On Book 10 of Diogenes Laertius

Various sayings about the Wise Man.

We do not deny that it is an inconvenient thing to be beaten, pushed, or to lose a limb. However, we deny that these things are "injuries" Latin: iniurias. In a legal and philosophical sense, an injury implies a moral wrong that harms the soul, not just the body.. We do not take away the sensation of pain from the Wise Man. We take away the name of "injury." That word cannot be accepted if virtue is to remain safe. We shall see which school speaks more truly. Both certainly agree on the contempt for injury. You ask what the difference is between the two? It is the same as the difference between two very brave gladiators. One hides his wound and stays in his fighting stance. The other, looking at the shouting crowd, signals that the wound is nothing and does not allow anyone to interfere. You should not think there is a great distance between these views. So says the author, who finally admits that the disagreement between the Stoic and Epicurus is not great. He argues the disagreement is based almost entirely on words. Epicurus calls "Injury" that harm which is brought upon the Wise Man by men driven by hate, envy, or contempt. The Stoic does not want it called an Injury because virtue cannot bear the word. As if virtue cared about the name of a thing, rather than simply ensuring it is endured with constancy. The Stoic does not take away the sensation of pain. Epicurus does not want the Wise Man to abandon his stance. No other distinction can be drawn from the comparison of the gladiators, except that while both Sages testify to their constancy, the Stoic adds an element of ostentation or show. The disagreement is similar when Epicurus says that pain is an "Evil." The Stoic does not allow it to be called an "Evil," even though he admits it is harsh, sad, hard, difficult to suffer, and against nature. Epicurus means nothing else by the name "Evil." He does not contend that pain is a shameful or vicious thing. This will be explained further in its proper place.

I add only this here: the "reasoning" Greek: tòn logismòn. The internal logical process used to maintain composure. or the counsel of reason by which Epicurus teaches the Wise Man to patiently bear injuries can be manifold. However, it seems most like the reasoning he later teaches for how the Wise Man prepares himself against Fortune. The Wise Man recognizes it is not in his power to make other men just or to keep them from being carried away by passions. Therefore, he is as little moved to anger by injuries brought by men as he is by the inconveniences or losses that come from chance events, or from other causes outside his control. He is not disturbed, for example, by heat or cold brought by the weather. It is the nature of the seasons to follow their cycles, and he cannot change this. Therefore, he is not disturbed by the injuries brought by the insolent and the wicked. They act according to their nature. It is not in his power to make them act differently or to change their nature. Here we look to those common examples of the patience of Socrates. He treated wastewater poured on him by his wife Xanthippe after her shouting as if it were rain falling after thunder. He treated a kick from an insolent man like a kick from a donkey, and other such things. Someone might object that other causes are blind and lack a will, while men do injury

On page 78.

knowingly and willingly, and therefore they provoke anger. However, the Wise Man considers such men as if they were blinded by lack of reason. Because of the impulse and violence of their passion, they are not in control of themselves. He thinks it is foreign to Wisdom to add "evil to evil." By this he means that, in addition to the harm happening from the outside, he should not summon internal turmoil upon himself by his own opinion. Just because another person wanted to afflict his mind with distress, he is not so foolish as to "gratify" that person by actually accepting the distress. Indeed, by remaining free from distress, he will achieve a kind of revenge. He will not seek it out, but it will happen. He leaves the attacker to his own devices, as the attacker realizes he has failed in his goal. The attacker has done nothing more than bark at the moon, throw a spear at the sun, or strike his fist against a cliff. But these things must be discussed more fully below.

One who has once been Wise does not fall away from Wisdom.

The text says: "But also, having once become wise..." Greek: Allà kaì tò hápax genómenon sophòn. A fragment from Diogenes Laertius stating that wisdom is a permanent state.. I add by way of interpretation: "truly and solidly." Otherwise, that which is only a shadow or a false front of wisdom can vanish and be destroyed with little effort. That which has only begun and has not taken deep roots can be easily uprooted. Lucretius seems to suggest this when he says nothing is more pleasant than:

To hold the serene temples, well-fortified

By the teachings of the Wise.

Indeed, he says "well-fortified." If someone appears to fall away from Wisdom, we must understand that he never truly stood in the citadel itself. Furthermore, this doctrine is related to what Plutarch attributes to Epicurus: "No one is persuaded of anything unchangeably, except the Wise Man" Greek: Tò mēdèn ametaptṓtōs pepeîsthái tina, plḕn tòn sophón.. This is because he thinks only the Wise Man weighs every part of a reason so carefully that once he has calculated everything and reached a conclusion, he holds it firmly and no longer wavers. Regarding doctrine, he suggested this at the start of his Letter to Pythocles. He wanted there to be a "constant persuasion" Greek: pístin bebáian.. This applies not only to things that can only happen one way, but also to things that can happen in many ways. In that case, the constant belief is that the thing can happen in multiple ways. Regarding character, he explains this later in the Principal Doctrines. He teaches that unless a person proposes for himself a "constant and reasoned end" Greek: tò hyphistòs, kaì epilogisménon télos, everything will be full of controversy and turmoil. This is why you see many people who spend their whole lives deliberating on how to live, yet

Horace, Epistles 1.1.

They cannot remain for an hour approving of the same things. Such a man is aptly compared to Proteus A Greek sea god capable of changing his shape at will.. He is mocked by the Poet Horace, who says:

He scorns what he sought; he seeks again what he recently left,
He seethes...