Menu
header photo

Blog Search

Comments

A Preview From Our Upcoming Book

- by Seneca the Younger

A Reasonable Approach to God and Universal Reason

Audi alteram partem

In the West today, there are six main categories on the Nature of God. Our main point today is not considering God; we are discussing Universal Reason, but, since Universal Reason issues from the Stoic concept of God, and other philosophies do not consider Universal reason, we must extrapolate the conclusions of other philosophies regarding Universal Reason by considering their concepts of God and what each concept would indicate about that school of thought’s view of Universal Reason, if they consistently took their assumptions of God to their reasonable and practical conclusions regarding Universal Reason issuing from their concept of God. The six main ideas contrary to the School’s concept of God, which lead to wrong reason about Universal Reason are:

Deism – generally, the idea that God set the Cosmos in motion as a watchmaker would make a fine timepiece and leave it in a bureau drawer. God then lets the Cosmos play itself out without interacting with it. In Deism, Universal Reason is a bastard infant that germinated from God and was then abandoned to exposure and was left to revolve mechanically with no interaction from God or man. While interpretations vary, the general implication is that what we call Universal Reason will eventually cause the watch to wind down to an undetermined entropy, which is not Conflagration.

Evangelicalism – generally, the idea that we can have a personal relationship with God, via Christ, akin to being personal friends, or the greatest BFF experience possible. In this belief system, what we call Universal Reason is an ecstatic experience of emotions from a unity with the creating force of the universe. Today, we will not discuss this issue directly; we emphasize, however, that it differs from the School’s concept of God and Universal Reason in that Universal Reason issues from something that is obviously more like a Supreme Judge than a best friend.

Traditional Christianity – also disparagingly called the “Santa Clause” concept of God, the idea here is that God can be accessed via prayer or the Saints, and He responds to suppliants by actively hearing their prayers and granting them miracles anywhere from healing children plagued with cancer to helping the faithful find their keys and leading them to the love of their life, so they may be blessed with a marriage literally made in heaven. While the School does not ignore the so-called miracles, the majority of those holding this view are talking more about what we call Providence. Since Seneca, the School discusses traditional Christianity separately. Let it suffice for now to say this is a special case for the School.

Agnosticism – the idea that God is ultimately unknowable, and possibly even whether God exists or not is unknowable. This means that it is not humanly possible to know accurately when or whether God intervenes in this world. This would mean that Universal Reason would be ultimately unknowable – an idea the School rejects. However, in a little while we will see how this concept was influential to the School at a critical time in history at Athens and separated us from the Epicureans.

Atheism – most modern “atheists” are actually agnostics. Atheism proper is generally understood by the School to mean those who affirmatively teach via methods including or similar to the Scientific Method that there is no God. This would mean Universal Reason is incomprehensible in the sense the School uses the term. True atheists relegate our concept of Universal Reason to something similar to our concept of Nature.

Hindu and Muslim God – generally, these teachings are related closely enough to be joined for our purposes today. They teach that anything is possible for God. This includes suspending the Laws of Nature arbitrarily, being unreasonable, and practicing capricious vice. This view of God(s) erases the entire concept of Universal Reason as the School uses the term. It also eliminates the true idea of Nature and the benefit of science, which we believe has been proven for centuries, by the negative, in societies governed by this concept, because they are scientifically stagnant.

A Difference Between Logic and Universal Reason

There is much about God that is counter-intuitive, which we would say is illogical, in that we could not figure it out before observing it. However, once it comes into the Cosmos, it is governed by Universal Reason, which is the only way for us to consider it in the first place. Right Reason is the main thing for us. It is the only way for us to harmonize with Universal Reason. Our ability to reason is our way to understand, harmonize with, and marshal the very forces of Nature in a way that we can utilize to our benefit and to the benefit of our kith and kin.

Universal Reason is the key to Socrates’ question, “What is Justice.” A specific Piety is Socrates’ Justice. It recognizes something higher than man’s laws. It recognizes Natural law. Otherwise, man’s law is the highest, but that is only legality and, at best, a subset of Justice, which is fully contained in Universal Reason.

Empathy is an illusion. We cannot feel another’s experience, as is shown in the Cave when the remaining prisoners cannot comprehend what the former prisoner experienced. God is Plato’s Good Sun. God is the Good. Universal Reason is what led the former prisoner out of the Cave and made everything sensible to him and was the pushing force back to those still in the Cave. The remaining prisoners could not make sense of what the returning free man experienced, because humans are incapable of feeling the experiences of others; they can only think about them. Nature’s preventing us from having empathy makes every individual find the Good himself.

 

Analytical Stoicism

We understand Universal Reason best by understanding God first, as is seen clearly when we put Universal Reason into its first table:

Table 1 – Causes of Universal Reason

Final               God

Cause

Formal            God

Cause

Material          God

Cause

Efficient          God

Cause

Well, what do you do with that? This table gives new students fits. It seems like a dead end. This is where Universal Reason plays the coquette. Every instructor makes sure he has no commitments the entire day when he walks with the students for this dialogue. It is almost always the longest dialogue in the School’s system.

The conspicuous observation is that everything in the table goes to God. Therefore, the table is meaningless unless we first understand the Stoic concept of God.

God yields this first table:

Table 2 – Causes of God

            Modern Notation      Ancient Notation

 

Final               0                                  Α

Cause

Formal           ∞                                 Ω

Cause

Material         ∞                                 Ω

Cause

Efficient         0                                  Α

Cause

One conspicuous observation is how the first century Christians adopted our notation to identify God. The “Alpha and Omega” resonates in Christian ears, although it is a Stoic concept. They adopted several Stoic concepts and practices because of our ideas’ irrefutability and Paul’s familiarity with Seneca the Younger in particular and the School in general.

However, using our words does not mean the borrowers use our ideas. In this case, the New Testament use of Alpha and Omega is not identical to ours. Much was divided by Christianity into a Stoic element that is entrusted with “the sword” due to their virtue, and is the natural governor of bodies of citizens, and the rest was transformed into a spiritual element that is entrusted with ministering to the souls of citizens due to the need of citizens for mentoring.

Our modern notation is more understandable to the average person today than is the Greek alphabet. In this case, the Final Cause is zero (modern) or alpha (ancient), meaning God has no beginning and is Beginning in itself or the beginning of all things. The formal cause is infinity (modern) or omega (ancient), meaning God is End in itself or the end of all things. The Material Cause is infinity, meaning God is Substance in itself or the substance of all things. The Efficient Cause is zero, meaning God is uncreated and is Creation in itself or the creation process of all things.

We perform the second operation by running the Causes of Universal Reason vertically down the left-most column in the bold type. Since all the Causes of Universal Reason are the Causes of God, which means all the Causes of Universal Reason are the Four Causes of God, each horizontal row is identical to the others, as I represent with modern notation.

Table 3 – Causes for God and Causes for Universal Reason in Standard Form

                      Final         Formal          Material         Efficient

                      Cause      Cause            Cause            Cause

                      of God      of God           of God          of God

 

Causes of

Universal

Reason

Final Cause          0          ∞                    ∞               0        

Formal Cause      0          ∞                    ∞                0

Material Cause    0           ∞                   ∞                0             

Efficient Cause   0           ∞                    ∞               0        

This is the most useful form for our purposes today, because it demonstrates the peculiar Shrinking Phenomenon. This is what happens whenever we take a table of anything to its end. Everything ultimately reverts to one thing, which we call Vibrations. The 0 and ∞ represent the greatest amplitude and frequency of Vibration. All other vibrations can resonate, harmonize, and strike chords with The Vibration. It is the Supreme Carrier Wave.This table is a symbolic representation of Conflagration, the shadow of which is plasma.

This is an Identity Matrix in Standard Form. Each horizontal row is identical and palindromic, every vertical column is palindromic, and there are only two symbols in the matrix. This makes both diagonals palindromic and identical to each horizontal row. The Final and Efficient columns are all one and the same thing. The Formal and Material columns are all one and the same thing. Since 0 (A) = 0 (A), and ∞ (Ω) = ∞ (Ω), the four columns collapse to two columns. Since columns collapse to the left (toward the Final Cause) in Standard Form, we have:

Table 4 – Causes for God and Causes for Universal Reason in Standard Form Collapsed Left

                                    Final/Efficient      Formal/Material      

                                    Causes                 Causes

                                    God                       God

Causes of

Universal                                       

Reason

Final Cause                         0                      ∞       

Formal Cause                     0                      ∞

Material Cause                    0                      ∞

Efficient Cause                   0                      ∞

Again, 0 (A) = 0 (A), and ∞ (Ω) = ∞ (Ω).

Palindromic rows collapse up (toward the Final Cause) in Standard Form, so we have:

Table 5 – Unit Identity Matrix for Universal Reason (UnIMUR)

                                    Final/Efficient      Formal/Material      

                                    Causes                 Causes

                                    of God                   of God

Final,

Formal,

Material, and 

Efficient Causes                                            

Of Universal Reason          0                        ∞

 

On UnIMUR

All Causes of Universal Reason come from what we mean by the School’s symbols of 0 and ∞.

In contrast to Universal Reason, God has two Causes solely from 0 and two Causes solely from ∞.

Implications of Analysis and Calculations

God and Universal Reason are not one and the same.

However, they are inextricably connected by causation.

All Four Causes of Universal Reason have a duality; for every one Cause, there is both a 0 and an ∞, therefore Universal Reason is not Singularity.

However, God has two Causes, which are 0 and two Causes which are ∞. Therefore, God is Singularity. Zero and infinity collapse into unity when we fulfill the orders of operations, because time disappears.

This indicates Universal Reason comes from what we call God; God does not come from Universal Reason.

First, the Efficient Cause of Universal Reason has little to do with Logic. It incorporates logic, but only to a degree or two.

Second, let’s consider the Material Cause of Universal Reason. It is the Good. This is Plato’s Sun that hurts all eyes coming out of the Cave. It is the thinking of the Cosmic body. Stoics look at the totality of the Cosmos and see that it is all, “very good.”

Third, what about the Formal Cause of Universal Reason? It is not logic. Universal Reason explains all things Logos, not only logic. All forms in the Cosmos are Reasonable, but it is debatable whether or not there are any that are logical. Yet they all have to do with Logos as we discuss many places. Universal Reason is something that prevents most non-Stoics from becoming fully Stoic, because Universal Reason means man’s futility in life is brought about by Universal Reason. Our futility and the irony of life are not logical, but they are reasonable to the initiated. This is where the evil in the world is reasonable, as is the wickedness, yet Virtue is shown to be not only the solution but the cause as well.

Fourth, the Final Cause of Universal Reason can be changeable. We see that Descartes’ “evil demon” could logically be true. We could be in a Matrix-like universe. The UnIMUR is why the School dismisses a vital part of Descartes’ logic on formal grounds, although his conclusions are basically correct, because logic is not helpful in all matters – logic is as helpful as a scorned lover, as we discussed yesterday. Descartes does not prove that everything could not be an illusion, but the School proved that God is the Good and not an evil demon for centuries before Descartes. Nevertheless, Descartes is a Hero, duly recognized by the School and memorialized every year for his praiseworthy work.

In a practical sense, this means that dismissing the existence of God because of wickedness and suffering in the world is unreasonable and only makes sense to those who do not know the nature of Universal Reason and God and the Causes of each. The nature of God is best discussed by analysis of its four Causes, and then we can find the Nature of Universal Reason, because Universal Reason issues from God. That means dismissing the existence of God also dismisses the existence of Universal Reason as the School uses the term. They are inextricably linked by CAUSATION.

Universal Reason, Logos, Fate, Nature, Providence, and God

God includes the non-yielding parts of the Universe. This includes what we mean here in Michigan when we quote the poet, “Does anyone know where the love of God goes when the waves turn the minutes to hours.” Providence is benevolent in that it provides for our needs. Other parts of Nature are violent. Animals eat one another alive. Men are wicked to one another. Unyielding Fate is a tyrant that does not change and cannot be mastered and strictly dominates us without mercy or spite. All of these names issue from the Stoic God via Universal Reason. Even the Stoic concept of God cannot be understood except by that which issues from it – Universal Reason. Nature and Providence are where it is in our control to better ourselves or to hurt ourselves. Logos and Fate are beyond our control.

This is why some accuse the School of minimizing logic. Even though we have contributed to the study of logic, we see that there is very little logic in practical life. The main area of logic in the Cosmos is mathematics. However, most of the Cosmos is non-logical or illogical. Even geometric mathematics is an imagination that has a barrier between it and the real world. For example, no geometrical measurements are exactly the length they are meant to be on a blueprint, especially the diagonal of a room that is one unit by one unit, let alone i, the imaginary number. All we have to do is measure them with a finer instrument to see there is a difference from the pure idea from math and the reality. If we refine our building tools, the difference might seem to disappear. However, if we further refine our measuring tools, we see a difference once again. So, pure logic always evades us. This is one reality that gives us pause to not over-emphasize the role logic plays in finding truth. Engineers memorialize this reality in their declarations of “tolerances,” that are acceptable for devices to work in the real world.

Another reality that puts logic in its place, so to speak, is shown best in The Syllogism. The conclusion, “Socrates is mortal,” only comes from two assumptions called premises. Every form of syllogistic logic depends on commonly accepted assumptions, which are ultimately unprovable by the same logical system of syllogisms. We encounter a similar limitation in other kinds of logic. In other words, you cannot prove that logic is true by logic. So, logic is not cut out for finding truth, but Reason is.

The final reality for the purposes of this book is the superabundance of non-logic in the Cosmos generally and life in particular. Some of this is captured in Chaos Theory, although much of Chaos Theory often ends up describing a deeper order rather than chaotic confusion. But, we need not go further than ourselves to see this non-logic phenomenon. For example, why does one person prefer yoghurt, and another prefers ice cream? Why does a person fall in love, especially when it is unrequited? Why is the acceleration of gravity 32 feet per second per second and not 31 or 33? Why do people often do what they know will harm them? This last question has long consumed the West’s intellectual life. It has, however, been answered and analytically proven by the Stoic School, as we constantly demonstrate. All of these things are true, but it is a stretch to call them logical. If we study the matter more and more, we find a farther and farther estrangement between logic and Reason.

Universal Reason includes logic, but it goes much further, it has a much more majestic sway, as we say. We speak of all things being reasonable and part of Universal Reason. But, we do not speak of all things being logical. We consider this as self-evident. We are not dogmatic about all things as to which are illogical in contrast to which things simply have a deeper logic left for us to discover. However, there are those few things that we can prove are illogical. Most things, however, are not proven with certainty as being in one category or the other. The UnIMUR shows this incorporation of logic and illogic when it displays each of the Four Causes of Universal Reason as having two causes (0 and ∞) that are extremes. The UniMUR is also the base from which many end up personifying God. To man, illogic and acting on passions seem to be part of what it means to be a person. Therefore, the thinking goes, God seems to be a person.

An unknown god – Seneca, Paul, and Socrates

One of the great wonders to Stoics is why so-called philosophers often demonstrate Bible-phobia. We read Plato even if we do not practice the Socratic method. We read Aristotle even if we are not Aristotelian. We read Marx even if we are not Marxist. We read everything in between even if we find it wanting. But, when it comes to the Bible, there is a palpable aversion. Yet, in one volume we find many stunning ancient transcripts that detail dialogues of everyday people at critical times in Western history.

For example, we can read an important insight into first century Stoicism that bears on our topic today. I will discuss one potent example – an ancient eye-witness account of a day in the life of the ancient Stoic School in Athens from a man who was a physician by learning and a historian by love. The witness recorded the event and sent it to his friend in a letter about what was going on philosophically in the first century. Partly due to this letter, the recipient converted to Stoicism and became the 14th Scholarch. Two letters from this historian, both of which were addressed to the same future Stoic and Scholarch are included in the New Testament, and that seems to be the reason university Academics reject the insight the letters give into everyday life in a Stoic culture. But, the School must admit that we have our own records of this event, and the letters from the historian are in agreement with our texts in the Annals. Let me demonstrate.

Here is a primary source that captures a day in the life of the Stoic School in the first century. This primary source has been preserved by the School and in the New Testament because it documents so many things that changed history forever and determined probably 90% of what you do day to day today. The School knew this was Universal Reason in action and how this would impact the West for centuries. That is why Theophilus and other Stoics preserved the transcript for us – many times at the cost of the lives of those who translated or protected the texts throughout the following 20 centuries until they were entrusted to the present generation. This is also one reason the leaders of the School today must also take the oath of passing on these texts at the cost of their lives, if necessary. The oath is not to give their lives in protecting these texts, it is to pass them on, even if it costs them their lives.

You don’t need access to the Annals to figure out what happened from the death of Socrates until the first century. The followers of Socrates were stunned. We were part of that group, because the School continued to follow the philosophy of Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle. But, at the time of Socrates’ execution, the School was not formally organized. All followers of the Socratic method were mixed together. Nevertheless, it is barely possible to overestimate the trauma that struck the Western intellectual world by the “trial” and death of Socrates and his Stoic conduct throughout the whole affair. It nearly broke the West. But, Socrates knew what was going on and made sure it would not end what he began, as his payment of a cock verifies. His trial is a seminar in itself. Here, we will just focus on three points as they relate to Universal Reason.

1) Socrates was convicted on the grounds of impiety or denying the gods. This was because he used “the God” every time he was serious. This was clearly heard by Athenian ears as a denial of polytheism. Yet, he still did not claim to know “the God” that must be virtuous.

2) Socrates testified that he was seeking this God. Finding “the God” that was virtuous would reveal what justice always is and never is not.

3) The disciples of Socrates could not deny what Socrates taught. They also did not want the Master’s teachings to fade away. After the execution of Socrates, the School eventually erected an altar very near to where Socrates was sentenced to death for impiety. The symbolism of this was not obvious to the Athenians at the time. For the next several centuries, Stoics would visit the monument to contemplate Socrates’ new teachings revealed during his trial. The altar was inscribed with, “TO AN UNKNOWN GOD.”

The Second Chapter of Socrates’ Trial

One day in the first century, Seneca was teaching the Stoics at the School in Athens, so the Epicureans joined them to discuss each’s teachings as to how they applied practically to the news of the day. A Christian missionary approached the School. In a very short speech, the missionary showed he understood our teaching on Universal Reason and God. He came to the very place Socrates was condemned to death. This is what he said:

A group of Epicurean and Stoic philosophers began to debate with him. Some of them asked, “What is this babbler trying to say?” Others remarked, “He seems to be advocating foreign gods.” They said this because Paul was preaching the good news about Jesus and the resurrection. Then they took him and brought him to a meeting of the Areopagus, where they said to him, “May we know what this new teaching is that you are presenting? You are bringing some strange ideas to our ears, and we would like to know what they mean.” (All the Athenians and the foreigners who lived there spent their time doing nothing but talking about and listening to new ideas.)

Paul then stood up in the meeting of the Areopagus and said: “People of Athens! (1) I see that in every way you are very religious. For as I walked around and looked carefully at your objects of worship, I even found an altar with this inscription: TO AN UNKNOWN GOD. So, you are ignorant of the very thing you worship—and this is what I am going to proclaim to you.

“The (2) God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by human hands. And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything. Rather, he himself gives everyone life and breath and everything else. From one man he made all the nations, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he marked out their appointed times in history and the boundaries of their lands. God did this so that they would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though (3) he is not far from any one of us. (4) For in him we live and move and have our being.’ As some of your own poets have said, (5) We are his offspring.’

“Therefore, since we are God’s offspring, we should not think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone - an image made by human design and skill. In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent. For he has set a day when (6) he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to everyone by raising him from the dead.”

(7) When they heard about the resurrection of the dead, some of them sneered, but others said, “We want to hear you again on this subject.” At that, Paul left the Council. Some of the people became followers of Paul and believed. Among them was Dionysius, a member of the Areopagus, also a woman named Damaris, and a number of others.

(1)       By this time, centuries after the death of Socrates, it was common knowledge what the altar meant to the Stoics. The School had suffered several generations of disillusionment after the death of Socrates. Where was Universal Reason to be found in what happened? However, the School was the only school that kept teaching that Justice would ultimately prevail, while admitting ignorance on how this would occur.

Remember, for Stoics, piety or being religious in the classical sense, is akin to being Just. The Stoic School was known for finishing the mission of Socrates to find what Justice always is and never is not. The School has always known this involves something rational that is above human laws. This is a clear, albeit oblique, reference to our concept of Universal Reason.

(2)       These are Stoic terms of art. Seen as impiety by the Athenians and somewhat misunderstood by the Christians, the School made a sharp distinction between “dwelling” in a material building and “eminent immanence in all matter.”

Nevertheless, the School then and the School today does its best to avoid getting hung up on words. Rather, the School then appreciated that the speaker understood the School’s teaching enough to bring something new to the painted porch.

The ‘giving everybody life and breath and everything else’ continues to be language of the School describing the Stoic concept of Providence.

(3)       This is a reference to the School’s teaching of Eminent Immanence. If something is a part of your being, or if you are a part of its being, it cannot be far from you.

(4)       Here is a quote from the Cretan philosopher Epemenides. The speaker demonstrated an understanding of our concept of Logos, God, Providence, and Universal Reason. Moving, living, and our being, are not logical, we are not God, we can do things that harm ourselves in contrast with Providence; yet, all is part of our concept of Universal Reason, which the speaker clearly understood. The School was intrigued by the speaker’s use of nuances in our teachings.

(5)       Here is a quote from the famous Phaenomena of our poet Aratus of Cilicia. However, it is noteworthy that the speaker uses the plural of poet when he says, “as some of your own poets have said …” This might be the only non-School source that verifies that many of our revered poets used, not only this concept, but this specific special phrase. It has been a Stoic term of art since the beginning. The teaching that, “we are his offspring,” prepares the audience for a few sharp points from the speaker regarding Universal Reason. “His offspring” would hit Stoic ears as a reference to our concept of God, which the speaker needed to get back into focus before making a Stoically coherent argument about Universal Reason, since Universal Reason issues from Socrates’ UNKNOWN GOD.

(6)       This was the speaker’s direct address to the School’s thoughts about the death of Socrates. In a quite Stoic way, the speaker obviously knew that, whether the School accepted his argument or not, the School could not ignore its own teachings on Justice, specifically that Time is not considered by Universal Reason in regard to what is Justice, because Time is a function of matter and therefore has no bearing whatsoever on what is Virtue.

This was an insightful and charitable approach to the Stoic School. At the location of Socrates’ mock trial, the speaker emphasized Justice. The speaker was offering a new idea to the School, but he was complementing the School by saying Justice would prevail in the end, regardless of whether or not we accepted his new ideas. Stoics could accept the new teaching of the speaker, but, even if they did not, the speaker was offering something that would strengthen the School in its continued existence as a bastion of Virtue. The School memorializes this moment with solemnity as an example of Universal Reason realized in matter. In other words,

(7)       Here the speaker showed intimacy with Stoic teachings regarding Universal Reason. This was the most provocative part of the entire speech to the Stoic School.

The speaker used language almost identical to our language regarding the Conflagration. However, the speaker slipped in this idea of a resurrection (Gr. and Lt. for “Rise again”).

The Question Before the School

The Stoic School had long taught the Conflagration. This was a major tenant of the teaching on Universal Reason. This speaker claimed that a person had been resurrected in the recent past, while the School had totally missed any observation or awareness of such a dramatic event. In other words, the speaker claimed that those at the Areopagus had lived through what the School says is caused by Conflagration, but none of the audience had even noticed it. What a ridiculous circumstance.

The very idea that a Conflagration could go unnoticed was absurd. So where did the speaker go wrong? He used Stoic teaching accurately up until his novel conclusion that a Conflagration had happened on a personal level a few years ago. The speaker had developed a logical argument. But, the School knew that did not prove it was part of Truth. But, the Stoics in Athens had never heard this line of thinking before, so the task was to analyze where Reason was violated, if anywhere.

There were three reactions to the speech over the next few weeks. 1) Some Stoics converted to Christianity; 2) some Stoics rejected the speech outright; 3) some Stoics listened to the speaker again at a later time to analyze his ideas more rigorously.

The point for us today is that the Stoic School was so well known that speakers could visit the School completely unannounced and argue very intimately about Stoic teachings. This happened regularly. Can you imagine a philosophy professor today tolerating that kind of disruption, let alone inviting it? Think about a philosophy professor lecturing you about Nietzsche and in comes a Christian missionary to talk about the Christian perspective on Nietzsche. What would you do if you were the professor? What would you do as a student in the class? Wouldn’t you wish the missionary got out of the room, so you could learn what you needed to know for the final exam? Universal Reason will not go away. It survives even Conflagration.

First, note the close association of the Stoics and Epicureans. We broke from the Cynics because of their contempt for civic conventions. Then, for a long time the School was close to the Epicurean school because of their sincerity and moderation. However, the School parted ways with the Epicureans for two reasons:

1) They devolved into Hedonism.

2) After a few centuries, the School decided the Epicureans would not or could not entertain the difference between Logic and Universal Reason. This committed their school to Sophistry. Sophistry can persuade a person even of lies; Reason finds truth.

Second, the School began to wonder if Christianity could possibly introduce the “UNKNOWN GOD” that would overthrow Zeus as foretold by Prometheus. It was a novel idea that would influence Western philosophy. This was because it answered a question from the very beginning of Western civilization, namely, “Why do men do what they know will harm them.” The missionary speaking to the School at Athens claimed it was ignorance. Well, the School always taught this, but the School meant ignorance having to do with human events. The School immediately recognized the speaker was talking about ignorance of things having to do with “the Unknown God.” It neither contradicted nor harmonized with anything Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, or Zeno had said, because none had discussed it.

After the Areopagus incident, the School formalized its teaching on Universal Reason:

1)         Universal Reason includes injustice and suffering for man.

2)         Universal Reason is mostly non-logical.

3)         Universal Reason is from the Good, because the injustice, the suffering, and the non-logical are the only way man can grow certain kinds of obedience.

4)         Universal Reason survives even Conflagration, because it is what makes the Cosmos new after the Conflagration.

Go Back

Comment