Alexander possessed a splendid talent when it came to tactics, military expeditions and conquests of foreign lands. However, these achievements led to an unimaginable cultural revolution: Hellenic culture reached all conquered peoples and the Hellenics were greatly influenced by the most diverse cultures, particularly the Orientals. However, in contrast to culture, there was also a political upheaval, whose foundation is the passage from the Greek city-states to the Alexandrian authoritarian monarchies. Subduing all the freedom and happiness of the Greeks, sustained by democracy, there is an intrinsic spiritual and political anarchy in these monarchies. Thus, the scenario boils down to the disappearance of the citizen, or even the very feeling of being a citizen, and the establishment of the individualcosmopolitan, that is, the citizen of the world.
In addition to Plato's Academy and Aristotle's Lyceum, other schools were developed in the Hellenistic period: Stoicist, Epicurean and Pyrrhonist.
The schools of Plato and Aristotle played an essential role in defining and interpreting the theories of their founders. On the other hand, Stoicism, Epicureanism and Pyrrhonism had a different thought from these schools, seeking a different view of ethics and, therefore, of education or Paideia, as were based on passing on to their disciples theoretical foundations that could establish principles that would instruct a morally correct life and, essentially, a life happy. These schools diverge on some theoretical aspects that influence the ethical principles that underlie each conception of education. Let's see what these differences are:O Pyrrhonism derives from the thought of Pyrrhus, a philosopher who radically denied the entire Platonic-Aristotelian tradition, putting in doubt all human knowledge, because things are, in themselves, impossible to know, or be, "each thing is nothing more than that", and so our representations are nullified and any attempt to form judgments about any obtained sensation is doomed to failure. Thus, those who wish to be happy must keep abstaining from judgment and always stay indifferent to things, because attempts to form any kind of judgment are impossible; therefore, those who insist on such an act will only achieve disturbance of the soul, which is totally contrary to the ideal of happiness, which is the apathy or imperturbability of the soul.
O Epicureanism he does not deny the certainty of knowledge of things, since he admits in his studies of nature that everything is matter and that all things are made up of thousands of different atoms that prove their existence as they come into contact with our sensations. In this way, our sensation is perfectly capable of referring us to the outside world and, above all, of making us sure of finding the truth (the thing itself). It is in this contact with the truth that Epicurean moral precepts find their foundations: when things come into contact with our sensation, awaken in us a feeling of pleasure or pain, and the criterion for discerning what is good for the individual is the pleasure; and to discern what is not good, pain.
However, it is not all the feeling of pleasure that promotes happiness; in this way, the existence of natural and necessary pleasures is explained, others that are natural, but not necessary, and not yet natural and not necessary. Thus, Epicurus gives fundamental importance to wisdom for good judgment, since the canons (maxims) destined to guide his disciples to distinguish in a way are established. correct the pleasures and so that they always choose the natural and necessary pleasures, it provides everyone with the health of the body and the tranquility of the soul and, as a result, the happiness. It is also the precepts of Epicurean ethics, not fear of the gods and death, as it contradicts the atomistic-materialist theory of Epicurus. Thus, the posture of the Epicurean sage is one of great seclusion, which provides everyone with the possibility of recognizing the best pleasures, but always recognizing the importance of friendship that opens the opportunity to exchange knowledge with others and establish an indispensable wisdom for the formation of the individual.
Do not stop now... There's more after the advertising ;)
Finally, Epicurean education would aim, above all, under the foundation of wisdom, to form the moral individual and guide his actions, keeping his soul away from the fears of common people, passions and vices (pain), while looking for natural pleasures necessary to establish a healthy, peaceful life and, finally, happy.
already the Stoicism it conceives nature as being determined according to a pantheistic-monism: monism because it is a single body called the world (Whole); and pantheistic because there is in this world, disseminated everywhere, a creative and normative principle called Logos. It is present in man, but in a different way: he is a hegemonic part of the human soul, that is, in man, he is what we know as reason. Thus, man is naturally rational and this reason is responsible for leading him (guiding).
According to the Stoics, being happy is also being or living in accordance with nature; therefore, we must first observe the nature of man. It is an animal that needs conservation, that is, it needs to feed and breed. But this conservation is duly updated, as it survives through the centuries. On the other hand, it is rational and, however, needs constant updating (as in body care). In this way, the Stoics determined all the concepts necessary for the individual to become aware of his physical constitution. in order to increase (perfect) its rational part, which is flawed, choosing only the goods, based on the criteria of truth, so that he keeps away from error (misjudgments) and, therefore, from the passions which inhabit the soul and which cause him grievous unhappiness.
Thus, for the Stoics, education would be based on clarifying to the individual that, being aware and following his reason together with all the criteria of judgment, he will have the perfect condition of being constantly prudent in making judgments to execrate everything that does not improve its nature, keeping away from itself any and all passions, in order to live with happiness.
By João Francisco P. Cabral
Brazil School Collaborator
Graduated in Philosophy from the Federal University of Uberlândia - UFU
Master's student in Philosophy at the State University of Campinas - UNICAMP