Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
On the Fear of Death essay
Civilization of Rome and Greece
On the Fear of Death essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: On the Fear of Death essay
The Enchiridion of Epictetus
Epictetus started his life as a Roman slave who was owned by a man named Epaphroditus. He became a free man after his master was killed. During the years of his slavery he was allowed to go to philosophy lectures and as such, became a philosopher himself. Epictetus followed what is called Stoic tradition. A man going from a slave to a philosopher in the course of his lifetime is no small feat. His time as a slave surely gave Epictetus a different and unknown picture into the human condition.
The Enchiridion of Epictetus was not actually written by Epictetus himself. He never actually wrote any books of his own. He had a student under him named Arrian (who would go on to become the biographer of Alexander the great) who took all of Epictetus’s thoughts, wrote them down, and created Discourses. This was originally 8 volumes but only 4 survived over time. These 4 volumes were put together in an abridged version that would become Enchiridion. Enchiridion is just the Greek word meaning handbook.
Epictetus’s philosophy followed Stoicism, which is a train of thinking that became a major body of thought in ancient Rome. It basically follows thoughts of universal law, fearlessness of death, an independent mind, and restraint in emotions and life. Epictetus covers all of these things in the handbook.
Epictetus’s largest philosophy was acceptance. Back in those
…show more content…
days, submission to Zeus (who was God, to them) allowed a man to have a belief that they were in harmony with the universe. That they were acting as they were supposed to be one with the world. Everyone in life had a certain part to play and going against that thought process would only bring a person misery and a terrible life. It is when you refuse to accept that something in your life has happened that the most pain also happens, in its worst form. The events themselves are not what is exactly the painful thing; It’s the helpless feeling of not understand the ‘why’ behind what we are experiencing. If you break your leg, it will stop you from walking, yes, but is the leg itself the reason why you feel unhappy? Epictetus felt that no situation ever required one specific reaction. If we simply accept that God’s workings are rational, then we can feel safe in the fact that all things happen for a reason – even if we can’t see it at the time. We have control over some things and some things we don’t, according to Epictetus. We can’t control the hand that life is going to play. What we do control is what we do with that hand once the cards are on the table. Not being able to recognize the difference between these things is sure to lead us to all kinds of stress and anxiety. If you spend all your time trying to avoid death, and sickness, and poverty, you’re going to be unhappy because you don’t control a single one of those things – esp. death. You can only be happy by exercising your attention to things you can control – and that is the type of person you are. Your thoughts, actions, and how you handle your life as it comes at you. A peaceful life comes disciplining our thoughts and mind to have cut out the aversions. The Enchiridion states that if you keep dreadful things in the forefront of your mind; you’d change your attitude about a lot of things. People love to say “These things happen!” That phrase is usually used when someone needs to put a situation into perspective. To generalize it for someone else when they don’t understand the ‘why.’ When it happens to ourselves though, it’s all: “How could this have happened to me?” It’s a double standard – one for you and one for your fellow man. A wise person should be able to take that remark and apply it to themselves – that no matter how bad it is, that event was supposed to happen just as the universe planned it to be. Stoic philosophy can seem a little unobtainable – to just accept everything the way it is and never question it.
Everyone is in love with the idea of changing the world, themselves, their stars. I don’t think Epictetus should be seen as a pessimist – in the sense that you can’t fight city hall. He was simply trying to obtain happiness from a different angle – that acceptance. He wants people to stop trying to fight the world – to stop judging it. It’s a very spiritual view of philosophy; living a life according to the will of God and it is very well expressed though the
Enchiridion.
This man had spent the better part of a year reading and rereading the Handbook of Epictetus, throughout that book the message is similar to one of the topics Sherman touches on, “Some things are up to us and some are not up to us,”(pg 2). Basically the circumstances maybe beyond our control, but ultimately what affects us is our judgements and the way we react. She makes a great point that we underutilize our ability to control ourselves when we let external things drive our happiness and that is the difference in so many people's lives, they wager their happiness and satisfaction on factors that should not ultimately
Athena is the daughter of Zeus, the king of the Greek gods. She is one of the 12 Olympians that live on top of Mount Olympus. Athena is the goddess of wisdom, strategy, skill, and justice, and the owl is her sacred bird. In Mandelbaum verse translation of the epic poem the Odyssey of Homer, Athena helped Odysseus by providing guidance, physical, and internal help. Without this help, Odysseus would have to forge the path home by himself and face the challenges that are to come alone. He would be left to face the wrath of both Zeus and Poseidon without another major god’s help. Athena aided Odysseus in the trials he was to face, which gave him the guidance and help he needed to return to his home, Ithaca.
The Stoic philosopher Epictetus is one such philosopher. In The Enchiridion he outlined how to live a good life as a stoic. Anything that is not one's own action is out of their control and should be ignored. He lists "Body, property, reputation, and command" as examples.1 He claims they are weak, and do not belong to us. Trying to control them will lead to unhappiness. On the other hand, he believes if you recognize that external things belonging to others, and internal things as yours you will be much better off.2 To Epictetus, proper way to live is to let things come to you, while being reserved. To illustrate this, he uses the example of a dinner party, where you should not reach across the table and take things. Instead you wait till they come to you.3
contrast the God of Epictetus, and the God of Augustine, and in the end, my stand will
I believe that due to morals other religions and the natural act of someone dying proves to be enough not to agree with Epictetus’. Based on other people’s religious beliefs and their moral values I do not think Epictetus’ views on death and grieving apply to everyone. Someone who believes in a certain religion is going to follow what that religion calls for when it comes to dealing with death. On the other hand, some may also have set values that call for accepting the death as is and follow the grieving process. I feel that the grieving process is not someone’s choice. I think that grieving is an instinct. The first thing that came to my mind when I lost a loved one was, no way this is real and why me. I believe that everyone grieves to a certain extent because of the instinct that his or her mind
More specifically, Stoicism is a moral guide for humans. Though nature is absolute and perfect through God, the human thought is the one and only feature of life that is controlled and changed by people. Humans have the ability to reason and to know that everything in life is determined. For every event that they encounter, humans are able to acknowledge the fact that it is a part of their life plan. Therefore, a person can control whether he/she accepts that the action is unchangeable. Many humans think that they have a choice for all that they do and all that happens to them. But in Stoic reality, natures plan has one path with no possible differences. Thus, good is not defined by what a person does; but, by a per...
As said before, this is an unanswerable question, but to find a few conclusions it would be essential to look back at what Epicurus thought of what was life all about and to look back at what Gramsci meant about be a partisan. Equally important, is to look back at how these two philosophies influenced literature and art, by reading Sartre's thoughts on the engaged writer and by recalling to our minds some i...
There have been many attempts at formulating a theory that accounts for our intuitions regarding the harm of death. Most theories attempt to account for this intuition by attributing the harm of death to a deprivation of some sort. That is a person is harmed when she dies because she is deprived of some good thing. This paper is a defense of Epicurius's argument regarding death as a response to deprivation theories.
Epicurus was admittedly a Hedonist, and this philosophy has had a huge influence on his work. Especially so on his death argument. Hedonism is, “the doctrine that pleasure is the only thing that is good in itself for a person, pain the only thing that is bad in itself for a person.”
With their philosophical roots grounded in ancient Greece, Stoicism and Epicureanism had contrary yet significant impacts on Roman society. These two philosophies differed in many of their basic theories. Stoics attempted to reach a moral level where they had freedom from passion, while Epicureans strove for pleasure and avoided all types of pain. Stoics like the Epicureans, emphasized ethics as the main field of knowledge, but they also developed theories of logic and natural science to support their ethical doctrines.
One of the main ideas which form part of the answer as to what it means to follow nature for the Stoics is the following of an intended trajectory. As the oak tree strives to achieve its natural form of the best oak tree that it can become, it is upon its natural trajectory of reaching its potential. So too, borrowing from Aristotle, humans have the potential of becoming excellent in their own right through...
In Plato’s Theaetetus, Socrates examines the first definition of knowledge that theaetetus gives that knowledge is perception. Socrates gives us many example that both supports and refutes that knowledge is perception. The basic claim from Protagoras is that truth is based on the perception of every man. This means that things are to any person as they seem to that person. Socrates explains to us Protagoras’s view with the cold wind example. He say that through Protagoras theory, the wind is cold to the person that feels cold, and the wind is warm to the person that feels warm. Both “the wind is cold” and “the wind is war” is true according to Protagoras and it is based on the perception of the person. Then we learn from Socrates that if knowledge and truth is based on perception then everything that has perception has his own set of knowledge and truth. Also sense Protagoras not considering himself to be a god, and is on the same level of us then wouldn’t the truth and knowledge he definite in his doctrine only be his own set truth and knowledge for he only knows his own perspective.
As the History unfolds Herodotus diverges from the central idea by introducing characters which do not seem to correspond with that central theme. These diverges serve instruct the reader as to Herodotus’ view on moral issues. Herodotus expresses his view on the way death should be perceived by society through the words of Artabanus. Xerxes represents the common perception of death when he is admiring the vastness of his army and begins to weep because he realizes that they will all be gone in short span of time. Artabanus tells Xerxes “Life is gives us greater occasion for pity that this. Short as his life is, no man is happy…but many times, to wish himself dead rather alive (Artabanus 7.46).” Herodotus is explaining through these words that death should not be seen in a negative view because life brings man so much troubles and anguish that he desires for death to come upon him. Artabanus tells us of these troubles when he says “For there are calamities that meet him and diseases that derange him, so that they make this life…seem long (Artabanus 7.46).” Even though people may agree with Xerxes actions that death should be pitied but Herodotus does show that life brings tragedy to man and that death may act as an escape from these tragedies.
Many stoic philosophers have taken a different approach to virtue and happiness. Homer and Epicurus for instance argue that happiness through desires and virtue are co-dependent suggesting that men with no desires cannot live happy lives. This slightly counters Seneca’s belief that happiness is a result of virtue.
Before I can begin with the argumentative side of the paper, it is necessary that some background information on Epicurus be given. Epicurus was both a hedonist as well as an egoist, and was very concerned with how people get happiness. He was a psychological hedonist because he argued that we aim only at pleasure for its own sake. He was an ethical hedonist because he believed that only pleasure has true value. Similarly, he was called both a psychological and ethical egoist because he claimed that what we are aiming for and what is valuable to each of us is our own pleasure. (Epicurus (1994) text 4) With this in mind, we are ready to move on to the arguments for why the only thing we desire for its own sake is pleasure, and why it is best to keep our desires simple.