Living without regret is a crucial element of happiness, but it is easier said than done. Seneca (4 BC-65 AD) devoted many pages to this subject because he was aware of the difficulty. It’s far from self-evident to let go of past mistakes, setbacks and defeats.
Seneca devoted his dialogue “On Clemence” to praising the benefits of leniency and forgiveness towards other people, but failed to point out the importance of exercising those virtues also towards ourselves.
In this essay, Seneca advises Emperor Nero (37-68 AD) to show clemency towards his enemies, explaining that clemency will also benefit its practitioner. It will reconcile him with the world and help him understand the weakness of human nature.
Seneca recommends Nero to govern the Roman Empire “in a firm, but gentle manner.” Fair enough, but how many people are able to govern themselves “in a firm, but gentle manner.”
I have witnessed too many cases of individuals going to one or the other extreme. Either they apply excessive firmness and flagellate themselves psychologically for their errors, or they apply excessive leniency and abandon all ethical standards.
Seneca correctly regarded excessive severity and excessive leniency as inhibitors of happiness. Gaius Julius Caesar (100-44 BC) exercised leniency on many occasions, but did it serve him well? Arguably not, since he was eventually murdered by beneficiaries of his past leniency.
Seneca: between leniency and severity
Caesar may have exercised leniency because he wanted to live without regret; he had already bought into the doctrine that Seneca would preach one generation later, namely, that it’s fine to err on the side of forgiveness.
Seneca’s formula for living without regret requires careful calibration. If we go overboard on the side of leniency, we will fall prey to untamed passions; and if we go overboard on the side of severity, we’ll be harmed by psychological or physical revenge.
I regard Seneca’s prescription as almost impossible to fulfil because of the high level of energy it requires. I wonder how many individuals have the energy and motivation to seek the golden mean between severity and leniency, year after year, so that they can live without regret.
The Roman Emperors Marcus Ulpius Traianus (53-117 AD) and Publius Aelius Hadrianus (76-138 AD) took Seneca’s prescription to heart and did their best to govern “in a firm, but gentle manner,” but their reigns still show periods of savage brutality.
Seneca’s historical examples of clemency are unconvincing. I find it particularly disingenuous that Seneca is categorising Alexander the Great (356-323 BC) as merciful. Those familiar with Alexander’s biography tend to view his clemency as a tool for building his power and consolidating his conquests.
Why does Seneca’s prescription prove so difficult to put into practice? Because it regards leniency and severity as isolated, self-standing virtues that need constant calibration.
Seneca’s critique of virtue signalling
Seneca did not realize that leniency and severity mean little if they are not placed in a wider context, namely, in the context of the pursuit of happiness.
Similarly, in the 38th Letter to Lucilius, Seneca criticises the Roman philosophers Euphrates and Demetrius, whom he had personally met. Seneca condemns the affectation in their looks.
With their unkempt beard and rough tunic, they emulate the looks of Socrates, but it was just for the show. It was all devoid of philosophical depth.
Euphrates and Demetrius had engaged in virtue signalling to publicise their alleged philosophical depth, but they actually lacked wisdom.
Still today, people engage in virtue signalling to show how great they are. It’s their attempt to live without regret and attain happiness. Seneca prognosticated that their attempt would fail, and on my side, I share his low opinion of virtue signalling.
However, Seneca should have explained more clearly why humans cannot attain peace of mind through virtue signalling. His prescription for happiness should have been more precise, so that we know what to do and why in every situation.
Living without regret requires a rational assessment of past errors, extracting lessons for the future, and putting them into practice. Only this perspective enables us to decide when to go for leniency, severity, or give external signs of our convictions.
In the 38th Letter to Lucilius, Seneca meandered around the subject of happiness, sometimes telling readers to go north, other times south. I find his lack of clarity puzzling.
For instance, if Euphrates and Demetrius are guilty of too much virtue signalling, why did Seneca praise Epicurus (341-270 BC) for publicly embracing a bread-and-water diet? Was Epicurus’ public adoption of the poor-man’s diet not a form of virtue signalling?
Seneca’s prescription for emotional balance
In the 50th Letter to Lucilius, Seneca embraces a more solid strategy for living without regrets and achieving happiness. His focus is on anger, as the primary negative emotion, but arrives at conclusions that apply equally to guilt, poor self-confidence, and preoccupations.
Seneca cogently points out that we are the principal victims of our negative emotions. If we blow our past errors and future threats out of proportion, we will be consumed by regrets and preoccupation.
As an example, Seneca mentions Gaius Marius (157-86 BC) and his emotional outbursts. Marius’ mind was in turmoil most of the time, prompting him to make detrimental decisions.
Living without regret is possible only to individuals who’ve embraced a solid philosophy. For those who are still searching, it might prove productive to imitate Seneca, write down their thoughts, review them in detail and remove all inconsistencies.
If you are interested in applying rational ideas to smooth out difficult situations, I recommend my book titled “Consistency: The key to permanent stress relief.”
Related articles
Seneca’s philosophy of tranquillity
Seneca’s simple formula for happiness