Arius Didymus and why the Stoic sage can cook lentils perfectly
An Odd Claim about the Sage
It is maintained by Athenaeus, a third century CE Greek rhetorician, in his work, The Deipnosophistae, that the Stoic sage will be the only person who is able to cook lentils prudently (Greek: phronimos).
This, as he claims, is “Stoic dogma,” maintained by those well-acquainted with Stoic philosophy, knowledgeable of its various intricacies, even as regard cooking.
It is, of course, a very minor (and actually very funy) point made concerning the Stoic sage, but it is very telling of his nature.
The focus of this essay will be not only to answer the question of why this is the case, but how this statement can be understood in the context of Stoic (Senecan) ethical philosophy, and, most importantly for the Stoic, how it can be obtained.
To understand why the sage is able to cook lentils “prudently,” first it must be understood who the sage is, and, by extension, who he is not.
A General Description of the Sage
The fundamental distinction in Stoicism in terms of agents (i.e., rational, human beings) is between that of the wiseand the ignorant, or the worthwhileand the worthless.
The worthwhileman is synonymous with the Stoic sage, and is described with various epithets which explicate both his disposition (e.g. great, eminent) and his manner of action(e.g. sensible, restrained, virtuous). The division between the Stoic sage and the rest of humanity, then, is binary.
One is either wise, or is ignorant.
The difference between the two states of being is informed by how the wise man acts, namely, that he acts virtuously.
The Sage is the Perfect Human Being
The various characteristics of the sage which are found in the work of Arius Didymus, a first century Stoic and tutor to the emperor Augustus, his Epitome of Stoic Ethics, describe the sage as the perfect human being.
He is perfect, not in the sense that anything about his physical form is perfect, nor in the extent of his knowledge (i.e. he does not know everything), but in how he uses his knowledge. He is perfect because his actions are virtuous. His actions are virtuous, as they use the dictates of reason as their standard, which he gleans from his study of nature. With reason as standard, he lives in complete accordance with virtue.
Virtue is the art of living, and thus, living virtuously, he lives well.
The Stoics explicate this claim by means of analogy. Just as there is an art-form to flute-playing, and that can be learned by instruction, there is also an art of living, and that can be learned from following nature.
The Stoic sage is the logical conclusion of a philosophy which holds the assumption that man’s rational nature, his defining feature, can be honed.
If this nature can be made better through some process, then it can be perfected.
The attributes of the Stoic sage make this apparent, as he is described as being, among other things, the best poet, literary critic, orator and prophet. Though he is best in these realms, his perfection in them is not apparent at the very onset of sagehood. He must perfect his skills through a process of trial and error, as these skills each have a particular set of rules which guide them and must be learned.
The sage, however, cannot be understood by a series of definitions alone. The characteristics of the sage are not separable from the actions which define him, and he is understood fully only in context of these actions.
The key difference between the sage and the sage-aspirant, as aforementioned, is how they act. In this regard, the sage is said to act virtuously, where as the sage-aspirant does not.
Groundwork: Stoic Value Theory and What Virtue is
The Stoics believed that, of things which exist, some are good and some are bad with respect to their moral worth. Virtue falls under the category of things which are good. Understood in a very broad sense, it can be divided into those virtues which concern knowledge and expertise, and those which do not. For the sake of brevity, I’ll focus on the virtues which concern knowledge and expertise, specifically the virtue of intelligence.
The cardinal virtues and their subdivisions
The virtues concerned with knowledge are as follows: intelligence, self-restraint, justiceand bravery.
(i) Intelligence (often called wisdom)is the knowledge of what things must be done, must not be done, and what are neither;
(ii) Self-restraint (often called temperance) is the knowledge of what things are worth choosing, avoiding and are neither;
(iii) Justice concerns proportioning to each (action, person) its due;
(iv) Bravery is a knowledge of what things are terrible, what are not, and what are neither.
These virtues are also described as being primary (or cardinal), each one having virtues which are subordinate to it (e.g. “circumspection” is subordinate to intelligence). The virtue of intelligence is particularly noteworthy, as are its subordinate virtues.
The virtue of intelligence
Subordinate to intelligence are the following virtues:
Circumspection, shrewdness, sensibleness, soundness of aim, and ingenuity.
(i) Circumspectionis concerned with summarizing, regarding a whole action, what is completed and what remains to be done;
(ii) shrewdness is concerned with discerning appropriate actions immediately (on the spot);
(iii) sensiblenessis concerned with which objects of choice are better or worse;
(iv) soundness of aim is concerned with having correct goals;
(v) ingenuity is concerned with discovering a way out from difficulty.
The virtue of intelligence, then, can be summarized as the knowledge of what the Stoics call appropriate acts. These are actions which are consistent with reason, in that they can be said to be reasonably defended.
An illustration of Virtue: Cooking with the Stoic Sage
To understand how this virtue is manifest in action, while definitions are helpful, illustrations are even moreso. Take, for example, that above-stated quote from Athenaeus. The Stoic sage is said to cook lentils prudently, meaning intelligently, which means that he is acting both in accordance with his own reason and nature. This has implications not only for the sage himself, but for the would-be sage, the sage-aspirant.
Each facet of the virtue of intelligence is used at each stage of this process, as each stage of this process is an action which is under the guide of reason.
Prior to cooking
Prior to cooking, the sage-aspirant goes down to the agora to purchase his lentils. He acknowledges that he has none in his house, and so resolves that he must go to where they can be found. His _circumspection_discerns that, for a specific dish of lentils, he needs a specific amount of such and such kind of lentil, such and such kind of seasoning, of vegetable, and of broth. All of which he has yet to purchase. Thus he goes down to the agora, bearing in mind a specific idea of what it is that he still needs to do.
His sensiblenessdiscerns what options are preferable and what are not, given the ideal of lentil soup he has composed in his mind’s eye (e.g. a soup of carrots and lentils).
His soundness of aim first composed this ideal from an impulse (a knowledge of taste), which was then modified in accordance with reason and refined taste (i.e. something savory works well in a lentil soup, but not something bitter).
His shrewdnessdirects his actions when he arrives in front of the merchant. At this time already having formulated an idea of what he needs, he obtains them.
His ingenuitysaves him if the merchant lacks such and such lentil, vegetable or spice, in that he is able to alter his recipe. In every stage of this process, each facet contributes to the actions which the sage-aspirant undertakes.
Even though each has its own specific domain, they collectively create the virtue known as intelligence, which informs, not simply his cooking, but his life as a whole.
The Perfect Chef
It has just been described how the virtue of intelligence will inform the decisions of the sage-aspirant. When compared to the conduct of the sage, it is necessarily imperfect.
The key characteristic of the sage, then, is that his actions and his conduct, when compared to that of the aspirant, are perfect.
Everything he does is done well, in accordance with reason, and with a harmony of his soul. His actions are not more appropriate than those of the aspirant in their result, but in their content. Whereas they might both choose a specific kind of lentil for their soup, the aspirant will be indecisive initially, whereas the sage will show a sort of consistency from experience. The sage knows, through a history of trial and error, that such and such kind of lentil will produce the ideal soup when paired with such and such seasoning and vegetables. The aspirant, who lacks the familiarity of lentils which characterizes the sage, lacks the proper intelligence with regard to lentil soup, and so may choose the right kind, but via the wrong process. The reasoning faculty of the aspirant is defined by its imperfect experience, whereas the faculty of the sage is defined by its perfected reflection upon experience.
The Making of a Meal
Having obtained his provisions from the agora, he sets to work. Every facet of the soon-to-be-meal, from the lentils themselves to the water which will become broth, has been procured and prepared with a reason perfected through practice. He knows everything that is pertinent to the art of making lentils, as he has made them many times before. At each moment he bears in mind the advice and model of his predecessors, imitating them in their preferences and styles, but discovering his own.
Working from this experience, he wastes no time, but is exact and mindful in everything he does. He does not delay, having prepared and ordered his ingredients beforehand and having already brought his water to a simmer. He does not second guess the amounts which he must use, using neither too much nor too little, but just as much as reason and recipe demand. His soul is in harmony with itself, confident in its knowledge and secure from anxiety. He does not over-season nor under-season, not does he add seasoning to the dish at the improper time.
His intelligence and sense perception have been honed to the degree that he knows when the lentils and other vegetables have reached their proper tenderness. He also knows when the broth has reached its proper viscosity. When he has cooked the phaken for the proper amount of time, to his liking, or to the liking of his guests, he removes it from the heat and allows it to rest. When it is the proper time, he apportions it to his guests or himself with justice, neither too much, nor too little. He has performed this act perfectly from the dictates with reason, at harmony with himself, his will, and his result.
He is truly a master chef.
Bibliography:
- Athenaeus, The Deipnosophists, or, Banquet of the learned of Athenæus (London: Henry G. Bohn, York Street, Covent Garden, 1854), Perseus Digital Library. http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A2013.01.0003%3Abook%3D5%3Achapter%3D47
- Didymus, Arius , Epitome of Stoic Ethics. Translated by A. J. Pomeroy. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 1999.