seanius's review against another edition
4.0
A substantial body of the teachings of Epictetus, mostly as recorded by his student Arrian. A challenging read in form, in content and in tone (Epictetus was an outspoken and very direct teacher - during the reading of this text, you will often be addressed with such honours as ‘wretch’, ‘slave’, 'fool' and ‘idiot’! The Greek 'Moron' also makes an appearance). The Fragments and Handbook are more digestible in size if not in content, although unfortunately they appear at the end of the book, after the lengthy and repetitive Discourses.
Epictetus' Stoic teachings seem more severe than the later Seneca, perhaps because Seneca was wealthy and powerful and thus compromised in his ideals - but perhaps also because Seneca was a practical Roman and not an idealistic Greek. Marcus Aurelius on other hand, could almost be seen as a posthumous student of Epictetus, humbly attempting to apply his doctrine of self restraint. Other writers influenced by Epictetus are too numerous to mention here.
At the risk of hubris, yet with the intention of improving my own understanding, I will try to summarise what I learned from this book. Epictetus’ main teaching seems to be to know what is within one’s power and what is not, and then think and act accordingly, whilst still respecting social norms and relationships. What we have in our control is small but powerful: whether to assent to impressions (“how important is this?”), what judgements or thoughts to host about those impressions, and then how to act according to those judgements. All else are externals, even the body. This seems an extreme position to take, and even Epictetus does not pretend to have fully succeeded in practicing this way of life, or even to know of such a person, except perhaps Socrates or Cato or such heroes of old, who lived and died by their word.
There appear to be some overlaps with Buddhist philosophy: avoiding attachment to externals or temporary phenomena such as social status or love or possessions or relationships. Also the recommendations to exercise restraint in passion and consumption, and care in thoughts and what one pays attention and importance to. However, Epictetus does not give much attention to meditation as a practice, nor the focus on the breath nor the practice of yoking the body (‘yoga’) - this is something missing from Stoicism - there is an over emphasis on Reason and the conscious mind, with a neglect of the wisdom of the body. This is a classic error, repeated later by Descartes, of separating mind from body, when any human that has experienced intense pain or ecstasy cannot deny they are an embodied mind.
Another weakness of the Stoic approach to life is its apparent dedication to poverty, mediocrity and a kind of lifeless, disengaged and sterile way of life (perhaps this too could be said of Buddhism?). When I read the great mad romantic Nietzsche, there is a kind of honest fire there burning: free expression of the individual, both good and bad, and a healthy redefinition of the good as being strong and successful in life - this kind of life-affirming energy seems to have a vitality and potency that Stoicism lacks. Of course, Nietzsche's teachings have their own weaknesses, the most apparent being the lack of friendship or compassion - the results of which can be seen in any history of the 20th Century (though perhaps this was his accurate Vision and not his Desire?).
A weakness of the book itself is that it does not give much space to critical analysis of the philosophy, whilst there is much commentary on the little we know of Epictetus and the origins of the texts. Classic criticisms of this severe Stoicism are several and perhaps more useful than such biographical speculations. These classic critiques include: its apparent heartlessness (for example when dealing with the grief of others), its impracticality (even Epictetus describes aims rather than achievable goals) and, perhaps unfairly given the aforementioned qualification, its apparent hypocrisy (although this criticism seems more easily leveled in Seneca’s direction, the wealthy slave and land owner, than that of Epictetus, the simple-living teacher in exile).
However, perhaps a full discussion of Epictetus’s teachings of Stoic philosophy are beyond the scope or intention of this book - and require further reading, thinking and discussion in itself.
Essential reading for anyone interested in Stoic philosophy.
Epictetus' Stoic teachings seem more severe than the later Seneca, perhaps because Seneca was wealthy and powerful and thus compromised in his ideals - but perhaps also because Seneca was a practical Roman and not an idealistic Greek. Marcus Aurelius on other hand, could almost be seen as a posthumous student of Epictetus, humbly attempting to apply his doctrine of self restraint. Other writers influenced by Epictetus are too numerous to mention here.
At the risk of hubris, yet with the intention of improving my own understanding, I will try to summarise what I learned from this book. Epictetus’ main teaching seems to be to know what is within one’s power and what is not, and then think and act accordingly, whilst still respecting social norms and relationships. What we have in our control is small but powerful: whether to assent to impressions (“how important is this?”), what judgements or thoughts to host about those impressions, and then how to act according to those judgements. All else are externals, even the body. This seems an extreme position to take, and even Epictetus does not pretend to have fully succeeded in practicing this way of life, or even to know of such a person, except perhaps Socrates or Cato or such heroes of old, who lived and died by their word.
There appear to be some overlaps with Buddhist philosophy: avoiding attachment to externals or temporary phenomena such as social status or love or possessions or relationships. Also the recommendations to exercise restraint in passion and consumption, and care in thoughts and what one pays attention and importance to. However, Epictetus does not give much attention to meditation as a practice, nor the focus on the breath nor the practice of yoking the body (‘yoga’) - this is something missing from Stoicism - there is an over emphasis on Reason and the conscious mind, with a neglect of the wisdom of the body. This is a classic error, repeated later by Descartes, of separating mind from body, when any human that has experienced intense pain or ecstasy cannot deny they are an embodied mind.
Another weakness of the Stoic approach to life is its apparent dedication to poverty, mediocrity and a kind of lifeless, disengaged and sterile way of life (perhaps this too could be said of Buddhism?). When I read the great mad romantic Nietzsche, there is a kind of honest fire there burning: free expression of the individual, both good and bad, and a healthy redefinition of the good as being strong and successful in life - this kind of life-affirming energy seems to have a vitality and potency that Stoicism lacks. Of course, Nietzsche's teachings have their own weaknesses, the most apparent being the lack of friendship or compassion - the results of which can be seen in any history of the 20th Century (though perhaps this was his accurate Vision and not his Desire?).
A weakness of the book itself is that it does not give much space to critical analysis of the philosophy, whilst there is much commentary on the little we know of Epictetus and the origins of the texts. Classic criticisms of this severe Stoicism are several and perhaps more useful than such biographical speculations. These classic critiques include: its apparent heartlessness (for example when dealing with the grief of others), its impracticality (even Epictetus describes aims rather than achievable goals) and, perhaps unfairly given the aforementioned qualification, its apparent hypocrisy (although this criticism seems more easily leveled in Seneca’s direction, the wealthy slave and land owner, than that of Epictetus, the simple-living teacher in exile).
However, perhaps a full discussion of Epictetus’s teachings of Stoic philosophy are beyond the scope or intention of this book - and require further reading, thinking and discussion in itself.
Essential reading for anyone interested in Stoic philosophy.
katietran96's review against another edition
4.0
I think the "Handbook" section should have been presented first and before the Discourses and Fragments. In this edition, "Handbook" is presented last. "Handbook" introduces Epictetus' idea of "sphere of choice" and what is inside and outside of our "sphere of choice." The idea that we should only focus our efforts on what is inside our sphere of choice and that we ought to train ourselves to be indifferent to what is outside our sphere of choice is repeated throughout the Discourses and Fragments, so it would have been nice to have some sort of an introduction to this concept beforehand. The Handbook has a brief description of what Epictetus means by sphere of choice, so I just think, to make this work more accessible to readers, that "Handbook" ought to have been placed first. But just my opinion.
georgewhatup's review against another edition
5.0
Extremely repetitive but I think that's kinda the point. Still not sure I get it.
I'm more of a Peripatetic myself.
I'm more of a Peripatetic myself.
bamacpherspn's review against another edition
challenging
informative
inspiring
reflective
slow-paced
4.0
biofaust's review against another edition
5.0
It took me 6 months to read this book in its entirety, mostly because I am a slow reader who has been tackling other texts in the meantime, but I would actually recommend to read this and other Stoic texts in this way, making them a presence in one's life.
Actually the most famous portion of these texts is the Enchiridion, which translates as "ready at hand" and it is, in my opinion what one should read first, not only in this book, but of all ancient Stoic texts and possibly as second only to Massimo Pigliucci's "How to be a Stoic" which serves as a proper introduction for beginners in Stoicism and practical philosophy.
And practical philosophy is really the main theme of the book and something that apparently Epictetus focused a lot on in his teachings (and not surprisingly, given what we can still read of his own teacher Musonius Rufus). In his words, one is not to be considered a philosopher only for talking about philosophy or for being able to argument and discuss paradoxes and other logical tricks, but first and foremost for applying even just the simplest rules of philosophy in one's own life.
The translation is very good and fluid even for a non-native speaker of English like me and the edition contains an Index of Themes at the end which, after this first reading, will surely prove itself useful in turning this book into a reference.
A must read indeed and, for those coming into Stoicism, a much better first one than the much more "hyped" Marcus Aurelius.
Actually the most famous portion of these texts is the Enchiridion, which translates as "ready at hand" and it is, in my opinion what one should read first, not only in this book, but of all ancient Stoic texts and possibly as second only to Massimo Pigliucci's "How to be a Stoic" which serves as a proper introduction for beginners in Stoicism and practical philosophy.
And practical philosophy is really the main theme of the book and something that apparently Epictetus focused a lot on in his teachings (and not surprisingly, given what we can still read of his own teacher Musonius Rufus). In his words, one is not to be considered a philosopher only for talking about philosophy or for being able to argument and discuss paradoxes and other logical tricks, but first and foremost for applying even just the simplest rules of philosophy in one's own life.
The translation is very good and fluid even for a non-native speaker of English like me and the edition contains an Index of Themes at the end which, after this first reading, will surely prove itself useful in turning this book into a reference.
A must read indeed and, for those coming into Stoicism, a much better first one than the much more "hyped" Marcus Aurelius.
papi's review against another edition
5.0
The Enchiridion (translated as manual or handbook) of Epictetus (Epic-tee-tus) is worth many readings. Even more, it is worth thinking about and translating into action. This is from the Robin Hard translation, and is only from The Enchiridion, not from the other discourses and fragments of his writings. A few thoughts from my most recent reading:
Some things are within our power to control, others are not, and (as Donald Robertson suggest) some are only partially within our control.
To achieve great things, you must not only exert great effort, but you must also renounce many things, and postpone others for the present.
Practice recognizing and acknowledging that every disagreeable impression is, in fact, just an impression, and may well not be what it appears to be. Then examine it and test its veracity.
It isn’t the thing themselves that disturb people, but the judgments that they form about them.
Thus, whenever I react to something with strong emotion, recognize the judgment from which that emotion arises, and that the emotion is mine because the judgment is mine.
Everyone is subject to anyone who has power over what he wants or doesn’t want. If you want to be free, then you need to neither want nor seek to avoid anything that is under the control of others. Otherwise you are in some degree a slave to that person.
This doesn’t mean that you can’t enjoy the good things of life, only that to you they should be “preferred indifferents” – things to which I am indifferent, but that I prefer over things that are “dispreferred indifferents.” Either way, I should strive to be indifferent to their presence or absence in my life. There are much more important things to do and to think about.
If someone handed over your body to somebody whom you encountered, you’d be furious; but that you hand over your mind to anyone who comes along, so that, if he abuses you, it becomes disturbed and confused, do you feel no shame at that?
For where a person’s interest lies, there too lies his piety. Sounds a lot like Matthew 6:21: For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.
So, approach [God] with confidence, as your adviser, and afterwards, when some advice has been granted to you, remember who it is that you have taken as your adviser, and whom you will be disregarding if you disobey...
Resort to divination as Socrates thought right, in matters in which the enquiry relates exclusively to the outcome, and where neither reason nor any technical knowledge provides the means that are required to discover the point in question
The Stoics argued that we should focus our thoughts and efforts only on things within our control, and outcomes are usually not in our control. Yet, here Epictetus is suggesting that where reason and technical knowledge fail us, and the focus is on an outcome, we should appeal to God for further insight or understanding. Again, this sounds remarkably consistent with the gospel!
Truth in action as well as in words: When you’ve decided that you ought to do something and are doing it, never try to avoid being seen to do it, even if most people will probably view it with disapproval; for if it isn’t right to do it, avoid doing it in the first place, but if it is, why be afraid of those who’ll reproach you without justification?
Someone takes his bath in a hurry; don’t say that he bathes badly, but that he does so in a hurry. In other words, don’t confuse facts with value judgments.
So you should think fit from this moment to live as an adult and as one who is making progress; and let everything that seems best to you be an inviolable law for you. And if you come up against anything that requires an effort, or is pleasant, or is glorious or inglorious, remember...that there is no possibility of further delay, and that it depends on a single day and single action whether progress is to be lost or secured.
Don’t waste the days, hours, or minutes available to you. The time to act is now!
Some things are within our power to control, others are not, and (as Donald Robertson suggest) some are only partially within our control.
1. Within my control: Opinion, motivation, desire, aversion, whatever is of my own doing.
2. Partially in my control: Performance, behavior, achievement, etc.
3. Outside my control: Property, reputation, office, whatever is exclusively the thought or action of another person.
To achieve great things, you must not only exert great effort, but you must also renounce many things, and postpone others for the present.
Practice recognizing and acknowledging that every disagreeable impression is, in fact, just an impression, and may well not be what it appears to be. Then examine it and test its veracity.
It isn’t the thing themselves that disturb people, but the judgments that they form about them.
Thus, whenever I react to something with strong emotion, recognize the judgment from which that emotion arises, and that the emotion is mine because the judgment is mine.
Everyone is subject to anyone who has power over what he wants or doesn’t want. If you want to be free, then you need to neither want nor seek to avoid anything that is under the control of others. Otherwise you are in some degree a slave to that person.
This doesn’t mean that you can’t enjoy the good things of life, only that to you they should be “preferred indifferents” – things to which I am indifferent, but that I prefer over things that are “dispreferred indifferents.” Either way, I should strive to be indifferent to their presence or absence in my life. There are much more important things to do and to think about.
If someone handed over your body to somebody whom you encountered, you’d be furious; but that you hand over your mind to anyone who comes along, so that, if he abuses you, it becomes disturbed and confused, do you feel no shame at that?
For where a person’s interest lies, there too lies his piety. Sounds a lot like Matthew 6:21: For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.
So, approach [God] with confidence, as your adviser, and afterwards, when some advice has been granted to you, remember who it is that you have taken as your adviser, and whom you will be disregarding if you disobey...
Resort to divination as Socrates thought right, in matters in which the enquiry relates exclusively to the outcome, and where neither reason nor any technical knowledge provides the means that are required to discover the point in question
The Stoics argued that we should focus our thoughts and efforts only on things within our control, and outcomes are usually not in our control. Yet, here Epictetus is suggesting that where reason and technical knowledge fail us, and the focus is on an outcome, we should appeal to God for further insight or understanding. Again, this sounds remarkably consistent with the gospel!
Truth in action as well as in words: When you’ve decided that you ought to do something and are doing it, never try to avoid being seen to do it, even if most people will probably view it with disapproval; for if it isn’t right to do it, avoid doing it in the first place, but if it is, why be afraid of those who’ll reproach you without justification?
Someone takes his bath in a hurry; don’t say that he bathes badly, but that he does so in a hurry. In other words, don’t confuse facts with value judgments.
So you should think fit from this moment to live as an adult and as one who is making progress; and let everything that seems best to you be an inviolable law for you. And if you come up against anything that requires an effort, or is pleasant, or is glorious or inglorious, remember...that there is no possibility of further delay, and that it depends on a single day and single action whether progress is to be lost or secured.
Don’t waste the days, hours, or minutes available to you. The time to act is now!