Dr. Angelos Sofocleous on Melancholia: Ancient Philosophy, Depression, and the Good Life

Dr. Angelos Sofocleous is a philosopher whose work examines depression, melancholia, and lived mental distress through phenomenology. He completed a BA in Philosophy and Psychology and an MA in Philosophy at Durham University, then earned a PhD in Philosophy from the University of York with a thesis on how depression alters interpersonal relationships and the experience of being in the world. His research addresses non-participant spectatorship, unhomelikeness, temporality, and mindfulness in depression. He has published in the Journal of Humanistic Psychology, including work on major depressive disorder and treatment. A 2025 journal article lists him as affiliated with the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens in Greece.

Scott Douglas Jacobsen interviews Dr. Angelos Sofocleous on how ancient philosophy and modern phenomenology illuminate depression, melancholia, and the pursuit of the good life. Sofocleous explains that ancient thinkers approached mental distress through introspection, environmental conditions, and practical reflection rather than diagnostic checklists. He contrasts humoral and spiritual explanations of melancholia with contemporary psychiatric models while emphasizing that suffering remains a universal human condition. The discussion highlights Aristotle’s empirical orientation, Zeno of Citium’s Stoic response to hardship, and the enduring value of philosophical traditions that help individuals interpret adversity, cultivate resilience, live more thoughtfully, and endure unavoidable suffering.

Scott Douglas Jacobsen: You have worked extensively on existentialism and depression, with a personal dimension informing your analysis. Ancient philosophers addressed similar phenomena without the modern diagnostic language we use today. They had greater scope for introspection but lacked advanced empirical tools and treatments.

How did philosophers who treated this subject seriously approach it? Given the same cognitive and emotional apparatus, what methods did they use? How does that compare to modern philosophers who incorporate contemporary psychiatry, diagnostic criteria, and clinical frameworks? The subjective experience remains, but the interpretive framework differs.

Dr. Angelos Sofocleous: My work on ancient philosophers includes empirical elements, including mental disorders. These thinkers relied on observation and explanation. They functioned as natural scientists. Aristotle, for example, examined why the Nile overflows in summer rather than in winter and why sounds at night appear more intense than during the day.

They analyzed everyday phenomena, offering either scientific or phenomenological explanations. Their accounts of melancholia emerged largely from introspection. Ancient philosophical traditions centred on the question of how to live a good life.

When thoughtful individuals address that question, they produce philosophical systems that can guide people toward better ways of living.

Jacobsen: When ancient thinkers discussed melancholia and similar states, how did they frame them in relation to the good life? Not necessarily as direct opposites, but as part of that broader picture. Do modern, empirically grounded understandings of these mental states provide a better framework for building a good life—or for asking better questions about it—given how many people experience depression or melancholy at some point?

Sofocleous: If we examine ancient explanations for melancholia, we find accounts that would now be considered pre-scientific. These include ideas about demonic possession or imbalances in bodily humours. The term “melancholia” itself derives from the Greek melaina chole, meaning “black bile,” reflecting humoral theory.

These accounts differ significantly from modern diagnostic models based on symptom criteria or neurochemical explanations. Ancient philosophers, in contrast, emphasized the broader conditions of a person’s life. Melancholia was often understood as connected to one’s environment, habits, and way of living.

This perspective encouraged individuals to ask reflective questions: What in my life is disordered? What causes distress or anxiety? The emphasis was not on identifying a checklist of symptoms but on examining one’s form of life. In that sense, depression was not reduced to biology alone but understood as emerging within a wider existential and social context.

Jacobsen: How did earlier philosophers—particularly within Greek traditions—approach responding to these states? Did they advocate enduring them, or did they offer practical guidance for addressing conditions such as melancholia?

Sofocleous: We know of approximately eighteen ancient Cypriot philosophers, although for many of them we have little more than their names. One figure of clear relevance here is Zeno of Citium, the founder of Stoicism. Stoicism emerged as a practical philosophy aimed at helping individuals address everyday difficulties, cultivate meaning, and live well. More than two millennia later, it remains influential and has been integrated into certain therapeutic approaches in recent years.

The Stoic position is not to dismiss suffering or advise resignation. Rather, it emphasizes that suffering is an inherent part of human life. No one is exempt from it. The task is neither to deny nor to be overwhelmed by suffering, but to recognize it as part of the human condition and to respond to it constructively.

Stoic thought encourages individuals to use adversity as an opportunity for development—for strengthening character and preparing for future challenges. A well-known anecdote, preserved by Diogenes Laertius, recounts that Zeno’s philosophical journey began after he lost his cargo in a shipwreck. Having been a merchant, this loss marked a turning point that led him to Athens, where he studied philosophy, including under Crates the Cynic.

From this perspective, when events beyond one’s control occur—such as illness, loss, or unexpected hardship—the response is not merely to dwell in distress, but to examine how the experience might be used to cultivate resilience, clarity, and a more grounded way of living.

Jacobsen: Thank you very much for the opportunity and your time, Angelos.

Scott Douglas Jacobsen is a blogger on Vocal with over 130 posts on the platform. He is the Founder and Publisher of In-Sight Publishing (ISBN: 978–1–0692343; 978–1–0673505) and Editor-in-Chief of In-Sight: Interviews (ISSN: 2369–6885). He writes for International Policy Digest (ISSN: 2332–9416), The Humanist (Print: ISSN, 0018–7399; Online: ISSN, 2163–3576), Basic Income Earth Network (UK Registered Charity 1177066), Humanist Perspectives (ISSN: 1719–6337), A Further Inquiry (SubStack), Vocal, Medium, The Good Men Project, The New Enlightenment Project, The Washington Outsider, rabble.ca, and other media. His bibliography index can be found via the Jacobsen Bank at In-Sight Publishing,, comprising more than 10,000 articles, interviews, and republications across more than 200 outlets. He has served in national and international leadership roles within humanist and media organizations, held several academic fellowships, and currently serves on several boards. He is a member in good standing in numerous media organizations, including the Canadian Association of Journalists, PEN Canada (CRA: 88916 2541 RR0001), Reporters Without Borders (SIREN: 343 684 221/SIRET: 343 684 221 00041/EIN: 20–0708028), and others.