We have spoken of Plato, Aristotle and Epicurus as if their ethical philosophies were devised in isolation from the social conditions of the time. It should be stressed that moral philosophies to a great extent are products of their times. Great philosophies, especially moral philosophies, may be regarded as saying more clearly and usually more strikingly what many common people vaguely realize. This is especially true of Cynicism and Stoicism whose attraction for so many cannot be fully appreciated apart from some knowledge of the social conditions from which they developed. To some extent, this is even true of Hedonism.

When we suffer great catastrophes, we may grasp at pleasure as providing some comfort and security in a collapsing world. Hedonism is a philosophy which justifies this behaviour, and under such conditions we may be attracted to it. In this regard, Hedonism may be considered a philosophy which arises out of despair. Cynicism and Stoicism resemble Hedonism in being, generally speaking, philosophies of consolation. But instead of suggesting that the acquisition of pleasure is the proper goal of life, they offer different advice. Let us look at these doctrines now in order to see why they arose when they did, and what sorts of answers they give to the persistent questions of 'What is the good life for people ?' and 'How should we act ?'

There are various ways in which we can deal with adversity. We can accept it, fight it, escape it and so on. For each of these types of behaviour there is a corresponding ethical theory which justifies it. Quietism, for example, is an Oriental ethical philosophy which advises us to accept and succumb to adversity, Hedonism can be looked at as a way of escaping from it, and Utilitarianism as a way of combating it.

All ethical theories arise because we are dissatisfied either with our personal lives or with the world in which we live. If we are content with our lot and with the situation in which the world finds itself, we will not in general seek to change it. What would be the point of trying to do so ? But when we are dissatisfied, we will attempt to alter the circumstances in which we find ourselves we have said, he may fight these circumstances or try to escape from them. Likewise, philosophers do not develop theories about how one ought to behave unless they are discontented with the way people do in fact behave : they offer these theories as advice for altering the situation as they see it.

This is particularly true of Cynicism. It can be regarded as prescribing behaviour for those whose lives became intolerable owing to the collapse of the world about them or for reasons of personal despair. This collapse in part began with the decline of the Greek city state (there were frequent wars between Sparta and Athens, and between Sparta and Thebes, with the incredible loss of life and destruction that they entailed) and is accelerated by the turmoil that was attendant upon the collapse of the Alexandrian Empire. When social institutions and societies break down, people are naturally led to consider how they may achieve personal salvation.

Cynicism offers one answer to this question. It holds that the fruits of civilisation are worthless - government, private property, marriage, religion, slavery (in the Greek social order), luxury, and artificial pleasures of the senses. If salvation is to be found it is to be found in a rejection of society and in a return to the simple life - to a life of ascetic living.

The early Cynics led frugal and even miserable lives to such an extent that they were likened to animals in their mode of life. In fact, the word 'Cynic' comes from the Greek word 'kunos', which means 'dog-like' (we find a cognate of it in the English word 'canine'). Diogenes, for example, is supposed to have lived in a large tub, and rejected all refinements - of dress, food, personal cleanliness and so on. Here is a famous story told about him and Alexander, then the greatest ruler in the world. Alexander came to visit Diogenes, and asked him if there was anything he could do for him to relieve him of the miserable conditions in which he existed. Diogenes is supposed to have replied : 'Yes, you can stand out of my light and let me see the sun.'

The Cynics believed that the world was fundamentally evil; in order to live properly we must withdraw from participation in it. But at the same time, even if we live a private life, such a life may be devoted to acquiring the usual goods of the world - such as money, a house, fine clothes and so on. And all of these things are precarious too - for if we trust our happiness to the possession of them, we may find ourselves again misled. Consequently, all externals, whether private or public, must be dispensed with. If we are to find salvation in the world he must find it within ourselves - this is what virtue is. The Cynics thus advocated a rejection of the goods of the world, and in this way tried to show people that by ignoring such externals they would be free from fear. (We will indicate later that a more sophisticated version of this theory is to be found in the philosophy of Spinoza and considerable elements of it occur in Stoicism.)

It is interesting to speculate upon how the word 'cynical' acquired its modern meaning. The rejection of external goods includes the rejection of other people, so that a complete indifference and lack of feeling for others resulted. Furthermore, although the early Cynics such as Diogenes and Antisthenes lived moral and upright lives of extreme frugality in accordance with the precepts mentioned above, later followers used the doctrine for personal advantage. They borrowed money and food from friends, and then applied the doctrine of 'indifference' when it came time to repay these debts. People gradually came to feel that the doctrine was being applied insincerely and callously - and out of such feelings the word 'cynic' developed its modern meaning.

It can be seen that Cynicism is primarily a doctrine which is anti-social. It does not attempt to describe how we can be happy as social beings, but instead tries to propose ways for achieving individual salvation. In this way, it contributed much to the philosophical undermining of social standards, arguing that only individual virtue was of fundamental importance. This outlook considerably abetted the moral chaos into which the ancient world fell after the collapse of the Alexandrian Empire. Not only is Cynicism anti-social but it is also one ofth forerunners of asceticism. By rejecting the claim that worldly possessions are of value, it was one of the precursors of the sort of asceticism which we find so brilliantly pictured in Anatole France's novel Thais , where people are depicted as living solitary, miserable lives in the Egyptian desert - lying on hard ground at night, fasting for days at a time and in general subjecting themselves to physical and mental torture.

Cynicism as a philosophy has not only had great influence upon plain people, but it was a considerable factor in the development of early Christian thinking. The monk and nun, in a way, can be pictured as a person who follows the advice of the cynic: they live a simple, frugal, cloistered life, shunning the world's institutions and goods - such as marriage, the accumulation of private property, and fame - and all this so that they may develop their character as an individual and cast aside the world for devotion to God. The general effect of Cynicism is in this 'other worldliness.' This is why it has played so great a role in influencing the way of life advocated by pietistic religions such as Christianity.

Read about 2 leading cynics Antisthenes & Diogenes.