The five days debate at Cicero's house in Tusculum between master and sophister.

SECT. XII. Against some Heterodox Philosophers.

BUT why are we angry with Poets? there have been found Philosophers, Teachers of Vertue, who have affirm'd Pain to be the greatest Evil. But you, young man, when you had but a little before declar'd that to be your thought, upon the question barely put by me, whether greater than Dishonour, at the very word fell off from your opinion. I put Epicurus the very same question, he will justifie it, that a small Pain is greater Evil than the greatest Dishonour. Because in the Dishon∣our it self there is no Evil, unless Pains ensue upon it. Now what Pain doth ensue upon Epicurus, when he maketh such Assertion, more dishonourable than which, I cannot expect any thing from a Phi∣losopher. So that you have secur'd me, when you reply'd, that you esteem'd Dishonour a greater Evil than Pain; for do but keep to this, you will have a Rule how far we should strive against Pain; for it is not so much the Question, whether Pain be evil or not, as the business to fortifie the mind against impa∣tience under Pain. (i) The Stoicks bring little Ar∣guments to prove it not to be evil, as though it were a Contest about words, and no real concern. Zeno, why do you impose upon me? for when the thing that seems terrible to me, you affirm to have no ill in it at all; I am caught, and desire to know how that which I judge most miserable, should not be so much as evil: Nothing, saith he, is evil, but

what is base and vitious. Nay, now you triffle again; I know that Pain is no lewdness. Forbear teaching me that, teach me this, that it is indifferent, whe∣ther I am in Pain or not in Pain. There is no diffe∣rence at all, saith he, in order to happiness, which is plac'd in Vertue alone; but yet it is to be refus'd. Why so? It is rough, unnatural, hard to be endur'd, bitter, grievous.

(i) The Stoicks bring little Arguments to prove it not to be evil.] Cicero having confuted the Epicureans, who, contra∣ry to their own Principles, in a Bravado gave out, that they counted Pain pleasant, or at the worst but indifferent; now attacks the Stoicks, who thought it indeed offensive, but not evil, because not morally evil: this Restriction of the term he doth not allow, because in common acceptation it is of larger import. Then satisfieth them with assigning a different definition of the term, Evil, according to the re∣ceived Sense. Yet withall, he allows it comparatively to bear no proportion with dishonesty; so that forfeiture of Honor and Conscience in the least, is infinitely worse than suffering the greatest Pain. Then dismisseth the Cause, as a meer Controversie about words. Here he bears the Person of a moderate Peripatetick.