Abstract
According to the apophthegm reported by Plutarch and Stobaeus (SSR V B 61), Diogenes the Cynic accused Plato of ‘causing pain to no one’ during his long philosophical career. This article considers whether this critique of Plato is accurate by examining previous interpretations and proposing others. First, Plutarch understood the ‘pain’ required by Diogenes as a psychological motivator that drives the young to study hard. This interpretation, however, is implausible because Plato does not seem unfamiliar with this treatment of ‘pain’. Second, Stobaeus connected pain with parrhēsia, likely supposing that a philosopher should tell the truth even if it hurts his audience. Nevertheless, his account needs further clarification since Plato also emphasises the importance of parrhēsia. To resolve the problem, this article proposes a distinction between two kinds of parrhēsia: ‘telling the truth’ and ‘openly making abusive remarks’. Unlike Plato, the Cynics occasionally resort to the latter, which causes sufferers completely passive pain. This kind of pain is certainly alien to Plato’s philosophy, which presupposes some active participation by sufferers. Finally, the article introduces the Cynic concept of askēsis to illuminate another aspect of ‘philosophical pain’. While Plato confines his askēsis to mental labour or moderate physical exercise, the Cynics also demand that individuals undergo physical pain in the course of askēsis. In conclusion, the article argues that Diogenes’ objection to Plato is apt, at least in light of two antithetical natures of ‘pain’: passive/active and physical/mental.
References
Blank, D. L., 1993, “The Arousal of Emotion in Plato’s Dialogues”, The Classical Quarterly 43, pp. 428–439.
Borthwick, E. K., 2001, “The Cynic and the Statue”, The Classical Quarterly 51, pp. 494–498.
Bosman, P., 2006, “Selling Cynicism: The Pragmatics of Diogenes’ Comic Performances”, The Classical Quarterly 56, pp. 93–104.
Bosman P. (ed.), 2017, Ancient Routes to Happiness, Cape Town.
Braund D., Hall E., Wyles R. (eds.), 2019, Ancient Theatre and Performance Culture around the Black Sea, Cambridge.
Busse, A. (ed.), 1895, Ammonius in Aristotelis categorias commentarius (Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca IV.4), Berlin.
Castelnérac, B., 2007, “Plutarch’s Psychology of Moral Virtue: ‘Pathos’, ‘Logos’, and the Unity of the Soul”, Ancient Philosophy 27, pp. 141–163.
Chapuis, M., 2021, Figures de la marginalité dans la pensée grecque : Autour de la tradition cynique, Paris.
Delcomminette, S., 2018, “Plato on Hatred of Philosophy”, The Review of Metaphysics 72, pp. 29–51.
Dorandi, T. (ed.), 2013, Diogenes Laertius: Lives of Eminent Philosophers, Cambridge.
Emeljanow, V., 1965, “A Note on the Cynic Short Cut to Happiness”, Mnemosyne 18, pp. 182–184.
Flores-Júnior, O., 2021, La vie facile : Une lecture du cynisme ancien, Paris.
Foucault, M., 2009, Le courage de la vérité : Le gouvernement de soi et des autres II. Cours au Collège de France (1983–1984), Paris.
Futter, D., 2018, “Spiritual Pregnancy in Plato’s Theaetetus”, Apeiron 51, pp. 483–514.
Giannantoni, G. (ed.), 1990, Socratis et Socraticorum Reliquiae, Vol. 1–4, Napoli.
Goulet-Cazé, M.-O., 1986, L’ascèse cynique : Un commentaire de Diogène Laërce VI 70–71, Paris.
Hall, E., 2019, “The Tragedians of Heraclea and Comedians of Sinope”, in: Braund, Hall, Wyles 2019, pp. 45–58.
Helmer, É., 2021, “Philosophie et géographie : Lieu de la pensée et pensée du lieu en Grèce ancienne”, Dialogues d’histoire ancienne 47, pp. 91–112.
Hense, O. (ed.), 1894, Ioannis Stobaei anthologium, Vol. 3, Berlin.
Hock, R. F., 1976, “Simon the Shoemaker as an Ideal Cynic”, Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 17, pp. 41–53.
Husson, S., 2014, “Parrhèsia socratique et parrhèsia cynique : Le cas de l’injure”, Cahiers « Mondes anciens » 5. Available at: https://journals.openedition.org/mondesanciens/1256 (Accessed: 17 May 2025).
Irani, T., 2017, Plato on the Value of Philosophy: The Art of Argument in the Gorgias and Phaedrus, Cambridge.
Isnardi Parente, M., 1982, Senocrate, Ermodoro, Frammenti: Edizione, Traduzione e Commento, Napoli.
Kennedy, K., 1999, “Cynic Rhetoric: The Ethics and Tactics of Resistance”, Rhetoric Review 18, pp. 26–45.
Kuropatnicki, A. K., Kłósek, M., and Kucharzewski, M., 2018, “Honey as Medicine: Historical Perspectives”, Journal of Apicultural Research 57, pp. 113–118.
Malherbe, A. J. (ed.), 1977, The Cynic Epistles: A Study Edition, Atlanta.
Montanari, F. (ed.), 2015, The Brill Dictionary of Ancient Greek, Leiden.
Morreall, J., 2024, “Philosophy of Humor”, in: E. N. Zalta and U. Nodelman (eds.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2024 Edition). Available at: https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2024/entries/humor/ (Accessed: 17 May 2025).
Niehues-Pröbsting, H., 2016, Der Kynismus des Diogenes und der Begriff des Zynismus, Berlin.
Overwien, O., 2005, Die Sprüche des Kynikers Diogenes in der griechischen und arabischen Überlieferung, Stuttgart.
Pohlenz, M. (ed.), 1929, Plutarchi moralia, Vol. 3, Leipzig.
Prince, S., 2017, “Antisthenes and the Short Route to Happiness”, in: Bosman 2017, pp. 74–97.
Riginos, A. S., 1976, Platonica: The Anecdotes Concerning the Life and Writings of Plato, Leiden.
Roskam, G., 2021, Plutarch (New Surveys in the Classics No. 47), Cambridge.
Rossetti, L., 2011, “Le ridicule comme arme entre les mains de Socrate et de ses élèves”, in: Le dialogue socratique, Paris, pp. 195–213.
Tanner, S. M., 2017, Plato’s Laughter: Socrates as Satyr and Comical Hero, Albany.
Terzaki, K. M. L., 2023, “Dog-like Madness in Tragedy and the Early Cynics”, Athens Journal of Philosophy 2, pp. 119–138.
Warren, J., 2014, The Pleasures of Reason in Plato, Aristotle, and the Hellenistic Hedonists, Cambridge.
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Masaki Nagao
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Peitho provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.