Excerpt from De Finibus Bonorum Et Malorum: Libri Quinque About the Publisher Forgotten Books publishes hundreds of thousands of rare and classic books. Find more at www.forgottenbooks.com This book is a reproduction of an important historical work. Forgotten Books uses state-of-the-art technology to digitally reconstruct the work, preserving the original format whilst repairing imperfections present in the aged copy. In rare cases, an imperfection in the original, such as a blemish or missing page, may be replicated in our edition. (...) We do, however, repair the vast majority of imperfections successfully; any imperfections that remain are intentionally left to preserve the state of such historical works. (shrink)

Cicero's De finibus, written in 45 BC, consists of three separate dialogues, dealing respectively with the ethical systems of Epicureanism, Stoicism, and the `Old Academy' of Antiochus of Ascalon. This critical edition of the text, based on a fresh study and collation of the manuscripts, is the first to appear for many years and the first to reflect a clear understanding of the whole manuscript tradition. It will be the second in a series of editions of Cicero's philosophical works; (...) the first volume, the De officiis, edited by Michael Winterbottom, appeared in 1994. (shrink)

When Cicero examines the varied versions of cradle arguments that appear in De finibus, he finds much to criticize. Though he rejects these attempts to discern our proper ethical ends from the earliest inclinations of newborn animals, he nevertheless accepts that human beings should adopt ends for themselves that are consistent with, and perfections of, human nature. I argue that Cicero uses two connected argumentative strategies to create an appeal to nature that overcomes some basic problems he has with (...) the cradle arguments used in Epicureanism, Stoicism, and the Old Academy. The first strategy criticizes the different cradle arguments directly, by which Cicero establishes two negative criteria for any appeal to nature. These criteria indicate what to avoid in arguing for a highest moral end or summum bonum. These criteria eliminate the Epicurean and Stoic cradle arguments, and more subtly criticizes the Antiochian one. As a result, it may seem plausible that Cicero either adopts the Antiochian position himself or that he at least considers it to be a strong position that is worthy of further consideration, particularly in contrast with his categorical rejection of the other schools. Cicero’s second strategy, however, leads us away from accepting any established cradle argument, including the Antiochian one. This strategy develops a rich theme of education over the course of the text and emphasizes an appeal to the telic sense of “nature” that ultimately meets the two criteria set out by his first strategy. He does not seek ethical direction in some biological origin and given nature as cradle arguments do. Cicero appeals instead to human nature and its summum bonum as it appears during philosophical education. Though he finds cradle arguments rely too much on given nature and too little on telic nature, Cicero’s own own emphasis on education and telic nature amounts to a new appeal to “nature” that, in avoiding the “cradle”, is more sound than those of his philosophical rivals. (shrink)

Cicero’s De Finibus contains a debate about whether practical knowledge should be compared to theoretical knowledge (theôreia/sapientia), or to technical knowledge (technê/ars). The way in which practical knowledge is conceived by the Stoics on the one hand, and Peripatetics on the other, lies behind and explains, for Cicero, the tendency of Peripatetics to place greater priority upon harmony with the external world, and that of the Stoics to seek inner harmony at the cost of harmony with that external world. (...) The dialogue ends in aporia because, for Cicero, practical knowledge either comes to bear an excessive resemblance to technê, as in the case of the Peripatetics, or to theoretical knowledge, as in the case of the Stoics; for him, it must fall neither to one nor the other extreme. (shrink)

Two principal questions are addressed: In De Finibus 3.54 what position does Cicero imagine the talus to fall and lie? How does this talus simile shed light on the problematic relationship between the Stoics’ doctrine of ‘preferred indifferents’ and their definition of the Good as virtue?

There are grounds for the opinion that Cicero, well known today for his oratorical powers, has been denied his rightful place in the age long chain of philosophers. In the following article, Mr. Orford points out his true position and uncovers the essential points of one of his finest works.

Excerpt from M. Tulli Ciceronis De Finibus Bonorum Et Malorum Libri Quinque Duo sunt, opinor, quae lectures a me hoc loco requi rent aut, si non requirent ipsi, rogandi mihi sunt, ut beneuolo animo et adtento accipiaut. Nam primum di ccudam st de horum librorum, quos Cicero de finibus honorum et maiorum scripsit, emendatiolle et enarratione et nninersae opera a me in iis positm ratio sic expli canda, ut, qua in commentariis disperse posita sunt, ea ad suas canssas (...) generation reuocata et intellegi plenius et indicari rectius possint. Quo loco etiam illud ecli cere conabor, ut libertas quaedam et simplicitas indici et orationis, a qua ne hic quidem discedam, merito et necessario adhibita esse uideatur. Deiude, qum de Cice roniani operis forma atque descriptione ncitu digna ui debuntur neque in commentariis aut per excursus carpo sita, conprehendam et ab iis ad ipsos libros lectores nittam. Sed prior illa disputatio, cuius magna pars ad paratns critici ex;>licatione continebitur, quem sua na tura maiorem necessitatem habent quam delectationem in rebus minutis per ambages persequendis, tum molestior fit, quod plus uerhorum consumendum et in eorum co dicum conmemoratione, quos parum nouimus, quam in eorum, quorum plenus asus concessus est. Itaque de precor, ne mea existumetur culpa, qua superiorum st. About the Publisher Forgotten Books publishes hundreds of thousands of rare and classic books. Find more at www.forgottenbooks.com This book is a reproduction of an important historical work. Forgotten Books uses state-of-the-art technology to digitally reconstruct the work, preserving the original format whilst repairing imperfections present in the aged copy. In rare cases, an imperfection in the original, such as a blemish or missing page, may be replicated in our edition. We do, however, repair the vast majority of imperfections successfully; any imperfections that remain are intentionally left to preserve the state of such historical works. (shrink)

Cicero is increasingly recognised as a highly intelligent contributor to the ongoing ethical debates between Epicureans, Stoics and other schools. In this work on the fundamentals of ethics his learning as a scholar, his skill as a lawyer and his own passion for the truth result in a work which dazzles us in its presentation of the debates and at the same time exhibits the detachment of the ancient sceptic. Many kinds of reader will find themselves engaged with Cicero as (...) well as with the ethical theories he presents. This collection takes the reader further into the debates, opening up new avenues for exploring this fascinating work. (shrink)

This paper investigates the differences between ancient Greek and modern ethical naturalism, through the account of the whole classical tradition provided by Cicero in De finibus bonorum et malorum. Ever since Hume’s remarks on the topic, it is usually held that derivations of normative claims from factual claims require some kind of proper justification. It ́s a the presence of such justifications in the Epicurean, Stoic, and Academic-Peripatetic ethical theories (as portrayed in De finibus), and, after a negative (...) conclusion, I argue that we should conceive of this issue within a social-historical perspective: The radical difference between ancient and modern naturalistic ethics is due (in Weber’s terms) to the rationalization processes that generated the modern outlook on nature. (shrink)

Cicero is increasingly recognised as a highly intelligent contributor to the ongoing ethical debates between Epicureans, Stoics and other schools. In this work on the fundamentals of ethics his learning as a scholar, his skill as a lawyer and his own passion for the truth result in a work which dazzles us in its presentation of the debates and at the same time exhibits the detachment of the ancient sceptic. Many kinds of reader will find themselves engaged with Cicero as (...) well as with the ethical theories he presents. This collection takes the reader further into the debates, opening up new avenues for exploring this fascinating work. (shrink)

The extensive quality of the idea of limit expressed by finis becomes evident in the aporia posed in De finibus by the necessity that the supreme good, in order to be perfect, must not increase with duration. The semantic comparison between τέλος and finis explains the difficulty -in the Ciceronian treaty- to understand virtuous acts as non-cinetic acts and, therefore, capable of increasing intensively.

Cicero's De Finibus 3 gives in Latin, through the persona of Cato, an outline of Stoic ethical theory, and is the main continuous text on this subject extant from the ancient world. This edition with text and sub-titles, facing translation and commentary, aims to present to the modern reader the arguments in a clear and accessible form against the background of the turmoil of political events in Rome surrounding the death of Caesar, and in a presentation that will allow (...) those with only a little Latin to follow the original text. The Paradoxes give in a more popular form, and with many examples from Roman life and history, the contradictions resulting from a literal or unsympathetic application of strict Stoic theory to practice. Rosemary Wright has taught at the University College of Wales, Aberystwyth and was Senior Lecturer in Classics at the University of Reading. She is currently Head of Department at University of Wales, Lampeter. (shrink)

This paper argues that Cicero’s critique of Epicureanism in De finibus is motivated by a concern about its degrading effect on the moral sensibility of Rome’s best men. In place of earlier objections to Epicureanism, which centered on its inability to explain or recommend the virtuous conduct of Roman maiores, De finibus focuses on its inability to do so properly and, more prospectively, to assist boni in the work of maintaining the dignity and respectability of Roman civic life. (...) Responding to optimates like Cassius who claimed that Epicureanism was compatible with Roman politics because it treats virtue as being necessary for pleasure, Cicero holds that instrumentalizing virtue in this way is actually a grave corruption of it. Not only do Epicureans debase politics by reducing it to considerations of utility alone: they also introduce deeper forms of civic confusion by distorting and abusing the very idea of honorableness. (shrink)

This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in (...) the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant. (shrink)

Hanc quoque ‘iucunditatem’, si vis, transfer in animum , rnodo intellegas inter ilium qui dicat Tanta laetitia auctus sum ut nihil constet et eum qui Nunc demum mihi animus ardet, quorum alter laetitia gestiat, alter dolore crucietur, esse ilium medium [Quamquam haec inter nos nuper notitia admodum est] qui nee laetetur nee angatur, itemque inter eum qui potiatur corporis expetitis voluptatibus et eum qui crucietur summis doloribus esse eum qui utroque careat.

Hanc quoque ‘iucunditatem’, si vis, transfer in animum, rnodo intellegas inter ilium qui dicat Tanta laetitia auctus sum ut nihil constet et eum qui Nunc demum mihi animus ardet, quorum alter laetitia gestiat, alter dolore crucietur, esse ilium medium [Quamquam haec inter nos nuper notitia admodum est] qui nee laetetur nee angatur, itemque inter eum qui potiatur corporis expetitis voluptatibus et eum qui crucietur summis doloribus esse eum qui utroque careat.