The unfortunate story of Actaeon, as recorded by Ovid, unfolds as follows: As the sun nears its peak on a warm day, Actaeon calls a halt to his hunting party, using the break to wander through an unknown area of the forest. During his exploration, he stumbles across the hunting goddess Diana naked. As punishment for what Actaeon has seen, Diana transforms him into a stag and wills him away into the forest. Soon after his hunting dogs catch his new scent and unknowingly kill their previous owner, thus completing the punishment of the goddess. Preceding this account, Ovid claims that “destiny was to blame for Actaeon’s misfortunes, not any guilt on his own part.” In other words, Ovid’s interpretation of blame is that Actaeon is free of guilt
…show more content…
According to Xunzi, “‘inborn nature’ embraces what is spontaneous from Nature, what cannot be learned, and what requires no application to master.” These qualities correspond with the curiosity of man. Ascribing to Xunzi’s theory that the natural character of curiosity is evil, Actaeon is undoubtedly to blame for Diana’s punishment for him. In accordance with Xunzi’s theories, man is at fault for allowing his desires to control him, which Actaeon does. Xunzi argued that while humans are born in the state of being evil, they have the capability through education to strive to fulfill their desire for good. Therefore, because Actaeon allows curiosity, his natural evil state, to control his decisions, he is accountable for his own death. Actaeon’s transformation and resulting death are not caused by destiny but by his curiosity. The definition of curiosity is determined as the innate human desire to learn. Ovid’s writing indicates that this quality is evident in Actaeon before his encounter with Diana. Using Xunzi’s philosophy, it was also concluded that Actaeon’s curiosity could have been overcome. Combining these arguments, it is evident that Actaeon could have prevented the evil that results from his curiosity and because he does not, he is not innocent as Ovid
According to Xunzi, “‘inborn nature’ embraces what is spontaneous from Nature, what cannot be learned, and what requires no application to master.” These qualities correspond with the curiosity of man. Ascribing to Xunzi’s theory that the natural character of curiosity is evil, Actaeon is undoubtedly to blame for Diana’s punishment for him. In accordance with Xunzi’s theories, man is at fault for allowing his desires to control him, which Actaeon does. Xunzi argued that while humans are born in the state of being evil, they have the capability through education to strive to fulfill their desire for good. Therefore, because Actaeon allows curiosity, his natural evil state, to control his decisions, he is accountable for his own death. Actaeon’s transformation and resulting death are not caused by destiny but by his curiosity. The definition of curiosity is determined as the innate human desire to learn. Ovid’s writing indicates that this quality is evident in Actaeon before his encounter with Diana. Using Xunzi’s philosophy, it was also concluded that Actaeon’s curiosity could have been overcome. Combining these arguments, it is evident that Actaeon could have prevented the evil that results from his curiosity and because he does not, he is not innocent as Ovid