Epictitus Case

In chapter 8, Epictetus raises what I believe to be a valid concern. He states earlier in the book that it is not the study of philosophy that makes us more virtuous, but that we must work within ourselves to achieve this. "The man who has read the great philosophers believes himself to be virtuous. But what of it? I want to see how he applies his learnings to see his virtue." Or something to that extent. Also, both Epictetus and Aristotle argue for the good of reason in many ways at many different times. Here, however, Epictetus says that while reason is among the greatest of goods, being intelligent has no correlation with being virtuous. He believes that the power of reason is great, but that its study is inferior to that of gaining virtue. Reason he says, is a powerful tool, one too powerful to be in the unskilled hands of the un-virtuous. He goes further to say that most smart people, especially younger ones, are vain because of their intelligence. He next is presented be the argument that the majority of the great philosophers have also been known to be of high intellect as well. He says that assuming a philosopher (as someone with high virtue), is then necessarily smart, would be just like assuming that because Plato was handsome, so must every philosopher. He says that this argument confuses two random traits found in one person as being dependent upon one another. He ends by saying he doesn't reject the faculty of reason because of this and still holds it in high regard. I would agree with this train of thought completely. Most of the more virtuous persons I know, with a few exceptions of course, aren't of very high intelligence. Not that I don't respect them or love them for it, because I do. I do feel though, that while virtue can be refined through knowledge in the especially virtuous person, in most in is mainly challenged by knowledge. Or perhaps not knowledge, but open-mindedness, though the two more often than not come together.