You're right. The Romans were generally open to stoicism because, unlike epicureanism or cynicism, stoicism wasn't seen by Romans as demanding a retreat from pu

You're right. The Romans were generally open to stoicism because, unlike epicureanism or cynicism, stoicism wasn't seen by Romans as demanding a retreat from public affairs. >> ... [stoicism] is a response to perceiving the breakdown of a functioning world. Their prescription for dealing with such troubles is to develop profound internal strength, and in doing so the stoic attitude can dodge some societal-level failures by compartmentalizing toward a robust individualism. Where this author speaks of "profound internal strength", stoicism talks about ataraxia and "remedies" or techniques to achieve a state of tranquility when encountering something that disturbs that state (e.g. someone calls you an idiot). Seneca's letters, for example, talk about progressing along a path and becoming more skilled, not developing "profound internal strength". Lastly, I wanted to say "individualism" is an anachronistic modern concept the author has insinuated into the ancient world.