Book 3, Chapter 10
Original Latin
cadit igitur in eundem et misereri et invidere. nam qui dolet rebus alicuius adversis, idem alicuius etiam secundis dolet, ut Theophrastus interitum deplorans Callisthenis sodalis sui, rebus Alexandri prosperis angitur, itaque dicit Callisthenem incidisse in hominem summa potentia summaque fortuna, sed ignarum quem ad modum rebus secundis uti conveniret. atqui, quem ad modum misericordia aegritudo est ex alterius rebus adversis, sic invidentia aegritudo est ex alterius rebus secundis. in quem igitur cadit misereri, in eundem etiam invidere; non cadit autem invidere in sapientem: ergo ne misereri quidem. quodsi aegre ferre sapiens soleret, misereri etiam soleret. abest ergo a sapiente aegritudo.
22 Haec sic dicuntur a Stoicis concludunturque contortius. sed latius aliquando dicenda sunt et diffusius; sententiis tamen utendum eorum potissimum, qui maxime forti et, ut ita dicam, virili utuntur ratione atque sententia. nam Peripatetici, familiares nostri, quibus nihil est uberius, nihil eruditius, nihil gravius, mediocritates vel perturbationum vel morborum animi mihi non sane probant. omne enim malum, etiam mediocre, malum est; nos autem id agimus, ut id in sapiente nullum sit omnino. nam ut corpus, etiamsi mediocriter aegrum est, sanum non est, sic in animo ista mediocritas caret sanitate. itaque praeclare nostri, ut alia multa, molestiam sollicitudinem angorem propter similitudinem corporum aegrorum aegritudinem nominaverunt.
23 hoc propemodum verbo Graeci omnem animi perturbationem appellant; vocant enim πάθος, id est morbum, quicumque est motus in animo turbidus. nos melius: aegris enim corporibus simillima animi est aegritudo, at non similis aegrotationis est libido, non inmoderata laetitia, quae est voluptas animi elata et gestiens. ipse etiam metus non est morbi admodum similis, quamquam aegritudini est finitimus, sed proprie, ut aegrotatio in corpore, sic aegritudo in animo nomen habet non seiunctum a dolore. doloris huius igitur origo nobis explicanda est, id est causa efficiens aegritudinem in animo tamquam aegrotationem in corpore. nam ut medici causa morbi inventa curationem esse inventam putant, sic nos causa aegritudinis reperta medendi facultatem reperiemus.
Musean translation
Complete machine-assisted translation from the Latin. Latin transcription by the Perseus Project, Trustees of Tufts University, CC BY-SA 4.0.
“the same person, then, is liable both to pity and to envy. For whoever grieves at someone’s adversity also grieves at someone’s prosperity. Thus Theophrastus, lamenting the death of his companion Callisthenes, is tormented by Alexander’s successes, and says that Callisthenes fell into the hands of a man of supreme power and supreme good fortune, who did not know how prosperity should be used. But just as pity is distress at another’s adversity, so envy is distress at another’s prosperity. Whoever is liable to pity, then, is also liable to envy. But the wise person is not liable to envy, and therefore not to pity either. If the wise person were accustomed to feeling distress, he would also be accustomed to pity. Distress, therefore, is absent from the wise.
22 “These are the Stoics’ formulations, and their conclusions are rather tightly twisted. But at some point we must speak more expansively and fully; even so, we should chiefly use the views of those whose reasoning and judgment are most courageous and, so to speak, manly. For our friends the Peripatetics—unsurpassed in richness, learning, and weight—do not really convince me when they speak of moderate disturbances or diseases of the soul. Every evil, even a moderate one, is evil; but our aim is that there should be absolutely none in the wise person. Just as a body is not healthy even if it is only moderately sick, so this moderation in the soul falls short of health. Our people, then, were splendidly right, as in so many other things, to name trouble, anxiety, and anguish ‘distress,’ using a word for sickness because of their likeness to sick bodies.
23 “The Greeks use almost this very word for every disturbance of the soul: they call any turbulent movement in it an ‘affection,’ that is, a disease. We do better. For distress of soul most closely resembles bodily sickness, whereas desire does not resemble sickness, nor does immoderate joy, that exalted and exultant pleasure of the soul. Even fear, although close to distress, does not much resemble disease. But distress in the soul, like sickness in the body, has a name properly and inseparably associated with pain. We must therefore explain the origin of this pain, that is, the cause that produces distress in the soul as it produces sickness in the body. For just as physicians think that discovering the cause of a disease means discovering its cure, so, once we have found the cause of distress, we shall find the means of healing it.”
Plain English translation
Complete independent machine-assisted translation directly from the Latin. Latin transcription by the Perseus Project, Trustees of Tufts University, CC BY-SA 4.0.
“So the same person is capable of both pity and envy. Anyone who feels pain at someone’s misfortunes also feels pain at someone’s successes. For example, Theophrastus mourns the death of his friend Callisthenes and is troubled by Alexander’s success. He says that Callisthenes encountered a man with the greatest power and good fortune, but no understanding of how to use success properly. Now pity is distress at someone else’s misfortunes, just as envy is distress at someone else’s good fortune. So anyone capable of pity is also capable of envy. But a wise person isn’t capable of envy, and therefore isn’t capable of pity either. If a wise person regularly felt distress, they would regularly feel pity too. So a wise person is free from distress.
22 “That’s how the Stoics state their arguments and draw their conclusions, in a rather cramped form. But at some point we need to speak more broadly and fully. Still, we should rely chiefly on the views of those whose reasoning and outlook are the bravest and, so to speak, most manly. Our friends the Peripatetics are unsurpassed in richness of expression, learning, and seriousness. But I don’t really approve of their moderate amounts of emotional disturbance or mental illness. Every bad thing, even a moderate one, is bad. Our aim is that a wise person should have none of it at all. A body isn’t healthy even if it’s only moderately sick. In the same way, this moderation in the mind isn’t health. Our countrymen got it exactly right, as they did with so much else, when they named trouble, anxiety, and anguish aegritudo, ‘sickness,’ because of their likeness to sick bodies.
23 “The Greeks use much the same word for every disturbance of the mind. Any confused mental movement they call pathos, meaning ‘illness.’ Our usage is better. Mental distress is very like a sick body. Uncontrolled desire isn’t like sickness, nor is excessive delight, that excited, jumping pleasure in the mind. Even fear isn’t very like an illness, though it’s closely related to distress. But distress, in the mind, has a name specifically connected with pain, just as sickness does in the body. So we need to explain the origin of this pain: the cause that produces distress in the mind, as a cause produces sickness in the body. Doctors believe that once they’ve found an illness’s cause, they’ve found its treatment. In the same way, once we find the cause of distress, we’ll find a way to treat it.”
About this section
Book 3, Chapter 10 is part of Tusculan Disputations by Marcus Tullius Cicero. This page sets the Latin original beside 2 direct-source translations, so any line can be checked against the source. It is chapter 86 of 189 in the work, which is kept in the Roman tradition.
Open the work page for the full contents, every edition, and the download links, or go back to Explore to browse other complete works in the Roman tradition. The reader keeps your place when you are signed in and lets you compare the original with each translation, one edition at a time.