Jihyun Oh

Seneca’s De ira consists of three books, structured around two interrelated axes: theory and therapy. From its opening words, “you’ve pressed me, Novatus, to prescribe a way of soothing anger,” it is clear that the treatise sets a therapeutic goal, offering theoretical insights only insofar as they support effective intervention. However, much existing analysis treats its three movements of anger – the theoretical climax of the treatise – as separate from De ira’s therapeutic axis. Therefore, this study analyzes the three movements within Seneca’s therapeutic framework. The non contumax (non-obstinate) will governs the second movement. This deliberative will contemplates but has not yet assented to the proposition ‘it is right for me to be avenged, since I have been injured.’ As assent to this false proposition triggers impulse at once, Seneca suggests the eradication of the second movement by intervening reason’s true judgment to displace the false one, thereby, preventing the outburst of anger. The other movements also relate to Seneca’s therapeutic goal. Although reason cannot intervene in the involuntary first movement, this stage can be weakened with habitual vigilance of anger’s earliest warning signs. The third movement, by contrast to the previous movements that precede emotion, is governed by contumax anger: once the proposition has been assented to, anger renders the conscience and the deliberative capacity of the non contumax will impotent and overthrows reason. The depiction of anger paralyzing the conscience demonstrates why the Stoics’ therapy of emotion necessarily assumed the form of ex ante intervention. Therefore, Seneca presents the three movements of anger not merely as theoretical knowledge detached from therapeutic consideration. Rather, he traces the non contumax will’s descent into obstinacy, and reveals why anger is a vice to be cured. In doing so, he identifies the subject of therapy that can intervene ex ante to prevent the surge of passion.