The Art of Living: The Classical Mannual on Virtue, Happiness, and Effectiveness [Englisch] [Gebundene Ausgabe]

I basically agree with the review below which was critical of this work as watered down epictetus. I still believe however that this work provides an excellent introduction to the ideas of epictetus in particular and stoicism in general. If this is your only exposure to stoicism, I would worry that you might conclude that this is a warm and fuzzy, feel-good philosophy rather than an extremely tough form of mental discipline where if successful you can expect to live out your life free from suffering and maybe more importantly free from the fear of suffering. Epictetus was not a new age guru but a slave of the roman empire who ended up being the teacher of that other great stoic, the emperor Marcus Aurelius ( see Gladiator movie). The fact that the slave and the emperor both choose to live their lives by the tenants of this philosophy is a more powerful recommendation than anything I could add. I was already familiar with the "Discourses of Epictetus" so I was not really bothered by the shortcomings of "the art of Living" and I have to admit that reading the discourses is quite a slog (it is basically the lecture notes of one of his students). I have given copies of the "discourses" to friends and they went unread while over the last year I have given 10 copies of "The art of living" to friends in distress and they were all read. If you find this philosophy intriguing after this introduction you can move on to the Discourses ( I'd recommend the Long translation - best of a bad lot ) and then the "Confessions of Marcus Aurelius" and "the moral essays of Seneca". "Virtue is necessary and sufficent for a good life" - a radical idea to live by in this cesspool of self-indugence that passes for the good life in 21th century America.

Epictetus desperately needs a modern, contemporary translation. As far as I know, all of the available translations in print are either terribly academic or use Victorian language. This is NOT a translation but a very free, very loose paraphrase and condensation. I knew I was in trouble when I read the introduction. The author slams Western philosophy for being too cerebral and for not dealing sufficiently with the irrational aspects of life. She obviously does not like the use of reason to deal with day to day life. Then why, I might ask, is she paraphrasing a philosopher who is one of the presursors to modern rational psychotherapy? Like many Westerners who dabble in Eastern philosophy and only know it superficially, she assumes that it speaks more directly to the needs of people than Western philosophy. This despite the fact that Plato, Aristotle, Epicurus, Epictetus, etc. were immensely popular with the general population of ancient times. So much so, in fact, that common citizens wore rings and bought mirrors with sayings of Epicurus on them and Socrates could be lampooned in a popular comedy. Stoicism was the unoffical religion of the roman army-not an elitist, irrelevant teaching. And Epicureanism had widespread allegiance and was able to fill huge communities all throughout the ancient world. The most popular devotional books of the 17th and 18th century were all basically rewrites of the ancient Greeks. By the time the introduction was finished, I knew that I was in for a very trendy, inaccurate rendering of Epictetus. The worst chapter has to be the one called "Avoid casual sex". Being familiar with Epictetus, I would love to know where the author found anything in his works which would justify her stating that an active sex life is okay "within a framework of personal commitment". Epictetus believed that men and women should perform their moral duty no matter how difficult. That meant sex only within marriage-not some absurd arrangement that is, as the author says, "within a framework of personal commitment" which could mean anything-and usually does. Epictetus felt that men and women had a duty to something greater than their own personal ideas of what they thought that their duties and commitments might be at any particular moment. Individuals are citizens of a wider community and what they do should lend harmony to the larger community. Their behavior is not determined by trends but by the highest standards. Moderns may not like that. It goes against their grain. Fine, but don't distort Epictetus just to make people feel good. Epictetus, who never minced words, would never flatter his audience or offer a salve to their conscience. I think that Epictetus, the moral rigorist, would have been appalled. His teachings are very stern and difficult. That's why stoicism is both greatly admired and, also, widely rejected. It is a philosophy of moral battle and psychological toughness in a world where, as Tom Wolfe says in "A Man in Full" "principles are dead". When individuals feel they are surrounded by nothing but corruption, injustice, and irresponsibility and feel that they are victims of the same and can do little about any of it, Stoicism shows a way to salvation, a way to preserve your integrity and peace of mind even when you are working for a corporation run by modern day Nero's (are there any other kind?), or suffering physically and mentally from the stress of modern life and its overwhelming evils. Stocisim urges us all to be good men and women even-especially-when it is tough to do so. Epictetus teaches that the happy life is the virtuous one. Watering down his message is doing a disservice to him. Rather than claiming that this is Epictetus speaking, the author should have simply mentioned that it was inspired by some Stoic ideas. That is all it truly is.

The great Stoic philosopher's words are captred brilliantly in "The Art of Living". I shared the sentiment with other readers in wondering why more people have not either reviewed this book or at least read it. Except maybe for Confucius, no other philosopher offers the common sense and practical advice that Epictetus does. An excerpt from his writings I feel says it best: "The florishing life is not acheived by techniques. You cannot trick yourself into a life well lived. Nor it is achieved by following five easy steps or some charismatic figure's dogma" If this is the type of common sense realism you want instead of the moral hypocrisy called the Bible( with its exemplar Jesus Christ, then this is the book for you. Highly recomend it.