The Correspondence Between Encheiridion and Sterling's Axioms

The Correspondence Between Encheiridion and Sterling's Axioms

## **Encheiridion 1 ↔ †A4 (Control Dichotomy)**

### **Encheiridion 1:**

> "Some things are under our control, while others are not under our control. Under our control are conception, choice, desire, aversion... not under our control are our body, our property, reputation, office..."

### **Sterling's †A4:**

```

†A4: ∀x (Controlled(x) ↔ (Belief(x) ∨ Will(x) ∨ EntailedBy(x, belief_or_will)))

```

### **Perfect Correspondence:**

- **Epictetus**: "conception, choice, desire, aversion" = what we control

- **Sterling**: "belief, will, and their entailments" = what we control

- **Both**: Everything else (body, property, reputation) is external

**The Match**: Sterling's formal axiom captures exactly Epictetus's fundamental distinction.

---

## **Encheiridion 2-3 ↔ †A5 (Desires from judgments) + †A1-†A2 (Happiness pursuit)**

### **Encheiridion 2:**

> "Remember that the promise of desire is the attainment of what you desire... if you desire some one of the things that are not under our control you are bound to be unfortunate."

### **Encheiridion 3:**

> "With everything which entertains you, is useful, or of which you are fond, remember to say to yourself... 'What is its nature?' If you are fond of a jug, say, 'I am fond of a jug'; for when it is broken you will not be disturbed."

### **Sterling's Corresponding Axioms:**

```

†A1: ∀x Desires(x, happiness) - "Everyone wants happiness"

†A2: ∀x (Rational(x) ⊃ Prefers(x, complete_happiness, incomplete_happiness))

†A5: ∀x,y (Desires(x,y) ↔ (Judges(x,y,good) ∨ Judges(x,y,evil))) - "Desires from judgments"

```

### **The Connection Logic:**

1. **Encheiridion 2**: Desire for externals → misfortune

2. **A1-A2**: Everyone wants (complete) happiness

3. **A5**: Desires come from value judgments

4. **Therefore**: Judging externals as good/bad → desires for externals → misfortune

5. **Encheiridion 3**: Solution = correct labeling ("it's just a jug")

**The Correspondence**: Epictetus shows the problem (external desires cause suffering) and solution (proper judgment). Sterling formalizes the psychological mechanism.

---

## **Encheiridion 4-5 ↔ †A6 (Virtue-only value) + derived theorems T1-T7**

### **Encheiridion 4:**

> "When you are on the point of putting your hand to some undertaking, remind yourself what the nature of that undertaking is... I want to take a bath, and, at the same time, to keep my moral purpose in harmony with nature."

### **Encheiridion 5:**

> "It is not the things themselves that disturb men, but their judgements about these things. For example, death is nothing dreadful, or else Socrates too would have thought so, but the judgement that death is dreadful, this is the dreadful thing."

### **Sterling's †A6:**

```

†A6: ∀x (Good(x) ↔ Virtue(x)) ∧ ∀x (Evil(x) ↔ Vice(x))

"Only virtue is good, only vice is evil"

```

### **Sterling's Derived Theorems T1-T7:**

```

⊢T1: Desiring externals → possible unhappiness

⊢T5: Externals are neither good nor evil  

⊢T6: Desiring externals involves false judgment

⊢T7: Valuing virtue only → happiness and immunity

```

### **The Deep Connection:**

- **Encheiridion 4**: "Keep my moral purpose in harmony with nature" = only virtue matters

- **Encheiridion 5**: "Death is nothing dreadful... but the judgment that death is dreadful" = external events are indifferent, false judgments cause disturbance

- **A6**: Formalizes that ONLY virtue/vice have value

- **T1-T7**: Prove that external valuation causes suffering while virtue-only valuation guarantees happiness

## **Why This Correspondence Matters:**

### **1. Historical Validation**

Sterling's formal system isn't modern innovation - it's **systematic extraction** of what Epictetus actually taught in his opening sections.

### **2. Complete Coverage**

- **Encheiridion 1-5** contain the full framework

- **Sterling's axioms** capture every essential element

- **Nothing is lost** in the formalization

### **3. Practical Bridge**

- **Epictetus**: Scattered insights across different contexts

- **Sterling**: Organized logical system for systematic application

### **4. Proof of Authenticity**

The perfect correspondence demonstrates that Sterling's "radical" positions aren't distortions - they're **faithful systematizations** of Epictetus's actual teachings.

## **The Ultimate Insight:**

**Encheiridion 1-5 IS Sterling's 8-axiom system in narrative form.**

**Sterling's axioms ARE Encheiridion 1-5 in logical form.**

This correspondence proves that Sterling successfully **extracted the operational essence** of authentic Stoicism and **organized it for maximum practical effectiveness** without changing any fundamental insights.