Discussion about this post

User's avatar
D.S. Griffin's avatar

I really don’t understand all of the preening and praise for this book?

While it’s a competent introduction to Epicurean ethics, Austin’s ideological assumptions bleed through many things Epicurus himself would never have endorsed. The philosophy of withdrawal from political noise and tribal herd mentality gets repurposed as a vehicle for contemporary progressive causes.

That's not a minor editorial quirk. It's a contamination of the core.

Epicurus said withdraw from politics. He didn't say withdraw from politics unless the right politics. The man who wrote that genuine tranquility requires stepping back from public life and ambition would not have recognized himself in some of the modern applications Austin reaches for.

The writing is kitschy and feels like someone who is trying too hard to connect with readers not in her academic bubble of beliefs. Readers coming to Epicurus for the first time deserve to know the difference between what Epicurus actually taught and what a 2024 academic thinks he should have taught.

Every review of this book should end with a disclaimer that says read DeWitt for a better grasp of Epicurean philosophy after this nonsense.

2 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?