36 ms·

I'm also not a scholar of stoicism, but from my reading Epictetus teaches pretty plainly that you shouldn't care at all about anything you can't control. I don'

I'm also not a scholar of stoicism, but from my reading Epictetus teaches pretty plainly that you shouldn't care at all about anything you can't control. I don't think that's realistic. Though of course it's good to focus our efforts on what we have hope of changing, I think the Stoics miss the importance of actively seeking out ways that we can make things better for ourselves and others. They instead cast everything as "duty" in conformance to "nature", two very slippery concepts. Scholars have noted that Stoicism flourished in environments where people had to cope with severe disempowerment (such as being caught up in the politics of the Roman Empire.) I hope most of us are not in situations where we have to resort to the 100% stoic mindset.

spacemark 6y ago
Epictetus often reads as quite an unfeeling teacher (he's reported to never have laughed), and often lacks nuance. Especially with regards to all the grey areas of what is in our control. Seeking out paths to make change through all known and potential paths of influence is certainly within a reasonable interpretation of Stoicism. Epictetus's Stoicism was but one of dozens of varieties in its 2500 year history. That is to say there are no perfect models, and all require some reform in personal application. Or, you do you, as the kids say!
bumby 6y ago
>Stoicism flourished in environments where people had to cope with severe disempowerment This makes sense in the context of some of Sherman’s books. Her book “The Stoic Warrior” is aimed specifically at modern military members. I suspect it’s useful precisely because they are often in situations where they have limited control.
nverno 6y ago
I don't find it realistic personally, either. But, I do find it useful to use some of the Stoic ideas as focal points to meditate on what is truly under my control and where to best focus my attention. They can serve as good mantras without needing to devote yourself 100% to any particular interpretation of the philosophy.
p2detar 6y ago
> Epictetus teaches pretty plainly that you shouldn't care at all about anything you can't control. I don't think that's realistic. I think it does not seem realistic, because it’s not easy. You can’t just wake up and start doing that. It takes time and a lot of introspection and this is probably where people mostly give up.
- CarelessExpert 6y ago
  > I think it does not seem realistic, because it’s not easy. This is one of the reasons why I love Meditations. Reading Marcus, one of the truly great men of his time, you can see him struggling mightily to adhere to his values. As a work it's unique in that it shows with incredible intimacy that living a healthy life, however you choose to do it, is a continuous journey with curves and switchbacks and steps forward and backward.
- jasperry 6y ago
  I didn't mean it's unrealistic because it's difficult, I meant that carried to its logical conclusion, it means pushing all joys out of your life just because they also come with some possibility of pain. That's not the path to happiness.
sr1 6y ago
I have never read any philosophy but recently discovered existentialism and now Stoicism basically by exploring my own thoughts. I've been lately thinking about life, emotions, relationships, etc. I don't know if I am naive but when I contemplate these things it makes complete sense. The premise for my philosophy is that life is absurd with no pre-defined purpose unless the one running the simulation starts tweeting. So I accept the absurdity and take it as an opportunity to do whatever will make me feel the most alive with a peaceful mind. (root node) Now thinking in terms of first principle and contemplating situations I hardly ever get angry or sad (lately) because I'm mutating from my natural instinct of reaction (where the unconscious mind kicks in) to a more robust framework of response (why? -> okay -> work on it). (work in progress) If I know that something is not under my control, I'd probably not waste any energy on it unless it conflicts with my root node if it does then I'd switch to the problem-solving mode. Most of my actions are just functions aim towards maximizing the root node, and the above framework kinda makes it efficient. In my POV, if I can pattern match the cue for anger using the above framework with enough iteration I don't really think that it's unrealistic to control anger or any emotion.

spacemark 6y ago

Epictetus often reads as quite an unfeeling teacher (he's reported to never have laughed), and often lacks nuance. Especially with regards to all the grey areas of what is in our control. Seeking out paths to make change through all known and potential paths of influence is certainly within a reasonable interpretation of Stoicism. Epictetus's Stoicism was but one of dozens of varieties in its 2500 year history. That is to say there are no perfect models, and all require some reform in personal application. Or, you do you, as the kids say!

bumby 6y ago

>Stoicism flourished in environments where people had to cope with severe disempowerment This makes sense in the context of some of Sherman’s books. Her book “The Stoic Warrior” is aimed specifically at modern military members. I suspect it’s useful precisely because they are often in situations where they have limited control.

nverno 6y ago

I don't find it realistic personally, either. But, I do find it useful to use some of the Stoic ideas as focal points to meditate on what is truly under my control and where to best focus my attention. They can serve as good mantras without needing to devote yourself 100% to any particular interpretation of the philosophy.

p2detar 6y ago

> Epictetus teaches pretty plainly that you shouldn't care at all about anything you can't control. I don't think that's realistic. I think it does not seem realistic, because it’s not easy. You can’t just wake up and start doing that. It takes time and a lot of introspection and this is probably where people mostly give up.

CarelessExpert 6y ago
> I think it does not seem realistic, because it’s not easy. This is one of the reasons why I love Meditations. Reading Marcus, one of the truly great men of his time, you can see him struggling mightily to adhere to his values. As a work it's unique in that it shows with incredible intimacy that living a healthy life, however you choose to do it, is a continuous journey with curves and switchbacks and steps forward and backward.
jasperry 6y ago
I didn't mean it's unrealistic because it's difficult, I meant that carried to its logical conclusion, it means pushing all joys out of your life just because they also come with some possibility of pain. That's not the path to happiness.

sr1 6y ago

I have never read any philosophy but recently discovered existentialism and now Stoicism basically by exploring my own thoughts. I've been lately thinking about life, emotions, relationships, etc. I don't know if I am naive but when I contemplate these things it makes complete sense. The premise for my philosophy is that life is absurd with no pre-defined purpose unless the one running the simulation starts tweeting. So I accept the absurdity and take it as an opportunity to do whatever will make me feel the most alive with a peaceful mind. (root node) Now thinking in terms of first principle and contemplating situations I hardly ever get angry or sad (lately) because I'm mutating from my natural instinct of reaction (where the unconscious mind kicks in) to a more robust framework of response (why? -> okay -> work on it). (work in progress) If I know that something is not under my control, I'd probably not waste any energy on it unless it conflicts with my root node if it does then I'd switch to the problem-solving mode. Most of my actions are just functions aim towards maximizing the root node, and the above framework kinda makes it efficient. In my POV, if I can pattern match the cue for anger using the above framework with enough iteration I don't really think that it's unrealistic to control anger or any emotion.