Discourses · Chapter
Against the Academics explained
Epictetus discusses the challenge of arguing with those who deny evident truths, comparing their stubbornness to a stone.
What happens
Epictetus discusses the challenge of arguing with those who deny evident truths, comparing their stubbornness to a stone. He distinguishes between two kinds of hardening: one of the understanding and one of the sense of shame. He criticizes those who care more about bodily mortification than the soul's, and argues that a deadened sense of shame is worse than a dead man, as the rational faculty becomes brutalized.
Themes in this chapter
Rationality and Self-Examination
Epictetus emphasizes the importance of rational assent and the danger of a deadened sense of shame, which prevents self-examination and improvement.
Characters to notice
- Epictetus
The speaker who argues against those who oppose evident truths and criticizes the deadening of the soul's sense of shame.
Key passages
“If a man, said Epictetus, opposes evident truths, it is not easy to find arguments by which we shall make him change his opinion.”
When someone denies obvious facts, it's hard to reason them out of it.
Epictetus introduces the difficulty of arguing with those who reject self-evident truths.
“Most of us are afraid of mortification of the body, and would contrive all means to avoid such a thing, but we care not about the soul’s mortification.”
We go to great lengths to avoid physical harm, but neglect the decay of our character.
Epictetus contrasts concern for the body with neglect of the soul.
“He does perceive, but he pretends that he does not. He is even worse than a dead man.”
He sees the truth but feigns ignorance, making him worse than someone who is dead.
Epictetus condemns willful ignorance as worse than death.