What do you think?
Rate this book
Dialogues and Essays
'No man is crushed by misfortune unless he has first been deceived by prosperity.'In these dialogues and essays the Stoic philosopher Seneca outlines his thoughts on how to live in a troubled world. Tutor to the young emperor Nero, Seneca wrote exercises in practical philosophy that draw upon contemporary Roman life and illuminate the intellectual concerns of the day. They also have much to say to the modern reader, as Seneca ranges widely across subjects such as the shortness of life, tranquillity of mind, anger, mercy, happiness, and grief at the loss of a loved one.Seneca's accessible, aphoristic style makes his writing especially attractive as an introduction to Stoic philosophy, and belies its reputation for austerity and dogmatism. This edition combines a clear and modern translation with an introduction to Seneca's life and philosophical interests, and helpfulnotes.ABOUT THE For over 100 years Oxford World's Classics has made available the widest range of literature from around the globe. Each affordable volume reflects Oxford's commitment to scholarship, providing the most accurate text plus a wealth of other valuable features, including expert introductions by leading authorities, helpful notes to clarify the text, up-to-date bibliographies for further study, and much more.
297 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 64
361 people are currently reading
3973 people want to read
About the author
Seneca
2,481 books3,893 followersLucius Annaeus Seneca (often known simply as Seneca or Seneca the Younger); ca. 4 BC – 65 AD) was a Roman Stoic philosopher, statesman, and dramatist of the Silver Age of Latin literature. He was tutor and later advisor to emperor Nero, who later forced him to commit suicide for alleged complicity in the Pisonian conspiracy to have him assassinated.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 77 reviews
July 15, 2019
I had previously read the collection of Seneca's letters and thought it was quite good. This work is made up of essays and dialogues that are also often epistolary. I had read somewhere that Seneca had some parallels with Saint Paul; I hadn't noticed such parallels in the collection of his letters, but I did notice it here. His focus on acceptance of personal suffering and mercy are among the strongest parallels. It was probably the essay titled “Providence” where some interesting Christian parallels are found. This was certainly one of the more notable works in here. Another was the letter to Nero regarding mercy. It is interesting that one of the emperors most know for savagery had a philosopher that encouraged him to be merciful. If the letter had ever reached Nero, it is evident that it fell on deaf ears. But one must acknowledge Seneca's efforts in attempting to guide a tyrant into ethical practice. Supposedly, Nero later ordered Seneca to kill himself after a failed plot on Nero's life. Having an existing letter from a person as noteworthy as Seneca being addressed to Nero is an important historical record, if not important philosophically. Nero himself was an immediate type for the Antichrist for Christians living in the first century. It's hard to find a worse emperor than Nero, so it's to Seneca's credit that he attempted to influence his behavior.
It's hard to find much to criticize when it comes to Seneca's ethics. I might nitpick about the Stoic denunciation of pity as being blameworthy, but this is a very small criticism. I suppose one could see pity as being analogous to the word “sympathy” when used in a negative context. As it stands, though, while often the definitional difference between words like sympathy and empathy and pity and mercy are semantic, in practice, they can often entail distinctive nuance that is missed.
I noted how often Seneca mentions “fortune” in a way that entails poetic personification. More than in other philosopher I've read, Seneca seems to have been the biggest influence on Boethius' use of the term “fortune” in his Consolation of Philosophy. Boethius often personified fortune in the same ways Seneca did. It seems apparent to me that Seneca was a strong influence on Boethius.
Overall, a very good book. Like most of the later Stoics, there is little metaphysics in here and much that is ethical. I didn't find much that I would criticize. I give the book around four to four-and-a-half stars.
It's hard to find much to criticize when it comes to Seneca's ethics. I might nitpick about the Stoic denunciation of pity as being blameworthy, but this is a very small criticism. I suppose one could see pity as being analogous to the word “sympathy” when used in a negative context. As it stands, though, while often the definitional difference between words like sympathy and empathy and pity and mercy are semantic, in practice, they can often entail distinctive nuance that is missed.
I noted how often Seneca mentions “fortune” in a way that entails poetic personification. More than in other philosopher I've read, Seneca seems to have been the biggest influence on Boethius' use of the term “fortune” in his Consolation of Philosophy. Boethius often personified fortune in the same ways Seneca did. It seems apparent to me that Seneca was a strong influence on Boethius.
Overall, a very good book. Like most of the later Stoics, there is little metaphysics in here and much that is ethical. I didn't find much that I would criticize. I give the book around four to four-and-a-half stars.
January 30, 2016
Care to read the thoughts of a man chosen to tutor an emperor? Seneca the Younger lived in the opening century of the Roman Empire, and was such an accomplished author that even the early Roman Church tried to claim him. I've previously read a collection of his letters (Letters from a Stoic), part of an exchange between Seneca and his friend Lucilius, but Analogs and Essays is far more sharply focused. The theme of the letters ran toward the general; here, Seneca writes on particular topics, beginning with theodicy and touching on anger, happiness, tranquility of mind, sorrow, and -- oddly -- earthquakes.
This is a magnificent collection. If the translators' rendering in English is representative of the power Seneca imbued his Latin with, little wonder the early Church regarded a 'pagan' author with such admiration. Seneca here is clear, direct, and forcefully dramatic. After I finished the final piece, I re-read several essays over again, just to savor the experience. Stoicism is the reigning influence, of course: the ideas of Zeno are utterly pervasive. In the opening essay "On Providence", Seneca asserts that the universe is a fundamentally sensible and moral place: nothing happens without good purpose, and even the harshest of circumstances can prove a boon to the wise man. It matters not what we endure, Seneca writes, but how we endure it. Difficulties are not punishments: they are opportunities. The worst of luck is in fact a sign of favor of the gods, that they have deemed a man worthy of his character being tested. While I don't particularly agree with the notion that everything that happens is the product of a deity enforcing character training on we poor mortals, I rather like the indomitable attitude, and the idea that can winnowed out from the text -- life is nothing without struggle. We are creatures made to run and strive, not sit idly whining.
Although Stoicism dominates, Seneca is no puritan: he freely borrows from Epicurus, and not simply to 'know his enemy' as he piously defended himself in the Letters. Seneca sees Epicurus as quite wise, in fact, and not at all deserving the slander heaped upon him because of the abuses of those who call themselves his followers. Epicurus is in Seneca's eyes the soul of virtuous moderation -- and Seneca defends comfort and wealth at several points, perhaps feeling guilty at his own success. But lest we think him a hypocrite, when the time came Seneca followed in the path of his heroes, Cato and Socrates -- accepting death in the manner he advocated several times in this collection. (The final piece on earthquakes isn't quite as odd as it might seem: while Seneca spends most of it musing on how earthquakes might happen, he uses the then-recent destruction of Pompeii to point out that nothing in the material universe is truly reliable: only virtue matters, only it can maintain us against the ravages of fickle fortune.)
I have been sharing excerpts from this book on facebook's Stoics group, and they've found a very will-pleased audience there. This is the stuff of excellence; obviously of interest to those interested in philosophy, mindfulness, and wisdom literature, but a must-read for moderns who find such value in the Stoa as I do. Seneca's essays are elaborations on the potent thoughts of Epictetus' Handbook and Marcus Aurelius' Meditations.
This is one to re-read, remember, and recommend.
This is a magnificent collection. If the translators' rendering in English is representative of the power Seneca imbued his Latin with, little wonder the early Church regarded a 'pagan' author with such admiration. Seneca here is clear, direct, and forcefully dramatic. After I finished the final piece, I re-read several essays over again, just to savor the experience. Stoicism is the reigning influence, of course: the ideas of Zeno are utterly pervasive. In the opening essay "On Providence", Seneca asserts that the universe is a fundamentally sensible and moral place: nothing happens without good purpose, and even the harshest of circumstances can prove a boon to the wise man. It matters not what we endure, Seneca writes, but how we endure it. Difficulties are not punishments: they are opportunities. The worst of luck is in fact a sign of favor of the gods, that they have deemed a man worthy of his character being tested. While I don't particularly agree with the notion that everything that happens is the product of a deity enforcing character training on we poor mortals, I rather like the indomitable attitude, and the idea that can winnowed out from the text -- life is nothing without struggle. We are creatures made to run and strive, not sit idly whining.
Although Stoicism dominates, Seneca is no puritan: he freely borrows from Epicurus, and not simply to 'know his enemy' as he piously defended himself in the Letters. Seneca sees Epicurus as quite wise, in fact, and not at all deserving the slander heaped upon him because of the abuses of those who call themselves his followers. Epicurus is in Seneca's eyes the soul of virtuous moderation -- and Seneca defends comfort and wealth at several points, perhaps feeling guilty at his own success. But lest we think him a hypocrite, when the time came Seneca followed in the path of his heroes, Cato and Socrates -- accepting death in the manner he advocated several times in this collection. (The final piece on earthquakes isn't quite as odd as it might seem: while Seneca spends most of it musing on how earthquakes might happen, he uses the then-recent destruction of Pompeii to point out that nothing in the material universe is truly reliable: only virtue matters, only it can maintain us against the ravages of fickle fortune.)
I have been sharing excerpts from this book on facebook's Stoics group, and they've found a very will-pleased audience there. This is the stuff of excellence; obviously of interest to those interested in philosophy, mindfulness, and wisdom literature, but a must-read for moderns who find such value in the Stoa as I do. Seneca's essays are elaborations on the potent thoughts of Epictetus' Handbook and Marcus Aurelius' Meditations.
This is one to re-read, remember, and recommend.
July 25, 2012
Lucius Annaeus Seneca was an interesting man. His father, Seneca the Elder, was a famous teacher of rhetoric. His older brother (Junius Annaeus Gallio) was proconsul of Achaea during the 50s and makes an appearance in the Bible, where he lets the Apostle Paul off the hook. The younger Seneca was a tutor and advisor to Emperor Nero, one of the wealthiest men of his day, and one of the most prolific writers of the 1st century.
Seneca’s surviving writings include nine tragedies, 124 letters, a satire and 13 essays. This collection includes seven essays in their entirely and sections of two more:
On Providence: This is the only essay of Seneca’s that actually qualifies as a dialogue, with some back-and-forth between Seneca and another figure (Lucilius). Tackles the age-old question of whyGod Providence would let bad things happen to good people. I didn’t find Seneca’s explanation particularly convincing (if people are truly good nothing actually bad can happen to them; things that appear bad are really good, it’s our perception that’s the problem), but there are some interesting bits.
On Anger: A section of Seneca’s essay on anger. Controlling one’s temper is a good thing; acting rashly out of anger can have disastrous consequences. Nothing particularly mind-blowing here…only including a portion of this essay was probably a good choice.
Consolation to Marcia: An early work consoling a woman who’s been mourning her dead son for three years. While Seneca does not come across as incredibly sympathetic towards Marcia, philosophically this was interesting and one of the stronger essays in the collection.
On the Happy Life: The first half of this essay is a great introduction to Seneca’s Stoic beliefs. The second half is a muddled defense of Seneca’s vast personal fortune (for a man that preached about the unimportance of material possessions, Seneca had a lot of stuff). This one kind of fell apart down the stretch.
On the Tranquility of the Mind: Anxiety and restlessness can be cured by a calm mind focused on duty and philosophical reflection.
On the Shortness of Life: Valuing and allocating time property, not squandering it frivolously, is key to a fulfilling life. It’s not about how much time you have, but how you use it. Probably Seneca’s most famous essay, and his strongest.
Consolation to Helvia: Emperor Claudius exiled Seneca to Corsica for eight years. This essay was written to console his distraught mother. Not as strong as the first consolation, in my opinion.
On Mercy: An essay to Nero, Seneca’s former pupil. Discusses the benefits of merciful rule as opposed to tyranny. Very interesting, although considering what Nero turned into, and given that he later ordered Seneca to kill himself, it’s safe to say the lesson didn’t take.
Natural Questions, Book 6: On Earthquakes: An exploration of what causes earthquakes. The science is pretty much bunk, as one would expect. Interesting as a window into the science of antiquity, but mostly for its occasional references to the recent disaster at Pompeii.
This edition is the perfect collection of Seneca’s essays. The translations are excellent (as far as I can tell) and the decisions behind what to include and what to cut were very sound and will provide readers with an excellent understanding of 1st century Stoic thought. Seneca is sometimes criticized for not being a particularly original or profound thinker, and I do think there’s a degree of truth to that (I like him better as a tragedian). Readers expecting Plato or Aristotle will probably be disappointed. But Stoicism was the primary philosophy of ancient Rome, and this is a solid introduction to that school of thought. 3 stars, recommended for readers interested in Roman history and the history of philosophy.
Seneca’s surviving writings include nine tragedies, 124 letters, a satire and 13 essays. This collection includes seven essays in their entirely and sections of two more:
On Providence: This is the only essay of Seneca’s that actually qualifies as a dialogue, with some back-and-forth between Seneca and another figure (Lucilius). Tackles the age-old question of why
On Anger: A section of Seneca’s essay on anger. Controlling one’s temper is a good thing; acting rashly out of anger can have disastrous consequences. Nothing particularly mind-blowing here…only including a portion of this essay was probably a good choice.
Consolation to Marcia: An early work consoling a woman who’s been mourning her dead son for three years. While Seneca does not come across as incredibly sympathetic towards Marcia, philosophically this was interesting and one of the stronger essays in the collection.
On the Happy Life: The first half of this essay is a great introduction to Seneca’s Stoic beliefs. The second half is a muddled defense of Seneca’s vast personal fortune (for a man that preached about the unimportance of material possessions, Seneca had a lot of stuff). This one kind of fell apart down the stretch.
On the Tranquility of the Mind: Anxiety and restlessness can be cured by a calm mind focused on duty and philosophical reflection.
On the Shortness of Life: Valuing and allocating time property, not squandering it frivolously, is key to a fulfilling life. It’s not about how much time you have, but how you use it. Probably Seneca’s most famous essay, and his strongest.
Consolation to Helvia: Emperor Claudius exiled Seneca to Corsica for eight years. This essay was written to console his distraught mother. Not as strong as the first consolation, in my opinion.
On Mercy: An essay to Nero, Seneca’s former pupil. Discusses the benefits of merciful rule as opposed to tyranny. Very interesting, although considering what Nero turned into, and given that he later ordered Seneca to kill himself, it’s safe to say the lesson didn’t take.
Natural Questions, Book 6: On Earthquakes: An exploration of what causes earthquakes. The science is pretty much bunk, as one would expect. Interesting as a window into the science of antiquity, but mostly for its occasional references to the recent disaster at Pompeii.
This edition is the perfect collection of Seneca’s essays. The translations are excellent (as far as I can tell) and the decisions behind what to include and what to cut were very sound and will provide readers with an excellent understanding of 1st century Stoic thought. Seneca is sometimes criticized for not being a particularly original or profound thinker, and I do think there’s a degree of truth to that (I like him better as a tragedian). Readers expecting Plato or Aristotle will probably be disappointed. But Stoicism was the primary philosophy of ancient Rome, and this is a solid introduction to that school of thought. 3 stars, recommended for readers interested in Roman history and the history of philosophy.
May 21, 2022
9/10.
Other than the essay "On Earthquakes", which showcases Seneca's interest in the natural sciences, this collection of Seneca's letters and essays is a treasture of wisdom. Even with the translation, you can still feel the elegance of Seneca's Latin prose and the aristocratic sense of Rome.
What is this aristocratic sense? What is aristocracy? It is the rule of the best, the rule of the nobles. Nobility prides itself on noblesse oblige — the obligations of nobility. Due to their noble blood and honorable heritage, the nobles feel a duty to live up to something. And the Stoics called that something virtue. Virtue for the Stoics — similar to the Christian view, but certainly not the same — means the complete control of the passions by reason. Another way of talking about virtue — this view completely contrary to the Christian view — means yielding to the passions in accordance with Nature, but no more.
Nature? Yes, we must not overindulge our passions above their natural purpose. Let's give some examples.
Think about food. Its purpose is to provide nourishment, health, and energy. Natural deviations from this include overeating, undereating, and eating food that is unnatural/deleterious to our bodies. Therefore, we must avoid indulgence, avoid industrially-produced crap, and avoid starving ourselves unnecessarily. How can we reach this state? Physiologically, we can wean ourselves off of the food we are addicted to and fast (intermittently or otherwise) every week. If we cultivate this discipline (enacted externally in many religions, e.g. Orthodoxy), we will strengthen our will and decrease our servitude to passion.
Or take sex. Our society is sexually addicted — in an unnatural way. And that is the problem. Constant masturbatory stimulation to the most unnatural and depraved acts possible, women dressed provocatively everywhere they go, and a desire to fornicate — for fornication itself — are all extremely displaced from Nature's purpose of sex. Sex is for procreation. Procreation happens in marriage. Any other ejaculatory activity is wasting one's seed and sapping one's testosterone. It has been shown that masturbation destroys grey matter in your prefrontal cortex, makes you anxious and depressed, and destroys your sensitivity to the actual act of sex when you have it (erectile dysfunction). This is all due to deviating from Nature's purpose. Thus, we must understand sex as healthy, but only healthy in the way Nature created it: procreation. Unnecessary sexual desire will distract us and present our mind's eye with a barrage of reviling and distracting images, which will disturb our peace of mind with depravity.
One can apply this principle to rest (not too long, not too short), exercise (regular, but with rest days), drugs (avoid them entirely), sorrow (do not wallow in it, cut it out after its proper time), and anger (feel it when it happens, but do not inflame it by constantly thinking of the object which incenses you).
When we follow the course of Nature, we will become free — not "free" politically nor free to be the slave of our passions (the eternal slavery of modern man), but free to be self-sufficient and non-reactive. If you are a Skinnerian rat, ever conditioned to external stimuli, then you will never be in control of yourself. If you see a piece of candy, you won't be able to resist eating it. If you see a sexually attractive image, you won't be able to look away. If you are a slave of alcohol or coffee, you won't be able to live without it. You will be fragile — weak. If your external circumstances falter, then you will suffer.
That is the loss of all freedom. The goal of the philosopher — he who pursues wisdom — is to be separate from all external circumstances. This is the optimal state of existence. If one reaches this state, you will have no risk of compromising your values and beliefs, of lying, of cowardice in the face of battle. You will become like Socrates, taking the cup of hemlock with joy. How do you do this? Moderation, temperance, prudence. "The golden mean," as Aristotle said. Watch for overindulgence — in drink, lust, food, anger, or any other destructive substance or emotion — and once you detect it, cut it out.
"But I can't cut it out: it is too hard!". Externally cut it out, which will then modify your habits through necessity. For example, do not buy the food you are addicted to. Do not buy sugary food. If you have food items in your house that make you hate yourself after you consume them, then throw them away or give them away. Block pornographic websites that you habitually visit. Get a lockbox and put your wallet in it for the day if you are a spendthrift. Do not save your credit card on Amazon. Work out regularly with a friend, and make a promise that you will pay them $50 if you do not work out.
Thus you will take the first step toward changing your habits. From there, it will be easier to achieve an internal sense of self-control. Combine this sense of inner self-control with a sense of aristocratic duty — the duty of living up to your potential and ancestors. For they were tougher than you. How can you be so weak? How can you not take four hours out of your life to lift every week, when your ancestors were lifting hay bales for hours every day? How can you not simplify your diet to not include sugar and oily crap, when your ancestors were satisfied with bread, butter, vegetables, and meat? How can you not take one hour out of your day to read, when your ancestors knew five languages and had mastered Greek, Latin, and their nationality's literature? Raise your mind to the heights of those who came before, master your passions, and climb the mountains of man. Save yourself from endless self-pity and regret; replace them with a radiant cheerfulness and strength. Break the shackles of low expectations and rise to what you were meant to be: a noble.
Other than the essay "On Earthquakes", which showcases Seneca's interest in the natural sciences, this collection of Seneca's letters and essays is a treasture of wisdom. Even with the translation, you can still feel the elegance of Seneca's Latin prose and the aristocratic sense of Rome.
What is this aristocratic sense? What is aristocracy? It is the rule of the best, the rule of the nobles. Nobility prides itself on noblesse oblige — the obligations of nobility. Due to their noble blood and honorable heritage, the nobles feel a duty to live up to something. And the Stoics called that something virtue. Virtue for the Stoics — similar to the Christian view, but certainly not the same — means the complete control of the passions by reason. Another way of talking about virtue — this view completely contrary to the Christian view — means yielding to the passions in accordance with Nature, but no more.
Nature? Yes, we must not overindulge our passions above their natural purpose. Let's give some examples.
Think about food. Its purpose is to provide nourishment, health, and energy. Natural deviations from this include overeating, undereating, and eating food that is unnatural/deleterious to our bodies. Therefore, we must avoid indulgence, avoid industrially-produced crap, and avoid starving ourselves unnecessarily. How can we reach this state? Physiologically, we can wean ourselves off of the food we are addicted to and fast (intermittently or otherwise) every week. If we cultivate this discipline (enacted externally in many religions, e.g. Orthodoxy), we will strengthen our will and decrease our servitude to passion.
Or take sex. Our society is sexually addicted — in an unnatural way. And that is the problem. Constant masturbatory stimulation to the most unnatural and depraved acts possible, women dressed provocatively everywhere they go, and a desire to fornicate — for fornication itself — are all extremely displaced from Nature's purpose of sex. Sex is for procreation. Procreation happens in marriage. Any other ejaculatory activity is wasting one's seed and sapping one's testosterone. It has been shown that masturbation destroys grey matter in your prefrontal cortex, makes you anxious and depressed, and destroys your sensitivity to the actual act of sex when you have it (erectile dysfunction). This is all due to deviating from Nature's purpose. Thus, we must understand sex as healthy, but only healthy in the way Nature created it: procreation. Unnecessary sexual desire will distract us and present our mind's eye with a barrage of reviling and distracting images, which will disturb our peace of mind with depravity.
One can apply this principle to rest (not too long, not too short), exercise (regular, but with rest days), drugs (avoid them entirely), sorrow (do not wallow in it, cut it out after its proper time), and anger (feel it when it happens, but do not inflame it by constantly thinking of the object which incenses you).
When we follow the course of Nature, we will become free — not "free" politically nor free to be the slave of our passions (the eternal slavery of modern man), but free to be self-sufficient and non-reactive. If you are a Skinnerian rat, ever conditioned to external stimuli, then you will never be in control of yourself. If you see a piece of candy, you won't be able to resist eating it. If you see a sexually attractive image, you won't be able to look away. If you are a slave of alcohol or coffee, you won't be able to live without it. You will be fragile — weak. If your external circumstances falter, then you will suffer.
That is the loss of all freedom. The goal of the philosopher — he who pursues wisdom — is to be separate from all external circumstances. This is the optimal state of existence. If one reaches this state, you will have no risk of compromising your values and beliefs, of lying, of cowardice in the face of battle. You will become like Socrates, taking the cup of hemlock with joy. How do you do this? Moderation, temperance, prudence. "The golden mean," as Aristotle said. Watch for overindulgence — in drink, lust, food, anger, or any other destructive substance or emotion — and once you detect it, cut it out.
"But I can't cut it out: it is too hard!". Externally cut it out, which will then modify your habits through necessity. For example, do not buy the food you are addicted to. Do not buy sugary food. If you have food items in your house that make you hate yourself after you consume them, then throw them away or give them away. Block pornographic websites that you habitually visit. Get a lockbox and put your wallet in it for the day if you are a spendthrift. Do not save your credit card on Amazon. Work out regularly with a friend, and make a promise that you will pay them $50 if you do not work out.
Thus you will take the first step toward changing your habits. From there, it will be easier to achieve an internal sense of self-control. Combine this sense of inner self-control with a sense of aristocratic duty — the duty of living up to your potential and ancestors. For they were tougher than you. How can you be so weak? How can you not take four hours out of your life to lift every week, when your ancestors were lifting hay bales for hours every day? How can you not simplify your diet to not include sugar and oily crap, when your ancestors were satisfied with bread, butter, vegetables, and meat? How can you not take one hour out of your day to read, when your ancestors knew five languages and had mastered Greek, Latin, and their nationality's literature? Raise your mind to the heights of those who came before, master your passions, and climb the mountains of man. Save yourself from endless self-pity and regret; replace them with a radiant cheerfulness and strength. Break the shackles of low expectations and rise to what you were meant to be: a noble.
July 3, 2020
In the writings of Seneca who was a contemporary of Jesus one can see classical philosophy and Christianity converging. Seneca never heard of either the expulsion of Adam from the garden of Eden or the Resurrection of Christ. He did however believe that a single God had created a good universe, that human souls were emanations of the this supreme deity and that the fate of one's soul depended on one's conduct on this earth. Some writers have gone so far as to speculate that Seneca may even influenced St. Paul. While this theory is no longer widely held, the fact remains that Seneca's positions are very close of those of Christianity.
Stoic believed that one needed to accept the fate that one was dealt. Consequently, he assists on the need for the individual to practice virtue in order to be ready for life's unpleasant surprises and one's own death. One needed to practice moderation, suppress anger, do good works and help those in distress. In short, one had to lead what Socrates termed the good life.
Despite, its fame "On the Brevity" does not encapsulate Seneca's system nor is it even the best of his philosophical works. All of the consolations and essays must be read in order to understand Seneca's thought. This is by no means an onerous task as Seneca is a very clear and engaging writer.
Stoic believed that one needed to accept the fate that one was dealt. Consequently, he assists on the need for the individual to practice virtue in order to be ready for life's unpleasant surprises and one's own death. One needed to practice moderation, suppress anger, do good works and help those in distress. In short, one had to lead what Socrates termed the good life.
Despite, its fame "On the Brevity" does not encapsulate Seneca's system nor is it even the best of his philosophical works. All of the consolations and essays must be read in order to understand Seneca's thought. This is by no means an onerous task as Seneca is a very clear and engaging writer.
August 20, 2019
When the lamp has been removed from my sight, and my wife, no stranger now to my habit, has fallen silent, I examine the whole of my day and retrace my actions and words; I hide nothing from myself, pass over nothing.
(On Anger)
Seneca teaches us to look upon life calmly, facing both calamity and jubilation without protest, without drama, and certainly with dignity. Relevant in perpetuity—to read, and reread.
May 15, 2012
Seneca, what can you say? Montaigne read him centuries ago stating he could not read him for more than fifteen minutes at a sitting. With modern lighting and my spectacles, I am able to read for a half hour. Seneca's pr-Christianity sophistic philosophy view is disturbingly relevant to our so-called modern advanced life.
March 26, 2014
I think I was in the middle of "On Tranquillity of the Mind" when I came to the realization that I just couldn't keep reading this.
Unfortunately for Seneca, he doesn't rate very high either as a thinker or as a self-aware individual. You see, I usually use Wittgenstein as a point of comparison. Wittgenstein is amazing to me not only for making many lucid points about language and certainty but also in how he was able to self-reflect about his own worth as a thinker. Somehow this man managed to re-invent himself three times throughout his life, whereas most philosophers would have pushed one particular point of view and kept on hammering it over a long period of time. Rather than doing this, he was one for constant self-reflection and re-invention.
On the other hand, Seneca reminds me of my childhood church preacher -- pounding the pulpit with his sermons on duty, living in accordance with nature, and checking emotions as a wise man would do. My former preacher would have lectured about Christian values, but the format is the same. This is rhetorically rich stuff here - thematically linked collections of sentences probably meant to be read aloud in an oratorical style (much of reading in those days was out loud). Rich as it is in rhetoric, though, it does not hide the fact that these essays are much too long and convoluted for the simple messages they convey. I also agree with the criticism of hypocrisy he received in his own lifetime. I'll explain a bit more below.
On Providence: This essay states the dominant Stoic position that the world is a place designed according to the wisdom of the Gods and that everything within it has some teleological (end/goal-oriented) purpose dictated by fate. In this sense, we should be thankful we have things (life, children, etc.) in the first place because the Gods didn't have to give them to us. Dying early because of sickness may not be a first choice for someone, but we just have to deal with it if it happens to us because it's what the Gods had in mind for us.
Not only can you read about this position elsewhere, but it's also much more succinctly explained in Epictetus and secondary sources.
On Anger: Of the ones I managed to finish reading, this one is the best. It offers some practical advice to curb anger, also suggesting that anger is far more damaging than helpful. Nothing mind-blowing, but it's worth keeping in mind. Since it avoided Stoic-specific kinds of inquiries, it also avoided his shortcomings.
Consolation to Marcia: I know someone who mourned for her dead husband for about three years. In her case, she needed all that time to get better. Seneca is far too harsh on a person's emotions. Not only did this letter show no sympathy for the person in question (she had lost her son in the prime of his youth) -- it's entirely out of place given the circumstances. This person also lost her father through suicide (!) -- how is preaching Stoic doctrine a good idea in this case? Different people need different amounts of time to relieve their emotional situations. This essay doesn't work for me.
On the Happy Life: More prescriptive preaching about following virtue and living in accordance with nature and reason. Oddly, his defence of his riches and material wealth is completely unconvincing. In his case, rhetoric becomes weak and he tries to make allowances for himself when he would not do so for others. He tries to get off the hook by claiming he is a better person than than the person to whom the letter is addressed and that he is better able to use wealth than a more profligate man is. He owns wealth, the wealth doesn't own him like it would us. And it is a lot easier to practice his principles when he doesn't have to sweat and work hard for his means! Good lord, what a hypocrite. If he had not been so prescriptive and unforgiving in previous essays, I might have been able to deal with it a bit better, but he is hardly kind to those people who receive his other letters and essays.
(I have read, too, about the way he tried to kill himself -- trying to die like Socrates and then the resulting farce it became as nothing was effective. In the end, he drank poison and cut himself twice before finally drowning himself in hot water. He also had to make a speech like Socrates and have people around to witness his suicide. This is not the act of a Stoic sage -- a real Stoic would have died in a much less histrionic, melodramatic way.)
A total fail in every respect. Epictetus might have some of the same philosophical flaws, but he keeps it short. If you need this kind of Stoic philosophy in your life, I would suggest looking for his work instead.
A final update:
I really do wonder why it takes him so many pages to say the obvious? I just skimmed over "Shortness of Life" and the main point seems to be to use your time wisely before you die. I think most of us understand that without the tirade. An aphorism or short lecture could have been just as effective.
Unfortunately for Seneca, he doesn't rate very high either as a thinker or as a self-aware individual. You see, I usually use Wittgenstein as a point of comparison. Wittgenstein is amazing to me not only for making many lucid points about language and certainty but also in how he was able to self-reflect about his own worth as a thinker. Somehow this man managed to re-invent himself three times throughout his life, whereas most philosophers would have pushed one particular point of view and kept on hammering it over a long period of time. Rather than doing this, he was one for constant self-reflection and re-invention.
On the other hand, Seneca reminds me of my childhood church preacher -- pounding the pulpit with his sermons on duty, living in accordance with nature, and checking emotions as a wise man would do. My former preacher would have lectured about Christian values, but the format is the same. This is rhetorically rich stuff here - thematically linked collections of sentences probably meant to be read aloud in an oratorical style (much of reading in those days was out loud). Rich as it is in rhetoric, though, it does not hide the fact that these essays are much too long and convoluted for the simple messages they convey. I also agree with the criticism of hypocrisy he received in his own lifetime. I'll explain a bit more below.
On Providence: This essay states the dominant Stoic position that the world is a place designed according to the wisdom of the Gods and that everything within it has some teleological (end/goal-oriented) purpose dictated by fate. In this sense, we should be thankful we have things (life, children, etc.) in the first place because the Gods didn't have to give them to us. Dying early because of sickness may not be a first choice for someone, but we just have to deal with it if it happens to us because it's what the Gods had in mind for us.
Not only can you read about this position elsewhere, but it's also much more succinctly explained in Epictetus and secondary sources.
On Anger: Of the ones I managed to finish reading, this one is the best. It offers some practical advice to curb anger, also suggesting that anger is far more damaging than helpful. Nothing mind-blowing, but it's worth keeping in mind. Since it avoided Stoic-specific kinds of inquiries, it also avoided his shortcomings.
Consolation to Marcia: I know someone who mourned for her dead husband for about three years. In her case, she needed all that time to get better. Seneca is far too harsh on a person's emotions. Not only did this letter show no sympathy for the person in question (she had lost her son in the prime of his youth) -- it's entirely out of place given the circumstances. This person also lost her father through suicide (!) -- how is preaching Stoic doctrine a good idea in this case? Different people need different amounts of time to relieve their emotional situations. This essay doesn't work for me.
On the Happy Life: More prescriptive preaching about following virtue and living in accordance with nature and reason. Oddly, his defence of his riches and material wealth is completely unconvincing. In his case, rhetoric becomes weak and he tries to make allowances for himself when he would not do so for others. He tries to get off the hook by claiming he is a better person than than the person to whom the letter is addressed and that he is better able to use wealth than a more profligate man is. He owns wealth, the wealth doesn't own him like it would us. And it is a lot easier to practice his principles when he doesn't have to sweat and work hard for his means! Good lord, what a hypocrite. If he had not been so prescriptive and unforgiving in previous essays, I might have been able to deal with it a bit better, but he is hardly kind to those people who receive his other letters and essays.
(I have read, too, about the way he tried to kill himself -- trying to die like Socrates and then the resulting farce it became as nothing was effective. In the end, he drank poison and cut himself twice before finally drowning himself in hot water. He also had to make a speech like Socrates and have people around to witness his suicide. This is not the act of a Stoic sage -- a real Stoic would have died in a much less histrionic, melodramatic way.)
A total fail in every respect. Epictetus might have some of the same philosophical flaws, but he keeps it short. If you need this kind of Stoic philosophy in your life, I would suggest looking for his work instead.
A final update:
I really do wonder why it takes him so many pages to say the obvious? I just skimmed over "Shortness of Life" and the main point seems to be to use your time wisely before you die. I think most of us understand that without the tirade. An aphorism or short lecture could have been just as effective.
January 14, 2016
Another classic of Stoic philosophy. Seneca's writing is pretty timeless and still has lots of relevant advice for people today. He draws on lots of historical examples to illustrate his points which are fascinating in themselves. His prose is a bit more engaging than that of Epictetus.
February 5, 2015
Excellent. If only more would read him. Seneca and the Stoics had a marvelous way of looking at life. A very wise man. We should imitate him.
September 9, 2021
I will give this book 4 stars as a whole, because I would give most individual extracts within this collection 4 stars. 3 stars to On Providence, On Anger, On Mercy, and Natural Questions: solely because they were not for me, but for people who face those issues addressed by Seneca.
Seneca is a teacher, in the true sense of that word. His subject? How to live a good (read: virtuous) life. I have seen a few reviews by people who critique Stoicism as ultimately being commonsensical sophistry, which cannot logically form a part of the same canon as Aristotle and Wittgenstein. My reply to them would be, what is this canon about? Philosophy is a broad subject, and at least etymologically, the only criterion for finding a place in this canon should be demonstrating a love for wisdom. And that’s what Seneca is all about: he did not teach me any grand metaphysical systems for comprehending the world, but he did teach me wisdom. There is worth in Seneca’s advice on shunning materialism, controlling one’s emotions and mind, understanding and embracing mortality, and balancing self-improvement with fulfilling means of leisure.
Admittedly, I’ve read ascetic advice of this sort before. But all advice is worthless without action, and this is where the disciplinary, or repetitive pedagogical, value of literature on how to live a fulfilling life (the Dhammapada, Thoreau, Lucretius, and of course the stoic Marcus Aurelius are other names in this genre) are helpful. So while the content here did not absolutely blow me away, I had a fun time reading this, and if I were to copy-paste all the quotes I highlighted here, this write-up would become exceedingly long. Instead of doing that, I will reminisce here Seneca's remarks on how the reading of philosophy is to hold a conversation with great people of the past and to find in them the delight of stimulating conversation (a rarity in the physical world!). I also noticed obvious similarities between his thoughts on mortality, sensuality, and materialism with those of Epicurus/Lucretius. Finally, it was nice to see Seneca highlight the importance of leisure, of setting sharp limits on work: that will always have a soft corner in my indolent heart.
Seneca is a teacher, in the true sense of that word. His subject? How to live a good (read: virtuous) life. I have seen a few reviews by people who critique Stoicism as ultimately being commonsensical sophistry, which cannot logically form a part of the same canon as Aristotle and Wittgenstein. My reply to them would be, what is this canon about? Philosophy is a broad subject, and at least etymologically, the only criterion for finding a place in this canon should be demonstrating a love for wisdom. And that’s what Seneca is all about: he did not teach me any grand metaphysical systems for comprehending the world, but he did teach me wisdom. There is worth in Seneca’s advice on shunning materialism, controlling one’s emotions and mind, understanding and embracing mortality, and balancing self-improvement with fulfilling means of leisure.
Admittedly, I’ve read ascetic advice of this sort before. But all advice is worthless without action, and this is where the disciplinary, or repetitive pedagogical, value of literature on how to live a fulfilling life (the Dhammapada, Thoreau, Lucretius, and of course the stoic Marcus Aurelius are other names in this genre) are helpful. So while the content here did not absolutely blow me away, I had a fun time reading this, and if I were to copy-paste all the quotes I highlighted here, this write-up would become exceedingly long. Instead of doing that, I will reminisce here Seneca's remarks on how the reading of philosophy is to hold a conversation with great people of the past and to find in them the delight of stimulating conversation (a rarity in the physical world!). I also noticed obvious similarities between his thoughts on mortality, sensuality, and materialism with those of Epicurus/Lucretius. Finally, it was nice to see Seneca highlight the importance of leisure, of setting sharp limits on work: that will always have a soft corner in my indolent heart.
June 21, 2024
Really good, Seneca was a great addition when studying stoicism with my philosophy group. First went through Epictetus, then Marcus Aurelius, and finally Seneca.
The best dialogue was “On the Shortness of Life, which talked a lot about not wasting life, why people complain that life is short, and how to live a life that is long, ergo good. Ultimately a life that is purposive, virtuous, determined, and philosophic is a good life, and therefore a long life. The Stoic must use reason to evaluate all things, constantly self reflect on the law of nature and the imminence and necessity of death.
Other really good dialogues were “on Providence”, “on the tranquility of the mind”, and “on the happy life.”
Would definitely recommend this edition by Oxford world Classics. The translation is accessible yet true to form. If you’ve read Seneca‘s letters, then definitely pick this one up.
-b
The best dialogue was “On the Shortness of Life, which talked a lot about not wasting life, why people complain that life is short, and how to live a life that is long, ergo good. Ultimately a life that is purposive, virtuous, determined, and philosophic is a good life, and therefore a long life. The Stoic must use reason to evaluate all things, constantly self reflect on the law of nature and the imminence and necessity of death.
Other really good dialogues were “on Providence”, “on the tranquility of the mind”, and “on the happy life.”
Would definitely recommend this edition by Oxford world Classics. The translation is accessible yet true to form. If you’ve read Seneca‘s letters, then definitely pick this one up.
-b
August 2, 2011
in a way the mother of all self help books. but since it is a classic way cheaper. makes one realize that humans have been looking for advice about how to deal with life forever.
while seneca might not be the smoothest of these advice givers he certainly he can claim first dips on a lot of the advice folks like dr. phil make sound like they invited it themselves.
while seneca might not be the smoothest of these advice givers he certainly he can claim first dips on a lot of the advice folks like dr. phil make sound like they invited it themselves.
February 7, 2017
I enjoyed specially the first dialog On Providence, in which Seneca is conversing with his friend Lucilius. And the type of advice on how to live our lives that he is giving to his beloved friend is just timeless.
One just has to understand what bad means: bad for the wise man would be to have bad thoughts, to commit crimes, to desire money or fame.
One just has to understand what bad means: bad for the wise man would be to have bad thoughts, to commit crimes, to desire money or fame.
March 9, 2022
Get it for free here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j24WU...
'Wait but a little while, here comes death, who will make you all equals.' ~ Seneca - Dialogues & Essays.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j24WU...
'Wait but a little while, here comes death, who will make you all equals.' ~ Seneca - Dialogues & Essays.
April 11, 2010
Marvelous lengthy exposition from the famous Roman Stoic and advisor to the young Nero. The last essay, On Earthquakes, is of historical interest only. Naturally the science is totally wrong.
September 10, 2012
Excellent insights into the stoic philosophy.
August 16, 2019
This was the most accessible and enjoyable book I’ve come across from the ancient Stoics. I would highly suggest this to anyone new to Stoicism.
February 1, 2021
10/10 recommend! Some thought provoking real challenges aimed at the core of our existence. These are primary source ancient ideas behind the current resurgence in stoic thought.
July 16, 2020
All the self-help you'll ever need
October 10, 2022
The book did not resonate with me. It does not translate very well into the modern world (it was written in a different time and could be read in that context, but that is quite a difficult and unnecessary task in my opinion). I gave up 1/3 of the way through (still gave it a pretty good chance).
It is much better to read Ryan Holiday or go directly to Marcus Aurelius if you want to get the benefits of stoic teachings.
It is much better to read Ryan Holiday or go directly to Marcus Aurelius if you want to get the benefits of stoic teachings.
May 23, 2025
Did not read quite all of it but will return later. I went through a phase of devouring the Stoics as I struggled through a job situation that was overwhelming. I wish I had discovered their writing earlier in life. One thing that has really caught my attention and I want to pursue is the influence Greek philosophy had on the writing of the Apostle Paul. I spent a lifetime studying the Bible and it's interesting the ways in which his teachings both converge and diverge with the Stoics. All in all the Stoics make more sense for practical advice and don't have a theological axe to grind.
June 2, 2020
Excellent way to engage with some of the Seneca's best ideas... insightful, profound and provocative,... further, inasmuch as we know the clearance of his thought, this book will help you to see beyond...
February 9, 2018
When opening this book I could not have foretold how much impact it would have on me. I was blown away by Seneca's insightful writings and they have had a profound and lasting impact on me. I have been reading more and more Stoic teachings but to have the practical application, albeit two thousand years old, so eloquently directed could not have made a greater impression. It's a book I will undoubtedly return to as I continue my education in this field.
September 19, 2023
Wide-ranging collection of letters and essays from Seneca. You'll get a good feel for Stoic philosophy, with its strengths and (quite substantial) weaknesses.
January 20, 2021
Essential reading for stoic philosophy. I've read this many times and am certain I'll read it many more. The clarity, insight and general wisdom available here is worth your time if you are interested in late stoic thinking. It is blended a bit with epicureanism (like Cicero IMO) and I've found that I really prefer a blend of stoic and epicurean thought.
November 18, 2020
Seneca wrote in the opening years of the new millennium (around 30-40 AD) on a range of topics as was typical of philosophers of the time. This volume of essays (I won't say dialogues as only one of the nine claims to be a dialogue and is really a monologue anyway) ranges from discussions of anger to analysis of earthquakes.
Despite the breadth of topics, the style and purpose of all Seneca's writing here is consistent: to propound the Stoic approach to life and to advise the reader in the ways of virtue. Though stoicism is a familiar name, reading this book gives one a truer sense of the doctrine. Yes, the classic 'stoical' ideals are present and accounted for, in particular: that life is random and full of chance so why get worked up about it - we are told many times how death lurks around the corner so no need to fret about the small things. And people should think their way to a more balanced and calm life; understanding earthquakes leads to being less afraid and superstitious of them and so on.
Yet Seneca brings nuance to this picture of reasoned, emotionally stable existence. He particularly seems irked by what many would say about Stoicism today: that it is a philosophy aimed entirely at deadening the emotions and frowns upon all feeling whatsoever. In a couple of the more memorable passages, he extols on just letting go: "sometimes stimulus will be provided by ... convivial company and generous drinking. Occasionally we should reach the stage even of intoxication", though of course we should not allow it "to drown us, or to take over our senses" but rather let it "wash away our cares, and rouse the mind from its depths, acting as a cure for its melancholy as it does for certain maladies".
Another of the virtues of this virtue-obsessed book is its championing of science as a means to dispel fear and superstition. In discussing earthquakes, Seneca asks in lieu of such things "how much better would it be to examine the causes ... What, you ask, will justify this effort? The reward will be to know Nature". Not only does the author push a rational view of existence at a time when this would certainly not be the norm, but he makes some surprisingly astute psychological observations: "it is because we comprehend Nature, not with our reason, but with our eyes, giving thought, not to what she can do, but only to what she has done. [We are] frightened by things as new when in fact they are not new but simply unusual." This statement of our propensity to assume the future will resemble the past, and to base our assumptions around the examples that most readily come to mind (something that would today be called availability bias), would not be out of place in a modern discourse.
Indeed, the book is at its best in such moments, when the author puts down his interminable lists of examples and hectoring of the reader to reveal something important instead. In remarks on our irascible natures he notes that "the greatest cure for anger is to wait, so that the ... fog that shrouds the mind may subside"; on our assuming that if things are going well for us, they will continue to do so, Seneca comments that "you are made arrogant by a beautiful house, as though it cannot catch fire or collapse, you are reduced to astonishment by your riches, as though they have escaped all danger and have reached such proportions that Fortune has lost all power to destroy them"; in a chapter on the tranquility of mind Seneca observes of most people: "without a plan they rove, searching for work to occupy them, and what they end up doing is not what they have intended to do but whatever they have bumped into". In one of Seneca's best turns of phrase he styles this existence "restless idleness" - something highly relevant today in our twitchy, always-on culture. There is a similarly apposite comment on the "many times ... I see men seeking the time of others and those being asked most compliant; both parties are concentrating on why the request for time was made, neither on the time itself: it is as if nothing is being sought, nothing given." - a sentence that could easily describe the majority of meetings the white collar worker is pulled into today.
The problem, by and large, is that far too little of this book comprises this pithy, incisive commentary - which offers a fascinating view of the constancy of human nature and seems, in places, as relevant today as I imagine it did then. No, most of this book consists of hugely tedious exposition. It is not enough for Seneca to draw attention to (say) the pitfalls of anger and to perhaps illustrate with a handful of examples. He must, instead, batter the reader with instance after instance in which this or that issue has redounded to the person being discussed. This clearly is so much rhetorical style: without copious, illustrious examples, Seneca seems to feel, the work would be incomplete (poorly referenced in today's academic language).
Unfortunately for the modern reader, not only are most of the examples totally lost to time (you will be doing well if you know your Cato from your Cataline but who knows their Metrodorus from their Metullus?), but much of the discussion centres on totally alien examples. Readers now are unlikely to find much of use in discussions of the appropriate way to discipline your slaves, or of the horrors of being exiled from your homeland.
Our modern sensibility is also likely appalled by the crass indifference to emotions Seneca pays to Marcia - who he consoles on the death of her son with a range of arguments, from effectively 'he had a good run' to 'more illustrious people than you dealt with worse situations so you should move on too'. Perhaps most challenging of all is the very notion that reason can trump emotion even in such personally devastating times. ("any grief that has yielded to reason is laid to rest for ever").
Seneca even applies this cruel balm to his own mother - who he 'consoles' for his own exile. This chapter is honestly quite funny: not only does he contrast his mother's experience of his exile with other mothers' experiences of their sons' deaths, but he exhorts Helvia to "have done with lamentations and cries of sorrow and other means by which women generally express their noisy grief". The sexism of the time, however understandable, strains the reader and renders whole sections null and void. To round off the comedic effects of this chapter, it is only in the closing pages - after amazing passages implying his mother's crushing, agonising pain at her beloved Seneca's loss - that he comments that she still has "my brothers ... [who] in each of them, for all the difference of their merits, you have cause for delight". Having read pages of pretentious self-aggrandisement and tedious lists of the great and good who have survived worse led me to laugh out loud when I got to the last two pages of the chapter to see Seneca rattle off a series of other "consolations" that includes his mother's other two sons.
This book does contain some pearls of wisdom; and its emphasis on the value of reason and reflection over succumbing to blind superstition and emotion can be a useful regulative ideal. But it cannot offer a complete philosophy of life as Seneca views it and nor should it. While I often agreed with the book I couldn't help thinking as I went: this approach to life is not everything. The ideal man Seneca envisages is dull, lacks passion. I doubt some of our greatest art, or our greatest moments in life, would exist were everyone a stoic reason-being.
The book therefore fails in its central aim to convert the reader to a certain way of life. I also think it fails even as a more straightforward book of moralising. Such books generally do not develop whole philosophical systems, but make use of anecdotes, evidence and argument to think over issues that arise in life and this is definitely the way to approach this volume. But the lists of examples and the irrelevance of the subject matter, combined with the often near-humorous clinging to stoic ideals against all human feeling, combine to make this work a failure even when read in this manner. Far better to go read some Montaigne for a scattergun array of moralising essays on different topics, than this much more boring and hectoring collection.
Despite the breadth of topics, the style and purpose of all Seneca's writing here is consistent: to propound the Stoic approach to life and to advise the reader in the ways of virtue. Though stoicism is a familiar name, reading this book gives one a truer sense of the doctrine. Yes, the classic 'stoical' ideals are present and accounted for, in particular: that life is random and full of chance so why get worked up about it - we are told many times how death lurks around the corner so no need to fret about the small things. And people should think their way to a more balanced and calm life; understanding earthquakes leads to being less afraid and superstitious of them and so on.
Yet Seneca brings nuance to this picture of reasoned, emotionally stable existence. He particularly seems irked by what many would say about Stoicism today: that it is a philosophy aimed entirely at deadening the emotions and frowns upon all feeling whatsoever. In a couple of the more memorable passages, he extols on just letting go: "sometimes stimulus will be provided by ... convivial company and generous drinking. Occasionally we should reach the stage even of intoxication", though of course we should not allow it "to drown us, or to take over our senses" but rather let it "wash away our cares, and rouse the mind from its depths, acting as a cure for its melancholy as it does for certain maladies".
Another of the virtues of this virtue-obsessed book is its championing of science as a means to dispel fear and superstition. In discussing earthquakes, Seneca asks in lieu of such things "how much better would it be to examine the causes ... What, you ask, will justify this effort? The reward will be to know Nature". Not only does the author push a rational view of existence at a time when this would certainly not be the norm, but he makes some surprisingly astute psychological observations: "it is because we comprehend Nature, not with our reason, but with our eyes, giving thought, not to what she can do, but only to what she has done. [We are] frightened by things as new when in fact they are not new but simply unusual." This statement of our propensity to assume the future will resemble the past, and to base our assumptions around the examples that most readily come to mind (something that would today be called availability bias), would not be out of place in a modern discourse.
Indeed, the book is at its best in such moments, when the author puts down his interminable lists of examples and hectoring of the reader to reveal something important instead. In remarks on our irascible natures he notes that "the greatest cure for anger is to wait, so that the ... fog that shrouds the mind may subside"; on our assuming that if things are going well for us, they will continue to do so, Seneca comments that "you are made arrogant by a beautiful house, as though it cannot catch fire or collapse, you are reduced to astonishment by your riches, as though they have escaped all danger and have reached such proportions that Fortune has lost all power to destroy them"; in a chapter on the tranquility of mind Seneca observes of most people: "without a plan they rove, searching for work to occupy them, and what they end up doing is not what they have intended to do but whatever they have bumped into". In one of Seneca's best turns of phrase he styles this existence "restless idleness" - something highly relevant today in our twitchy, always-on culture. There is a similarly apposite comment on the "many times ... I see men seeking the time of others and those being asked most compliant; both parties are concentrating on why the request for time was made, neither on the time itself: it is as if nothing is being sought, nothing given." - a sentence that could easily describe the majority of meetings the white collar worker is pulled into today.
The problem, by and large, is that far too little of this book comprises this pithy, incisive commentary - which offers a fascinating view of the constancy of human nature and seems, in places, as relevant today as I imagine it did then. No, most of this book consists of hugely tedious exposition. It is not enough for Seneca to draw attention to (say) the pitfalls of anger and to perhaps illustrate with a handful of examples. He must, instead, batter the reader with instance after instance in which this or that issue has redounded to the person being discussed. This clearly is so much rhetorical style: without copious, illustrious examples, Seneca seems to feel, the work would be incomplete (poorly referenced in today's academic language).
Unfortunately for the modern reader, not only are most of the examples totally lost to time (you will be doing well if you know your Cato from your Cataline but who knows their Metrodorus from their Metullus?), but much of the discussion centres on totally alien examples. Readers now are unlikely to find much of use in discussions of the appropriate way to discipline your slaves, or of the horrors of being exiled from your homeland.
Our modern sensibility is also likely appalled by the crass indifference to emotions Seneca pays to Marcia - who he consoles on the death of her son with a range of arguments, from effectively 'he had a good run' to 'more illustrious people than you dealt with worse situations so you should move on too'. Perhaps most challenging of all is the very notion that reason can trump emotion even in such personally devastating times. ("any grief that has yielded to reason is laid to rest for ever").
Seneca even applies this cruel balm to his own mother - who he 'consoles' for his own exile. This chapter is honestly quite funny: not only does he contrast his mother's experience of his exile with other mothers' experiences of their sons' deaths, but he exhorts Helvia to "have done with lamentations and cries of sorrow and other means by which women generally express their noisy grief". The sexism of the time, however understandable, strains the reader and renders whole sections null and void. To round off the comedic effects of this chapter, it is only in the closing pages - after amazing passages implying his mother's crushing, agonising pain at her beloved Seneca's loss - that he comments that she still has "my brothers ... [who] in each of them, for all the difference of their merits, you have cause for delight". Having read pages of pretentious self-aggrandisement and tedious lists of the great and good who have survived worse led me to laugh out loud when I got to the last two pages of the chapter to see Seneca rattle off a series of other "consolations" that includes his mother's other two sons.
This book does contain some pearls of wisdom; and its emphasis on the value of reason and reflection over succumbing to blind superstition and emotion can be a useful regulative ideal. But it cannot offer a complete philosophy of life as Seneca views it and nor should it. While I often agreed with the book I couldn't help thinking as I went: this approach to life is not everything. The ideal man Seneca envisages is dull, lacks passion. I doubt some of our greatest art, or our greatest moments in life, would exist were everyone a stoic reason-being.
The book therefore fails in its central aim to convert the reader to a certain way of life. I also think it fails even as a more straightforward book of moralising. Such books generally do not develop whole philosophical systems, but make use of anecdotes, evidence and argument to think over issues that arise in life and this is definitely the way to approach this volume. But the lists of examples and the irrelevance of the subject matter, combined with the often near-humorous clinging to stoic ideals against all human feeling, combine to make this work a failure even when read in this manner. Far better to go read some Montaigne for a scattergun array of moralising essays on different topics, than this much more boring and hectoring collection.
April 13, 2018
This is a book that will stay with you for the rest of your life. As it is with Stoic philosophy, it's filled with insights that can directly be applied to many daily-life circumstances, in particular here dealing what challenges, anger, grief, etc. and also what is happiness and what brings tranquility of mind and enjoying our life as it actually is. I find quite interesting as well, that even though Seneca - as well as most other stoics and ancient philosophers - comes from a patriarchal mode, through the big insights unifies the feminine of surrendering to nature and what life brings. An excellent book in itself and a great introduction to the Stoic way of thinking.
July 20, 2022
It took me almost an year to read this book. If you plan on reading, you should take your time and reflect on the advices Seneca gives in each letter before move on to the next.
A lot of the lessons in this book can be applied in our day-to-day lives and that's what amazed me the most. How philosophers of ancient times were already trying to answer questions that afflict us to this day. Lots of food for thought :)
A lot of the lessons in this book can be applied in our day-to-day lives and that's what amazed me the most. How philosophers of ancient times were already trying to answer questions that afflict us to this day. Lots of food for thought :)
December 6, 2014
Seneca's writings are crowded with truths. Excellent, if occasionally in need of paring down.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 77 reviews