of definitions, Socrates, in fact, left his followers without
any definition of the supreme concept of his philosophy,
virtue. It was upon this point, therefore, that the follow-
ers of Socrates disagreed. They all agreed that virtue is
the sole end of life, but they developed different ideas as to
what sort of life is in fact virtuous.
The Cynics.
Antisthenes, the founder of the Cynic School, repeated the
familiar propositions that virtue is founded upon knowl-
edge, is teachable, and is one. But what aroused the admi-
ration of Antisthenes was not Socrates, the man of intellect,
the man of science, the philosopher, but Socrates, the man
of independent character, who followed his own notions of
right with complete indifference to the opinions of others.
This independence was in fact merely a by-product of the
Socratic life. Socrates had been independent of all earthly
goods and possessions, caring neither for riches nor for ap-
plause, only because his heart was set upon a greater trea-
sure, the acquisition of wisdom. Mere independence and
indifference to the {159} opinions of others were not for
him ends in themselves. He did not make fetishes of them.
But the Cynics interpreted his teaching to mean that the
independence of earthly pleasures and possessions is in it-
self the end and object of life. This, in fact, was their
definition of virtue, complete renunciation of everything
that, for ordinary men, makes life worth living, absolute
asceticism, and rigorous self-mortification. Socrates, again,
thinking that the only knowledge of supreme value is ethi-
cal knowledge, had exhibited a tendency to disparage other
kinds of knowledge. This trait the Cynics exaggerated into
a contempt for all art and learning so great as frequently to
amount to ignorance and boorishness. “Virtue is sufficient
for happiness,” said Antisthenes, “and for virtue nothing is
requisite but the strength of a Socrates; it is a matter of
action, and does not require many words, or much learn-
ing.” The Cynic ideal of virtue is thus purely negative; it
is the absence of all desire, freedom from all wants, com-
plete independence of all possessions. Many of them refused
to own houses or any dwelling place, and wandered about
as vagrants and beggars. Diogenes, for the same reason,
lived in a tub. Socrates, following single-heartedly what
he knew to be good, cared nothing what the vulgar said.
But this indifference to the opinion of others was, like his
independence of possessions, not an end in itself. He did
not interpret it to mean that he was wantonly to offend
public opinion. But the Cynics, to show their indifference,
flouted public opinion, and gave frequent and disgusting
exhibitions of indecency.Virtue, for the Cynics, is alone good. Vice is the only evil.
Nothing else in the world is either good or bad. {160} Ev-
erything else is “indifferent.” Property, pleasure, wealth,
freedom, comfort, even life itself, are not to be regarded as
goods. Poverty, misery, illness, slavery, and death itself, are
not to be regarded as evils. It is no better to be a freeman
than a slave, for if the slave have virtue, he is in himself
free, and a born ruler. Suicide is not a crime, and a man
may destroy his life, not however to escape from misery and
pain (for these are not ills), but to show that for him life is
indifferent. And as the line between virtue and vice is ab-
solutely definite, so is the distinction between the wise man