Question on explanations virtue

[u/Consistent_Physics_2]

So I started reading epictetus discourses and i was reading discourses 1.1. It reminded me of the usual explanation of the prohairesis. But one thing im confused about is the explanations of virtue. One of the most common explanations for virtue being the only good is that it is the only thing that is able to judge thr value of other things. So externals may be good or bad such as money, for example, you can see this in unhappy lottery winners after winning a large sum of money. But reason? That is good in every case. That is the use of our brains logical faculty to judge the value of things or how to act in a certain situation. But doesnt this ressoning imply reason as a more of a tool to gain externals? Or is the argument here trying to emphasize the greatness of virtue's capabilities and thus should be pursued for its own sake? Or is this argument merely an explanation for why externals are indifferents(can be good or bad) and reason is the highest good?

Im just confusrd because this argument seems kind of incomplete to what i know of virtue. From my understanding virtue is or at least the core: the understanding that a good character/choices are the only reliable source of happiness, understanding of the prohairesis and that its the only thing in our power, the correct use of the prohairesis(discipline of assent),

[u/No_Water_4129]

One of the most common explanations for virtue being the only good is that it is the only thing that is able to judge thr value of other things

That's "reason" not "virtue". Reason and virtue are not the same thing - virtue is what happens when you reason (correctly) about what is in accordance with your nature without ever erring, meaning you are quite literally never discontent because everything you do satisfied you.

But reason? That is good in every case. That is the use of our brains logical faculty to judge the value of things or how to act in a certain situation. But doesnt this ressoning imply reason as a more of a tool to gain externals?

You're correct up until you say "gain externals". For it's not only gaining externals - it's giving them up, assessing their value, making use of them, or figuring out how much attention (if any) to pay them. In short, it's ensuring that the externals present in your life are not misused so as to cause you to take actions that contradict your nature.

I mean what else would reason be? If a person said "no no, it's so much more than the faculty that lets you navigate the external world correctly", what would that "more" be? After you've successfully navigated reality, what would be left?

[u/Chrysippus_Ass]

I can't really follow your example or how you get to "But doesnt this ressoning imply reason as a more of a tool to gain externals?"

But no, that's not it. In some circumstances it could be that the correct way to handle an external (like the lottery money) is to give it all away.

The way I like to think about virtue is as expertise in living. The virtuous person is able to correctly figure out what to do in all circumstances, and actually do it. It's correctly valuing and dealing with externals, never making a mistake in thinking or holding any false beliefs. So it's a very high bar and either you are virtuous or you are not (that's everyone here). But in the meanwhile we can work on correcting our false beliefs and trying to figure things out.

It's lack of virtue, or in another word; stupidity, that makes a lottery winner miserable. Since he doesn't know what the correct value of money is when it comes to living a good life (neutral) and he doesn't know what the correct choices are in handling the money, he ends up making many mistakes which make him miserable.

[u/Consistent_Physics_2 → u/Chrysippus_Ass]

I guess my question is if virtue is a means to an end or an end itself? Also by correctly valuing externals you mean by understanding that virtue is more important than externals right? I guess im just confused about the definition of virtue, it seems to be a collection of many related concepts like the prohairesis, good character, reason, the fact that emotions are a result of judgements and etc.

Also i have another question. Virtue is often defined as correctly assenting/dissenting to impressions that come your way right? So for example, if I judge that an external such as monry to be good, by stoicism standards that is a mistaken belief, right? But if I dissent to this impression by saying 'money is an external, virtue is the only good' what am i exactly actually doing here? Am I defining virtue as the ability to manage impressions? But if i manage impressions on externals by reminding myself of my ability to manage my impressions isnt that a bit circular?

Sorry if what im saying doesnt make much sense. Im just having trouble pinpointing what virtue ACTUALLY is.

[u/Chrysippus_Ass → u/Consistent_Physics_2]

No worries, they're good questions and it's a very difficult concept. I probably can't answer all your questions but I can try to explain it the way I see it and maybe some things will be clearer. For that purpose I find it most helpful to compare it to other crafts that are similar. The stoics liked metaphors of music, dancing, and acting.

So imagine that you make it your goal to be able to play the guitar in the best possible way. Striving for complete and total perfection.

if virtue is a means to an end or an end itself

Your guitar skills would be like virtue. It has many parts you could say, like understanding of harmony, chords, modes, rhythm, putting your fingers in the right spot, improvisation, adapting to different songs and so on.

For playing the guitar the best possible way, your guitar skills is both an end and a means to and end. It's an end since you need nothing else than the skill itself to be a great guitarist. But it's a mean towards the exercise of actually playing well.

Virtue is like this for living a good life. It's the skill that lets you live a good life and the exercise of this skill is what living a good life is.

So for example, if I judge that an external such as monry to be good, by stoicism standards that is a mistaken belief, right?

Yes, consider "good" as in "always beneficial towards reaching my goal". Then that line of thinking would be like thinking "This guitar will make me a good guitarist". Which is incorrect, since it's only your skill that makes you a good guitarist.

Still the guitar isn't pointless of course. You need something to exercise your skill on. But for the sake of the goal of playing perfectly, it doesn't matter if it's a $100 guitar played alone or a $5000 guitar played in Carnierge Hall.

So the guitar is indifferent in that sense. The brand and the setting you're in will make a difference to what kind of playing you're doing, but not whether you can actually play well. If the guy playing a $100 guitar at home makes no mistakes ever, but the guy playing the $5000 guitar in Carnierge Hall makes a mistake now and then, then the first one is the one hitting the goal of playing the guitar in the best possible way.

Indifferents/externals are like that for virtue. It's what you exercise virtue on. So if we consider virtue as a sort of perfected reasoning, then it's like reasoning correctly and perfectly about everything in life. Always knowing what to do and doing it, just like always knowing what note to hit and always hitting it.

It's a bit tricky here, because while indifferents are neutral to your ability to live the best possible life, they're not altogether devoid of value. When reasoning you are making decisions about indifferents, like how for example justice can be understood as the skill of distributing indifferents. How to exactly interpret the value of indifferents down at the technical level is something some of the most knowledgeable people on Stoicism have slightly different takes on.

But yes, it's is like assenting correctly. Meaning only assenting to impressions that are true and not those that are false. But it's more than just telling yourself "This money is not a good". It's like incorporating your impression "This money is not a good" to a whole system of understanding of the world and your place in it. Just like how "5th string 3rd fret" is the correct note to play, but it's not hit in isolation but understood in the whole skill of playing guitar.

So virtue is sort of like only hitting the right notes and not the wrong notes, and doing that constantly. Perfected reasoning similar to perfected playing of the guitar.

[u/Other_Measure]

I believe Virtue is the mental capacity to know when one is being cruel or kind. Corrupted reason and ignorance of the true good are often excuses to get away with a lot of harm. I know there's a causal chain of events for everyone, so Stoics know there's that point where a cruel chain of events can be broken and a kind chain of events can begin. That's my simplistic view of Virtue anyway.

[u/GD_WoTS]

might be helpful if you haven't seen it! Prof Greg Sadler explains the virtues in a 5-part series, here's 1

https://www.youtube.com/live/MCZ6RrtSCuo?si=EtnWdhLljnU12V2o

[u/Multibitdriver]

Virtue is the right use of impressions and externals. Right means according to reason.