Summary Of Angel Of Philosophy And The Prisoner By Boethius

In an attempt to define true happiness, Boethius utilizes the discussion between the Angel of Philosophy and the Prisoner. The Angel carefully lies down her argument in the earlier chapters of Book III by listing the factors that men believe lead to happiness, such as wealth, honor, fame, power, and pleasure. She soon, however, refutes such ideas beginning with chapters three and four, in which she discusses how happiness is neither wealth nor high office. In order to carry out her points, the Angel sets a premise that self-sufficiency contributes largely to happiness. She contends that since those who are self-sufficient have no need to depend on others for help are able to satiate themselves on their own, they have less concerns and worries,
She sets her claim in motion as she asks the Prisoner, who was once wealthy, whether he was free of worries and anxieties. The Prisoner answers no, admitting that in no point was he worry-less, that the absence of things he desires and the presence of things he does not lead to such result. Upon hearing the Prisoner’s answer, the Angel insists that a rich man is not truly happy because he desires; that he desires due to the lack of something, the lacking state signifies insufficiency, and without self-sufficiency no true happiness exists. She expands this argument further as she mentions how those with money have to put effort into protecting and managing it, while those without money have no reason to do so, and thus require help from and grow dependent on others, which is also against the notion of self-sufficiency. According to the Angel, because people’s wants stem from greed instead of natural needs, wealth and riches simply make people deal with their wants easier, but by no means eliminate their wants, and actually increase the wants of their own, never able to result in complete satisfaction. Consequently, one who is unsatisfied is not self-sufficient, so one cannot reach true