The focus of the study is the understanding of self-sufficiency [αὐτάρϰεια] in early cynicism. A focused approach reveals that autarky in this context is a multidimensional concept that cannot be limited to the classical understanding of the physical or external renunciation of goods but goes beyond it. At least five dimensions can be named: (i) self-sufficiency due to physical depletion, (ii) self-sufficiency due to external reduction of goods, (iii) self-sufficiency through socio-cultural asset relativization, (iv) self-sufficiency through political relevance and ultimately (...) (v) self-sufficiency through educational and scientific relativization. The thesis of this study is that this multidimensional understanding of self-sufficiency can be seen, firstly, as the constitutive pivot of the practical-political approaches of the early cynicism, but secondly, has a further aim and is translated into a broader term: ἐγκράτεια, understood as the all-encompassing rule of man over himself. (shrink)

Bion de Borysthène, qui a fréquenté l’école académicienne (Xénocrate), cynique (Cratès) et cyrénaïque (Théodore), ne faisait pas partie des listes traditionnelles d’athées en circulation dans l’Antiquité, mais on lui attribue pourtant la formule athée d’après laquelle « il n’y a pas de dieux » (Diogène Laërce, IV, 55). L’examen des témoignages montre qu’il pouvait être qualifié d’athée à deux niveaux. Tout d’abord, aussi bien au niveau théorique que pratique, il adoptait une attitude très critique à l’égard des pratiques religieuses et (...) des récits mythiques traditionnels dont il mettait en valeur les contradictions et plus largement contestait la partition du réel entre sacré et profane (Sénèque, Des bienfaits, VII 7, 1-2). Par ailleurs, Bion s’est également opposé à la théologie philosophique épicurienne et, en particulier, à son anthropomorphisme. Il s’appuyait, entre autres, sur une thèse (« chaque genre de vivants a une forme particulière dans son genre particulier », Démétrius Lacon, De la forme du dieu, XIX, 13), compatible avec l’épicurisme. Pour cette raison, Démétrius Lacon entreprit d’y répondre en montrant que cette prémisse, pouvant aussi servir à contester les théologies astrales (platoniciennes ou stoïciennes), ne vaut que pour les êtres accessibles par la sensation, ce qui n’est pas le cas des dieux. Cette polémique, dont l’enjeu est la limite de l’application du principe d’isonomie, a laissé des traces jusque dans le De signis de Philodème. (shrink)

Through a commentary of a poem by Crates of Thebes, transmitted by Julian (Or. VII, Against Heracleios the Cynic, 9, 213a-214a and Or. XI [VI], Against the ignorant cynics, 17, 199c-200b), this article aims to show that the cynic philosophers borrowed from the animal behavior not only the paradigm of a kata phusin way of life, but also counter-examples of the kinds of attitude men should avoid.

Several versions of Diogenes of Sinope’s death are reported in Book VI of the Lives and Opinions of Eminent Philosophers. The heirs of Diogenes have transmitted to posterity that of suicide by self-asphyxiation, a death they deem worthy of his philosophy. This study aims to identify the Cynic foundation of Diogenes’ suicide by reconstructing the Cynic outlook on voluntary death. Several fragments and testimonies show that the Cynics consider life and death indifferent: what matters above all is to lead a (...) good life. Suicide is only justified when the philosopher’s body suffers from extreme and lasting weakness. To reach and maintain his ideal of freedom, the Cynic must submit his body to a training that requires some physical strength. Therefore, as soon as he loses the capacity to practise the Cynic askesis because of the physical limitations brought on by old age or illness, the philosopher does not hesitate commit suicide. This justification is attested in the exhortations to suicide formulated by the Cynics and in the accounts of the self-inflicted deaths of Metrocles, Heracles, Demonax and Peregrinus. (shrink)