Aulus Gellius, Attic Nights 9.5:
Various opinions of philosophers about the type and nature of pleasure; and some words of the philosopher Hierocles, with which he censured the ideas of Epicurus.
The ancient philosophers pronounced various opinions on pleasure. Epicurus sets pleasure down as the highest good, yet he defines it thus: a healthy condition of the flesh. Antisthenes the Socratic says that pleasure is the highest evil; for this is his opinion: I would rather lose my mind than feel pleasure. Speusippus and the old Academy say that pleasure and pain are two evils opposed between themselves, and the good is to be found between them. Zeno thought that pleasure was indifferent, that is neither good nor bad, which he called adiaphoron in Greek. Critolaus the Peripatetic says that pleasure is an evil and it brings forth many other evils from itself, such as carelessness, laziness, forgetfulness, idleness. Plato discoursed upon pleasure before all these guys so variously and with such comprehensiveness that all of those opinions, which I have placed above, appear to have flowed forth from the fountains of his writings. He uses each of these arguments as the nature of pleasure, which is manifold, suggests, and as is demanded by the reason of the causes which he is conducting and the things which he wishes to effect. But our man Taurus, whenever mention was made of Epicurus, always had these at the ready words of that serious holy man Hierocles the Stoic: Pleasure as the goal is a prostitute’s dogma; there is no foresight, nor a prostitute’s dogma.
V. Diversae nobilium philosophorum sententiae de genere ac natura voluptatis; verbaque Hieroclis philosophi, quibus decreta Epicuri insectatus est. De voluptate veteres philosophi diversas sententias dixerunt. Epicurus voluptatem summum bonum esse ponit; eam tamen ita definit: σαρκὸς εὐσταθὲς κατάστημα;. Antisthenes Socraticus summum malum dicit; eius namque hoc verbum est: μανείην μᾶλλον ἢ ἡσθείην. Speusippus vetusque omnis Academia voluptatem et dolorem duo mala esse dicunt opposita inter sese, bonum autem esse, quod utriusque medium foret. Zeno censuit voluptatem esse indifferens, id est neutrum, neque bonum neque malum, quod ipse Graeco vocabulo adiaphoron appellavit. Critolaus Peripateticus et malum esse voluptatem ait et multa alia mala parere ex sese, incurias, desidias, obliviones, ignavias. Plato ante hos omnis ita varie et multiformiter de voluptate disseruit, ut cunctae istae sententiae, quas supra posui, videantur ex sermonum eius fontibus profluxisse; nam proinde unaquaque utitur, ut et ipsius voluptatis natura fert, quae est multiplex, et causarum, quas tractat, rerumque, quas efficere vult, ratio desiderat. Taurus autem noster, quotiens facta mentio Epicuri erat, in ore atque in lingua habebat verba haec Hieroclis Stoici, viri sancti et gravis: ἡδονὴ τέλος, πόρνης δόγμα: οὐκ ἔστιν πρόνοια, οὐδὲ πόρνης δόγμα.