A truly fascinating journey into ancient thought, Rene Brouwer's book, "The Stoic Sage," does a wonderful job of guiding us through this core Stoic concept. Think of it as unlocking the secrets of what wisdom really meant to those brilliant minds from the third century BCE onwards. It wasn't just about knowing things; it was something far more profound and integrated into the very fabric of life and the cosmos itself! This study takes a close look at the Stoic conception of wisdom, moving beyond simple summaries to explore what wisdom _was_, how incredibly difficult it was to achieve, why it was so rare, and even whether the Stoics themselves believed anyone, including themselves, had reached this pinnacle. It's based on a fresh look at the ancient evidence, which is pretty exciting because it helps us see these ideas anew. While ancient evidence on early Stoicism can be scattered, especially from thinkers like Zeno, Cleanthes, and Chrysippus, this book attempts to reconstruct their core doctrines on the sage and wisdom, sometimes drawing on later sources like Seneca or Plutarch when they shed light on the founders' ideas. **So, What Did the Stoics Mean by "Wisdom"? Unpacking the Definitions** The sources highlight two main definitions of Stoic wisdom, and understanding these is like holding two keys to unlock their whole system of thought. 1. **"Knowledge of human and divine matters"**. This is perhaps the most well-known definition. At first glance, it might sound a bit general, but the Stoics packed it with specific meaning. The book explores the evidence showing that the Stoics were indeed the first to formulate this definition explicitly, even though it sometimes got attributed to Plato later on. This definition wasn't just a philosophical tidbit; it was deeply connected to core Stoic doctrines. - **Connecting the Dots: Elements and the Parts of Philosophy:** To understand this definition better, we can connect its three elements – knowledge, human matters, and divine matters – to the three parts of philosophy that the Stoics distinguished: logic, ethics, and physics. Think of philosophy as a field with these three main areas. - **Ethics and Human Matters:** Ethics was concerned with human life and everything related to us. So, 'human matters' naturally fits into the ethical part. - **Physics and Divine Matters:** Physics was about the cosmos and everything in it. This link to 'divine matters' might seem less obvious initially, but not for the Stoics! Their standard teaching was that nature or the cosmos _is_ divine, even identified with God. So, understanding the cosmos through physics was, in a sense, understanding the divine. - **Logic and Knowledge:** Logic (which the Stoics understood broadly, including epistemology or the theory of knowledge) is the key to 'knowledge'. The Stoics had specific ways of defining knowledge. - **What is Stoic Knowledge?** The sources give us a couple of ways the Stoics defined knowledge (`epistēmē`). - One definition is "a secure cognition". It's a grasp of something that is "unshakeable by reason". - Another definition describes knowledge as "a tenor that in the reception of impressions cannot be shaken by reason". 'Tenor' (`hexis`) refers to an enduring disposition. In the context of knowledge and virtue, this implies a stable, unshakeable disposition of the soul, sometimes called 'character' (`diathesis`). - **Putting Knowledge and the Elements Together:** So, wisdom, as knowledge of human and divine matters, involves having a secure, unshakeable grasp (cognition) of ethics and physics. It's also a fundamental disposition or character that is stable and unshakeable in its reception of impressions regarding human and divine things. - **Not Omniscience!** It's important to note that this didn't mean the Stoic sage knew absolutely everything – they weren't omniscient. The sources explicitly state that the sage might still need to learn specific things, like the 'principles' for being a diviner, poet, or rhetorician. Seneca, a later Stoic, even mentions that a sage will have "something to discover" and that "a sage does not know everything". Wisdom was more about a fundamental understanding and a perfect disposition, not encyclopedic knowledge. - **Know Thyself:** The Stoics connected wisdom, understood as secure cognition of human and divine matters, to the traditional Delphic maxim "know thyself". For the Stoics, this self-knowledge meant understanding one's own rational human nature _as a part of the nature of the whole cosmos_. Cicero (as reported in the sources) highlights how this self-knowledge connects to all three parts of philosophy: realizing one's rational nature makes one a good person (ethics), a citizen of the world (physics), and able to distinguish truth from falsehood (logic). - **Wisdom as Disposition and Cosmic Nature:** The dispositional side of knowledge is deeply tied to the Stoic view of nature. They saw the cosmos as a living, ensouled being pervaded by an active principle (force, breath, _pneuma_), which in its purest form is reason or Zeus. The sage's perfect disposition is seen as participating in this cosmic reason in the most powerful way – their nature is like the same pure, rational nature of the cosmic force. This means the sage's life isn't just _consistent_ with cosmic order (following its plan); it's also about _having the same nature_ as the cosmic force. - **Excellence (Arete):** This understanding of wisdom as both cognition and disposition also links up with the Stoic notion of excellence (`aretē`). The sources point out that 'excellence' is often a better translation than 'virtue' because the Stoics used the term more broadly, not just for moral qualities. Excellence, in general, is the perfection of a thing. Human excellence is "the natural perfection of a rational being as a rational being". Like knowledge and wisdom, excellence is understood both in terms of cognitions (e.g., excellences of logic, physics, ethics as "threefold product of the human mind") and as a disposition ("consistent character," "stable and unshakeable reason"). The excellence of the sage is either the cognition of their nature or their state of character, always related to the nature of the whole. Ultimately, from this perfect disposition, the sage can "understand and act well in any given circumstance". 2. **"Fitting expertise"**. This second definition is perhaps less discussed, but equally important. The sources suggest it parallels the first definition quite closely. - **Understanding Expertise:** Similar to knowledge, the Stoics had two definitions for expertise (`technē`). One is "a system of cognitions unified by training towards some useful end in life". The other is a "tenor that accomplishes everything methodically". Chrysippus clarified the latter, adding "with impressions" to make it "a tenor that proceeds methodically with impressions". These definitions show expertise involves both systematic understanding (cognitions) and a skilled disposition (tenor). - **What Makes Wisdom "Fitting"?** Wisdom is seen as a supreme expertise. The sources suggest its 'fitting' nature might relate to the sage's ability to know _why_ things happen, not just _how_. Seneca compares the geometer (knowing how) with the sage (knowing why, understanding causes). This highlights wisdom as a higher-level expertise that explains and provides causes, acting as an 'organon' for other kinds of knowledge. - **Parallel Structure:** Just like the first definition, wisdom as fitting expertise also relates to the interconnectedness of logic, ethics, and physics. It enables the sage to act in accordance with the structure of the world, implying an understanding of both human affairs (ethics) and the cosmos (physics), guided by correct reasoning (logic). It is a "fitting expertise" precisely because it allows the sage to act in alignment with the "expert-like structure of the world". It is also understood as an "expert-like disposition". So, in sum, Stoic wisdom is a rich concept involving both a perfect, unshakeable understanding of human and divine matters (ethics and physics, facilitated by logic) and a stable, perfectly rational disposition or character that flows from this understanding, enabling the sage to live and act 'fittingly' in line with the rational nature of the cosmos. **How Did Someone Become This Sage? The Radical Change** Now, if wisdom is this perfect state, how does one actually get there? This is where things get particularly interesting, as the sources describe the transition to wisdom as quite dramatic. - **The Last Step:** The book focuses on the final stage of becoming a sage. While there's a long process of developing one's reason (often called 'progress' or _prokopē_), the actual change _to_ wisdom is described in remarkable terms. - **Instantaneous and Radical:** According to the sources, this change isn't gradual; it's instantaneous. It's a radical shift from one extreme state (being vicious, ignorant, unstable) to the complete opposite (virtuous, knowledgeable, stable, wise). Think of it as a switch flipping, not a slow fade. - **Potentially Unnoticed:** Perhaps most remarkably, this sudden, radical transformation might initially go unnoticed by the person undergoing it. This contrasts sharply with other philosophical or religious conversion experiences. It's more like someone who has perfectly mastered a craft – their skill might seem effortless and perhaps even unremarkable to them initially, though their performance is perfect. - **The Paradoxes:** The description of this change often comes bundled with Stoic paradoxes. For instance, someone who was 'most vicious' can suddenly become virtuous. Or they might change from being 'unstable and ignorant' to 'stable and holding no opinions'. Even stranger, the change is described in terms of physical states – from wrinkled and sallow to seemly and godlike, from slave and poor to king and rich. These paradoxes, while seemingly absurd according to common sense (a sage might be poor but is truly rich because wealth lies in virtue), highlight the radical, virtue-based revaluation of values that comes with sagehood. - **Connecting the Change to the Parts of Philosophy:** Just like wisdom itself, the radical change can be understood through the lens of the three parts of philosophy. - **Ethical Change:** The shift from vice to virtue is the most prominent ethical change. Since virtue is defined as a stable character that doesn't admit of degrees (you either have it perfectly or you don't), the transition must be radical. The ethical paradoxes (slave to king, poor to rich) underscore this radical redefinition of 'good' based on virtue alone. - **Logical/Epistemological Change:** The change involves moving from having unstable cognitions and holding opinions (ignorance) to having secure, stable cognitions and holding no opinions (knowledge). Since knowledge, like virtue, is a state of perfect grasp, the change from ignorance to knowledge is seen as radical. - **Physical Change:** The sources hint that this transformation could be described in physical terms. Based on the Stoic hierarchy of nature (scala naturae), mature human beings have a rational faculty, but sages (and gods) are on a higher level, characterized by perfected reason or mind. This perfected reason might be understood as a qualitative, physical change to a purer state of the cosmic active principle, which the Stoics sometimes identified with fire. This physical shift to a state of 'unmixed, pure fire' could be the underlying basis for the radical changes seen in ethics (virtue as a stable soul state) and logic (knowledge as a secure, unshakeable grasp or disposition). From this perfect state, described as virtue, perfect reason, or even divine fire, the sage lives what the Stoics called a "good flow of life". They are said to be in a state of _apathy_ (free from disturbing emotions like suffering caused by incorrect judgments), _eupathy_ (experiencing appropriate 'good passions' like joy), and _sympathy_ (living in accordance with and being part of the cosmic reason). **The Rarity of the Sage: Did Any Stoics Make the Cut?** Given how demanding this ideal is, a natural question arises: Did anyone ever actually become a sage? And, perhaps more pointedly, did the Stoics themselves claim to be sages?. - **The Ideal vs. Reality:** The sources strongly suggest that the Stoics viewed the sage as incredibly rare. Expressions like the sage being "rarer than the Ethiopians' phoenix" (a mythical bird said to appear only once every 500 years) or that "just one or two sages have come into existence" are used to emphasize this rarity. These 'one or two' sages might have been seen as mythical figures like Heracles and Odysseus, not historical individuals. - **"Up Till Now the Sage Has Not Been Found":** The sources, including Sextus Empiricus, Cicero, and Seneca, indicate that the Stoics themselves held the view that "up till now the sage has not been found" in historical times. This seems to have been a common Stoic observation. - **Stoics Did Not Claim Sagehood:** Investigating the evidence about the Stoic founders themselves (Zeno, Cleanthes, Chrysippus) and their immediate followers (Sphaerus, Persaeus) suggests they did _not_ claim to be sages. - Sextus Empiricus reports that "according to the Stoics themselves," Zeno, Cleanthes, Chrysippus, and others from their school were considered "inferior persons" (non-sages). - Quintilian reports that when asked if Zeno, Cleanthes, and Chrysippus were sages, Stoics would reply that these men were important and venerable but did not achieve the highest human perfection. - Anecdotes about figures like Sphaerus, who was tested by a king, make more sense if interpreted as showing Sphaerus making significant _progress_ towards wisdom rather than already being a sage. The term 'progress' (_prokopē_) was a Stoic term for someone on the path to wisdom but not yet arrived. - The evidence strongly suggests that Chrysippus, a key figure in early Stoicism, explicitly did not consider himself a sage. - **Why the Denial?** This denial of sagehood, even among the most respected figures, underscores the incredibly high standard of the Stoic ideal. If even the founders weren't sages, it highlights just how radical and difficult the transition to wisdom was considered to be. **The Guiding Light: Socrates' Influence** Why would the Stoics set such an incredibly high bar for wisdom? The sources point to a major source of inspiration: Socrates. The Stoics consciously saw themselves as "followers of Socrates". - **Socrates' Search and Denial:** The Stoics were deeply influenced by how Socrates presented himself, particularly in Plato's writings like the _Apology_ and _Phaedrus_. - In the _Apology_, Socrates describes his life's pursuit as searching for wisdom, motivated by the Oracle of Delphi saying no one was wiser than he was. Through questioning others, Socrates realized his 'wisdom' lay simply in being aware of his own ignorance, unlike those who thought they knew but didn't. - In the _Phaedrus_, Socrates offers a famous self-portrait, saying he hasn't yet achieved self-knowledge and is still investigating whether he is a complex beast or a simpler, more cultivated human being with a divine portion. - **Stoic Appropriation:** The Stoics appear to have taken these portraits very seriously. They echoed Socrates' emphasis on the _search_ for wisdom. Crucially, Socrates' denial of possessing true wisdom, especially as the 'wisest of all human beings' according to the oracle, provided a powerful precedent for the Stoics to deny their own sagehood. If even Socrates didn't claim wisdom, who could?. - **Echoes in Terminology:** The sources show striking similarities between Stoic terminology and Socrates' language in the _Phaedrus_. Terms like _atuphos_ ('free from vanity/confusion'), 'simple' and 'cultivated', and 'portion' (_moira_) echo Socrates' self-description. The Stoics seem to have reinterpreted Socrates' words, seeing hints of their own ideal of the sage in his descriptions of his own condition. They might have seen Socrates' search for self-knowledge, possibly allegorized through his mention of the monster Typhon, as a metaphor for overcoming ignorance and realizing the divine rational principle within oneself. - **Making the Implicit Explicit:** The book suggests that the Stoic definition of wisdom as "knowledge of human and divine matters" can be seen as making explicit what was implicit in Socrates' thought. Xenophon's account of Socrates discussing justice and piety in terms of "lawful" matters that are both human and divine provides potential roots for this specific formulation. For the Stoics, who saw cosmic reason as divine law, articulating this link between knowledge and human/divine matters was perhaps their way of carrying forward Socrates' mission. This strong Socratic connection helps explain the lofty nature of the Stoic sage. They weren't just creating a theoretical ideal; they were following in the footsteps of philosophy's most iconic figure, who himself pursued wisdom relentlessly while acknowledging his own limitations. **Wrapping Up the Stoic Sage** In essence, the sources show us that the Stoics developed a profound and challenging conception of wisdom. It's captured in two definitions pointing to both a perfect understanding of reality (human and divine matters, tied to ethics, physics, and logic) and a flawless, stable disposition reflecting the rational nature of the cosmos. Becoming a sage involves a radical, instantaneous, and perhaps even initially unnoticed qualitative change. This state of perfection was considered incredibly rare, maybe even only achieved by mythical figures. Consequently, the Stoics themselves, following the lead of figures like Socrates who denied possessing wisdom, did not claim to be sages, instead emphasizing their status as making 'progress' towards the ideal. Their engagement with Socrates was deep, seeing in his life and words the very search and self-awareness that underpinned their own philosophical project. **Thinking Further...** Exploring the Stoic sage opens up many avenues for further thought: - What does the Stoic idea of an "instantaneous, radical change" to a state of perfection tell us about our own ideas of self-improvement or transformation? Is genuine, fundamental change ever truly sudden, or is it always the result of long preparation? - How does the Stoic understanding of wisdom as a disposition or character, intertwined with the rational nature of the cosmos, compare to modern ideas of wisdom or expertise? Do we still value a kind of knowledge that is deeply embodied and connected to understanding the fundamental nature of things? - The Stoics used Socrates' acknowledgment of ignorance as a model. Could embracing our own limitations and focusing on the pursuit of understanding, rather than claiming to have arrived, be a valuable approach in today's world? - The Stoic sage is free from inappropriate emotions (_apathy_) but experiences appropriate 'good passions' (_eupathy_) and feels connected to the cosmos (_sympathy_). How might this nuanced view of emotions in the wise person challenge common modern understandings of 'Stoicism' as simply suppressing feelings? - Considering the rarity of the sage, how important are philosophical or ethical ideals if they are presented as almost unattainable? Do they serve as genuine goals, or primarily as conceptual tools to highlight the shortcomings of ordinary life?