When taken out of context, philosophical statements can prove misleading; when poorly defined, they become dangerous; and the more frequently they are repeated, the more dangerous they become.
Seneca (4 BC-65 AD) did his fair share of repeating poorly defined statements. The fact that he eschewed debates spared him uncomfortable questions.
For instance, readers might have asked Seneca to clarify what he meant by “living in accordance with nature.” He loved to exhort everyone to “live in accordance with nature,” but his writings define “nature” rather fuzzily.
What did Seneca mean exactly? Was he talking about nature in the sense of trees, sheep, and mosquitoes? Or did he actually mean “human nature” as defined by Aristotle (384-322 BC)?
Seneca added to the mystification by using cryptic words. I am afraid that he only created confusion by advising people to “live in harmony with the logos.”
The word “logos” is employed by Seneca interchangeably with “cosmic order” and “universal reason.” Those don’t match exactly the Aristotelian tradition, which had only used the term “logos” to mean “intellect, reason or logic.”
Seneca’s views on nature compared to Aristotle’s
The fact that Seneca had not built on Aristotle’s works should raise the alarm in the philosophically minded. To make it worse, Seneca performed his word transmutation implicitly, without ever stating his rationale for not following Aristotle.
In the Letters to Lucilius, Seneca provides us an indirect definition of “logos.” He recommends respecting the “rational order.” It reminds me of Cleanthes’ advice to align our actions with “cosmic reason.”
Cleanthes and Seneca dug up a deep trench between their concept of logos and the one used by Aristotle. The trench is as deep as an oceanic abyss and as wide as the Himalayas. If we fall into this trench, I fear that we might never see the sunshine again.
Aristotle primarily employed the term “logos” in connection with the human capacity to reason, make good decisions, and achieve happiness. In contrast, Cleanthes used the term “logos” to refer to an external force against which we are powerless.
Seneca continues to deepen the trench every time he uses the word “logos.” In some Letters to Lucilius, he equates logos with reason, but making it sound somewhat as necessity.
Similarly, Chrysippus had stated that we are all parts of a wagon that keeps advancing. We can neither escape the wagon nor change its direction or speed. The best advice is to accept our plight and enjoy the ride as much as possible. If the wagon ends up crashing or falling off the cliff, that’s too bad, but we could not have prevented the disaster anyway.
Aristotle would have rejected Seneca’s views on nature and the cosmos. The whole point of human reason is to make good choices. However, if choices are impossible, we cannot escape destiny, and the Stoics regard it as rational to accept destiny.
The duality of Seneca’s definition of nature
Luckily for Seneca, he was inconsistent with his own ideas, and had no qualms about stretching his own definitions beyond recognition. I can only assume that he must have realised that his definition of “living in accordance with nature” was flawed and demotivating, but never found the time to correct it.
While the Letters to Lucilius often speak about acceptance, inevitability and resignation, Seneca gives strongly optimistic advice in other writings.
His essay “On the Happy Life” regards human beings as fully capable of shaping their own destiny, not as powerless pawns of cosmical circumstances.
Seneca praises Hercules, the mythical demigod, for making the correct decision. Instead of giving up, doing nothing, and accepting defeat, Hercules took action. He devoted his energies to pursuing difficult goals and emerged victorious.
It takes a detailed reading of Seneca’s works to get the full picture of what he means by “living in accordance with nature” and reject the resignation to fate in some Letters to Lucilius.
Seneca had his ups and downs in life, and those must have shaped his definition of nature. Sometimes, he regarded nature as benevolent, just as Aristotle had done in his “Nicomachean Ethics.” On other occasions, he viewed nature as overpowering and deterministic, leaving humans no choice about their future.
Seneca the pessimist versus Seneca the optimist
It makes a world of difference whether we endorse Seneca the pessimist or Seneca the optimist. Both versions of Seneca’s philosophy exist because his writings encompass decades.
Seneca’s own destiny is intertwined with his philosophical writings, and it’s up to the reader to draw the complete picture. We will do ourselves a great disservice if we limit our reading of Seneca’s works to isolated quotations because there are many more lessons to be drawn.
Aristotle was right in viewing virtue as instrumental, not as prescriptive. The purpose of leading a virtuous life is to attain happiness, not to “live in accordance with nature.”
The best of Seneca’s philosophy echoes Aristotle’s views on virtue. When the 9th Letter to Lucilius praises self-sufficiency and simplicity, it is making a point that goes beyond “living in accordance with nature.”
Stoics praised simplicity because they wanted to protect their independence, which they viewed as crucial to happiness. In Ancient Greece, Diogenes (412-323 BC) was known for his minimalist lifestyle, but Seneca did not go to such an extreme.
In the 9th Letter to Lucilius, Seneca turned a full circle and recognised the human capacity for self-sufficiency. I view it as the ability to shape our own destiny. I favour this interpretation of Seneca because it greatly enhances the value of his lessons.
If you are interested in applying rational ideas in all sorts of situations, I recommend my book “Sequentiality: The amazing power of finding the right sequence of steps.”
Related articles
Productiveness and Seneca’s advice to live in accordance with nature
Realism of Seneca’s advice to live in accordance with nature
Feasibility of Seneca’s advice to live in accordance with nature
Seneca’s approach to mental clarity
Seneca’s letters on motivation