Epictetus: The Strategy Of Living A Good Life

Humans are never content because, if any person is earning 2000 Dollars at this time a person is happy with that much. But after some time the same person will want to earn more because as a person earns as he or she Spent let’s suppose I am earning 2000 Dollars now days so according to that I eat I wear I use products and if my salary will increase from next month so then my expenses will increase as well even most richest persons are not content. I simply mean to say it’s a nature of Humans that they never be happy.

“Happiness is in the enjoyment of man’s chief good. Two conditions of the chief good: 1st, Nothing is better than it; 2nd, it cannot be lost against the will” (Augustine 264-267). As human

Mankind must by this time have acquired positive beliefs as to the effects of some actions on their happiness; and the beliefs which have thus come down are the rules of morality for the multitude, and for the philosopher until he has succeeded in finding better. That philosophers might easily do this, even now, on many subjects; that the received code of ethics is by no means of divine right; and that mankind have still much to learn as to the effects of actions on general happiness, I admit or rather earnestly maintain.

“Highlighted in prison camps, where everyday human nature, stripped bare, can be studied under a magnifying glass in accelerated time. Lessons spotlighted and absorbed in that laboratory sharpens one eye for their abstruse but highly relevant applications in the “real time” world of now”(10). As a POW he suffered indescribable trials externally controlled by other individuals. “ The historical perspective which enabled a man to take himself away from all the agitation, not necessarily see a rosy lining, but to see the real nature of the situation he faced, was truly a thing of value”(12). The misfortunes, which fell upon the POW’s, were unfair but in regard to Epictetus the unfairness in life is what makes individuals so courageous. POW not

An example of a case where a person believes something is possible, but in fact was not possible reminds me of this past weekend’s football game. Iowa Hawkeyes vs. Michigan Wolverines. Looking at the statistics heading into the game, you’d think two collegiate football teams can compete against one another, but looking at previous games, and looking at the statistics, you’d then think there’s no way and it’s impossible that the Hawkeyes can beat the Wolverines. This issue connects with Epictetus by his idea of a stoic perspective. Epictetus believes that you should go into something with satisfaction. He would say that knowing the past games played, if you know Iowa won’t win, you won’t be as disappointed. You should have an idea what they’re

After reading Epictetus’ lecture called The Handbook, one can have a better understanding of Epictetus’ view on free will and what we are able to control as human beings. According to Epictetus, “…all that is in your power is your mind – more specifically, your judgments of whether or not to assent to its presentations – and only what is in your power should be of concern to you” (Reeve & Miller, 2015, pp. 443). It appears that Epictetus leaves a lot up to chance. According to Epictetus, whatever life gives you, you are to take it with open arms and deal with it the best way seen fit.

For this essay, I’ve chosen to write about Epictetus’ thoughts on stoicism, Foer’s Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close, and Tolstoy’s The Death of Ivan Ilyich. I chose these three texts for a few reasons. Perhaps most importantly, they represent the three I have considered the most throughout this semester. As such, they are three of the ones I can most easily recall. Additionally, they have differing views of pain and suffering that will be interesting to explore together.

Like many philosophers during his time period, Epictetus spends a significant amount of time in his writing relating to the idea of “happiness” and “flourishing life.” In his handbook, the author exemplifies how some things are “choice-worthy.” However, in our power other circumstances within it must be avoided. The writer also gives us, the intuition of how stoic and impassive the authority of power can be. Epictetus relates to this theory by explaining that some of us as individuals have powers that are advantages and disadvantages.

I truly believe in Epictetus teaching but the three that captivated me the most are the discipline of desire, the discipline of action and the discipline of an asset. To begin with the discipline of desire stands for, the control of desire, according to this view, is the advantage of living in harmony with Nature and the universe as a whole, or in the language of Unemotional study of God. I myself strongly agree with this point because mastering discipline of desire it could help a person inner strength his or her desire and themselves which causes them to control their actions and reactions. It gives the person to stick to their choice of a decision and stay strong and firmed and follow them through, without a change of thought. So there for

Epicurus believes that pleasure leads to a good life and describes the most pleasant sort of life as one that is moderate and not filled with excess. While Epicurus says that it is pleasure that dictates whether a person has a blessed life or not, to him, pleasure means to be lacking needs. Furthermore, he considers pleasure to being in a state free of pain and fear in both mind and body. One of the biggest things that Epicurus says to not fear is death. If a person does not fear death, then they will have a more joyful life. Furthermore, Epicurus does not mean that pleasure is anything we want, when we want. Epicurus makes the argument that if a person is constantly surrounded by luxury, then they are no happier than someone who has enough

In part one of our book, “The Good Life,” we studied five different philosopher’s viewpoints on what is needed in order for a person to have a good, fulfilling life. They all included the concepts of pleasure and happiness to some extent in their theories, but they all approached the ideas in different ways. The two hedonists we studied, Epicurus and John Stuart Mill, place heavy emphasis on the importance of pleasure. They both believe that pleasure is a necessity in the ideal life. Jean Kazez agreed with their viewpoints in her theory and said that happiness was a necessity for a good life. Epicurus and Mill also argue that there is nothing else that we ultimately desire beyond pleasure and that it is an intrinsic good.

The reality for both authors is that the only true sense of self and happiness is obtained not by conformity, but in one's ability to live without judgement, to follow intuition and not fight instinct, and avoid the possibility of others controlling one’s

We are a pleasure driven society always waiting to be amused. Self indulgence is a very natural aspect of human life. Does pleasure affect our lives? Will it make us happy at the end? Well, Aristotle will let us know what it means to be happy and have a good life in the Nicomachean Ethics. In the process, he reveals his own account of pleasure as well as other philosophers opposing views on the subject. The author highlights the key them by telling us that pleasure is not the chief good. However, it is an end in itself, which makes it good. In addition, pleasure is also not a process because it doesn’t involve any movement from incompleteness to completeness. According to Aristotle, happiness is

In “Enchiridion” by Epictetus, the claim in selection number 7 is that humans should not get attached to material things because when nature calls them to return to it, they will have to leave their material belongings. The human desire of materialism is often too difficult to satiate. As humans start to gain material possessions, they tend to forget the great value of nature which surpasses that of materialism. Sooner or later, humans will be disappointed by materialism since they placed their entire faith on it, instead of placing it on nature. According to Epictetus, humans only borrow material things, those do not belong to any person and therefore humans do not have control over them. However, Epictetus suggests that nature is part of humans, it is what dictates their fate and it is in what humans should relied on since nature is the reason for everything that happens. Therefore, people should be willing to leave their material possessions whenever nature calls them, it is beneficial to concentrate on the guidance of nature to fate, and not on materialism that will disappoint them when they cannot have it anymore.

In order to explain the fundamentals of Aristotle's Virtue Ethics, one must acknowledge his primary motive in this study, which is to understand what it means to live well. Unlike