On the Consolation of Philosophy was written in AD 523 during a year-long imprisonment that the Roman statesman Boethius served while awaiting trial, and ultimately execution, for the alleged crime of treason under the Ostrogothic King Theodoric the Great. Boethius was imprisoned due to treachery, and his experience of this injustice inspired him to question how evil can exist in a world overseen by God. His answer to the problem of evil relies heavily on natural philosophy and the Classical Greek tradition.
On the Consolation of Philosophy is written as a discourse between Philosophy, who appears in the form of a woman, and a man who is resentful of the cruelty of fate (Boethius). Lady Philosophy’s arguments, many of which are based on Neoplatonic and Stoic ideas, enable the man to achieve a measure of transcendence above his experience of suffering. In Book 4, excerpts of which appear below, Philosophy and Boethius discuss the nature of good and evil, with Philosophy offering several explanations for why evil exists and why the wicked can never attain true happiness.
BOOK 4
Prose 1
When Philosophy had sung these words, with a stately look and grave expression, and yet lightly and sweetly, I still had not utterly forgotten my inner sorrow. So, before she could speak further, I broke in saying, “Oh wayfinder of the true light, the things your voice has poured out so far are divine in themselves to contemplate and seem invincible from your proofs as well. And though my misery over injustice made the things you told me lapse from my memory, I did know them once before. But the one, chief reason for my sorrow is this: if a good ruler over all things does exist, how can evils exist at all, let alone escape unpunished? At the very least, I am sure you realize how fair it is to be amazed at this. But there is a greater problem on top of that; because while injustice dominates and flourishes, virtue not only goes unrewarded but is trodden underfoot by evildoers, and receives the punishments due to crimes. That these things can happen under the rule of God, who knows all, has power over all, but wills only good things—no one can wonder at it enough, or lament it.”
“Yes,” she replied, “it would be infinitely amazing, the most horrible monstrosity of all, if it were as you think. It would be as if in the well-ordered household of such a great father the basest vessels were polished for display, while the precious ones collected dust. But it is not so; for if we maintain our previous, unshakable conclusions, you will learn—with the help of the same creator whose rule we are now discussing—that the good are always powerful, but the evil always helpless and weak, that vices are never without punishment and virtues never without reward, and that felicity always comes to the good and misfortune always to the wicked. These and many truths like them will put your complaints to rest and strengthen you with sturdy confidence. Now, since you saw the form of true blessedness when I showed it to you, and learned also where it resides, I will go over every remaining step that I think you must be taught and show you the path that will carry you home. I will graft wings to your mind than can raise you on high, and so your perturbation will be banished, and you will return safe and sound to your fatherland. It will be by my guidance, along my path, and with me carrying you.”
Verse 1
“Wings of my own sail aloft through the sky,
rising on up to high heaven;
clothed in these wings the fleet mind will
shun looking downward and earthward,
rising above the high sphere of vast air
seeing the clouds fall behind it,
going high over the uppermost fire
burning above the swift aether
vaulting at last to the star-bearing houses,
joining its pathway to Phoebus,
or taking Saturn’s path, ancient and cold,
soldiering after bright Mars,
chasing perhaps a bright star in its sphere
decking the night sky with brilliance.
Once it is tired and worn through, it proceeds,
passing the outermost sphere
stepping across the swift aether, becoming
mistress of holiest light.
Here rules the king with his scepter in hand,
guiding the reigns of the cosmos
ruling, unmoving, the winged chariot,
judge of all things, ever brilliant.
Should your path carry you back to this place,
which now unremembering you seek,
I can tell you what words you will say: ‘Here is home,
here I was born, here my path ends.’
Then if you wish to look back on the world,
into the night left behind,
you’ll finally recognize furious tyrants,
feared by the wretches, as exiles.”
Prose 2
“How wonderful!” I replied, “You promise such great things, and I have no doubt you can make good. Only I beg you, now that you’ve waked my desire, don’t hesitate to go on.”
“In that case,” she said, “you should first learn that power is always present to good men, while the wicked are desolate of all strength. These things entail one another, for since good and evil are contraries, the proof that goodness contains power shows that evil contains weakness, while exposing the fragility of evil confirms the solidity of the good. So to prove the reliability of my opinion even more abundantly, I will proceed along each path—confirming my propositions first in the former way and then in the latter.
“Now any completion of human acts depends upon two things: will and power, because if either is missing, nothing can be accomplished. If the will is lacking, no one even attempts what he does not will, while if power is absent, the will is frustrated. That is why if you see someone failing to attain what he yearns for, then you know he lacks the power to get what he wants.”
“That is clear,” I said, “and undeniable.”
“But if you see he has accomplished what he wanted, do you doubt he had the power?”
“No.”
“Then insofar as anyone is able to succeed you must reckon him powerful, and insofar as he is unable you must reckon him weak.”
“I agree.”
“Now do you remember the conclusion of our earlier arguments, that every intention of the human will, however various the inclinations it pursues, hastens toward blessedness?”
“I remember that was also proven.”
“Do you recall that blessedness is the good itself, so that when blessedness is sought, it is the good that is desired in every case?”
“I do not even need to ‘re-call,’ since I hold it fixed in my memory.”
“So do all men then, good and bad alike, regardless of their distinct intentions, work to arrive at the good?
“That follows.”
“But it is certain that men become good by attaining the good?”
“Certain.”
“So then good men attain what they desire?”
“So it seems.”
“But if evil men attained what they desire, that is, the good, then they could not be evil?”
“Right.”
“Then if both seek the good, but only the first attains it, while the other does not, do you doubt that good men are actually powerful, while evil men are actually weak?”
“Whoever doubts that,” I said, “pays no attention to either the nature of the world or the outcome of arguments.”
“Then consider this case,” she said. “Suppose two men were given the same natural task, and one of them carried out that task by natural means, and did it perfectly, while the other was wholly unable to behave naturally. Instead of completing the task in accordance with nature, he imitated the one who did complete it. Which one would you consider the more powerful?
“I think I know what you are getting at, but I want to hear it more plainly.”
“You wouldn’t deny that walking is a natural motion for men?”
“No.”
“Or doubt that it is a natural task of the feet?”
“Certainly not.”
“If one person walks along, able to step with his feet, but another is deprived of his feet’s natural use and tries to walk using his hands, which of them can be fairly considered the more powerful?”
“Go on with your argument,” I said. “No one questions that someone who can perform a natural action is more powerful than one who cannot do the same thing.”
“But though the highest good is presented equally to good men and evil, only the good seek it by the natural work of the virtues. The evil try to gain the same thing by all manner of lust, which is not the natural means of attaining the good. Do you disagree?”
“No, because the conclusion is already plain. It follows from what I have granted that the good are indeed powerful, but the evil, by necessity, are weak.”
“Right,” she said, “you are running ahead of me. That is a sign physicians hope for that nature is being set right and fighting its disease. But since I see you are quick to understand, I will heap argument on argument. Look how great an infirmity appears in vicious men: they cannot even reach the end that their natural inclination leads them to, and almost compels them. Now what if they were deserted by this help of nature, so great and near-invincible, which guides them forward? Think too how great the weakness is that lays hold of wicked men. For the prizes they pursue, but fail to reach and grasp, are not petty and slight. What they fail in is almost the very peak and summit of all things. The wretched do not reach the one goal they strive for day and night. But this is just where the power of good men is eminent. For you would consider someone the strongest walker if he could walk with his feet all the way to where there was no place farther to go; even so, you must consider someone most powerful if he takes hold of the end of all desires, beyond which there is no more.
From this, the converse follows, that cursed men likewise seem to be deserted by all power. For why do they abandon virtue and go after vices? Isn’t it from ignorance of the good? But what is feebler than the blindness of ignorance? What if they do know what things they should pursue, but desire casts them down from the path? Then they are frail from their intemperance, since they cannot fight against vice. Do they knowingly and willingly abandon the good and turn to vices? But in that case, they not only cease to be powerful but cease to be altogether; for those who relinquish the common end of everything that exists cease thereby to be.
“To some, it would seem amazing indeed that we would say evil men—a large share of humanity—do not exist, but that is just how things are. Now I do not deny that evil people are evil. What I deny is that they exist, in a pure and simple sense. I the same way that you would say a corpse is a ‘dead man,’ but could not simply call it a ‘man,’ I would grant that vicious men ‘are evil,’ but I cannot admit that they ‘are,’ absolutely. This is because a thing exists if it keeps its place and preserves its nature, but whatever falls away from nature also forsakes its being, since being is situated within nature.
“‘But,’ you will say, ‘evil men can act.’ Now, I won’t deny that, but this ability of theirs does not stem from strength, but weakness. For they can do evil things, which they could scarcely do if they were able to keep performing good deeds. Their supposed ability manifests their inability. Because, as we just concluded, evil is nothing, the unjust can only do evil, and so they can do nothing.”
“That is apparent.”
“And to make sure you understand what the force of this ability is, we defined earlier that nothing is more powerful than the highest good.”
“Yes, indeed.”
“But that good cannot do evil.”
“None at all.” “Then is there,” she asked, “anyone who believes than men can do all things?”
“No one but a madman.”
“But they can do evil things?”
“If only they couldn’t!”
“Since he who can only do good things can do all things, while those who can also do evil cannot, it is evident that those who can do evil are less powerful. In addition, all power should be considered desirable, and we have shown that all desirable things are related to the good as a sort of capstone to their nature. But the possibility of committing crime can have no reference to the good, since it is undesirable. Yet every power is desirable. It follows from this that the possibility of performing evil deeds is not a power.
“For all these reasons, the power of good men and the indubitable weakness of evil men appears indeed, demonstrating that true saying of Plato: ‘Only the wise can achieve their desires; the wicked indeed labor at their pleasures, but cannot satisfy their wants.’ They do whatever pleases them, thinking to obtain a longed-for good by means of pleasures, but they do not achieve it at all, because lawless acts do not arrive at blessedness.”
Anicius Manlius Severinus Boethius, On the Consolation of Philosophy, trans. Søren Filipski.