Reasonable Impressions in Stoicism

Abstract

This article offers a contribution to the understanding of the Stoic notion of the kathekon, by exploring the meaning of one of the terms which its definition is formulated. The kathekon is that which, once done, receives a defense or justification; my purpose is to investigate what is meant here by eulogos. The conclusion of the article is limited and negative. There are scattered bits of evidence that have led some critics to adopt one particular interpretation of eulogos the definition of the kathekon; I hope to show that this evidence does not give any support to what has seemed a tempting line of interpretation. I also offer some positive support for the opposing interpretation. Here, then, is the question that I shall ask about the definition of the kathetkon: does the word eulogos this context mean the sense of conforming to everyday norms of sensible, prudent behavior the sort of reasonableness that we all can and do attain to with fair regularity or does it mean something more like in accordance with right reason, i.e. conforming to some higher standard, like the rationality of the Sage? Or, to put it a different way, are the eulogoi justifications that kathekonta get, justifications that even non-Sages are capable of giving a reliable and non-accidental way? There is no doubt that non-Sages perform kathekonta, but then they might perform them without being able to justify them the relevant sense, or without being able to do so reliably. Is an action a kathekon so long as it can receive a justification that is reasonable by normal standards, or is some higher standard of justification required?

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 104 citations exist upstream.