248 //-109 to //-110
Seneca Letters on Ethics 120.3-14 [11-109]
So now I return to the topic you wish to have discussed, which is how
we get our conception of what is good and honourable. 4. Nature could
not have taught us this: she has given us the seeds of knowledge, but
not the knowledge itself. Some people say that we stumble onto the
notion, but it is unbelievable that anyone should learn the form of virtue
by chance. Our view is that it is the result of the observation and compari-
son to each other of frequently performed actions; our school thinks the
honourable and the good are understood by analogy ... Let me explain
what this analogy is. 5. We know what bodily health is; from this we
suppose that there is also a kind of health of the soul. We know what
bodily strength is; from this we infer that there is also a kind of strength
of the soul. Certain generous and humane deeds, certain brave deeds
struck us so forcefully that we began to admire them as though they
were perfect. They contained many faults, but these were hidden by the
shining beauty of a remarkable deed; these we ignored. Nature commands
us to magnify what is praiseworthy, and everyone exaggerates what is
glorious. It is from such actions that we derive the form of a great good ....
8 .... I shall add a point which will perhaps seem amazing: sometimes
bad things contribute to the form of the honourable and what is best
shines forth from its opposite. As you know, the virtues are quite close
to their opposites, and there is a similarity between what is right and
things which are corrupt and shameful. Thus the spendthrift mimics the
generous man, though there is a very great difference between someone
who knows how to give and someone who does not know how to save.
... Carelessness imitates easy-goingness; rashness imitates bravery. 9.
This similarity forced us to pay attention and to distinguish things which
are formally quite close to each other but in fact radically different. While
we were watching those who have been made famous by some outstanding
deed, we began to note who has done something with a noble spirit and
great effort, but only once. We saw a man brave in war, but a coward
in politics, a man who endured poverty with spirit, but disgrace with
shame. [In these cases] we praised the deed and held the man in contempt.
10. But we have [also] seen a different man, who is kind to his friends,
moderate to his enemies, governing public and private affairs in a pious
and religious manner; we saw that he did not lack patience in enduring
what had to be endured or prudence in doing what had to be done. We
have seen his generosity in distributing, his effort and determination
(which relieve bodily weariness) in working. Moreover, he was always
consistent in every action, not good by some plan, but by character the
sort of person who was not only able to act properly, but could not act