Bedarf die Politik im Rom der Divination? : Untersuchungen zur Existenz der Gottheit in De divinatione Ciceros

Abstract

In his book De divinatione, while Cicero adopts a stance that denies the existence of divinitas (divinity) in divination, Quintus adopts one that acknowledges it. In many of Cicero 's dialogues, one Epicurean interlocutor represents Cicero's stance (i.e., denial of the existence of divinity). Für example, in De natura deorum, Velleius, who represents Epicurean thüught, adopts a stance that denies the divinity of nature and existence of gods (he is criticized by Cotta, according to whom Velleius' affirmation is merely a facade; it is not something he genuinely believes in). It is also significant that while Cicero denies the existence of divinitas in divination, he acknowledges it in De legibus. Does Cicero really deny the existence of divination based on divinity or providence in De divinatione? It is interesting to consider the intentions behind his vehement denial of divination in De divinatione, which is the focus of this paper. This paper assumes that Cicero does not genuinely deny the existence of divinity, but deliberately plays the role of doing so in order to emphasize the point that it is egoistic on the part of modern politicians to exploit religious ceremonies, which are performed independent of the will of the gods. Although this is not conveyed directly by Cicero, it can be deduced through his arguments with Quintus in De divinatione.