What do you think?
Rate this book
Lekcje stoicyzmu
Krótki i praktyczny poradnik dla nowoczesnego stoika.
Od kilku lat stoicyzm cieszy się coraz większą popularnością. Ale o co tak naprawdę chodziło stoikom? By odpowiedzieć na to pytanie, filozof John Sellars na nowo odczytuje dzieła Seneki, Epikteta i Marka Aureliusza. Przygląda się nie tylko pozostawionym przez nich tekstom, ale też ich codzienności, która pomaga zrozumieć, czego starożytni mogą nauczyć nas dzisiaj.
Na nieco ponad stu stronach Sellars wyjaśnia, jak według stoików radzić sobie z emocjami, przezwyciężać porażki i w końcu – jak odnaleźć swoje miejsce w życiu.
Od kilku lat stoicyzm cieszy się coraz większą popularnością. Ale o co tak naprawdę chodziło stoikom? By odpowiedzieć na to pytanie, filozof John Sellars na nowo odczytuje dzieła Seneki, Epikteta i Marka Aureliusza. Przygląda się nie tylko pozostawionym przez nich tekstom, ale też ich codzienności, która pomaga zrozumieć, czego starożytni mogą nauczyć nas dzisiaj.
Na nieco ponad stu stronach Sellars wyjaśnia, jak według stoików radzić sobie z emocjami, przezwyciężać porażki i w końcu – jak odnaleźć swoje miejsce w życiu.
112 pages, Hardcover
First published September 5, 2019
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 29 of 841 reviews
September 6, 2019
John Sellars is a professor of philosophy who specializes in Stoicism. This is a very concise introductory text aimed at ordinary readers, though. There are lots of books and articles now available on Stoicism but unfortunately they sometimes perpetuate misconceptions about the philosophy. Sellars directly and authoritatively tackles some of the key misconceptions about Stoicism in this book and explains the philosophy in a very concise and practical fashion. (The ancient Stoics would appreciate the laconic - 96 page - format!) I'll definitely be recommending this book to newcomers.
March 9, 2025
کمک های فلسفه یا نام فرعی درس های اساسی فیلسوفان رواقی ، کتابی ایست از جان سلرز ، مدرس ، نویسنده و فیلسوف انگلیسی که بیشتر به خاطر آثارش در باره اپیکور و سنکا شهرت دارد .
کتاب بسیار کوتاه او ، مقدمه ای ایست مختصر اما بسیار مفید در باب آشنایی با رواقیون ، فلسفه و نگاه آن ها به دنیا . سلرز کوشیده تا خواننده را به صورت بسیار مختصر با موضوعات مهم ازنگاه رواقیون ، مانند مدیریت عواطف و کنترل آنچه در اختیار ماست ، پذیرش حوادث ناگوار ، درک جایگاه انسان در طبیعت ، روبرو شدن با مرگ و زندگی با دیگران آشنا کند .
سلرز را به خاطر توانایی در سادهسازی مفاهیم پیچیده فلسفی و ارائه آن به خواننده باید ستود . او با استفاده از زبانی ساده و روان، مفاهیم فلسفی را به گونهای قابل فهم برای همگان بیان کرده. از این رو کمک های فلسفه را باید کتابی مفید در باب آشنایی با رواقیون و تکنیک های آنان دانست .
کتاب بسیار کوتاه او ، مقدمه ای ایست مختصر اما بسیار مفید در باب آشنایی با رواقیون ، فلسفه و نگاه آن ها به دنیا . سلرز کوشیده تا خواننده را به صورت بسیار مختصر با موضوعات مهم ازنگاه رواقیون ، مانند مدیریت عواطف و کنترل آنچه در اختیار ماست ، پذیرش حوادث ناگوار ، درک جایگاه انسان در طبیعت ، روبرو شدن با مرگ و زندگی با دیگران آشنا کند .
سلرز را به خاطر توانایی در سادهسازی مفاهیم پیچیده فلسفی و ارائه آن به خواننده باید ستود . او با استفاده از زبانی ساده و روان، مفاهیم فلسفی را به گونهای قابل فهم برای همگان بیان کرده. از این رو کمک های فلسفه را باید کتابی مفید در باب آشنایی با رواقیون و تکنیک های آنان دانست .
June 8, 2025
ولی میشود بین دو چیز دست به انتخاب زد: انتخاب اینکه آن پیشامد را چنان ببینیم که گویی ضربهای هولناک است، یا گویی چالشی است مثبت.
.
کار فیلسوف این است که ما را برانگیزد این حقیقت را درک کنیم، و سپس در کوششی که برای درمان عارضههای نفوسمان به خرج میدهیم، پشتیبان ما باشد.
.
فضیلتمندی به طور خاص یعنی خردمند، دادگر، دلیر و میانهرو بودن.
.
کتابهای زیادی در مورد فلسفهی رواقیگری نوشته شده، بخصوص کتابی که نشر گمان منتشر کرده و بسیار جامع و کامل بود. ولی این کتاب هم در حجم کم نکات کلیدی از فلسفهی رواقی و فیلسوفانی که پیرو این فلسفه هستند، ارائه میدهد، که بسیار جالب و خواندنی بود. متفکرانی از جمله سنکا، اپیکتتوس و ... که به نظرم نبوغ خود را صرف پذیرش، درک و توجه، هماهنگی با طبیعت، اهمیت اجتماعی بودن، قضاوت، موفقیتهای دنیوی، کنترل، اهمیت عواطف، جایگاه ما در طبیعت و حوادث ناگوار و کنار آمدن با آنها و .... کردهاند، برای تغییر نگرش و طرز تفکر...
.
کار فیلسوف این است که ما را برانگیزد این حقیقت را درک کنیم، و سپس در کوششی که برای درمان عارضههای نفوسمان به خرج میدهیم، پشتیبان ما باشد.
.
فضیلتمندی به طور خاص یعنی خردمند، دادگر، دلیر و میانهرو بودن.
.
کتابهای زیادی در مورد فلسفهی رواقیگری نوشته شده، بخصوص کتابی که نشر گمان منتشر کرده و بسیار جامع و کامل بود. ولی این کتاب هم در حجم کم نکات کلیدی از فلسفهی رواقی و فیلسوفانی که پیرو این فلسفه هستند، ارائه میدهد، که بسیار جالب و خواندنی بود. متفکرانی از جمله سنکا، اپیکتتوس و ... که به نظرم نبوغ خود را صرف پذیرش، درک و توجه، هماهنگی با طبیعت، اهمیت اجتماعی بودن، قضاوت، موفقیتهای دنیوی، کنترل، اهمیت عواطف، جایگاه ما در طبیعت و حوادث ناگوار و کنار آمدن با آنها و .... کردهاند، برای تغییر نگرش و طرز تفکر...
October 17, 2019
I am absolutely delighted by this little book.
The content is only 67 page long, but don't let its brevity fool you. It covers key Stoicism points in highly accessible manner.
Whether you are new to Stoicism and want a very quick overview of the philosophy, or whether you have been practicing for years and need a quick refresher on many useful lessons, this book is for you.
The content is only 67 page long, but don't let its brevity fool you. It covers key Stoicism points in highly accessible manner.
Whether you are new to Stoicism and want a very quick overview of the philosophy, or whether you have been practicing for years and need a quick refresher on many useful lessons, this book is for you.
November 17, 2019
With the world a complete dog's breakfast, my seventh decade nearly upon me, and intimations of mortality coming thick and fast, it seems an excellent time to seek the consolations of the Stoic philosophy. If you find yourself in a similar bind, this book is an good place to start. I read an (free for review) electronic version of this book, but I hope the publisher actually issues it in pocket size, as (at 64 pages) it would be an excellent addition to any overcoat or purse for people who are attempting to break the insidious grip of the smartphone while commuting and other waiting.
This is largely an introduction to a trio of great Roman thinkers (Seneca, Epictetus, Marcus Aurelius), although other philosophers appear briefly. If you've read even one or two other books on the topic or the previously-mentioned philosophers, this book probably won't tell you anything that you don't know.
The book has a lot of great good sense that would be difficult for any person to argue with. Philosophers analyze how you think. Wealth is neither good nor bad itself, but it can be used for good or bad ends. Pursuit of fame or money can be a grave mistake. Some (maybe much) of your life is out of your control. Don't react impulsively. Don't let anger control your actions. Don't worry about what other people think. If you postpone your plans and dreams until retirement, it may be too late.
Some might argue against the existence of a rational intelligence driving the universe, but it's interesting to see that Stoics came up with, and defended, this idea without the influence of religion as we practice it.
I, rightly or wrongly, tend to associate Stoics with conservatives, in the modern US political sense of that last word. I guess it's because I've seen it come up in the writings of Nassim Nicolas Taleb, who doesn't have much good to say about non-conservatives, also because Stoicism seems to frequently address the value of self-control, also a favorite topic of US conservatives (in rhetoric, if perhaps not so much in practice). So I was surprised to read that some stuff that could be interpreted as a defense of unfashionable internationalism, including this quote from Seneca (location 504):
I'd like to quibble with one sentence at location 197: “In modern English, the word 'stoic' has come to mean unfeeling and without emotion, and this is usually seen as a negative trait.” I just don't think this is correct. Of course, some people may feel this way. But this sentence is in the form of a general statement of fact, and I don't think enough people have this negative version of the word “stoic” in their mental dictionaries to support it. The problem is not, I think, that people are going around with an incorrect definition of “stoic”. The problem is that people are going around with no definition of “stoic” at all.
You might reasonably object: if you want to learn about stoic philosophy, why not read the philosophers themselves? I tried. There are a bewildering variety of translations available. I have somewhat less cash on hand than I would ideally want, so I first tried an old translation, now in public domain, available for free download. The translator had the curious notion that deliberately rendering the translation in language that was antiquated – even at the time of publication – somehow captured the spirit of the original more completely. The results were occasional sentences of great lucidity followed by difficult-to-understand paragraphs. I did not finish the book.
This book has a recommended reading list in the back, which I hope will guide me to more readable translations. I converted the reading list into a Goodreads shelf.
There are also no less than four lists about Stoic-related books on Goodreads Listopia.
I received a free electronic galley copy of this book from University of Chicago Press via Netgalley. Thanks to all.
This is largely an introduction to a trio of great Roman thinkers (Seneca, Epictetus, Marcus Aurelius), although other philosophers appear briefly. If you've read even one or two other books on the topic or the previously-mentioned philosophers, this book probably won't tell you anything that you don't know.
The book has a lot of great good sense that would be difficult for any person to argue with. Philosophers analyze how you think. Wealth is neither good nor bad itself, but it can be used for good or bad ends. Pursuit of fame or money can be a grave mistake. Some (maybe much) of your life is out of your control. Don't react impulsively. Don't let anger control your actions. Don't worry about what other people think. If you postpone your plans and dreams until retirement, it may be too late.
Some might argue against the existence of a rational intelligence driving the universe, but it's interesting to see that Stoics came up with, and defended, this idea without the influence of religion as we practice it.
I, rightly or wrongly, tend to associate Stoics with conservatives, in the modern US political sense of that last word. I guess it's because I've seen it come up in the writings of Nassim Nicolas Taleb, who doesn't have much good to say about non-conservatives, also because Stoicism seems to frequently address the value of self-control, also a favorite topic of US conservatives (in rhetoric, if perhaps not so much in practice). So I was surprised to read that some stuff that could be interpreted as a defense of unfashionable internationalism, including this quote from Seneca (location 504):
Let us grasp the idea that there are two commonwealths – the one, a vast and truly common state, which embraces alike gods and men, in which we look neither to this corner of earth or to that, but measure the bounds of our citizenship by the path of the sun; the other, the one to which we have been assigned by accident of birth. The key thing to note here is that we are members of both communities, with responsibilities to our local community but also with a duty of care to all humankind that transcends local customs and laws. On occasions where the two might come into conflict, the latter must come first, but doesn't make the former go away.I also enjoyed learning why the Stoics are called Stoics (Kindle location 24).
I'd like to quibble with one sentence at location 197: “In modern English, the word 'stoic' has come to mean unfeeling and without emotion, and this is usually seen as a negative trait.” I just don't think this is correct. Of course, some people may feel this way. But this sentence is in the form of a general statement of fact, and I don't think enough people have this negative version of the word “stoic” in their mental dictionaries to support it. The problem is not, I think, that people are going around with an incorrect definition of “stoic”. The problem is that people are going around with no definition of “stoic” at all.
You might reasonably object: if you want to learn about stoic philosophy, why not read the philosophers themselves? I tried. There are a bewildering variety of translations available. I have somewhat less cash on hand than I would ideally want, so I first tried an old translation, now in public domain, available for free download. The translator had the curious notion that deliberately rendering the translation in language that was antiquated – even at the time of publication – somehow captured the spirit of the original more completely. The results were occasional sentences of great lucidity followed by difficult-to-understand paragraphs. I did not finish the book.
This book has a recommended reading list in the back, which I hope will guide me to more readable translations. I converted the reading list into a Goodreads shelf.
There are also no less than four lists about Stoic-related books on Goodreads Listopia.
I received a free electronic galley copy of this book from University of Chicago Press via Netgalley. Thanks to all.
December 10, 2021
کتاب کم حجم با ترجمه ی خوب و روون. نکات خیلی خیلی خوبی رو درباره ی عقیده فیلسوفهای رواقی در خصوص زندگی گفته بود. و اگر واقعا تو زندگیمون این راهکارها رو پیاده کنیم رستگار می شیم. تنها ایراد کتاب هم نداشتن پاورقی برای یه سری از اسامی بود.
______________________________
از متن کتاب فصل زندگی و مرگ : هرچیزی که داریم و هرچیزی که به آن دل بسته ایم فقط امانت است و بس.
__________________________
احمقی اگر بخواهی فرزندان، همسر، یا دوستانت عمر جاودان داشته باشند، زیرا میخواهی چیزی که بیرون ازحیطه ی قدرت توست در حیطه ی قدرتت باشد، و هدیه ای که از آن خودت نیست از آن تو باشد.
_________________________
تحت هیچ شرایطی نگو: ((چیزی از دست داده ام)) فقط بگو :((آن را باز پس داده ام.)) فرزندت مرد؟ نه باز پس داده شد، همسرت مرد؟ نه باز پس داده شد.
______________________________
از متن کتاب فصل زندگی و مرگ : هرچیزی که داریم و هرچیزی که به آن دل بسته ایم فقط امانت است و بس.
__________________________
احمقی اگر بخواهی فرزندان، همسر، یا دوستانت عمر جاودان داشته باشند، زیرا میخواهی چیزی که بیرون ازحیطه ی قدرت توست در حیطه ی قدرتت باشد، و هدیه ای که از آن خودت نیست از آن تو باشد.
_________________________
تحت هیچ شرایطی نگو: ((چیزی از دست داده ام)) فقط بگو :((آن را باز پس داده ام.)) فرزندت مرد؟ نه باز پس داده شد، همسرت مرد؟ نه باز پس داده شد.
December 22, 2022
A wonderful handbook that introduces the key teachings of the Stoics. A useful starting point to guide one to further reading.
June 14, 2020
Well, I was already interested in Seneca's philosophy and ideas about life and death... The one that is often described as a cold way to live... Portrayed as an emotionless military procession in life. Well it simply isn't the case. Stoicism is just another way of managing your emotions, relationships and social awareness. It doesn't require you to turn yourself to a stone but it just suggests ways that your emotions wouldn't hijack your brain (because it does more than you can tell) - Have you watched the movie Inside Out? You can probably start from there.
In any case this is an enjoyable short book where the author draws from various stoic philosophers/contributors namely : Seneca himself, Nero, Heracles, Marcus Aurelius,.... And is organized according in an ascending order : starting from the self to include humanity.
A friendly reminder of how life is a great opportunity to be part of humanity and how we all had this chance...
Stoicism is simple it's all about consistency, integrity and honesty... (and especially avoiding over extended meetings)
In any case this is an enjoyable short book where the author draws from various stoic philosophers/contributors namely : Seneca himself, Nero, Heracles, Marcus Aurelius,.... And is organized according in an ascending order : starting from the self to include humanity.
A friendly reminder of how life is a great opportunity to be part of humanity and how we all had this chance...
Stoicism is simple it's all about consistency, integrity and honesty... (and especially avoiding over extended meetings)
March 22, 2024
Lessons in Stoicism- What ancient philosophers reach us about how to live by John Sellars: 4.5⭐️
This 80 page non-fiction follows 3 Roman stoics; Seneca, Epictetus & Marcus Aurelius. Epictetus thought of philosophers as doctors which was interesting to me. Since reading this I’ve also read Marcus Aurelius’ Meditations (which I also enjoyed)! If you’re into philosophy, I would def recommend this book. I’ve been having difficulty with feelings of anger/betrayal/stress, so the first page of this book immediately hooked me in. Stoicism believes in being in tune with nature. Nothing is in our control in life except for our “judgements, impulses & desires”. Our bodies, material possessions, reputation & worldly success are ultimately out of our control. We must do the best with what we are given. Feel the emotions, but don’t let them keep you down, don’t let them ruminate until they hinder/pain you (which is an unfortunate tendency of mine). This book is def an intro & you can see the influence of stoicism in cognitive behavioural therapy. This concept requires daily practice & long periods of time. I must admit I’ve found them very helpful, it’s made me be way less anxious & I’ve been catastrophizing less (lol small steps). I def want to further delve into the world of stoicism. I’ve also recommended this to a friend & they’ve also enjoyed it. I think if you’re struggling with adversity, this might be an interesting read for you.
“Our soul ultimately determines the quality of our lives” (6)
“The money in itself is neither good nor bad. Whether it is used for good/bad ends depends on the character of the person who has it. A virtuous person can use money to do good things, while a not so virtuous individual might use it to generate great harm” (7)
“We cannot control other people’s emotions” (21)
“The wise man will put up with these things, not go out of his way to meet them; he will prefer a state of peace to a state of war” (34)
This 80 page non-fiction follows 3 Roman stoics; Seneca, Epictetus & Marcus Aurelius. Epictetus thought of philosophers as doctors which was interesting to me. Since reading this I’ve also read Marcus Aurelius’ Meditations (which I also enjoyed)! If you’re into philosophy, I would def recommend this book. I’ve been having difficulty with feelings of anger/betrayal/stress, so the first page of this book immediately hooked me in. Stoicism believes in being in tune with nature. Nothing is in our control in life except for our “judgements, impulses & desires”. Our bodies, material possessions, reputation & worldly success are ultimately out of our control. We must do the best with what we are given. Feel the emotions, but don’t let them keep you down, don’t let them ruminate until they hinder/pain you (which is an unfortunate tendency of mine). This book is def an intro & you can see the influence of stoicism in cognitive behavioural therapy. This concept requires daily practice & long periods of time. I must admit I’ve found them very helpful, it’s made me be way less anxious & I’ve been catastrophizing less (lol small steps). I def want to further delve into the world of stoicism. I’ve also recommended this to a friend & they’ve also enjoyed it. I think if you’re struggling with adversity, this might be an interesting read for you.
“Our soul ultimately determines the quality of our lives” (6)
“The money in itself is neither good nor bad. Whether it is used for good/bad ends depends on the character of the person who has it. A virtuous person can use money to do good things, while a not so virtuous individual might use it to generate great harm” (7)
“We cannot control other people’s emotions” (21)
“The wise man will put up with these things, not go out of his way to meet them; he will prefer a state of peace to a state of war” (34)
April 25, 2024
Such a digestible way to learn Stoicism, gave me broad ideas and then further readings to get into it more.
Loved it. So simple, yet so efficient.
Thanks JADEY
Loved it. So simple, yet so efficient.
Thanks JADEY
March 12, 2025
He leído esto porque últimamente absolutamente todos los hombres de mi entorno están obsesionados con el estoicismo y quería entenderlo mejor, ahora me cuadran cositas y me tiembla un ojo
November 1, 2024
‘Elsewhere Marcus imagines looking down on the earth from a great height – as astronauts have since done – and seeing how tiny each country is and how minuscule great cities are. As for the people living in those cities, with lives full of cares and concerns, they are practically nothing when viewed from such a cosmic perspective. From such a vantage point it can feel as if the universe doesn’t care about us, and why should it. Strictly speaking, this is not the Stoic view. The Stoics didn’t think that Nature is an indifferent mass of matter in motion.’
Not usually that interested in (reading about) ‘Stoicism’ (not because I am ‘against’ it/them, but I feel like at some point in our lives, aren’t we all made a bit of a ‘Stoic’ whether or not we choose to be? But maybe this is simply my silly jolt of ignorance prematurely braiding loose, weak threads of over-simplification and over-generalisation of those ‘big’ ideas), but I'm 'open' to having a little read or two/maybe more. Having done a module on ‘Ancient Greek’ back in uni., naturally, I developed a hate/love relationship to all things ‘ancient’ Greek, but also a slightly ‘snobbish’ and hugely uncertain (coloured with doubt) views on almost all ‘translations’ of the texts (except for Emily Wilson’s work (Illiad and Aeneid) — for she’s perfect in every way, and I will not think otherwise (for now anyway)). But mostly (why I read this was because) I was very kindly gifted a copy of Marcus Aurelius' Meditations recently, so I felt inclined to dig/delve deeper (for the lack of a better analogy). I felt sort of ‘confused’ reading it, as in like — is this (a bit too much) ‘determinism’ (for one to handle?), and did the ‘Stoics’ read/found resonance in Lao Tzu’s texts? And/but also it made me wonder if Rust Cohle (one of my favourite telly characters ever) is a little bit of a Stoic, but probably not (unless we’re viewing this with the mindset of how everyone’s probably a little bit ‘stoic’ anyway)? In any case, I think anyone curious about Stoicism and/or the Stoics would/should find this little primer well gorgeous. Can’t say I didn’t ‘enjoy’ it from cover to cover. But I also found it all quite — ‘helpful’ and informative (which was exactly what I wanted from it). Also very 'brief' despite all that it contains, so definitely highly recommend this for anyone more or less curious about 'Stoicism'.
Read
May 11, 2020nice little read, great way to get started on the topic of stoicism.
June 25, 2024
Basics of stoicism explained. Really inviting book to dive deeper into this philosophical scope.
April 2, 2020
Succinct introduction to stoicism. I think this is an important take on life/happiness to explore.
This is a very quick read - and so captivating that I could not stop reading. I contemplated giving the book a 4 star rating because there are some ideas that I do not fully agree with or some concepts I didn't deem completely logical (specifically the chapter on life or death and ideas about leisure) . But of course, that is not an indictment on Sellars.
By focusing on the lives of three specific Stoics: Seneca, Epictetus and Marcus Aurelics, Sellars clearly explained different ideas of stoicism. I really enjoyed the different insights this choice provided. Personally, I think my philosophy aligns more with the views of Epictetus (which is also besides the point).
I thoroughly enjoyed the emphasis on time in Chapter 6 and I think we all could benefit from reading this section at the very least.
Essentially, I thought this was a brilliant job done by Sellars- great read.
This is a very quick read - and so captivating that I could not stop reading. I contemplated giving the book a 4 star rating because there are some ideas that I do not fully agree with or some concepts I didn't deem completely logical (specifically the chapter on life or death and ideas about leisure) . But of course, that is not an indictment on Sellars.
By focusing on the lives of three specific Stoics: Seneca, Epictetus and Marcus Aurelics, Sellars clearly explained different ideas of stoicism. I really enjoyed the different insights this choice provided. Personally, I think my philosophy aligns more with the views of Epictetus (which is also besides the point).
I thoroughly enjoyed the emphasis on time in Chapter 6 and I think we all could benefit from reading this section at the very least.
Essentially, I thought this was a brilliant job done by Sellars- great read.
July 7, 2021
I like this book, it's very quick and easy to read and is a good introduction to certain aspects of stoicism
It was really repetitive though? Despite it being so short I found that he often repeated the same points twice or three times with slightly different phrasing, but I guess that's just how a lot of ancient greek philosophy is, especially stoicism mfers just love simplicity and not being douches about their writing style
anyway thanks john I am now going to go and obsess over the Gaia hypothesis <3
It was really repetitive though? Despite it being so short I found that he often repeated the same points twice or three times with slightly different phrasing, but I guess that's just how a lot of ancient greek philosophy is, especially stoicism mfers just love simplicity and not being douches about their writing style
anyway thanks john I am now going to go and obsess over the Gaia hypothesis <3
May 28, 2021
This is an excellent primer on the basic principles of Stoicism and how we might apply them to everyday life.
April 25, 2022
long live stoicism
February 23, 2025
Джон Селларс
"Уроки стоїцизму", "Епікур та мистецтво жити щасливо"
Переклад Олександра Петришина
«Порожні слова того філософа, якими не лікується жодне страждання людини».
Так говорив філософ Епікур, який народився і виріс на грецькому острові Самос у середині IV століття до н. е. Філософією він зацікавився ще підлітком, бо, як свідчать перекази, розчарувався у своєму вчителеві, який не міг пояснити йому сенс віршів Гесіода. Батьки Епікура були родом з Атен, і він успадкував атенське громадянство. Коли йому виповнилося вісімнадцять років, він поплив на рідний острів своїх батьків, ймовірно, щоб відбути військову службу, обов'язкову для атенян. Якраз у той час, коли він мав повернутися додому, його сім'ю разом із рештою атенських переселенців вигнали із Самосу, і кілька років Епікурові довелося поневірятися, не маючи постійного притулку. Якийсь час він жив у Мітилені, на острові Лесбос, де й узявся викладати філософію та зустрів Гермарха, з яким надалі дружив усе життя. Місцеві жителі не схвалювали атенської манери філософувати привселюдно, тож Епікур, Гермарх і, мабуть, ще кілька його послідовників змушені були перебратися до Лампсака, розташованого на теренах Малої Азії, неподалік від стародавньої Трої. Там за кілька років Епікур створив свою школу з вірних послідовників, але цього разу він та його учні розмовляли поміж себе, пам'ятаючи про мітиленський досвід."
Дві роботи Селларса зібрані під однією обкладинкою, які я давно хотів прочитати. Не зважаючи на невелику кількість сторінок, ця книжка надзвичайно насичена. 0% - зайвих слів, тільки лаконічний виклад двох на перший погляд розрізнених, а насправді дуже схожих філософських шкіл.
Напевно, як і багато хто, я полюбив Епікура через Сенеку, який дуже багато його цитує, особливо у славнозвісних "Листах". З робіт самого Епікура ми маємо кілька листів та фраґменти деяких його праць. Тим не менш, є прекрасна можливість насолодитись його вченням через посередництво Лукреція - українською є чудовий переклад Содомори, особливо раджу перше видання в мистецькій чорній обкладинці,яке я й читав.
Цінність книги Селларса в тому, що вона має хорошу бібліографію вкінці з якої я вже додав собі кілька десятків книг для майбутнього читання. Обов'язково читатиму Філодема, та опис геркуланумських папірусів. Інше важливе ддерело: напис Діогена Еноандського, який теж є в реконструкції та перекладі, звісно ж, англійською мовою.
Якщо коротко, то суть вчення Епікура можна виразити в формі "Тетрафармакоса" (звучить прекрасно!) , тобто Чотириліків:
"Не бійся богів,
Не переймайся смертю,
Добра легко досягнути,
Зло легко перенести."
На перший погляд, звучить це все банально та наївно. Але вся суть в детальному аналізі кожного "ліку" та приведенні його в життя. Епікур був гностиком, бо вважав спасіння у знанні, в так званій "статичній насолоді". І в цьому я його прекрасно розумію, адже зробив ціллю свого життя насолоду від власного ментального, візіонерського, та самісного багатства. Це насолода від думання і споглядання, яка не потребує ані друзів, ані соціального статусу, ані володіння непотрібними предметами та атрибутами.
Як ви помітили, я почав свій огляд з другої праці, не згадавши першу - про стоїцизм. Все напевно через те, що вона мені не відкрила нічого нового. Безперечно, написано дуже добре і корисно було її прочитати, щоб потім відразу порівняти з епікуреїзмом. Але я вже це чув і читав багато разів.
Виділю хіба вічну думку Епіктета про сфери впливу і спосіб реакції, які спільні і для вчення Епікура:
"Забудьте про речі, які ви не можете контролювати, і зосередьтесь на своїх думках. Вам до снаги, змінюючи їх, ушляхетнювати свою душу. Тільки так, за словами Зенона, ви знайдете "рівноплинне життя щасливої людини".
В підсумку, маємо насправді прекрасну книжку, яка може слугувати стартом для новака, як у царину стоїків так і до вчення Епікура. З ньюансів - помітив кілька перекладацьких та коректорських помилок, як от повторення слів та дивну побудову деяких речень (маю надію, що то не ознака ШІ). З іншого боку - оцінюю використання перекладачем рідкісних смачних слівець, що урізноманітнюють читання.
"Уроки стоїцизму", "Епікур та мистецтво жити щасливо"
Переклад Олександра Петришина
«Порожні слова того філософа, якими не лікується жодне страждання людини».
Так говорив філософ Епікур, який народився і виріс на грецькому острові Самос у середині IV століття до н. е. Філософією він зацікавився ще підлітком, бо, як свідчать перекази, розчарувався у своєму вчителеві, який не міг пояснити йому сенс віршів Гесіода. Батьки Епікура були родом з Атен, і він успадкував атенське громадянство. Коли йому виповнилося вісімнадцять років, він поплив на рідний острів своїх батьків, ймовірно, щоб відбути військову службу, обов'язкову для атенян. Якраз у той час, коли він мав повернутися додому, його сім'ю разом із рештою атенських переселенців вигнали із Самосу, і кілька років Епікурові довелося поневірятися, не маючи постійного притулку. Якийсь час він жив у Мітилені, на острові Лесбос, де й узявся викладати філософію та зустрів Гермарха, з яким надалі дружив усе життя. Місцеві жителі не схвалювали атенської манери філософувати привселюдно, тож Епікур, Гермарх і, мабуть, ще кілька його послідовників змушені були перебратися до Лампсака, розташованого на теренах Малої Азії, неподалік від стародавньої Трої. Там за кілька років Епікур створив свою школу з вірних послідовників, але цього разу він та його учні розмовляли поміж себе, пам'ятаючи про мітиленський досвід."
Дві роботи Селларса зібрані під однією обкладинкою, які я давно хотів прочитати. Не зважаючи на невелику кількість сторінок, ця книжка надзвичайно насичена. 0% - зайвих слів, тільки лаконічний виклад двох на перший погляд розрізнених, а насправді дуже схожих філософських шкіл.
Напевно, як і багато хто, я полюбив Епікура через Сенеку, який дуже багато його цитує, особливо у славнозвісних "Листах". З робіт самого Епікура ми маємо кілька листів та фраґменти деяких його праць. Тим не менш, є прекрасна можливість насолодитись його вченням через посередництво Лукреція - українською є чудовий переклад Содомори, особливо раджу перше видання в мистецькій чорній обкладинці,яке я й читав.
Цінність книги Селларса в тому, що вона має хорошу бібліографію вкінці з якої я вже додав собі кілька десятків книг для майбутнього читання. Обов'язково читатиму Філодема, та опис геркуланумських папірусів. Інше важливе ддерело: напис Діогена Еноандського, який теж є в реконструкції та перекладі, звісно ж, англійською мовою.
Якщо коротко, то суть вчення Епікура можна виразити в формі "Тетрафармакоса" (звучить прекрасно!) , тобто Чотириліків:
"Не бійся богів,
Не переймайся смертю,
Добра легко досягнути,
Зло легко перенести."
На перший погляд, звучить це все банально та наївно. Але вся суть в детальному аналізі кожного "ліку" та приведенні його в життя. Епікур був гностиком, бо вважав спасіння у знанні, в так званій "статичній насолоді". І в цьому я його прекрасно розумію, адже зробив ціллю свого життя насолоду від власного ментального, візіонерського, та самісного багатства. Це насолода від думання і споглядання, яка не потребує ані друзів, ані соціального статусу, ані володіння непотрібними предметами та атрибутами.
Як ви помітили, я почав свій огляд з другої праці, не згадавши першу - про стоїцизм. Все напевно через те, що вона мені не відкрила нічого нового. Безперечно, написано дуже добре і корисно було її прочитати, щоб потім відразу порівняти з епікуреїзмом. Але я вже це чув і читав багато разів.
Виділю хіба вічну думку Епіктета про сфери впливу і спосіб реакції, які спільні і для вчення Епікура:
"Забудьте про речі, які ви не можете контролювати, і зосередьтесь на своїх думках. Вам до снаги, змінюючи їх, ушляхетнювати свою душу. Тільки так, за словами Зенона, ви знайдете "рівноплинне життя щасливої людини".
В підсумку, маємо насправді прекрасну книжку, яка може слугувати стартом для новака, як у царину стоїків так і до вчення Епікура. З ньюансів - помітив кілька перекладацьких та коректорських помилок, як от повторення слів та дивну побудову деяких речень (маю надію, що то не ознака ШІ). З іншого боку - оцінюю використання перекладачем рідкісних смачних слівець, що урізноманітнюють читання.
March 14, 2022
This is a useful, brief introduction to stoicism. The book is divided into a few main themes/chapters, mostly based on the the teachings of Stoic philosopher Epictetus but also taps on the thinking of other Stoics and is able to draw out the subtle differences between them, which I thought is useful nuance.
What are my key take-aways?
That Stoic philosophy has a lot in common with Buddhism. Stoicism’s view on life’s impermanance and constant changes are similar to many other spiritual traditions. However, Buddhism has something unique, including its emphasis on equanimity in approach, and emphasising that our suffering has origination and causal links as expressed in its teachings on Dependent Origination.
Except for people who are extremely virtuous and can be viewed through positive lens, most other things, people, situations can be seen through neutral lens, as Epictetus says they have an "indifferent" quality. This encourages a more neutral (or equanamous) attitude towards things outside of your control, as these are not inherently positive or negative but are subject to how you see or judge the situation.
In the chapter “What do you control?”, we are reminded that change is constant and that "All we have is complete control over are our judgements, which is to say what we think about things that happen to us."
He said that we have control over everything that matters for our wellbeing, and if our sense of wellbeing depends on externals, then we have effectively handed over our happiness to the whims of something or someone else. The fact is, we think we have control over these externals, when the plain fact is that we don’t, hence, frustration and disappointment ensues.
Epictetus was clear that while we have control over our judgements and hence our actions, we don’t have control over their outcomes. And that if we tie our happiness to achieving a specific outcome, we run the risk of being frequently disappointed. But if we make our goal simply doing the best we can, then nothing can get in our way. His concept of going with the flow, of accepting what happened and work with it rather than fight against it to ensure a a smooth flow of life is so very Tao!
One very, very important point I want to highlight about the nuances of Epictetus’ teachings is that he is able to understand that there are certain mental formations or thoughts that we do not have control over, just as Buddha taught. Epictetus said we do not have complete control over everything in our minds, since we we don't choose the sensations and memories consciously. What we have is our volitional thoughts, that is, our act of judgement. “Whatever value these things might seem to have is the value that we attribute to them with our judgements, and not anything inherent in the things.”
He argues for the need to integrate periods of reflection into our daily lives and to to be constantly attentive of our thoughts and judgements, and that if we let out attention slip we can quickly lose whatever progress we may have made. This is so very similar to Buddhism, especially Zen (one Zen master says that we stand on the razor edge of now.)
I especially like the chapter on “The problem with emotions”. I have started reading Marcus Aurelius’ Meditations and understand that the current day understanding of a stoicism is very different from how the ancient Stoics or Stoic philosophers see emotions, and hence contributed to a misconceptions about stoicism. The author said: “The Stoic claim - and this is an important point – is not that we should deny or suppress our emotions; it is rather that we should try to avoid having them in the first place.” (Reference to the point about things as “indifferent”, that they are neutral.)
What I found very interesting and very similar to Buddha’s teachings on Dependent Origination is what Epictetus called the “first movements” - that this is a an involuntary first movement, which is a natural physiological reaction out of our control. But secondly, there arises a judgement in response to the experience, which is within our control. Third, an emotion that, once created, is out of our control. Once the emotion is there, there is noting we can do but wait for it to subside.
Hence, the subtlety and the power of the Stoic teaching! The understanding of what you can control and not, including in your psyche and mind!
And an important thing is that, whether harm is done to you or not is not the point, but that you must have believed or perceived that you are being harmed and that causes you to suffer. So it is the perception that matters. That is something we can control – because it is a judgement, and it can be subjective and that means subject to us too.
Stoics like Marcus Aurelius talks about “Nature” a fair bit, to reflect a certain natural way of things that need to go through a certain process or progression or path. That Nature isn’t blind and chaotic, it is ordered and beautiful, with its own rhymes and patterns (very Tao) and that fate is the fate of physics and nature (like Karma law or more precisely karmic conditionings) .
On life and death, Stoics see that the universe is a is a single living organism, of which we are all parts of the whole. Even in loss or death, we should not see that we have lost something or someone, but we have returned it to its source.
More importantly, Seneca says that for many of us, by the time we are really ready to start living, our lives are almost over. So we should not postpone our plans and dreams until retirement. Sometimes, having gained all the material success, we will lack time, time for ourselves, for peace and quiet, leisure and retirement. In essence, he says that actually, all of us have more than enough time, no matter how long or short our lives turn out to be - the problem is that we waste more of it.
“It was Nature’s intention that there should be no need of great equipment for a good life: every individual can make himself happy. External goods are of trivial importance and without much influence in either direction: prosperity does not elevate the sage and adversity does not depress him. For he has always made the effort to rely as much as possible on himself to derive all delight within himself. “(Seneca)
Stoics see the philosopher as a doctor, and Socrates has argued that the task of the philosopher is to take care of one's soul, just as a physician takes care of one's body.
What are my key take-aways?
That Stoic philosophy has a lot in common with Buddhism. Stoicism’s view on life’s impermanance and constant changes are similar to many other spiritual traditions. However, Buddhism has something unique, including its emphasis on equanimity in approach, and emphasising that our suffering has origination and causal links as expressed in its teachings on Dependent Origination.
Except for people who are extremely virtuous and can be viewed through positive lens, most other things, people, situations can be seen through neutral lens, as Epictetus says they have an "indifferent" quality. This encourages a more neutral (or equanamous) attitude towards things outside of your control, as these are not inherently positive or negative but are subject to how you see or judge the situation.
In the chapter “What do you control?”, we are reminded that change is constant and that "All we have is complete control over are our judgements, which is to say what we think about things that happen to us."
He said that we have control over everything that matters for our wellbeing, and if our sense of wellbeing depends on externals, then we have effectively handed over our happiness to the whims of something or someone else. The fact is, we think we have control over these externals, when the plain fact is that we don’t, hence, frustration and disappointment ensues.
Epictetus was clear that while we have control over our judgements and hence our actions, we don’t have control over their outcomes. And that if we tie our happiness to achieving a specific outcome, we run the risk of being frequently disappointed. But if we make our goal simply doing the best we can, then nothing can get in our way. His concept of going with the flow, of accepting what happened and work with it rather than fight against it to ensure a a smooth flow of life is so very Tao!
One very, very important point I want to highlight about the nuances of Epictetus’ teachings is that he is able to understand that there are certain mental formations or thoughts that we do not have control over, just as Buddha taught. Epictetus said we do not have complete control over everything in our minds, since we we don't choose the sensations and memories consciously. What we have is our volitional thoughts, that is, our act of judgement. “Whatever value these things might seem to have is the value that we attribute to them with our judgements, and not anything inherent in the things.”
He argues for the need to integrate periods of reflection into our daily lives and to to be constantly attentive of our thoughts and judgements, and that if we let out attention slip we can quickly lose whatever progress we may have made. This is so very similar to Buddhism, especially Zen (one Zen master says that we stand on the razor edge of now.)
I especially like the chapter on “The problem with emotions”. I have started reading Marcus Aurelius’ Meditations and understand that the current day understanding of a stoicism is very different from how the ancient Stoics or Stoic philosophers see emotions, and hence contributed to a misconceptions about stoicism. The author said: “The Stoic claim - and this is an important point – is not that we should deny or suppress our emotions; it is rather that we should try to avoid having them in the first place.” (Reference to the point about things as “indifferent”, that they are neutral.)
What I found very interesting and very similar to Buddha’s teachings on Dependent Origination is what Epictetus called the “first movements” - that this is a an involuntary first movement, which is a natural physiological reaction out of our control. But secondly, there arises a judgement in response to the experience, which is within our control. Third, an emotion that, once created, is out of our control. Once the emotion is there, there is noting we can do but wait for it to subside.
Hence, the subtlety and the power of the Stoic teaching! The understanding of what you can control and not, including in your psyche and mind!
And an important thing is that, whether harm is done to you or not is not the point, but that you must have believed or perceived that you are being harmed and that causes you to suffer. So it is the perception that matters. That is something we can control – because it is a judgement, and it can be subjective and that means subject to us too.
Stoics like Marcus Aurelius talks about “Nature” a fair bit, to reflect a certain natural way of things that need to go through a certain process or progression or path. That Nature isn’t blind and chaotic, it is ordered and beautiful, with its own rhymes and patterns (very Tao) and that fate is the fate of physics and nature (like Karma law or more precisely karmic conditionings) .
On life and death, Stoics see that the universe is a is a single living organism, of which we are all parts of the whole. Even in loss or death, we should not see that we have lost something or someone, but we have returned it to its source.
More importantly, Seneca says that for many of us, by the time we are really ready to start living, our lives are almost over. So we should not postpone our plans and dreams until retirement. Sometimes, having gained all the material success, we will lack time, time for ourselves, for peace and quiet, leisure and retirement. In essence, he says that actually, all of us have more than enough time, no matter how long or short our lives turn out to be - the problem is that we waste more of it.
“It was Nature’s intention that there should be no need of great equipment for a good life: every individual can make himself happy. External goods are of trivial importance and without much influence in either direction: prosperity does not elevate the sage and adversity does not depress him. For he has always made the effort to rely as much as possible on himself to derive all delight within himself. “(Seneca)
Stoics see the philosopher as a doctor, and Socrates has argued that the task of the philosopher is to take care of one's soul, just as a physician takes care of one's body.
September 8, 2021
Excelente introducción a la filosofía estoica. Desde el relato de momentos relevantes en la vida de los principales autores del estoicismo (Séneca, Epicteto y Marco Aurelio), el autor va incluyendo las principales disposiciones de ésta filosofía, estableciendo una lógica narrativa que hace muy sencilla la lectura.
Se abordan de manera acertada aspectos cotidianos de la vida, en los que el pensamiento estoico nos puede ofrecer diversas herramientas para afrontarlos.
Definitivamente es un libro muy recomendado para iniciarse en el estudio del estoicismo y la vida de sus pensadores más destacados.
Se abordan de manera acertada aspectos cotidianos de la vida, en los que el pensamiento estoico nos puede ofrecer diversas herramientas para afrontarlos.
Definitivamente es un libro muy recomendado para iniciarse en el estudio del estoicismo y la vida de sus pensadores más destacados.
July 10, 2022
Such a great book. An excellent introduction to the aspects of Stoicism.
November 16, 2023
This is good, obviously it's very hard to implement this philosophy irl but this book shows very clearly how to do so. Excited to try it out I think its a very good intro to stoicism and explains a lot of the basic pillars of it without getting too complicated. The only reason I'm not rating it higher is becuase it's just too hard for me personally to understand 100% of it like I'm not smart enough yet to comprehend it all hahahaha need to read more philosophy
June 17, 2024
I’m not as stoic as I thought I was. On to cynicism
![Profile Image for nastia დ [semi-ia | new job + reading slump].](https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/users/1785957191i/95171139._UY200_CR0,0,200,200_.jpg)
November 15, 2023
«A slightly less well-known Stoic of the imperial period called Hierocles (about whose life we know almost nothing) outlined in his treatise on Stoic ethics the idea that we are each at the centre of a series of expanding circles of concern, starting with ourselves, then containing our immediate family, then our local community and eventually ending with the largest circle that embraces all humankind. The modern idea of cosmopolitanism, then, has its origins with the Stoics.
It is worth noting, though, that this does not mean that you should neglect your place within your local community. In a famous passage, Seneca put it like this:
Let us grasp the idea that there are two commonwealths – the one, a vast and truly common state, which embraces alike gods and men, in which we look neither to this corner of earth nor to that, but measure the bounds of our citizenship by the path of the sun; the other, the one to which we have been assigned by the accident of birth.»
It is worth noting, though, that this does not mean that you should neglect your place within your local community. In a famous passage, Seneca put it like this:
Let us grasp the idea that there are two commonwealths – the one, a vast and truly common state, which embraces alike gods and men, in which we look neither to this corner of earth nor to that, but measure the bounds of our citizenship by the path of the sun; the other, the one to which we have been assigned by the accident of birth.»
January 18, 2021
This is a short, concise, easy-going book, which provides a generalised introduction to the themes of Stoicism. It does so well, although I wasn't as engaged as I thought I would be - perhaps because I had been introduced to many of the philosophies discussed here through various podcasts and other reading. Regardless, this small volume contains much value and insight, and will absolutely be useful to those who might be interested in stoicism and the benefits we might gain from its insights.
April 12, 2021
WOW!! So interesting, I love reading about different philosophies because they always make me reflect on the way I perceive my own life and my placement in the world. I'm not gonna lie, some of the parts were a bit iffy to me but all in all, it was such a good, and easy read. Read it on the plane for like 45 minutes so very easy but still essential in my understanding of myself. Looking forward to doing some further reading 😝🤘
December 8, 2021
This book is an excellent summary of the essential aspects of stoicism.
Maybe a little bit dry in some parts, but perhaps that’s because I already knew the information in it.
I believe it would be a good book for people interested in stoicism and are at the beginning of their journey because it provides a good and concise overview of the topic.
Maybe a little bit dry in some parts, but perhaps that’s because I already knew the information in it.
I believe it would be a good book for people interested in stoicism and are at the beginning of their journey because it provides a good and concise overview of the topic.
December 30, 2023
Short, easy to read, and practical. A good first book on how to live like a a Stoic.
Displaying 1 - 29 of 841 reviews