How to Interpret Greek and Roman Philosophies

Since Rome’s focus was toward war and fighting for Rome’s protection and survival; developing philosophic references weren’t a high priority. Since the inhabitants of Rome didn’t take philosophic ideas seriously, it is important to recognize the first two philosophies that actually made mark on Rome’s history. Like other traditions, art forms and ideals; the two new philosophies were stemmed from Greek philosophy. With all the scrutiny of tangible things like music and philosophy to Romans; those who even took too much interest might face consequences. Even though the two schools made the Roman public take notice, there concepts would have to be virtually intoxicating to have made any huge impact on Roman culture.

The philosophy of Epicurus was named after the creator, “Epicurus.” His ideas associated with his philosophy leaning toward humans taking a special interest in seeking personal pleasure. His ideas are confusing because if his objective of the Epicurus philosophy was to make decisions based on what is pleasurable. Always making decisions based on what would feel the best individually could potentially create a chaotic environment. Epicures’ approach to his philosophy was introduced all wrong. The fact that his philosophy was centered on having a full life by seeking pleasure confused the public. Even though Epicurus tried to rectify his claims by telling the public to not indulge in pleasure; the damage was already done. Ironically, the Roman public main reason for dismissing the philosophy was that the thesis resembled too much of a Greek nature. The Romans had been emulating the Greek culture and twisting it into their own; for years by now. The Romans continued to express their dislike of the Epicurus philosophy by deeming it a selfish one that didn’t concentrate enough on Rome as a whole. A profound follower of the Epicurus school of philosophy was a poet named, “Lucretius.” He tried to get the public to give the school a second chance by explaining it’s components in a more realistic way. He tried to fire up the people by telling them they should never have to fear the unknown, and that humans create their own destiny. Overall, the philosophy of Epicurus had some foundation, with a bad deliverance.

Stoicism is a radical philosophy to say the least. The school of Stoicism was a very different complex philosophy. Stoicism was the belief that extreme human emotion, whether that is jealousy, anger or passion; were all signs to weakness and evil influences. Those who behaved in a perfect “stoic” manner were the ones who had their life together and on track.  There are certain symbols and readings that suggest those who behave like perfect statues, will receive a ticket to some kind of happiness. There isn’t really any strong research that points out the specific benefits of showing no emotion. In a way, this philosophy is an example of preaching the fact that showing emotion is a weakness. It would not be outlandish to say that the creator of this school might have tried to gain followers by conforming to Romans beliefs. Romans felt war and protection of Rome was such a high priority, that there was little time to participate in anything else. Stoicism represented a motivation to block out emotions that might interfere with the Roman cause. Overall, this philosophy is hard to completely understand because there are no definitive beliefs. The only concrete representation of the philosophy is the invisible benefit individuals receive by not exerting extreme acts of emotion or passion.