A guide to the good life pdf free download

A guide to the good life pdf free download

BOOK PDF A Guide to the Good Life: The Ancient Art of Stoic Joy,A Guide to the Good Life: The Ancient Art of Stoic Joy PDF Details

It is the philosophy of the ancient Stoics. The Stoic philosophy of life may be old, but it merits the attention of any modern individual who wishes to have a life that is both meaningful and Download PDF - blogger.com [geo9n8] A Guide to the Good Life PDF Details. audible mp3, ePUB (Android), kindle, and audiobook. A Guide to the Good Life is a beautiful novel written by the famous author William B Irvine. The A Guide to the Good Life: The Ancient Art of Stoic Joy PDF book by William B. Irvine Read Online or Free Download in ePUB, PDF or MOBI eBooks. Published in the book BOOK PDF A Guide to the Good Life: The Ancient Art of Stoic Joy Continue Reading Download Free PDF Related Papers Timothy Seid Based on several different developments ... read more

To achieve this goal, sophists taught various techniques of persuasion, including both appeals to reason and appeals to emotion. In particular, they taught students that it was possible to argue for or against any proposition whatsoever. Alternatively, parents might have sought the services of a philosopher. Like sophists, philosophers taught persua- sive techniques, but unlike sophists, they eschewed appeals to emotion. Also unlike sophists, philosophers thought that besides teaching their pupils how to persuade, they should teach them how to live well. Consequently, according to the historian H. There are no longer schools of philosophy, and this is a shame. It is true that philosophy is still done within schools— more precisely, within the philosophy departments of universi- ties—but the cultural role played by philosophy departments is quite unlike the role played by the ancient philosophical schools. And if they do seek a philosophy of life, they would, in most universities, have a hard time finding a class that would offer them one.

But even though schools of philosophy are a thing of the past, people are in as much need of a philosophy of life as they ever were. The question is, Where can they go to obtain one? If they go to the philosophy department of the local univer- sity, they will, as I have explained, probably be disappointed. What if they instead turn to their local church? Their pastor might tell them what they must do to be a good person, that is, what they must do to be morally upstanding. They might be instructed, for example, not to steal or tell lies or in some reli- gions have an abortion. Their pastor will also probably explain what they must do to have a good afterlife: They should come to services regularly and pray and in some religions tithe.

But their pastor will probably have relatively little to say on what they must do to have a good life. This, one imagines, is why the adherents of the various religions, despite the differences in their religious beliefs, end up with the same impromptu philosophy of life, namely, a form of enlightened hedonism. Thus, although Lutherans, Baptists, Jews, Mormons, and Catholics hold different religious views, they are remarkably alike when encountered outside of church or synagogue. They hold similar jobs and have similar career ambitions. They live in similar homes, furnished in a similar manner. And they lust to the same degree for whatever consumer products are currently in vogue. It is clearly possible for a religion to require its adherents to adopt a particular philosophy of life. Consider, by way of illus- tration, the Hutterite religion, which teaches its adherents that one of the most valuable things in life is a sense of community.

We can, of course, question whether this is a sound philosophy of life. What this means is that it is entirely possible these days for someone to have been raised in a religion and to have taken philosophy courses in college but still to be lacking a philosophy of life. Indeed, this is the situation in which most of my students find themselves. What, then, should those seeking a philosophy of life do? Perhaps their best option is to create for themselves a virtual school of philosophy by reading the works of the philos- ophers who ran the ancient schools. This, at any rate, is what, in the following pages, I will be encouraging readers to do. In ancient Greece, when schools of philosophy were still prominent features of the cultural landscape, there were any number of schools to which parents could send their chil- dren.

We could begin our tour in the Agora, where Socrates a century earlier had philosophized with the citizens of Athens. On the northern side of the Agora we would see the Stoa Poikile, or Painted Porch, and holding forth there might be Zeno of Citium, the founder of the Stoic school of philosophy. Philosophy Takes an Interest in Life 25 As we walked through Athens, we might come across the Cynic philosopher Crates, whose school of philosophy Zeno had once attended. Although the first Cynics met near the gymnasium of Cynosarges—hence their name—they could be found anywhere in Athens, attempting to draw or drag, if need be ordinary people into philosophical discussions. Furthermore, whereas parents might have willingly sent their children to study with Zeno, it is unlikely that they encour- aged them to become Cynics, inasmuch as Cynic doctrines, if successfully internalized, would guarantee their child a life of ignominious poverty.

Heading northwest and leaving the city by Dipylon Gate, we would come to the Garden of the Epicureans, presided over by Epicurus himself. The Garden was in fact a working garden in which the Epicureans grew their own vegetables. Continuing toward the northwest, about a mile from the Agora, we would come to the Academy, the school of philos- ophy founded by Plato in bc, a bit more than a decade after the death of Socrates. It was a parklike retreat, furnished with walks and fountains. On the Academy grounds were buildings, paid for by Plato and his friends. Holding forth there in bc might have been Polemo, who had inherited the position of master of the school. In this wooded area, near a shrine to Apollo Lykeios, we could see the Peripatetics, disciples of Aristotle, walking and talking, and at the head of the group might be Theophrastus. But this is only the beginning of the educational options open to ancient parents.

Besides the schools mentioned in connection with our walking tour, there were the Cyrenaic, Skeptic, Megarian, and Elian schools mentioned earlier, to which we can add several other schools mentioned by Diogenes Laertius, including the Eretrian, Annicerean, and Theodorean schools, along with the schools run by the Eudaemonists, the Truth-lovers, the Refutationists, the Reasoners from Analogy, the Physicists, the Moralists, and the Dialecticians. Sometimes fathers studied alongside their sons. Other adults, though never having belonged to a school, might have attended its lectures as guests. Their motives were prob- ably very much like the motives modern individuals have in attending a public lecture: They sought to be enlightened and entertained.

The early Stoics, for example, were interested not only in a philosophy of life, but in physics and logic as well, for the simple reason that they thought these areas of study were inherently entwined. The Cyrenaics and Cynics were inter- ested in neither physics nor logic; at their schools, all one was taught was a philosophy of life. Those schools that offered students a philosophy of life differed in the philosophy they recommended. The Cyrenaics, for example, thought the grand goal in living was the expe- rience of pleasure and therefore advocated taking advantage of every opportunity to experience it. The Cynics advocated an ascetic lifestyle: If you want a good life, they argued, you must learn to want next to nothing. The Stoics fell somewhere between the Cyrenaics and the Cynics: They thought people should enjoy the good things life has to offer, including friend- ship and wealth, but only if they did not cling to these good things.

Indeed, they thought we should periodically interrupt our enjoyment of what life has to offer to spend time contem- plating the loss of whatever it is we are enjoying. Those who took their philosophy seriously attempted to live that philosophy from day to day. Instead, I think that which philosophy of life a person should choose depends on her personality and circumstances. But having made this admission, let me add that I think there are very many people whose personality and circum- stances make them wonderful candidates for the practice of Stoicism. Furthermore, whatever philosophy of life a person ends up adopting, she will probably have a better life than if she tried to live—as many people do—without a coherent philosophy of life. T WO The First Stoics Zeno — bc was the first Stoic. And by Zeno, I mean Zeno of Citium, not to be confused with Zeno of Elea, who is famous for a paradox involving Achilles and a tortoise, or with any of the seven other Zenos mentioned by Diogenes Laertius in his biographical sketches.

Among them were philosophy books purchased in Athens. As the result of a shipwreck, Zeno found himself in Athens, and while there, he decided to take advantage of the philo- sophical resources the city had to offer. Just then, Crates the Cynic was walking by. They instead advocated a rather extreme philosophical lifestyle. Socially speaking, they were the ancient equivalent of what we today call the homeless: They lived in the streets and slept on the ground. Reviling or blows or insults are nothing to him. The Cynics were renowned for their wit and wisdom. He pointed out, by way of illustration, that a statue, the only function of which is to please the eye, might cost three thou- sand drachmas, while a quart of barley flour, which when consumed can keep us alive, can be bought for only two copper coins.

And like Socrates, the Cynics sought to instruct not only those who offered themselves as pupils but anyone at all, including those who were reluctant to be taught. He therefore came up with the idea of focusing not just on a philosophical lifestyle or a philosophical theory, but combining lifestyle with theory, the way Socrates had done. He went off to study with Stilpo, of the Megarian school. Crates responded by physically trying to drag him away. He also studied with Polemo at the Academy, and in around bc, he started his own school of philosophy. In his teaching, he appears to have mixed the lifestyle advice of Crates with the theoretical philosophy of Polemo. Those who studied Stoicism under him started with logic, moved on to physics, and ended with ethics.

Logic is, after all, the study of the proper use of reasoning. By teaching their students logic, the Stoics were helping them develop these skills: Students who knew logic could detect the falla- cies committed by others and thereby prevail over them in arguments. And besides providing explanations of natural phenomena, as modern physics does, Stoic physics was concerned with what we would call theology. Zeno, for example, tried to explain such things as the existence and nature of the gods, why the gods created our universe and its inhabitants, the role the gods play in determining the outcome of events, and the proper relationship between people and the gods. The Stoic conception of ethics, readers should realize, differs from our modern conception. We think of ethics as the study of moral right and wrong. A modern- day ethicist might wonder, for example, whether abortion is morally permissible, and if so, under what circumstances.

Its central, organizing concern is about what we ought to do or be to live well—to flourish. The Stoics, however, thought it entirely possible for someone to have a bad life despite making a very good living. Suppose, for example, that he hates his high-paying job, or suppose that the job creates conflict within him by requiring him to do things he knows to be wrong. What, then, must a person do to have what the Stoics would call a good life? Be virtuous! Tell a modern reader that the Stoics advocate that she live in a virtuous manner, and she might roll her eyes; indeed, to this reader, nuns would be prime examples of virtuous individuals, and what makes them virtuous are their chastity, humility, and kindheartedness.

Are the Stoics, then, advocating that we live like nuns? To be virtuous, then, is to live as we were designed to live; it is to live, as Zeno put it, in accordance with nature. And for what function were people designed? To answer this question, the Stoics thought, we need only examine ourselves. On doing this, we will discover that we have certain instincts, as do all animals. But we differ from other animals in one important respect: We have the ability to reason. From this we can conclude, Zeno would assert, that we were designed to be reasonable. And if we use our reason, we will further conclude that we were designed to do certain things, that we have certain duties.

Most significantly, since nature intended us to be social creatures, we have duties to our fellow men. We should, for example, honor our parents, be agreeable to our friends, and be concerned with the interests of our countrymen. Although, as I have said, the primary concern of the Stoics was with ethics—with living virtuously and thereby having a good life—they were also interested in logic and physics. And by studying physics, they hoped to gain insight into the purpose for which we were designed. The Stoics came up with various metaphors to explain the relationship between the three components of their philosophy. If we lived in perfect accordance with nature—if, that is, we were perfect in our practice of Stoicism—we would be what the Stoics refer to as a wise man or sage. For the Stoics, however, the near impossi- bility of becoming a sage is not a problem. They talk about sages primarily so they will have a model to guide them in their practice of Stoicism.

The sage is a target for them to aim at, even though they will probably fail to hit it. The sage, in other words, is to Stoicism as Buddha is to Buddhism. When Cleanthes grew old, though, he started losing students to other schools, and the future of Stoicism looked bleak. When he died, leadership of the Stoic school was passed on to his pupil Chrysippus c. After the death of Chrysippus, the Stoic school continued to prosper under a succession of leaders, including Panaetius of Rhodes, who is remembered in the annals of Stoicism not as an innovator but as an exporter of the philosophy.

When Panaetius traveled to Rome in around bc, he took Stoicism with him. He befriended Scipio Africanus and other Roman gentlemen, got them interested in philosophy, and thereby became the founder of Roman Stoicism. After importing Stoicism, the Romans adapted the doctrine to suit their needs. For one thing, they showed less interest in logic and physics than the Greeks had. Indeed, by the time of Marcus Aurelius, the last of the great Roman Stoics, logic and physics had essentially been abandoned: In the Meditations, we find Marcus congratulating himself for not having wasted time studying these subjects.

As we have seen, the primary ethical goal of the Greek Stoics was the attainment of virtue. The Roman Stoics retained this goal, but we find them also repeatedly advancing a second goal: the attainment of tranquility. And by tranquility they did not have in mind a zombie-like state. Rather, Stoic tranquility was a psychological state marked by the absence of negative emotions, such as grief, anger, and anxiety, and the presence of positive emotions, such as joy. For the Roman Stoics, the goals of attaining tranquility and attaining virtue were connected, and for this reason, when they discuss virtue, they are likely to discuss tranquility as well. In particular, they are likely to point out that one benefit of attaining virtue is that we will thereupon experience tran- quility.

Although the Handbook is filled with advice on what, according to Epictetus, we must do if we wish to gain and maintain tran- quility, Arrian saw no need to mention virtue. One last comment is in order on the connection for the Roman Stoics between the goal of attaining virtue and the goal of attaining tranquility. Someone who is not tranquil—someone, that is, who is distracted by negative emotions such as anger or grief—might find it difficult to do what his reason tells him to do: His emotions will triumph over his intellect. This person might therefore become confused about what things are really good, consequently might fail to pursue them, and might, as a result, fail to attain virtue. Thus, for the Roman Stoics, the pursuit of virtue and the pursuit of tranquility are compo- nents of a virtuous circle—indeed, a doubly virtuous circle: The pursuit of virtue results in a degree of tranquility, which in turn makes it easier for us to pursue virtue.

Why did the Roman Stoics give the attainment of tranquility a more prominent role than their Greek predecessors did? Part of the answer to this question, I think, is that the Roman Stoics had less confidence than the Greeks in the power of pure reason to motivate people. The Greek Stoics thought that the best way to get people to pursue virtue was to make them understand what things were good: If a person understood what the truly good things were, he, being rational, would necessarily pursue them and thereby become virtuous.

The Greek Stoics therefore saw little need to mention the beneficial by-products of the pursuit of virtue, including, most signifi- cantly, the attainment of tranquility. The Roman Stoics therefore seem to have concluded that by sugarcoating virtue with tranquility—more precisely, by pointing to the tranquility people would gain by pursuing virtue—they would make Stoic doctrines more attractive to ordinary Romans. Furthermore, Stoic teachers such as Musonius Rufus and Epictetus had another reason for highlighting tranquility: By doing so, they made their school more attractive to potential students.

In the ancient world, we should remember, schools of philosophy were in direct competition with each other. To gain and retain students, schools were willing to be flex- ible in the philosophical doctrines they taught. It has been suggested, for example, that in the middle of the third century bc, the Academic and Stoic schools of philosophy, because they were losing students to the rival Epicurean school, decided to join into a philosophical alliance and modify their doctrines accordingly, with the common purpose of attracting students away from the Epicureans. For example, when Potamo of Alexandria decided to start a school of philosophy, he had a stroke of marketing genius: He decided that the best way to draw students was to cherry-pick from the philosoph- ical doctrines of competing schools.

More to the point, we should remember that Zeno himself, to concoct Greek Stoicism, bent and blended the doctrines of at least three different philosophical schools: the Cynics, the Megarians, and the Academy. By highlighting tranquility in their philosophy, the Stoics not only made it more attractive to ancient Romans but made it, I think, more attractive to modern individuals as well. It is unusual, after all, for modern individuals to have an interest in becoming more virtuous, in the ancient sense of the word. Thus, tell someone that you possess and are willing to share with him an ancient strategy for attaining virtue, and you will likely be met with a yawn. Indeed, if asked, he might go on at length about how his life has been blighted by tranquility-disrupting negative emotions. The First Stoics 43 It is for this reason that in the following pages I focus my attention on the Roman rather than the Greek Stoics, and it is for this reason that the primary focus of my examination of the Roman Stoics is not their advice on how to attain virtue but their advice on how to attain and maintain tranquility.

Having said this, I should add that readers who follow Roman Stoic advice on attaining tranquility might thereby attain virtue as well. Should this happen, so much the better! T HREE Roman Stoicism The most important of the Roman Stoics—and the Stoics from whom, I think, modern individuals have the most to gain—were Seneca, Musonius Rufus, Epictetus, and Marcus Aurelius. Seneca was the best writer of the bunch, and his essays and letters to Lucilius form a quite accessible intro- duction to Roman Stoicism. Musonius is notable for his prag- matism: He offered detailed advice on how practicing Stoics should eat, what they should wear, how they should behave toward their parents, and even how they should conduct their sex life. Lucius Annaeus Seneca, also known as Seneca the Younger, was born sometime between 4 and 1 bc in Corduba, Spain.

Chrysippus was remarkably prolific, but his works have not survived. Nor was he particularly original. Nevertheless, his Stoic writings are quite wonderful. His essays and letters are full of insight into the human condition. In these writings, Seneca talks about the things that typically make people unhappy—such as grief, anger, old age, and social anxieties—and about what we can do to make our life not just tolerable but joyful. Seneca, like the other Roman Stoics I will discuss, was not stoically resigned to life; he was instead an active participant in it.

And like these other Stoics, he was a complex individual. Indeed, even if Seneca had never written a word of philosophy, he would have made it into the history books for three other reasons. He would be remembered as a successful playwright. He would be remembered for his financial undertakings: He appears to have been a prototypical investment banker who became enormously wealthy in large part because of his finan- cial acumen. And finally, he would be remembered for the role he played in the politics of first-century Rome; besides being a senator, he was a tutor and subsequently a principal advisor to Emperor Nero. Thus it was that after eight years of banishment, Seneca returned to Rome.

Seneca also flour- ished during this period: He became incredibly wealthy. This wealth has given rise to the charge that Seneca was a hypo- crite, that he advocated Stoic restraint while living a life of extreme affluence. Readers need to keep in mind, though, that unlike Cynicism, Stoicism does not require its adher- ents to adopt an ascetic lifestyle. To the contrary, the Stoics thought there is nothing wrong with enjoying the good things life has to offer, as long as we are careful in the manner in which we enjoy them. In particular, we must be ready to give up the good things without regret if our circumstances should change.

Roman Stoicism 47 After the death of Agrippina in 59—Nero had her killed— Nero began to chafe at the guidance of Seneca and Burrus. In 62, Burrus died, either from illness or as the result of being poisoned. Seneca realized that his days at court were numbered, and he attempted to retire from politics, pleading ill health and old age. Nero finally agreed to let him retire, but the retire- ment was short-lived. When the friends who were present at his execution wept over his fate, Seneca chastised them. What, he asked, had become of their Stoicism? He then embraced his wife. The arteries in his arms were slit, but because of age and infirmity, he bled slowly, so the arteries of his legs and knees were also severed. Still he did not die. He asked a friend to bring poison, which he drank but without fatal consequences. He was then carried into a bath, the steam of which suffocated him. Paul in Corinth. In this essay, Seneca explains how best to pursue tranquility. Fortunately, Musonius had a pupil, Lucius, who took notes during lectures.

It is also likely that Musonius used these conversations both to instruct his students and to assess their philosophical progress. Roman Stoicism 49 Musonius was at the height of his fame and influence at the time of Emperor Nero. Nero had him imprisoned and subsequently banished him. In 65 ad, he was sent to the island of Gyara or Gyaros in the Cyclades, a group of islands in the Aegean Sea southeast of Greece. The island was desolate, bleak, rocky, and nearly waterless. He instead took an interest in Gyara and its inhabitants, mostly fishermen. He soon discovered a spring on the island and thereby made it more habitable. And whatever loneliness he might have experienced there was relieved by an influx of philosophical disciples. Not long thereafter, Emperor Vespasian banished all philosophers from Rome but seems to have exempted Musonius.

He died in around ad. According to Musonius, we should study philosophy, since how otherwise could we hope to live well? Musonius therefore taught his students how to retain their Stoic tran- quility while participating. Besides thinking that philosophy should be practical, Musonius thought the study of philosophy should be universal. He was subsequently acquired by Epaphroditus, secretary to Emperor Nero and later to Domitian. This must have given Epictetus exposure to the imperial court. Romans valued those slaves who showed signs of intelligence and initiative. Roman Stoicism 51 They trained them so they could make the best use of their gifts, and they subsequently put their slaves to work as teachers, counselors, and administrators.

Epictetus appears to have developed an interest in philos- ophy early in life. As a youth, we are told, he went around asking people whether their souls were healthy. If they ignored him, he persisted in questioning them until they threatened to beat him. Even in his mature philosophy, we can find evidence of his respect for the Cynics. After the death of Nero, Epictetus apparently gained freedom. He started a school of philosophy but was subse- quently banished, along with all the other philosophers in Rome, by Domitian. He moved his school to Nicopolis, in what is now western Greece. After the assassination of Domitian, Stoicism regained its respectability and even became fash- ionable among Romans.

Epictetus was by then the leading Stoic teacher. He could have moved back to Rome but chose instead to remain in Nicopolis. His school, despite its location, attracted students from around the Roman Empire. According to the classicist Anthony A. To the contrary, he wanted his students to take his lectures personally. He wanted his remarks to strike close to home. He taught them, among other things, how to respond to insults, how to deal with incompetent servants, how to deal with an angry brother, how to deal with the loss of a loved one, and how to deal with exile. Furthermore, they would retain their dignity and tranquility regardless of the hardships life might subsequently inflict on them. Those who read Epictetus cannot help but notice his frequent mention of religion.

Indeed, Zeus is mentioned more than anyone except Socrates. If this person asked what one must do to practice Stoicism, Epictetus might describe the various techniques Stoics advocate. If he asked why he should prac- tice these techniques, Epictetus might reply that doing so will enable him to attain tranquility. Suppose, more precisely, he asked Epictetus what reason there was to think that the techniques advocated by the Stoics would enable him to attain tranquility. In his response to this question, Epictetus would start talking about Zeus. We were, he would tell the student, created by Zeus. His student was likely to accept this claim, inasmuch as atheism appears to have been a rarity in ancient Rome. Then again, what Epictetus had in mind when he referred to Zeus is probably different from what most Romans had in mind.

In particular, it is possible that Epictetus identified Zeus with Nature. We are therefore a curious hybrid, half-animal and half-god. But sadly, he appears not to have been omnipotent, so in creating us, there were limits to what he could do. Yet since I could not give thee this, we have given thee a certain portion of ourself, this faculty of choice and refusal, of desire and aversion. Consequently, when a difficulty befalls, remember that God, like a physical trainer, has matched you with a rugged young man. He will then discover the reason we were created and the role we play in the cosmic scheme. He will realize that to have a good life, he needs to perform well the function of a human being, the function Zeus designed him to fulfill.

He will therefore pursue virtue, in the ancient sense of the word, meaning that he will strive to become an excellent human being. He will also come to realize that if he lives in accordance with nature, he will be rewarded with the tranquility that Zeus promised us. In chapter 20 I will have more to say about how this can be done. Because he was someone important, we know more about Marcus than about any of the other Roman Stoics. We also have an unusual degree of insight into his inner thoughts, thanks to the correspondence he carried on with his tutor Cornelius Fronto and thanks, also, to his Meditations, in which he reflects on life and his response to it. Marcus was born in He appears to have taken an interest in philosophy at an early age. Like Epictetus, Marcus was far more interested in Stoic ethics—in, that is, its philosophy of life—than in Stoic physics or logic.

From the time Marcus entered palace life, he had political power, and when Antoninus became emperor, Marcus served as virtual co-emperor. This was the first time the Roman Empire had two emperors. For one thing, he exercised great restraint in his use of power. No emperor, we are told, showed more respect to the Senate than Marcus did. Each of the five emperors who then reigned deserves to be placed among the best rulers who have ever lived. To the contrary, he thought its value was obvious. He was sick, possibly with an ulcer. His family life was a source of distress: His wife appears to have been unfaithful to him, and of the at least fourteen children she bore him, only six survived. Added to this were the stresses that came with ruling an empire. During his reign, there were numerous frontier uprisings, and Marcus often went personally to oversee campaigns against upstart tribes. His own officials—most notably, Avidius Cassius, the governor of Syria—rebelled against him.

During his reign, the empire also experienced plague, famine, and natural disasters such as the earthquake at Smyrna. But for my part, I admire him all the more for this very reason, that amid unusual and extraordinary difficulties he both survived himself and preserved the empire. He refused to eat or drink in an attempt to hurry death. His death provoked an outburst of public grief. His soldiers in particular were deeply moved by his passing. Marcus, however, did not preach Stoicism. He did not lecture his fellow Romans on the benefits of practicing Stoicism; nor did he expose them to his philosophical writings. In a sense, then, Marcus represents the high-water mark of Stoicism.

That Stoicism has seen better days is obvious. Have you, in the course of your life, encountered even one practicing Stoic? It is tempting to attribute this decline in popularity to some flaw in the Stoic philosophy. I would like to suggest, though, that the unpopularity of Stoicism is due not to a defect in the philosophy but to other factors. For one thing, modern indi- viduals rarely see the need to adopt a philosophy of life. They instead tend to spend their days working hard to be able to afford the latest consumer gadget, in the resolute belief that if only they buy enough stuff, they will have a life that is both meaningful and maximally fulfilling. Furthermore, even if it dawns on these individuals that there is more to life than shop- ping, they are unlikely, in their pursuit of a philosophy of life, to turn to Stoicism.

Allow me, therefore, as part of my attempt to reanimate Stoicism, to explain, in the chapters that follow, what, exactly, is involved in the practice of this philosophy. Any thoughtful person will periodically contemplate the bad things that can happen to him. The obvious reason for doing this is to prevent those things from happening. Someone might, for example, spend time thinking about ways people could break into his home so he can prevent them from doing so. Or he might spend time thinking about the diseases that might afflict him so he can take preventive measures. But no matter how hard we try to prevent bad things from happening to us, some will happen anyway.

Seneca therefore points to a second reason for contemplating the bad things that can happen to us. We humans are unhappy in large part because we are insatiable; after working hard to get what we want, we routinely lose interest in the object of our desire. Rather than feeling satisfied, we feel a bit bored, and in response to this boredom, we go on to form new, even grander desires. The psychologists Shane Frederick and George Loewenstein have studied this phenomenon and given it a name: hedonic adaptation. To illustrate the adaptation process, they point to studies of lottery winners.

Winning a lottery typically allows someone to live the life of his dreams. It turns out, though, that after an initial period of exhilaration, lottery winners end up about as happy as they previously were. Another, less dramatic form of hedonic adaptation takes place when we make consumer purchases. Initially, we delight in the wide-screen television or fine leather handbag we bought. After a time, though, we come to despise them and find ourselves longing for an even wider-screen television or an even more extravagant handbag.

Likewise, we experi- ence hedonic adaptation in our career. We might once have dreamed of getting a certain job. We might consequently have worked hard in college and maybe graduate school as well to get on the proper career path, and on that path, we might have spent years making slow but steady progress toward our career goal. We will grumble about our pay, our coworkers, and the failure of our boss to recognize our talents. We also experience hedonic adaptation in our relationships. We meet the man or woman of our dreams, and after a tumul- tuous courtship succeed in marrying this person. As a result of the adaptation process, people find themselves on a satisfaction treadmill. They are unhappy when they detect an unfulfilled desire within them. They work hard to fulfill this desire, in the belief that on fulfilling it, they will gain satisfac- tion.

They end up just as dissatisfied as they were before fulfilling the desire. One key to happiness, then, is to forestall the adaptation process: We need to take steps to prevent ourselves from taking for granted, once we get them, the things we worked so hard to get. And because we have probably failed to take such steps in the past, there are doubtless many things in our life to which we have adapted, things that we once dreamed of having but that we now take for granted, including, perhaps, our spouse, our children, our house, our car, and our job. This means that besides finding a way to forestall the adapta- tion process, we need to find a way to reverse it. Around the world and throughout the millennia, those who have thought carefully about the work- ings of desire have recognized this—that the easiest way for us to gain happiness is to learn how to want the things we already have.

This advice is easy to state and is doubtless true; the trick is in putting it into practice in our life. How, after all, can we convince ourselves to want the things we already have? The stoics thought they had an answer to this question. They recommended that we spend time imagining that we have lost the things we value—that our wife has left us, our car was stolen, or we lost our job. Doing this, the Stoics thought, will make us value our wife, our car, and our job more than we otherwise would. This technique—let us refer to it as negative visualization—was employed by the Stoics at least as far back as Chrysippus. Seneca describes the negative visualization technique in the consolation he wrote to Marcia, a woman who, three years after the death of her son, was as grief-stricken as on the day she buried him. In this consolation, besides telling Marcia how to overcome her current grief, Seneca offers advice on how she can avoid falling victim to such grief in the future: What she needs to do is anticipate the events that can cause her to grieve.

If nothing else, our own death will end it. Epictetus also advocates negative visualization. The second refuses to entertain such gloomy thoughts. He instead assumes that his child will outlive him and that she will always be around for him to enjoy. The first father will almost certainly be more attentive and loving than the second. When he sees his daughter first thing in the morning, he will be glad that she is still a part of his life, and during the day he will take full advantage of opportunities to interact with her. The second father, in contrast, will be unlikely to experience a rush of delight on encountering his child in the morning. Indeed, he might not even look up from the newspaper to acknowledge her presence in the room.

During the day, he will fail to take advantage of opportunities to interact with her in the belief that such interactions can be postponed until tomorrow. Besides contemplating the death of relatives, the Stoics think we should spend time contemplating the loss of friends, to death, perhaps, or to a falling-out. Thus, Epictetus coun- sels that when we say good-bye to a friend, we should silently remind ourselves that this might be our final parting. Among the deaths we should contemplate, says Epictetus, is our own. Indeed, Seneca takes things even further than this: We should live as if this very moment were our last. Some people assume that it means living wildly and engaging in all sorts of hedonistic excess.

After all, if this day is our last, we will not pay any price for our riotous living. We can use drugs without fear of becoming addicted. We can like- wise spend money with reckless abandon without having to worry about how we will pay the bills that will come to us tomorrow. This, however, is not what the Stoics had in mind when they advise us to live as if today were our last day. Such reflection, rather than converting us into hedonists, will make us appreciate how wonderful it is that we are alive and have the opportunity to fill this day with activity. This in turn will make it less likely that we will squander our days.

In other words, when the Stoics counsel us to live each day as if it were our last, their goal is not to change our activities but to change our state of mind as we carry out those activities. Why, then, do the Stoics want us to contemplate our own death? Because doing so can dramatically enhance our enjoy- ment of life. And besides contemplating the loss of our life, say the Stoics, we should contemplate the loss of our possessions. We would be much better off, Marcus says, to spend this time thinking of all the things we have and reflecting on how much we would miss them if they were not ours. But thanks to hedonic adaptation, as soon as we find ourselves living the life of our dreams, we start taking that life for granted. Instead of spending our days enjoying our good fortune, we spend them forming and pursuing new, grander dreams for ourselves.

As a result, we are never satisfied with our life. Negative visualization can help us avoid this fate. What about a homeless person, for example? Those who enjoy a comfortable and affluent life can benefit from the practice of Stoicism, but so can those who are impoverished. In particular, although their poverty will prevent them from doing many things, it will not preclude them from practicing negative visualization. Consider the person who has been reduced to possession of only a loincloth. His circumstances could be worse: He could lose the loincloth. He would do well, say the Stoics, to reflect on this possibility. Suppose, then, that he loses his loincloth. As long as he retains his health, his circumstances could again be worse—a point worth considering. And if his health deterio- rates? He can be thankful that he is still alive. It is hard to imagine a person who could not somehow be worse off.

It is therefore hard to imagine a person who could not benefit from the practice of negative visualization. The claim is not that practicing it will make life as enjoyable for those who have nothing as it is for those who have much. Along these lines, consider the plight of James Stockdale. A navy pilot, Stockdale was shot down over Vietnam in and held as a prisoner of war until During that time, he experienced poor health, primitive living conditions, and the brutality of his jailers. And yet he not only survived but emerged an unbroken man. How did he manage it? In large part, he says, by practicing Stoicism. The Stoics would work to improve their external circumstances, but at the same time, the Stoics would suggest things they could do to alleviate their misery until those circumstances are improved.

One might imagine that the Stoics, because they go around contemplating worst-case scenarios, would tend toward pessi- mism. What we find, though, is that the regular practice of negative visualization has the effect of transforming Stoics into full-blown optimists. Allow me to explain. We normally characterize an optimist as someone who sees his glass as being half full rather than half empty. After expressing his appreciation that his glass is half full rather than being completely empty, he will go on to express his delight in even having a glass: It could, after all, have been broken or stolen. And if he is atop his Stoic game, he might go on to comment about what an astonishing thing glass vessels are: They are cheap and fairly durable, impart no taste to what we put in them, and—miracle of miracles! This might sound a bit silly, but to someone who has not lost his capacity for joy, the world is a wonderful place.

To such a person, glasses are amazing; to everyone else, a glass is just a glass, and it is half empty to boot. Hedonic adaptation has the power to extinguish our enjoy- ment of the world. Because of adaptation, we take our life and what we have for granted rather than delighting in them. Negative visualization, though, is a powerful antidote to hedonic adaptation. By consciously thinking about the loss of what we have, we can regain our appreciation of it, and with this regained appreciation we can revitalize our capacity for joy.

One reason children are capable of joy is because they take almost nothing for granted. To them, the world is wonder- fully new and surprising. But as children grow older, they grow jaded. By the time they are teenagers, they are likely to take almost everything and everyone around them for granted. And in a frightening number of cases, these children grow up to be adults who are not only unable to take delight in the world around them but seem proud of this inability. They will, at the drop of a hat, provide you with a long list of things about themselves and their life that they dislike and wish they could change, were it possible to do so, including their spouse, their children, their house, their job, their car, their age, their bank balance, their weight, the color of their hair, and the shape of their navel.

Ask them what they appreciate about the world— ask them what, if anything, they are satisfied with—and they might, after some thought, reluctantly name a thing or two. Sometimes a catastrophe blasts these people out of their jadedness. Suppose, for example, a tornado destroys their home. Such events are tragic, of course, but at the same time they potentially have a silver lining: Those who survive them might come to appreciate whatever they still possess. More generally, war, disease, and natural disasters are tragic, inasmuch as they take from us the things we value, but they also have the power to transform those who experience them.

Before, these individ- uals might have been sleepwalking through life; now they are joyously, thankfully alive—as alive as they have felt in decades. Catastrophe-induced personal transformations have draw- backs, though. Indeed, many people have a catastrophe- free—and as a consequence, joyless—life. A second drawback is that catastrophes that have the power to transform someone can also take his life. Consider, for example, a passenger on an airliner, the engines of which have just burst into flames. This turn of events is likely to cause the passenger to reassess his life, and as a result, he might finally gain some insight into what things in life are truly valuable and what things are not. Unfortunately, moments after this epiphany he might be dead.

The third drawback to catastrophe-induced transforma- tions is that the states of joy they trigger tend to wear off. Those who come close to dying but subsequently revive typi- cally regain their zest for living. They might, for example, feel motivated to contemplate the sunsets they had previ- ously ignored or to engage in heartfelt conversations with the spouse they had previously taken for granted. They do this for a time, but then, in all too many cases, apathy returns: They might ignore the gorgeous sunset that is blazing outside their window in order to complain bitterly to their spouse that there is nothing worth watching on television. Negative visualization does not have these drawbacks. And because negative visualization can be done repeatedly, its beneficial effects, unlike those of a catas- trophe, can last indefinitely.

Negative visualization is therefore a wonderful way to regain our appreciation of life and with it our capacity for joy. Negative Visualization 77 The Stoics are not alone in harnessing the power of negative visualization. Consider, for example, those individuals who say grace before a meal. Some presumably say it because they are simply in the habit of doing so. But under- stood properly, saying grace—and for that matter, offering any prayer of thanks—is a form of negative visualization. Before eating a meal, those saying grace pause for a moment to reflect on the fact that this food might not have been available to them, in which case they would have gone hungry. And even if the food were available, they might not have been able to share it with the people now at their dinner table.

Said with these thoughts in mind, grace has the ability to transform an ordinary meal into a cause for celebration. In the course of my life, I have met many such people. They analyze their circumstances not in terms of what they are lacking but in terms of how much they have and how much they would miss it were they to lose it. Many of them have been quite unlucky, objectively speaking, in their life; nevertheless, they will tell you at length how lucky they are—to be alive, to be able to walk, to be living where they live, and so forth. Earlier I mentioned that there are people who seem proud of their inability to take delight in the world around them.

Or maybe they have decided that it is fashionable to refuse to take delight in the world, the way it is fashionable to refuse to wear white after Labor Day, and they feel compelled to obey the dictates of fashion. To refuse to take delight in the world, in other words, is evidence of sophistication. They should want more and not rest content until they get it. To be able to be satisfied with little is not a failing, it is a blessing—if, at any rate, what you seek is satisfaction. And if you seek something other than satisfaction, I would inquire with astonishment into what it is that you find more desirable than satisfaction. What, I would ask, could possibly be worth sacrificing satisfaction in order to obtain? If we have an active imagination, it will be easy for us to engage in negative visualization; it will be easy for us to imagine, for example, that our house has burned to the ground, our boss has fired us, or we have gone blind.

We will quickly discover that we are living in what to them would have been a dream world—that we tend to take for granted things that our ancestors had to live without, including antibiotics, air conditioning, toilet paper! The negative visualization technique, by the way, can also be used in reverse: Besides imagining that the bad things that happened to others happen to us, we can imagine that the bad things that happen to us happened instead to others. One way to avert this anger is to think about how we would feel if the incident had happened to someone else instead.

The Stoics, as we have seen, advise us to pursue tranquility, and as part of their strategy for attaining it they advise us to engage in negative visualization. Suppose, for example, that a Stoic is invited to a picnic. Maybe someone will break an ankle playing softball. Maybe there will be a violent thunderstorm that will scatter the picnickers. Maybe I will be struck by lightning and die. But more to the point, it seems unlikely that a Stoic will gain tranquility as a result of entertaining such thoughts. To the contrary, he is likely to end up glum and anxiety-ridden. In response to this objection, let me point out that it is a mistake to think Stoics will spend all their time contemplating potential catastrophes. It is instead something they will do periodically: A few times each day or a few times each week a Stoic will pause in his enjoyment of life to think about how all this, all these things he enjoys, could be taken from him.

Furthermore, there is a difference between contem- plating something bad happening and worrying about it. Contemplation is an intellectual exercise, and it is possible for us to conduct such exercises without its affecting our emotions. It is possible, for example, for a meteorologist to spend her days contemplating tornadoes without subsequently living in dread of being killed by one. In similar fashion, it is possible for a Stoic to contemplate bad things that can happen without becoming anxiety-ridden as a result. Negative Visualization 81 Finally, negative visualization, rather than making people glum, will increase the extent to which they enjoy the world around them, inasmuch as it will prevent them from taking that world for granted.

Despite—or rather, because of—his occa- sional gloomy thoughts, the Stoic will likely enjoy the picnic far more than the other picnickers who refuse to entertain simi- larly gloomy thoughts; he will take delight in being part of an event that, he fully realizes, might not have taken place. The critic of Stoicism might now raise another concern. But thanks to their ongoing practice of negative visualization, the Stoics will be remarkably appreciative of the people and things around them. Consider, by way of illustration, the two fathers mentioned earlier. The first father periodically contemplates the loss of his child and therefore does not take her for granted; to the contrary, he appreciates her very much. The second father assumes that his child will always be there for him and there- fore takes her for granted. It might be suggested that because the second father does not appreciate his child, he will respond to her death with a shrug of his shoulders, whereas the first father, because he deeply appreciates his child, has set himself up for heartache if she dies.

Stoics, I think, would respond to this criticism by pointing out that the second father almost certainly will grieve the loss of his child: He will be full of regret for having taken her for granted. If only I had told her more bedtime stories! If only I had gone to her violin recitals instead of going golfing! Make no mistake: The first father will grieve the death of his child. As we shall see, the Stoics think periodic episodes of grief are part of the human condition. But at least this father can take consolation in the knowledge that he spent well what little time he had with his child. Words: 3, Pages: 6. A Guide to the Good Life THE BIG IDEAS The Ancient Art of Stoic Joy The Art of Living BY WILLIAM B. Stoic Virtue Live the life we were designed to live.

Hedonic Adaptation Step off the bling treadmill. Negative Visualization Is positive. Projective Visualization Give it a try! In the pages that follow, I focus my attention on a philosophy that I have found useful and that I suspect many readers will also find useful. It is the philosophy of the ancient Stoics. The Stoic philosophy of life may be old, but it merits the attention of any modern individual who wishes to have a life that is both meaningful and fulfilling—who wishes, that is, to have a good life. Be Truly Alive I love it. Most Important Choice Although pretty obscure today, Stoicism was once the primary philosophy of the Western world. Contemplate impermance to do so. To choose our own thoughts. First, a quick historical background: Stoicism was founded by Zeno in ~ B. William B. This means that if you lack a grand goal in living, you lack a coherent philosophy of life. The pages that follow are my answer to this question. This book is PACKED with Big Ideas.

He is the one, in fact, who knows the fundamental thing: how to live. Stoicism, in a way that our feelings are not. The more control we develop over of the most popular and our actions, the more chance we have of producing a self we can be proud of. Instead, it depends on her excellence as a human being—on how well she performs the function for which humans were designed. To be virtuous, then, is to live as we were designed to live; it is to live, as Zeno put it, in accordance with nature. The Stoics would add that if we do this, we will have a good life. THAT is what living with virtue is all about. Not the sort of uptight, pleasure-hating Puritanism that some people now associate with that word, but a broader kind of virtue that goes back to ancient Greece. The Greek word areté meant excellence, virtue, or goodness, especially of a functional sort He was saying that a would call a good life? Be good life is one where you develop your strengths, realize your potential, and become what it is virtuous!

Irvine in your nature to become. To understand Nature and to follow it. For what task, then, were you yourself created? And 2 PhilosophersNotes A Guide to the Good Life what is it that reason demands of him? Something very easy—that he live in accordance with his own nature. And, are you living as you were designed to live? Rather than feeling satisfied, we feel a bit bored, and in response to this boredom, we go on to form new, even grander desires. The psychologists Shane Frederick and George Loewenstein have studied this phenomenon and given it a name: hedonic adaptation. To illustrate the adaptation process, they point to studies of lottery winners.

Winning a lottery typically allows someone to live the life of his dreams. It turns out, though, that after an initial period of exhilaration, lottery winners end up about as happy as they previously were. They start taking their new Ferrari and mansion for granted, the way they previously took their rusted-out pickup and cramped apartment for granted. As a result, we are never satisfied with our life. Negative visualization can help us avoid this fate. They recommended that we spend time imagining that we have lost the things we value—that our wife has left us, our car was stolen, or we lost our job. Doing this, the Stoics thought, will make us value our wife, our car, and our job more than we otherwise would. This technique—let us refer to it as negative visualization—was employed by the Stoics at least as far back as Chrysippus. Want to appreciate the wonderful things you have in your life?

Imagine losing them. Who and what do you love most in your life?

Better World Books. Uploaded by station cebu on January 29, Internet Archive logo A line drawing of the Internet Archive headquarters building façade. Search icon An illustration of a magnifying glass. User icon An illustration of a person's head and chest. Sign up Log in. Web icon An illustration of a computer application window Wayback Machine Texts icon An illustration of an open book. Books Video icon An illustration of two cells of a film strip. Video Audio icon An illustration of an audio speaker. Audio Software icon An illustration of a 3.

Software Images icon An illustration of two photographs. Images Donate icon An illustration of a heart shape Donate Ellipses icon An illustration of text ellipses. Search Metadata Search text contents Search TV news captions Search archived websites Advanced Search. A guide to the good life : the ancient art of Stoic joy Item Preview. remove-circle Share or Embed This Item. EMBED for wordpress. com hosted blogs and archive. Want more? Advanced embedding details, examples, and help! Publication date Topics Stoics Publisher Oxford ; New York : Oxford University Press Collection inlibrary ; printdisabled ; internetarchivebooks Digitizing sponsor The Arcadia Fund Contributor Internet Archive Language English. xii, p. Full catalog record MARCXML. plus-circle Add Review. Reviewer: TowerDisciple - favorite favorite favorite favorite favorite - October 28, Subject: Changed my life. This is a great tool for a better life.

download 1 file. Books for People with Print Disabilities. Internet Archive Books. SIMILAR ITEMS based on metadata.

FREE A Guide to the Good Life PDF Book by William B Irvine (2009) Download or Read Online Free,Summary of A guide to the good life : the ancient art of Stoic joy

BOOK PDF A Guide to the Good Life: The Ancient Art of Stoic Joy Continue Reading Download Free PDF Related Papers Timothy Seid Based on several different developments A Guide to the Good Life PDF Details. audible mp3, ePUB (Android), kindle, and audiobook. A Guide to the Good Life is a beautiful novel written by the famous author William B Irvine. The 16/11/ · A Guide to the Good Life by William Irvine [BOOK SUMMARY & PDF] A Guide to the Good Life is an eye-opening read about how to live a happier and more meaningful life. · MB · , Downloads · New! The #1 New York Times Bestseller, with over 3 million sold, now available in a large print edition The Purpose Driven Li Start Where You Download PDF - blogger.com [geo9n8] A Guide to the Good Life: The Ancient Art of Stoic Joy PDF book by William B. Irvine Read Online or Free Download in ePUB, PDF or MOBI eBooks. Published in the book ... read more

Stoics, I think, would respond to this criticism by pointing out that the second father almost certainly will grieve the loss of his child: He will be full of regret for having taken her for granted. I would like to suggest, though, that Cato and the other Stoics found a way to retain their tranquility despite their involvement with the world around them: They internalized their goals. Irvine Submitted by: Maria Garcia Views Request a Book Add a Review A Guide to the Good Life: The Ancient Art of Stoic Joy PDF book by William B. Some people, I realize, will find it depressing or even morbid to contemplate impermanence. It is also likely that Musonius used these conversations both to instruct his students and to assess their philosophical progress. download 1 file.

PhilosophyNon FictionPsychologySelf Help. Includes bibliographical references and index. He did not lecture his fellow Romans on the benefits of practicing Stoicism; nor did he expose them to his philosophical writings, a guide to the good life pdf free download. But when I do concern myself with this, my goal should not be the external goal of making her love me; no matter how hard I try, I could fail to achieve this goal and would as a result be quite upset. A guide to the good life pdf free download particular, if you lack an effective strategy for attaining your goal, it is unlikely that you will attain it. After all, if this day is our last, we will not pay any price for our riotous living. After expressing his appreciation that his glass is half full rather than being completely empty, he will go on to express his delight in even having a glass: It could, after all, have been broken or stolen.