We follow where reason, not truth, has taken us

A conversation with ChatGPT about Cicero and Seneca's very similar thoughts on probability

Cicero and Seneca obviously have a lot in common Cicero seems to be leaning more towards having positive views about what is good and bad than traditional Sceptics - and Seneca seems to be leaning more in the direction of Scepticism than a traditional Stoic would ever dream of. I am wondering if they, taken together, can help us shape an understanding of Socrates’ philosophy of happiness that is viable for the present stage of history. So I had a chat with ChatGPT about that.

Jannik: How would you interpret the quote from Cicero's "The Nature of the Gods" (1.13)?

"We Academics are not the type of philosophers who think that nothing is true. Our claim is that certain falsehoods impinge on all true statements, and that these bear so close a resemblance to the truth that they contain no criterion by which to judge them or to lend assent to them. The outcome of this is our view that many things are probable, and that though these are not demonstrably true they guide the life of the wise man, because they are so significant and clear-cut".

I'm wondering how Cicero thinks his probability follows from the fact that certain falsehoods impinge on the truth to the extent that, in some cases, knowledge is not possible.

ChatGPT: Cicero, as an Academic Skeptic, is expressing the view that certainty in knowledge is difficult, if not impossible, to attain because truths and falsehoods can be so similar that they're indistinguishable.

To unpack this a bit more, the Academic Skeptics held that for any argument or position, a counterargument of equal persuasiveness can be made. Therefore, it becomes impossible to establish truth with absolute certainty. However, this does not mean that everything is entirely unknowable or that all claims are equally valid. Some claims may be more plausible or probable than others based on our perceptions and reasoning.

When Cicero states that "certain falsehoods impinge on all true statements," he means that for every truth, there are falsehoods that can appear just as convincing, which makes it challenging to distinguish between the two. Despite this, he doesn't suggest that we can't make judgments or decisions at all. Instead, we should operate on the basis of what is probable or plausible, given our available information and reasoning.

This position allows for practical decision-making in the face of uncertainty. While we might not have absolute certainty, we do often have enough information to make reasonable judgments about what is likely or unlikely. So, for Cicero, the wise person operates on the basis of these probable truths, making the best decisions possible in light of the limitations of human knowledge.

This approach is a practical one. Recognizing the potential for uncertainty doesn't necessarily paralyze us; rather, it leads us to adopt a measured, probabilistic approach to truth and decision-making. For Cicero and the Academic Skeptics, wisdom consists in recognizing the limitations of our knowledge and yet navigating life effectively within those constraints.

Jannik: This seems very close to the position expressed by Seneca in this quote from his work "On Benefits” (4.33.1-3):

"we never wait for absolute certainty, since discovery of the truth is arduous, but we follow what is likely to be true. This is the path we follow in accomplishing all our tasks. That is how we sow, how we sail, how we go to war, how we contract marriage, how we rear children; since the outcome of all these activities is uncertain, we adopt a course of action where we believe our hopes have a good chance of being fulfilled. For who will promise you a harvest when you sow, or a harbor when you sail, or victory when you go to war; who will promise you a chaste wife when you marry, or dutiful children when you become a father? We follow where reason, not truth, has taken us. If you wait and do nothing that is not certain to succeed and claim no knowledge whose truth is not confirmed, all activities will cease and life will stand still. Since it is not truth, but what is likely to be true, that directs me to this or that, I shall confer a benefit on someone who is likely to be grateful.”

ChatGPT: Yes, there is indeed a similarity between the views expressed in Cicero's quote and the one from Seneca that you've shared. Both point to a kind of pragmatic approach to dealing with uncertainty in life.

Seneca, like Cicero, suggests that we cannot wait for absolute certainty to act. Instead, we act on the basis of what is likely or probable, given our current knowledge and reasoning. In this way, both philosophers emphasize the importance of practical wisdom: making the best decisions we can, given the inherent uncertainties of life.

There is a key difference in emphasis, however. While Cicero's quote focuses on the epistemological issue of discerning truth from falsehood, Seneca's quote is more directly concerned with the practical question of how to live well and act wisely in the face of uncertainty. He underscores that the search for absolute certainty can paralyze action, so instead we must move forward guided by what is likely to be true, even if it is not confirmed.

Another interesting note is that Seneca, as a Stoic philosopher, also believed in the idea of living in accordance with nature or reason, which involves recognizing the things that are and are not within our control. This Stoic perspective might also resonate in his acknowledgement of the uncertainty of life's outcomes and the necessity to make decisions based on probabilities rather than certainties.

So, while Cicero and Seneca come from different philosophical schools (Academic Skepticism and Stoicism, respectively), they both articulate a practical approach to dealing with uncertainty in knowledge and in life. They emphasize the necessity of acting on the basis of what is likely or reasonable, given the limitations of human knowledge and the unpredictability of life's outcomes.

Jannik: I realize that Seneca is talking about practical reason in this passage but, to a Stoic, there is not a very clear cut distinction between practical and theoretical reason, I think. According to the theory of homologia a Stoic is looking to nature for directions about value. I wonder if Seneca's general epistemological position could be closer to that of Cicero than is commonly assumed. What do you think?

ChatGPT: It's an intriguing point, and you're correct that Stoicism doesn't make a sharp distinction between practical and theoretical reason. For Stoics, wisdom isn't purely theoretical or abstract; it's also about how to live well, which involves the application of reason to practical matters.

The idea of homologia, or living in agreement, in Stoicism does suggest looking to nature for guidance about value. This is because Stoics believed that reason is a fundamental part of nature, and thus, by using our reason, we are aligning ourselves with the rational structure of the universe.

In the quote you provided, Seneca's approach to determining whom to confer a benefit on—choosing someone who is likely to be grateful—does resemble Cicero's idea of following what is probable. Both emphasize the importance of acting on the basis of likelihood and practical reasoning, given the uncertainties and limitations of our knowledge.

That being said, while there are similarities in these practical matters, there remain significant differences in the overall philosophical frameworks of Stoicism and Academic Skepticism. Stoicism maintains that we can attain certain knowledge by aligning ourselves with the rational structure of nature, while Academic Skepticism is more skeptical of the possibility of attaining such certainty.

However, your point is well-taken: there's more overlap between Cicero's Academic Skepticism and Seneca's Stoicism than might be initially apparent, especially when it comes to their pragmatic approach to dealing with uncertainty in life. This demonstrates the richness and complexity of ancient philosophy, as well as the fruitful dialogues and intersections between different philosophical schools.

Jannik: I suspect that Seneca is more influenced by Cicero than he is willing to acknowledge in his writings. A major theme for Seneca is to justify withdrawal from any kind of duty to the surrounding society and to focus on writing philosophy for coming generations instead. This theme appears to be unique for Seneca among Stoic philosophers but it is a major theme for Cicero as well. Of course, it might simply be due to the fact that they were both Romans and had to deal with the norms of Roman culture.

ChatGPT: It's certainly possible that Seneca was influenced by Cicero more than he explicitly acknowledged. Both were prominent Roman philosophers and statesmen, and they shared similar social and cultural contexts. Furthermore, Cicero's works were widely read and influential in Roman society, so it's likely that Seneca would have been familiar with them.

Your observation about the theme of withdrawal from societal duties is an interesting one. Both Cicero and Seneca indeed grappled with the tension between public duties and philosophical pursuits. Cicero often emphasized the importance of balancing active political involvement with philosophical contemplation, and Seneca similarly explored the theme of balancing active life with the pursuit of wisdom.

However, it's important to note that the Stoic philosophy, which Seneca adhered to, also contained within itself a tension between engagement with the world and withdrawal. Stoics held that virtue is the only true good and is entirely dependent on one's own actions and attitudes. This could support a focus on self-improvement and philosophical contemplation, possibly at the expense of active engagement in public life.

As to your point about the influence of Roman culture, it's certainly possible that the particular social and political pressures of their time influenced both Cicero's and Seneca's perspectives. Rome was a society that highly valued public service and political involvement, so the question of how to balance these expectations with the pursuit of wisdom would have been particularly salient.

In any case, it's always a challenging task to determine the exact nature and extent of one philosopher's influence on another. Influence can take many forms and can occur at both explicit and more subtle, implicit levels. Despite these challenges, your observations provide a thoughtful and insightful contribution to the ongoing dialogue about the relationships between these two significant figures in Roman philosophy.

Jannik: Thank you 😊 They also share that they both chose to write extensively about philosophy in Latin. Both were pioneers in doing so.

ChatGPT: Indeed, both Cicero and Seneca were pivotal in shaping Latin philosophical literature. Latin, as opposed to Greek, wasn't commonly used for philosophical writing during their times. Their choice to write in Latin made philosophical ideas more accessible to the Roman public and had a lasting impact on the development of Western philosophy.

Cicero's works, written in a highly polished Latin prose, not only introduced Roman audiences to Greek philosophical concepts but also showcased the potential of Latin as a language for philosophical expression. His philosophical works are still widely studied today, both for their philosophical content and for their stylistic elegance.

Similarly, Seneca's philosophical writings, including his moral essays and letters, have been influential in Stoicism and beyond. His lucid and accessible Latin prose contributed to the spread of Stoic ideas throughout the Roman Empire and into the broader Western intellectual tradition.

So, their shared choice to write philosophy in Latin is another significant parallel between Cicero and Seneca. This choice had profound implications for the spread of philosophical ideas and the development of Latin as a language of philosophy.

Jannik: Do you agree that Cicero is less sceptic than other famous Sceptic when he says that there things that guide the life of the wise man because they are so significant and clear-cut and probably true?

ChatGPT: Yes, that would be fair to say. Cicero, as a representative of the Academic Skeptic school, holds a more moderate form of skepticism compared to other forms of skepticism, such as Pyrrhonian skepticism.

Academic Skepticism, as articulated by Cicero, acknowledges the difficulty of attaining certainty but maintains that some things can be known with a degree of probability. This allows for practical decision-making and action, as we can act on the basis of what seems most likely to be true, even if we can't know it with absolute certainty. This is why Cicero talks about things that guide the life of the wise man because they are so significant, clear-cut, and probably true.

In contrast, Pyrrhonian skeptics suspend judgement on all things, maintaining that we can't know anything for certain and we can't even know what is likely or unlikely. They aim to achieve a state of ataraxia, or tranquility, by suspending all judgement and avoiding dogmatic beliefs.

So, while Cicero is a skeptic in the sense that he acknowledges the difficulty of attaining certainty, his position is more moderate than some other forms of skepticism. He allows for the possibility of probable knowledge and believes that we can make reasonable decisions based on this probable knowledge.

Jannik: Do you also agree that Seneca's Stoicism is more pragmatic and oriented towards real life than traditional Stoicism?

ChatGPT: Indeed, Seneca’s form of Stoicism is often considered more pragmatic and relatable compared to earlier Stoic philosophers. This is primarily because Seneca, through his letters and essays, applies Stoic principles to a wide range of real-life situations.

While Stoicism as a philosophical school emphasizes the pursuit of virtue and living in accordance with nature, Seneca particularly focused on providing practical guidance on how to navigate daily life, endure hardships, manage emotions, and maintain tranquility. He wrote extensively on themes like grief, anger, and the fleeting nature of life, offering Stoic solutions to these common human experiences.

Additionally, Seneca’s writings often delve into the complexity and nuances of Stoic philosophy as applied to real life. For instance, while Stoics traditionally advocate apathy (in the sense of being free from irrational passions), Seneca acknowledges the difficulty of completely eradicating feelings. Instead, he discusses how one might manage and navigate them more effectively.

That said, it’s important to note that the earlier Stoics, like Zeno and Chrysippus, also provided guidance for real-life applications of their philosophy, even if their works (most of which are lost) might have emphasized more theoretical aspects of Stoic doctrine. Seneca’s contribution, however, was in his ability to express these teachings in a vivid, clear, and engaging style, which has made Stoicism accessible and relevant to countless individuals even today.

Update: Part two of this conversation is here.

Using Midjourney to imagine Seneca (left) and. Cicero (right) in their original environment.