Thursday, September 12, 2013
In Pursuit of Peace
The writings of Epictetus illustrate a system of thought that seeks to banish baser outside emotion and instead follow reason as the guiding principle for one’s life. This system called Stoicism is often identified as cutting away a large part of a person’s humanity (pathos) in exchange for insight guided only by reason (logos). Many praise the benefits of this philosophy as they see it as curbing man’s more animal side and instead ushering forward the developed logical part of his soul. However the drawback from this arrangement would be that man loses his capacity to care and to love. One theoretical situation into which Stoicism could be applied today is the current civil war in Syria and other conflicts involving human rights throughout the world.
The conflict in Syria has recently escalated due to the use of chemical weapons by the Assad regime. These weapons were fired at a rebel held position in Damascus and caused in addition to fighters deaths, some 1400+ fatalities, many being children. The world responded to this human rights violation with outrage and rightfully so. However would the world have had the same reaction had Stoic principles been applied to the situation?
To answer that question one must ask is the protection of human life reasonable? Is it logical to protect one’s fellow man? The answer to that question has been debated since antiquity and has had famous proponents on both sides. Personally I believe that to protect your fellow man is a rational action because in the act of protecting him, you are by extension giving value to human life. If you give value to human life then by extension again, you are giving value to your own life. If we as society allow injustice to be perpetrated on the weakest members of our society then we expose ourselves to the same potential suffering. So yes, by a Stoic philosophy I believe that there would have been the same moral outrage-though on different grounds- as there was in our world based on a more humanistic philosophy.
Based on this reasoning, the United States should take an active stance in resolving the Syrian Civil War and work to usher in a pro-liberty government in Syria. This reasoning should not only be applied to Syria, but to the whole world. Are we meant to be the world’s peacekeepers? According to Epictetus, we are meant to play the role into which divine fate has led us. For the United States this role is that of the world’s sole superpower. We can take a stand as a force for good in this world or we can sit back and fail in our responsibilities to our fellow man and ultimately ourselves.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
It's very interesting and laborious to apply stoic beliefs to modern day ideals, as the are so diametrically opposed. True stoicism tells of a very diminished view on the value of human life. I do believe that while a Stoic may not grieve the losses of innocents in Syria, he would be able to see the threat of the perpetrators. It would be in the best interest, as far as bringing a sense of balance to nature, to stop these attacks. Now of course this could be interpreted in a million ways; perhaps a true stoic would just see this as any loss of life and suffer nothing in silence at the loss. If I were to speculate on a true stoic's plan of action as far as the United States were concerned. I would say that the stoic would be against involvement, unless a threat were posed against us; however it depends on how we would label relationship to us. If Syria's peace meant a world more harmonious with nature then we would expedite the process, if not, or if we could not predict the result of this, we would not
ReplyDelete