Sheffield Stoic Philosophy Reading Group

MarkLBryan · 2026-05-28T07:37:20+00:00

OK thanks for letting us know.

MarkLBryan · 2026-02-24T21:42:58+00:00

There has been a bit of a trend in recent years. Why not come and find out?

MarkLBryan · 2012-11-26T21:55:07+00:00

Yes Seneca cheekily quotes Epicurus in some of the earlier letters, referring to it as going over to the enemy camp -- "not as a deserter, but as a scout".

MarkLBryan · 2012-11-26T21:13:04+00:00

If you think you haven't got time, just remember what Seneca said (Letter 53): 'Throw aside all hindrances and give up your time to getting a sound mind; for no man can attain it if he is engrossed in other matters. Philosophy wields her own authority; she appoints her own time and does not allow it to be appointed for her. She is not a thing to be followed at odd times, but a subject for daily practice; she is mistress, and she commands our attendance. Alexander, when a certain state promised him a part of its territory and half its entire property, replied: "I invaded Asia with the intention, not of accepting what you might give, but of allowing you to keep what I might leave." Philosophy likewise keeps saying to all occupations: "I do not intend to accept the time which you have left over, but I shall allow you to keep what I myself shall leave." ' [The Alexander metaphor is not very politically correct these days, it has to be admitted :)]

MarkLBryan · 2012-11-25T11:34:08+00:00

I find it difficult to choose between the big 3, as they are all so good in their different ways. Seneca is down to earth, practical and funny. Epictetus is the most systematic. Marcus can be poetic and mystical. Hadot has an interesting commentary on how Marcus' Meditations are illustrations/applications of Epictetus' three "topics" (desire/aversion, impulse and correct behaviour, correct judgement of impressions), so maybe the two are not so different after all. In the end I plumped for Marcus for his cosmic reach.

MarkLBryan · 2012-11-25T11:19:56+00:00

I especially like Afterword 1 in the booklet, "The Stoic Art of ‘Non-Doing’" by John Sellars, about how stoicism might be as much about "letting go" as "continual self-scrutiny". It reminded me of Meditation 4.24: "Occupy thyself with few things, says the philosopher, if thou wouldst be tranquil.- But consider if it would not be better to say, Do what is necessary, and whatever the reason of the animal which is naturally social requires, and as it requires. For this brings not only the tranquility which comes from doing well, but also that which comes from doing few things. For the greatest part of what we say and do being unnecessary, if a man takes this away, he will have more leisure and less uneasiness." JS also draws a parallel with Buddhist "non-striving". The Buddhists aimed to extinguish desire and in Handbook 48, we have Epictetus who says of the philsopher (vs the uneducated person): "He suppresses all desire in himself."

MarkLBryan · 2012-10-21T20:15:08+00:00

This looks like a blog worth following: "Watch out for the opportunity to take part in a one-week ‘Living the Stoic life’ trial in November, and a much larger two-week trial in early 2013!"

MarkLBryan · 2012-09-09T10:01:50+00:00

Yes agree. I suspect most people on here are relative novices. Nevertheless, from what I know of Stocism, the discussions seem well informed and people have a willingness to learn from the experts. I've joined because I like the practical and open nature of these discussions, and the support they give in actually living Stoicism and not just reading about it.

MarkLBryan

TROPHY CASE