|Look up sage (sophos) in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.|
In the Symposium, Plato draws a distinction between a philosopher and a sage (sophos, σοφός). The difference is explained through the concept of love, which lacks the object it seeks. Therefore the philosopher (literally lover of wisdom in Greek) does not have the wisdom he or she seeks. The sage, on the other hand, does not love or seek wisdom, because he already has wisdom. According to Plato, there are two categories of beings who do not do philosophy:
- Gods and sages, because they are wise;
- senseless people, because they think they are wise.
The position of the philosopher is between these two groups. The philosopher is not wise; but, aware that he is not wise, seeks wisdom, and loves wisdom. This distinction between the philosopher and the sage played an important part in Stoic philosophy that developed after Plato.
The Stoic sage
|“||It is the view of Zeno and his Stoic followers that there are two races of men, that of the worthwhile, and that of the worthless. The race of the worthwhile employ the virtues through all of their lives, while the race of the worthless employ the vices. Hence the worthwhile always do the right thing on which they embark, while the worthless do wrong.||”|
The Stoics conceived of the sage as an individual beyond any possibility of harm from fate. The life difficulties faced by other humans (illness, poverty, criticism and bad reputation, death, etc.) could not cause a sage any sorrow, and the life circumstances sought by other people (good health, wealth, praise and fame, long life, etc.) were regarded by the Stoic sage as unnecessary externals. The Stoics thought of the sage as an agent unaffected by life circumstances, whose happiness (eudaimonia) is based entirely on virtue.
The Stoics regarded the sage, the truly wise man, as rare, and few (if any) examples of actual sages who had lived were ever named. Despite that, the Stoics regarded sages as the only virtuous and happy humans. All others are regarded as fools, morally vicious, slaves and unfortunate. The Stoics did not admit any middle ground between sages and non-sages: one is either a sage or a fool. Cicero wrote that, according to the Stoics, "every non-sage is mad."
- Pierre Hadot, What is Ancient Philosophy?, pp. 39–45
- Arius Didymus, Epitome of Stoic Ethics, trans. Arthur J. Pomeroy, p. 73 (John Strobaeus, Anthology, 2.7.11g)
- M.Andrew Holowchak, The Stoics, A Guide for the Perplexed, pp. 19–25
- R.J.Hankinson, Stoic Epistemology, in The Cambridge Companion to the Stoics, Brad Inwood editor, p. 59
- Dirk Baltzly, Stoicism. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
- Stoic Ethics. The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
- John Sellers, Stoicism p. 37, University of California Press