Comparing ancient and modern philosophy is always an interesting thing to do. Ancient philosophy seems to have been much more practical and applied; something that everyone could take part in, instead of being relegated to experts in the field. It was not there to argue about everything in existence (well, except for the Skeptics) but was instead meant to teach you how to live your life to the fullest. In ancient philosophy, a lot was taken for granted that would never be done so today; such as morality. It was not called into question, not investigated, but it was assumed that everyone would agree that “good” was good and “evil” was evil. Unlike modern philosophy, which all too often goes off into incomprehensible, overly complicated, and useless areas of discussion, ancient philosophy was more like a handbook of proper living.
To get the book itself, it was pretty good overall. I did not enjoy it as much as Marcus Aurelius' or Seneca's works, but it still had its good parts. It is split into three parts: the Discourses, the Handbook, and the Fragments. The vast majority of the book is composed of the Discourses; a very small portion of the book contains the other two sections. In the Discourses, Epictetus discusses and argues about and for his flavor of Stoicism. The Handbook is just what it sounds like- a handbook of Stoic philosophy, containing a summary and guide of many of the Stoic teachings for living life. The Fragments are some collected teachings from and about Epictetus that don't belong to either of the previous two.
I am a big fan of many aspects of the Stoic philosophy. Its emphasis on virtue, self control, and only worrying about what you have control over really resonates with me. I do not remember who exactly said this, but this paraphrase summarizes so much of Stoic philosophy: there are two types of things that people complain about; things that they have control over, and things they do not. If it is the first, fix it- there is no reason to complain. If it is the second, it is out of your hands and you should just get used to it- there is also no reason to complain. Certainly, it is probably too black and white of a worldview to be practical for most people; but with a little adaption, much of the Stoic lifestyle and outlook can be applied to modern life quite well.
Two of the most major problems I have with ancient Stoicism are their ignorance of psychological disorders and their views on women. The first is not unexpected, and I don't really hold it against them. To think philosophers two thousand years ago should think of either depression or anxiety as a clinical disease much like physical ailments is naïve at best. We can easily enough forgive this and adapt Stoicism using insights; in fact, modified versions of it may still be helpful in certain cases of mental illness. But a more inexcusable flaw is the majority of Stoic's views about women. Many of them seem to think that women should be valued as nothing more than as objects to men, and certainly not being considered worthy enough of being philosophers themselves. Besides this, anything considered “feminine” is automatically equated with being improper for the aspiring Stoic philosopher. There are exceptions to this of course, but Stoics were certainly not egalitarian when it came to women. On a final note, a problem I have with Epictetus' personal philosophy (I say personal because I haven't read it in other Stoic's writings) is his opinion on humanity's position in the world. Unsurprisingly, he seems to hold that we are the most important living beings on Earth. Considering that it is ancient philosophy, that's not what bothers me. What does bother me is that he thinks everything else in existence was created to serve mankind somehow; for example, the donkey was created specifically for humans to carry things on (Ray Comfort's banana, anyone?). A remarkably pompous and arrogant viewpoint to hold. Even so, it may not be as bad as it first seems, as long as it is held along with the Stoic morals of modesty and respect for life. But still, an entirely indefensible idea to hold, particularly today.
Even with all these flaws- and there are more still, just much less bothersome to me- it was still a good book to read. It gives you insight into the world of Ancient Rome, and shows how many Romans viewed themselves and the world around them. And on top of that, it has a lot that can be taken away and applied to modern life as well. So in conclusion, I would recommend this book to people with an interest in philosophy or history, although it definitely is not my favorite Stoic work. Although a lot of the book is good, and a few areas really shine above the rest, the flaws prevent me from giving it a higher rating.