Discourses · Chapter
XXVIII: That We Ought Not to Be Angry with Men; and What Are the Small and the Great Things Among Men explained
Epictetus argues that anger toward others is irrational because all human actions are driven by appearances (opinions) of what is good or beneficial.
What happens
Epictetus argues that anger toward others is irrational because all human actions are driven by appearances (opinions) of what is good or beneficial. He distinguishes between trivial external events (like loss of property or life) and the truly great evils: the corruption of one's character, fidelity, modesty, and intelligence. Using examples from Homer and Euripides, he shows that tragedies arise from mistaken appearances, and that we should pity rather than blame those who err, just as we pity the blind or lame.
Themes in this chapter
Rationality and Self-Examination
Epictetus urges examining appearances and using reason (like a scale or rule) to judge what is truly good or evil, rather than acting rashly.
Desire and Aversion
The chapter shows how mistaken desires (e.g., for revenge or a mistress) arise from false appearances and lead to moral ruin.
Social Duty and Friendship
Epictetus emphasizes social community, fidelity, and modesty as the true measures of a person's worth, contrasting them with trivial external losses.
Characters to notice
- Epictetus
Primary speaker; teaches that anger is misplaced and that true ruin lies in the loss of moral character.
- Alexander the Great
Cited as an example: his real ruin was not the destruction of Troy but the loss of modesty, fidelity, and decency.
- Achilles
Used to illustrate that his ruin began with anger over a girl, not the death of Patroclus.
- Medea
Example of someone who acts on a false appearance, knowing the evil but following passion.
- Menelaus
Mentioned in the hypothetical: if he had seen the loss of Helen as a gain, the Iliad and Odyssey would not exist.
- Helen
Her decision to follow Alexander was based on appearance, contributing to the Trojan War.
Key passages
“What is the cause of assenting to anything? The fact that it appears to be true. It is not possible then to assent to that which appears not to be true.”
We only agree with something because it seems true to us; we cannot genuinely agree with what seems false.
Epictetus explains the psychological necessity of assent based on appearances.
“Whoever then clearly remembers this, that to man the measure of every act is the appearance (the opinion)—whether the thing appears good or bad: if good, he is free from blame; if bad, himself suffers the penalty... whoever remembers this will not be angry with any man, will not be vexed at any man, will not revile or blame any man, nor hate nor quarrel with any man.”
If you understand that everyone acts according to what seems good to them, you will stop being angry or blaming others, because they are only following their own judgment.
Core Stoic teaching on compassion and non-anger.
“The Iliad is nothing else than appearance and the use of appearances. It appeared to Alexander to carry off the wife of Menelaus: it appeared to Helene to follow him. If then it had appeared to Menelaus to feel that it was a gain to be deprived of such a wife, what would have happened? Not only would the Iliad have been lost, but the Odyssey also.”
The entire Trojan War story is just a series of choices based on appearances. If Menelaus had seen the loss of Helen as a benefit, neither epic would exist.
Epictetus uses Homer to show how small changes in perception can alter vast events.
