4 ms·

I didn't misunderstand Stoic thought. Maybe the guy writing the article misrepresented Stoicism. "Work toward as serene a degree of acceptance as you can muster

I didn't misunderstand Stoic thought. Maybe the guy writing the article misrepresented Stoicism. "Work toward as serene a degree of acceptance as you can muster instead. This doesn’t mean suppressing emotions. Rather, it means shifting your emotional spectrum—away from unhealthy emotions like anger and toward the mindful embracing of healthy ones like joy—by working on consciously altering the way you think about yourself and the world." He's the one that said anger is an unhealthy emotion. So my comment may be a perfect example of people misunderstanding Stoicism, but I'm merely the messenger. The guy who wrote the article is the one that made the claim. By the way, I don't think this is a small or unimportant point. Suppressed anger is extraordinarily unhealthy. Telling people their anger is bad for them just makes the problem worse.

CarelessExpert 6y ago
> Suppressed anger is extraordinarily unhealthy. Telling people their anger is bad for them just makes the problem worse. Well, good thing no one is telling folks they should suppress their anger, this article included. In fact, if I had to summarize the article in one sentence it would be "Despite what you might think, Stocism isn't about suppressing your emotions." It's like, practically the thesis of the piece. At this point I'm kinda wondering if you're reading your own biases into the text.
- bcatanzaro 6y ago
  I'm sure we're all reading our own biases into the text. But all I said was that I stopped reading as soon as the author said anger is unhealthy. Which the author did. And I think is bad.