William B Irvine is professor of philosophy at Wright State University. The author of seven books, including A Guide to the Good Life, he has also written for the Huffington Post, Salon, Time, and the BBC. He lives in Dayton, Ohio.
There will be鈥攐r already has been!鈥攁 last time in your life that you brush your teeth, cut your hair, drive a car, mow the lawn, or play hopscotch.
In my review of Feeling Good, a self-help book, I noted the lack of practical philosophies in the modern world. Far from an original insight, I now see that this idea is a relatively common criticism of contemporary education and modern philosophy. The other day, for example, I stumbled upon a YouTube channel, the , an educational project that tries to teach life lessons rather than academic knowledge. This book, an attempt to revive ancient Stoicism, is part of the same loose movement.
William B. Irvine set himself the task of making Stoicism viable and palatable in today鈥檚 world. To put it bluntly, this meant rummaging through the Stoic classics to make a self-help book. Whereas the classic Stoic authors鈥擬arcus Aurelius, Seneca, and Epictetus鈥攄ispensed practical advice without much order, Irvine tries to create a systematic practice that any reader can follow.
Irvine鈥檚 system consists of several mental exercises, or tricks, that the novice Stoic can use to gain tranquility. The most important of these is negative visualization: take a moment to imagine how things could go wrong, how you could lose what you have鈥攜our health, job, or spouse鈥攁nd how everything you take for granted might never have existed at all. This will counteract what Irvine calls 鈥渉edonistic adaptation,鈥� which is when we get used to the good things in our lives and lose the ability to enjoy them. Hedonistic adaptation is the real enemy of tranquility, because it forever enchains us to desire鈥攁s soon as one desire is satisfied, we have another one, and the process repeats without us getting any happier.
Another Stoic exercise is the internalization of goals. First, determine the extent to which you can control the outcome of any situation; then, make sure you only worry about that part which you can control, and don鈥檛 trouble yourself about the rest. If you are going on a first date, for example, don鈥檛 make it your goal to impress the person鈥攕ince you can鈥檛 directly control whether someone likes you or not鈥攂ut make it your goal to try your best. In the language of self-help, that is, focus on the process and not the product, the effort and not the outcome.
The last major technique can be better described as an attitude rather than an exercise. This is to take a fatalistic attitude towards the past. Since what happened in the past is beyond your power to alter, don鈥檛 trouble yourself with 鈥渋f-onlys鈥� or fill up your mind with regrets. Instead, try to cultivate amor fati, love of fate; learn to appreciate the good in what has happened, rather than think of all the ways it could have been better.
The general attitude that a Stoic wishes to cultivate is a mixture of enjoyment and detachment: the ability to enjoy all of the little pleasures of daily life without becoming so attached to anything that you are incapacitated without it. It is rather like the attitude of a spectator at a play: heartily enjoying the show, while keeping in mind that all the action is staged and not worth getting upset over. With this mentality you could, in theory, be satisfied with anything, and maintain your tranquility under any circumstances.
These, in nutshell form, are the book鈥檚 major pieces of advice. The rest of the book is divided into a brief historical sketch of Stoicism, a series of short chapters about applying Stoicism to specific challenges, and a broader cultural criticism from a Stoic perspective. The latter of these was the most interesting鈥擨rvine isn鈥檛 a fan of political correctness or of grief counseling. He also has a lot of advice about responding to insults, some of which I thought was obvious, some of which I thought was wrong, and most of which made me wonder: Why is he talking so much about insults? Is poor Irvine getting insulted all the time?
My main criticism of this book is its style. Perhaps because Irvine was trying to appeal to a popular market, the prose is painfully simple, and filled with unnecessary clarifications and wearying redundancies. "Repetitive" is a charitable description. Added to that, I often got the feeling that he was purposefully avoiding delving deeply into any topic, for fear of losing any novice readers, which irked me.
The important question is: Do the techniques work? I have been having some fun imagining my life going horribly wrong: my metro being crushed underground in an earthquake, my computer bursting into flames and blinding me鈥攇etting struck by lighting on my walk to work, all of my friends leaving me en masse, and so on. Somehow, this exercise does tend to put me in a cheerful mood. I also agree with Irvine about desire鈥攚hy hedonism doesn鈥檛 produce contentment, why connoisseurship is counterproductive, why it鈥檚 wise to accustom oneself to some disappointment and discomfort.
At the very least, this book is an interesting experiment: trying to revive a dead philosophy of life for the twenty-first century. Now, to put Stoicism into practice, I'm going to imagine this review not getting any likes.
Recommended to: If you are interested in applying philosophical views and wisdom to your life and if you value tranquility and inner peace above all.
What this book is about: The author William Irvine who is a professor of philosophy at Wright State University after having read through many philosophy schools from Zen Buddhist to Cynics and Stoics has come into conclusion that living a stoic life is worth pursuing due to its promising benefit which is tranquility and joy. He has thus compiled teachings of great Stoics from Seneca to Marcus Aurelius and tailored them to suit the modern days.
Pros: Author has provided well organized, practical bits of advice which are the essence of Stoic philosophy from negative visualization to practicing self-discipline through self-denial.
Also, he has made a decent contribution on portraying an actual picture of what Stoicism is really about.
Cons: Franky I saw no use of the last chapter, it had no relevance to a guide to a good life and it wasn't a short chapter believe me and the contents were advocation of stoic philosophy which he had done already in previous chapters very well.
Selected synopsis: A potent way of confronting a disturbing situation is the use of negative visualization, namely, imagining what would happen if you lost your dear possessions, be it your car, house, or even your beloved. It argues that by doing so you come to appreciate your belonging far more than those who take things for granted. --- Internalize your goals: A beautiful piece of advice. It says that we must focus our attention on what we have full or partial control on, not the things we have no control over. For example, if you have a tennis match, don't set your goal on being the winner, because if you fail, you will lose your tranquility and become utterly upset, instead, make your goal to practice and play at highest level possible which in turn can have the added value of winning the match. --- What upsets people is not things themselves but their judgments about these things. --- What point is there on "being unhappy", just because once you were unhappy... --- We can easily replace out feelings of regret at having lost something with feelings of thanks for once having had it. --- Reason, is the best weapon against grief. Unless reason puts an end to our tears, fortune will not do so. --- If we seek social status, we give people power over us: since we have to do things calculated to make them admire us and we will have to refrain from doing things that will trigger their disfavor. --- To retain inner peace, focus on what you have control on, It's foolish to concerns ourselves with what we can't control like when the sun rises or when a dear person to us might die. --- Vices are contagious: They spread, quickly and unnoticed, from those who have them to those with whom they come into contact.
This book gets 5 stars for subject, 2 stars for execution. The Stoics themselves are fascinating and every quote is a gem. However, the author doesn't trust the ancient Stoics to carry the argument. Instead, his account is a series of straw man arguments ("you might think that a Stoic would eat babies, but there's another reading..." Not quite that bad but almost.). Further, when he gets to the section on updating Stoicism for the modern world, the section where he has to do the heavy lifting by himself, he has a failure of nerve or a bout of laziness or both. It turns into a hypothetical argument ("if one were to argue, one would start by describing how evolution supports Stoicism..." but he never actually makes the argument!) "One" should go ahead and make his argument, rather than totally copping out with a sketch of an idea. I was predisposed to like this book given the subject, but I was left wishing for a far better treatment. The Stoics deserve better.
Fiind el 卯nsu葯i un stoic declarat, William B. Irvine (n. 1952), profesor la Universitatea din Dayton, Ohio, 葯i-ar dori s膬 tr膬iasc膬 卯ntr-o lume de stoici. Crede c膬 ar ar膬ta ceva mai bine dec卯t 卯n prezent. Oamenii s-ar chinui mai pu葲in cu fleacuri, ar fi mai senini 葯i mai voio葯i. 葮i, cu siguran葲膬, ar tr膬i mai mult, ar dep膬葯i suta. De acord.
脦n acest nobil scop, el descrie filosofia stoic膬, principalii ei reprezentan葲i (Zenon, Seneca, Epictet, Musonius Rufus, Marcus Aurelius) 葯i o adapteaz膬 la vremurile noastre (pp.27-71). Autorul recomand膬 c卯teva 鈥瀍xerci葲ii spirituale鈥� 葯i sfaturi: vizualizarea negativ膬, renun葲area la ego / sine, medita葲ia asupra b膬tr卯ne葲ii 葯i a mor葲ii etc. (pp.74-215). 脦n final, William B. Irvine discut膬 motivele care au dus la 鈥瀌eclinul stoicismului鈥� 葯i necesitatea de a-i da o nou膬 卯nf膬葲i葯are, acceptabil膬 pentru contemporani (pp.219-294).
Este o lucrare mult mai bun膬 dec卯t C膬rticica stoicismului de Jonas Salzgerber. William B. Irvine chiar i-a citit pe stoici. Singurul lucru care m膬 irit膬 este faptul c膬 toat膬 aceast膬 literatur膬 de self-help (care se revendic膬 de la Seneca 葯i Epictet) s-a ivit 葯i a explodat abia dup膬 ce filosofii 卯n cauz膬 au devenit vedete interna葲ionale prin lucr膬rile lui Pierre Hadot 葯i Michel Foucault. Dar nimeni nu-i men葲ioneaz膬 ca precursori.
C膬r葲ile de self-help au dou膬 defecte majore: simplific膬 la maximum 卯nv膬葲膬turile la care trimit (卯n cazul de fa葲膬 preceptele stoicismului) 葯i mimeaz膬 un optimism for葲at. Vre葲i s膬 fi葲i ferici葲i 葯i toat膬 lumea s膬 prospere? Da? Atunci urma葲i 卯ntocmai cele 133 de reguli din aceast膬 carte. Lumea va r卯de de voi, dar nu v膬 face葲i griji, fi葲i stoici...
Ca de obicei, traducerea 葯i corectura lucr膬rii las膬 de dorit. Filosoful Canus nu putea juca 葯ah (p.207). El juca latrunculi, un joc cu pioni de culori diferite, f膬r膬 leg膬tur膬 cu 葯ahul. Seneca nu a redactat niciodat膬 o lucrare cu titlul Consola葲ii c膬tre Marcia (p.107). Titlul latinesc al scrisorii este Ad Marciam: De Consolatione 葯i se traduce prin Consola葲ie / M卯ng卯iere. Pentru Marcia, a葯a cum foarte corect e 卯n nota de subsol. 脦n paragraful 3 de la p.257, sintagma 鈥灻畁 primul r卯nd鈥� se repet膬 inutil 卯n aceea葯i fraz膬.
Un extras: 鈥濩u siguran葲膬 c膬 nu s卯nt primul stoic care modific膬 doctrina. Romanii, dup膬 cum am v膬zut, au adaptat stoicismul grec nevoilor lor... Stoicii credeau c膬 principiile stoicismului nu s卯nt de piatr膬, ci mai cur卯nd din lut...鈥� (p.256).
Traducerea acestui volum apar葲ine lui Florin Tudose. Nu e men葲ionat 卯n prezentarea c膬r葲ii.
Have you ever thought about how we can live a happy life? Most people are thinking about it on daily basis and indeed it has been one of the greatest human concerns throughout history. Nowadays we can hardly find anyone to answer this question properly even the best philosophers are occupied with some other branches of philosophy such as logic, ethics, epistemology and ... But about more than 2000 years ago there were philosophers whose main job was to teach 鈥減hilosophy of life鈥�, which refers to a comprehensive guide regarding how we should live in order to be happy and satisfied in our lives and how to alleviate or even eliminate all negative emotions such as anger, grief, anxiety, depression etc. The importance of having a philosophy of life is that if we don鈥檛 have a proper philosophy we might waste our precious life pursuing things that are not worth pursuing and attaining things that are not worth attaining. In other words, at the end of the life we might find out that we didn鈥檛 live a good life and we have just wasted it in haphazard way. Having A philosophy of life enables us to know the true value of everything we encounter and be aware of what we should focus on and what we should ignore. So, because of this importance there were schools in which great Greek philosophers taught their philosophy of life. Among them one of the most prominent and marvelous schools was the schools of 鈥渟toics鈥�. They were great philosophers and psychologists who obtained a remarkable wisdom regarding how to get rid of negative emotions and consequently; live a happy life. The stoics asserts that the important goal in life is achieving 鈥淭ranquility鈥�. By tranquility they mean a life without or with little negative emotions like anger and anxiety, and have a tranquil state of mind. They also thought that we can achieve tranquility by living a 鈥渧irtuous鈥� life. According to stoics, a virtuous person is one who performs well the function for which humans were designed. For example, a virtuous hammer is one that drive nails properly. So for what function were people designed?? To answer this question the stoics thought we need only examine ourselves. On doing so, we will discover that we Have the ability to reason and we differ from other animals in this respect, so a virtuous person should be reasonable. Other natural characteristics of human are the same. For example we are naturally social creatures, so we have duties to our fellow men. In sum, stoics claim that if we live virtuous( in conformity with nature) we will reach tranquility and as a result, we will live a happy and satisfied life. The author of this book is a proficient writer and he explained stoics theories in the best way possible. He focuses of practical aspects of stoics literature and explains their psychological techniques in a way that is so useful in everyday life. He also adds stoic sage鈥檚 advices about some important aspects of life such as how to treat in our social life, how to respond when we hear an insult, what should be attitude towards fame or fortune, and etc. I highly recommend this book to all sorts of readers, the least benefit of this book is that it will definitely help you to enhance your mental state.
If someone asks me why am I living and what is the purpose in life? then I don't have an answer. In pursuit of improving myself and better quality of life, I started reading self-help books and I've stumbled on Stoic mentions in other books on various occasions and thus I picked this one to learn about stoicism and this one is wonderful beginner book to become a practising stoic.
Why is it important to have a philosophy of life? If not we might unintentionally lead a bad life and on death bed we contemplate and regret that we have lead a bad life and did not accomplish anything substantial.
The purpose of practicing stoicism is to attain tranquility, this book helps you by providing teachings of Ancient stoics like Seneca, Marcus Aurelius, Epictetus and others. Towards the end of this book, as a practicing stoic, the author advices on practicing stoicism and how it would be helpful for you in this modern world.
Stoicism teachings are not easy to follow, they are very difficult to practise. If you're planning to practice stoicism then the author strongly recommends to keep it a secret to avoid discouragement and humiliation from others.
Few of the teachings I remember are:
1 - Negative imagination: This is a tough one, stoics tell that by practicing negative imagination, we don't take the people or things we value most for granted. E.g., If you value your house more, then imagine it is on fire, such that if the time comes you'll be able to cope with that disaster. Practising negative imagination for sometime in a day helps us to be more affectionate with our loved ones.
2 - Dealing with insults: Insults either direct or indirect cannot be avoided, in your career or in your personal life. Stoics tell us respond to insults with silence and much better with self-deprecating humour by this we'll become more immune to insults.
3 - About control: Do not worry about the things you cannot control like Weather or traffic and so on. Care only about the things which you have complete control like your goals and ambitions. If some cases you have partial control like a Tennis match you're playing, if you're adamant on winning the match, you might get disappointed and it disturbs your tranquility instead focus on giving the best you can.
There's much more to learn from this book, it's worth giving it a try.
Academic life often leads people in unexpected directions. William Irvine is Professor of Philosophy at Wright State University, Dayton, Ohio. After receiving his PhD from UCLA in 1980, Irvine taught and practiced analytic philosophy for many years before gradually losing interest in it as overly technical and removed from life. Irvine looked for other philosophical and personal options and came close to adopting a Zen Buddhist practice. He ultimately rejected Zen because it did not fit the analytic quality of his mind. Irvine then began a serious study of the Greek and Roman stoics, philosophers he never had to read during his years of philosophical study. The result was his book "On Desire: Why We Want what we Want" (2006) followed by this book, "A Guide to the Good Life: The Ancient Art of Stoic Joy" (2008) in which Irvine articulates a contemporary stoic philosophy.
Irvine writes for the educated lay reader rather than for academic philosophers. He argues that an important task of philosophy is to help individuals form a "philosophy of life" that gives meaning and purpose. Without a philosophy of life, Irvine argues, "there is danger that you will mislive-- that despite all your activity, despite all the pleasant diversion you might have enjoyed while alive, you will end up living a bad life. There is, in other words, a danger that when you are on your deathbed, you will look back and realize that you wasted your one chance at living. Instead of spending your life pursuing something genuinely valuable, you squandered it because you allowed yourself to be distracted by the various baubles life has to offer."
Besides helping a person to discover his or her "grand goal in living", philosophy also has the task of pointing out a path or strategy for realizing the goal. As mentioned above, Irvine seriously explored Zen Buddhism but found ancient stoicism more suitable to his character in setting out a goal and a means for its attainment.
In his book, Irvine explains the need people to reflect and form a philosophy of life, the value of stoicism, and the means of practicing stoicism. He also takes stoicism out of its ancient theological and teleological (teleology means finding that nature acts purposefully) bases and restates it under assumptions of naturalism.
In the first part of the book, Irvine offers a rapid overview of ancient philosophy and ancient stoicism, culminating in four philosophers of the Roman Empire, Seneca, Musonius Rufus, Epictetus, and Marcus Aurelius.Irvine shows that the "grand goal" of these philosophers shifted gradually from the reason and "eudamoneia" (a difficult word meaning roughly "virtue") of the Greeks to a goal of emotional tranquility. This, rather than the Greek goal, is the goal Irvine adopts. The goal of tranquility does not advocate suppressing emotions or becoming a zombie. Rather, Irvine defines "tranquility" as "a psychological state marked by the absences of negative emotions, such as grief, anger, and anxiety, and the presence of positive emotions, such as joy."
After identifying the goal, Irvine offers steps towards its attainment. He recommends living modestly, being content with what one has, letting go of the past and of feelings of remorse and guilt, and meditation and reflection on one's goals. A stoic life is internalized, which means it depends of developing what is in one's control rather than seeking for happiness in things outside one's control. To give examples from my own life. I get frustrated when my teachers and others do not rate my piano playing as highly as I would like. I have to remember that the goal of playing the piano is not to have a concert career or to impress others but to bring out music for myself and for those who want to hear. Then again, closer to home, I get angry when I spend time on an Amazon review only to have it curtly negated. I have to remind myself that I write to read and to learn rather than to seek approval from negginators. When I find myself overly bothered, I post here on 欧宝娱乐 which has the virtue of no negators.
In the third part of the book, Irvine offers more broadly-based discussions of stoicism as a guide to life. He discusses the control rather than the repression of emotions such as grief, and strategies for living contentedly with others. He focuses on his own and on his reader's mortality by eloquently reminding of the inevitability of old age and death and of the stoic wisdom of loving life in its transience and letting go.
In the fourth part of the book Irvine, describes again the metaphysical bases of ancient stoicism, which Irvine rejects by rephrasing stoic insights against a backdrop of evolutionary naturalism. Many readers may not be convinced by this attempt to jettison stoicism out of its original context. I think Irvine's point could be better made not by substituting one metaphysical view for another but rather by eliminating the need for a metaphysical "underpinning" for a philosophy of life altogether. The latter stoics showed little interest in teleology or metaphysics. In other words, stoicism stands of falls on its own merits and results as a philosophy and does not require a metaphysical support. This conclusion is consistent with much modern "technical" philosophy, as I understand it, which Irvine claims he no longer wishes to pursue. In the final part of the book, Irvine turns autobiographical and offers insights on what a stoic practice has meant to his own life.
Throughout the book, Irvine approaches his subject with enthusiasm and with at times an almost missionary zeal. There are two parts to the story to be distinguished. The first is the value to a person of developing a philosophy of life. Convincing the reader of the value of a philosophy of life is Irvine's greater goal and, most of the time, it is the source of his enthusiasm and preaching to the reader. The second is the stoic philosophy that Irvine has adopted for himself. Here too, Irvine develops his stoic philosophy and tries to persuade his readers. But he recognizes that a single philosophy will not suit all temperaments, and that there are varied approaches to the good life. His approach has strong components of pragmatism as taught by William James.
This is an excellent work of philosophy for non-specialists. A growing number of philosophers work to make their thoughts accessible, and Irvine is, perhaps, too harsh on the academic study of philosophy. The book has received substantial attention, with many thoughtful reviews and valuable criticisms.
There aren't many books written on a philosophy of life as there are 'philosophies' for life out there; and there aren't many books that exist in the great divide between academic philosophy and water-downed caricatures of philosophy (think Consolation of Philosophy but PART TWO...). Mr Irvine's book, however, provides one fairly detailed philosophy of life as Stoicism goes and bridges the divide by not only describing what is Stoicism but also, how to practice Stoicism for both tranquility and joy in the context of our insane and insatiable consumerist culture amid other existential fears and anxieties.
Let me say this first: this is a timely book in view of the Financial Crisis of 2008 transforming into something Unknown and Monstrous for 2009 and beyond. Here, Mr Irvine's book contains not just sound advice for living amid hardship, but also useful tidbits of wisdom in the face of calamity and unrest. But as the Fates would have it, it may be all good but a tad too late.
Even so, Mr Irvine's book is part self-reflection, part 'what is Stoicism' (and who the Stoics were), and part how to be a Stoic. If you find yourself immediately put off by the word 'Stoic', don't. Mr Irvine has done marvelously well on explaining why the modern interpretation of 'Stoic' has been more of a misinterpretation than the lived reality of a good life: his reflection of those mundanely trivial but existentially heroic accounts of his own life suffice.
However, what I find singularly troubling is Mr Irvine's ambition in explaining Stoicism at an extremely high level of evolutionary psychology; that the Stoics techniques have been designed to short-circuit what might be the undesirable consequences of human evolution on "autopilot" to the ultimate demise of the human psyche and society (e.g. insatiable greed for security and an extreme one, an eye for an eye to ensure one stays as the Alpha Male for reproduction). But consistent to the claims of the evolutionary psychology one can also find himself inevitably suggesting that because Stoicism exists, it must have also been somewhat effective in increasing the chance for successful reproduction; that merely than short-circuiting anxieties, fears, greed and so on for 'short-term' tranquility, it also acts as a long term catalyst, if not a direct cause for successful reproduction. So is Stoicism a cure or a cause? Is it both? In trying to explain the causes of the symptoms Stoicism tries to cure via evolutionary psychology, Mr Irvine opens up new questions he was not prepared to answer.
In fact, what I find most satisfying, and also where the philosophical lore is the richest, are those direct and honest accounts of living as a Stoic in today's world. For example, in one of Mr Irvine's account of changing a 16 year old car for a 9 year old 'new' one with neither a radio nor a cup-holder brought a smile to my face--indeed, why do we need three jumbo cup-holders and 8000 channels on our car radios today? By 'downgrading', Mr Irvine suggests (he would probably use the word, 'simplifying') our materialistic lives, we are in fact 'upgrading' in virtuous Stoical character-building. I think I see Mr Irvine nodding.
Yet, Mr Irvine shies away from those difficult, pressing questions as the contemporary mouth-piece, if not a modern peer to philosophers like Seneca and Epictetus. Sure, one can see how a new Ferrari can disturb one's newfound Stoical tranquility and joy. But what if one is not choosing between a materialistic entity which works on the principle of decreasing marginal satisfaction (hence an increasing indifference, if not dissatisfaction ) and a virtuous good, but between two competing virtuous goods, for example, in being responsible to my children, spouse or parents and being responsible to the duties and commitments of the workplace? The ultimate good of both choices are no different than the Stoic version of the highest goods of tranquility and joy, yet one is often compelled to choose only one, assuming that an acceptable balance between the two means some compromise to this tranquility. To this ultimate competition of ultimate goods, Mr Irvine's Stoicism has nothing to say. This is not to say that Mr Irvine's account is a straw-man account. But very often, perplexities and anxieties in life has to do with the competition of virtuous goods, and not to the marginal acquisition of a Ferrari or a Renoir. Perhaps this was why Marcus Aurelius hastened his own death as a public servant-emperor, who most likely, had to choose between two competing goods as a Stoic.
In addition, what about those who collect Ferraris and Renoirs so they can appreciate their beauty? Because Mr Irvine assumes that crass materialism has solely been undertaken for the envy of our neighbors, Mr Irvine also misses the point that a good number of 'materialists' out there can also be aestheticians. Sure, Stoicism dismisses connoisseurship, especially connoisseurship that overly commits one to dependency on luxury, Mr Irvine argued. But surely a Stoic would not dismiss the appreciation of beauty through materialism as a path to Stoic tranquility and joy, as one may collect humble stamps and common vases, or grow roses?
Lastly, Mr Irvine's overall account tacitly position his interest in broadly speaking to a certain class of citizens in certain advanced capitalistic economies. Tacitly, I think he was speaking to the middle and upper middle class of the American society. I don't know if Marcus Aurelius or Seneca made that assumption, though both were reputably wealthy individuals who had SOMETHING they can imagine themselves losing and hence, feel content through the practice of negative visualization. But it is true that in the world today, there are many who have NOTHING to lose; that is, they are not even substantively well-off and have nothing but their own bodies to be exploited and harvested by others. To tell these folks about practising negative visualization is to also mock them. If so, does this demonstrate that Stoicism is a philosophy predicated upon the class structure? To some extent by the absence in Mr Irvine's depiction, yes. But since we know the classical Stoics were not unreasonable brutes, then we must commit to the possibility that something is lacking in Mr Irvine's modern account in an unreasonably unjust world. This, I suppose, would be up to the readers' own musing, for Mr Irvine has nothing to say to this regard.
Indeed, what Mr Irvine fails to mention--and I think if he did, aptly in a time like this--is that personal tranquility and joy may be necessary but not sufficient for a Good Life. Unlike the Greeks or the Romans who blissfully lived their circumscribed spheres thinking that theirs was the known world, Moderns can no longer afford the luxury of a the Good Life based on a Personal notion without relating to the Others (who often do not have it so Good). What we seem to need today, if Stoicism is indeed the philosophical practice for the Good Life, is not only to deflect insult for insult; or to abandon crass materialism for character-building; or to be justly indifferent to external circumstances, but in fact, to broadly engage these external circumstances in a fast-deteriorating and destructively spiraling external world we all inhabit, Stoics and 'materialists' alike. Mr Irvine lamented the demise of Stoicism after the Empire; but likely is the possibility that its notion of the Good Life is limited when Others don't have it so good.
Without such an engagement, even a Stoic may find it difficult to attain the Good Life.
This popular book won't be of much interest to those who have already read Seneca, Epictetus, Musonius Rufus, and Marcus Aurelius, or, indeed, to anybody who has read a solid introduction to their thought.
Nor would it satisfy those looking for a clear and concise description of Stoic psychological techniques or 'exercises': for that, one might turn to "Stoic Spiritual Exercises" by Elen Buzare.
However, the book may be of interest to those seeking an easy-to-digest introductory exposition of Stoic practice and "philosophy of life".
Be warned, however, that Irvine's treatment of Stoic philosophy is a somewhat idiosyncratic interpretation. Irvine attempts to make Stoicism palatable for modern readers and applicable to their lives. In pursuing this end he may actually have, to some extent, distorted or misrepresented Stoicism. He points out, however, that he is writing to help people find a practical philosophy of life, not to please academics. He also points out that he is but one in a long line of interpreters of Stoic philosophy which stretches all the way back to the ancient world.
"A Guide to the Good Life" is a popular book and probably deserves its popularity: the proof of the pudding is, after all, in the eating. However, it wasn't of much use to me personally, hence only three stars.
Stoicism was a philosophical movement developed during the Hellenistic period and later practiced by a number of prominent historical figures, including Seneca and Marcus Aurelius. I was reminded again that this time period saw a flourishing of many competing schools of philosophy with their own ideas about the human condition and their own physical meeting locations to concentrate their followers; these have all but disappeared in the modern times. Human psychology has not changed much on the scale of 2,000 years, making a lot of these schools of thought quite relevant to this day. This work organizes this body of literature into a kind of classical antiquity self-help book. I realized that, without knowing it, I was already following many of the psychological tips and tricks that, according to the stoics, leads to tranquility and the absence of negative emotion.
The book goes into much more detail, but among these are negative visualization to fight our psychological natural tendency of "hedonistic adaptation" (the practice of imagining a regression to your living condition along various dimensions to appreciate its presence), projective visualization, active self-denial (e.g. temporary practice of poverty to appreciate wealth), categorization of worries into those you do or do not have control over, which e.g. leads to fatalism w.r.t. the past and the present, meditation (not in the buddhist sense of clearing your mind, but quite opposite a deliberate, intense psychological practice of the above techniques), etc.
A little bit too long, a little bit too bloated and repetitive, but good fun.