What do you think?
Rate this book
The Stoic and Epicurean Philosophers: The Complete Extant Writings of Epicurus, Epictetus, Lucretius and Marcus Aurelius
In the writings of Epicurus, Epictetus, Lucretius & Marcus Aurelius, Greek & Roman philosophy comes into its fullest flowering. The advocates of the principles of virtue & pleasure are brought together into a single inexpensive volume for the first time; hitherto their works were obtainable only in separate, expensive editions. The four thinkers here represented have been brilliantly translated by Cyril Bailey, H.A.J. Munro, P.E. Matheson & George Long. In addition, Cleanthes' famous poem Hymn to Zeus & Matthew Arnold's Essay on Marcus Aurelius are included.
627 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1940
12 people are currently reading
188 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 - 5 of 5 reviews
June 4, 2024
AN EXCELLENT COLLECTION OF WRITINGS OF FOUR EARLY PHILOSOPHERS
Editor Whitney J. Oates (1904–1973) was chairman of the Classics department at Princeton University. He wrote in the Preface to this 1940 collection, “No acquaintance with the tradition of Greek philosophy can be regarded as adequate without a thorough grasp of the two great systems of Epicureanism and Stoicism, for these two, along with the schools of Plato and Aristotle, constitute the real body of ancient classical thought. The present volume has been prepared in order that there may be readily available to the reader the complete extant writings of Epicurus and Lucretius, the great exponents of the system founded by the former, as well as those of Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius, the major sources for our knowledge of Stoicism.”
He quotes from a letter of Epicurus to Herodotus, “we must not look for time, as we do for all other things which we look for in an object, by referring them to the general conceptions which we perceive in our own minds, but we must take the general intuition, in accordance with what we speak of as ‘a long time’ or ‘a short time,’ and examine it, applying out intuition to time as we do to other things… Nor again must we predicate of time anything else has having the same essential nature as this special perceptions… but we must turn our thoughts particularly to that only with which we associate this peculiar perception and by which we measure it.” (Pg. 12)
Epicurus wrote to Menoeceus, “The things which I … commend to you, these do and practice, considering them to be the first principles of the good life. First of all believe that god is a being immortal and blessed… and do not assign to him anything alien to his immortality or ill-suited to his blessedness…. For gods there are since the knowledge of them is by clear vision. But they are not such as the many believe them to be… And the impious man is not he who denies the gods of the many. For the statements of the many about the gods are not conceptions derived from sensation, but false suppositions, according to which the greatest misfortunes befall the wicked and the greatest blessings the good by the gift of the gods.” (Pg. 30)
He continues, “Become accustomed to the belief that death is nothing to us. For all good and evil consists in sensation, but death is deprivation of sensation. And therefore a right understanding that death is nothing to us makes the mortality of life enjoyable, not because it adds to it an infinite span of time, but because it takes away the craving for immortality. For there is nothing terrible in life for the man who has truly comprehended that there is nothing terrible in not living… So death, the most terrifying of ills, is nothing to us, since so long as we exist, death is not with us; but when death comes, then we do not exist.” (Pg. 30-31)
He clarifies, “When… we maintain that pleasure is the end, we do not mean the pleasures of profligates and those that consist in sensuality… but freedom from pain in the body and from trouble in the mind. For it is not continuous drinkings and revellings, nor the satisfaction of lusts, nor the enjoyment of fish and other luxuries of the wealthy table, which produce a pleasant life, but sober reasoning, searching out the motives for all choice and avoidance, and banishing mere opinions, to which are due the greatest disturbance of the spirit.” (Pg. 32)
In his “Principal Doctrines,” Epicurus observes, “VIII. No pleasure is a bad thing in itself: but the means which produce some pleasures bring with them disturbances many times greater than the pleasures… XIX. Infinite time contains no greater pleasure than limited time, if one measures by reason the limits of pleasure.” (Pg. 35-36)
Among some fragments are, “It is vain to ask of the gods what a man is capable of supplying for himself… Sexual intercourse has never done a man good, and he is lucky if it has not harmed him… If God listened to the prayers of men, all men would quickly have perished: for they are ever praying for evil against one another.” (Pg. 43, 45, 50)
In Lucretius’ ‘On the Nature of Things,’ he observes, “we shall begin with this first principle, nothing is ever gotten out of nothing by divine power. Fear in sooth holds so in check all mortals, because they see many operations go on in earth and heaven, the causes of which they can in no way understand, believing them to be done by power divine. For these reasons when we shall have seen that nothing can be produced from nothing, we shall then more correctly ascertain that which we are seeking, both the element out of which every thing can be produced and the manner in which all things are done without the hand of the gods… We must admit therefore that nothing can come from nothing, since things require seed before then can severally be born and be brought out into the buxom fields of air.” (Pg. 71-73)
He continues, “Therefore if first bodies are … solid and without void, they must be everlasting. Again unless matter had been eternal, all things before this would have utterly returned to nothing and whatever things we see would have been born anew from nothing. But since I have proved above that nothing can be produced from nothing, and that what is begotten cannot be recalled to nothing, first-beginnings must be of an imperishable body into which all things can be dissolved at their last hour, that there may be a supply of matter for the reproduction of things.” (Pg. 79)
He observes, “Now I assert that the mind and the soul are kept together in close union and make up a single nature, but that the directing principle which we call mind and understanding, is the head so to speak and reigns paramount in the whole body… It by itself alone knows for itself, rejoices for itself, at times when the impression does not move either soul or body together with it… thus the mind sometimes suffers pain by itself or is inspirited with joy.” (Pg. 117)
He points out, “if the nature of the soul is immortal and makes its way into our body at the time of birth, why are we unable to remember besides the time already gone, and why do we retain no traces of past actions? If the power of the mind had been so completely changed, that all remembrance of past things is lost, that methinks differs not widely from death; therefore you must admit that the soul which was before has perished and that which now is has now been formed.” (Pg. 128)
He suggests, “Think too how the bygone antiquity of everlasting time before our birth was nothing to us. Nature therefore holds this up as a mirror of the time yet to come after our death. Is there aught in this that looks appalling, aught that wears an aspect of gloom? Is it not more untroubled than any sleep?” (Pg. 134)
Epictetus states, “To the rational creature that which is against reason is alone past bearing; the rational he can always bear. Blows are not by nature intolerable.” (Pg. 226) He notes, “Concerning the gods there are some who say that the Divine does not exist, others that it exists but is inactive and indifferent and takes no thought for anything, others again that God does exist and take thought but only for great things and things in the heavens, but for nothing on earth; and a fourth class say that God takes thought also for earthly and human things, but only in a general way, and has no care for individuals… it is necessary to examine each of these views… For if there are no gods, how can following the gods be the end of man? If again there are gods, but they care for nothing, in that case too what good will it be to follow them? But… if they exist and do care, yet if there is no communication between them and men… to follow them cannot be a true end.” (Pg. 247)
He notes, “Remember that it is not only desire of office and of wealth that makes men abject and subservient to others, but also desire of peace and leisure and travel and learning. Regard for any external thing, whatever it be, makes you subservient to another… If reading does not win you peace of mind, what is the good of it?” (Pg. 425) He says in his Manual, “What disturbs men’s minds is not events but their judgments on events. For instance, death is nothing dreadful, or else Socrates would have thought it so. No, the only thing dreadful about it is men’s judgment that it is dreadful.” (Pg. 469)
[I have reviewed the Penguin Books edition of Marcus Aurelius’s ‘Meditations’ in its own review.]
This is an excellent collection of these important early philosophical writings, that will be very helpful to those studying this subject.
Editor Whitney J. Oates (1904–1973) was chairman of the Classics department at Princeton University. He wrote in the Preface to this 1940 collection, “No acquaintance with the tradition of Greek philosophy can be regarded as adequate without a thorough grasp of the two great systems of Epicureanism and Stoicism, for these two, along with the schools of Plato and Aristotle, constitute the real body of ancient classical thought. The present volume has been prepared in order that there may be readily available to the reader the complete extant writings of Epicurus and Lucretius, the great exponents of the system founded by the former, as well as those of Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius, the major sources for our knowledge of Stoicism.”
He quotes from a letter of Epicurus to Herodotus, “we must not look for time, as we do for all other things which we look for in an object, by referring them to the general conceptions which we perceive in our own minds, but we must take the general intuition, in accordance with what we speak of as ‘a long time’ or ‘a short time,’ and examine it, applying out intuition to time as we do to other things… Nor again must we predicate of time anything else has having the same essential nature as this special perceptions… but we must turn our thoughts particularly to that only with which we associate this peculiar perception and by which we measure it.” (Pg. 12)
Epicurus wrote to Menoeceus, “The things which I … commend to you, these do and practice, considering them to be the first principles of the good life. First of all believe that god is a being immortal and blessed… and do not assign to him anything alien to his immortality or ill-suited to his blessedness…. For gods there are since the knowledge of them is by clear vision. But they are not such as the many believe them to be… And the impious man is not he who denies the gods of the many. For the statements of the many about the gods are not conceptions derived from sensation, but false suppositions, according to which the greatest misfortunes befall the wicked and the greatest blessings the good by the gift of the gods.” (Pg. 30)
He continues, “Become accustomed to the belief that death is nothing to us. For all good and evil consists in sensation, but death is deprivation of sensation. And therefore a right understanding that death is nothing to us makes the mortality of life enjoyable, not because it adds to it an infinite span of time, but because it takes away the craving for immortality. For there is nothing terrible in life for the man who has truly comprehended that there is nothing terrible in not living… So death, the most terrifying of ills, is nothing to us, since so long as we exist, death is not with us; but when death comes, then we do not exist.” (Pg. 30-31)
He clarifies, “When… we maintain that pleasure is the end, we do not mean the pleasures of profligates and those that consist in sensuality… but freedom from pain in the body and from trouble in the mind. For it is not continuous drinkings and revellings, nor the satisfaction of lusts, nor the enjoyment of fish and other luxuries of the wealthy table, which produce a pleasant life, but sober reasoning, searching out the motives for all choice and avoidance, and banishing mere opinions, to which are due the greatest disturbance of the spirit.” (Pg. 32)
In his “Principal Doctrines,” Epicurus observes, “VIII. No pleasure is a bad thing in itself: but the means which produce some pleasures bring with them disturbances many times greater than the pleasures… XIX. Infinite time contains no greater pleasure than limited time, if one measures by reason the limits of pleasure.” (Pg. 35-36)
Among some fragments are, “It is vain to ask of the gods what a man is capable of supplying for himself… Sexual intercourse has never done a man good, and he is lucky if it has not harmed him… If God listened to the prayers of men, all men would quickly have perished: for they are ever praying for evil against one another.” (Pg. 43, 45, 50)
In Lucretius’ ‘On the Nature of Things,’ he observes, “we shall begin with this first principle, nothing is ever gotten out of nothing by divine power. Fear in sooth holds so in check all mortals, because they see many operations go on in earth and heaven, the causes of which they can in no way understand, believing them to be done by power divine. For these reasons when we shall have seen that nothing can be produced from nothing, we shall then more correctly ascertain that which we are seeking, both the element out of which every thing can be produced and the manner in which all things are done without the hand of the gods… We must admit therefore that nothing can come from nothing, since things require seed before then can severally be born and be brought out into the buxom fields of air.” (Pg. 71-73)
He continues, “Therefore if first bodies are … solid and without void, they must be everlasting. Again unless matter had been eternal, all things before this would have utterly returned to nothing and whatever things we see would have been born anew from nothing. But since I have proved above that nothing can be produced from nothing, and that what is begotten cannot be recalled to nothing, first-beginnings must be of an imperishable body into which all things can be dissolved at their last hour, that there may be a supply of matter for the reproduction of things.” (Pg. 79)
He observes, “Now I assert that the mind and the soul are kept together in close union and make up a single nature, but that the directing principle which we call mind and understanding, is the head so to speak and reigns paramount in the whole body… It by itself alone knows for itself, rejoices for itself, at times when the impression does not move either soul or body together with it… thus the mind sometimes suffers pain by itself or is inspirited with joy.” (Pg. 117)
He points out, “if the nature of the soul is immortal and makes its way into our body at the time of birth, why are we unable to remember besides the time already gone, and why do we retain no traces of past actions? If the power of the mind had been so completely changed, that all remembrance of past things is lost, that methinks differs not widely from death; therefore you must admit that the soul which was before has perished and that which now is has now been formed.” (Pg. 128)
He suggests, “Think too how the bygone antiquity of everlasting time before our birth was nothing to us. Nature therefore holds this up as a mirror of the time yet to come after our death. Is there aught in this that looks appalling, aught that wears an aspect of gloom? Is it not more untroubled than any sleep?” (Pg. 134)
Epictetus states, “To the rational creature that which is against reason is alone past bearing; the rational he can always bear. Blows are not by nature intolerable.” (Pg. 226) He notes, “Concerning the gods there are some who say that the Divine does not exist, others that it exists but is inactive and indifferent and takes no thought for anything, others again that God does exist and take thought but only for great things and things in the heavens, but for nothing on earth; and a fourth class say that God takes thought also for earthly and human things, but only in a general way, and has no care for individuals… it is necessary to examine each of these views… For if there are no gods, how can following the gods be the end of man? If again there are gods, but they care for nothing, in that case too what good will it be to follow them? But… if they exist and do care, yet if there is no communication between them and men… to follow them cannot be a true end.” (Pg. 247)
He notes, “Remember that it is not only desire of office and of wealth that makes men abject and subservient to others, but also desire of peace and leisure and travel and learning. Regard for any external thing, whatever it be, makes you subservient to another… If reading does not win you peace of mind, what is the good of it?” (Pg. 425) He says in his Manual, “What disturbs men’s minds is not events but their judgments on events. For instance, death is nothing dreadful, or else Socrates would have thought it so. No, the only thing dreadful about it is men’s judgment that it is dreadful.” (Pg. 469)
[I have reviewed the Penguin Books edition of Marcus Aurelius’s ‘Meditations’ in its own review.]
This is an excellent collection of these important early philosophical writings, that will be very helpful to those studying this subject.
April 23, 2020
Though originally published in 1940, this translation of the extant writings of four famous Hellenistic philosophers does a fantastic job of keeping the idiom and implications of the original Greek. There is little in the way of commentary, but I appreciate that the translator and editor allows the text to speak for itself.
October 1, 2017
The translation is problematic (I think that's what the problem is) but it is a fairly old book. The parts talking about ancient (i.e. wrong) physics are skippable, but the philosophy is set out in a fairly coherent way.
January 16, 2022
Epicureans get four out five while the stoics get one out of five.
April 13, 2008
A wonderful reference book
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews