I tend to examine philosophers as closely as I examine their philosophy. Did they preach by example? Did they put their ideas successfully into practice? Did they lead a happy life and inspired their friends and family members?
Seneca laboured intensively in the pursuit of wisdom. He devoted four decades of his life to reflecting and writing about philosophy. I would not question his dedication, but I cannot ignore the rather poor results he achieved. The fact that he ended up killing himself does not speak in his favour.
Despite Seneca’s large efforts to acquire wisdom, we should not close our eyes to his errors. He gained important insights on Stoicism and made solid recommendations, but where did he go wrong? Why did he not come up a winner in the end?
Seneca’s Letters to Lucilius provide the clue for solving this mystery. The purpose of the Letters is to praise self-control and condemn emotional overreactions. Seneca rated Stoic self-denial and calm very high, while condemning aggressiveness, anger and rage.
Seneca’s bias for looking downwards
The 47th Letter to Lucilius does not equate rationality and tolerance, but anyway, it encourages readers to befriend people who they might have regarded below their level. The letter refers to servants, in the sense of Ancient Roman law, but the idea applies to all sorts of situations.
Seneca is telling us to embrace life’s experience as a whole, and draw spiritual benefits from every situation, friendship or acquaintance. In order to attain this goal, we should judge each person for what they are, not by external appearances such as their clothes or their role in society.
I can only endorse Seneca’s openness and equanimity, but I detect a strong prejudice in the 47th Letter against “ambition or the pursuit of success.” Seneca devotes almost every sentence to encouraging us to look downwards, while sternly opposing people who dare to look upwards.
Seneca’s characterisation of wisdom shows a deep negative bias. He rightly praises our willingness to share our table with the disadvantaged, but why does he condemn our ambition to achieve success and prosperity?
I view Seneca’s bias as extremely dangerous because, if we take it at face value, it becomes demotivating and paralysing. It can prove harmful to look only downwards and talk only about the disadvantaged, instead of improving our own life.
Seneca’s bias against ambition and growth
Seneca had already put forward this idea in the 10th Letter to Lucilius, where he condemned people who rely primarily on religious prayer (instead of self-discipline) to solve problems. I mean people who pray, asking for help in some private matter.
I find it problematic that Seneca condemns all private goals as impure and demands total transparency. He speaks in favour of openness and publicity, but overlooks that silent praying can provide people comfort and strength in times of trouble.
Seneca is correct in condemning praying for satisfying low passions, but again, he is solely looking downwards, forgetting the beneficial motivation drawn from looking upwards.
My contention is that wisdom requires balance. Rationality cannot consist only of looking downwards and demonstrating compassion. It cannot be solely focused on risks, setbacks, and defeat. It cannot be entirely pessimistic.
Seneca would have done better, especially in the last years of his life, if he had spent more time looking upwards. He may have realized that he was occupying the wrong office, helping the wrong people and pushing in the wrong direction. If he had looked upwards, he might have gathered the strength to quit.
Stoicism supplies remarkable insights on the pursuit of truth and wisdom, but we should place those insights in context. The danger is that, if we fail to strike a fair balance, we might draw the wrong conclusions from reading Marcus Aurelius (121-180 AD), Epictetus (55-135 AD), or any other Stoic philosopher.
Seneca’s insights and William Hesketh Lever
Let me illustrate this idea by referring to a personality from the nineteenth century: the industrialist William Hesketh Lever (1851-1925). He was the son of a grocer and nobody expected him to achieve great success.
If Lever had followed Seneca’s recommendations, he might have spent his life looking downwards. He may have contented himself with his modest income, and possibly donate part of it to less fortunate people, but without making a large impact.
Seneca’s Letters to Lucilius would not have prompted Lever to look upwards and take resolute action to improve his station in life. Lever’s convictions did not fall far from Stoicism, but in one crucial aspect, he did better than Seneca: he stayed alert to opportunities and did not hesitate to try new ideas.
At thirty-four, Lever started a company to make soap, but in contrast to competitors, he constantly came up with initiatives to improve his products, packaging, distribution, advertising, and quality control.
Seneca’s advice on acquiring wisdom lacks the proactive or ambitious attitude displayed by Lever. In the absence of strong desires for self-improvement, Stoicism tends to decay into self-justification for inaction.
Lever went through a steep learning curve in his business. If he had limited himself to looking downwards, his soap-making enterprise would have perished fairly quickly.
The missing element in Seneca’s pursuit of wisdom
It took Lever a great deal of alertness to identify the benefits of making inexpensive products with standardised quality and a strong branding. Nobody was doing that in England when he started his company.
Seneca’s advice must be taken with a grain of salt to avoid falling prey to defeatism. Lever understood from the beginning that, if he wanted to prosper, he had to promote the benefits of his products. As a result, his advertising focused on health and hygiene.
Neither Zeno of Citium (334-262 BC), Cleanthes (330-230 BC) or Chrysippus (279-206 BC) would have pushed for rapid product diversification. They would have felt paralysed by the fear of failure, while Lever was diversifying into detergents.
The Stoic approach to pursuing wisdom should remain open to self-improvement. Seneca’s bias against ambition and profit-seeking only leads to philosophical blindness. Lever remained all his life a modest, down-to-earth person, but his equanimity did not prevent him from looking upwards. Let’s not forget this crucial aspect when studying Stoicism.
If you are interested in putting rational ideas into practice in all kinds of situations, I recommend my book “Against all odds: How to achieve great victories in desperate times.”
Related articles
Seneca on overcoming doubts and fears
Seneca’s advice on making good decisions
Seneca’s advice on the pursuit of wisdom