Against Hastily Wearing Philosophers' Clothing

Never praise nor blame a man because of the things which are common (to all, or to most),⁷⁵³ and do not ascribe to him any skill or want of skill; and thus you will be free from rashness and from malevolence. This man bathes very quickly. Does he then do wrong? Certainly not. But what does he do? He bathes very quickly. Are all things then done well? By no means! but the acts which proceed from right opinions are done well; and those which proceed from bad opinions are done ill. But do you, until you know the opinion from which a man does each thing, neither praise nor blame the act. But the opinion is not easily discovered from the external things (acts). This man is a carpenter. Why? Because he uses an axe. What then is this to the matter? This man is a musician because he sings. And what does that signify? This man is a philosopher. Because he wears a cloak and long hair. And what does a juggler wear? For this reason if a man sees any philosopher acting indecently, immediately he says, See what the philosopher is doing; but he ought because of the man's indecent behaviour rather to say that he is not a philosopher. For if this is the preconceived notion (πρόληψις) of a philosopher and what he professes, to wear a cloak and long hair, men would say well; but if what he professes is this rather, to keep himself free from faults, why do we not rather, because he does not make good his professions, take from him the name of philosopher? For so we do in the case of all other arts. When a man sees another handling an axe badly, he does not say, what is the use of the carpenter's art? See how badly carpenters do their work; but he says just the contrary, This man is not a carpenter, for he uses an axe badly. In the same way if a man hears another singing badly, he does not say, See how musicians sing; but rather, This man is not a musician. But it is in the matter of philosophy only that people do this. When they see a man acting contrary to the profession of a philosopher, they do not take away his title, but they assume him to be a philosopher, and from his acts deriving the fact that he is behaving indecently they conclude that there is no use in philosophy.

Never praise or blame a man for things common to all, or to most people.⁷⁵³ Do not attribute skill or lack of skill to him on that basis. Then you will be free from rash judgment and ill will. This man bathes very quickly. Does he do wrong? Certainly not. What does he do? He bathes very quickly. Are all things done well, then? By no means! Acts that come from right opinions are done well, and acts that come from bad opinions are done badly. But until you know the opinion behind a man's action, neither praise nor blame it. And that opinion is not easily discovered from outward actions. This man is a carpenter. Why? Because he uses an axe. But what does that have to do with it? This man is a musician because he sings. And what does that prove? This man is a philosopher because he wears a cloak and has long hair. But what does a juggler wear? So, if someone sees a philosopher behaving indecently, he immediately says, See what the philosopher is doing. But because of the man's indecent behavior, he should instead say that the man is not a philosopher. If a philosopher's recognized identity (πρόληψις) and professed aim were to wear a cloak and long hair, people would be right to say that. But if his professed aim is instead to keep himself free from faults, why not deny him the name of philosopher when he fails to live up to it? That is what we do with all other arts. When someone sees a man using an axe badly, he does not say, What use is carpentry? See how badly carpenters do their work. Instead, he says the opposite: This man is not a carpenter, because he uses an axe badly. Likewise, if someone hears a man singing badly, he does not say, See how musicians sing. Instead, he says, This man is not a musician. People do otherwise only when it comes to philosophy. When they see a man acting against what a philosopher professes, they do not deny him the title. They assume he is a philosopher. And because his actions show that he is behaving indecently, they conclude that philosophy is of no use.

What then is the reason of this? Because we attach value to the notion (πρόληψιν) of a carpenter, and to that of a musician, and to the notion of other artisans in like manner, but not to that of a philosopher, and we judge from externals only that it is a thing confused and ill defined. And what other kind of art has a name from the dress and the hair; and has not both theorems and a material and an end? What then is the material (matter) of the philosopher? Is it a cloak? No, but reason. What is his end? is it to wear a cloak? No, but to possess the reason in a right state. Of what kind are his theorems? Are they those about the way in which the beard becomes great or the hair long? No, but rather what Zeno says, to know the elements of reason, what kind of a thing each of them is, and how they are fitted to one another, and what things are consequent upon them. Will you not then see first if he does what he professes when he acts in an unbecoming manner, and then blame his study (pursuit)? But now when you yourself are acting in a sober way, you say in consequence of what he seems to you to be doing wrong, Look at the philosopher, as if it were proper to call by the name of philosopher one who does these things; and further, This is the conduct of a philosopher. But you do not say, Look at the carpenter, when you know that a carpenter is an adulterer or you see him to be a glutton; nor do you say, See the musician. Thus to a certain degree even you perceive (understand) the profession of a philosopher, but you fall away from the notion, and you are confused through want of care.

Why is this? Because we value our idea (πρόληψιν) of a carpenter, a musician, or any other craftsperson. But we do not value our idea of a philosopher. Judging only by appearances, we consider philosophy confused and ill defined. What other craft takes its name from clothing and hair, rather than having principles, a subject, and a goal? What is the philosopher’s subject? Is it a cloak? No, it is reason. What is his goal? Is it to wear a cloak? No, it is to keep his reason in good condition. What are his principles? Do they concern how to grow a beard or long hair? No. As Zeno says, they concern knowing the elements of reason, what each is, how they fit together, and what follows from them. When a man behaves badly, will you not first see whether he is practicing what he claims to practice? Only then should you blame his pursuit. But instead, when you yourself behave sensibly, you see him doing something you think is wrong and say, Look at the philosopher. You speak as if someone who does such things deserves to be called a philosopher. You even say, This is how a philosopher behaves. Yet you do not say, Look at the carpenter, when you know a carpenter is an adulterer or see him being a glutton. Nor do you say, Look at the musician. So even you understand to some degree what a philosopher’s profession is. But you lose sight of that idea and become confused because you do not pay attention.

But even the philosophers themselves as they are called pursue the thing (philosophy) by beginning with things which are common to them and others: as soon as they have assumed a cloak and grown a beard, they say, I am a philosopher.⁷⁵⁴ But no man will say, I am a musician, if he has bought a plectrum (fiddlestick) and a lute: nor will he say, I am a smith, if he has put on a cap and apron. But the dress is fitted to the art; and they take their name from the art, and not from the dress. For this reason Euphrates⁷⁵⁵ used to say well, A long time I strove to be a philosopher without people knowing it; and this, he said, was useful to me: for first I knew that when I did any thing well, I did not do it for the sake of the spectators, but for the sake of myself: I ate well for the sake of myself; I had my countenance well composed and my walk: all for myself and for God. Then, as I struggled alone, so I alone also was in danger: in no respect through me, if I did anything base or unbecoming, was philosophy endangered; nor did I injure the many by doing any thing wrong as a philosopher. For this reason those who did not know my purpose used to wonder how it was that while I conversed and lived altogether with all philosophers, I was not a philosopher myself. And what was the harm for me to be known to be a philosopher by my acts and not by outward marks?⁷⁵⁶ See how I eat, how I drink, how I sleep, how I bear and forbear, how I co-operate, how I employ desire, how I employ aversion (turning from things), how I maintain the relations (to things) those which are natural or those which are acquired, how free from confusion, how free from hindrance. Judge of me from this, if you can. But if you are so deaf and blind that you cannot conceive even Hephaestus⁷⁵⁷ to be a good smith, unless you see the cap on his head, what is the harm in not being recognized by so foolish a judge?

But even those called philosophers begin their pursuit of philosophy with things they have in common with everyone else. As soon as they put on a cloak and grow a beard, they say, I am a philosopher.⁷⁵⁴ But no one says, I am a musician, just because he has bought a plectrum (a pick) and a lute. Nor does anyone say, I am a smith, just because he has put on a cap and apron. Instead, the clothing suits the craft. People take their names from the craft, not from the clothing. For this reason Euphrates⁷⁵⁵ was right to say: For a long time I tried to be a philosopher without people knowing it. He said this was useful to him. First, he knew that when he did anything well, he did it for himself, not for an audience. He ate well for his own sake. He kept his expression and his walk composed, all for himself and for God. Also, just as he struggled alone, he alone was at risk. If he did anything shameful or improper, philosophy was in no way endangered because of him. Nor did he harm the many by doing anything wrong as a philosopher. For this reason, those who did not know his purpose used to wonder about him. How could he talk and live entirely among philosophers, yet not be a philosopher himself? And what harm was there in being recognized as a philosopher by his actions rather than by outward signs?⁷⁵⁶ See how I eat, drink, and sleep. See how I endure and restrain myself, and how I cooperate with others. See how I use desire and aversion (turning away from things). See how I maintain my relationships, both those that are natural and those I have acquired. See how free I am from confusion and obstacles. Judge me by these things, if you can. But suppose you are so deaf and blind that you cannot recognize even Hephaestus⁷⁵⁷ as a good smith without seeing his cap. What harm is there in not being recognized by so foolish a judge?

So Socrates was not known to be a philosopher by most persons; and they used to come to him and ask to be introduced to philosophers. Was he vexed then as we are, and did he say, And do you not think that I am a philosopher? No, but he would take them and introduce them, being satisfied with one thing, with being a philosopher; and being pleased also with not being thought to be a philosopher, he was not annoyed: for he thought of his own occupation. What is the work of an honourable and good man? To have many pupils? By no means. They will look to this matter who are earnest about it. But was it his business to examine carefully difficult theorems? Others will look after these matters also. In what then was he,⁷⁵⁸ and who was he and whom did he wish to be? He was in that (employed in that) wherein there was hurt (damage) and advantage. If any man can damage me, he says, I am doing nothing: if I am waiting for another man to do me good, I am nothing. If I wish for any thing, and it does not happen, I am unfortunate. To such a contest he invited every man, and I do not think that he would have declined the contest with any one.⁷⁵⁹ What do you suppose? was it by proclaiming and saying, I am such a man? Far from it, but by being such a man. For further, this is the character of a fool and a boaster to say, I am free from passions and disturbance: do not be ignorant, my friends, that while you are uneasy and disturbed about things of no value, I alone am free from all perturbation. So is it not enough for you to feel no pain, unless you make this proclamation: Come together all who are suffering gout, pains in the head, fever, ye who are lame, blind, and observe that I am sound (free) from every ailment―This is empty and disagreeable to hear, unless like Aesculapius you are able to show immediately by what kind of treatment they also shall be immediately free from disease, and unless you show your own health as an example.

Most people did not recognize Socrates as a philosopher. They would come to him and ask him to introduce them to philosophers. Did he get upset, as we do, and say, “Don’t you think I’m a philosopher?” No. He would take them and introduce them to philosophers. He was satisfied simply to be a philosopher. He was even pleased not to be thought one, and he was not annoyed. For he kept his mind on his own work. What is the work of an honorable and good man? To have many pupils? Not at all. Those who care about that will attend to it. Was his work to examine difficult theorems carefully? Others will attend to those matters too. Then what was his occupation,⁷⁵⁸ and who was he, and who did he wish to be? He was occupied with the things that could harm or benefit him. “If anyone can harm me,” he says, “I am accomplishing nothing. If I wait for someone else to do me good, I am nothing. If I want something and it does not happen, I am unfortunate.” He invited everyone to compete with him in this, and I do not think he would have refused anyone.⁷⁵⁹ What do you think? Did he proclaim, “I am such a man”? Far from it. He showed it by being such a man. It is the mark of a fool and a boaster to say, “I am free from passions and disturbance. Make no mistake, my friends. While you are anxious and troubled about worthless things, I alone am free from all disturbance.” Is it not enough to be free from pain? Must you also announce, “Come together, all of you who suffer from gout, headaches, or fever, or who are lame or blind. See that I am free from every ailment”? Such a proclamation is empty and unpleasant to hear. It is so unless, like Aesculapius, you can immediately show them what treatment will free them from disease at once, and show your own health as an example.

For such is the Cynic who is honoured with the sceptre and the diadem by Zeus, and says, That you may see, O men, that you seek happiness and tranquillity not where it is, but where it is not, behold I am sent to you by God as an example,⁷⁶⁰ I who have neither property nor house, nor wife nor children, not even a bed, nor coat nor household utensil; and see how healthy I am try me, and if you see that I am free from perturbations, hear the remedies and how I have been cured (treated). This is both philanthropic and noble. But see whose work it is, the work of Zeus, or of him whom he may judge worthy of this service, that he may never exhibit any thing to the many, by which he shall make of no effect his own tes timony, whereby he gives testimony to virtue, and bears. evidence against external things:

Such is the Cynic whom Zeus honors with the scepter and the crown. He says: People, you seek happiness and peace where they cannot be found, not where they can. To show you this, God has sent me as an example.⁷⁶⁰ I have no property or house, no wife or children, not even a bed, a coat, or a household utensil. Yet see how healthy I am. Test me. If you see that I am free from distress, listen to the remedies and learn how I was cured (treated). This is both generous and noble. But consider whose work this is. It is the work of Zeus, or of the person he judges worthy of this service. That person must never show the public anything that would undermine his own testimony. For he testifies in favor of virtue and against external things:

And not this only, but he neither desires nor seeks any thing, nor man nor place nor amusement, as children seek the vintage or holidays; always fortified by modesty as others are fortified by walls and doors and doorkeepers.

And that is not all. He neither desires nor seeks anything: no person, place, or amusement. He does not seek them as children look forward to the grape harvest or holidays. Modesty always protects him, just as walls, doors, and doorkeepers protect others.

But now (these men) being only moved to philosophy, as those who have a bad stomach are moved to some kinds of food which they soon loathe, straightway (rush) towards the sceptre and to the royal power. They let the hair grow, they assume the cloak, they show the shoulder bare, they quarrel with those whom they meet; and if they see a man in a thick winter coat,⁷⁶¹ they quarrel with him. Man, first exercise yourself in winter weather: see your movements (inclinations) that they are not those of a man with a bad stomach or those of a longing woman. First strive that it be not known what you are: be a philosopher to yourself (or, philosophize to yourself) a short time. Fruit grows thus: the seed must be buried for some time, hid, grow slowly in order that it may come to perfection. But if it produces the ear before the jointed stem, it is imperfect, a produce of the garden of Adonis.⁷⁶² Such a poor plant are you also: you have blossomed too soon; the cold weather will scorch you up. See what the husbandmen say about seeds when there is warm weather too early. They are afraid lest the seeds should be too luxuriant, and then a single frost should lay hold of them and show that they are too forward. Do you also consider, my man: you have shot out too soon, you have hurried towards a little fame before the proper season: you think that you are something, a fool among fools: you will be caught by the frost, and rather you have been frost-bitten in the root below, but your upper parts still blossom a little, and for this reason you think that you are still alive and flourishing. Allow us to ripen in the natural way: why do you bare (expose) us? why do you force us? we are not yet able to bear the air. Let the root grow, then acquire the first joint, then the second, and then the third in this way then the fruit will naturally force itself out,⁷⁶³ even if I do not choose. For who that is pregnant and filled with such great principles does not also perceive his own powers and move towards the corresponding acts? A bull is not ignorant of his own nature and his powers, when a wild beast shows itself, nor does he wait for one to urge him on; nor a dog when he sees a wild animal. But if I have the powers of a good man, shall I wait for you to prepare me for my own (proper) acts? At present I have them not, believe me. Why then do you wish me to be withered up before the time, as you have been withered up?

But now these men are drawn to philosophy as people with a bad stomach are drawn to foods they soon come to loathe. They rush straight for the scepter and royal power. They grow their hair, put on the cloak, and bare a shoulder. They quarrel with people they meet. If they see someone in a thick winter coat,⁷⁶¹ they quarrel with him. Man, first train yourself in winter weather. Examine your impulses. Make sure they are not like those of someone with a bad stomach or a woman with a craving. First, try not to let anyone know what you are. Practice philosophy privately for a little while. This is how fruit grows. The seed must be buried and hidden for a while. It must grow slowly to reach maturity. But if it produces the ear of grain before the stalk has joints, it is imperfect, like a plant from the garden of Adonis.⁷⁶² You too are such a poor plant. You have blossomed too soon, and the cold will scorch you. Consider what farmers say about seeds when warm weather comes too early. They fear that the seeds will grow too lush. Then a single frost will strike them and show that they have grown too fast. Consider this too, my man. You have shot up too soon. You have rushed after a little fame before the right time. You think you are somebody, but you are a fool among fools. The frost will catch you. In fact, the root beneath you has already been frostbitten. But the parts above ground still blossom a little. That is why you think you are still alive and flourishing. Let us ripen naturally. Why do you expose us? Why do you force our growth? We are not yet able to bear the open air. Let the root grow, then develop the first joint, then the second, then the third. In this way the fruit will naturally push itself out,⁷⁶³ even if I do not want it to. For who can be pregnant with such great principles without recognizing his own powers and moving to act on them? A bull knows his own nature and strength when a wild beast appears. He does not wait for someone to urge him on. Nor does a dog when he sees a wild animal. But if I have the powers of a good man, will I wait for you to prepare me to act as I should? Believe me, I do not have those powers yet. Why, then, do you want me to wither before my time, as you have withered?

Quid, si quis vultu torvo ferus et pede nudo Exiguaeque togae simulet textore Catonem, Virtutemne repraesentet moresque Catonis?

What if someone imitates Cato with a fierce scowl, bare feet, and a short toga of the same fabric? Would that show Cato’s virtue and character?