Did Galen Understand Platonic and Stoic Thinking on Emotions?

Abstract

My question, more precisely, is whether Galen understood the relationship between Platonic and Stoic thinking on emotions. I discuss this question not in general terms, but in connection with one specific, but very important, topic: the reliability of Galen’s account in On the Doctrines of Hippocrates and Plato (PHP) 4–5 of Stoic debate about the passions. Galen’s picture is that Posidonius reacted againt Chrysippus’ monistic psychology and reintroduced Plato’s tripartite model, a move which Galen warmly applauds. In general, like John Cooper above, I think that Galen gives a highly partisan and misleading picture of this Stoic debate (although he is also an indispensable source for it). But I also think that Galen fastens on (though misdescribing) one salient feature of Chrysippus’ theory. This is that Chrysippus, in spite of his psychological monism, sees passion as involving a certain kind of inner conflict. Defining the nature of this conflict is crucial for understanding both Chrysippus’ theory and Posidonius’ modification of this. Exploring this point can also help us to gain a better understanding of the relationship between Stoic thinking on the passions (both Chrysippan and Posidonian) and Platonic psychology. I believe that this relationship is very different from that suggested by Galen, and that Platonic psychology (even in the Republic) is closer to Stoic thinking, both Chrysippan and Posidonian, than Galen allows. It is possible, though not certain, that the Stoics recognized this similarity; and that Platonic thinking was an important stimulus to the distinctively Stoic form of thinking on the passions.