted above: "That there may be someone to sit by him when he is ill, to help him when he is in prison or in want;" but that he may have someone by whose sick-bed he himself may sit, someone a prisoner in hostile hands whom he himself may set free. He who regards himself only, and enters upon friendships for this reason, reckons wrongly.

He notes that friendship which starts on the premise of reward and payment, such friendship will most likely end as such.

He who begins to be your friend because it pays will also cease because it pays. A man will be attracted by some reward offered in exchange for his friendship, if he be attracted by aught in friendship other than friendship itself.

Seneca then gets more into the details of the nuance of self-sufficiency and friends.  In so explaining, he notes the Stoic concept of Eternal Recurrence and the conflagration and cycles of the Cosmos (Nature).

Therefore, although he is self-sufficient, yet he has need of friends. He craves as many friends as possible, not, however, that he may live happily; for he will live happily even without friends. The Supreme Good calls for no practical aids from outside; it is developed at home, and arises entirely within itself. If the good seeks any portion of itself from without, it begins to be subject to the play of Fortune. 

People may say: "But what sort of existence will the wise man have, if he be left friendless when thrown into prison, or when stranded in some foreign nation, or when delayed on a long voyage, or when cast upon a lonely shore?" His life will be like that of Jupiter, who, amid the dissolution of the world, when the gods are confounded together and Nature rests for a space from her work, can retire into himself and give himself over to his own thoughts.

It is part of our nature to want sociability.  To deny such would be to deny our very nature.  But is it a requirement to be in the constant presence of friends, essential to achieving eudaimonia?  The Stoic response is: no.  Even God/Nature/the Cosmos goes through periods of solitary time in contemplation.  A practicing Stoic, too, would choose to spend time alone, in contemplation.  Just as today's modern stoics take cold showers and fast, to practice hardship, so too the Stoic should incorporate time alone into her routine.

Stilbo offers the right perspective and demonstrates true equanimity regardless of fate.

after his country was captured and his children and his wife lost, as he emerged from the general desolation alone and yet happy, spoke as follows to Demetrius, called Sacker of Cities because of the destruction he brought upon them, in answer to the question whether he had lost anything: "I have all my goods with me!"  There is a brave and stout-hearted man for you! The enemy conquered, but Stilbo conquered his conqueror. "I have lost nothing!" Aye, he forced Demetrius to wonder whether he himself had conquered after all. "My goods are all with me!" In other words, he deemed nothing that might be taken from him to be a good.

I'm not sure how I could endure the same fate as Stilbo.  This is a premeditatio malorum exercise I'll have to contemplate.  And it is this kind of exercise Epictetus wants us to practice too.  We may need to start small - with a favorite coffee mug - and then work our way up to a circumstance similar to what Stilbo actually faced.

It is awe-inspiring to see such fortitude in Stilbo.  Seneca writes in admiration:

We marvel at certain animals because they can pass through fire and suffer no bodily harm; but how much more marvellous is a man who has marched forth unhurt and unscathed through fire and sword and devastation! Do you understand now how much easier it is to conquer a whole tribe than to conquer one man? This saying of Stilbo makes common ground with Stoicism; the Stoic also can carry his goods unimpaired through cities that have been burned to ashes; for he is self-sufficient. Such are the bounds which he sets to his own happiness.

Three quotes, to wrap up this letter.  Three quotes to contemplate in your solitude today.

"Whoever does not regard what he has as most ample wealth, is unhappy, though he be master of the whole world." 

"A man may rule the world and still be unhappy, if he does not feel that he is supremely happy."

"Folly is ever troubled with weariness of itself."

And an alternate translation of the same quote above ... "All foolishness suffers the burden of dissatisfaction with itself."

* Sep 24, 2020 - Thanks to a Instagram follower, he helped to make a correction on this post.  the other school: the wikisource makes it clear that the other school is the Cynics.  The Penguin 2004 edition reads "The difference here between the Epicurean and our own school..." which makes it read that Seneca is comparing the Epicureans and the Stoics, when in fact he is comparing the Epicureans/Stoics and the Cynics.  I've revised the post accordingly.