Stoicism: A Very Short Introduction

Very Short Introductions #570

by Brad Inwood

Stoicism is both a long past philosophical school of ancient Greece and Rome, and an enduring philosophical movement that still inspires people in the twenty-first century to re-think and re-organize their lives in order to achieve personal satisfaction. What is the connection between them? This Very Short Introduction provides an introductory account of Stoic philosophy, and tells the story of how ancient Stoicism survived and evolved into the movement we see today. Exploring the roots of the school in the philosophy of fourth century BCE Greece, Brad Inwood examines its basic history and doctrines and its relationship to the thought of Plato, Aristotle and his successors, and the Epicureans. Sketching the history of the school's reception in the western tradition, heargues that, despite the differences between ancient and contemporary Stoics, there is a common core of philosophical insight that unites the modern version not just to Seneca, Epictetus, and Marcus Aurelius but also to the school's original founders, Zeno, Cleanthes, and Chrysippus. Inwood concludes by considering the place of Stoicism in modern life.

Genres: Philosophy, Nonfiction, History, Reference, Personal Development, Audiobook, Ebooks

136 pages, Kindle Edition

First published January 1, 2018

About the author

Brad Inwood is a specialist in ancient philosophy with particular emphasis on Stoicism and the Presocratics. He received his BA in Classics from Brock University in St. Catharines, Ontario. After an MA in Classics at the University of Toronto and a year of post-graduate research at Cambridge, he completed his doctorate in Classics at Toronto with a focus on ancient philosophy.

His career began with a Mellon postdoctoral fellowship at Stanford and he then took up a teaching post at the University of Toronto. While at Toronto he had two terms as DGS in Classics and served as chair of the Classics department and as acting chair of Philosophy, and founded Toronto’s Collaborative Program in Ancient and Medieval Philosophy (with two terms as director). He has enjoyed fellowships at the National Humanities Centre and the Centre for Advanced Study in the Behavioural Sciences and held the Canada Research Chair in Ancient Philosophy.

His research has always focused on ancient philosophy, especially in the Hellenistic and Presocratic periods. Major works include Ethics and Human Action in Early Stoicism, The Poem of Empedocles, Reading Seneca: Stoic Philosophy at Rome, Seneca: Selected Philosophical Letters, and Ethics After Aristotle. From 2007 to 2015 he was the editor of Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy and he is currently working on Later Stoicism 155 BC to AD 200: An Introduction and Collection of Sources in Translation for Cambridge University Press.

Primary appointments in both Philosophy and Classics. Ancient philosophy special interests include the Presocratics, Stoicism, moral psychology and ethics.

Reviews

[Jordan B Cooper · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent. This is one of the best volumes in this series that I've read. The author is clear, concise, and knowledgeable on the subject. A perfect introduction to this ancient school of thought.

[Henry Manampiring · Rating 4 out of 5]

It's called a "very short" introduction, but it doesn't mean it can't give you headache. I have been into Stoicism for a year now, reading the classics as well, and still I find it useful.

Recommended if you are REALLY into Stoicism and want to learn a complete introduction of the philosophy (logic, physics, ethics). Most contemporary books focus only on the ethics part.

[Leon · Rating 2 out of 5]

“When you wake up in the morning, tell yourself: the people I deal with today will be meddling, ungrateful, arrogant, dishonest, jealous and surly. They are like this because they can't tell good from evil. But I have seen the beauty of good, and the ugliness of evil, and have recognized that the wrongdoer has a nature related to my own - not of the same blood and birth, but the same mind, and possessing a share of the divine. And so none of them can hurt me. No one can implicate me in ugliness. Nor can I feel angry at my relative, or hate him. We were born to work together like feet, hands and eyes, like the two rows of teeth, upper and lower. To obstruct each other is unnatural. To feel anger at someone, to turn your back on him: these are unnatural.” - Marcus Aurelius

Tl;dr:
1. Today I'll meet annoying fools.
2. But they don't know what they are doing, and I do.
3. They are my kinsmen in reason.
4. Kinsmen in reason are built to work together.
5. So it's in my reason to work with them rather than dismiss them angrily.

Takeaways:
-People can't tell right from wrong, if they could, they'd surely act better.
"No one does wrong willingly" -Socrates
-Teach such people what is right rather than to get angry or vengeful.

[Manu Hortet · Rating 3 out of 5]

Quick look at Stoicism as a Greek school of thought, its preoccupations and main notions. I found valuable to connect what we would call modern Stoicism (the condensation of Marcus and Epictetus’ works into a guide for self-improvement) with its inevitable roots in the antique school, as such contextual framing pours reality and completeness into it.

I also find a very interesting exercise in considering the wide relationship between our beloved Jude-Christian tradition and these antique schools (Stoicism, late Platonism). This appears to facilitate a revitalized, way less dreamy reading on Christianity, which I felt could act as a firelighter for a friendlier intellectual relationship with it.

[Zackariah · Rating 5 out of 5]

Good introduction, but also reaches Plato, Marcus Aurelius, Seneca, and Cicero which give a highlighted understanding of the beginnings of the stoic mindset. These foundations of thought will allow for perseverance and intelligent exploration of a technical “tried and true” approach to the world.

[Kenneth · Rating 5 out of 5]

Not a how to, but an historical overview of stoicism and its beliefs. A lot of stuff the broics skip over, and for good reason. Stoic physics and logic just read as gobbledygook today. But it was exactly what I expected and wanted it to be.

[Jeremy · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is one of the best of the Very Short Introduction series I've read. The organization is straightforward, the explanations are clear, and the coverage of the material seems just right.

Stoicism is a philosophical school that existed from about 300 BC to about the third century AD, after which it pretty much disappeared until being rediscovered during the Renaissance. Unlike other ancient philosophies, there are no complete writings that have survived from the founding of the school and most material dates from near the end of its prominence. Most of that material is about ethics, which means that a lot of interesting scholarship has gone into trying to understand what the Stoics thought about other parts of philosophical endeavor and how they developed those ideas.

Ancient Stoics were divided into two groups - Big Stoicism, which is a full philosophy and includes Stoic ideas about ethics (how to live), physics (the nature of the world), and logic (reasoning); and minimal Stoicism, which says only ethics really matters and the rest is unnecessary. Much of the Stoic writing we have concerns ethics, and most people who are interested in Stoic thought today are in the minimal camp, but Inwood does a good job of showing the whole picture of Stoicism.

He starts by talking about the popularity of Stoicism today, with quotes from Marcus Aurelius, a Roman emperor whose philosophical musings on how to live a good life were Stoic in nature, and Epictetus, another important Stoic writer. From there is a chapter on some of the major themes of Marcus Aurelius, Epitectus, and Seneca. Then he launches into a full discussion of the founding of the school, followed by chapters on Physics, Ethics, and Logic. His final chapter is a discussion about whether Stoicism has any relevance today.

Stoicism was a very advanced philosophical system. Its origins are with Socrates and Plato, but the Stoics broke from Platonism because they didn't accept Plato's idea of forms. Specifically, they believed in a material universe where everything that can cause something else is physical. This also turns out to be why Stoicism faded away after the third century AD and was absorbed into existing Platonism. However, while it lasted, the Stoics had a very sophisticated explanation of the nature of the universe (physics) and a very advanced logic (method of reasoning). This led to a very satisfying set of ethics, and Stoicism was extremely popular.

Inwood does a great job of explaining all these sometimes difficult concepts. He uses quotes from Stoic writers and also contrasts the Stoics with other philosophical schools of the time in ways that help to explain Stoic concepts. I really felt like I was able to get a very good handle on the overall thinking of the Stoic philosophers, including where individuals in the school differed from each other. Inwood also does a good job at pointing out why the development of these ideas is important.

The only place I think Inwood falters a bit is in the last chapter. The Stoics believed some things that science has shown to be false, such as there is no space between matter. Overall, they believed that the universe was created and overseen by a benevolent god who desired good. Their ethics is based on the idea that people will do good when they know what good is. And since the natural state of the universe is good because of its creator, living in harmony with the universe means living a good life. We just have to understand what that good is. Inwood asks the question, now that we are so sophisticated, and he specifically means that now we know there is no benevolent creator, does Stoicism have any value. He says yes. But there are still many people who, despite other parts of Stoic physics being proven wrong, do believe in a benevolent creator and I think could connect more deeply with Stoicism than Inwood proposes. Not understanding that is a very slight miss on his part.

[KritikKröte · Rating 3 out of 5]

3 Sterne mag hart klingen aber wir müssen ja auch die unteren Sterne benutzen. Bewertungsinflation ist haram.

In dem Buch wird das Thema, wie bei der Reihe immer, oberflächlich behandelt. Stoizismus in diesem Fall, teilt der Autor in drei Kerngebiete ein: Physik, Ethik, Logik. In dieser Reihenfolge werden die drei Themen dann auch behandelt. Ich muss zugeben, dass Physik und Logik alles andere als verständlich waren und, was daran liegen mag, dass ich mich mit der Ethik besser auskenne oder weil das einfach generell leichter zu verstehen ist. Viel zu sagen gibt es über die einzelnen Teile eigentlich nicht, da die Erwartungen bei einem Einführungsbuch in der Regel erfüllt werden, allerdings mochte ich die Einführung mit der Geschichte der Stoa und das Ende mit Stoizismus in der heutigen Zeit.

Das Buch empfehlen würde ich allen, die verstehen wollen warum die stoische Ethik so ist wie sie ist, da die Physik größtenteils nicht mehr haltbar ist und die Logik wahrscheinlich zwei Jahrzehnte Studium bedarft. Dennoch sind die verständlichen Nuggets beider Teile gut zu gebrauchen wenn man sich die Ethik herleiten will. Wer nur für die praktischen Vorteile der Ethik kommt braucht nur den Anfang, das Ende und den Ethikteil lesen; liest idealerweise aber lieber The Daily Stoic von Ryan Holiday, da man da die pure Praxis bekommt und für den Anfang ausreichende Erklärung wie ich finde. Folglich ein Buch was man lesen kann aber nicht unbedingt muss.

[Lukáš Pelcman | From Book to Mind · Rating 3 out of 5]

It is interesting to find out that Stoicism is not only about the "indiference" and calm (in ethics), but that it also had physics and logic worked out. I begin to understand that ancient philosophical schools presented to its followers a complete worldview, including understanding of both the physical world as well as spiritual.

I had no idea that the bulk of Stoic philosophy has been building on Aristotelian virtue ethics. The cornerstone of its teachings on ethics is that there are virtues (to be pursued), vices (to be avoided) and then indifferent things, either preferable (such as wealth, health, life) or non-preferable (such as disease, poverty or death). In pursuit of virtues, true Stoic should be willing to accept the indifferent, both preferable as well as non-preferable.

It is also clear that Stoicism was building on determinism and is governed by providence. Nonetheless, core idea of stoic ethics was that one can lead a good life that is in accordance with nature. Author makes a point at the end of the book that though stoic teachings on physics are obsolete now, it still makes sense to follow the idea of good life with our current best understanding of physical world.

[Luke · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent read. This book was concise yet included enough substance for the reader to develop a deeper understanding of the Stoic philosophy. I thoroughly enjoyed how the book began by summarizing the historic predecessors of Stoicism (Socrates, Plato) and compared and contrasted these schools of thought throughout. This book does best at exploring the historical, cosmological, and ethical underpinnings of Stoicism rather than fleshing out the core tenets that can be used in daily modern life. If you are wanting to understand Stoicism on a deeper level, look no further.

[Daniel Wright · Rating 4 out of 5]

Chapter 1: Ancient Stoicism and modern life
Chapter 2: Reading Stoics today: Epictetus, Marcus Aurelius, and even Seneca
Chapter 3: The origins of the school: Stoicism and Plato
Chapter 4: Physics
Chapter 5: Ethics
Chapter 6: Logic
Chapter 7: Stoicism, then and now

[Melissa Barbosa · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is such a great book! It is a rather complicated topic, but the writing is very clear. I had a great time reading it.

[Ocean · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very useful little book

[Essence · Rating 3 out of 5]

Many people were probably like myself who went into this book expecting a broad summary. That is a yes and no answer with this book. This book includes the history and logic of the Stoics in addition to basic tenets. It’s honestly a springboard into further reading. This book is best processed with a notebook as it is very dense, but I feel very thorough.

[Tommy]

What a horrible way to live

[Alice R · Rating 3 out of 5]

Surprisingly packed full of info for what is called a short introduction. It is split into seven chapters with the largest chapters dedicated in turn to 'physics', 'ethics' and 'logic' which explain these pillars of stoicisms, diving into them with examples and quotes. You're introduced to a lot of names and branches of stoicism throughout the book which can feel a little too pacy at times, but I understand that this is meant to give an overview of the philosophy as a whole without too much focus on single individuals.


It definitely could have benefittrd from the addition of a glossary of terms (often borrowed from other philosophical schools, linguists, physics, and psychology). I often felt myself reaching for a dictionary, especially in the sections concerning physics and logic.


The book does very successfully provide a further reading list and quotes from the figures named to give you a path for further research. I'd recommend it as an introduction if you're interested in learning about stoicism and doing your own research after reading, but not if you're looking for a 'read and done' fully comprehensive book on the topic (if such a thing can exist), or a more casual/light read just about how you could apply stoicism to your own life.

[Steph K · Rating 2 out of 5]

I started this book of November 2021 and it was so dense and boring and hard to understand that it took me months to finish it (it's only 108 pages, for perspective). It's more like a textbook than a "brief introduction." It can get repetitive and too detailed at times. I honestly learned very little from this book, which was disappointing considering how excited I was when I bought it.

[Nathan Seale · Rating 4 out of 5]

A helpful introduction to the tenets of Stoicism. Inwood looks at the three prominent Stoic writers (Seneca, Epictetus, and Marcus Aurelius) and compares their views of Stoicism to other ancient philosophies: Platonism, Aristotelianism, and Epicureanism.

[Dave Reads · Rating 3 out of 5]

Because I teach a college-level course on ethics, I have read a lot about Stoicism, the philosophy that continues to guide people who seek a productive and satisfying life. One might think that a book called “Stoicism: A Very Short Introduction” would be light on details. But the book by Brad Inwood, who teaches ancient philosophy at Yale University, is surprisingly comprehensive. It’s a no-fluff book that takes us through the history and meaning of this philosophy.

We learn about the history of Stoicism and how it has remained popular throughout generations, gaining new fans and followers even today. Its explanation of how it relates to the thinking of other philosophers, including Epicurus, Plato, Aristotle, and others, was better than in some longer publications. There are seven chapters of the book, with several focusing on physics, ethics, and logic.

The final chapter deals with how this philosophy is part of today's fascination. We have seen new books, websites, and even social media sites devoted to this form of deep thinking.
“Stoicism: A Very Short Introduction” is an ideal book for anyone interested in learning more. But even those who have never read much Stoicism will come away with a good understanding of its theories.

MEMORABLE HIGHLIGHTS:
Marcus Aurelius, emperor of Rome from 161 to 180 ce and arguably the most powerful man alive at the time, was also a Stoic. And Stoicism, as is well-known, prepares its adherents for the tough times, gives them perspective, puts things in context. If life hands out lemons, the Stoic will certainly try making lemonade, but if that doesn’t work she’ll at least know why and be able to manage nicely. Her philosophy prepares her for whatever the world sends her way; she will be well-practised in the art of managing life, using her intelligence and training to embrace it, whether it’s going well or badly. Her philosophy will be a genuine guide for life.

Epictetus was born in Hierapolis in Phrygia (Asia Minor) around 50 ce and sent to Rome as a slave while still young. His master was a Greek freedman, Epaphroditus, who served at Nero’s court. Epictetus studied philosophy with Musonius Rufus, was eventually freed, and then was expelled from Rome by Domitian along with other teachers of philosophy. He set up a school in Nicopolis, in north-western Greece, where he taught until his death early in the 2nd century ce. He lectured on technical topics in Stoicism,

Marcus Aurelius was born to a politically important aristocratic family in 121 ce and had an exceptional education in rhetoric, philosophy, and politics. Preferring the philosophical life, he was nevertheless adopted as successor to the emperor Antoninus Pius. After a long apprenticeship in power, he became emperor in 161 ce and governed well under difficult circumstances until his death (while on military campaign) in 180 ce. He established philosophical schools in Athens during his reign. His philosophical diary, To Himself (more commonly known as the Meditations), wasn’t published in his lifetime and became influential when it was ‘rediscovered’ in the 10th century ce.

For modern readers, Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius provide the foundation for our understanding of Stoicism. Yet looked at from a historian’s perspective, they are hardly typical representatives of the school. The emperor was not a professional philosopher and sometimes expresses views that conflict with what we know about the school from other sources. Some scholars even question whether it is right to count him as a Stoic at all; after all, he credits philosophers from other schools with inspiring his thought and even refers to Stoics in the third person

Human beings are by nature motivated to pursue happiness, their natural goal (telos), but they also have a motivation to pursue other values, though these lesser aims are always to be sacrificed if necessary. What, we might join their ancient opponents in asking, is the relationship between these two kinds of aim? We get some insight into this question by considering the variety of ways in which the Stoics described the telos, the goal of human life.

[Jeremy Murray · Rating 3 out of 5]

I encountered the "Very Short Introduction" series while at university, and they continue to live up to their name here with Brad Inwood's introduction to Stoic philosophy.

In addition to being short, and, at times, densely packed with ideas, a whirlwind overview of an ancient, essential philosophy doesn't have much time to engage the reader with asides, anecdotes or applications, the sort which might make the work more approachable.

As such, I enjoyed the first two chapters most, an introduction to how stoicism applies to modern life and a look at some of the key figures and their writing. The main featured thinkers are Epictetus, famously a stoic slave, and Marcus Aurellius, famously a stoic emperor.

That two such wildly different men could find solace in stoicism speaks to the resonance the philosophy maintains to this day. The frequency with which one encounters the word stoic is evidence of this.

To Aurelius, Stoicism provides an understanding of right and wrong, and an empathy for fellow human beings, even those who have an imperfect understanding of these principles.

Epictetus, Aurelius and Seneca are featured here since much of the original Stoic sources have been lost to time. The ideas of original founder Zeno were passed down by students, forming differing streams of thought, Large and Minimal Stoicism, the latter of which focuses exclusively on ethics.

Seneca was the most prolific of the featured thinkers, and I reread this little book, which made little impact on me the first time, the day after reading Seneca. I am glad I read them in that order, since Seneca is engaging and accessible, and the bulk of the remaining "Short Introduction" gets more technical.

After a historical overview examining the influence of Plato, we get chapters on physics, ethics and logic. Greek physics bears little resemblance to the modern discipline, and obviously much of the 'science' explored is no longer considered scientific.

We get a variety of interpretations of the nature of matter, and while these can help us to understand aspects of Stoicism that apply to modern life, for the most part this is of interest to philosophers and historians. All one really need know is that the stoics were determinists - they believed that the universe was mapped out for us, and that our free will is only applied in terms of how well, or poorly, we trod the path laid out.

Technical issues dominate the chapter on logic as well, leaving the chapter on ethics as the most interesting and relevant for the modern reader. The new philosopher-reader might enjoy these chapters as introductions, but the proficient will want more depth. And for lay-philosophers like myself, the juice here isn't worth the squeeze.

Stoic ethics are contrasted with the 'instrumental' ethics of the Epicureans, who viewed ethics as a means to an end rather than as the supreme example of 'the good life'. I find tremendous personal value in Aristotelian virtue ethics, and while I reject the determinism of the Stoics, I appreciate their emphasis on practicing virtue.

Elements of Stoicism do not correspond with modern evolutionary psychology, such as the notion that the wise man suffers no grief, and aspects of modern stoic practices in the self-help sphere can give an insubstantial or even narcissistic accounting of the depth of the philosophy, but overall Stoicism remains a powerful means of finding peace in a tumultuous world.

Inwood gives us a brief final "Then and Now" chapter, and the book concludes with a further reading list and index.

I find metaphysics and logic fairly tedious going, despite my interest in philosophy. Hence the three-star review.

But this book remains comprehensive for a "Very Short Introduction". Recommended for new students of philosophy and for those, like myself, who want to read some of the great primary sources, like Seneca. Check out my review of Seneca's "On the Shortness of Life" for a more relatable introduction to this great philosophy.

[Clif · Rating 4 out of 5]

This small book packs in a wealth of information on Stoicism, a good deal of it of little or no interest to the modern reader simply because the ancients either had things wrong or their ideas have been superseded. What interests most of us about Stoicism is the view it had of how to live life, an area that is always open to contributions old or new since the challenge is as much before modern readers as it was to the people of ancient Greece.

Brad Inwood is true to his subject, conscientious in briefly going over all the areas held dear to the ancients. These sections can be easily skipped leaving about half the tiny book to explain the area of ethics that never loses its appeal and that we hear stated often without the speakers necessarily knowing they are expressing Stoic views. One could call much of it common sense.

A few things I like about Stoicism are the freedom from conjuring up a deity, the absence of any idea of sin or a low opinion of the human being by nature and most of all no concept of an afterlife. Recognizing our reasoning ability, like a good psychiatrist, Stoicism asks us to consider the nature of life and how we might maximize its value while minimizing, or at least handling, the unavoidable tragedies we are sure to encounter.

To help us through life, making it both good and satisfying, the Stoic offers self-improvement, giving work to do in an area where each of us is fully empowered: the self. This doesn't mean being a saint, but building virtue, in the Stoic sense of pursuing justice, wisdom, courage and self-control. These are all within the power of each of us in a world where most things are beyond our control. Don't carry the world on your shoulders as worry achieves nothing. Appreciate the people and things around you, but also realize that along with everything else, the objects of your love will not last, nor will you.

Enjoy life with enthusiasm and full participation, but don't give in to passion, temporary by nature, which puts one in a squirrel cage of endless pursuit of unlimited desire. Far from avoiding thoughts of tragic events such as the death of a loved one, ponder beforehand how to react when it happens. Don't bemoan your own physical deterioration, but counter it with exercise and healthy habits.

Supporting all is the natural world. Things work best when they operate according to nature and for man with his reasoning ability, that demands thinking about what to do and recognizing both abilities and limitations. Stoicism found acquisitiveness and a driving ambition to have power over others dead-ends with no possibility of stable satisfaction. Competition can be fun, but the greatest challenge is within oneself.

Firmly anchored in the material world where cause and effect rule, Stoicism had no use for Platonic ideals, perfect representations of the things we know that are standards for excellence (the perfect horse or tree). It did not get literally lost in thought, where the things held in the head were real and superior to what was before the eyes. Stoics had a charming word for concepts, "sayables", that were good for communication and working with logic but that had no material existence.

Far from pessimists, Stoics thought things were for the best overall, overseen by divine power which, mercifully, was not elaborated or personified. Humanity was not deceived by the cosmos. They were not the dour, long suffering and emotionless people that is unfortunately the impression many people today have of them. They simply recognized that living for sensation, to get the higher high and the more extreme experience was not the path to happiness.

As I read, I found myself continually thinking "this makes a lot of sense." The book is an easy read, another in the delightful Very Short Introduction series of which there are now around 100 titles.

[Bernie Gourley · Rating 5 out of 5]

Inwood provides an overview Stoic philosophy as it’s discussed in a scholarly context. To distinguish Stoicism as scholars see it from how it’s viewed by those who practice it as a lifestyle, the author differentiates “large Stoicism” from “minimal stoicism.” The vast majority of books today deal only with minimal stoicism – in other words; they exclusively explore how to lead a good and virtuous life, i.e. ethics-centric Stoicism. Scholars, however, are also interested in the physics (/ metaphysics) and the logic of Stoicism.


There are several reasons for this difference in scope. First, Stoic ethics has aged much better than its other philosophical branches. Much of Stoic logic has been improved upon or superseded, and Stoic physics is [arguably] obsolete. This means that scholars studying Stoic physics and logic are more interested in those subjects as a stage of development or a piece of philosophical history than they are as contenders for understanding those subjects. Second, prominent Stoic philosophers with surviving writings (i.e. Epictetus, Marcus Aurelius, and Seneca) have inspired many people by discussing Stoicism as a way of life – not so much as a navel-gazing endeavor.


After discussing the origins of Stoicism, the major Stoic authors, and how Stoicism relates to other philosophical schools of the ancient world, the book presents a chapter each on physics, ethics, and logic. The last chapter investigates how Stoicism is viewed today and how it might maintain relevance despite challenges to some of its metaphysical and logical underpinnings.


Having read a number of books on Stoicism, I didn’t know whether this concise book would be of much benefit. However, by describing Stoicism’s broader context and how the deterioration of much of that context influences the philosophy’s relevance, the book offered plenty of food-for-thought. If you’re interested in this broader context, you may want to give this book a look.

[Travis A Coe]

Highly recommended for anyone who has a serious interest in Stoicism or ancient history.

Inwood does a great job giving the highlights of the reconstruction of the early and middle Stoa writers and what their beliefs were. Using that historical view he contrasts Large Stoicism with Minimal Stoicism (argued by Aristo an early Stoic period philosopher), this is most similar to the Modern Stoicism that we see written an today. Knowing this contrast of opinions existed from early Stoic philosophy gives some perspective on the breadth of views within Stoicism, much of which is lost to modern people who are just hearing about Stoicism now.

I feel that knowing Large Stoicism gives perspective on why Logic, Physics, and Ethics were so important to the Stoics’ philosophy. The other important perspective piece is the information on how the Stoics adapted parts of other prior philosophies, in what they kept, what they refuted and how they refuted those philosophies. These perspectives really come together at the conclusion of the book, where discussion of what Stoicism has to offer to us today is discussed. The rise of modern science means we understand our place in the universe differently from what the Stoics had believed it to be. Modern application of philosophy needs to navigate modern science as part of its approach to answering what it means to have a good human life. Inwood recommended reading Lawrence Becker’s, “A New Stoicism”, I will have to get that book once I work my way through my recent new books.

[Iain Peters · Rating 3 out of 5]

The introduction to the text hints that there is a dichotomy within peoples' perception of what 'Stoicism' actually is. There is the modern minimalist interpretation of stoicism which focuses more on living a good life (via the works of Marcus Aurelius, Epictetus, and - to a lesser extent - Seneca the younger) and then there is the more academic study of the teachings of the ancient school of Stoicism that provided the basis for the works of the aforementioned 'big three'.

I was hoping (my fault, I suppose, for not researching the book thoroughly enough...) that the book would give a primer - or a 'grounding'- in the basics of philosophy which would be required to make the transition to reading the actual texts of Marcus Aurelius, Epictetus, and Seneca much less painless. Instead, it read more as a part-biography/part-critique of Stoicism as a whole from the perspective of somebody who is already - quite evidently - learned in the sphere of philosophy. As such, I would not recommend this to somebody who does not already have a firm grounding in the philosophy of Plato/Socrates (as well as the pre-socratics).

Basically, it wasn’t what I had hoped, but it was well-researched and interesting nonetheless.

[João Silva · Rating 3 out of 5]

Uma boa introdução, mas só peca por ser curta demais...
Poderia ter abordado melhor o contexto socio cultural dos diferentes autores e como isso moldou as suas diferenças até da filosofia ao longo do tempo, como ele bem escreveu.
A filosofia grega estoica original é bastante diferente em vários pontos do período final romano que caracteriza o seu apogeu e que é o mais conhecido até hoje...
Um livro que aborda bem apesar disto as áreas do estoicismo desde a física, ética, lógica , e os seus limites e apelos atuais...
Principalmente o seu carácter mais desconhecido até "teológico" e que vai muito para além da ética.. pois o estoicismo até influenciou vários aspetos do cristianismo.
Basicamente o autor desmonta alguns mitos bem prevalentes que esta filosofia é vítima, e demonstra o que é ter um espírito estoico atual, eloquente dito na conclusão como estoicismo máximo...
Citando mas não desenvolvendo as diferentes fontes dos autores que podemos beber e fazer os nossos próprios julgamentos .. pois o livro focou se mais nos princípios basilares em que se entendiam e que mantinham essa perspetiva evolutiva e de continuidade..
Mesmo assim este pequeno livro pode nos dar a volta á cabeça 👀
Boas leituras:)

[Anastasia Bizyayeva · Rating 5 out of 5]

This introduction was the perfect segue into what I'm branding as 'Stoic month', where I read a couple of Stoic texts across March. I'm a little bit biased in my review because Brad Inwood was a much-beloved university professor of mine and he can do no wrong in my eyes, but this is genuinely a massively helpful introduction.

This book does a couple of things:
-Gives you a sense of how much Stoic knowledge we have and how much hasn't survived (hint: we basically have no early Stoic works so everything is at best second-hand from that time)
-Orders Stoic thinkers by when they were active & who their influences were
-Connects Stoicism with other schools of thought like logotherapy and rational emotive therapy, while also contrasting it with Epicureanism, Cynicism, Platonism, and Aristotelianism (among others).
-Gives a brief intro into Stoic metaphysics, logic, and ethics (and considering most places only focus on the ethics, it's great to have these components)

Ultimately, a lot jam packed into a little book, and all structured supremely well.

[Ftpagain · Rating 3 out of 5]

A decent overview.
The only real problem I have with this book is the last few sentences. The author's conclusion was, for lack of a better word, silly. Inwood posed a question whether or not stoicism has a place in modern society. The argument was that modern people can't fully subscribe to this philosophy because the view of ancient stoics on "physics" is, and I quote, "obsolete." It seems that the author is not aware that the vast majority of people on Earth today believe in almost identical universe, and our place in it, as stoics. Besides, the book is all about different approaches to stoicism by different people in history, so why even post a question that has an obvious answer? Just like in the past, modern people take stoicism and develop different schools of thought around it, disagreeing on certain aspects and agreeing on others. An atheist will take the idea of rational universal being /God and move away from it, while a theist will lean into it. Both, however, can very much follow stoic ideas on reason, ethics, virtues , etc

[Ava · Rating 5 out of 5]

What a wonderful little book! Especially compared to Beard and Henderson’s disappointing book on Classics in the same series. Brad (who I am very grateful to have taken a seminar with) does something very important here: he compares ancient stoicism with the modern stoicism trend. Or, why do self-proclaimed stoics today only care about the ethical aspects of stoicism? Do we have anything to gain today from the physics and logic of stoicism? These are excellent guiding questions and this volume will help any modern practitioner of “stoicism” (whatever that may mean to them) understand the roots of this philosophy. Brad gives an excellent beginner-level introduction to ancient stoicism, and yet he doesn’t dumb things down. Even for me the chapter on stoic logic was tricky but fascinating. I hope more books in this OUP series are as well written as Brad’s. I loaned this to my dad for him to read.

[Odhran Molloy · Rating 4 out of 5]

A different book than I as expecting but valuable information.

If you have only read Modern Stoicism books from the likes of Donald Robertson, Massimo Pigliucci or Ryan Holiday, this book is different. This is not a guide to using Stoicism in your everyday life, or even extolling the benefits of such practices. This book is giving you the history and a (pretty in-depth) overview of the major Stoic areas of thought, Logic, Physics, Ethics. A breakdown of what is known of the ancient Stoic thoughts on each area and how they compared to the other major schools of thought.

I enjoyed this book and value the author's style. It wasn't the book I thought it was but that shouldn't count against it.

[Nelson · Rating 5 out of 5]

I'm hijacking this book and review for Jesus (sorry not sorry).

A great intro to Stoicism. Inwood offers plain explanations, as well as quotes from original sources for many of the essential concepts of this philosophical school.

I first noticed obvious Stoic language ("act and not be acted upon") in 2 Nephi Chapter 2, so I wondered if there was anything else from that school in that chapter.

Looked on Wikipedia to see if more of Stoicism can be found, and discovered that there is ("if there is no righteousness there is no happiness"). Stoics believed happiness came only from virtue. Health and wealth are "preferred" but they can make you do bad things as well.

So I requested this book from interlibrary loan to dig deeper to see if there's even more. Indeed, there is. The human telos is happiness ("men are that they might have joy"); good can't come without opposition ("there needs be an opposition in all things) and contrasts ("neither good nor bad...all things must needs be compounded in one").

I Googled and asked around LDS groups, and no one has ever touched this low-hanging fruit.