The Stoic Notion of Cosmic Sympathy in Contemporary Environmental Ethics

In Antiquity, Modern World and Reception of Ancient Culture. Belgrade: pp. 290-305 (2012)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The later Stoics, especially – and most notably – Posidonius of Apamea, allegedly the greatest polymath of his age and the last in a celebrated line of great philosophers of the ancient world, gradually developed the belief that all parts of the universe, either ensouled or not, were actually interconnected due to the omnipresent, corporeal, primordial kosmikon pyr which, according to Stoicism, pervades each being as the honey pervades the honeycomb. As for reasonable beings, in particular, kosmikon pyr takes the form of logos. Due to that power, Posidonius believes, the phases of moon, for instance, can affect the succession of tides and ebb–tides; on the same grounds, the signs can have major effect on the course of events and, therefore, allow for divination. That kind of interconnectedness, apart from justifying the interdependentness of all beings to each other, testifies for an utter kinship between them, for sympatheia. In this short paper I intent to show that Posidonius’s approach has been promptly adopted and utilized by modern holistic theories concerning Environmental Ethics, especially by Arne Naess’s Deep Ecology and Ecosophy T, in the context of which notions such as kinship, interconnectedness, interdependentness and identification of all beings are key parameters for the articulation of their argumentation. I also intent to outline some essential – in my opinion – differences in the way Posidonius and Naess make use of the notion of interconnectedness, together with some inconsistencies which can be potentially fatal, at least as far as a system of ethics is concerned. This is because notions such as cosmic sympathy may possibly establish an interesting, even charming and influential cosmology or metaphysics, but when it comes to ethics, in my opinion, they can only provide shaky grounds for establishing a firm one, since they allow for deterministic views, which more or less leave no room for personal responsibility, to wit for personal praise or blame.

Links

PhilArchive

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

On “Self-Realization” – The Ultimate Norm of Arne Naess’s Ecosophy T.Md Munir Hossain Talukder - 2016 - Symposion: Theoretical and Applied Inquiries in Philosophy and Social Sciences 3 (2):219-235.
A state of mind like water: Ecosophy T and the buddhist traditions.Deane Curtin - 1996 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 39 (2):239 – 253.
Man Apart and Deep Ecology: A Reply to Reed.Arne Naess - 1990 - Environmental Ethics 12 (2):185-192.
Man Apart and Deep Ecology: A Reply to Reed.Arne Naess - 1990 - Environmental Ethics 12 (2):185-192.
Identification with nature: What it is and why it matters.Christian Diehm - 2007 - Ethics and the Environment 12 (2):1-22.
Darwin and Deep Ecology.Christian Diehm - 2014 - Ethics and the Environment 19 (1):73.
Community, and Lifestyle, 144 and 159. Also see Sessions,".Ecology Naess - 2000 - Eco Philosophy, Utopias, and Education," and Arne Naess and Rob Jankling," Deep Ecology and Education: A Conversation with Arne Naess," Canadian Journal of Environmental Education 5.
Deep Ecology and the Irrelevance of Morality.Mathew Humphrey - 1999 - Environmental Ethics 21 (1):75-79.
Deep Ecology and the Irrelevance of Morality.Mathew Humphrey - 1999 - Environmental Ethics 21 (1):75-79.

Analytics

Added to PP
2021-01-30

Downloads
223 (#87,138)

6 months
80 (#53,507)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references