Experience has taught me to be sceptical of philosophical or ideological proclamations, especially when they conflict with my own observations. Seneca (4 BC-65 BC) wrote abundantly about self-control and moderation, but I see too few successful examples in reality.
Did Seneca expect that people would adopt his philosophy? Would he wonder why, centuries later, practically everybody is ignoring is advice?
In the 56th Letter to Lucilius, Seneca stated that “The most precious wealth is to content oneself with a modest lifestyle.” I think that, when he wrote that statement, Seneca was talking to himself and possibly to the few people who read his writings in the first century of our era.
Do we see nowadays many people that content themselves with a humble lifestyle? I mean people who have consciously renounced ambition, advancement and improvement.
Truth be told, I know a few of those individuals, but their lifestyles are severely limited. I would not want to imitate their boring existence, which they sustain by restricting their desires to the barely minimum.
Self-improvement compared to Seneca’s moderation
I wonder if the obsession for moderation and self-discipline is derived from ignorance, but presented as deep philosophy. In fact, those people are devoting massive psychological energies to justify their humdrum lifestyle. Would it not be wiser to put those energies to a better use?
Seneca never answered this question, not event indirectly. I find it annoying that, instead of providing an answer, he came up with meaningless paradoxes. For instance, in his 61st Letter to Lucilius, he affirms that “if we aren’t happy with our present situation, we will remain unhappy after achieving our goals.”
I find Seneca’s prediction specious and insincere. It does not match reality and contradicts all historical experience. Let’s not question that well-fed people are happier than those that do not have enough to eat. Or that individuals who own a vehicle are happier than those who must take the bus.
Seneca’s error rests on his distorted vision of human nature. He argues that ambition is unwise because it feeds on envy, but that is rarely true. Envy and resentment are seldom the driving forces behind self-improvement.
In his “Nicomachean Ethics,” Aristotle (384-322 BC) had categorised self-improvement as a natural, healthy impulse. He regarded ambition as beneficial, provided that we set our goals by using reason.
Envy and Seneca’s doctrine of moderation
Envy does not play any role in the happiness equation, even if we draw motivation from someone else’s achievements. Our admiration for heroes should not be treated with disdain. It has everything to do with values, and nothing to do with envy.
We know that great authors such as Alphonse de Lamartine (1790-1869) and Victor Hugo (1802-1885) had drawn their inspiration from Rene Chateaubriand (1768-1848), a novelist from the previous generation.
There is nothing negative in their profound admiration for Chateaubriand’s achievements. Lamartine and Victor Hugo did not pursue a literary career out of envy for Chateaubriand. The motivation for their work is drawn from self-improvement and ambition, not from negative emotions.
Seneca’s doctrine becomes impractical if we apply it to intangible pursuits such as learning. Should we moderate our efforts when learning a foreign language? Mastering a foreign language requires lots of work. Should we embrace moderation and content ourselves with becoming moderately proficient?
The feasibility of Seneca’s moderation doctrine depends on its interpretation. A literal reading of Seneca’s writings doesn’t fulfil the needs of our century; however, we can draw immense benefits from his insights if we place them in today’s context.
A contemporary interpretation of Seneca’s moderation
The 104th Letter to Lucilius provides us the key to a modern interpretation of Seneca’s philosophy. The recommendations in this letter concern one’s health and physical appearance. Those play a major role in happiness, but we shouldn’t turn them into an obsession, warns Seneca.
Seneca warns us against considering out health and physical appearance “the most significant aspects in our lives.” He does not contest their central role, but is asking us to place them in perspective.
Their importance is cut down to size when we set them side by side with love, friendship, artistic contemplation, the pursuit of justice, and other crucial elements of human life.
Proportionality is the right interpretation of Seneca’s call for moderation. We can grow in effectiveness and happiness if we keep our concerns in balance. We need to allocate our attention and efforts rationally, but not equally.
Serenity, perspective and thoughtfulness are needed to keep our concerns in good balance. Proportionality, not moderation, is the key for rendering Seneca’s doctrines practicable today.
If you are interested in putting rational ideas into practice in all kind of situations, I recommend you my book “Asymmetry: The shortcut to success when success seems impossible.”