Book Review: Hellenistic Philosophy, A.A. Long
The following is a book review I completed for the Marcus Aurelius Program I am currently undertaking through the College of Stoic Philosophers.
Book details here: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/145570097
Reading this book deepened my understanding of the various Hellenistic philosophies, particularly Epicureanism and Scepticism. It also reinforced my belief that Stoic philosophy is the most practical and pragmatic of the Hellenistic schools, offering the greatest potential for both individual and community flourishing. I found it interesting that all three philosophies shared the common goal of achieving eudaimonia and tranquillity, yet proposed very different paths to acheive it.
Modern interpretations of Epicureanism often misrepresent it as a philosophy of indulgence, focused on giving in to desires and seeking sensory pleasures such as luxury and fine foods. At its core, however, Epicureanism emphasises the removal of pain and anxiety as the path to eudaimonia. While this approach seems logical in theory, striving to eliminate discomfort rather than learning to face life’s challenges can hinder the pursuit of a fulfilling and virtuous life.
There are valuable lessons to draw from Epicureanism, particularly its focus on valuing life’s simple pleasures, such as friendships and intellectual reflection. These teachings encourage prioritising what truly matters and avoiding the unnecessary complexities of society.
However, the Stoic perspective views such pleasures as indifferents, things that can be enjoyed but are not essential to virtue or happiness. Stoicism teaches that true eudaimonia comes from within and relies solely on virtue. Epicureanism’s recommendation to withdraw from public life to avoid suffering raises concerns. Advocating for such detachment undermines opportunities for individuals to contribute to their communities, weakening society as a whole. If everyone avoided life’s difficulties, our collective resilience and social fabric would suffer. In contrast, Stoicism provides tools to face adversity with virtue, benefiting both individuals and the wider community.
Scepticism, compared to Stoicism and Epicureanism, struck me as the least systematic and least pragmatic philosophy. The Sceptics sought eudaimonia by withholding assent to all claims of knowledge, rejecting the possibility of certainty. In contrast, Stoics believe knowledge is attainable through rationality and sense impressions. They emphasise the importance of assenting to impressions as a practical necessity for living and progressing. The Sceptic refusal to assent risks stifling both personal growth and community advancement, which may explain why Scepticism is no longer actively practised today.
The section on Stoicism highlighted several key elements that resonated with me. Firstly, Stoic philosophy is a journey, one that acknowledges human imperfection and the impossibility of reaching Sagehood. This lifelong practice evolves with maturity, starting with our innate impulses for self-preservation and survival and culminating in the development of logos (rationality). The book also insinuated that philosophy was once taught from a young age, fostering rationality and virtue early on. In contrast, modern times often treat philosophy as an academic pursuit rather than a guide for living. As a result, fewer individuals embrace a philosophical framework, leaving society with fewer truly mature men and women. Teaching philosophy earlier in life could benefit both individuals and society.
The challenges posed to traditional Stoic philosophy by figures like Panaetius, Posidonius, and Antiochus were also thought-provoking. While maintaining virtue as the highest good, Panaetius and Posidonius acknowledged the practical value of external goods, reflecting Aristotelian influences. Antiochus went further, accusing Stoics of 'smuggling' external goods into their philosophy under different terminology. This critique made me reflect on my own reliance on preferred indifferents, such as health, friendships, and having money to support a happy and fulfilling life. While I understand Stoic teachings that eudaimonia should depend solely on virtue, I question whether I could truly maintain happiness if all external goods were taken away. This introspection highlights how far I have yet to go on my Stoic journey.
Stoicism also prompts reflection on the Cynic lifestyle, which Epictetus respects for its rigour and purity. While few can live as Cynics, their example challenges Stoics to examine their own dependence on externals. This book reinforced my commitment to pursuing Stoic philosophy. It deepened my understanding of Hellenistic thought and clarified why Stoicism remains the most suitable path for me. Although my practice is far from perfect, I feel more confident in my journey as a Prokopton. This is a philosophy of continual growth, and I am keen to embrace that process wholeheartedly.
Alastair Mackenzie