​

This paper compares the way Aristotle and the Stoic philosopher Chrysippus conceptualized emotions. Framed in this way, the topic reflects the problematic nature of “emotions” through two antithetical perspectives: that of Chrysippus, who regarded them as negative, harmful to virtue and wisdom, and as corrupt judgements detrimental to our prospects and well-being; and that of fairness and balance articulated by Aristotle, who advocated their practical and social role. This study presents and evaluates the arguments and positions that elucidate each philosopher’s conception of emotions, both in terms of their nature and their relationship to human agency within the external world. To this end, it adopts first an analytical-descriptive methodology to interpret the philosophical stance of both thinkers; and second, a critical comparison, which accords Aristotle a distinct status, in view of the scientific framework he applied to the study of emotions.​