Cicero on goodness and happiness

I've begun reading a collection of Cicero's writing entitled On the Good Life.  Today I was reading a portion from the Discussions at Tusculum and encountered much that I disagreed with.  Cicero was writing about goodness and happiness and the oft-repeated ancient view that the morally good life is the happy life, and vice versa and its corollary that the morally good person is always happy, no matter what circumstances may bring.  This was clearly counterintuitive to many ancients, as the dialogues always express dismay on the part of the interlocutors, and the points must constantly be made again and again.

Here are a few of the lines of Cicero's that I particularly disagreed with:

For nothing that there is the slightest possibility of eventually losing can be regarded as an ingredient of the happy life.

What of losing a friend?  Friendship, at least for Aristotle, is a requirement of the good life.  What of children, spouse, fulfilling work, health?  I know Cicero would say no, but it seems so directly opposed to actual human experience.  These are elements of happiness for most people.  Now, maybe if we can be happy without them, that means they are not essential ingredients of happiness?  But, then again, some people are never happy when they have lost these persons.  Grief and depression can forever rob them of the joy of living.  It seems to me that we have such a more robust understanding of human psychology and a deeper appreciation for human relationships.  Thoughts?  Where am I wrong?

For the happy man, as I see him, has to be safe, secure, inconquerable, impregnable: a man whose fears are not just insignificant but non-existent.

First, a person with no fear at all seems like a fool to me.  Someone who is impregnable and unfeeling seems inhuman.  Clearly we are deeply affected by the Judaeo-Christian worldview that values compassion, love, humility, and sacrifice above these images of perfect being.  And we are affected by developments in feminism that emphasize an ethics of care and liberation theologies that emphasize solidarity with the poor.

We can disregard wealth, which I do not include in the category of good things because anyone, however unworthy, can get hold of it -- and that could never be true of things that are really good.

We are clearly to democratic to believe that something cannot be good if everyone can have it.  In fact, we would like tend to the other direction, that the good things necessary for a happy life are those things accessible to all persons.  And we would place political freedom as one of those basic requirements, followed closely by equality of opportunity.

And anyone who is self-controlled, unwavering, fearless, undistressed, the victim of no cravings or desires, must inevitably be happy.

I've taught self-control and a measure of Stoic reserve, but here Cicero is excessive, in my opinion.  Yes, our current age is too hedonistic, but I don't think it is a flaw that we have tilted to an Epicurean worldview.  The good life that many aspire to does involve pleasure, even if refined and disciplined pleasures, and cultivating of good taste.  Desire is the source of our greatest spiritual power, our connection with the creativity of the universe, the source of our greatest human attributes.  

If therefore, happiness and moral goodness are not identical, it would be necessary to suppose that there is something morally better than the happy life -- which would be an utterly nonsensical conclusion.

There are traditions, including many in the Reformed tradition, that held the moral life to be superior to the happy life.  In fact, often the moral people in those traditions didn't appear to be very happy or joyful.  This is not my own view of the good and happy life, but I don't see it even remotely nonsensical that one could imagine the good life to be distinct from or superior to the happy life.

Now, there were things I liked and agreed with, but this post was focused on where I disagreed, which was with the core thrust of what I read.

Comments

[Baley Olmos]

I can't live without my family, friends, children, siblings and others. They make my life complete. Life is barren without them. Love you all!

[Cunniff Talbott]

I can't imagine myself losing someone I loved. They're my life.

[Biermann Paniagua]

My family is the most essential tool to keep me going especially when I am down.I cant imagined my life without them.

[Boeding Mcdougal]

My family and friends are the important elements in my life. They made my life complete for without them I consider myself as nothing. I love them so much!