Boni Gone Bad: Cicero’s Critique of Epicureanism in De Finibus 1 and 2

IF 0.3 3区 历史学 0 CLASSICS POLIS Pub Date : 2023-02-06 DOI:10.1163/20512996-12340389
M. Clarke
{"title":"Boni Gone Bad: Cicero’s Critique of Epicureanism in De Finibus 1 and 2","authors":"M. Clarke","doi":"10.1163/20512996-12340389","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThis paper argues that Cicero’s critique of Epicureanism in De finibus is motivated by a concern about its degrading effect on the moral sensibility of Rome’s best men. In place of earlier objections to Epicureanism, which centered on its inability to explain or recommend the virtuous conduct of Roman maiores, De finibus focuses on its inability to do so properly and, more prospectively, to assist boni in the work of maintaining the dignity and respectability of Roman civic life. Responding to optimates like Cassius who claimed that Epicureanism was compatible with Roman politics because it treats virtue as being necessary for pleasure, Cicero holds that instrumentalizing virtue in this way is actually a grave corruption of it. Not only do Epicureans debase politics by reducing it to considerations of utility alone: they also introduce deeper forms of civic confusion by distorting and abusing the very idea of honorableness.","PeriodicalId":43237,"journal":{"name":"POLIS","volume":"113 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"POLIS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/20512996-12340389","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"CLASSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper argues that Cicero’s critique of Epicureanism in De finibus is motivated by a concern about its degrading effect on the moral sensibility of Rome’s best men. In place of earlier objections to Epicureanism, which centered on its inability to explain or recommend the virtuous conduct of Roman maiores, De finibus focuses on its inability to do so properly and, more prospectively, to assist boni in the work of maintaining the dignity and respectability of Roman civic life. Responding to optimates like Cassius who claimed that Epicureanism was compatible with Roman politics because it treats virtue as being necessary for pleasure, Cicero holds that instrumentalizing virtue in this way is actually a grave corruption of it. Not only do Epicureans debase politics by reducing it to considerations of utility alone: they also introduce deeper forms of civic confusion by distorting and abusing the very idea of honorableness.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
坏坏的博尼:西塞罗对伊壁鸠鲁主义的批判《论终结》第一、二章
本文认为,西塞罗在《论终结》中对伊壁鸠鲁主义的批判,其动机是担心其对罗马最优秀的人的道德感知力的贬低作用。早期对伊壁鸠鲁主义的反对,主要集中在它无法解释或推荐罗马贵族的美德行为,而《论终结》的重点是它无法正确地做到这一点,更有前景地,在维护罗马公民生活的尊严和体面的工作中帮助boni。像卡修斯这样的理想主义者声称伊壁鸠鲁主义与罗马政治是相容的,因为它认为美德是快乐的必要条件,西塞罗认为,以这种方式将美德工具化实际上是对美德的严重腐化。伊壁鸠鲁主义者不仅通过将政治简化为对效用的考虑而贬低政治,而且还通过扭曲和滥用诚实的概念而引入更深层次的公民困惑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
POLIS
POLIS CLASSICS-
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
33
审稿时长
7 weeks
期刊最新文献
The Concept of Partnership in Book II of the Republic Socratic Contempt for Wealth in Plato’s Republic Praxis as Property: the Concept of Justice in Plato’s Republic Political Performativity in Performance Culture: Xenophon’s Hipparchikos and the Dithyrambic Chorus The King’s House or the Tyrant’s Palace? Rethinking Persia in Herodotus’s History
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1