Customer Reviews

Stoicism (Ancient Philosophies)

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Who were the Stoics? How did they understand philosophy? How did their ideas of "ethics," "physics" (including what we call "metaphysics" as well as science), and "logic" (also much broader than what Mr. Spock engages in) join together into an organic whole? What role did the sage play in the Stoic system -- if such a creature were even possible. (Stoic agnosticism on this point was very similiar to that of the early Confucians about a "sheng ren," BTW.)

Sellars begins by giving an overall answer to these questions. Then he describes the three Stoic categories -- physics, logic, and ethics -- in the following chapters. He finishes the book with a chapter on the "Stoic legacy" -- the influence they have had since their gradual disappearance in the 4th and 5th Centuries. (One surprise: John Calvin was sympathetic to the Stoics in an early writing -- I've read his commentary on Acts 17, in which Paul discusses the Christian faith with Epicurean and Stoic philosophers in Athens, and he didn't seem so open-minded there -- perhaps because he was jousting at "Papist" shadows. But Sellars spreads his comments out through the centuries -- this section is very succinct, but interesting.)

I wanted a good general introduction to Stoicism, before reading (as I plan to) more of the primary and secondary material. This book turned out to be great for that purpose. It's simple, fairly straightforward, though Sellars also interacts in a light way with the scholarship, and does an excellent job of "mapping out" key figures and questions. Sellars is objective, seldom intruding his own views on the discussion, but (in general) describing what is understood about the Stoics, and clearly marking out where opinions differ. All in all, an excellent introduction to an interesting school of thinkers.

One of several things that piqued my curiosity, was the dissonance between the tone of Cleanthes' Hymn to Zeus, and the role "God" plays in abstract Stoic philosophy. Sellars doesn't pick up on this, but the contradictions in Stoic philosophy seem as interesting to me as the continuity.

The traditional caricature that portray Stoic philosophers as stone faced, unemotional, and indifferent thinkers "does not tell the whole story" according to John Sellars' recent book, Stoicism. Some fifteen hundred years since Stoicism fell into antiquity, it is fair to say its influence is very much part of the western mind to this day. The book is presented as an introduction for students and general audiences alike in an accessible way and has some reasonable depth that will challenge novice readers. Sellers acknowledges the limits of this introduction, but presents a well organized overview of the history and what Epictetus called topoi or areas of study.

It begins with a brief history of Stoic philosophy, beginning with Zeno in 330B.C.E. and ending with Simplicius in 529C.E. Although many Stoic texts were lost to history, as noted by the author, we have lengthy works from Seneca, Epictetus, and Marcus Aurelius and are able to glean important information and understanding from critics of Stoicism like the well-known skeptic Sextus Empiricus. I found the authors observation that the nature of Stoicism is itself partly responsible for its own decline interesting. According to Sellars, the Stoics where inspired by Socrates' focus on applying wisdom to living over theorizing which may have lent to less writing and more living the philosophy. He states, "For Epictetus, it is not the voluminous author Chrysippus who stands as his philosophical role model; rather it is Socrates, who expresses his philosophy in deed rather than words" (28). The Stoic ideal is of the sage who has the correct understanding of nature and lives in accordance with their nature.

From there we launch into the Stoic system: the three topos of Stoicism - logic, physics, and ethics. To the more ethics oriented readers, like myself, the feeling of dread looms over chapters titled logic or physics; expecting dry logical syllogisms and mathematical theorems that are barely intelligible. Fortunately, this is not the case; the author discusses Stoic logic and physics by providing basic but interesting summaries, and explains the important points and arguments. In addition, we learn the Stoic philosophy of language, ontology, cosmology, theology, epistemology, and psychology. We learn of "assertables" and "sayables," but what was most interesting in these chapters is the Stoics view of interconnectedness of nature and its inhabitants, what Sellars calls "cosmobiology" and today is discussed as the Gaia hypothesis, nature is conscious. Stoic logic and physics are part of a complex system and Sellars clearly presents the arguments, problems, and debates.
The final part of the Stoics topos is the ethical. From the logic and physics it follows that the core of human behavior is self-preservation, but a preservation of not merely our biology. Our rational-self that is most important because it is in the rational we find virtue. The Stoic's breakdown impressions, feelings, and emotions and argue we give "assent" to certain impressions and deny others; there are things that are "up to us" and "not up to us." The most interesting is the inward looking Stoics distinction between virtue and happiness. The commonly held view is to be happy is to get what you want, but the Stoics disagree and argue that to be happy requires virtue, which they understand as a healthy soul or disposition - "something choice-worthy for its own sake" (124). Sellars gives an interesting and solid discussion about Stoic ethics and their political cosmopolitanism.

The final section gives a brief look at the influence of Stoicism in Western philosophy. Important thinkers like Spinoza (perhaps the closest to Stoics), Kant, Nietzsche, Marx, Russell, Foucault, and Deleuze, to name a few, discusses Stoicism. For some, Stoics are a beacon while for others they are misguided or just wrong. Stoic philosophy has come in and out of fashion over the centuries perhaps due to its enigmatic nature, for it is persuasive, paradoxical, and problematic all at the same time. Sellars book brings this to light in an excellent, informative introduction to this fascinating philosophical system. For those interested in continuing their study of Stoicism or more specific topoi, the author provides an excellent guide to readings including top scholars. I would say if readers are interested in Stoicism and want a solid, thoughtful introduction than this is the book to read.

Excelent Introduction. It sums up a lot of accurate information and doesn't assume prior knowledge. I would also recommend it for a advanced reader of Stoicism who wants a short book to help him remember some historical details. This book can help the advanced reader to organize many different bits of information we learn as we read different books. Therefore, it can be recommended for both the beginner looking for a good introduction and the more experienced reader of stoicism.

Stoicism by John Sellers is an excellent introduction to Stoic philosophy. There are a number of books, which cater solely to Stoic ethics, but this book gives equal representation to Stoic logic and physics. It is very well written and researched. I would consider this book essential to anyone wishing to understand the essence of Stoic philosophy.

A fine historical summary of stoicism. I found the stoic treatment of emotions especially interesting. The chapter on the influence of stoicism in later centuries was very helpful. Foucault a stoic!

A dry and academic survey. Probably written as a text for a college level course. Not a book for the casual reader seeking insight into stoicism.

An academic work, not user-friendly for popular consumption like "A Guide to the Good Life."

The author is not a Stoic, and it reads that way. He, the author, if you can call him that, is a poor writer. This book is as much fun as drinking a tall glass of sand. Don't buy this one, or else, you'll leave this fantastic philosophy behind.