Were Hand Gestures a Technique of Stoicism?

Hand Gestures in Stoicism

Were they a psychological technique?

Chrysippus Gesturing

Copyright (c) Donald Robertson, 2012.  All rights reserved.

[This is still a draft, using material I’m researching for my next book, so please feel free to comment or raise questions, and I may revise the content accordingly.]

The early Stoics reputedly said that “knowledge is the leading part of the soul in a certain state, just as the hand in a certain state is a fist” (Sextus in Inwood & Gerson, 2008, The Stoic Reader, p. 27).  This analogy between secure knowledge, having a firm grasp on an idea, and the physical act of clenching the fist seems to be a recurring theme in Stoic literature.

And Zeno used to make this point by using a gesture.  When he held out his hand with open fingers, he would say, “This is what a presentation is like.”  Then when he had closed his fingers a bit, he said, “Assent is like this.”  And when he had compressed it completely and made a fist, he said that this was grasping (and on the basis o f this comparison he even gave it the name ‘katalepsis’ [grasp], which had not previously existed).  But when he put his left hand over it and compressed it tightly and powerfully, he said that knowledge was this sort of thing and that no one except the wise man possessed it.  (Cicero in Inwood & Gerson, 2008, p. 47)

The sculpture of Chrysippus in the picture above, from the 3rd century BC, shows him holding his hand out with open fingers, in a similar posture.  So we have a series of four hand gestures:

  1. The hand is held open, at a distance, with palm upwards, to symbolise a superficial impression or “presentation”.
  2. The hand is closed loosely, to symbolise initial “assent” or agreement with the idea.
  3. The hand is squeezed tightly into a fist to symbolise a firm grasp (katalepsis) or sense of certainty.
  4. The fist is enclosed tightly in the other hand, to symbolise the perfect “knowledge” of true ideas attained by the ideal Sage, which is elsewhere described as an interconnection of firmly-grasped principles and ideas, forming the excellent character of the wise.

Marcus Aurelius explicitly refers to the Stoic clenching his fist as a metaphor for arming himself with his philosophical precepts or dogmata:

In our use of [Stoic] precepts [dogmata] we should imitate the boxer [pancratiast] not the swordsman [gladiator].  For the swordsman’s weapon is picked up and put down again.  However, the boxer always has his hands available.  All he has to do is clench his fist. (Meditations, 12.9)

For the Stoics it was important to memorise the precepts and integrate them completely with one’s character in order to have them always “ready-to-hand” in the face of adversity.  It’s possible that the physical act of literally clenching the fist, like a boxer, was used as a mnemonic to recall principles required in difficult situations.

It’s possible perhaps to construct a modern Stoic psychological exercise out of this symbolic set of hand gestures.  While repeating a precept of Stoicism (“the only good is moral good”, “pain is not an evil”) the Stoic student might initially hold his hand open as if toying with the idea and then progressively close it more tightly, while imagining accepting it more deeply, until he finally clenches his fist tightly to symbolise having a firm grasp of the idea, and closes his other hand around it, to symbolise integrating it more deeply with his character, and contemplating how the Sage might hold this belief.  This might be compared to the use of “autosuggestions” or rehearsing “rational coping statements” in modern psychological therapies.

There may also be an additional use, in relation to false or irrational ideas.  In the Enchiridion, Epictetus says that the first thing a Stoic should do when encountering a harsh (problematic) impression is to remind himself that it is merely an impression and not at all the thing it claims to represent.  This sounds very much like an important psychological strategy used in modern CBT and behaviour therapy, called “cognitive distancing” or “defusion”.  As it happens, Cicero says that the hand gesture demonstrated in the sculpture of Chrysippus above was used by Zeno and other Stoics to symbolise entertaining an idea, such as an “automatic negative thought”, in the form of a superficial “presentation” or impression.  Hence, a modern Stoic might make the same gesture when he notices an unhelpful or irrational thought occurring spontaneously, and entertain it a while longer, as if holding it loosely in an open hand, at a distance, while repeating “This is just an automatic thought, and not at all the thing it claims to represent” or “This is just a thought, not a fact”, etc.

We don’t know whether the set of symbolic hand gestures described by Zeno was meant originally as a psychological technique of this kind.  However, the quote from Marcus Aurelius above could perhaps be read, if taken very literally, as a description of an actual physical practice employed by Stoic students: clenching their fists to arm themselves, like a boxer, with their philosophical precepts (dogmata) in the face of adversity.

3 thoughts on “Were Hand Gestures a Technique of Stoicism?

  1. Very interesting examination of what I call, “the two-way street of cognition.” We are familiar with bodily postures and gestures being an ‘output’ of mental processes (‘body language’) but they are also ‘inputs’ into the mind (crudely oversimplifying for the moment.) There are well-known experiments and techniques around using deliberately constructed facial expressions to engender certain mental states – e.g. put a pencil in your mouth horizontally, so you are forced to ‘smile’ as you go about a task and you will feel much happier about doing it – see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facial_feedback_hypothesis. Therefore, it makes sense that if we force our hands into certain gestures that the mental pathways that lead to specific cognitive states may be stimulated or at least made more likely. Great stuff!

  2. Yes, this is a very old concept. It’s similar to the famous James-Lange theory of emotion but was also explicitly described several decades earlier as the “reciprocal interaction” between muscular action and subjective experience by James Braid, the founder of hypnotism. It’s possible the Stoics had that in mind, although they may simply have meant that gestures can be used to symbolise cognitions and evoke them in that manner, which I think would be slightly different from the “facial feedback hypothesis” or James-Lange theory of emotion, that you’re alluding to.

  3. Contrary to popular or misguided opinion. W. James did not have a theory of (adult) emotion. He explicitly states in his book ‘The Principles of Psychology’ that he was against a theory of the emotions. What W. James developed was a theory of Darwinian instincts and impulses (in the chapter just before his chapter on the emotions) which are present in all animals (carrying an object to the mouth; biting; clasping; fighting; imitation; locomotion; vocalization; the hunting instinct; anger; sympathy; jealousy; love and a lot lot more). Emotions, for W. James, involved a complex mixture of instincts and impusles which is why he was opposed to a theory of adult emotions (there would be so many). Adult anger may involve a complex mix of clasping, locomotion, imitation for example. Or, if you are Luis Suarez, ‘biting’ http://www.bahaistudies.net/asma/principlesofpsychology.pdf

What do you think?

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s