Chapter One the SAYING of ANTISTHENES the ASKESIS of the EARLY GREEK CYNICS
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Chapter One THE SA YING OF ANTISTHENES & THE ASKESIS OF THE EARLY GREEK CYNICS ] 'aitOlgolfrs distinglle, en ejfet, dans Ie diJ"Collrs, Ie di11? et Ie dit. QIIe Ie di11? doive fomporterlin dit est line nefessite dllme me ord11? qlle felle qlli imp ose line societe, avec des lo is, des institlltions et des 11?lations so ciales. iVlaisIe dire, e'est Ie foit que de vant Ie visagei: ne restepas simplement /a a Ie contempler,je Ill i riponds. Ledire est linemaniere de saltier alllmi, mais saltier alltmi, e'est dija ripond11? de Illi. (E. Livinas, Ethiqlle et bifini, Paris: FCfYard, 1982, pp . 92-93) The valrle!essnw" ofItfo (die Werlhlosigkeit des le bms) was grasped by the 0nics, bllt it wasn 'tyet app lied against Itfl . (F.Nie tZJ·,·he, Posth"moIlJ" Fragments Slimmer 1882-Spnng 1884, 7[222J) Introduction In this part of the dissertation, I will be considering the early Greek Cynics, and particularly Antisthenes and Diogenes of Sinope. I will analyzeAntisthenes' ethics and theory of language before studying the ethics of the early Greek Cynics.l Rather than distinguishing between Antisthenes' ethics and theory oflanguage as most earlier scholars have done, I will try to show how his theory oflanguage 1 Our main primarysou rce fo r Antisthenes and the early Greek Cynics is Diogenes Laertius. The SL...:th book of his Lives and Opinions oj-Eminent Philosophersis dedicated to the early Cynics. There are also various references in Aristotle, Stobaeus, Plutarch, the Gnom% giJ{m Vati,"tlnllm, Philodemus, Clement of Alexandria, Sirnplicius,Julian, and Epictetus, just to cite a fe "T. The most complete collections of these references can be found in Fernanda Decleva Caizzi's Antisthenis Fragmenta, tvIilano: Istituto Editoriale Cisalpino, 1966, Gabriele Giannantoni's Socraticomm Reliqlliae, volumes II and III, Roma: Edizioni dell'Ateneo, 1983, and Leonce Paquet's Us Cyniqlles Grees, Ottawa: Presses de l'Universite d'Ottawa, 1988 (1975), and Paris: Librairie Generale de France, 1992. The mainse condary sources that have dealt directly with the subject-after E. Zeller,T. Gomperz, WI.Ja eger. K.Joe l, K. von Fritz, A.-J. Festugiere, and G. Rodier-are Donald C. Dudley, Farrand Sayre, R. HOlstad, I. M. Nakhov, H. D. Rankin,Marie-Odile Go ulet-Caze, Margarethe Billerbeke, Audrey N. M. Rich, Heinrich Niehus-Probsting, Aida Branccaci, and Robert Bracht Branham. is a practical application or a strategy that has direct implication fo r his ethical project. Antisthenes' ethical project consisted of making of philosophya way of living and acting rather than an elaboration of general theories involving concepts and universal considerations. Thisway ofliving entails a constant unlearning ofconventional habits and a continuous effort towards self-sufficiencyand the strengthening of one's character. In analyzing Antisthenes' theory of language, I will concentrate on his so-called "theory of unique enunciation." In order to linkAntisthenes' theory of language with his ethics and his anti-conventional stance, I will study his approach to communication before briefly assessing relevant similarities and differences between certain positions of Antisthenes and those of some Skeptics, Sophists, Cyrenaics, and Megarians. I will finally use concrete examples, drawn from reports of Antisthenes' and Diogenes' life stories, to support the claim that Antisthenes' approach to communication is a practical strategy supporting his ethical outlook. I will then present the Cynic way oflif e as exemplified by Diogenes of Sinope. I will describe how Diogenes and later Cynics rejected any approach that might have a theoretical framework and resorted instead to radical "direct action" mix ed with derision and mockery. Their way of living becomes an askesis that aims at getting away from laws and social conventions, but als o from honor, virtue, and the idea of "goodness" that Antisthenes was still attached to. Rather than having a set "measure" fo r their askesis--as Socrates was to Antisthenes-the Cynics wanted to become closer to beasts and to gods, something that is neither impossible nor possible to assess or concretize. While virtue cannot be unlearned fo r Antisthenes, there is no such virtue to be leamed, and nothing, or very little, has any lasting effects fo r Diogenes and the later Cynics who rejected most of Antisthenes ' positive practices-suchas his attempts to salvage celt1.inaspects of communicationby regulatingwhat in language should or shouldn't be used. What I will try to show is that practices such as anaideia and parrhesia were necessary fo r the Cynics in order to constandy di stance and differentiate themselves from 21 others and from cchonor," CCglory," and other ingrained values and beliefs set by conventions. For them, possessions of all sorts need to be given up: not only materialones but also the so-called ccspiritual" ones of the kind that Antisthenes proclaimed in Xenophon's Symposillm. The Cynic self-sufficiency doesn't present an economy that saves or accounts fo r constructing anything. Socrates and Antisthenes questioned laws and conventions in order to build on a more solid ground, a ground that is practical and more cctruthfuL" \"X'hil e fo r Socrates, this ground may be based on knowledge, and fo r Antisthenes, it may be based on strength ofcharacter and firmness of the will, Diogenes and the later Cynics could not look fo r a firmground nor could they want to solidly build anything, since the world is dominated by (yche and they have to learn to adapt to a process of constant change and transformation. AboutAntisthenes The child of an Athenian fa ther and a Thracian mother, Antisthenes 2 flourishedaround 420-370 B.C£' He became a close friend and associate of Socrates after reportedly studying with Gorgias of Leontium (fl. 440 B.C£' and visited Athens around 427 B.CE.) and had many ccsophist" friends, such as Prodicus and Hippias. Although wealthy enough not to worry about his livelihood, he professed extreme austerity-to the point where Socrates supposedly criticized him for showing off his tom cloak.3 Antisthenes is said to be one of the precursors, ifnot the fo under, of ancient Greek Cynicism. The opinions about this issue vary: some consider him the fo under of Cynicism, others claim that he has no relation whatsoever to Cynicism, whilea majority of today's scholarship finds clear indications 2 CE. Diogenes Laertius, Uoes ofEmi nent Philosophers VI, 1-19, R. D. Hicks (translator), Cambridge, London: Harvard University Press, 1991 (1925, 1931) and Xenophon, Banqlfet IV, 34-45, O. J Todd (translator), Cambridge, London: Harvard University Press, 1947 (1 922), as well as Donald R. Dudley, A His/oT] ofCyn idsm, pp. 1-16, HiIdesheim: Georg OIms Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1967 (1937), and Farrand Sayre, C<Antisthenes the Socratic" inDie I<;yllikerin dermodemen Forschlfng, Margarethe Billerbeck (editor), Amsterdam: B. R. Gruner, 1991, pp. 73-85. 3 Cf. Diogenes Laertius, VI, 8 and Aelian, Var. His!. LX , 35 (Caizzi 148A) . 22 that Cynic doctrines had been largely influenced by some of his positions. Traditional scholarship, fo llowing Diogenes Laertius and Cicero,oJ has considered Antisthenes to be the initiatorof the Cynic way of living. \V hile Zeller, Grote, Maier, Gomperz, Festugiere, and Rodier, continued to consider Antisthenes as the founder ofCynicism,5 Dudley-after Dupreel-tried to prove that Antisthenes had no C<direct connexion" with the Cynics and fo und in the need to trace a Stoic lineage, or C<succession," going back to Socrates the reason why he was ascribed this role.6 Dudley is supported by the fa ct that Aristode,Theop hrastus, and Xenophon do not associate Antistheneswith the Cynicsor with any major Cynic characteristics. Both Theophrastus and .Anstode were well aware of "Cynic" practices and one may speculate on why they neglected to point out any association between Antisthenes-and the "Antistheneans" (A ntistheneiot) -and Diogenes of Sin ope -or "the Dog."; Sayre also attempts to show, from a different angle, that Antisthenes had nothing to do \V- ith the Cynics, and joins Schwartz and Wilamowitz-Mollendorff in rejecting any connection of Antisthenes to the Cynics.8 Nowadays, fo llowing] oel and von Fritz, Giannantoni, Goulet-Caze, and most recendy Long, agree that Antisthenes oJ C£ Diogenes Laertius, VI, 2 and Cicero, De Oral. III, 17 (Caizzi 134B) . 5 Check the bibliography fo � references. 6 Cf. Dudley, A Hislory ofy' nicism, pp. 1-5 and Eugene Dupreel, La Lig ende SOtTaliqlle et les SOllrces de Platon, Bruxelles, 1922, pp. 372-386. Dupreel, finding support inPaul Tannery's "Sur Diodore d'Aspendos" (inArc hiv jiir Gesdlichte de r Philo sophie, 1896, p. 176) and inAesch ines' Te lattges and Cillias, tries to show that the Cynics were probably an off-shoot of a Pythagorean sect which could be traced to the Diodorus of Aspendos mentioned in Diogenes Laertius VI, 13 (and Athenaeus IV, 163E). i C£ Diogenes Laertius, V, 43, Aristotle's Top. 104b 20, Alet. 1024b 32 and 1043b 24, PoL 1284a 15, Rhet. 1407a 9-10 and 141 1a 24-25, as well as A.A. Long's "The Socratic Tradition" in The y'nit'J', Braham & Goulet-Caze (eds.), Berkeley, Los Angeles, and London: University ofCalifomia Press, 1996, pp. 28-46. Also c£ Goulet-CazC's most recent contributionto the reading of Aristotle's Rhet. 1411a 24-25 in "\'{fho was the Firs t Dog?," The y'nia, pp. 414-415. 8 Sayre, op. cit., pp.80-83; Schwartz, ''Diogenes der Hund und Krates derKyniker" inCh araklerkiipfi ailS derantiken Literatllr, volume 2, Leipzig: Teubner, 1911, pp. 1-23; and Wilamowitz-M6llendorff, U. von, Platon, Berlin: Weidemann, 1920, vol. 1, pp. 259ff, vol 2, pp. 162ff. 23 was not the founder of Cynicism but that he influenced Cynicism to a great extent.9 I subscribe to the view that Antisthenes has gready influenced the Cynics and, whether we consider him as a precursor of the movement or not, there is an intricate connectionbet ween some of his epistemological, linguistic, and ethical stances and the standpoints of Diogenes of Sinope and later Cynics.