4 ms·

This raises the question of why passion and empathy are so in vogue these days.

by robnado 3y ago

r4t4t4k 3y ago
Not only that. The stoic values also seem to be under much scrutiny in the broader "toxic masculinity" narrative.
- Sakos 3y ago
  I mean, we know why. It's been co-opted by toxic male communities and is being bastardized by people who twist it to justify them being assholes. It is interesting though that Stoicism has this problem but Buddhism doesn't, even though they have similar ideals and concepts.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - ilrwbwrkhv 3y ago
    Because Buddhism is strongly non violent
    - whythre 3y ago
      That’s largely just the brand of Buddhism that’s gotten the most bandwidth in the west. Historically some variants were exceptionally violent. Feudal Japan had entire sects of Buddhist warrior-monks they accepted and even celebrated violence. A modern example of followers of Buddhism engaged in violent conflict is myanmar’s 969.
      - ilrwbwrkhv 3y ago
        That is the exception not the norm though. Non violence is one of the strongest tenets of Buddhism. Bhikkhus, even if bandits were to sever you savagely limb by limb with a two-handled saw, he who gave rise to a mind of hate towards them would not be carrying out my teaching. — Kakacūpama Sutta, Majjhima-Nikāya 28 at MN i 128-29 So it is quite hard for the red pill movement to co opt Buddhism and thank goodness for that.
      - nullindividual 3y ago
        If the individual accepts the “Western” brand of Buddhism which is non-violent, they are absolutely correct in their statement. Buddhism, historically or actively in other sects do not impact how a Western individual practices their form of Buddhism. If we can accept the sects of Christianity and they have different viewpoints, etc. without the whataboutism, we need to do the same and stop this with “Western” Buddhism, as well.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- snakeyjake 3y ago
  Toxic dudebros use stoicism as a cloak to excuse their assholery. One aspect of stoicism that they ignore is that, at its core, stoicism is about being patient, forgiving, and kind. They throw that in the trash and only implement the "IDGAF" bits like Christians who recite chapter and verse the parts about hating on gay people while ignoring the parts above and below those that say not to do other things that they do every day. edit: another aspect they ignore is malleability. A practicing stoic should immediately shift their views on something regardless of their previous position when presented with compelling arguments-- without resentment or attachment. If a stoic was taught and grew up believing "A" and then an expert presents evidence that "B" is correct, said stoic should purge "A" from their minds regardless of external pressure-- even if it means looking like a hypocrite, a fool, someone who has wasted their time/effort, or if it deviates them from the local norm. YouTube stoics... don't do that. More words on stoicism were written by its inventors about attachment than any other topic. Many (most of the most popular) pop-stoics are poster children for the vain, wealth-obsessed (cryptobro connection), cigar smoking, lambo driving (renting to show off), hyper-attached Andrew Tate archetype. Stoicism: >The measure of possession is to every man the body, as the foot is of the shoe. If then you stand on this rule , you will maintain the measure: but if you pass beyond it, you must then of necessity be hurried as it were down a precipice. As also in the matter of the shoe, if you go beyond the foot, the shoe is gilded, then of a purple colour, then embroidered: for there is no limit to that which has once passed the true measure. Pop-stocism: All those ripped dudes with abs who fuck bitches and drive lambos? THEY'RE STOICS! Ignore SOCIETY when they tell you STOICSM is TOXIC. Every time a stoic ridicules a man for crying I want to attach my boot to their face. Lamenting is a-ok: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0236%3Atext%3Denc%3Achapter%3D16 http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%... also: a stoic doesn't care if someone points out the irrefutable and easily demonstrable fact that their philosophy is associated with bad actors, nor does he or she resent that. They accept it. Attached assholes do care, though. They care A LOT.
  - robnado 3y ago
    You are describing narcissism or even anti-social personality disorder. I agree that they have little in common with true stoicism.
- jstarfish 3y ago
  Stoicism means you're not taking the bait. Ergo, since you can't be controlled through arousal (in the literal sense), you're written off as problematic/toxic/phobic.
  - toomuchtodo 3y ago
    Ironically, Stoicism sometimes needs to be arrived at by taking a beating (figuratively). Don’t let the emotional discovery experience go to waste.
derstander 3y ago
I’ve heard this charge that empathy is incompatible with Stoicism (or Buddhism) somewhat often but I don’t see it myself. Passion, on the other hand, I understand.
- perryg 3y ago
  To me, empathy is required to be a good stoic. Empathy helps guide ethical decision making. Just because we’re not overwhelmed by it and show it outwardly, doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. Similar, though less essential, with other emotions. Stoicism is not the eradication of feeling. That would be denying our basic humanity and contrary to stoic principles. Instead, it is the mastery of it. Keep logic in control. Think Spock.
PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y ago
being loud is not passion. passion is spending an inordinate amount of your time practicing something because you love it rather than strictly to get a J.O.B. Think of it this way, you can quietly defend your children. That you're not screaming does not make you love them less, you can be no less adamant on the defense without being loud. being loud is not passion.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
Anon_Forever 3y ago
Political power. Once you're able to label anything you dislike as "triggering", "non-inclusive", "toxic", "unsafe", etc. then you can squash any opposition by emotionally overreacting. Cry bullying in a nutshell. This has been insanely effective. Everyone was walking on eggshells around these passive aggressive cry bullies up until just recently. People are starting to see through the BS and the power dynamic is shifting.
xchip 3y ago
I tend to ignore all those articles, they keep talking about the same old things but using different names.
xchip 3y ago
I'm order to sell, you need to tell people what they want to hear

This raises the question of why passion and empathy are so in vogue these days.

r4t4t4k 3y ago

Not only that. The stoic values also seem to be under much scrutiny in the broader "toxic masculinity" narrative.

Sakos 3y ago
I mean, we know why. It's been co-opted by toxic male communities and is being bastardized by people who twist it to justify them being assholes. It is interesting though that Stoicism has this problem but Buddhism doesn't, even though they have similar ideals and concepts.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- ilrwbwrkhv 3y ago
  Because Buddhism is strongly non violent
  - whythre 3y ago
    That’s largely just the brand of Buddhism that’s gotten the most bandwidth in the west. Historically some variants were exceptionally violent. Feudal Japan had entire sects of Buddhist warrior-monks they accepted and even celebrated violence. A modern example of followers of Buddhism engaged in violent conflict is myanmar’s 969.
    - ilrwbwrkhv 3y ago
      That is the exception not the norm though. Non violence is one of the strongest tenets of Buddhism. Bhikkhus, even if bandits were to sever you savagely limb by limb with a two-handled saw, he who gave rise to a mind of hate towards them would not be carrying out my teaching. — Kakacūpama Sutta, Majjhima-Nikāya 28 at MN i 128-29 So it is quite hard for the red pill movement to co opt Buddhism and thank goodness for that.
    - nullindividual 3y ago
      If the individual accepts the “Western” brand of Buddhism which is non-violent, they are absolutely correct in their statement. Buddhism, historically or actively in other sects do not impact how a Western individual practices their form of Buddhism. If we can accept the sects of Christianity and they have different viewpoints, etc. without the whataboutism, we need to do the same and stop this with “Western” Buddhism, as well.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
snakeyjake 3y ago
Toxic dudebros use stoicism as a cloak to excuse their assholery. One aspect of stoicism that they ignore is that, at its core, stoicism is about being patient, forgiving, and kind. They throw that in the trash and only implement the "IDGAF" bits like Christians who recite chapter and verse the parts about hating on gay people while ignoring the parts above and below those that say not to do other things that they do every day. edit: another aspect they ignore is malleability. A practicing stoic should immediately shift their views on something regardless of their previous position when presented with compelling arguments-- without resentment or attachment. If a stoic was taught and grew up believing "A" and then an expert presents evidence that "B" is correct, said stoic should purge "A" from their minds regardless of external pressure-- even if it means looking like a hypocrite, a fool, someone who has wasted their time/effort, or if it deviates them from the local norm. YouTube stoics... don't do that. More words on stoicism were written by its inventors about attachment than any other topic. Many (most of the most popular) pop-stoics are poster children for the vain, wealth-obsessed (cryptobro connection), cigar smoking, lambo driving (renting to show off), hyper-attached Andrew Tate archetype. Stoicism: >The measure of possession is to every man the body, as the foot is of the shoe. If then you stand on this rule , you will maintain the measure: but if you pass beyond it, you must then of necessity be hurried as it were down a precipice. As also in the matter of the shoe, if you go beyond the foot, the shoe is gilded, then of a purple colour, then embroidered: for there is no limit to that which has once passed the true measure. Pop-stocism: All those ripped dudes with abs who fuck bitches and drive lambos? THEY'RE STOICS! Ignore SOCIETY when they tell you STOICSM is TOXIC. Every time a stoic ridicules a man for crying I want to attach my boot to their face. Lamenting is a-ok: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0236%3Atext%3Denc%3Achapter%3D16 http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%... also: a stoic doesn't care if someone points out the irrefutable and easily demonstrable fact that their philosophy is associated with bad actors, nor does he or she resent that. They accept it. Attached assholes do care, though. They care A LOT.
- robnado 3y ago
  You are describing narcissism or even anti-social personality disorder. I agree that they have little in common with true stoicism.
jstarfish 3y ago
Stoicism means you're not taking the bait. Ergo, since you can't be controlled through arousal (in the literal sense), you're written off as problematic/toxic/phobic.
- toomuchtodo 3y ago
  Ironically, Stoicism sometimes needs to be arrived at by taking a beating (figuratively). Don’t let the emotional discovery experience go to waste.

derstander 3y ago

I’ve heard this charge that empathy is incompatible with Stoicism (or Buddhism) somewhat often but I don’t see it myself. Passion, on the other hand, I understand.

perryg 3y ago
To me, empathy is required to be a good stoic. Empathy helps guide ethical decision making. Just because we’re not overwhelmed by it and show it outwardly, doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. Similar, though less essential, with other emotions. Stoicism is not the eradication of feeling. That would be denying our basic humanity and contrary to stoic principles. Instead, it is the mastery of it. Keep logic in control. Think Spock.

PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y ago

being loud is not passion. passion is spending an inordinate amount of your time practicing something because you love it rather than strictly to get a J.O.B. Think of it this way, you can quietly defend your children. That you're not screaming does not make you love them less, you can be no less adamant on the defense without being loud. being loud is not passion.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

Anon_Forever 3y ago

Political power. Once you're able to label anything you dislike as "triggering", "non-inclusive", "toxic", "unsafe", etc. then you can squash any opposition by emotionally overreacting. Cry bullying in a nutshell. This has been insanely effective. Everyone was walking on eggshells around these passive aggressive cry bullies up until just recently. People are starting to see through the BS and the power dynamic is shifting.

xchip 3y ago

I tend to ignore all those articles, they keep talking about the same old things but using different names.

xchip 3y ago

I'm order to sell, you need to tell people what they want to hear