Skip to content
Coordinates of ThoughtHome of Philosophy
Join
Question · Explain Newcomer-friendly

Epictetus says some things are up to us. What did that depend on for him?

Serkan Aydoğdu Fellow
· 5 replies
Happiness & well-beingGreek & RomanIndianIslamicStoicismChrysippusEpictetusShinranZeno of Citium#dichotomy-of-control#epictetus#providence#stoic-physics
Follow

Its coordinates: 3.5 Value Theory

Epictetus is still my favourite. The Handbook begins by saying some things are up to us and some are not: our opinions, desires and aversions are up to us; our body, property, reputation and office are not. In traffic this is very useful. The traffic is not up to me. My anger is.

Recently I read that the modern versions of this, in self-help books and "resilience" courses, keep the technique but throw away the rest of Stoicism, and that without the rest it is "no longer Stoicism". The technique may still work, the book said, but it becomes a coping method.

I want to understand what the "rest" was. What did Epictetus believe that made "focus on what is up to you" more than a coping method for him? I think it has to do with God, or nature, or the universe being ordered, but I don't know the details.

Simple explanation please. I am not a student, only a driver who reads.

LikeAnswer
Follow5 answers

Join the conversation: members reply here, and joining is free. Reading is always free.

Join free to reply Sign in

5 answers

Accepted answer

  1. Elin Hedqvist

    ✓ Accepted answer Fellow

    For the Stoics, the whole cosmos is a single living, rational being, permeated by reason (logos), which they also called God, Zeus or nature. Everything that happens follows from this reason, and the whole is ordered for the best, even when a part of it is painful to us. That is providence.

    So "what is not up to you" isn't random bad luck. It is your place in a good whole. Epictetus quotes Chrysippus saying that if he knew he was fated to be ill, he would even want it, as a foot, if it had a mind, would be willing to step in the mud for the sake of the whole body. A famous image attributed to Zeno and Chrysippus is a dog tied to a cart: it can walk along willingly, or be dragged, but it will go either way.

    And what is up to you, your capacity to judge and choose, is for Epictetus a fragment of God in you. At the start of the Discourses he says Zeus gave us a portion of himself.

    So the original teaching says two things at once: accept what happens, because the whole is rational and good; and govern your judgements, because they are the divine part of you. Remove the first and acceptance becomes just endurance.

    Helpful · 3

Other answers

  1. Rohan Desai

    Fellow

    The Bhagavad Gītā has a very similar technique and makes the same point about its foundations. Krishna tells Arjuna that his right is to the action alone, never to its fruits. You act well and let go of the result. Today this is quoted in management seminars as "don't worry about outcomes".

    But in the Gītā it rests on a whole cosmology: dharma, the cosmic order; the self that is not the body; and Krishna himself as the one through whom all things happen. Without that, "let go of the fruits" is just advice to care less.

  2. Bilal Rashid

    Fellow

    In Islam the nearest ideas are riḍā, contentment with what God decrees, and tawakkul, reliance on God. A well-known hadith tells a man who asked whether to tie his camel or trust in God: tie it, and trust. So you do what is in your power, and accept the rest.

    From what I have seen, the technique alone does help people. But when it rests on trust in a wise and merciful God, it becomes something different: not "this is not my business" but "this is in good hands". That is the difference Elin describes.

    Helpful · 1
  3. Serkan Aydoğdu

    Fellow

    So, Elin, Rohan and Bilal, it was never only a trick for the traffic. For Epictetus, when the bus is late, it is part of a good order, and my patience is God in me. That is a big thing to believe at a red light. I am not sure I believe it. But now I know what I am leaving out when I use only the trick.

    Helpful · 2
  4. Rin Matsuda

    Fellow

    My grandmother was a Jōdo Shinshū Buddhist, and she would have added a fourth version. Shinran taught that we cannot reach awakening by our own effort; we can only entrust ourselves to Amida Buddha's vow, which he called other-power. My grandmother thought trying hard to become enlightened was a kind of vanity. When something went wrong she did not say "this is outside my control", she said the nembutsu and let go. From outside it looks like the same technique. From inside it rested on trust in a vow, not on a rational cosmos or on discipline. Serkan, I think you are right that the same gesture can mean very different things.

    Helpful · 3