Chapter 2.—How Varro, by Removing
All the Differences Which Do Not Form Sects, But are Merely
Secondary Questions, Reaches Three Definitions of the Chief Good,
of Which We Must Choose One.
The same may be said of those three
kinds of life, the life of studious leisure and search after truth,
the life of easy engagement in affairs, and the life in which both
these are mingled. When it is asked, which of these should be
adopted, this involves no controversy about the end of good, but
inquires which of these three puts a man in the best position for
finding and retaining the supreme good. For this good, as soon as
a man finds it, makes him happy; but lettered leisure, or public
business, or the alternation of these, do not necessarily
constitute happiness. Many, in fact, find it possible to adopt
one or other of these modes of life, and yet to miss what makes a
man happy. The question, therefore, regarding the supreme good
and the supreme evil, and which distinguishes sects of philosophy,
is one; and these questions concerning the social life, the doubt
of the Academy, the dress and food of the Cynics, the three modes
of life—the active, the contemplative, and the mixed—these are
different questions, into none of which the question of the chief
good enters. And therefore, as Marcus Varro multiplied the sects
to the number of 288 (or whatever larger number he chose) by
introducing these four differences derived from the social life,
the New Academy, the Cynics, and the threefold form of life, so, by
removing these differences as having no bearing on the supreme
good, and as therefore not constituting what can properly be called
sects, he returns to those twelve schools which concern themselves
with inquiring what that good is which makes man happy, and he
shows that one of these is true, the rest false. In other words,
he dismisses the distinction founded on the threefold mode of life,
and so decreases the whole number by two-thirds, reducing the sects
to ninety-six. Then, putting aside the Cynic peculiarities, the
number decreases by a half, to forty-eight. Taking away next the
distinction occasioned by the hesitancy of the New Academy, the
number is again halved, and reduced to twenty-four. Treating in a
similar way the diversity introduced by the consideration of the
social life, there are left but twelve, which this difference had
doubled to twenty-four. Regarding these twelve, no reason can be
assigned why they should not be called sects. For in them the
sole inquiry is regarding the supreme good and the ultimate
evil,—that is to say, regarding the supreme good, for this being
found, the opposite evil is thereby found. Now, to make these
twelve sects, he multiplies by three these four things—pleasure,
repose, pleasure and repose combined, and the primary objects of
nature which Varro calls
primigenia
. For as these four
things are sometimes subordinated to virtue, so that they seem to
be desired not for their own sake, but for virtue’s sake;
sometimes preferred to it, so that virtue seems to be necessary not
on its own account, but in order to attain these things; sometimes
joined with it, so that both they and virtue are desired for their
own sakes,—we must multiply the four by three, and thus we get
twelve sects. But from those four things Varro eliminates
three—pleasure, repose,
pleasure and repose
combined—not because he thinks these are not worthy of the place
assigned them, but because they are included in the primary objects
of nature. And what need is there, at any rate, to make a
threefold division out of these two ends, pleasure and repose,
taking them first severally and then conjunctly, since both they,
and many other things besides, are comprehended in the primary
objects of nature? Which of the three remaining sects must be
chosen? This is the question that Varro dwells upon. For
whether one of these three or some other be chosen, reason forbids
that more than one be true. This we shall afterwards see; but
meanwhile let us explain as briefly and distinctly as we can how
Varro makes his selection from these three, that is, from the sects
which severally hold that the primary objects of nature are to be
desired for virtue’s sake, that virtue is to be desired for their
sake, and that virtue and these objects are to be desired each for
their own sake.