What do you think?
Rate this book
Entretiens. Manuel
Je dois mourir.
Si c'est tout de suite, je vais à la mort ;
Si c'est dans un moment, pour l'instant, je déjeune, puisque l'heure est venue de le faire, ensuite je mourrai.
I, 1
Si c'est tout de suite, je vais à la mort ;
Si c'est dans un moment, pour l'instant, je déjeune, puisque l'heure est venue de le faire, ensuite je mourrai.
I, 1
488 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 108
235 people are currently reading
4405 people want to read
About the author
Epictetus
907 books2,312 followersEpictetus was a Greek Stoic philosopher. He was probably born a slave at Hierapolis, Phrygia (present day Pamukkale, Turkey), and lived in Rome until his exile to Nicopolis in northwestern Greece, where he lived most of his life and died. His teachings were noted down and published by his pupil Arrian in his Discourses. Philosophy, he taught, is a way of life and not just a theoretical discipline. To Epictetus, all external events are determined by fate, and are thus beyond our control, but we can accept whatever happens calmly and dispassionately. Individuals, however, are responsible for their own actions which they can examine and control through rigorous self-discipline. Suffering arises from trying to control what is uncontrollable, or from neglecting what is within our power. As part of the universal city that is the universe, human beings have a duty of care to all fellow humans. The person who followed these precepts would achieve happiness.
Other language versions:
Epictète
Epícteto
Epiktet
Other language versions:
Epictète
Epícteto
Epiktet
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 157 reviews
Read
October 8, 2017
Epictetus (c. 60 - c. 125 CE), whose name literally meant "bought", was a Greek born in what is now western Turkey and became, we know not how, a slave in Rome. His last master, himself a freedman, allowed him to attend the lectures of the Roman Stoic philosopher C. Musonius Rufus and eventually freed him. Epictetus taught philosophy in Rome until Emperor Domitian banned all philosophers from the city. He moved to Nicopolis in Epirus and started a school of his own, where he remained until his death, despite Marcus Aurelius' requests that he return to Rome.
Epictetus was a philosopher in the then already very old tradition called Stoicism, begun by Zeno in the 5th century BCE, and, according to those much more expert in the Stoic literature than I, was not himself a creative thinker. However, he knew the tradition well and adopted a tone and style of presentation which has appealed for nearly 2,000 years. Epictetus did not, in fact, write "his" books; they were written down by his student and ultimately well known historian, Arrian. It is of interest to note that those who can read the original Greek report that the language used in the books attributed by Arrian to Epictetus is quite different from that used by Arrian in his own books, a good indication that Arrian might be reporting faithfully what Epictetus actually said.
Not all of these writings have survived, but, unlike the founders of the Stoic tradition - Zeno, Cleanthus (Cleanthes), Chrysippus - of whose extensive writings almost nothing has survived, we do have a few hundred pages of these reports on the lectures and discussions of Epictetus.
The founders of Stoicism were very interested in physics, metaphysics and logic, but there is little to none of that in Epictetus. He seems to be almost exclusively concerned with ethics, with what is the correct way to live, what are the correct values in life. And because he was co-opted by the Roman Catholic Church and generations of the oligarchy in Europe and America, reading Epictetus can arouse some very distasteful associations in one's mind.(*) So, above all, be careful of the translation you read. Also, beware something called The Golden Sayings of Epictetus; that appears to be a cherry-picking of Epictetus made for the above-mentioned clientele.
In this book we have an English translation of the Discourses and the Enchiridion (also known as the Manual). The Manual is exactly what the title suggests - a short summary of Stoic dogmas with an admixture of advice and admonishments. I discuss a French translation of the Manual elsewhere
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
and will concentrate on the significantly lengthier Discourses here. The Discourses, of which only about half has survived to our day, present in a very unorganized, non-uniform and sometimes repetitive manner Epictetus' thoughts on many matters. These are reports of lectures and conversations. They are not all of equal quality, but altogether I find them to be quite interesting.
At the center of Stoic philosophy is the faculty of reason, and the Discourses begins with it. Although Epictetus does not broach the subjects of physics and metaphysics, the Stoics view the universe as rational, though cold and cruel. It runs by its own rational laws without any concern for humans; the only advantage human beings have in this universe is that with the faculty of reason they may understand their limited place in it and come to accept these limitations. And central to this is understanding what is and what is not within our power. There is a distinction between that which depends solely on us (that which is solely within our power to affect) and the rest. And precious little is on this side of the line; even one's own body is not within our power in this sense, for it becomes injured and ill, ages and decays, none of which we would permit if it were actually within our power. Once this distinction is clearly understood, the next central Stoic axiom is posited: Don't be concerned with anything which lies on the other side of the line; only that which lies on this side of the distinction matters and should occupy us. The rest must be accepted and endured as it comes.
I find this to be a fascinating philosophical position. The Stoics isolate an inviolable core of control and will, make that the center of life, and dismiss the rest.
This is an austere and ascetic philosophy.
As for desire, for the moment, suppress it completely.
This follows because that which one desires lies on the other side of the line. But even those things on this side of the line, such as urges, likes and dislikes, follow them only lightly, nonsystematically, without excessive effort. All attachments to objects, people, ambitions, etc. should not be taken as essential or important. In fact, one must constantly remind oneself that they "do not depend upon us," they are outside of our control, and therefore should be taken or left as they come and go.(**)
Another central, but related dogma:
That which torments men is not reality but the opinions they make of it for themselves.
Our opinions do depend on us; we may change them as we will. Hence, if one feels torment, change your opinion so that you no longer do so. Epictetus grants, somewhat indirectly, that this may well be very difficult to carry out and repeatedly offers various concrete ways in the Manual to develop this ability to become unattached.
Do not expect that events will occur as you wish; decide to want whatever happens and you will be happy.
Again, not at all easy to do. Hidden within these maxims is the prospect of an enormous mental and spiritual effort.
Clearly, there is nothing passive about Stoicism's resignation to what is not within one's power. Stoicism is also not at all timorous. After pointing out that human beings have many gifts such as reason, fortitude and patience, Epictetus inveighs against those who fear that which is not in one's power.
...but you sit trembling, for fear this or that should happen, and lamenting and mourning and groaning at what does happen; and then you accuse the gods! In what does such baseness end but in impiety? And yet God has not only granted these faculties by which we may bear every event without being depressed or broken by it, but, like a good king and a true father, has placed their exercise above restraint, compulsion, or hindrance, and wholly within our own control; nor has he reserved a power, even to himself, of hindering or restraining them. With these things free, and your own, will you not use them, nor consider what you have received, nor from whom?
(This "God" is the great artificer who made everything, including the gods of the Greek pantheon. You can see how Christianity was able to absorb much of Epictetus' writings.)
It is difficulties that show what men are.
It is a pity that the word "character" (in the moral sense) has been so debased. Speaking only for myself, I can hardy write the word down. For I've seen so often that the word was shouted the loudest by those with the blackest characters and employed as a weapon to attain or maintain personal power and advantage. As soon as I hear the word, I start sniffing for the odor of shameless hypocrisy. And in my nostrils no stench is worse. However, it is a central notion in Greco-Roman philosophy, including Stoic philosophy. Character was developed, attained and proven, not endowed. And to develop, attain and prove character was for Epictetus nearly synonymous with understanding the universe, performing the arduous mental and spiritual work necessary to deal with the consequences of that understanding, and then to live that understanding in a completely consistent manner. This he makes clear in his many stories illustrating admirable behavior and despicable behavior.
One could well imagine that this philosophy could lead to a complete disengagement from society and one's fellow man, even to a disregard or disdain for them, but such is not the case at all. For how one chooses to behave in intercourse with other humans is one of the few things within our power, and those are precisely the matters the Stoics do take seriously. A natural consequence of the essential axioms above is that one does not take advantage of others, for there is nothing of value to be taken from them. One does not steal, cheat, lie, murder, etc., for nothing is to be gained. Though Epictetus writes that all creatures are selfish, he also writes that the universe is designed so that no individual can increase his (real) good without simultaneously increasing that of all. And, unlike the Cynics (with whom the Stoics have much in common), the Stoics did not spurn cooperating with societal norms as long as they did not directly conflict with the basic axioms and their consequences.
The Discourses is a very rich book, but this review is getting long, so I have to leave much aside.
I cannot close before re-emphasizing that Epictetus' informal, conversational style in the Discourses is a major factor in his 2,000 year long success, though, as you can see above, he sometimes has recourse to hectoring.(***) It is often a pleasure to read the Discourses, though, of course, I was careful just to note my pleasure, not to revel overmuch in it...
(*) When they translated Epictetus, the monks freely made substitutions (like the disciple Paul for Socrates) and chose wording which changed the content. In fact, I have an English translation from the beginning of the 20th century which makes Epictetus sound like he wrote Victorian Christian tracts... I'm looking forward to the upcoming Oxford Classics translation, which should have even less additional veneer than this one does.
(**) Clearly, Stoicism has many commonalities with Buddhism. In fact, at the beginning of the 17th century the Portuguese priest Matteo Ricci translated some of Epictetus into Chinese, because he felt they would recognize some of their own views. This was designed to gain their confidence, preliminary to pressing translations of the Bible onto them.
(***) An integral part of his style is to use stories about historical figures to exemplify his points, so be sure to get an edition in which his many references to these figures are thoroughly explained, as does this one.
Rating
http://leopard.booklikes.com/post/812...
April 12, 2011
Stoicism is based on one big assumption and 2 decisions based on this assumption.
The assumption: There are things outside your control and things within your control.
Decision #1: I accept that which is outside my control and refuse to let it bother me.
Decision #2: I will perfect what is in my control.
I wish I had read this in college, because it provides a workable system to attaining something closer to inner peace in a wide variety of situations. I don't control my law school acceptance, but I do control how much effort I will put into my personal statement. As a Stoic, I would hard on my statement, and realize that stressing over the decision is a waste of time. This is easier than it sounds.
Epictetus has great ideas, and this is worth reading for someone who is interested in truly freeing their minds, but I still prefer Seneca the Younger (who treats his reader as a friend) over Epictetus (who treats his reader as a student).
The assumption: There are things outside your control and things within your control.
Decision #1: I accept that which is outside my control and refuse to let it bother me.
Decision #2: I will perfect what is in my control.
I wish I had read this in college, because it provides a workable system to attaining something closer to inner peace in a wide variety of situations. I don't control my law school acceptance, but I do control how much effort I will put into my personal statement. As a Stoic, I would hard on my statement, and realize that stressing over the decision is a waste of time. This is easier than it sounds.
Epictetus has great ideas, and this is worth reading for someone who is interested in truly freeing their minds, but I still prefer Seneca the Younger (who treats his reader as a friend) over Epictetus (who treats his reader as a student).
July 14, 2024
I could NOT finish the book. It's really laborious and requires a lot of dedication and passion on this topic in order to sustain your attention for its duration. Just not for me. For this level of philosophy I require either a different medium, a different author, or smaller chunks.
September 4, 2021
I went into this book looking to understand a little more about Stoicism. And, boy, did I get it. Before you read on, let me tell you right away: from a recommendations point of view, the Discourses is a slog. It repeats the same thing over and over again from different angles. If you want a gloss and/or just the juice of it, read the Enchiridion and skip the Discourses. The Enchiridion is a series of pithy aphorisms and thoughts. It wouldn’t be amiss in a modern, self-help section of a bookshop. I don’t mean to denigrate it by saying that, either. I think it’s a feat of the work. It manages to distill the general point of Stoic thought into a pamphlet that remains digestible, even now, to an audience of people whose attention spans have been fried by Twitter.
As for the Discourses: like I said, it’s long and repetitive. But you come away feeling like you understand Stoicism. Here is my gloss: a good Stoic should divide everything into two camps: that which you can control and that which you can’t control. Call the former internals and the latter externals. You cannot be reasonably charged with moral agency over externals, so dismiss externals from your life. They are of no interest to you. In fact, if you make the mistake of desiring externals or placing too much value in externals, you will find yourself a slave to something: be it beauty, fame, intellect, power, sex, alcohol, or luxury. You cannot control whether you will always have these things or not. If you put stock in them, your actions and happiness will be independent of your own will; rather, they will be dependent on whichever externals you choose to chase and desire. You make yourself a slave to them. If you want to be free, if you want to be a rational agent, turn away from them.
Internals are where the hard work must be done. Epictetus believes to be a good person, you have to live in excellent conformity to your nature as a human being. Once you’ve dismissed externals, you can begin focusing on the important virtues that you do have control over. He never strictly gives you a list of virtues or tells you exhaustively what the nature of a human being is, but examples and adjectives do pop up every now and again. “Kindness”, “co-operation”, “humility”, the exercising of one’s rational faculty, being good at your job and contributing to society — that sort of thing.
Personally, I find the tool of separating things into internals and externals to be incredibly useful. I’m the sort of person who struggles with my relationship to things I can’t control, especially other human beings. I want people to think well of me and I get very lonely when I perceive I’m unloved. It’s useful to use Stoicism as a reminder that, when I get that way, I’m living in a prison of my own making. I’m choosing to be a slave to external opinion, rather than a free man. It’s important to constantly remind oneself of that which one can control and that which one cannot.
However, I do worry sometimes that the Stoic philosophy goes too far. In the pursuit of personal happiness — which, admittedly, can be achieved by restructuring the way you think about things and being careful where you place value — Epictetus sometimes seems to suggest allowing injustice to go unimpeded. I feel there is something to be said for indignation against injustice, even if the cause of that injustice is outside of the Stoic’s thin boundaries of ‘internals’. Yes, this decreases your happiness, but perhaps the existence of injustice is good reason to be unhappy. It bonds you in a small way to those going through injustice, and it provides motivation to act in case you ever are able to do something about it. The second thing I’m uncertain about is the notion that our rational faculties are as free as Epictetus seems to assume. This isn’t really the place to delve into a philosophical investigation of that claim, but I’ll just say: if our rational faculties aren’t that free, it stands to reason that we need more than just an individual Stoic attitude to improve ourselves and society as a whole. Finally: I’m unconvinced by the religious underpinning of the whole project. This final objection isn’t a huge one. I can imagine reworking it to remove the insistence that living Stoically is the right thing to do because it matches the will of your chosen Deity. But all the same, the invocation of God’s will seemed to be a crucial pillar, at least for Epictetus, and leaning on that so heavily did detract from its overall strength.
Still, with those concerns and objections, I found a lot incredibly useful and worthwhile in Stoicism. I recommend this to anyone, even if it’s only the Enchiridion that you go for.
As for the Discourses: like I said, it’s long and repetitive. But you come away feeling like you understand Stoicism. Here is my gloss: a good Stoic should divide everything into two camps: that which you can control and that which you can’t control. Call the former internals and the latter externals. You cannot be reasonably charged with moral agency over externals, so dismiss externals from your life. They are of no interest to you. In fact, if you make the mistake of desiring externals or placing too much value in externals, you will find yourself a slave to something: be it beauty, fame, intellect, power, sex, alcohol, or luxury. You cannot control whether you will always have these things or not. If you put stock in them, your actions and happiness will be independent of your own will; rather, they will be dependent on whichever externals you choose to chase and desire. You make yourself a slave to them. If you want to be free, if you want to be a rational agent, turn away from them.
Internals are where the hard work must be done. Epictetus believes to be a good person, you have to live in excellent conformity to your nature as a human being. Once you’ve dismissed externals, you can begin focusing on the important virtues that you do have control over. He never strictly gives you a list of virtues or tells you exhaustively what the nature of a human being is, but examples and adjectives do pop up every now and again. “Kindness”, “co-operation”, “humility”, the exercising of one’s rational faculty, being good at your job and contributing to society — that sort of thing.
Personally, I find the tool of separating things into internals and externals to be incredibly useful. I’m the sort of person who struggles with my relationship to things I can’t control, especially other human beings. I want people to think well of me and I get very lonely when I perceive I’m unloved. It’s useful to use Stoicism as a reminder that, when I get that way, I’m living in a prison of my own making. I’m choosing to be a slave to external opinion, rather than a free man. It’s important to constantly remind oneself of that which one can control and that which one cannot.
However, I do worry sometimes that the Stoic philosophy goes too far. In the pursuit of personal happiness — which, admittedly, can be achieved by restructuring the way you think about things and being careful where you place value — Epictetus sometimes seems to suggest allowing injustice to go unimpeded. I feel there is something to be said for indignation against injustice, even if the cause of that injustice is outside of the Stoic’s thin boundaries of ‘internals’. Yes, this decreases your happiness, but perhaps the existence of injustice is good reason to be unhappy. It bonds you in a small way to those going through injustice, and it provides motivation to act in case you ever are able to do something about it. The second thing I’m uncertain about is the notion that our rational faculties are as free as Epictetus seems to assume. This isn’t really the place to delve into a philosophical investigation of that claim, but I’ll just say: if our rational faculties aren’t that free, it stands to reason that we need more than just an individual Stoic attitude to improve ourselves and society as a whole. Finally: I’m unconvinced by the religious underpinning of the whole project. This final objection isn’t a huge one. I can imagine reworking it to remove the insistence that living Stoically is the right thing to do because it matches the will of your chosen Deity. But all the same, the invocation of God’s will seemed to be a crucial pillar, at least for Epictetus, and leaning on that so heavily did detract from its overall strength.
Still, with those concerns and objections, I found a lot incredibly useful and worthwhile in Stoicism. I recommend this to anyone, even if it’s only the Enchiridion that you go for.
March 20, 2023
Quizás es porque soy una fanática del mundo grecorromano. Quizás es porque lo que este libro encierra es lo que necesitaba leer en este momento: para ser feliz no tienes que pretender ser más allá de lo que la naturaleza ha dispuesto para ti y, según ello, debes guiar tu juicio y vida. Sólo así serás feliz. Y será normal que por el camino haya opiniones en tu contra, gente que desprecie tu opinión, pero tu sabrás que estás en lo correcto y deberás hacer oídos sordos. Bien hay que decir que tampoco estuve de acuerdo en todo lo que exponía, pero ello me sirvió para pensar en el por qué de no estarlo. Hay personas que encuentran estos escritos oxidados y sin valor, yo, como esta y otras veces, encuentro compasión y reflexión.
September 17, 2013
I love this man's philosophy. Down-to-earth and true to this day, despite the fact that he wrote his observations before the first century.
October 3, 2012
These discourses are something everyone should read to see where we came from.
January 11, 2018
Wonderful read full of wisdom and thoughts...
Here's my favorite quote from the book...
“How long are you going to wait before you demand the best for yourself and in no instance bypass the discriminations of reason? You have been given the principles that you ought to endorse, and you have endorsed them. What kind of teacher, then, are you still waiting for in order to refer your self-improvement to him? You are no longer a boy, but a full-grown man. If you are careless and lazy now and keep putting things off and always deferring the day after which you will attend to yourself, you will not notice that you are making no progress, but you will live and die as someone quite ordinary.
From now on, then, resolve to live as a grown-up who is making progress, and make whatever you think best a law that you never set aside. And whenever you encounter anything that is difficult or pleasurable, or highly or lowly regarded, remember that the contest is now: you are at the Olympic Games, you cannot wait any longer, and that your progress is wrecked or preserved by a single day and a single event. That is how Socrates fulfilled himself by attending to nothing except reason in everything he encountered. And you, although you are not yet a Socrates, should live as someone who at least wants to be a Socrates.”
― Epictetus
Here's my favorite quote from the book...
“How long are you going to wait before you demand the best for yourself and in no instance bypass the discriminations of reason? You have been given the principles that you ought to endorse, and you have endorsed them. What kind of teacher, then, are you still waiting for in order to refer your self-improvement to him? You are no longer a boy, but a full-grown man. If you are careless and lazy now and keep putting things off and always deferring the day after which you will attend to yourself, you will not notice that you are making no progress, but you will live and die as someone quite ordinary.
From now on, then, resolve to live as a grown-up who is making progress, and make whatever you think best a law that you never set aside. And whenever you encounter anything that is difficult or pleasurable, or highly or lowly regarded, remember that the contest is now: you are at the Olympic Games, you cannot wait any longer, and that your progress is wrecked or preserved by a single day and a single event. That is how Socrates fulfilled himself by attending to nothing except reason in everything he encountered. And you, although you are not yet a Socrates, should live as someone who at least wants to be a Socrates.”
― Epictetus
March 20, 2025
Interesante conjunto de reflexiones breves, algo así como variaciones sobre un mismo tema, el estoicismo y su escuela filosófica. Reconozco estar más inclinado al epicureísmo (aunque puede que no sepa muy bien que son ambos), pero estás píldoras son útiles y revitalizantes: ocúpate en lo que depende de ti. Trata de ser mejor. Presta atención. Vive la vida. Supongo que son asertos algo depreciados por la repetición retórica, pero su valor debiera incrementarse por su ausencia práctica. Una lectura grata. Recomendable.
October 27, 2023
Primer estoico que leo y me ha gustado mucho por la naturaleza práctica del texto que nos guía acerca de aprender a discernir entre lo propio y lo ajeno, lo que podemos controlar (juicios) y lo que no (todo lo demás). Siento curiosidad ahora por ver como la cbt tomó este principio de una filosofía tan antigua, si fue una cuestión fortuita, política, del contexto de la época, etc.
Buena edición cuyas anotaciones ayudan a entender el contexto histórico y la traducción de algunas palabras.
Buena edición cuyas anotaciones ayudan a entender el contexto histórico y la traducción de algunas palabras.
April 6, 2013
The rantings of the ancient philosopher Epictetus, who went around telling people how they could become less offensive (to *him*) by controlling their emotions. Because it was all about *him*. Because people who have problems are just a bunch of whiners.
Epictetus had a point of view which nowadays we call "uncultured" and "inhuman". His system of "philosophy" consists mainly of sneering at anyone who's Other. His collection of beliefs is one which any teenage hipster could come up with -- and even today, many still do.
Here, check out his medieval advice:
• “It is not he who reviles or strikes you who insults you, but your opinion that these things are insulting.” Great advice. I'm sure crazy basketball coaches *love* that one.
• A gladiator, headed to his death in the Colosseum, should have the attitude “I go either to excel, or to give another the occasion to excel.” This is why I dislike the Stoics: They found it so easy to trivialize other people’s situations. They felt that everyone exists for the entertainment of others.
A great book for those who believe in slavery and human sacrifice.
Epictetus had a point of view which nowadays we call "uncultured" and "inhuman". His system of "philosophy" consists mainly of sneering at anyone who's Other. His collection of beliefs is one which any teenage hipster could come up with -- and even today, many still do.
Here, check out his medieval advice:
• “It is not he who reviles or strikes you who insults you, but your opinion that these things are insulting.” Great advice. I'm sure crazy basketball coaches *love* that one.
• A gladiator, headed to his death in the Colosseum, should have the attitude “I go either to excel, or to give another the occasion to excel.” This is why I dislike the Stoics: They found it so easy to trivialize other people’s situations. They felt that everyone exists for the entertainment of others.
A great book for those who believe in slavery and human sacrifice.
August 7, 2020
I've been listening to this audiobook on and off for a while now. I used to just listen when I got stressed. I finally decided to go ahead and finish it so I could catch up on my book challenge. I also have a printed copy of Discourses, which I'd sometimes read. Discourses is translated by George Long, who also translated Marcus Aurelius. I'm not crazy about Long's translations, although it started growing on me toward the end. I have a more modern translation that I started reading as a companion. It's probably going to get two stars too, so both of them together will be four stars.
January 27, 2021
Epictetus is intensely focused on the best way for you to live your life. Everything you have, your body, your things, and your health are technically only rentals. Be fully aware that these things will leave you. Instead of wishing to keep them forever, only wish for them to happen as they will. Only focus on things that are under your control and be aware of your sphere of influence. Master your habits, your actions, and corresponding reactions. Only then can you attain the freedom that will never leave you.
October 26, 2021
Get it here for free:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdbrj...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdbrj...
March 1, 2024
Прослухав аудіокнигу українською:
https://youtu.be/sxU9mN1YJ5Q?si=emk5a...
https://youtu.be/sxU9mN1YJ5Q?si=emk5a...
May 28, 2024
Como libro individual, esta antología de textos (compuesta por el "Manual" y las "Disertaciones") se deja leer muy bien gracias a dos razones: la primera por la introducción tan clara y precisa que hace Ignacio Pajón Leyva para sumergirnos en la historia del estoicismo y de lo que sabemos de Epicteto; y la segunda por su propia manera de entender el estoicismo. Es decir, al ser una filosofía preocupada principalmente por la práctica, sus enseñanzas son aplicables a nuestra vida cotidiana por la sencillez con que son expuestas, asimismo, la traducción y notas nos muestran maneras de comprender mejor ciertos pasajes y de concebir al estoicismo como una corriente con sus propios conceptos con los que familiarizarnos en el lenguaje cotidiano. Definitivamente, uno no puede hacer de cuenta que no pasó por las enseñanzas de Epicteto.
June 19, 2025
This book took me a long time to finish. Very heavy, read it in bite sized sections. Enchiridion was fantastic. The discourses were difficult but would occasionally blow my mind in wisdom that I wish I could memorize in fullness.
July 2, 2024
Es un libro que aún puede aplicarse a lo que el ser humano vive y le aqueja día a día. Te recuerda algunas nociones básicas que a veces por la rapidez en la que vivimos perdemos de vista, como enfocarse en lo que está en nuestra esfera de control.
July 31, 2024
நமது கட்டுப்பாட்டில் இருப்பவை மட்டுமே நமது கவலைக்கும் கரிசனத்திற்கும் உரியவை; அவற்றின் மீது நாம் கவனம் குவிக்க வேண்டும். நமது கட்டுப்பாட்டிற்கு அப்பாற்பட்டவை மீது நாம் ஏன் கவலைப்பட வேண்டும். அதனால் ஒரு பயனும் இல்லை”.
- எபிக்டெடஸ்
- எபிக்டெடஸ்
April 13, 2025
I've been wanting to start reading about stoicism for a while and this was a good start. It'll probably be even better after a reread.
November 18, 2022
el estoicismo me parece muy interesante, diría que hasta útil en muchas ocasiones;; sin embargo, contiene mucha frivolidad e individualismo, expone todo lo contrario a una posible realidad comunitaria/autogestionada, creo que sirve para las cuestiones del "yo" pero no para "nosotros"
September 4, 2017
First you get the lashes, then ointment is applied, all in one book!
July 27, 2023
principis molt interessants, de vegades portats a l'extrem
February 25, 2020
Rating only applies to Enchiridion
September 17, 2025
The Stoic world is different to ours, so let's break it down, one big idea after another.
1. Man's Nature
Whether it was Nature, Fortune, Evolution, or God, the fact of the matter is that we are distinguished from other living beings by two things: our reason and our social nature.
Our reason allows us not only to problem-solve & communicate, which is an ability that many other creatures posses, but also to ponder our own thinking, which is a feature that, as far as we know, does not exist anywhere else in the world. This idea seems obvious, but we put little effort in embodying it, often behaving like beasts by yielding to impulses, passions and unexamined desires. Imagine a cat that doesn't know how to hunt, a dog that doesn't know how to bark, or a bee that cannot find a flower; this is man without his ruling faculty, a being that has lost itself.
The Stoics remind us that, aside from our reason, we are also distinguished by our socialness. Unlike spiders, snakes & cats, human existence relies largely on the contribution of other members of its own species. This has been the case since we started forming tribes and has become even more of a phenomenon in the modern world, where every product or service we touch is brought to us by humans, sometimes many hundreds miles away. And more than this - we share a common bond, the experience of being human, of having our special form of reason, that we do not share with anything else in the same way. In this we are tied through our nature. So when we are met with other humans, we say: "Here is another person who has been blessed with the faculty of choice. He is my brother. She is my sister. No matter what external factor separates us, this we both share."
2. The Dichotomy Of Control
Some additional context before we dive into this topic.
2a - Ownership
The Stoics had a very strict definition of ownership. For the Stoics, you owned only what could never be taken from you. Under this strict definition, only your thoughts and choices are yours. No amount of torture, for example, could convince you that the sky is actually purple, if you do not assent to this idea yourself, even if you say the words out loud. No one can force you to believe something that you don't believe, unless you have assented to this belief. It follows then, that all things outside of choice, including money, fame, health, reputation, property, friendship, love, are not truly ours because they are not within our control. Your money can be taken from you by your employer. Your wife can be taken from you by death or another person. Your child as well. Your reputation is in the hands of others. You can prepare for years and then in your defining moment as a tennis player, you can slip on a piece of paper and lose the trophy you've been chasing all your life. A judge could rule 'guilty' and take your freedom. All these things that are lauded as 'yours' can be taken from you. So what remains that is truly our own? Only our choice, the Stoics say.
2b - The World Order
Orthodox Stoics like Epictetus believed that the world is governed by a benevolent, ordered, logical creator. They believed everything was made to fulfil a purpose, and they used the forms and functions of things to understand what that purpose was. A bee, due to its wings and its natural habit of going to flowers and creating honey, was made to fly and make honey. That is its God-ordained purpose. Similarly, human beings, with their reason and social nature, were designed to live reasonably and socially with one another.
Now, let's return to this idea of ownership. Ownership is a simple but powerful because it leads us to unconventional places. Take this example. To the normal person, death is a horrific thing to be avoided, but to the Stoic, death is just one other thing that is not within our control, so we must learn to accept it. Now replace 'death' with literally anything that is not 'choice,' and the idea leads you to the conclusion that nothing can be good or bad that is not within your choice, only indifferent.
Again, you are in a bizarre place - your wife is not good, she's an indifferent, because she can be taken from you. Your children are not good, they're an indifferent, because they can be taken from you. Your health, wealth, etc.. everything the world tells us is good, the Stoics tell us is an indifferent. It is your inaccurate judgement that makes you say what is indifferent is either good or bad.
Let's push the idea even more. If nothing outside of our sphere of choice is good or bad, then where do good and bad come from? The Stoics say they come from our choice - from how we decide to react to external events. Let's take the example of losing your leg. The Stoic would say: "Since your leg can be taken from you, it's neither a good nor a bad but an indifferent. Also, since the world is governed by an all-knowing, benevolent creator, then losing your leg is just part of the broader story of God. Therefore, since reason dictates that losing your leg is neither good nor bad, and since losing your leg was ordained by an all-knowing, benevolent creator, then to live according to our purpose would be to bear this indifferent well. To bear it well, we should avoid becoming angry and sorrowful, and instead aim to tame these emotions and maintain our happiness for properly fulfilling our role in the broader story. Basically, the Stoics say you're supposed to think of yourself as an actor in a play; You do not decide what happens to your character, so you must just read the lines and play the part as well as you can. The director is also the GOAT, so you don't want to question or disappoint him, so do your part well & without moaning!
3. Practicing Virtue
With this context, we can now discuss how the Stoics arrived to the idea that by consciously examining one's impressions of the external world and arriving to the right response, one can live a virtuous life, encompassing both one's rational and social nature as a member of the broader cosmic whole.
The Stoics basically say that the world is just a series of stimuli. You receive praise from a stranger. This is a stimulus. Your leg is broken. This is a stimulus. Your neighbor's wife looks at you sexually. This is a stimulus. You see a grand mansion. This is a stimulus. Humans often jump from stimulus to judgement without recognizing the leap. You receive praise from a stranger, you acknowledge this as good, and you smile. Your leg is broken, you acknowledge this as bad, and you cry. Your neighbor's wife looks at you sexually, you acknowledge this as good, and you have sex with her.
The Stoics tell us that we are constantly making miscalculated judgements about what is good and what is bad without conscious awareness. A virtuous person, according to the stoic, pauses to reflect on these judgements, considers it, weighs whether it's a good or a bad, and then takes the choice that reflects the 'true' good. So to do right, you must know two things: the nature of good and bad (which we have discussed), and how to spot and calibrate miscalculated judgements. The first part is easy; the second is what most are never able to sustain and what makes Stoicism a life-long practice.
Consider the example of the neighbor's wife. Your lust tells you that pleasure is good. But we have examined the nature of things and come to the opposite conclusion - that pleasure cannot be good because it does not come from choice. Moreover, sleeping with your neighbor's wife is a breach against our social nature because it harms the neighbor's husband and betrays trust between humans. The impression, therefore, that your neighbor's wife coveting you is a desirable thing, is in fact incorrect. The correct action would be to ignore her advance. The even more correct action would be to change your view that your neighbor coveting you is something worth smiling about.
Under the Stoic lens, life is just a series of these mini-stimuli. The philosopher has acknowledge the true nature of good and bad. More importantly, he has trained himself against the strong desires that leads one to believe that good and bad exist outside the realm of choice. These are some of our strongest desires - embodied via the pursuit of pleasure and the aversion to pain. The Stoics demand you command these to live a virtuous life.
Through these three key points, the Stoics provide an instruction manual on how to deal with the world so that you come out of it happy. While I do not agree with everything in here, some of the stuff is just too good to ignore.
1. Man's Nature
Whether it was Nature, Fortune, Evolution, or God, the fact of the matter is that we are distinguished from other living beings by two things: our reason and our social nature.
Our reason allows us not only to problem-solve & communicate, which is an ability that many other creatures posses, but also to ponder our own thinking, which is a feature that, as far as we know, does not exist anywhere else in the world. This idea seems obvious, but we put little effort in embodying it, often behaving like beasts by yielding to impulses, passions and unexamined desires. Imagine a cat that doesn't know how to hunt, a dog that doesn't know how to bark, or a bee that cannot find a flower; this is man without his ruling faculty, a being that has lost itself.
The Stoics remind us that, aside from our reason, we are also distinguished by our socialness. Unlike spiders, snakes & cats, human existence relies largely on the contribution of other members of its own species. This has been the case since we started forming tribes and has become even more of a phenomenon in the modern world, where every product or service we touch is brought to us by humans, sometimes many hundreds miles away. And more than this - we share a common bond, the experience of being human, of having our special form of reason, that we do not share with anything else in the same way. In this we are tied through our nature. So when we are met with other humans, we say: "Here is another person who has been blessed with the faculty of choice. He is my brother. She is my sister. No matter what external factor separates us, this we both share."
2. The Dichotomy Of Control
Some additional context before we dive into this topic.
2a - Ownership
The Stoics had a very strict definition of ownership. For the Stoics, you owned only what could never be taken from you. Under this strict definition, only your thoughts and choices are yours. No amount of torture, for example, could convince you that the sky is actually purple, if you do not assent to this idea yourself, even if you say the words out loud. No one can force you to believe something that you don't believe, unless you have assented to this belief. It follows then, that all things outside of choice, including money, fame, health, reputation, property, friendship, love, are not truly ours because they are not within our control. Your money can be taken from you by your employer. Your wife can be taken from you by death or another person. Your child as well. Your reputation is in the hands of others. You can prepare for years and then in your defining moment as a tennis player, you can slip on a piece of paper and lose the trophy you've been chasing all your life. A judge could rule 'guilty' and take your freedom. All these things that are lauded as 'yours' can be taken from you. So what remains that is truly our own? Only our choice, the Stoics say.
2b - The World Order
Orthodox Stoics like Epictetus believed that the world is governed by a benevolent, ordered, logical creator. They believed everything was made to fulfil a purpose, and they used the forms and functions of things to understand what that purpose was. A bee, due to its wings and its natural habit of going to flowers and creating honey, was made to fly and make honey. That is its God-ordained purpose. Similarly, human beings, with their reason and social nature, were designed to live reasonably and socially with one another.
Now, let's return to this idea of ownership. Ownership is a simple but powerful because it leads us to unconventional places. Take this example. To the normal person, death is a horrific thing to be avoided, but to the Stoic, death is just one other thing that is not within our control, so we must learn to accept it. Now replace 'death' with literally anything that is not 'choice,' and the idea leads you to the conclusion that nothing can be good or bad that is not within your choice, only indifferent.
Again, you are in a bizarre place - your wife is not good, she's an indifferent, because she can be taken from you. Your children are not good, they're an indifferent, because they can be taken from you. Your health, wealth, etc.. everything the world tells us is good, the Stoics tell us is an indifferent. It is your inaccurate judgement that makes you say what is indifferent is either good or bad.
Let's push the idea even more. If nothing outside of our sphere of choice is good or bad, then where do good and bad come from? The Stoics say they come from our choice - from how we decide to react to external events. Let's take the example of losing your leg. The Stoic would say: "Since your leg can be taken from you, it's neither a good nor a bad but an indifferent. Also, since the world is governed by an all-knowing, benevolent creator, then losing your leg is just part of the broader story of God. Therefore, since reason dictates that losing your leg is neither good nor bad, and since losing your leg was ordained by an all-knowing, benevolent creator, then to live according to our purpose would be to bear this indifferent well. To bear it well, we should avoid becoming angry and sorrowful, and instead aim to tame these emotions and maintain our happiness for properly fulfilling our role in the broader story. Basically, the Stoics say you're supposed to think of yourself as an actor in a play; You do not decide what happens to your character, so you must just read the lines and play the part as well as you can. The director is also the GOAT, so you don't want to question or disappoint him, so do your part well & without moaning!
3. Practicing Virtue
With this context, we can now discuss how the Stoics arrived to the idea that by consciously examining one's impressions of the external world and arriving to the right response, one can live a virtuous life, encompassing both one's rational and social nature as a member of the broader cosmic whole.
The Stoics basically say that the world is just a series of stimuli. You receive praise from a stranger. This is a stimulus. Your leg is broken. This is a stimulus. Your neighbor's wife looks at you sexually. This is a stimulus. You see a grand mansion. This is a stimulus. Humans often jump from stimulus to judgement without recognizing the leap. You receive praise from a stranger, you acknowledge this as good, and you smile. Your leg is broken, you acknowledge this as bad, and you cry. Your neighbor's wife looks at you sexually, you acknowledge this as good, and you have sex with her.
The Stoics tell us that we are constantly making miscalculated judgements about what is good and what is bad without conscious awareness. A virtuous person, according to the stoic, pauses to reflect on these judgements, considers it, weighs whether it's a good or a bad, and then takes the choice that reflects the 'true' good. So to do right, you must know two things: the nature of good and bad (which we have discussed), and how to spot and calibrate miscalculated judgements. The first part is easy; the second is what most are never able to sustain and what makes Stoicism a life-long practice.
Consider the example of the neighbor's wife. Your lust tells you that pleasure is good. But we have examined the nature of things and come to the opposite conclusion - that pleasure cannot be good because it does not come from choice. Moreover, sleeping with your neighbor's wife is a breach against our social nature because it harms the neighbor's husband and betrays trust between humans. The impression, therefore, that your neighbor's wife coveting you is a desirable thing, is in fact incorrect. The correct action would be to ignore her advance. The even more correct action would be to change your view that your neighbor coveting you is something worth smiling about.
Under the Stoic lens, life is just a series of these mini-stimuli. The philosopher has acknowledge the true nature of good and bad. More importantly, he has trained himself against the strong desires that leads one to believe that good and bad exist outside the realm of choice. These are some of our strongest desires - embodied via the pursuit of pleasure and the aversion to pain. The Stoics demand you command these to live a virtuous life.
Through these three key points, the Stoics provide an instruction manual on how to deal with the world so that you come out of it happy. While I do not agree with everything in here, some of the stuff is just too good to ignore.
September 4, 2024
Of course there are things that are beyond our control. Of course we view all things the way WE view all things. Of course it is right and proper that any other man views those things from his perspective.
It is impossible to want nothing. But what if all you wanted was all you needed.
There we are onto something.
It is impossible to want nothing. But what if all you wanted was all you needed.
There we are onto something.
August 4, 2024
The Enchiridion is lectures notes written down by Epictetus’s student “Flavius Arrianus” (yes I know) who was apart of the nobility in Rome. The enchiridion gives probably the most influential ideas for stoicism which heavily inspired those who came later like Aurelius. I’ve already explained stoic cosmology and the problems with it in my review of Mediations so I’ll refrain from bringing that up. It’s also incredibly important to note that translations are incredibly important in Greek (as annoying and snooty as it can be at times…), and what you read in the enchiridion should be approached with a grain of salt.
My opinion of the Enchiridion is mixed. I think to follow this down to the book like the dogmatic stoic would be quite worrisome, if not even psychopathic. I struggle with the extreme ideas he gives at times. For example, the of abstracting to generalizations to help with grief. “it’s not my wife who died, but a wife died.” “Think about a neighbors child who died, now take that feeling and apply it the same way about your own who perished.” If not already apparent, I believe this to incredibly inhuman and disturbing. But that’s the problem with stoicism if you try to be an applied stoic, the indifference (indifference meaning: X thing is good and I recognize that, but I don’t need nor desire it) to everything fundamentally denies what it means to be human.
The ethical system of stoicism is built upon the indifference to all desire, and an intense focus on the internal while simultaneously trying to distance and generalize the external as much as possible. I think there are much better systems of morality, for example the focus on the human to human relationship and empathy is what builds morality like in Smith & Hume’s moral sentiments.
I do however think there are great segments in this book that if you approach it with pragmatism, picking and taking what you need for inspiration in difficult times—inspiration meaning here and there, not how you live your life daily!—it can be quite impactful and helpful. You already see the influence with these texts in the military, and it makes sense. You may die and have no choice about that in the end. Do you go out whimpering and screaming, or, in the words of Epictetus, “stick your neck out for the blade”?
My opinion of the Enchiridion is mixed. I think to follow this down to the book like the dogmatic stoic would be quite worrisome, if not even psychopathic. I struggle with the extreme ideas he gives at times. For example, the of abstracting to generalizations to help with grief. “it’s not my wife who died, but a wife died.” “Think about a neighbors child who died, now take that feeling and apply it the same way about your own who perished.” If not already apparent, I believe this to incredibly inhuman and disturbing. But that’s the problem with stoicism if you try to be an applied stoic, the indifference (indifference meaning: X thing is good and I recognize that, but I don’t need nor desire it) to everything fundamentally denies what it means to be human.
The ethical system of stoicism is built upon the indifference to all desire, and an intense focus on the internal while simultaneously trying to distance and generalize the external as much as possible. I think there are much better systems of morality, for example the focus on the human to human relationship and empathy is what builds morality like in Smith & Hume’s moral sentiments.
I do however think there are great segments in this book that if you approach it with pragmatism, picking and taking what you need for inspiration in difficult times—inspiration meaning here and there, not how you live your life daily!—it can be quite impactful and helpful. You already see the influence with these texts in the military, and it makes sense. You may die and have no choice about that in the end. Do you go out whimpering and screaming, or, in the words of Epictetus, “stick your neck out for the blade”?
January 18, 2024
Estou gostando de ler os estoicos, é uma experiência muito boa para se aprofundar nessa filosofia.
Com Epicteto se aprende o estoicismo puro. O fato de ignorar eventos incontroláveis e focar no que se tem controle, o fato de aceitar as coisas como são, não se abater por perdas, entender que não tem nada e, portanto, nada há que se perca, além de alguns comportamentos inerentes à prática estoica.
Com Epicteto se aprende o estoicismo puro. O fato de ignorar eventos incontroláveis e focar no que se tem controle, o fato de aceitar as coisas como são, não se abater por perdas, entender que não tem nada e, portanto, nada há que se perca, além de alguns comportamentos inerentes à prática estoica.
August 3, 2008
My first and best introduction to Stoic philosophy.
November 9, 2014
Something about stoicism just rubs me the wrong way.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 157 reviews