Cicero

Cicero, was truly a man of the state. His writings also show us he was equally a man of


  philosophical temperament and affluence. Yet at times these two forces within Cicero clash


  and contradict with the early stoic teachings. Cicero gradually adopted the stoic


  lifestyle but not altogether entirely, and this is somewhat due to the fact of what it was


  like to be a roman of the time. The morals of everyday Rome conflicted with some of the


  stoic ideals that were set by early stoicism. Thus, Cicero changed the face of stoicism by


  romanizing it; redefining stoicism into the middle phase.


  Of Cicero it can be said he possessed a bias towards roman life and doctrine. For Cicero


  every answer lay within Rome itself, from the ideal governing body to the   place of


  divination. Cicero does not offer any alternate answers to roman society, which robs him


  of being truly a unique and bold political philosopher. This is not to say however some


  of his doctrines are untrue, just that he is somewhat blinded by his roman beliefs and


  assumptions.


    The assumptions of Cicero can be noticed when one inspects his view of the ideal


    governing body, which he expresses through Scipio (in the commonwealth). Although Cicero


    presents very convincing arguments for a Composite government, clearly his view is


    possibly only due towards his belief in the roman structure of government.1


    Cicero was limited to roman borders of experience, and this point was best illustrated


    by   his disagreement with Aristotle's writings on the decay of states. Cicero was


    unable to think on the level of Aristotle's logic. He quite simply used roman history


    as a mapping of the paths of the decay of states.


In contrast, Aristotle understood the underlying forces and influences that transpired when


a state...