John Vespasian

Most philosophical doctrines are worthless for dealing with uncertainty. They fail to recognise emerging threats and, when people wake up, it’s too late to do anything. If we want to have a successful, happy life, we need to know what to do exactly in order to deal effectively with uncertainty. Seneca came up with the answer, although he failed to see the implications. He was too busy with his own problems and possessed only a limited grasp of economics. Let us review his insights and complete them where necessary. In his 102nd Letter to Lucilius, Seneca described in detail the risks that we all face in life. I would use the metaphor of trees that we have seen when they were planted, but that are now old and decayed. I am referring to the process of getting old, but we can extrapolate the principle to all areas of human life. In terms of business, professional or social development, we all face risks of obsolescence, market shifts, and decreasing opportunities. Uncertainty is a general concept that encompasses all kinds of future risks. If we fail to adopt preventive measures, we may have to face a sharp decline in our health, social and financial status. Stoics sometimes employ the metaphor of a tree, which used to be tall and thriving, but has become dead wood, only good enough for burning in the fireplace. Lamentations will not help us deal successfully with future changes in the environment; they will not help us identify risks and determine what to do exactly. The Stoic prescription given by Zeno of Citium (334-262 BC) and Cleanthes (330-230 BC) consisted of acceptance and resignation. The same passive attitude had been proposed by Chrysippus (279-206 BC). I regard the prescriptions of the early Stoics as profoundly unsatisfactory. Uncertainty constitutes a generic risk that every person needs to face; a philosopher that preaches acceptance or resignation is not helping us deal with uncertainty. Seneca improved substantially compared to the early Stoics because he had understood that, when we are facing important threats, passivity is suicidal. Zeno was advising people to take setbacks philosophically, but is it not better to adopt preventive measures to avert problems? In his 19th Letter to Lucilius, Seneca identifies a formula for dealing effectively with uncertainty, although he fails to take it further. Heraclitus had already implied that fortune is always flowing; sometimes, turning in our favour, other times, against. Here is the link to the original article: https://johnvespasian.com/senecas-advice-on-dealing-with-uncertainty/

Seneca laboured intensively in the pursuit of wisdom. He devoted four decades of his life to reflecting and writing about philosophy. I would not question his dedication, but I cannot ignore the rather poor results he achieved. The fact that he ended up killing himself does not speak in his favour. Despite Seneca’s large efforts to acquire wisdom, we should not close our eyes to his errors. He gained important insights on Stoicism and made solid recommendations, but where did he go wrong? Why did he not come up a winner in the end? Seneca’s Letters to Lucilius provide the clue for solving this mystery. The purpose of the Letters is to praise self-control and condemn emotional overreactions. Seneca rated Stoic self-denial and calm very high, while condemning aggressiveness, anger and rage. The 47th Letter to Lucilius does not equate rationality and tolerance, but anyway, it encourages readers to befriend people who they might have regarded below their level. The letter refers to servants, in the sense of Ancient Roman law, but the idea applies to all sorts of situations. Seneca is telling us to embrace life’s experience as a whole, and draw spiritual benefits from every situation, friendship or acquaintance. In order to attain this goal, we should judge each person for what they are, not by external appearances such as their clothes or their role in society. I can only endorse Seneca’s openness and equanimity, but I detect a strong prejudice in the 47th Letter against “ambition or the pursuit of success.” Seneca devotes almost every sentence to encouraging us to look downwards, while sternly opposing people who dare to look upwards. Seneca’s characterisation of wisdom shows a deep negative bias. He rightly praises our willingness to share our table with the disadvantaged, but why does he condemn our ambition to achieve success and prosperity? I view Seneca’s bias as extremely dangerous because, if we take it at face value, it becomes demotivating and paralysing. It can prove harmful to look only downwards and talk only about the disadvantaged, instead of improving our own life. Seneca had already put forward this idea in the 10th Letter to Lucilius, where he condemned people who rely primarily on religious prayer (instead of self-discipline) to solve problems. I mean people who pray, asking for help in some private matter. I find it problematic that Seneca condemns all private goals as impure and demands total transparency. He speaks in favour of openness and publicity, but overlooks that silent praying can provide people comfort and strength in times of trouble. Seneca is correct in condemning praying for satisfying low passions, but again, he is solely looking downwards, forgetting the beneficial motivation drawn from looking upwards. Here is the link to the original article: https://johnvespasian.com/senecas-mistake-in-the-pursuit-of-wisdom/

The best advice provided by Seneca concerns the method for making decisions. His recommendations are condensing decades of philosophical reflection, and a profound knowledge of Ancient Greek and Roman history. Seneca’s advice is straightforward: Keep going in the right direction and do not dwell on difficulties and setbacks. He had seen too many of his friends choose unhealthy, self-defeating lifestyles for the sake of fitting in society. In doing so, those friends of Seneca’s had relinquished their best opportunities to achieve serenity and happiness. The question, of course, is to identify “the right direction” that should guide our decisions. In Seneca’s case, the answer was obvious because of his strong interest in philosophy. For other people, the answers might be different. In his 56th Letter to Lucilius, Seneca points out that people tend to assign too much power to external events. He gives the example of noise and social pressure. Those factors can prove annoying, but we should not give them more weight than they deserve. Seneca points to boisterous youngsters and sportsmen, the passage of commercial and private wagons, and chatter of all kinds; a philosophical mind can acknowledge them as potential distractions, but only to reaffirm its commitment to achieving one’s essential objectives. I would generalise this point by saying that we should keep going in the right direction and let our focus keep distractions at bay. If we maintain our equanimity, we won’t be bothered by setbacks or by hostile environments. Seneca condensed his strategy as follows: “When we are at peace with ourselves, we won’t be shaken by the world’s noise, praise or reproach.” It is far more important to enjoy a peaceful mind, he argued, than living in a peaceful neighbourhood. His advice to keep going in the right direction only becomes feasible when we possess sufficient serenity and equanimity. It entails substantial amounts of focus and self-discipline. These two Stoic virtues, argued Seneca, are indispensable to serenity. Seneca expanded this piece of advice in the 81st Letter to Lucilius, where he favoured serenity and mental independence. In modern terms, I would see this point as a call for spiritual self-sufficiency.” I can only endorse Seneca’s praise for mental independence because it is a prerequisite for other virtues. I must point to Seneca’s example of the wealthy but anxious man, who cannot even fall asleep due to his preoccupations. His mind remains outwardly focused, unable to find peace, because any change in circumstances will disturb its balance. Seneca warns us against making decisions based on external factors. He was referring to the blind pursuit of wealth, fame, influence and power. Those objectives alone cannot fulfil the definition of “the right direction” and cannot provide guidance for making good decisions. Here is the link to the original article: https://johnvespasian.com/senecas-advice-on-making-good-decisions/

Amongst all insights gained by Seneca, his recipe for handling pessimism is particularly remarkable. I find it perennial in its validity and universal in its applications. Few philosophers have analysed this issue as profoundly as Seneca, and even fewer have come up with useful recommendations. I can sum up Seneca’s recipe for handling pessimism in one brief metaphor. Instead of adopting a fearful, worrisome view of the world, we should imitate the insouciance of dogs, cats or any other wild species. On good and bad days, they keep walking around, looking for food. They fail in most of their attempts to chase a prey or obtain food, but they keep trying nonetheless. Even when they succeed, they seldom get their favourite food, but they enjoy it anyway. Last but not least, when things turn for the worse, they look for solutions without exaggerating the problem. Their attention and capabilities are focused on addressing the problem at hand, leaving no time for blowing up future risks out of proportion. Seneca did not employ the metaphor of animal insouciance, but his Letters to Lucilius provide advice that corresponds one hundred per cent to this metaphor. I am referring in particular to the 49th, the 92nd and the 24th Letters. In the 49th Letter to Lucilius, Seneca addresses the question of how to face adversity. Life is full of crises, some of them heavier than others. When Seneca wrote the 49th Letter, he was surrounded by war and violence, fearing for his own safety. Even in the worst circumstances, it pays to keep going and making the best of each day, Seneca concludes. “Some people live a long life, but they waste most of their time,” he notes. It’s up to us to seize the available opportunities each day without wasting time with complaints. Thus, my metaphor for dogs and cats, or wild animals. Seneca considers a pure time waste to engage in pessimistic thinking. In his own situation, amidst bitter military hostilities, he could spend the whole day agonizing over the risk that “this might be the last day of my life.” Such a pessimistic attitude is useless and counterproductive. We should rather imitate cats and dogs in their ability to stay relatively insouciant in times of trouble. They keep going each day, not wasting time agonizing over potential risks. Seneca complements this important insight in the 49th Letter to Lucilius, where he reminds us of the human ability to deal with adversity. I would call it a formula for attaining happiness to the maximum extent possible. The philosopher knows how to deal with negative elements and make the best of each day. In the original Latin text, Seneca is referring to any material setback, external or internal. For instance, he is talking about health problems as much as material poverty. I have translated this concept by “negative elements beyond his control.” In my metaphor, I refer to the animals’ contentment in cases where they do not find their favourite type of food. This covers the great majority of cases. Nonetheless, they are happy to eat whatever is available and call it a day. We should not grow pessimistic by the fact that we have not yet achieved our goals, or due to the uncertainty of ever getting to our desired destination, argues Seneca. In the 92nd Letter to Lucilius, Seneca affirmed that we can deal successfully with anger. It has taught me that our soul enables us to deal with negative issues and elevate us above a purely perceptual level. In this area, we are far better equipped than dogs, cats or any other creature. Seneca emphasises the need to maintain our equanimity and keep pessimism at bay. In this respect, I must mention Publius Rufus Rutilius (2nd century BC) as an illustration of the human ability to deal with setbacks and still find happiness. Rutilius was twice prosecuted on dubious ground, absolved the first time, but the second time sent into exile. Here is the link to the original article: https://johnvespasian.com/seneca-on-handling-pessimism/

I pity those who ignore the lessons from antique thinkers because they are leaving remarkable wisdom on the table. It is a sign of deep ignorance to categorise Socrates (470-399 BC), Plato (427-347 BC) and Aristotle (384-322 BC) as impractical, and to sustain that their works are no longer worth studying. Curiously enough, Seneca often battled with prior Greek and Roman thinkers; he regarded their conclusions as superficial or incomplete, and claimed for himself the credit of having discovered a higher truth. Are those debates too theoretical? No, not at all. Does it make a real difference whether we favour modern thinkers to the detriment of the ancients? Yes, it makes a large difference because it is costly to acquire wisdom. If we foolishly discard our intellectual inheritance, we may prove unable to replace it when things turn from the worse. If we fail to absorb the wisdom from the past here and now, we’ll miss those insights when we need them badly. Seneca made this mistake in his treatment of doubts, fears, and threats. In his 90th Letter to Lucilius, he put aside the ideas and wisdom of Posidonius (135-50 BC) all too quickly and all too recklessly, just because Posidonius was not a Stoic. Let’s not forget that Posidonius had written fifty-two history books that, in Seneca’s lifetime, constituted the most accurate record of the late Roman Republic. Those books contained lots of details about philosophy, psychology and culture. Posidonius’ works gave a first-hand account of how Ancient Romans addressed problems, individually and societally. Their stories illustrated especially how people dealt effectively with doubts and fears. In the 90th Letter to Lucilius, Seneca discards all inherited wisdom as fruitless, and calls for “returning to nature” in terms of clothing, nourishment, habitation and social mores. He calls Posidonius’ reflections undesirable because they make our life easier and safer. Seneca expects readers to use their philosophical skills to overcome doubts, fears, poverty and lack of comfort, but fails to realise the high cost associated with his recommendation. This error becomes obvious when Seneca, discussing how people protect themselves from cold, puts on an equal footing primitive fur clothing and a well-built, comfortable home. Who can affirm truthfully that the former is as good as the latter? Antique philosophy teaches us how to overcome doubts and fears by thinking rationally. This entails employing the insights and resources available in our culture. It would be foolish to go back in history and discard the knowledge accumulated by our predecessors. In the 39th Letter to Lucilius, Seneca somewhat remedies his mistake because he praises a moderate lifestyle as the essential Stoic strategy for dealing with doubts and fears. He speaks in favour of “aiming high when following our natural drives” and avoiding excesses. Stoicism calls for dissolving doubts and fears through daily virtue. Seneca does not expect his readers to deploy impossible levels of willpower and determination. His method is soft and incremental, and simply encourages us to live in accordance with nature. In the 39th Letter to Lucilius, Seneca regards “uncontrolled passions” as the most dangerous enemy to Stoic virtue. His call for a tempered, moderate lifestyle summarises his prescription against doubts and fears. Does Seneca’s recipe work in real life? Only to the extent that we complement it with state-of-the-art knowledge. Unless we adopt Posidonius’ love for existing know-how, chances are that our attempt to “return to nature” will create more problems than it solves. Here is the link to the original article: https://johnvespasian.com/seneca-on-overcoming-doubts-and-fears/

How many people do you know that are able to remain calm under extreme pressure? My guess is that you know very few. I can count those I know with the fingers of one hand. Serenity is not taught in school, and when people most need it, then it is far too late to acquire it. Seneca came up with effective strategies for staying calm under pressure, although, to be fair, I must point out that he built on the ideas of Zeno of Citium (334-262 BC), Cleanthes (330-230 BC) and Chrysippus (279-206 BC). The most important innovation of Seneca’s in this respect is that he combined the ancient Stoic wisdom with the doctrines of Epicurus (341-270 BC). The resulting advice carries, in my view, a much heavier weight than the ideas of prior Stoics. Seneca addressed this matter fragmentarily in the 22nd and 75th Letters to Lucilius. We need to pick up those separate observations and put them together into a powerful recipe that can be still employed today. In the 75th Letter to Lucilius, Seneca conveys the idea that most people tend to suffer gratuitously due to their poor habits. If they practised Stoicism, he argues, they would be protected from “the surrounding horrors and temptations.” Seneca affirms that the only valid method for staying calm under pressure is “to break with bad habits and tendencies.” He is referring to the severe fear that handicaps individuals when they are confronted to sickness, poverty or social exclusion. For staying calm under pressure, Seneca’s prescription calls for adopting good habits (intellectual and physical habits) and practising them day after day. Seneca strongly condemns individuals who are willing to practise virtue when it is already too late. He is employing the wording “people who practise virtue only sporadically.” Let us take note of this recommendation as the first step for staying calm under pressure. From those Letters, I have concluded that it is not generally a bad idea to complain and give other people too many details about our problems. If we do so, those problems will remain unsolved and the pressure will not relent. Seneca acknowledges that “conversation can appear deeply appealing, almost like love or drinking wine,” but we shouldn’t engage in counterproductive actions when we are surrounded by trouble. There is a high risk, argues Seneca, that lamentations would make things worse. Instead of solving the underlying problem, there is a high risk that those conversations would elicit “envy, disdain, fear or hatred.” Those elements can surely not help us to stay calm under pressure. Here is the link to the original article: https://johnvespasian.com/senecas-advice-on-staying-calm-under-pressure/

Despite his extensive philosophising, Seneca never showed a systematic approach to philosophy. His Letters to Lucilius employ hundreds of times the word “virtue,” but do not connect it to metaphysics, epistemology, politics, aesthetics or to the Aristotelian tradition. Seneca was a gifted writer, but not a systematic thinker. His goal was to prevent misery more than to promote happiness. In his works, we are led to assume that he knew the doctrines of Plato and Aristotle, but he does very little to prove this point. How can I then summarise Seneca’s insights? I will do so in seven principles that condense the essence of his philosophical works. These seven ideas are spread all over Seneca’s works. It would take days for anyone to go through all of Seneca’s works and come to these conclusions: Life is to a great extent unpredictable, and philosophy is the best tool for navigating the uncertainty. In his 71st and 88th Letters to Lucilius, Seneca acknowledges that Stoicism views philosophy as the study of virtue, but the study is not a purely theoretical study. The goal of philosophy is to help us make good decisions, especially when we only possess incomplete information. Even if living conditions have improved enormously since the times of Ancient Rome, Seneca’s insights remain true: Every person is going to be confronted, sooner or later, with setbacks, failure and sickness. Wisdom is philosophy in practice. Seneca employs the metaphor of the voyage in the 71st Letter to Lucilius. This Letter prompts me to conclude that, if life is a voyage, then philosophy shows us the goal, and wisdom delineates the path to follow. Wisdom is the skill that we acquire through careful, detailed and sustained study of philosophy. It is a skill that protects our serenity when things turn for the worse. In those Letters to Lucilius, Seneca fails to quote Aristotle (384-322 BC) and his “Nicomachean Ethics” and “Eudemian Ethics,” which also conceived ethics as a practical science, but one that is fully consistent with other branches of philosophy. I miss in Seneca this concern for consistency and integration. Stoicism admits that philosophy also deals with politics, nature, aesthetics and logic, but in practice, pays little attention to those matters. Seneca focused almost exclusively on ethics, just as the prior Stoics had done. The extant works of Cleanthes (330-230 BC), Chrysippus (279-206 BC) and Zeno of Citium (334-262 BC) don’t contain many disquisitions on logic, aesthetics and politics. Peace of mind was their priority and everything else came second. Seneca calls for concentrating our efforts on learning all the intricacies of Stoicism. In the 32nd Letter to Lucilius, he is condemning those who make material abundance their priority because, in doing so, they are unlikely to find happiness. Stoicism, says Seneca in the 32nd Letter, can render us calm, peaceful and satisfied. Later Stoics, such as Marcus Aurelius (121-180 AD) and Epictetus (55-135 AD) gave more weight to minimising suffering and increasing our resilience. Philosophy is for practising, not for preaching. Seneca is often coming back to this idea in his Letters to Lucilius and in his essays “On the Constancy of the Wise” and “On the Happy Life.” He views it as a waste of time to try to convince other people to change their ideas and lifestyle. In the 29th Letter to Lucilius, Seneca considers philosophical proselytism ineffective because it is doomed to fail most of the time. Here is the link to the original article: https://johnvespasian.com/senecas-philosophy-explained/

Amongst all paths to serenity, the one delineated by Seneca is the most straightforward. It rests on a single principle that can be applied to all problems and circumstances that we encounter in life. Seneca’s path to serenity has been proven effective through twenty centuries of experience. In contrast to the recipes given by Marcus Aurelius (121-180 AD) and Epictetus (55-135 AD), Seneca’s path can be summarised in one word: flexibility. Nowadays, most people regard themselves as flexible, but is it really true? Does their flexibility correspond to Seneca’s idea as presented in his Letters to Lucilius? Surely not. Seneca was not referring to the willingness to eat fish and chips instead of hamburger, or take the early flight when later flights are fully booked. His conception of flexibility is wider and deeper. In the 36th Letter to Lucilius, Seneca underlines the fleeting nature of life and exhorts us to practice virtue. It has led me to conclude that most problems pale when we accept the fact that, one day, we will pass away, just like every other human being. The philosophical mind looks at the present and the future at the same time. In doing so, it strengthens its resolve to enjoy each day to the maximum. Stoicism calls for mental flexibility, for the ability to weigh the pros and cons of each situation, and automatically gravitate to the best alternative. Cleanthes (330-230 BC) personified the idea of flexibility because he was willing to take a succession of menial jobs to fund his philosophical quest. Seneca’s meaning of flexibility encompasses the willingness to relocate, change professions, change friends, accept failure and setbacks as a normal part of life, and cope with dire illness if need be. His concept of flexibility was as radical as one can imagine nowadays. In the 67th Letter to Lucilius, Seneca explains how to lead a happy life, but it does not tell us, for instance, how to cope with debilitating illness. Instead of complaining about poor health, should we declare ourselves happy that, due to our illness, we can devote more time to reading or music? Seneca enumerates many setbacks that confront individuals in the course of their existence: War, physical injuries, material privations or accidents of all sorts. What to do in those cases? The fool will waste his energy crying and complaining. His goal is to elicit compassion from other people, and obtain help and comfort. The problem is that, even if he succeeds, he will remain anxious about the future. His supporters might change their mind, or his problems might grow worse over time. Seneca explains that the path to serenity consists of patience and flexibility. The Stoic regards problems as the price we pay to be alive. No problems, explains Seneca, means death. In the 67th Letter to Lucilius, Seneca is quoting Demetrius, a philosopher who had compared a smooth life to a “dead sea.” I find the idea of a totally smooth life unrealistic anyway, but the point made by Seneca is that, even if it was possible, it would prevent us from developing our intellectual and physical skills. Seneca was referring to Demetrius, a contemporary of his, more closely associated with the Cynics than with the Stoics. Curiously enough, Demetrius also endured exile under the rule of Nero, just as Seneca had done. Flexibility entails the automatic capability to see the hidden benefits that go hand in hand with seemingly dire situations. In the 81st Letter to Lucilius, Seneca encourages readers to count their blessings and express gratitude at every opportunity. Here is the link to the original article: https://johnvespasian.com/senecas-path-to-serenity/

Seneca (4 BC-65 AD) had no understanding of the concept of justice, and what is even worse, he did not care. As a result, his version of Stoicism lost touch with the social and economic fibre of the Roman Empire. It would have been easy for Seneca to endorse the doctrines of Aristotle (384-322 BC) on justice. In the “Eudemian Ethics” and the “Nicomachean Ethics,” Aristotle considered justice a major virtue. A rational man aims at giving each person his due, Aristotle argued. Fairness and justice arise from the human capacity to think. Animals have no concept of justice, and no expectations thereof. Without rationality, we cannot determine who deserves what, who owns what, and who has earned what. Seneca gained important insights on the subject of serenity, equanimity and happiness, but he would have done even better if he had devoted some time to reflecting about justice. He did acknowledge the problems caused by malfeasance and abuse, but without pointing to their root cause. The 47th Letter to Lucilius exemplifies Seneca’s astonishing indifference to injustice. It recounts that Calvisius Sabinus, a Roman aristocrat, had mistreated his servants, but fails to rate Sabinus’ behaviour as evil. Instead of condemning Sabinus for mistreating his servants, Seneca expresses his dislike for Sabinus’ ignorance in matters of literature and social decorum. The Letter demonstrates deep moral and social blindness on Seneca’s side. Obliviousness to justice is a general problem affecting Stoic thinkers. In the ensuing generations, Marcus Aurelius (121-180 AD) and Epictetus (55-135 AD) show slightly more sensitivity for justice than Seneca, but their passive acceptance of abuses remains worrying. What about earlier Stoics? Zeno of Citium (334-262 BC), Cleanthes (330-230 BC) and Chrysippus (279-206 BC) had not remained insensitive to injustice, but they viewed it as a source of suffering that cannot be eradicated. For Seneca, philosophy is a balsam for the victims of abuse, mistreatment and other injustices, but its effects are limited in scope. The balsam may heal existing injuries, but does nothing to prevent new abuses from occurring. Due to Seneca’s underlying indifference for justice, I find it difficult to take his advice for victims seriously. The 47th Letter to Lucilius affirms that “only the practice of virtue can help us secure happiness,” but does not mention justice a single time. Seneca systematically avoided social or economic criticism. I have not found in all his writings even a couple of paragraphs commenting on Aristotle’s theory of justice. The avoidance of this sensitive subject is of course deliberate, not unintentional. In comparison, Seneca devoted hundreds of pages to issues of little importance. As a salient illustration, I can point to the 15th Letter to Lucilius, which criticises pointless exercise. The banality of its contents barely justifies the cost of the paper that Seneca employed for writing it. In any case, I think that Seneca should have rather praised the benefits of moderate exercise. Seneca arrives at the wrong conclusion that we should not expect too much from life. He regards failure and injustice as perennial and universal, as something we cannot avoid even if we deploy our best efforts. The 67th and 78th Letters to Lucilius present shipwreck (in a figurative manner) as normal. We can choose a good pilot for our ship and he can deploy his best efforts, but a storm may appear out of nowhere and cause the ship to sink. As philosophers, Seneca says, our job consists of fortifying our soul, so that we can cope with shipwrecks (setbacks). His most definite statement reads as follows: “Neither poverty nor suffering nor any other storm can have negative effects on wise individuals.” I couldn’t disagree more and I regret that Seneca missed the point completely. Here is the link to the original article: https://johnvespasian.com/senecas-teachings-on-justice/

Romantic literature defends the thesis that it is better to go through ups and downs in life rather than leading a smooth and peaceful existence. I have my doubts about their exaltation of adventure, but when it comes to real life, none of us is afforded the luxury of perfect smoothness and peace. Seneca (4 BC-65 AD) was conscious of the detrimental role played by heartbreak and grief in human existence. Some men and women bring about their own misery, for instance because they engage in reckless behaviour; others are simply victims of circumstances. In all cases, heartbreak and grief can make bad situations even worse. I reckon that, amongst all Stoic philosophers, Seneca gave the most sensible advice for dealing with heartbreak and grief. His recommendations remain valuable today, twenty centuries after he had consigned them to paper, but require some minor adaptations. Seneca provides his universal prescription in the 20th Letter to Lucilius, where he advises us to “moderate our desires,” although in a different context. His views are drawn from three centuries earlier, from the writings of Epicurus (341-270 BC). The 20th Letter is coupling the material with the intangible by referring to Epicurus advice to Pythocles: The best way to grow wealthier is to moderate one’s desires. Seneca is using the quotation from Epicurus in the sense of physical desires and professional ambitions, amongst others. How does this recommendation apply to individuals that are suffering from heartache or grief? Their suffering comes from the desire to have reality changed, recover their lost fortune, get their lost friend back, or resurrect their deceased spouse. Seneca calls for moderating our desires in good times and bad times; excessive ambition will prove as pernicious as blind faith in the impossible. The wise man knows the difference between fantasy and feasibility, and avoids the former. Heartache and grief are aggravated when individuals look at others that seem to enjoy vast advantages. The impression that other people are luckier can magnify one’s feelings of misery. I find it sensible of Seneca’s to clarify, also in the 20th Letter, that such public images of power and wealth tend to be transient. Seneca remarks that many people who occupy a powerful or influential position will be quickly forgotten upon their passing and nobody will pay homage to their feats. It is thus irrational to compare oneself to public images that may not depict solid achievement or enjoyment. Heartbreak and grief are best combatted by focusing on the best kind of role models: people who have surmounted failure and hardships. I’m referring to individuals who have personally experienced setbacks and have emerged triumphant. In the 33rd Letter to Lucilius, Seneca warns us against weak role models. Victims of heartache and grief should pay special attention to this recommendation. Seneca invoked Pythagoras (6th century BC) as an example of teachers “who not only talk, but also do as they say.” Here is the link to the original article: https://johnvespasian.com/seneca-on-dealing-with-heartbreak-and-grief/