What do you think?
Rate this book
Epictetus’s 'Encheiridion': A New Translation and Guide to Stoic Ethics
For anyone approaching the Encheiridion of Epictetus for the first time, this book provides a comprehensive guide to understanding a complex philosophical text. Including a full translation and clear explanatory commentaries, Epictetus's ' Encheiridion' introduces readers to a hugely influential work of Stoic philosophy. Scott Aikin and William O. Stephens unravel the core themes of Stoic ethics found within this ancient handbook. Focusing on the core themes of self-control, seeing things as they are, living according to nature, owning one's roles and fulfilling the responsibilities that those roles entail, the authors elucidate the extremely challenging ideas in Epictetus's brisk chapters. Divided into five distinct parts, this book provides readers
- A new translation of the Encheiridion by William O. Stephens.
- A new introduction to ancient Stoicism, its system of concepts, and the ancient figures who shaped it.
- A fresh treatment of the notorious and counter-intuitive 'Stoic paradoxes'.
- An accessible overview of the origin and historical context of the Encheiridion.
- Detailed commentaries on each chapter of the Encheiridion that clarify its recurring themes and highlight their interconnections.
- Careful attention to the presentation of the arguments embedded in Epictetus's aphoristic style.
- A thoughtful discussion of serious criticisms of Epictetus's Stoicism and replies to these objections.
Written with clarity and authority, Epictetus's ' Encheiridion' provides a foundation from which readers can understand this important text and engage with the fundamental questions of Stoic philosophy and ethics. This guide will aid teachers of Epictetus, students encountering Stoicism for the first time, and readers seeking a greater understanding of Stoic ethics.
- A new translation of the Encheiridion by William O. Stephens.
- A new introduction to ancient Stoicism, its system of concepts, and the ancient figures who shaped it.
- A fresh treatment of the notorious and counter-intuitive 'Stoic paradoxes'.
- An accessible overview of the origin and historical context of the Encheiridion.
- Detailed commentaries on each chapter of the Encheiridion that clarify its recurring themes and highlight their interconnections.
- Careful attention to the presentation of the arguments embedded in Epictetus's aphoristic style.
- A thoughtful discussion of serious criticisms of Epictetus's Stoicism and replies to these objections.
Written with clarity and authority, Epictetus's ' Encheiridion' provides a foundation from which readers can understand this important text and engage with the fundamental questions of Stoic philosophy and ethics. This guide will aid teachers of Epictetus, students encountering Stoicism for the first time, and readers seeking a greater understanding of Stoic ethics.
- GenresPhilosophy
320 pages, Paperback
Published June 15, 2023
13 people are currently reading
38 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
August 14, 2023
If all Western philosophy can be summarized as “footnotes to Plato,” then all Stoic philosophy can be summarized as “footnotes to Epictetus.” That’s the reason, almost 2,000 years later, we continue to get new translations and commentaries on Epictetus’ classic texts (which, of course, were written by Arrian).
But this raises the question: Why rely on Epictetus when we have a host of contemporary philosophers that specialize in Stoicism? The reason is that there is simply no better, more concise expression of Stoic ethics than is found in the Enchiridion (Handbook). Even Marcus Aurelius’ Meditations can be read more or less as self-reminders to abide by Epictetus’ principles, which no Stoic philosopher since has really tried to improve upon (rather than simply restate). What you have then, subsequent to late Roman Stoicism, is a series of commentaries on the Handbook with the primary aim of applying its principles to one’s life, not revising them.
Indeed, the handbook’s historical list of adherents is impressive, including prominent names like Adam Smith, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, and Walt Whitman, among others. In fact, Jefferson, who felt the need to modify even the Bible—by removing all instances of miracles and the supernatural—felt no need to modify Epictetus’ masterpiece of ethics.
The upshot is that, if you want to learn about Stoicism, there is probably no better source than Epictetus. The only issue is that, being written so long ago, it is inevitable that the language and examples—though not necessarily the concepts—will seem a bit outdated. And this is why the new translation by Scott Aikin and William O. Stephens is a welcome addition to the literature.
The book is much more than a new translation, however. Remember that the Handbook is a quick read: at around 3,000 - 4,000 words, you could read it in well under 20 minutes. But by simply reading the Handbook, the reader loses much of the context, background, and underlying assumptions that form the foundation of the text.
And so, in addition to the updated translation, this book provides the full context and background of the text, chapter-by-chapter commentaries of the text, replies to common criticisms of Stoicism, and a framework, centered around the Handbook, by which one can practice the art of Stoicism.
What perhaps best sets this book apart from the rest is something many books on Stoicism ignore, or at least only present tangentially—the common criticisms of Stoicism. Here, the authors address these criticisms and offer replies to them through their extensive commentaries and in an entire section of the book. Whether and to what extent they are successful readers will have to judge for themselves, but it’s worth pointing out a few things.
First of all, we can ask why Epictetus’ short book has been so influential throughout history, and, more generally, why Stoicism has endured as a practical ethical framework. The answer is that at the heart of Epictetus’ brand of Stoicism (and its controversy) lies a powerful idea: the dichotomy of control. If you truly understand this concept, then you understand Stoicism. The idea is simple enough; as Epictetus taught:
Some things are within our power, while others are not. Within our power are opinion, motivation, desire, aversion, and, in a word, whatever is of our own doing; not within our power are our body, our property, reputation, office, and, in a word, whatever is not of our own doing. And the things up to us are naturally free, unhindered and unimpeded. But the things not up to us are weak, enslaved, hindered and not yours.
The rest of the Handbook is an elaboration on this principle, and on how to apply it to one’s own life. It is a recipe for psychological freedom in the sense that, since you can’t control outside events, but you can control your judgments of those events, and since your judgments are entirely up to you, once you master your judgments, you become psychologically invincible. Once you learn how to prioritize the things under your direct control—virtue, wisdom, goodness, character—and not on superficial things like wealth and status, you become tranquil, free, productive, and wise.
This is generally good advice, but it’s also where Stoicism’s critics enter the fray. They do so most vociferously at this point because, if you can refute the core tenet of Stoicism—of which everything else is based—then you can go a long way towards refuting Stoicism itself.
The argument goes like this: The idea that we should focus only on what we can control, and accept what we cannot, is far too passive. Oftentimes, we cannot yet determine what it is that we can and can’t control until after we try to affect change. Political and social movements, as well as scientific endeavors, often at first seem impossible; however, through perseverance and resolve, we can, by valuing externals, overcome obstacles and achieve the impossible. But this can only be accomplished via the extraordinary motivation that comes only from doing what Stoics most despise—valuing externals.
So there is a definite tension between, on the one hand, being so unbothered and unemotional that you lose the motivation to pursue challenging tasks, and, on the other hand, the promise of achieving total and complete tranquility in the face of adversity. But is tranquility worth the cost of indifference? Stoicism’s critics will say no (they’ll also say that it’s psychologically impossible to act this way).
Proponents of Stoicism will say yes, and might add that Stoicism is not about indifference to achieving important or difficult goals; rather, Stoicism simply focuses attention on the aspects of the task that are entirely within your control, and reminds you to not become discouraged at things ultimately beyond your control. If you want to change the world, go ahead and try; just don’t become despondent if things don’t go as planned.
No part of Stoicism says that you cannot in some sense value externals (what Stoics call “preferred indifferents”), only that you cannot allow this to compromise what truly matters: your character. If you can strive for social justice and maintain your integrity, go for it; there is nothing about Stoicism that says you must live as a passive, reclusive hermit (Marcus Aurelius was, after all, the emperor of Rome). You can, as the authors point out, have it both ways, so long as your integrity is not jeopardized.
This inherent tension between indifference/tranquility and motivation/action is found throughout the book, which the authors try to resolve throughout their extensive commentaries. How you work through these issues and resolve the tension will determine whether or not you choose to embrace Stoicism, reject it, or otherwise modify it. But even if not adopted wholesale, the aspirational aspects of the philosophy—the idea that you should be most concerned with what you can control, and with building your own strength of character for the betterment of yourself and society—is a welcome message that will forever be part of the better side of humanity’s ethical toolkit.
But this raises the question: Why rely on Epictetus when we have a host of contemporary philosophers that specialize in Stoicism? The reason is that there is simply no better, more concise expression of Stoic ethics than is found in the Enchiridion (Handbook). Even Marcus Aurelius’ Meditations can be read more or less as self-reminders to abide by Epictetus’ principles, which no Stoic philosopher since has really tried to improve upon (rather than simply restate). What you have then, subsequent to late Roman Stoicism, is a series of commentaries on the Handbook with the primary aim of applying its principles to one’s life, not revising them.
Indeed, the handbook’s historical list of adherents is impressive, including prominent names like Adam Smith, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, and Walt Whitman, among others. In fact, Jefferson, who felt the need to modify even the Bible—by removing all instances of miracles and the supernatural—felt no need to modify Epictetus’ masterpiece of ethics.
The upshot is that, if you want to learn about Stoicism, there is probably no better source than Epictetus. The only issue is that, being written so long ago, it is inevitable that the language and examples—though not necessarily the concepts—will seem a bit outdated. And this is why the new translation by Scott Aikin and William O. Stephens is a welcome addition to the literature.
The book is much more than a new translation, however. Remember that the Handbook is a quick read: at around 3,000 - 4,000 words, you could read it in well under 20 minutes. But by simply reading the Handbook, the reader loses much of the context, background, and underlying assumptions that form the foundation of the text.
And so, in addition to the updated translation, this book provides the full context and background of the text, chapter-by-chapter commentaries of the text, replies to common criticisms of Stoicism, and a framework, centered around the Handbook, by which one can practice the art of Stoicism.
What perhaps best sets this book apart from the rest is something many books on Stoicism ignore, or at least only present tangentially—the common criticisms of Stoicism. Here, the authors address these criticisms and offer replies to them through their extensive commentaries and in an entire section of the book. Whether and to what extent they are successful readers will have to judge for themselves, but it’s worth pointing out a few things.
First of all, we can ask why Epictetus’ short book has been so influential throughout history, and, more generally, why Stoicism has endured as a practical ethical framework. The answer is that at the heart of Epictetus’ brand of Stoicism (and its controversy) lies a powerful idea: the dichotomy of control. If you truly understand this concept, then you understand Stoicism. The idea is simple enough; as Epictetus taught:
Some things are within our power, while others are not. Within our power are opinion, motivation, desire, aversion, and, in a word, whatever is of our own doing; not within our power are our body, our property, reputation, office, and, in a word, whatever is not of our own doing. And the things up to us are naturally free, unhindered and unimpeded. But the things not up to us are weak, enslaved, hindered and not yours.
The rest of the Handbook is an elaboration on this principle, and on how to apply it to one’s own life. It is a recipe for psychological freedom in the sense that, since you can’t control outside events, but you can control your judgments of those events, and since your judgments are entirely up to you, once you master your judgments, you become psychologically invincible. Once you learn how to prioritize the things under your direct control—virtue, wisdom, goodness, character—and not on superficial things like wealth and status, you become tranquil, free, productive, and wise.
This is generally good advice, but it’s also where Stoicism’s critics enter the fray. They do so most vociferously at this point because, if you can refute the core tenet of Stoicism—of which everything else is based—then you can go a long way towards refuting Stoicism itself.
The argument goes like this: The idea that we should focus only on what we can control, and accept what we cannot, is far too passive. Oftentimes, we cannot yet determine what it is that we can and can’t control until after we try to affect change. Political and social movements, as well as scientific endeavors, often at first seem impossible; however, through perseverance and resolve, we can, by valuing externals, overcome obstacles and achieve the impossible. But this can only be accomplished via the extraordinary motivation that comes only from doing what Stoics most despise—valuing externals.
So there is a definite tension between, on the one hand, being so unbothered and unemotional that you lose the motivation to pursue challenging tasks, and, on the other hand, the promise of achieving total and complete tranquility in the face of adversity. But is tranquility worth the cost of indifference? Stoicism’s critics will say no (they’ll also say that it’s psychologically impossible to act this way).
Proponents of Stoicism will say yes, and might add that Stoicism is not about indifference to achieving important or difficult goals; rather, Stoicism simply focuses attention on the aspects of the task that are entirely within your control, and reminds you to not become discouraged at things ultimately beyond your control. If you want to change the world, go ahead and try; just don’t become despondent if things don’t go as planned.
No part of Stoicism says that you cannot in some sense value externals (what Stoics call “preferred indifferents”), only that you cannot allow this to compromise what truly matters: your character. If you can strive for social justice and maintain your integrity, go for it; there is nothing about Stoicism that says you must live as a passive, reclusive hermit (Marcus Aurelius was, after all, the emperor of Rome). You can, as the authors point out, have it both ways, so long as your integrity is not jeopardized.
This inherent tension between indifference/tranquility and motivation/action is found throughout the book, which the authors try to resolve throughout their extensive commentaries. How you work through these issues and resolve the tension will determine whether or not you choose to embrace Stoicism, reject it, or otherwise modify it. But even if not adopted wholesale, the aspirational aspects of the philosophy—the idea that you should be most concerned with what you can control, and with building your own strength of character for the betterment of yourself and society—is a welcome message that will forever be part of the better side of humanity’s ethical toolkit.
October 21, 2023
As informative as Hadot’s Inner Citadel but much easier to read.
This is perhaps my favorite book on Stoicism. The translation is fresh and easy to understand, and the annotations for each chapter are very illuminating. There were points while I was reading that I felt truly excited about the ideas the authors presented. I was also impressed how the authors addressed criticisms of Stoicism. By the end of the book, I felt smarter than the topic but also keenly aware of how much more I need to learn.
This is perhaps my favorite book on Stoicism. The translation is fresh and easy to understand, and the annotations for each chapter are very illuminating. There were points while I was reading that I felt truly excited about the ideas the authors presented. I was also impressed how the authors addressed criticisms of Stoicism. By the end of the book, I felt smarter than the topic but also keenly aware of how much more I need to learn.
June 29, 2024
Easily one of the best modern books on Stoicism outside of academia. Through a focus on Epictetus, Aikin and Stephens cover Stoicism generally and in detail. Starting with a brief but informative history, they go through not only the handbook of Epictetus (as recorded by his student Arrian), but also criticisms of Stoicism and rebuttals to those criticisms.
The authors do a good job of toeing the line between an academic book and a book for popular consumption. There is a wealth of knowledge presented in an easy to consume format. If you are well versed in Stoicism you will find the critiques interesting, whether you agree with the premises or not. And if you are relatively new to Stoicism you will leave with a much better understanding of the Philosophy.
The authors do a good job of toeing the line between an academic book and a book for popular consumption. There is a wealth of knowledge presented in an easy to consume format. If you are well versed in Stoicism you will find the critiques interesting, whether you agree with the premises or not. And if you are relatively new to Stoicism you will leave with a much better understanding of the Philosophy.
February 6, 2025
The Handbook itself is extremely short, so most of the length of this book is devoted to supporting materials like history and related philosophical arguments. It’s all very well done and worth thorough exploration. My one quibble is with the modernization of the text. There are times when you see someone mention a modern, accessible translation and what they mean is that the last one was back in the Victorian era, so the focus was on rendering the original text in contemporary English. That’s part of what they did here. The other part was to replace, say, chariot races with modern events like NASCAR. This broke my own immersion in the text every time. Fortunately, it only happened a few times. I still highly recommend this version of the Handbook.
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews