Читать книгу From Paideia to High Culture - Imelda Chlodna-Blach - Страница 10

Chapter 1 Classical culture – towards perfection

1. From valour to magnanimity – the way of the Greeks

1.1. THE OLD NOBILITY MODEL OF EDUCATION

What we call culture today has its beginning as early as with the Greeks. They were distinguished by the extraordinary skill of inquiry into the laws governing reality. This skill is visible in all aspects of their lives – in the way they thought, spoke and acted, in various directions of artistic creativity. The Greeks looked for laws in the essence of things and tried to follow them in their lives. They comprehended particular facts in the light of a single vision, which in turn explained their place and purpose as a part of a certain whole. It can be clearly seen in one of the greatest achievements of the Greek genius, namely philosophy. It is an expression of that very ability to notice the unchangeable order which is the basis of everything that happens and changes in nature and in the human world. The philosophical sense of the Greeks consisted in the fact that they were able to discover the universal laws at the basis of human nature and point to the norms stemming from those laws in the fields of personal actions and in the order of the society.

The Greeks used their knowledge of the natural rules of human life and the inherent rights governing its physical and spiritual forces when studying the issues of culture and education. Both of the indicated terms were of similar meaning for the Greeks. At that point, education started to be understood as a type of effort aimed at the specified – everlasting and universal ideal model of man. That ideal model was achieved through the development of all fields of human life (the so-called integral education), which was supposed to be made possible by culture. Hence, the main purpose of culture was to perfect the human being. Initially, the Greek ideal model of humanity developed within one – aristocratic class and later acquired a universal meaning.

As Werner Jaeger indicates, the Greeks were the first to believe that education must be a process similar to construction. At the same time, the greatest work of art for which that nation heard a calling was the living human.¹ Therefore, ←17 | 18→they compared education to artistic, plastic shaping while taking into consideration the model of the idea existing in the artist’s mind. Only after understanding education this way can we refer to it using the term “formation” in its actual meaning, in which it first appears in Plato’s works for the first time, as a visualisation of education procedures.²

The transmission of culture hinged upon the creation of an ideal model which had certain characteristic features. There was a certain ideal model of man, at which the entire process of education was aimed. The characteristic feature of those times was the fact that the focus was not on the practical aspect of that process.

The Greeks distinguished the “transmission of culture” from “education” understood as techné – professional skills and abilities, craftsmanship. These two processes stem from different sources.³ Here, culture is seen as a consciously nurtured ideal model of human excellence. Culture understood in this way is expressed in the entire human character – both in his external behaviour and actions and in his inner attitude. That line of conduct, as well as the internal attitude are not caused by accident, but are the result of conscious effort leading towards a specific goal. Such preparation begins in an inner social circle, within a noble layer of a given nation. In terms of aristocratic origin, the Greek – classical kalos kagathos resembles the English ideal model of a gentleman.⁴ Initially, both those terms referred to an ideal representative of a higher class of a chivalrous character. The history of the Greek culture, i.e. the process of shaping the Greek national personality begins within the old Hellenic nobility with the formation of a specific ideal model of man of the higher rank, which the education of the nation’s elite aims at. Over time, when the place of the upper class of knights started to be occupied by a middle-class society, adopting the same ideal model, it became a universal good and a generally followed formula.

In addition, the beginnings of an old Hellenic noble culture are closely related with the concept of areté.⁵ It was the best expression of the then views concerning ←18 | 19→an ideal of a human and a citizen. Its beginnings are associated with the way of life of the chivalry nobility. Areté is a proper expression appertaining to a noble man.⁶ The Greeks understood it primarily as efficiency, an ability to do something. It was an indispensable condition to occupy the chief position. In the works of Homer, it denoted the heroic valour which combined the moral value with the physical strength. It had a similar meaning as the terms agathos and áristos.⁷ The indicated expressions refer to people combining the knightly bravado with the aristocratic origin. Areté indicated a man of noble birth who had to obey certain rules of conduct, both in everyday life and in war, non-existent for ordinary men.⁸ A simple man has no areté. This notion in the aristocratic concept is therefore a natural feature, associated with the excellence of a family (eugeneia) and the possession of an estate (plutos).⁹ According to the then ethics, man does not become agathos, he is agathos (or is not) by nature.¹⁰

Thus, the code of conduct applying to a knightly state, the so-called noble moral code became the foundation of the Greek education. Moreover, the aristocratic ideal included such features as: the harmonious development of the body and soul, mind and heart, the refinement of custom and an impressive way of life. The indicated synthesis of physical and spiritual virtues constituted the essence of the ideal embodied in the phrase: kalos kagathos anér.¹¹ The fullness of ←19 | 20→areté (kalokagathía) is achieved only by man fully aware of his worth. Therefore, the sense of self-worth denotes a higher level of areté.¹²

It is significant that nobility imposed certain obligations on those who were entitled to it. An educative aspect of nobility was realized in instilling a sense of duty with regard to the ideal by which man was guided. Additionally, the concept of areté was closely connected with reverence expressing itself by evaluating the community to which a given person belonged. The reverence (timé) and publicity (kleos) were the natural consequences of acquiring primacy. The reverence was regarded as an objective social manifestation of the universal appreciation (charis) that man deserved for the performance of excellent deeds, for which no adequate, material award could be found.¹³ Hence, areté was measured by appreciation that a given person enjoyed among equals.¹⁴ It was on that recognition and respect that the social position of nobility was based. The sources of reverence or disgrace were praise and reprimand. They pointed to the existence of objective evaluation criteria in social life. The reverence constituted therefore a natural standard of measuring the level of being near the ideal of areté. It is necessary to add at this point that a characteristic feature, an ethical virtue distinguishing the noble man was the recognition of self-esteem, namely the justified pride. However, it must be underlined that the true self-esteem was regarded as the most difficult feature to achieve by man. The sense of aristocratic pride (aidós) boosted a constant heading in this direction. The opposite action aroused the righteous anger in the environment (nemesis).¹⁵ The sense of pride prevented man from performing acts regarded as despicable (aischron) and from doing something that might compromise him in the eyes of his fellow citizens. Thus, the two concepts (aidós and nemesis) were the typical concepts of the aristocratic moral code in Homer. It is worth noting here that there was a change, in the later philosophical thought, based on the fact that man looked for acceptance in his own conscience.¹⁶ Over time, people started to consider reverence (timé) as ←20 | 21→a mere reflection of the inner value of an individual person in the opinion of a human community. In Homer’s works, however, man was dependent – as far as self-esteem was concerned – solely on the judgement of the community to which he belonged.¹⁷ Due to the fact that he was a member of his state, he measured his areté by an appreciation of others. Homer’s ethics was therefore the ethics of reverence. For the aristocracy of his time, no reverence given by the environment was the greatest tragedy that man could encounter. Praise (epainos) and reprimand (psogos) were the sources of reverence and disgrace.¹⁸

The aforementioned characteristics of the early stages of the Greek culture are included in the works of Homer. He is regarded as one of the first and greatest creators who shaped the Greek ideas of humanity.¹⁹ His poems are the source of knowledge on the oldest Greek society and its ideals²⁰. He immortalized the world of great demands and proud traditions in them. He presented the principles governing the operation of the high noble culture that expressed universal ideals. Therefore, those epics became the core of ubringing and education of not only the nobility, but with the advent of democracy, of the whole youth – initially in Greece and then in other countries influenced by Hellenism²¹. The very word areté – virtue, perceived as having the highest quality feature, presented by Homer, is crucial for the understanding of culture. In culture, the central place was occupied by human areté (valour), for the appearance of which education was indispensable.²² It is through education that man gains the skills and qualities necessary to be fully human. Homer, speaking through the mouth of Phoenix – the tutor of Achilles – expresses his opinion on the two most important skills being the goal of education: “to be both a speaker of words and a doer of actions.’²³

←21 | 22→

We can find a description of an ideal model of heroism and an irreversible destiny of a great warrior in The Iliad. The author presents the figures of heroes, who are typical representatives of knighthood, against the backdrop of the Battle of Troy. They are characterized by a militant temperament and a passionate pursuit of glory. They fight, competing for the wreath of the highest areté.²⁴ A brave man in this poem is at the same time a highborn man. The fight and the victory constitute the proper content of his life, the highest distinction. It is therefore a man of noble birth who, both in everyday life and during the war, is guided by certain rules of conduct which do not apply to a simple man, defined as kakos as opposed to agathos. There is a constant competition for the wrath of areté among people called aristoi.²⁵ The fight is a true test of male virtues. The victory is not only a physical defeat of the opponent but also a condition of winning areté.

On the other hand, a description of the noble culture and custom was included by Homer primarily in the Odyssey. The work is a source of information about the conditions in which the older noble culture was shaped.²⁶ It was the ionic culture. The work presents a description of life of the nobles at their courts and in country estates. The author gives a detailed description of the characteristic features of courtly manners and aristocratic custom during peace. The nobility in the Odyssey is a closed state with a strong consciousness of its privileged position, its refined manners and a mode of action. It is distinguished by a certain uniform lifestyle. The relations among the people from this sphere are characterized by a high degree of sophistication. In addition to the knightly valour, the Odyssey displays an understanding for certain spiritual and social values.

The conditions indispensable for the development of the noble culture are: the sedentariness, the land property and the tradition.²⁷ They facilitate the transmission of a certain lifestyle from an older to a younger generation. Thereby, an aristocratic ideal included the environment’s appreciation and some external goods without which it was impossible to practise certain virtues significant for the man of noble birth. The condition for social recognition was the material independence provided by wealth based on the possession and land cultivation.²⁸

←22 | 23→

In addition, it is indispensable to consciously implement specific courtly standards among young people, teaching them the specific internal discipline. The conscious education and the transmission of culture was significant for the nobles. The indicated education relied on the development of human personality through consistent advice and spiritual guidance. Specific demands, which could be fulfilled only under the condition of deliberate care given to certain essential qualities of character, were placed on the entire human person. The conviction of superiority and rights to occupy a leading position instilled the need among the nobles to teach the young representatives of their state the recognized patterns of noble conduct. It is in such circumstances that education served for the first time as the culture transmission – namely, shaping the entire personality of man according to a specific pattern. The presence of such a pattern is a core of the development of every noble culture²⁹ Apart from the ideal model of the knightly valour, the importance of spiritual and social virtues is stressed. For a woman, such values included her beauty, as well as the purity of customs and cost-effectiveness.³⁰ The woman was given respect and regards as she was the guardian of good manners and a cultivator of traditions. She had an educative and refining impact on the rough, militant and brutal world of men.

In the two epics, both in The Iliad and in The Odyssey, one can find a description of the education methods used within the noble layer. An inexperienced, young man was in the company of an experienced tutor due to whom he could get acquainted with lofty ideals of male virtues passed on by the tradition.³¹ The element of particular importance with respect to the noble ideals was an ←23 | 24→educative meaning of an example. Thus, in addition to the impact of the environment, primarily the family, an example constituted the core of the education process. It strengthened the power of persuasion. Appealing to figures of famous heroes and to examples from legends was an inseparable part of the noble ethics and education.

Over time, the ideals included in those two poems acquired the universal meaning. They expressed the fullness of not only the noble features but also of the human nature in general because every man should be able to articulate the wise thought and implement the right objectives³². The human education hinged upon the “bottom up” and not the “top down” principle. It was reflected in the ideal of noble competition. The possession of areté was the foundation of a healthy self-love (philautía) and required the fair respect and reverence from the environment. Thus, although the possession of virtues originally constituted the innate privilege of the noble layer, it gradually began to rely on the education within the framework of tradition and under the guidance of a respected, righteous person, who acted as a guide on the path of learning a definite moral discipline and was able to give good advice and illustrate it with an accurate example.³³ Such model of culture and education became a characteristic feature of the Western culture: Greece, Rome and the Christianity.

1.2. DEMOCRACY – THE POPULARISATION OF THE IDEAL

With the emergence of a new socio-political structure – the city-state, called polis, the meaning of the concept of aréte went through certain transformations. Greece was divided into a number of independent small states, governed by their own rules. They were the centres in which the political, social, economic and cultural life of the then man was realized. The relationship between the man and the society started to be more clearly accentuated and a specific understanding of a political community, uniting all citizens, was developed. The framework for the statehood emerged along with the Greek polis (city-state). The polis became the source of all applicable standards.³⁴

The appearance of polis had a fundamental importance for the transformation of ancient Greek court culture into the Pan-Hellenic culture. Under these conditions, the Greek culture reached its classical character.³⁵ Over time, the ←24 | 25→urban culture began to replace the noble culture. The meaning of polis relied, among other things, on the fact that it constituted a social framework for a new, Greek culture and was the source of all forms of cultural life. It impacted the creation of new concepts regarding, among other things, the aims and methods of education and the transformation of the existing ideals. However, it is necessary to stress at this point an element which is typical for the Greek culture – it was developing and it did not destroy its previous forms. The indicated development took place through the transformation of what existed and the adaptation to the new current living conditions.³⁶

With the appearance of a new ideal model of man, who regarded not only the nobility of deed but also the nobility of spirit as the supreme goal, the old chivalrous concept of aréte, signifying the heroic strength and bravery on the battlefield, turned out to be insufficient. As a result of the transformation of old noble traditions, the democratization of the Greek culture took place in the fifth and the fourth centuries BC.³⁷ It became available to the entire society. In the course of the indicated transformations, its two characteristic features emerged, namely, the universalism and rationalism, due to which it became the culture of the whole Greek nation and finally, the universal culture.³⁸ It was refined by ←25 | 26→the fact that it included a certain pattern of a higher form of life – the life consistent with reason. Therefore, the careful and purposeful education of the most talented citizens was paid attention to in the democratic Athens. The rulers were selected and trained to serve for common good.

The expression of the changes taking place at that time was a new – political and military – ideal proclaimed by the Greek poet Tyrtaeus.³⁹ The subject of his poetry was the fight of Sparta with Messenia. The old Homeric ideal of a heroic areté was firmly contrasted by the author with the new ideal of love to the nation.⁴⁰ He gave the final shape to the ideal model of civic areté, based on the new moral and political order. He perceived it as a readiness to fulfill the social duties of a citizen. He discovered a new concept of valour and perfection. The place of the Homeric ideal of a knight, whose areté manifested itself in the individual fight and personal success, in line with a new civic ethics, was seized by an ideal of undertaking action for the good of the society, the common good (koinon agathon).⁴¹ Areté was understood as a warlike fortitude displayed in a particular type of fight. Now, it was not about finding one hero but it was about raising the whole community of heroes, soldiers ready to sacrifice themselves for the country.⁴² In one of his excerpts, Tyrtaeus writes: “It is a beautiful thing to die fighting in a first row, as benefits a brave man, who fights for his homeland.’⁴³ Following the principles of the civic ethics, the key measure of the true value is the country and what is beneficial to it. A man distinguished by bravery and valour, not aiming at gaining personal recognition but at defending the endangered freedom of polis, became a model.⁴⁴

←26 | 27→

The ideal glorified by Tyrtaeus had a significant impact on education in the entire Greece at that time. It was also accepted outside the Spartan country. Tyrtaeus’ elegies became a solid foundation of the civic culture. At special moments of fighting for the preservation of freedom and national existence – both during the Greco-Persian wars and during the Peloponnesian War – a common reverence was offered to a citizen, who while fighting against an enemy, distinguished himself by valour.⁴⁵ The fact that a hero forever remained in the memory of the citizens, whose good he was fighting for, is meaningful because the early Greek thought did not know the concept of the immortality of the soul. At that time, there was a conviction that along with the death of the body, the whole man died. It was believed, however, that the sacrifice of life on the battlefield – in the name of the common good – ensured immortality.⁴⁶

While analysing the changes that took place at that time, it should be noted that one of the important factors responsible for those transformations was the democratization of the military service – the former aristocratic privilege. Given the fact that in the Athenian polis every citizen was obliged to do a period of military service, the equality sign was placed between the concept of a “citizen” and a “soldier.” The changes related not only to the issues of the tactics of fighting but also to the sphere of morality, in addition, they significantly impacted the personality of the warrior himself. The civic ethics moved the values of solidarity and obedience into the foreground, in contrast to the chivalrous ethics of individual distinctions. Moreover, taking care for one’s dignity was closely connected with attention paid to the victory gained while defending others. According to the then ideal, the warrior’s valour could not be dependent on thymos – passion and the lack of control, but it was in a close relationship with sóphrosyné – the sense of moderation and discipline.⁴⁷

←27 | 28→

By analysing this Greek term, it is possible to notice that it encompasses two dimensions of human life – moral and intellectual. They consist of the following elements: temperance, self-control, self-knowledge, inner balance and common sense. This is the essence of the intellectual freedom (mens sana, set against the powerlessness caused by the lack of control and passions.⁴⁸ Due to the combination of areté – in the sense of valour with sóphrosyné, the ideal of strength and physical fitness was linked with the new ideal of spiritual perfection, according to which man’s behaviour had to be subordinated to the power of reason and law.

Further transformations pertaining to the understanding of the term areté occurred in the fifth and the fourth centuries BC when the aforementioned ideal began to devaluate.⁴⁹ The number of citizens able to serve in the ranks of the hoplites decreased significantly as a result of continuous wars since the end of the fifth century.⁵⁰ With the advancement of technology and tactics of fighting, the army preparation requirements rose as well. They could be met only by the professional army – the mercenary army.⁵¹ Valour based on physical fitness and patriotism (areté) was gradually replaced by the ability to apply the technical means of action (techné). The aforesaid changes significantly influenced the attitudes of the citizens of polis. They recognized that the city-state could be defended by others, even by the paid mercenaries who could be foreigners. The fact that citizens deviated from the indicated duty led to a deterioration of patriotism and citizenship of Athenians. In the face of that crisis, one could observe an increased activity of the then writers. The frequently selected leitmotiv of their works was showing examples of the ancestors’ valour, which was to exemplify some kind of paradeigma – a pattern and a principle of action⁵². This form of literary creation was incorporated into the education methods used both in the period of aristocratic and democratic education. Their core relied on using ←28 | 29→two inseparable elements in the education process: paradeigma and mimesis – a model and imitation.

Following the theorists’ considerations from the fourth century BC, we can see that the significance of arête was expanded. It included the following elements: valour – andreia, theoretical wisdom – phronesis, caution and temperance – sóphrosyné, the sense of justice – dikaiosyné. Thus, areté understood in this way defined the moral perfection of man. The indicated features constituted the canon of civic virtues. Plato emphasized in particular the importance of justice (dikaiosyne).⁵³ It was in justice, in his opinion, that the fullness of arête was included. By extension, striving for justice borne on the grounds of polis became the new force of human education, which was analogous to the chivalrous ideal of valour in war, favoured in the previous aristocratic society.’⁵⁴ The concept of justice was henceforth at the forefront of civic virtues. It should be stressed at this point that the components of the former Spartan concept of excellence were not removed but were shifted to a higher level⁵⁵. According to Plato, human happiness depends on whether man follows the principles of reason and justice in his way of conduct. Plato indicated that sóphrosyné and dikaiosyné were closely linked with the human happiness. Happiness was, as of yet, tied to the victory in battle and fame associated with it. Moreover, sóphrosyné and dikaiosyné were particularly valued by Isocrates among the four virtues. He claimed that they were the features of perfect citizens. The two remaining features – andreia and phronesis, may also be the attributes of bad people.⁵⁶ The new ideal based on a strong sense of justice, penetrated all spheres of the Athenian state in the fourth century BC.

The source of changes in the meaning of areté in the emerging Athenian democracy was also a changing attitude to wealth and the possession of material goods. A richer layer of demos began to grow, next to aristocracy, claiming power in the state.⁵⁷ This change in ownership relations had also influence on the aristocratic concept of areté. Therefore, separating nobility from the possessed wealth became the more and more frequent practice. People were inclined to let the behaviour decide that a man of noble birth was simply a noble man. It was some kind of the nobility of the spirit. According to the ethics of the democratic ←29 | 30→polis, areté could not depend on the origin or wealth. The confirmation of this principle was isonomia – equal justice under law guaranteeing that all citizens could participate in the state management.

Over time, the Athenian society was less and less stable and uniform. The economic changes that took place in Athens at that time caused that the position of a citizen was no longer determined by the originating status. It facilitated the stratification determined by economic factors and resulted in serious changes in morality. The differences between the old land aristocracy ad the new plutocracy started to blur. The Athenians became increasingly open to granting citizenship to the representatives of various social layers and different professions, however, they always drew their attention to the fact whether that person turned out to be chresimos té polei – whether he did something good to the nation or to the people.⁵⁸ The terms areté or agathos have pragmatic meaning. Virtue is no longer associated with one origin or another but with an active attitude and acting for the benefit of the polis. In Greece, there was some sort of universal politicization of man, who was required to actively engage in the public life of the state and to be aware of his civic duties. Man had to divide his life into what was private (idion) and what was social (koinon). As of yet, the indicated duties rested on the nobility. It was the nobility that possessed the ability to exercise power. In the new conditions, there was still some reference to the old noble way of education. An ideal of being a speaker of words and a doer of deeds was still the most important goal of life for the citizen of the polis.⁵⁹ The ancient Greek ideal model of noble culture found its deeper meaning just in the culture of the city-state. It was transferred to the general public there. An aristocratic education became a universally applied means of the formation of a man and a citizen. Thus, after the noble culture, the original polis constituted the next indispensable stage in the process of developing a humanistic ideal of the universal, ethical and political culture.

1.3. PAIDÉIA DURING THE TIME OF THE ATHENIAN DEMOCRACY

One can look for the beginnings of the cultural process called paidéia – the highest physical and spiritual perfection – in the sense of the highest human arête, in the fifth century BC. From that time, the aforementioned perfection has also been quite consciously extended to the spiritual culture.⁶⁰ The category of ←30 | 31→paidéa is crucial for the understanding of the Greek culture sources because it was organized on a fundamentally different basis than other cultures.

Paidéia (from the Greek word pais – a boy, a child; Latin: educatio, humanitas, cultura) was understood as a comprehensive “cultivation,” rational education of man in the individual and social aspect.⁶¹ This term occurred for the first time just in the fifth century BC in the plays of Aeschylus, where it was synonymous with “feeding,” education of children.⁶² In the broader sense, it denoted a general, human nature-oriented basis of education or an ideal model of education developed by Ancient Greeks and regarded as embracing the whole of mankind.⁶³ This term was used to define both the course and the process of a child’s education as well as its goal and effect. It was about the formation of man from an early age through upbringing and education. The indicated process was closely connected with reading the human nature since the Greeks claimed that one’s susceptibility to education came from nature, whereas the application of appropriate methods, the so-called cultivation of nature – was the work of man called culture. The proper education should help man achieve the superior goal of his life which is the activation of the supreme powers with regard to the supreme subject. This process is very long and difficult. Man, unlike the world of nature, is born as ill-suited to life, and even more to achieve the true purpose of life. Man must learn how to live in the manner tailored to him if he wants to develop the most humane features within himself. Due to the fact that it does not happen automatically, man needs help. It can be obtained through proper education – paidéa. It is therefore the human equipment in proper dispositions for proper action. Such permanent dispositions were called aretai, or virtues becoming like the second nature. The task of paidéa is just to fill the gaps of nature. The classical one had nothing in common with inventing the worlds of value. Culture included everything that man needed in order to pass through the broken passage from nature to a person at the level of action. Putting the crack together is made possible due to reason which enables man to recognize the proper means permitting the genuine personal life. Various inclinations that drive man in different directions are oriented by him at the ultimate personal good. Thanks to education and virtues, this direction takes permanent forms such as, for instance, the character.

←31 | 32→

All spheres of human life need ordering. At first, it the sphere of reason itself that must be able to properly read the good, the hierarchy of goods and to select proper means that lead to good. That was the task of the virtue of prudence. Additionally, the emotional life must be ordered, both in the realm of desire (pleasure, unpleasantness) – moderation, and in terms of the warlike feelings (fear, anger) – valour. Finally, our relationships with other people as well as with the society as such need to be organized. This is the place for three types of justice – distributive, commonly shared and replaceable. It is this harmonious cooperation of all the indicated virtues in man that ensured a complete, integral development of a person.

Thus, the Greek culture-paidéia was an education of man, the work of the human reason oriented at an accomplishment of a certain ideal, the development of a more perfect man. The principle of the Greek culture was not individualism but humanism in the sense of shaping a proper human character and true humanity. It was only in the Greek culture that education was deliberately targeted at a specific human ideal and not only at the preparation for a profession or the formation of one social layer within a single nation.⁶⁴

Over time, due to Thucydides, Aristophanes and sophists, the reflection on the notion of paidéia became deeper. It started to be identified with a comprehensive encyclopaedic education – énkýklos paidéia, providing with a practical preparation for living in a society. Isocrates, Socrates, Plato and Aristotle significantly contributed to the understanding of this concept by pointing to ethical issues of the arising model of education: “[…] they put less emphasis on the practical aims of education but they valued ethical and, in a broader sense, philosophical education instead, which they regarded as the most effective instrument of shaping a perfect man. In this way paidéia became the central concept within the pedagogical reflection, with clear anthropological implications.’⁶⁵

The educational trends that occurred under the conditions created by a democracy – in the writings of Plato, Isocrates and Xenophon – still referred to the old aristocratic tradition and the ideal model of areté characteristic for it.⁶⁶ It is indicated in the postulate of Plato that the best education is the condition and the justification of elite governments and the indicated education requires ←32 | 33→in turn the best natural conditions as a basis for its development to take place⁶⁷. Plato thought that birth was of significant importance during the formation of elites since only the best could give birth to the best ones. The indicated view had its origin in the old Greek noble ethics. The nobles believed in the existence of innate values, constituting the core of any true virtue and therefore they sought to preserve the priceless blood heritage.⁶⁸

1.3.1 Plato – from an ideal to an idea

Plato based his ideas concerning paidéa on a former, old, Greek concept. He claimed that the new elite, composed of the representatives of the highest areté, could be created through a purposeful natural selection.⁶⁹ His philosophical interpretation of education can be found both in the works such as the State and the Laws. In the first of the works, Plato considered the highest level of paidéa, whereas in the second one, he analyzed the indicated process from the earliest childhood.⁷⁰ In the Laws he observed that the main element of paidéa was a proper pre-school education.⁷¹ What is to be achieved and perfectly mastered by a grown-up person should be awakened in the soul of a child already at the indicated stage. He pointed to the dependence of the complete areté in every field from the conditions under which man was raised. Education denotes teaching areté. It begins in childhood and awakens in us the desire to become good citizens.⁷² Plato opposed the true paidéa to vocational training and he called it a training to reach spiritual perfection. Professional skills are only tools and means to higher aims. In the Laws he pointed out that the proper understanding of the nature of paidéa was the basis of all legislation. Considering its essence, Plato placed man within the state and related the value of individual education to his or her ability to cooperate with others. The precepts of law in the state are the signs of the operation of logos to which man should subordinate first of all. Paidéia relies on subordinating the soul to the logos.⁷³ Therefore, the ideal of ←33 | 34→paidéa is finally the self-control and not the control exercised by others (which was the case in Sparta).⁷⁴

In Laws, Plato strongly emphasized the relationship between the word paidéia and pais – a boy or a child.⁷⁵ He thereby indicated that the education starts at an early age, in childhood, when the process of harnessing desires through reason begins. He divided children’s education into stages. Children who are 3–6 years of age should be engaged in playing only. However, punishments should not be avoided at that time.⁷⁶ Moreover, children should not be forced to play. Nannies should be employed to monitor their behaviour. Both boys and girls under 6 should be taught by women. Coeducation was obligatory by that age, later children were separated.⁷⁷ When it came to exercise, Plato recommended dancing and wrestling, with the exception of everything that was not useful for later military training.⁷⁸ All the recommendations were aimed at developing the free and refined style. Therefore, the tendency to underline the importance of the development of the military spirit dominated in Plato’s theory. The common military conscription was the legal basis for the civic life in the Athenian democracy. It was a natural condition of freedom enjoyed by every citizen of the state.⁷⁹

The education in the early childhood was limited almost exclusively to controlling the feelings of pleasure and pain. Paidéia understood in this way became the pedagogy.⁸⁰ Over time, Plato more and more strongly emphasized the belief that the success of later education depends on the effects of the first efforts taken in childhood to shape the character. It is necessary to start a possibly early shaping of the desires of a child so that he or she could learn to love good and hate evil as early as possible.⁸¹ Plato was inclined to believe that the first stage of areté, appearing already in childhood, is paidéia. In so doing, he strongly emphasized the role of education claiming that no one could get the best out of one’s own logos if he or she had not been earlier prepared for that by someone else’s logos – a teacher or a parent. Any areté is based on the harmony of a rational perception and habit. Paidéia denotes shaping an attitude towards pleasure and ←34 | 35→pain, and thus, shaping the character, on which, in turn, the indicated harmony is founded.⁸² It therefore concerns the right relationship between desires and intellect.

A general idea concerning the fact that the philosopher’s duty is to shape the character was expressed by Plato in the State, whereas the issue of building the character in the strictest sense of the word was tackled by him in the Laws. He wondered how the ethos should be shaped in the early adolescence. He paid attention to musical education – singing and dancing, as extremely important elements of the ancient Greek culture. Plato regarded them as the basic components of education since they were connected with accustoming children to the right pleasures from an early age. He emphasized that education took place by means of sensitivity to harmony: “And further, because omissions and the failure of beauty in things badly made or grown would be most quickly perceived by one who was properly educated in music, and so, feeling distaste rightly, he would praise beautiful things and take delight in them and receive them into his soul to foster its growth and become himself beautiful and good.’⁸³ A young man discovering the existence of rhythm and harmony develops moral and aesthetic sense in himself.⁸⁴ According to Plato, the rhythmic movement and the harmonious choral singing provide the grounds for education. As he claimed: “the well-educated man will be able both to sing and dance well […] he keeps right in his feelings of pain and pleasure, welcoming everything good and abhorring everything not good.’⁸⁵ Plato meant both the ethical and aesthetic beauty here. He strongly stressed the unity of ethics and aesthetics in art. Particularly, in dance that he considered to be a model of art.⁸⁶ It should be emphasized at this point that the basis of beauty was the harmony of the soul, namely, the moral beauty and secondarily the beauty of appearance, i.e. the aesthetic beauty.

According to Plato, such art, or more broadly – culture, that is to have an educational function, should be free of any interference by reformers or the restorers and of individual preferences or taste.⁸⁷ He believed that the measure of artistic ←35 | 36→value was not the pleasure given to a casual recipient but joy aroused in the best recipients, the ones who had been appropriately trained or even in man who is ranked the highest in terms of excellence and culture. The main assumption of education was the belief that moral patterns were immutable and that the institutions dedicated to creating good traditions were permanent. Plato emphasized that any change was dangerous (excluding the change of something wrong) both in the climate and in the physical, spiritual or mental constitution.⁸⁸

Teaching music and gymnastics constituted an initial stage of paidéa. However, Plato indicated that they were insufficient as they referred to what was transient (gymnastics) and provided no knowledge (music). On the other hand, the professional skills supply only the purely artisanal information, not contributing to the formation of character at all. Therefore, the more perfect kind of knowledge to be acquired only by reason is the knowledge of numbers, namely arithmetic.⁸⁹ The place it occupied in the educational system of Plato made him treat it as a humanistic science since without knowing it man was not man.⁹⁰ Therefore, Plato stressed the educative qualities of both arithmetic and mathematics in general, including geometry or mathematically cultivated astronomy⁹¹. They were to stimulate thinking. Their practical use was less important for Plato than the theoretical function which relied on the development of mind. The high demands set up by mathematics for learners were the reason why it was treated as a tool for educating the intellectual elite. There was another level of knowledge in the system of Plato – the highest stage of paidéa, to which mathematics was a prelude, a preparatory exercise (propaidéia).⁹² That higher level was represented by dialectics (the art of conversation) which grew out of the Socratic discourse.⁹³ It allowed, to reach the essence of every object and finally “the good in itself,” which was an end to what the mind could perceive, on the path of rational understanding. Moreover, it gave the possibility to justify one’s ideas. The period ←36 | 37→of dialectical education should last fifteen years. The greatest advantage of the highest level of paidéa – teaching “the discipline that will enable one to ask and answer questions in the most scientific manner’⁹⁴ – is, according to Plato, the fact that it teaches man to be conscious and intellectually sensitive. This is what, in the opinion of Plato, constitutes the higher education.

Plato proposed the virtue of justice in place of the hitherto highest virtue, such as valour.⁹⁵ The analyses of justice and its functions in an ideal state reflect Plato’s ideas on the soul and its parts presented in enlargement as the image of the country and its states.⁹⁶ The principle of justice saying that everyone should do what he or she is supposed to do constitutes, according to Plato, the essence of areté, consisting of the fact that each element of the whole and every part of it perfectly fulfils its function.⁹⁷ Plato refers here to individual parts of the human soul. Justice bases here on the fact that each of them performs its own duties.⁹⁸ These parts corresponded to three states in the country. Each of the states had its characteristic virtue: the rulers should be wise⁹⁹, the warriors should be brave¹⁰⁰, whereas the workers ought to possess the virtue of wise self-control (sóphrosyné) because they were expected to be obedient to the higher states.¹⁰¹ Thus, they were supposed to voluntarily surrender to the better ones. Plato stressed that it was justice that made all other virtues valuable.¹⁰²

←37 | 38→

The implementation of Plato’s universal system of education was to take place in the state. The state is indispensable for the existence of education.¹⁰³ He treats them as a framework and a background for the activities performed in the areas of education. There is a mutual dependence between Plato’s educational system and his concept of the state – without paidéa, there is no ideal polis, which, in turn, facilitates the formation of a perfect man in line with the principles of paidéa. Therefore, the entire structure of Plato’s state is based on the proper education.¹⁰⁴ In Laws, Plato stressed the fundamental significance of paidéa in the state. The law constitutes the tool for education. The entire human nature, being the core of the full development of personality, is the model for that education.¹⁰⁵ The proper ethos of the state should rely on a healthy spiritual structure of an individual. Plato stressed the primacy of paidéa over the practical policy. The first one is a prerequisite for the second one, and not conversely. Plato created a complete system of basic education which was the so-called paidéia of the people and the basis of a higher education. He emphasized the significance of travelling for cultural reasons. Their aim was to learn about other cultures and civilizations both in the aspect of science developed by them and everyday life. His programme was based on the former aristocratic ideal regarding the complete shaping of the human character. The indicated ideal model of areté was applied in the education of people in the changed social and political conditions of the classical Greek city-state.¹⁰⁶ Moreover, Plato’s suggestion was the first systemically constructed educational project in the European culture.¹⁰⁷

←38 | 39→

1.3.1. The Sophists – paidéia for everyone

There occurred some changes at that time in the understanding of the ideal model of the human perfection. The old noble model of education was based on the belief that areté was available only to those who, in a certain way, kept it in themselves as given from above, inherited from their divine ancestors. Contrary to the aristocratic system, the new urban system brought with itself the concept of political arête independent of the noble origin.

Therefore, the modern city-state firstly seized and universalised the physical areté of the nobles by providing all with gymnastic exercises and also – determined a goal to achieve the spiritual virtues that were inherited by the nobility from their ancestors, and which prepared it for the political leadership by means of appropriately structured education.¹⁰⁸ Thus, as Jaeger observes: “[…] the great educational movement, which distinguished the fifth and fourth centuries and which is. the origin of the European idea of culture, necessarily started from and in the city-state of the fifth century.’¹⁰⁹ At the beginning and in the middle of the fifth century, there was a concept of education which regarded knowledge – being the factor that dominated the cultural life of the epoch – as the force capable of shaping man. Thus, efforts were made to overcome the existing belief in the advantages of blood for the benefit of the postulate to base areté on knowledge.¹¹⁰ The initiators of this concept were the sophists, supported by public opinion, feeling the need to widen the horizons of an average citizen and raise the individual culture of individuals to a higher level.¹¹¹ The sophists came to Athens in the epoch of the democracy development during the age of Pericles.¹¹²

The task of the sophists was to train political leaders (not the folk masses). In the past, it was the job of the noble class but the sophists introduced new rules. They especially emphasized the art of speech since they thought that the ability to speak in a persuasive way on each subject could be learnt. Jaeger, pointing to ←39 | 40→the ambiguity of the Greek word logos (speech – thought – reason), observed that the sophists’ way of teaching encompassed both the formal and material skills.¹¹³ The rationalisation of educating for the political life was at that time only one of the stages of rationalisation of the entire life.¹¹⁴ Facing the fact that the cult of knowledge and reason became a general phenomenon, the ethical values had to be moved to the background in favour of the intellectual values. The educational tasks at which the sophists aimed were therefore subordinated to the intellectual aspect of the human nature. They were convinced that they could teach areté.

The important contribution of this epoch was the introduction into the ideal of areté of all the values that Aristotle later called in his ethics the intellectual virtues (dianoethical) – dianoetikai aretai¹¹⁵ – and tried to combine them with the ethical virtues of man into a whole of a higher rank.¹¹⁶ The ability to clearly differentiate between technical skills and knowledge from the proper culture is also due to the sophists. The famous sophist Protagoras placed the education of man at the centre of the whole life. The stress put on ethical and political elements should be emphasized here since it was important to link all the higher forms of culture with the idea of the state and the society in the classical period of the Greek history.¹¹⁷

Thus, sophistry formulated an ideal of culture called “humanism” based on the previous development of the Greek thought. As Jaeger notes, “our ideal of “universal” culture originated in the civilisation of Greece and Rome. In that sense, then, humanism is essentially a creation of the Greeks.’¹¹⁸

The most significant creation of the sophists is the fully conscious concept of culture per se. It resulted from the Greeks striving for – through poetry and philosophy – the formation of an authoritative ideal model of man.¹¹⁹ It made them realize the deeper meaning of the idea of education. The creation of an abstract concept of culture took place when the subject of the conscious educative work (paideuein) ceased to be solely a child (pais) but it started to be – primarily – an adolescent man, from the moment when people became aware of the fact that there was no definite age limit that, when reached, would stop the inner ←40 | 41→development of an individual. It was the moment when the paidéia of an adult came to existence.¹²⁰ Therefore, the paidéia proposed by the sophists differed in this aspect from the Greek education model that ended when a lad reached the age of majority. It included everything that positively shaped a human being – a citizen (polites) – for a specific purpose, closely associated with a political activity.¹²¹

The sophists put great emphasis on the shaping of man, which underlined any rational organization of life. They attempted to synthetize two opposing models of education: the tradition of the noble nurture (based on the belief in the nobility of blood) and political and democratic concept of bringing up (based on a rationalistic point of view).¹²² The value of man was no longer constituted by blood inherited from gods since then, but by the human nature subjected to nurture.

The sophists stressed the importance of the question: what is the relationship between the “nature” of man and the possibility of exerting a purposeful impact on it through education? The new concept of man, proposed by them, who was not shaped by nature (physis) or origin in a definite and positive way but by education, was crucial in that context.¹²³

They maintained that nature (physis) constituted the basis on which any education had to be based. Education, however, took place through teaching (didaskalía), learning (máthesis) and by exercise (áskesis), due to which what had been learnt became the second nature. Basing on the medical perception of human nature, they worked out a concept according to which nature constituted the whole composed of a body and soul but a special focus was given to the spiritual organization of man. Protagoras noticed that every individual was subjected to a pedagogical influence from an early age. At school, in turn, a pupil learns by heart the works of good poets and music, which accompanies him when he is reciting the poems of lyrical poets, and gymnastics. When a young man graduates from school and enters the stage of practical life, the proper civic education began. The differences between the old noble paidéia and a new civic education are clearly seen at this point. The entire noble education, starting with Homer, is dominated by the concept of a model.

There were two aspects of paidéa: substantial and formal. In the substantial aspect, the sophists taught what showed man his place in a social group, in polis, ←41 | 42→and, in addition, enabled him to act in a good, fair and beneficial way for polis, and thus for himself: what is the state, law, what are ethical and moral standards, what is their origin, what is the nature of man? In the formal aspect, they taught how to acquire and use knowledge to accomplish a goal being, which, by definition, is the welfare of the polis and one’s own prosperity.¹²⁴

The following question should be asked: how did the sophists justify the possibility or even the necessity of education? First, by pointing to the necessary assumptions of the state and society (it was about, among other things, the civic education); second, they derived it from political and moral common sense. Protagoras proved that every man was trying to provide his children with possibly the most thorough education and that, in fact, everyone who did not even think about it, provided some education; third, they considered the problem in the context of the relationship between nature and art in general, in particular, the educative art. They pointed to its indispensable role in completing the existing nature. As they emphasized, on the one hand, it was necessary to know the human nature, on the other hand, however, it was important to have the knowledge on the proper methods of “cultivating” it. Moreover, they underlined that “the essential thing is to begin work at the right moment, the most educative moment, which in the human species is childhood, when nature is still pliable, and whatever is learnt is absorbed, easily but permanently, by the soul.’¹²⁵

The essence of education perceived in this way was explained on the basis of land cultivation as a typical example of perfecting nature due to skilful human practices. Excellent yields can be expected only where the right conditions are met! Even the deficits of the poor nature can be removed at least partially when the suitable cultivation is applied in the form of education and exercise (and therefore the broadly understood culture). On the other hand, even the most beautifully equipped nature will fail if it lacks such cultivation. Aristotle pointed out that art compensated for the deficits of nature.

Over time, the comparison of man with agri cultura entered the permanent set of notions of the Western peoples, creating the basis for a hyperbolic use of that word in the form of cultura animi and for imagining that the indicated education constituted a certain “spirit cultivation.” The etymology of the word “culture” itself points to its close relationship with education.

←42 | 43→

Therefore, it was to the sophists, especially Protagoras, that we owe the association of pedagogy with the philosophy of culture. The idea of man formation is the highest stage of culture – namely, the so-called high culture.

1.4. KALOKAGATHÍA AS THE CROWNING OF ALL VIRTUES

The sophists reinforced the concept of education to culture, which started to be a conscious orientation of a human being towards the defined – universal ideal of man rather than merely a preparation for the profession or forming one social layer within a single nation. The main motif of culture was the perfection of man.

The indicated perfection was defined by the Greek term kalokagathía (beauty-good, nobility, perfection).¹²⁶ This term is a combination of two words – “beauty” and “good” – kalos kai agathos, the Greeks, however, treated them as one word. This ideal is one of the most specific features of the Greek culture, actually starting with Homer. It was in his works that beauty and good were connected for the first time.¹²⁷ Later, they could be found in Solon¹²⁸ and Thucydides.¹²⁹ However, the complete theory could be observed in Plato and Aristotle. Therefore, the fact regarding the presence of kalokagathía at the dawn of the Greek culture is extremely important as it proves the extraordinary vitality of the word, which the subsequent philosophers tried to explain.¹³⁰

The Greek term kalokagathía embodied in itself the earlier aristocratic ideal of a gentleman.¹³¹ Moreover, in the new political order kalokagathía increasingly defined the old ideal of areté, covering the entire man and all his powers. It was an obliging ideal that fostered imitation.¹³² It derived from the world of noble ←43 | 44→terms but gradually gained a broader meaning. Finally, it started to be used for defining an ideal of every citizen seeking to attain a higher culture and, finally, the indicated term became a synonym of the “civic virtue.’¹³³

The combination of both beauty and good in one ideal was possible due to a specific, not unambiguous but analogous understanding of both terms. Beauty was better defined by Plato in his Feast where he stated that it was something deserved not only by art but by science and beautiful laws and beautiful behaviour and beautiful bodies and finally the idea itself. Those were the things that the Greeks referred to as beautiful. However, the sense of good was explained by Aristotle in Nicomachean Ethics: “Every skill and every inquiry, and similarly every action and rational choice, is thought to aim at some good; and so the good has been aptly described as that at which everything aims.’¹³⁴ Thus, Aristotle claims that it was not connected with morality only since it was the aim of action and production as well as cognition. It was the goal pursued and strived for in various ways. It was not without reason that the Ancients were not satisfied with a mere definition of the “moral good” but they spoke of the “moral beauty.” They were not satisfied with the notion “good” itself since they could find good in other orders as well; the “moral good” was not enough either because there were such moral goods that did not deserve to be called beautiful.¹³⁵ One should therefore consider various types of moral goods to indicate in them the morally beautiful aspect.

These issues were discussed by Aristotle in Book II of Nicomachean Ethics: “ There are three objects of choice – the noble, the useful, and the pleasant – and three of avoidance – their contraries, the shameful, the harmful, and the painful. In respect of all of these, especially pleasure, the good person tends to go right, and the bad person to go wrong.’¹³⁶ Man can therefore strive for something either because it is morally beautiful, which in the Latin tradition was defined as the ←44 | 45→decent good – bonum honestum, or because it is useful – bonum utile, or because it is pleasant – bonum delectabile. The difference between them relies on the fact that we desire the last one due to the pleasure it gives us and the second one due to the fact that it serves something different and the first one is the aim in itself, we want it for its own sake. Morality is not limited only to the decent good but it refers to each of the goods. The aim of the virtuous man is a proper selection of a particular good, bearing in mind the existing hierarchy. Therefore, he should treat the decent good as an end in itself, as a pleasant good, which is not a real aim of morality, it must be measured by the real relationship with the good per se, however, the useful good cannot only become the goal but it must be decent itself, as a means leading to the good (the end cannot justify the means used to reach it).¹³⁷

The above explanations point to the fact that only the good-aim is morally beautiful in the proper sense. The remaining goods however, are moral goods but they are not morally beautiful. The indicated considerations concerned the objective aspect, namely, the aspect to which our actions referred. When we approach the action from the perspective of the subject itself, it turns out that the activity related to any of the goods will be morally beautiful provided that it is proper¹³⁸. Therefore, Aristotle wrote that acting in compliance with the requirements of virtue was morally beautiful.¹³⁹ It is the way in which the twofold nature of the moral beauty – objective and subjective – is revealed. What connects them is the direct or indirect (in the case of a pleasant or useful good) subordination to bonum honestum – the decent good. This good is man himself. He is both the subject and the object of morality. Apart from the hierarchy existing in the context of various goods, there is also a hierarchy between particular “parts” of which man is composed. They include the material “parts,” i.e. hands, legs, the internal organs, the psychological and emotional sphere and spiritual powers to which the intellect and will belong. The latter ones are immaterial and subjectified in something immaterial that in the Greek and Latin tradition was called the soul. The spiritual life distinguishes man from other earthly beings. He transcends the world of nature due to it, living a personal life, in a spiritual way. Thus, the inner hierarchy of various “parts” of man finds its justification in the human spirit. Man exists to activate that spirit whereas the remaining parts and their actions must be subordinated to that spirit. In the light of the above ←45 | 46→considerations we can conclude that finally our action is morally beautiful only when the inner hierarchy is respected with reference to both the acting subject and other human subjects. Only then is our action really oriented towards the good-aim.¹⁴⁰ Therefore, the action we purse because of the goal in and of itself – is just the noble good, also called beauty. Aristotle defined it in the following words in the Rhetoric: “The beautiful is what merits recognition due to the fact that it is worthy of choosing as such.’¹⁴¹ The moral virtues of man targeted at the aim itself and at the decent good, were accentuated in the ideal of kalokagathía. That is why the term kalos related to the highest category in the moral order, to the good in itself which was the decent good, in contrast to the pleasant and useful good, which were goods due to the good in and of itself.¹⁴²

The ideal of kalokagathía referred both to women and younger people, as well as the older ones. The ideal model was not only a beautiful woman in terms of looks but also the one who had the noble soul. It was emphasized that older people should remember to respect the high moral standards until the end of their lives, which was regulated by law. Kalokagathía was of great importance in public life – it was to characterize the ruler and be the opposite of laziness.¹⁴³ What characterized the Greeks was therefore the combination of good and beauty with moral order, with human conduct in the broad sense of the word. We are dealing here with the primacy of the moral order over the sensual and aesthetic one and with the primacy of the spiritual order over the physical one.¹⁴⁴

The word kalokagathía was used by Xenophon for the first time to describe the ideal guiding the activity of his master Socrates.¹⁴⁵ The indicated ideal was mostly moral in character. As Xenophon wrote, Socrates claimed that only good and beautiful road led to true happiness.¹⁴⁶ What makes man better and better is the moral improvement, in particular, the acquisition of the virtue of justice (dikaiosyné) and not the practical skills. The noble disposition was manifested by the religious cult.¹⁴⁷ Xenophon himself was regarded as a representative of the ←46 | 47→aristocratic virtue placed by the Greeks at the highest level. His person reflected the combination of the physical beauty with the internal desire to reach what was beautiful.¹⁴⁸ An ancient biographer – Diogenes Laërtius called Xenophon “modest and extraordinarily handsome (kalos).’¹⁴⁹ In Diogenes’ account, Xenophon was beautiful (kalos) by nature but he was to become good (agathos) only under the influence of the teaching of Socrates. Socrates was Xenophon’s teacher of good manners and his model of moral conduct. Thus such features as: self-control, moderation, simplicity, inner harmony and fervent piety were attributed to Xenophon.¹⁵⁰ However, his ideal was “a Doric hero with a beautiful, hardened, athletic body, able to cope with various situations, always full of good ideas, able to use the right word, humane in behaviour, faithful to friends, pious and brave.’¹⁵¹ He was the character resembling the characters from the works of Homer.

Kalokagathía denoted general culture, based on the ability to relate to all people and gods in a proper way. It was mainly associated with the moral beauty and belonged to the virtues of a free man.¹⁵² As we can therefore see, apart from the moral – personal dimension, the ideal of kalokagathía had also a social dimension. It referred to proper relations with other people, developed on the basis of a morally correct character. A society, contrary to a community, similarly to any individual person, should be internally ordered and organized. Only then does it deserve to be called a society. The indicated order is based not only on a certain type of unity but also on a hierarchy of goods. Therefore, there must be some chief good, called a common good that unites a given society. This is the social dimension of moral beauty.

1.4.1. Plato – the philosopher as a model

Plato gave a wider – cultural meaning to the term kalokagathía. The aforementioned word appears in his works in a decumulate form: kalos kai agathos. It is associated with an educational ideal promoted from an early age and primarily ←47 | 48→refers to morality. In Plato’s thought, Kalokagathía is the aim of paidéa. The character of the aforesaid kalokagathía is defined by Plato in opposition to injustice and wickedness and thus, it he provides it with a remarkably ethical colouring.¹⁵³ In a narrower sense, it denotes an innate, natural openness to the truth that must be obeyed if one wants to become a philosopher, a beautiful, good man. In addition, it indicates an intuitive ability to recognize what is morally good and lawful and what is not, with no need to establish the law and improve the rights all the time. Moreover, it relates to the aristocratic layer. Beauty and good are also the features of thought which moves up to the Good in and of itself.¹⁵⁴ Plato expressed the original sense of the “general” old Greek culture of the polis in the Laws. As he claimed, the essence of any true culture was to “training from childhood in goodness, which makes a man eagerly desirous of becoming a perfect citizen, understanding how both to rule and be ruled righteously.’¹⁵⁵ Thus, culture is something general since the ability to be attuned to politics is the ability to understand general matters. The indicated ability is to a great extent possessed by a philosopher, referred to in the State by Plato as kalos kai agathos.¹⁵⁶ It is the philosopher who has access to true cognition and true knowledge since he can notice the permanent in the reality, the universal and the immutable, namely its “idea.” He is the only one who can determine what is in fact truly fair and beautiful whereas the views of the general public revolve between a non-being and a true being.¹⁵⁷ That is why Plato claimed that satisfying the tastes of the masses made the true education of man, based on the criterion of permanent values, impossible.¹⁵⁸ He wrote that a philosopher was a man who carried a reliable paradeigma, namely an idea of good, in his own soul.¹⁵⁹ Due to the ability to perceive the indicated norm, the philosopher outweighs an ordinary politician. He subordinates all his activities to the cognition of good as the highest goal of man. For Plato, it was an ideal of a perfect ruler.¹⁶⁰ Additionally, the philosopher was ←48 | 49→also a man of high culture for Plato. The features characterizing him are: excellent memory, cleverness, quickness of mind, desire for knowledge and perseverance. He is not small-minded and he does not focus on details or external goods. He values the truth, justice, valour. He controls himself. The aforementioned features are crucial to achieve a higher intellectual culture. Education and a long experience play a vital role in the development of such a person.¹⁶¹ Among other things, the indicated factors provide a balance between the intellectual and moral side. It is important due to the fact that, according to Plato, the process of cognition must be accompanied by the development of character. An ideal form of a society which is indispensable for the complete development of an individual’s abilities called upon by nature to philosophy is an ideal state of Plato.¹⁶² It allows a philosopher to pass from contemplation to action. At first, he shapes his own character (heauton plattein) to be able to develop the characters (ethe) of others.¹⁶³ The Platonic philosopher is an embodiment of kalokagathía – the highest ideal of humanity, typical for a classical era of the Greek culture. Plato transforms here the existing epic – a heroic ideal model of man into a new philosophical ideal. However, frequent references to the principles of the old chivalric ethics are very clear, as for example the requirement to be persistent (menein) in both learning and in fight. The aforementioned principles were transferred by Plato into the realm of the spirit. The similarity found here lies in the fact that just like the Greek education stemmed from the layer of ancestral nobility, Plato’s entire process of education aimed at the formation of a new aristocracy of the spirit. Through the conscious exploitation of education to implement a particular ideal model of man, the Platonic philosophy of education fell within the trend of humanism, characteristic to the entire Greek culture. Its purpose is the full development of man in man. Everything present in a human being is subordinated by it to his rational component, leading to a completely different notion of life – as bíos¹⁶⁴ and a true human perfection. The Greek state thought ←49 | 50→shaped the western concept of a free personality as well, that was not based on the human law but on the cognition of the eternal norm, which was the purpose of the entire Platonic philosophy of education.

1.4.2. Aristotle – towards the moral beauty

In the writings of Aristotle kalokagathía completes all virtues. It is reached when detailed virtues are achieved. It refers to decent good that is the goal in itself.¹⁶⁵ Stagirite uses the following words to define man with the most perfect of virtues, namely the noble man: “A person is a noble person because of possessing those goods that are noble for their own sake, and because of doing noble deeds for their own sake. What things, then, are noble? The virtues and the works of virtue.’¹⁶⁶ He mentions justice and moderation among the indicated virtues. Therefore, nobility is the complete perfection.¹⁶⁷

It is the feature of young people who have the character and display thinking typical of free people.¹⁶⁸ Kalos denotes the behaviour which complies with virtues, the highest happiness, everything that is to be done in line with one’s will.¹⁶⁹ In Politics, Aristotle associates the term kalokagathía with people who belong to noble families.¹⁷⁰ Additionally, he points out that it guarantees the good life in the state: “The end of the city-state is living well, then, but these other things are for the sake of the end. So political communities must be taken to exist for the sake of noble actions, and not for the sake of living together.’¹⁷¹ Thus, the realization of beauty is the accomplishment of the morally beautiful deeds that, on the one hand, allow to shape people who are friendly to one another, on the other hand, however, make it possible to activate the purely human acts in man.

←50 | 51→

1.5. MEGALOPSYCHÍA (MAGNANIMITY) – THE CROWNING CULTURE

The possession of ethical excellence (kalokagathía) is a prerequisite for the sense of self-worth and a justified pride, called by Aristotle magnanimity¹⁷² (Gr. megalopsychía, Lat. magnanimitas). Magnanimity was known long before the appearance of Aristotle’s ethics. In Homer’s poetry, magnanimity appears as a feature of heroes (Achilles, Odysseus and others) in the form of the aristocratic pride. Homer does not know the word “magnanimity.” He speaks not of the “great spirit” but of the “great heart” (megas thymos) of his protagonists.¹⁷³ The aim (duty) of knights of noble birth is to apply for the laurel of primacy. In consequence, they gain reverence and fame. The constant striving for the highest bravery and consequently for great fame is boosted by the very sense of pride. In addition, it guarantees integrity and moral perfection of a well-born man who could not deserve the highest honour if he behaved inappropriately in any sphere of life.¹⁷⁴

Plato used the word megalopsychía to define “arrogance” (“ambition’) – Greek aphrosyne.¹⁷⁵

For Aristotle, the term areté has a strictly moral connotation – it denotes every individual virtue, not only bravery. Despite the fact that there was a crisis of the ←51 | 52→heroic bravery in his times, thinking about the heritage of ancestors and their areté becomes a model of not only an aristocratic but also a democratic education. For Aristotle then, magnanimity denotes a sort of greatness and strength of the spirit. The justifiably proud man is the one who, while considering himself worthy of great things, actually deserves them (he thinks that he deserves what he is actually worthy of). The justified pride is a belief that one is able to do great things and it is the feature of the man who trusts his own power.¹⁷⁶ Knowing oneself is a prerequisite of magnanimity. It constitutes the basis of the good self-esteem. As Aristotle writes: “[…] Vain people, however, are foolish, and ignorant of themselves quite obviously so.’¹⁷⁷ In order to develop, one must therefore face the truth about oneself. Humility, which is a condition for the acceptance of truth, is very helpful at this point. It prevents us from striving for what is beyond our capacities. We must be aware of our own powers with regard to what is beyond their grasp.

Therefore, magnanimity refers to great things. A magnanimous man has the ability to correctly evaluate great and small goods. The following questions arise here: what are the great things which make the soul great (magna anima)? What is the subject of magnanimity?

Aristotle explains that great goods are the ones which are aimed at by a person who has the best disposition for it, namely, the virtue of magnanimity.¹⁷⁸ It is necessary to recall the hierarchy of goods by Aristotle to understand what the great goods are.¹⁷⁹ The goods mentioned by him include what is morally beautiful (bonum honestum), then what is useful (bonum utile) and subsequently what is pleasant (bonum delectabile). The decent good is ranked the highest in this hierarchy since it is most suited to the specific functions of man (it draws him closer to the ultimate goal). This specific human function is rational acting, whereas the specific function of a brave man is the same type of action performed in a particularly good manner.¹⁸⁰ Thus, the subject of magnanimity is the decent good because it is the only good that can improve the soul (move closer to happiness). It is desired for its own sake, it is not easy but it is very honourable. Virtue constitutes such good because it is a perfection of a particular power, ←52 | 53→which realizes itself (improves) not through any action but through the great or difficult act.¹⁸¹

Striving for great goods is difficult, that is why the virtue of magnanimity is also helpful in overcoming the difficulties. Although Aristotle distinguished many virtues and grouped them according to the division of powers of the spirit, which they improve, he realized that moral conduct was marked by unity. All virtues are linked by the fact that the essence of each of them is constituted by the internal measure, the maintenance of which depends on a particular virtue of prudence. The indicated unity is also guaranteed by the attitude of the subject of virtues (man), a certain desire to act in line with this internal measure in every situation, which is beautiful according to Aristotle but rare at the same time and above all difficult. The greatest of all virtues is magnanimity. It is on top in two meanings: firstly, it consists of a set of human virtues, called kalokagathía, secondly, the awareness of man, who possesses it, of their value due to which the indicated virtues are brought to full bloom. Moreover, the consciousness makes the magnanimous man want only the great things and despise the small ones.

Speaking of magnanimity, Aristotle has in mind the desire to possess the greatest external good, and this is what we give to the gods, what people holding the highest positions aim at and what constitutes a reward for the noblest deeds. This is reverence (timé). That is why the justified pride is associated with reverence,¹⁸² which is one of the most significant features of a magnanimous man. The benevolent man honours the virtue above all, and being aware of possessing it, he expects honour for his virtue and for himself from others. The reverence is the greatest external good.¹⁸³ It is a kind of worship usually conducted by people ←53 | 54→with reference to gods only. It is inseparably associated with “great deeds.” It is the greatest award for virtue. Proper attitude towards reverence and infamy is also a secondary object of magnanimity.

Moreover, Aristotle emphasizes that the justifiably proud man is at the same time the bravest man in ethical terms. The more virtues we have the greater things we are worthy of. The man with the greatest number of virtues is worthy of the greatest things. The reverence is therefore a reward for ethical valour and is awarded only to those who are ethically brave. Thus, it is impossible to be justifiably proud without ethical excellence (kalokagathía).¹⁸⁴ A justifiably proud man enjoys the privileges coming from noble men, however, he ignores the privileges coming from insignificant people and resulting from unimportant deeds.¹⁸⁵ In addition, he disdains the symptoms of infamy because they are not just with reference to him.¹⁸⁶ The man with a well-founded pride can be therefore recognized by, among other things, his attitude to privileges, wealth and power,¹⁸⁷ success and failure in general. Such man will be primarily characterized by virtue of moderation.

Thus, Aristotle strongly stresses the significance of ethical valour. He points out that people, who have external goods without ethical valour, easily become proud and impudent and additionally, they are wrongly convinced of their superiority.¹⁸⁸

The man who is justifiably proud faces dangers when it comes to important things. He is also willing to make benefactions, he helps willingly and acts openly, tells the truth, he is not vindictive, he does not gossip, he does not complain and ask for things of small significance or the ones which are immutable. ←54 | 55→He is inclined to have rather beautiful things and not the ones that yield benefit or profit.¹⁸⁹

The virtue associated with justified pride is ambition. As Aristotle writes, it does not have a Greek synonym (name). It is translated as a restraint with regard to the greed for reverence.¹⁹⁰

When it comes to the consequences for the entire moral life, resulting from the reverence understood in this way, it must be stressed that it presupposes moral perfection (virtuous conduct in every sphere of life), since – in accordance with the definition of a magnanimous man – the one who does not follow virtue in a particular area (behaves badly) cannot be worthy of the highest reverence.¹⁹¹ This perfection is not to be understood in the current sense, as having an act of all virtues, but as an improvement to given acts (dispositions for them).¹⁹² Such striving for greatness in behaviour provides not only the unity of all virtues (is a prerequisite of this unity) but also, in consequence, the unity of a human character.

Continuous striving for greatness becomes a permanent feature of character and adds a feature of perfection to each action. Therefore, the reverence is such a general feature which is a prerequisite for a full moral life, due to striving for what is great and the second feature, next to prudence, that unites all virtues as if from the interior, by maintaining a proper measure of reason in every act. A similar thought guided Marcin from Brakara (the sixth century), who replaced valour with magnanimity among the cardinal virtues in his treaty entitled Formula vitae honestae.¹⁹³

The disadvantages corresponding to magnanimity are: presumption (vanity – chaunotes) – when one considers himself worthy of great things, not being worthy of them, not having real achievements, and exaggerated humility (pusillanimity – mikropsychia) – when someone does not demand the reverence at all or regards himself as worthy of smaller things than what he deserves; and ←55 | 56→therefore he does not regard himself as worthy of something great, even though he has the features due to which he can be duly considered to be worthy of them; he is too shy.¹⁹⁴ Pusillanimity is thus associated with cowardice and a lack of trust to one another, whereas vanity is associated with presumptuousness.

For Aristotle, magnanimity was a typical virtue from the group of valour, characterized by striving for good associated with difficulties. It stems from the tradition dating back to the times of Homer, in which the feeling of the aristocratic pride forced one to undertake the greatest efforts in order to achieve fame, and the fame was for the Greeks some sort of immortality in a human dimension, it was the greatest thing. Magnanimity was a model of moral perfection; however, it was not accessible to everyone; it could be achieved only by few – nobly born individuals.¹⁹⁵ It was the consequence of the ethical system by Aristotle for whom the aim (happiness) of man was to act in compliance with nature – to act rationally. Living according to the precepts of reason guarantees the implementation of human potentialities and a self-improvement by a proper good. Therefore, someone deprived of intellectual development in any way would also be deprived of virtue, and even more, of absolute happiness.¹⁹⁶ The indicated problem could be solved only with the advent of Christianity. The proper perspective for the indicated issues was introduced by the concept of the personal God, the creation ex nihilo, providing the basis for the understanding of a human being as a person.¹⁹⁷

←56 | 57→

2. From paidéa to humanitas – the way of the Romans

2.1. CULTURE AS ANIMI CULTURA – TOWARDS HUMANITAS

Although both Plato and his disciple Aristotle strongly stressed the association between the term paidéia and politeia, their followers departed from that type of thinking. They did not subordinate education to the interests of the state any more, but above all emphasized the comprehensive education and the improvement of an individual according to a specified pattern. Paidéia gained the status of a specific way of human existence, facilitating the development of the entire spiritual and intellectual potential of man, leading to full humanity. This very concept of paidéa was absorbed by the culture of ancient Rome: “The idea of paidéa understood in this way was developed in the works of the disciples of Aristotle and the stoics, spreading throughout the whole Greek world of that time and recovering through the ideas of Cicero and the Roman humanitas.’¹⁹⁸

The meeting of the Greek paidéa with the Roman ideal of education took place at the end of the fourth century BC, when Athens lost the political power. As a result, the Athenians scattered all over the then world, spreading the Hellenistic culture and contributing to the emergence of new centres of philosophical thought. What the ancient Greeks called paidéia, understood as a universal “cultivation,” a rational human education in the individual and social aspect, found its continuation in the ancient Rome under the name “culture.’¹⁹⁹ Cicero was the first to describe philosophy as the soul cultivation: cultura animi philosophia est.²⁰⁰ From Cicero, therefore, the term animi cultura started to be ←57 | 58→used, understood as the “culture of the spirit” – refining the human mind, basically through philosophy.²⁰¹

The theory developed by Cicero in his Tusculan Disputations had its origins in the thought of Panaetius of Rhodes – a stoic philosopher who lived in the second century BC. He impacted the circle of the philhellene aristocrats centred around Scipio Africanus the Younger (the so-called Scipionic Circle). The group played a major role in the adaptation and assimilation of the Greek culture. Its activity was an important stage in the development of the Roman idea of humanitas.²⁰² In the works of Panaetius himself, the terms and ideas taken from the earlier period of the Greek thought, such as anthropinos (human), received additional meaning as elements of paidéa. Moreover, Panaetius often replaced the word paidéia by a new word: anthropismos (humanity). In this sense, the word was also used by his disciple, Poseidon, who, in turn, was to become a teacher of Cicero. Cicero was called one of the most brilliant successors of the Scipionic Circle.²⁰³ He personally knew the last members of that congregation and he felt obliged to familiarize the Roman society with the ideal of humanitas. Thus, due to Cicero, the Greek paidéia, through anthropismos of Panaetius and Poseidon, became humanitas (from Latin homo – man, humanus – human).²⁰⁴

From the semantic point of view, the term is difficult to define, at least due to the fact that it was perceived differently over the centuries.²⁰⁵ In Latin, the ←58 | 59→indicated word has a variety of meanings, depending on the context: 1) “human nature,” “humanity;” 2) “nobility of customs, culture, civilization, elegance;” 3) “being human with respect to someone, kindness, graciousness, courtesy;” 4) “education, good manners, culture, polish, elegance, aesthetic taste.” In the post-classical period, the following terms were added: 1) “mankind, humanity, people;” 2) “equity, rationale;” 3) “generosity;” 4) “treat, hospitality’.²⁰⁶ These are elementary explanations that raise awareness on the broad meaning of the term, for which it is difficult to find a precise synonym in both Greek and in modern languages.²⁰⁷

Apart from the Greek word paidéia, the Latin word humanitas corresponds in meaning to the Greek concept of philanthrôpía (love for what makes us human). The indicated terms express many qualities which make up the Romanian traditional, unwritten code of conduct (mos maiorum – the custom of the ancestors). Cicero stressed the indicated fact at the beginning of his Tusculan Disputations: “[…] our countrymates gained an advantage through valour or even more through discipline. Finally, what they attained due to the features of character and not by virtue of scholarship could not be compared with either Greece or any other nation. What nation was distinguished by such dignity, stability, magnanimity, reliability and fidelity glowing with such wonderful qualities of all kinds that could be compared with our ancestors?’²⁰⁸ Thus, the Greek words philanthrôpía and paidéia were close in meaning to the term humanitas. The first term referred more to ethical (virtus) and social values and was closer to today’s humanitarianism, whereas the second term was associated with intellectual values (doctrina) and a later notion of “humanism.’²⁰⁹ However, as Wiesław Pawlak indicates, none of the words –philanthrôpía or paidéia, because of a narrower meaning, can be treated as a synonym of humanitas. Although he admits that in structural terms (association with homo) humanitas is closer to the Greek philanthropy.²¹⁰ Originally, philanthropy referred to deities and their particular friendliness towards people. The adjective philántropos was first used ←59 | 60→in the tragedy Prometheus Bound, attributed to Aeschylus. There was a reference there to the main protagonist’s spirit that was friendly to people (mortal). Similarly, Plato used the indicated adjective primarily with reference to gods. Then, philanthropy was used to define the virtue of the high-ranked people, especially the rulers who showed their mercy to the subjects. Philanthropy understood in this way was praised by Xenophon and Isocrates who thought that “who wants to reign, should be a philanthropist (philántropos) and should love his city-state (philópolin).’²¹¹ Additionally, Isocrates stressed the high culture of Athens that affected others, which was also a manifestation of philanthropy: “Now, our city has so far surpassed all the rest of mankind in political prulence and artful persuasions […] our city has caused the name of Grecian no longer seems to be a mark of a nation, but of good sense and understanding: those are called Greeks that have the advantage of our education, rather than the natives of Greece.’²¹² He thereby focused on the fact that the ideal of paidéa was realized in Athens and was understood as a constant striving for wisdom and knowledge and as a higher level of education or culture which was the effect of the indicated desire.

In turn, a broader scope of use of the term philanthropy may be noticed in the writings of Demosthenes. As W. Pawlak notices, this concept started to change its meaning in the democratic Athens. It denoted: compassion, reckoning with others, courtesy or simply a broadly perceived kindness towards others. In the court speeches, it was often about the philanthropy of the judges against the accused and thus an attitude close to compassion and mercy. It was also the virtue of the accused as citizens manifesting itself in the participation in social life and bearing the burden for the benefit of the state. The word “philanthropy” additionally denoted friendly, kind interpersonal relations and even an attitude of the tamed animals towards human beings. However, the use of this noun usually indicates an attitude that assumes certain superiority or some advantage over another person. It has its roots in the original meaning of philanthropy, which in the first place related to deities.²¹³

Going back to the term humanitas, among the Latin writers of the classical period, Cicero was the one who used the term most frequently.²¹⁴ Around 80 BC, ←60 | 61→the term occurs in his speeches, letters, rhetorical and philosophical writings as one of the most important terms referring to man and thus as a key term within his anthropology.²¹⁵ As Pawlak emphasizes: “The high rank attributed to humanitas by Cicero and the changes that he made in the semantics of the concept turned out to be fraught with consequences for the future of the indicated term since both the direct successors of Arpinata and later Roman authors as well as fifteenth- and the sixteenth-century humanists more or less referred to his very concept.’²¹⁶ The term humanitas was for the first time certified in an anonymous Rhetoric to Herennius (ca. 86–82 BC.), where it denoted both humanity as such (characteristics typical of a human nature per se), and its particular aspect, expressed through the treatment of people, including enemies, in a manner that is worthy of man, so in a kindly, sympathetic and “humane” way. However, only in the circle of Cicero, did the idea fully develop. He used the term humanitas in various meanings:²¹⁷

• In the most basic one – to define human nature (natura humana, natura hominis) in contrast to animals and gods;

• characterising interpersonal relations relevant to human dignity (common humanity for all communis humanitas – is what requires us to save our opponents and do good to others; humanitas discourages from committing murder and constitutes an antidote to the horrors of civil war, which lead to the disappearance of all traces of humanitas in human hearts);

• he also appealed to the humanitas of judges to raise their sympathy in the cases in which he acted as a defender or a prosecutor;

• he used the term in the meaning of the royal virtue, worthy of rulers, chiefs and all those who exercised power. There is therefore the following advice given by Cicero to his brother Quintus – the governor of the Asia province: “[…] if fate gave you power over Africans, Spaniards or Gauls, the savage and barbarian ←61 | 62→nations, you should still strive for their comfort, their needs and safety, due to your humanitas;”²¹⁸

• while using the indicated term, he characterized the formation of an ideal speaker – rhetorician, who, as he claimed, should be equipped with a set of virtues that predisposed him both to active public life and to satisfactory private life. As Cicero writes, the goal of this formation should be a comprehensive education based on natural talents and continuous exercise. He underlined the importance of cultivating both moral and social values.

However, his greatest merit was the significant expansion of the importance of humanitas. The words humanum and humanitas concerned not only the human nature and a friendly attitude towards other people but also what belonged to the specificity of man as man, not only in relation to others but with reference to himself and to his own talents as well.²¹⁹ Thus, the aforementioned terms defined the essence of humanity, as nothing given but assigned by nature as a subject of constant development and improvement and as an ideal that one should aim at, making use of everything that man was inherently equipped. Human activities are here motivated by moral obligation (honestum) and the inner sense of decency (decorum), on account of which man is capable of sacrifice. Thanks to the fact that man is equipped with reason, he can attain the perfection placing him above the average. According to Cicero, human perfection does not consist in having any significant position or wealth but in being a wise man, restrained and just. He perceived wisdom as an ability to reach the truth, understand relationships and causes; temperance as a rational-minded ability to remain unaffected by passions and feelings; justice, namely, as the cooperation of all citizens for the benefit of common good and restraint in applying penalties.²²⁰ Cicero emphasized that all these virtues were based on reason, enabling one to discern the causes and effects of one’s actions, expand the activities and deepen social relations. Due to reason man acquires independence and courage, which are indispensable to face the life’s difficulties. Without reason and virtues humanitas would be extremely shallow and even meaningless.

All the skills and studies facilitating the achievement of the fullness of humanity are called artes humanitatis propriae. Even though at a first glance it ←62 | 63→resembles the Greek ideal of comprehensive encyclopaedic education (énkýklos paidéia), in Cicero the particular emphasis was placed on the skills connected with speech – poetry and rhetoric. They constituted a certain core of the Ciceronian humanitas and proper studia humanitatis.²²¹ Speech was treated by him as a discipline integrating all sciences and skills and constituting their finial. In this way, humanitas became primarily the ideal and the aim of upbringing and education (Bildungsideal), covering a large spectrum of ethical, intellectual, aesthetic and civic values expressed by Cicero and his followers through such terms as: “mansuetudo, cultus, doctrina, dignitas, fides, pietas, honestas, iustitia, gravitas, virtus, integritas, lepos, facetiae, elegantia, eruditio, urbanitas, hilaritas, iocositas, festivitas, sapientia, moderatio, modestia, aequitas, magnanimitas, comitas, benignitas, clementia, misericordia, benevolentia, facilitas, mollitudo, liberalitas, munificentia.”²²²

Cicero’s humanitas should be treated not only as an educational programme. As Pawlak indicates, it absolutely deserves the title of an anthropological project, extremely attractive for future generations²²³. The indicated project is described as a “qualified humanity.” It consists of two dimensions – both the humanitas, and the litterae – the refined education.²²⁴

As Wolfgang Schadewaldt’s work, Humanitas Romana, reads: “The essence of the Roman humanitas is that it is one of the aspects of an ordered set of different, demanding values which were included in the Roman citizen code of conduct from the beginning and are in fact untranslatable into Greek: Latin pietas (which differs from the Greek eusébeia), Latin mores (which do not fully coincide with ethos), Latin dignitas, gravitas, integritas, and so on. The idea of humanitas encompasses all the indicated values […] and simultaneously, blurs the differences between them, making them less rigid and more universal.’²²⁵ In turn, in one of the German encyclopaedias, where the term humanitas occurs, ←63 | 64→the author explains: “Humanitas covers, in the full meaning of the word, the development and the activity of these spiritual (broadly understood) qualities, which characterize and distinguish man as man, and which, in the opinion of the representatives of this ideal, are not given to man by nature, but are only assigned.’²²⁶

Thus, humanitas expressed the possibilities determining the value of man: magnanimity and fidelity, among other things, as well as refinement, intelligence and development in the field of arts. Pietas constituted the basis of humanitas and it denoted modesty, due to which man could properly measure the relations with all people and things, with friends, a spouse, parents or children, with different peoples and the state which had to conquer the world and then enable all people’s participation in the just rule of law. At the same time humanitas meant that man transcended what was too human in him through what constituted the essence of his humanity – through reason given to him by the nature itself, designing the divine and human law. Additionally, humanitas denoted liberating from a daily labour. That is why studying the great works of literature was treated as the most human and the most liberating mental entertainment, whereas people who had been shaped by that true art of humanity, should be regarded as the ones who realized the fullness of humanity.

Both the Greek idea of paidéa and the Roman idea of humanitas found their places within the culture called Hellenism. Partial identification of the two terms occurred there and they became the synonyms of the entire Greek-Roman civilization, juxtaposed with the barbarian world. Isocrates explained the meaning of the word Hellenes in the following words: “The word Hellenes has taken on the meaning that no longer denotes origin but rather a way of thinking, so the term Hellenes refers rather to those who participate in our education rather than to people of common origin.’²²⁷ In addition, the concepts of paidéia and humanitas were extended and deepened within the indicated civilization and were applied to all people. The recognition of the existence of an all-encompassing interpersonal relationship was something new in the ancient thought. Its advocates were the Roman aristocrat Seneca and the Roman emperor, Marcus Aurelius. However, one may observe a tendency to associate humanitas with the concepts close to the Greek philanthropy in the works of Seneca. As is observed by W. Pawlak: “[…] additionally, the humanitas of Seneca can, in the Platonic spirit, denote a persistent idea of mankind by which unsustainable ←64 | 65→human beings are formed.’²²⁸ Pliny the Elder, on the other hand, pointed to the relationship between humanitas and doctrina, and thus, like Cicero, applied the term humanitas to an intellectual or literary formation. Pliny the Younger was the closest to the Ciceronian understanding of humanitas. With reference to Cicero, more than a century later, he defined humanitas as the ability to develop lower feelings without disturbing the higher ones.²²⁹ Like Cicero, he pointed out that both the concept and the idea of humanitas originated in ancient Greece.²³⁰

Over time, the concept of humanitas started to be identified with ordinary kindness. It was indicated by Quintilian, who under the influence of Cicero emphasized the special role of education in the formation of a person.²³¹ An oversimplification of the concept of humanitas was objected to by the Roman poet Gellius who, in the second century AD stressed the ethical and also the intellectual (educational) aspect of both this concept and the concept of idea. He wished to restore its original meaning close to the Greek paidéa: “Those who created the Latin words and used them appropriately, gave a different meaning to the word humanitas than the common people expected and which was expressed by the Greek word φιλανθρωπία [philanthrôpía], denoting some kindness and friendliness towards all people without distinction, however humanitas denoted more or less the same as the Greek παιδεία [paidéia] or what we call education and assimilation of noble skills. Those who truly desire them and strive for them are to the greatest extent humanissimi.²³² Gellius was of the opinion that the only true Latin equivalent of the word humanitas was animi cultura.

The above considerations show that the meaning of the Roman humanitas was very broad. The idea involved various factors namely, universal human duties, broadly understood love and affection, the improvement of living conditions, the pleasure of experiencing literature, art, contemplation, learning, rational action improved by virtues. All of this was supposed to increase the good of both the individual and the whole community.

←65 | 66→

2.2. THE MEETING OF CHRISTIANITY WITH THE GREEK PAIDÉIA AND THE ROMAN HUMANITAS

2.2.1. Does a Christian need paidéa?

The Greek ancient culture, whose ideals were concentrated in the term paidéia, had a significant impact on the thought and culture of the early Christianity, developed in the context of Hellenism.²³³ Christianity took over the foundations of the Greek culture as indispensable for the formation of man, although the anthropocentric perspective was replaced by the theocentric one. Christianity aimed not so much at the perfection of man on his own but at his openness to God in the perspective of the ultimate goal of the human life, the salvation.