Stoicism

I was reading Meditations or "The Emperor's Handbook" by Marcus Aurelius these days...

In a nutshell he says to act in accordance with nature, restrain passions and emotions, think, speak and act as if you are dying, be simple, use reason...

Pure stoicism: en.wikipedia.org...

Basicaly It teachs one to use free will wisely.

If you like Marcus Aurelius, then you'll probably like Epictetus, too. A sweet but respectable introduction appears here:

puffin.creighton.edu...

and the works in English translation are here

classics.mit.edu...

Ah, some philosophy!

But I have to argue against it now.
We are not Vulcan...we are human. And there is a reason for having the capacities we have. Specifically here, I mean the capacities for emotion, collected or otherwise.

We need not to control our emotions, just as we need not to control the people and things around us. We need simply to coexist with them and to also keep them in check so they do not control us.

Let's skip the semantics over human nature.

Without passion then what would we be?
Would we be able to have art? Music? Drama?
People often romanticize the Greeks (yes, I put it that way on purpose) as a culture at the height of human potential for reason, etc.
So then why did they commonly ask at the burial ritual of one, did they live with passion?

It takes emotion to understand we need reason. Then it takes reason to understand we need emotion.

Focusing on one or the other, well, it's two sides of the same coin, as they say.

One must strive for the harmony of all things that are human.

Because what's real is real in its consequences. Truth is what you make of it. It's your truth because of perspective. So truth truly lies (yup, said it that way on purpose as well) in the one who feels the strongest about whatever.

All things in moderation and all that jazz.

reply to post by onenotsaved


I completely agree with you - life without passion is meaningless. However, I don't read Stoicism as avoiding all emotion, but only "destructive" emotions. Not sure what they mean be destructive, but I'd guess it's saying things like, being angry and working the conflict out with your co-workers, or just going postal and killing them all. Probably they're not so extreme, but I could see a calm, sustained love versus a rabid, frenzied, and ultimately futile obsession. That sort of thing.

But I wonder how Stoic these guys were when they whacked their thumb with a hammer or something. As Shakespeare said, "For there was never yet philosopher that could endure the toothache patiently,"

reply to post by chiron613



Entirely!
However, I say we have such emotions for a reason.
A guide or a tool or whathaveyou. Hatred can be just as powerful a driving force as love. We feel things to guide us, not to control us.
Doing away with such feelings, well...in my experience it can't be done. We are instinctual creatures, as much as we hate to admit it, but conditioning can only go so far.

I say that stoicism is fear of feeling.
It's rational, sure - but we can rationalize anything.

Marcus Aurelius is another one of those authors that should be required reading for schoolchildren. Dont understand why so few are familiar with him.

[edit on 14-10-2009 by Skyfloating]

i think stoicism leads to midlife crisis. its like some conformity what a strong man should be like bs.

Originally posted by ruckus49
i think stoicism leads to midlife crisis. its like some conformity what a strong man should be like bs.

What things stoicism promotes that make you believe that It does lead to midlife crisis?*

What is a strong man to you?

How one can be a strong man?


*It's my opinion that the people on mid-life crisis or crisis of any sort are doing the exact opposite of what stoicism is. But hey, It's me and I could be totaly wrong...