Chrysippus

Agora

Chrysippus

c. 279–206 BCE

A first way ina deliberate simplification – the portrait says more

Everything happens by fate, through an unbroken chain of causes – yet not of necessity, and our assent is still our own, so we are responsible. He also gave Stoic propositional logic its classic, systematic form.

Placement

Hellenistic, Roman & Late Antique · West Asia & North Africa · Logic, Ethics

Second founder of the Stoa; systematized Stoic logic as an early propositional logic.

Key ideas

Propositional logic
Determinism and responsibility

Open in the star map

Influence

Influenced by 1

Zeno of Citium

influenced by
Chrysippus defended and systematised the Stoicism founded by Zeno, especially its logic and theory of knowledge; hence the saying ‘without Chrysippus there would be no Stoa’. Diogenes Laertius VII.179–183; IEP “Chrysippus”; SEP “Stoicism”
Evidence: also in InPhO · InPhO
Zeno of Citium › c. 334–262 BCE

Influenced 4

Cicero

influenced
Cicero set out and examined Chrysippus’ attempt to reconcile fate with human assent, including the analogy of the rolling cylinder, in De fato (44 BCE). Cicero, De fato 39–45; IEP “Chrysippus”
Evidence: AI draft
Cicero › 106–43 BCE
Philo of Alexandria

influenced
Philo used Stoic doctrines as systematised by Chrysippus, such as the grades of pneuma as cohesion, nature and soul, in his allegorical reading of Scripture. Philo, Quod Deus sit immutabilis; Legum allegoriae II; IEP “Philo of Alexandria”
Evidence: AI draft
Philo of Alexandria › c. 20 BCE – 50 CE
Seneca

influenced
Seneca followed Chrysippus in treating anger as assent to a judgement and distinguished involuntary ‘first movements’ that precede assent (De ira II.1–4). Seneca, De ira II.1–4; De beneficiis I.3–4 (on Chrysippus’ Graces); R. Sorabji, Emotion and Peace of Mind (2000); SEP “Seneca”
Evidence: AI draft
Seneca › c. 4 BCE – 65 CE
Epictetus

influenced
Epictetus treated Chrysippus as the authoritative Stoic teacher but insisted that progress lies in living by his doctrine, not in expounding his books (Discourses I.4, I.17). Arrian, Discourses of Epictetus I.4, I.17; SEP “Epictetus”
Evidence: also in InPhO · InPhO
Epictetus › c. 50–135

Criticism

Criticized by 2

Carneades

criticised by
Carneades attacked Chrysippus’ ‘kataleptic’ impression, arguing that any true impression could have an indistinguishable false twin; he said that he himself would be nothing without Chrysippus. Cicero, Academica II.40–42, 83–90; Diogenes Laertius 4.62; SEP “Carneades”
Evidence: AI draft
Carneades › c. 214–129 BCE
Sextus Empiricus

criticised by
Sextus Empiricus turned Chrysippus’ Stoic logic against itself, contesting the criterion of truth, proof and the indicative sign (Outlines of Pyrrhonism II; Against the Logicians). Sextus Empiricus, Outlines of Pyrrhonism II.14–192; Adversus mathematicos VII–VIII; SEP “Sextus Empiricus”
Evidence: AI draft
Sextus Empiricus › c. 160–210

Position

Chrysippus gave Stoicism its systematic form and defended it against the sceptics of the Academy. In logic he developed a propositional logic of conditionals and inference schemes that was rediscovered and properly appreciated only in the twentieth century. In physics he defended a strict determinism of fate, yet argued that our assent remains our own: a cylinder rolls because it is pushed, but how it rolls depends on its own shape. In ethics he analysed the passions as mistaken judgements. Most later Stoicism, including that of the Roman Stoics, builds on his doctrines.

Life & context

Chrysippus came from Soli in Cilicia, studied in Athens under Cleanthes and succeeded him as head of the Stoic school around 230 BCE. He was enormously productive – ancient sources credit him with more than seven hundred books – but nearly all of them are lost. A saying went: “Without Chrysippus, there would be no Stoa.”