Happiness and Greek Ethical Thought (Continuum Studies in Ancient Philosophy) by M. Andrew Holowchak


Happiness and Greek Ethical Thought (Continuum Studies in Ancient Philosophy)
Title : Happiness and Greek Ethical Thought (Continuum Studies in Ancient Philosophy)
Author :
Rating :
ISBN : 1441112375
ISBN-10 : 9781441112378
Language : English
Format Type : Paperback
Number of Pages : 272
Publication : First published August 1, 2004

This book presents a fresh exploration of happiness through the ideas of the ancient Greek philosophers. It introduces readers to the main currents of Greek ethical thought (Socratic living, Platonism, Aristotelianism, Epicureanism, Scepticism, Stoicism, Cynicism) and takes a close look at characters such as Socrates, Diogenes and Alexander the Great.
Yet Happiness and Greek Ethical Thought is much more than just a casual stroll through ancient thinking. It attempts to show how certain common themes in Greek thought are essential for living a happy life in any age. The author maintains that, in many respects, the Greek integrative ideal, contrary to the hedonistic individualism that many pluralistic societies at least implicitly advocate, is a much richer alternative that warrants honest reconsideration today.


Happiness and Greek Ethical Thought (Continuum Studies in Ancient Philosophy) Reviews


  • Tomislav

    Meandering book with some well-written, interesting parts. It is not really an extensive, general inquiry into the idea of happiness in Greek philosophy. First two chapters are retelling of Symposium and Nicomachean Ethics, followed by an overview of Epicurean and Pyrrhonian philosophies, with Stoics and Cynics occasionally mentioned. The later parts deal with all kinds of loosely connected topics, from Greek schools of medicine and biography of Alexander to moralistic criticism of modern individualism. The author usually tries to connect ancient ideas with contemporary thought, although his choice of representative modern thinkers is somewhat dubious. In his conclusions he often dismisses the ideas with which he personally disagrees without really giving any convincing arguments, often just claiming that they are extreme and that his opinion presents the obviously correct, moderate position on the subject.