This paper examines the profound influence of afterlife beliefs on psychological ideals in ancient Greece between 3000 and 323 BC. It traces the evolution of Greek concepts of the afterlife from the Bronze Age warrior culture—where heroic deeds alone secured entry to Hades—through the democratic reforms of the Archaic period and into the Classical era. The paper demonstrates how the development of the phalanx democratized access to glory and virtue, while the emergence of early scientific thought and philosophical systems, particularly those of Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle, fundamentally reshaped Greek understanding of mortality and human purpose. The author argues that beliefs about the afterlife have been more psychologically influential than scientific advancement in shaping how individuals develop their ideals and conduct their lives.
Throughout the history of human existence, perceptions of the afterlife have influenced the psychological ideals of people from ancient through modern times. Some may argue that science has been the most influential in shaping our human lives, but this claim cannot be entirely accurate. Science study and applicability are in their infancy compared to the beginnings of human life. Science has only recently become a normal part of everyday life when considering the much older timeline of human history. Ideas about the afterlife have influenced the psychological ideals of societies as a whole as well as the individual lives of people living in them. Perceptions of the afterlife were especially influential during the Bronze Age through the Classical Period in ancient Greece.
The Greek men of the Bronze Age saw themselves as warriors before anything else. The ancient Greeks did not have the similar perceptions of heaven and hell as many people do today. Today, a common view of the afterlife is that a pleasant one can be attained by leading a life of good moral standings. Conversely, living an immoral life will lead to an unpleasant experience in the afterlife. The ancient Greeks were not as simplistic with respect to the existence of heaven and hell, or concepts of good and bad. To them, a pleasant afterlife was attainable only through glory and exceptional deeds.
In the Iliad, Achilles encapsulates this worldview when he says, "If I stay and battle Troy my fate is surely sealed, but my glory will live on forever. If I leave to return to my home, I will lose my pride and my glory will cease to exist." This passage embodies the way Greeks truly viewed their actions with respect to achieving a pleasant afterlife. To the ancient Greeks, a warrior's true worth was measured by his lot of heroic deeds. A warrior known for his heroic deeds would live on forever in the stories of others. A warrior without heroic acts leaves no legacy when he dies.
The ancient Greeks added some caveats to their theory on reaching an extravagant afterlife. A pleasant afterlife was not attainable for all men equally. Only the fittest of free men were afforded the chance to enter the good afterlife. As one scholar notes, "Hades is the god of the underworld... only the strongest and most impressive of men could live in Hades." Women, slaves, and the poor did not possess the virtue necessary to achieve the afterlife in any form. The bodies of fallen warriors, often with their wounds in place, could travel to Hades. This was a less literal life after death than simply being remembered through stories after death.
The Bronze Age Greeks did not believe in an immortal soul that continues to live even after the body has perished. According to their belief, the men who would go on to Hades would do so in a zombie-like form—essentially a shell of a body without feeling, thoughts, and speech, and even incapable of normal functioning. Such entities lacked the necessary inner functions that make a man distinct in real life. To make it into the afterlife, a proper burial was needed. This essentially excluded young children, young adults, and the elderly. Only the most worthy of free men were afforded this ceremonial observance.
The warriors of the Bronze Age fought every battle individually, as only their actions could secure a place in the afterlife. The size of the fight was irrelevant to the warrior, as he was fighting for his glory, which no other warrior could assist him in obtaining. In simple terms, Bronze Age battles were fought one-on-one and resulted in one victor claiming the glory. This early form of battle was a spectator event watched by thousands and was significant to the warrior because it was a sure way to obtain greatness in life and the afterlife. Warriors were dressed in expensive armor and would enter the battle by chariot. One could argue that the warrior ethos of the Greeks was so powerful that when the style and mechanics of battle changed during the Archaic age, so too changed the concept of the afterlife.
The development and use of the phalanx in battle fundamentally altered the traditional perception of the afterlife. In the phalanx, soldiers were lightly armored, carried primitive long pikes, and were capable of making tremendous strides by fighting as a group rather than individually. With this one invention, and the development of the polis, the aristocrats lost their monopoly on glory in battle, prowess in political office, and their place as the sole possible occupiers of the afterlife. "The polis made it possible for any citizen, not just the wealthy aristocrats, to achieve arête." Though glory was still sought, it was now sought for the benefit and pride of all citizens, and many more citizens were now able to achieve warrior virtue (and the warrior's afterlife) who were unable to before.
It would still be a long time before women, children, the disabled (from birth), and the elderly would be able to live on in some way after death. However, this evening out of access to power led to an evening out of wealth and temperance on excessive actions. One could argue that trying not to do anything in excess was the first step toward self-monitoring and intrinsic morality. As well, opening up the afterlife to more individuals was the first step toward the afterlife being available to all individuals. The promise of a pleasant afterlife as a reward to those who had lived morally in their actual lives would (and certainly still does) serve as an extrinsic motivator to those who lack sufficient intrinsic motivation to live morally.
Now that more people were involved in making Greece powerful, more people were allowed to offer their opinion, though still not women. This, roughly, was the beginning of their democracy and their science. People were now allowed to disagree with certain ideas, or at the very least attempt to add to them. As one early philosopher stated, "This is how I view things—how I believe things are. Try to improve my teaching." Laws were written down so that they protected the poor and the rich alike, though de facto still excluding many. The main intellectual gain during this era came through the philosophers.
Through Atomism, early thinkers began to look at what humans were made of. Whether they guessed that the common denominator was water, fire, or large ideas about the smallest imaginable pieces was not important. The key idea was that humans could discover secrets to their creation and that these secrets did not need to contain elaborate stories about the lives of gods. In short, the answers human beings needed could be found without religion. This was the break-away point between science and the stories that make up religion.
Xenophanes of Colophon pointed out the human characteristics of the gods, and Pythagoras of Samos created the concept of proof as a reason to believe a claim or a connection between ideas. This came at a time when a person of political power within a community could still sentence someone to death by saying one or more gods had left him (and it was always a him) some manner of instructions to do so. This made the afterlife in general a more pleasing goal, as the gods that lived there could no longer be seen as cruel for no reason.
Two important theoretical ideas would emerge from this time of early scientific discovery and would have implications to this day, aiding people who want to hold onto the idea that their religion exists and that the afterlife is achievable. First, Parmenides of Elea would posit that everything is unchanging and that all that is meant to be will be and is unchangeable. People who believed in a creator then, as well as those who do today, take this philosophy in hand when they say common phrases such as "Everything happens for a reason" and "Everything in God's time." Though Parmenides was not talking about a creator but rather a foundational principle of the universe, many religious people from his time to modern times unknowingly use his principle as one of their own personal proofs that a creator exists.
A second, and obviously counter, idea from this time is that of Heraclitus. He stated that everything is, in fact, always changing. Heraclitus believed you could never put your foot in the same river twice. The idea that everything is constantly changing would serve as an anthem of sorts to atheists, both then and now, who cannot believe in predetermination of events as they do not believe in a being who can or would predetermine. One could argue that the idea of things always changing is disconcerting or frightening, and this fear throughout time has caused people to seek the comfort of major religions. No matter what one's personal beliefs are, the power of these early thoughts—neither of which was made in reference to religion—to influence people's personal quests to find meaning is undeniable.
Atheism, as it was alluded to before, centers on the belief that there is no God. Many atheists might also say their philosophy rests on the belief in personal responsibility. More specifically, atheism involves the idea that a life should be lived justly and morally because it is the best option for the human race, not because of an extrinsic motivation of a reward at the end of life. The birth of science and the separation of it from religion initially fostered hedonism. Hedonism, at its base, is the pursuit of pleasure operating concurrent with the avoidance of pain. This erupted as a possibility around the same time as the theories of Parmenides and Heraclitus, and like the theories created by them, people adopted it into a total way of being.
Democritus of Abdera viewed hedonism as a natural outcome of a materialistic mindset and denying God's existence. As Greece moved from the Archaic Age to the Classical period, this was more common as pleasure was associated with material things. Hedonism is essentially an atheistic lifestyle without inherent morality. Seeing as these people had associated the existence of a God or even multiple gods with tyranny and oppression, the idea that an omnipotent or oppressive judge is not reality seemed liberating. On the other hand, the body and all the pleasure that can be derived through free will most certainly exist. Though hedonism certainly still exists today, society's current laws make many hedonistic behaviors impossible without repercussion. Still, the idea that the initial form of hedonism ever existed in a functioning society shows the profound effect that the idea of a new religion had on Greek society.
"Three thinkers reshape virtue, heaven, and the soul"
"Existential meaning-making and identity formation"
You’re 56% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 2 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.