We will apparently be dealing with the Stoics today.
Stoicism. The Stoics included people like Zeno of Citium and Marcus Aurelius. Stoics held that the good was not in avoiding pain, but in being indifferent to pain. They believed that all events in the world, including human action, were ordained by a reasonable and good Logos, and that therefore enduring pain was proper, as pain was also ordained by the Logos. Since the Logos was all good, and everything came from the Logos, nothing was not good. Anything perceived as not-good results from an error in judgment on the observer’s part. The Logos was not, apparently, an anthropomorphic deity or even necessarily an entity; Logos, the word, literally means “Word”. Problems with Stoicism: Denial of the existence of evil is problematic. Free Will is a problematic concept under Stoicism, as the Logos causes everything in the universe, including human choices.
Hedonism. The Hedonists held that the good life was the one containing the maximum amount of pleasure for the longest duration. This is a contrast with the Epicureans who thought you should simply avoid pain. Like Epicureanism, however, Hedonism identifies The Good with a physical state. Hedonists believe that something is Good insofar as it gives pleasure. Hedonism has theoretical difficulties. First, on the basis of the hedonist principles, no action which produces pleasure can be immoral. Second, given the identification of The Good with Pleasure, the Hedonist has no means of judging between the pleasures and pains of other people. Third, it is difficult to balance the demands of immediate and potential pleasure. Pleasure can be heightened by periods without pleasure; likewise, protracted pleasure can become less pleasurable or even painful. Therefore, to pursue the most good, one may have to also pursue things which are not good. Hedonism and Epicureanism are philosophically connected with Utilitarianism, which tries to correct their atemporality and egocentrism.