Name: Severi S.
10A

Composition: Epicureanism and Stoicism in Shakespeare's Julius Caesar

In Julius Caesar written by William Shakespeare, one finds two main, conflicting, philosophies. These are Epicureanism and Stoicism. Epicureanism is a school of thought from the Greek and Roman antiquity, which teaches that “pleasure, particularly mental pleasure, [is] the highest good” (Concise Oxford Dictionary). Stoicism, however, is a Greek way of life that teaches that “it is wise to remain indifferent to vicissitudes of fortune and to pleasure and pain” (Concise Oxford Dictionary). Epicureanism tells its disciples to have as much fun as possible, whilst Stoicism tells one to take a more conservative root, warning that joy and material goods will corrupt one’s life.

Two of the main characters in this play, Marcus Brutus and Caius Cassius, are divided by these two philosophies. Brutus is the Stoic. This is shown by the way that he conducts himself throughout the play. He behaves and reacts to every situation very objectively, and he never loses site of the goal. This becomes apparent through his unwavering attitude towards the commoners, never taking his newfound power for granted.

Caius Cassius conversely, is an Epicurean. He is quick to milk his followers and inferiors of there (ndlr: I hope you're not going to make this mistake again!) riches through bribes: “let me tell you, Cassius, you yourself are condemned to have an itching palm, to sell and mart your offices for gold to undeservers.” In other words, Cassius provided positions in his army to unqualified men in exchange for money and riches.

Attitudes play a big part in this play, from Caesar’s over-confidence and weakness to praise; to Marc Anthony’s passionate desire for vengeance. Since beliefs, such as Stoicism, form and structure their follower’s attitudes, philosophies, and conflicts between philosophies, mold this plot into what it is. One must only imagine what would be left of this play if Cassius had not killed himself. What if Cassius and Brutus had both lived life “to its fullest” in the comfort of there (ndlr: Hope dashed.) new positions? The point of view in which the audience would have followed the rest of the play would have been completely different. Shakespeare was not a dumb man. (ndlr: He's a pretty smart dog, too!)