Seneca on Philosophy and Friendship 11

. . . But you must not think that our school alone can utter noble words; Epicurus himself, the reviler of Stilpo, spoke similar language; put it down to my credit, though I have already wiped out my debt for the present day. He says: "Whoever does not regard what he has as most ample wealth, is unhappy, though he be master of the whole world."

Or, if the following seems to you a more suitable phrase—for we must try to render the meaning and not the mere words: “A man may rule the world and still be unhappy, if he does not feel that he is supremely happy."

In order, however, that you may know that these sentiments are universal, suggested, of course, by Nature, you will find in one of the comic poets this verse: “Unblessed is he who thinks himself unblessed.” Or, what does your condition matter, if it is bad in your own eyes?. . .

—Seneca the Younger, Moral Letters to Lucilius 9, tr Gummere

No one person or group can claim to have a private monopoly on the truth. The truth is not merely the assertion of an idea, but the openness and ability to understand reality as it is in itself. Though we are so often tempted to reduce life to philosophical, ideological, or political schools and platforms, dwelling on merely the differences is a denial of our shared nature and world.

Seneca has already found common ground with Stilpo, and now he even finds it with Epicurus. Though the Epicureans held pleasure, and not virtue, to be the highest human good, they too seemed to understand something of the principle of self-sufficiency.

I sometimes summarize this principle to myself in short form: I can only be as happy as I consider myself to be. This hardly means that my happiness is whatever I desire, but rather that how I go about estimating my own nature will determine whether I can be happy with who I am and with what I have.

This returns, of course, to a shared theme of the entire letter, that how we think and what we do is more important than what we receive or what happens to us. So it is with happiness, for it is only my own judgment of what is good about who I am that will determine whether I can be happy with who I am. So it is also with friendship, for it is only my judgment of the nature of friendship that will determine if I am able to be a friend.

Consider how two people could be in virtually identical situations, yet one could be happy, and be a friend, while another could not. The difference rests entirely in the things that are valued. Some people care for their status and possessions, and then wonder why they are miserable when these things are not exactly as they wish them to be. Some people, however, care for their virtue, and can therefore be content whichever way the wind blows.

Likewise, some people care for friends because they are useful to them, and then wonder why they are so lonely, even surrounded by a crowd. Some people, however, care for friends out of what they can give to them, and this is why they need never feel lonely. It is the attitude that will shape what we make of our situation, and will swing us between misery and bliss.

Written 1/2005

Image: Johann Heinrich Lips (1758-1817), An Allegory of Friendship