It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by muzzleflash
If you are feeling stoic, than you cannot possibly be stoic. Because you are not indifferent to Stoicism now are you?
Originally posted by arpgme
Originally posted by muzzleflash
If you are feeling stoic, than you cannot possibly be stoic. Because you are not indifferent to Stoicism now are you?
Technically, you can't feel "stoic" because "stoic" means being indifferent to emotion.
The word "stoic" is an adjective, NOT and emotion.
Originally posted by arpgme
If you can't feel the happiness of your success, why bother?
If you can't feel the empathy of your own family members or friends or anyone else, why bother?
If you can't feel excitement about the new stuff in life, why bother?
If you can't feel pain and suffering why do you care about your body at all?
I'm not understanding Stoicism
Originally posted by muzzleflash
link
According to this, it can be used as a noun, adjective, or adverb.
Originally posted by muzzleflash
Originally posted by arpgme
Originally posted by muzzleflash
If you are feeling stoic, than you cannot possibly be stoic. Because you are not indifferent to Stoicism now are you?
Technically, you can't feel "stoic" because "stoic" means being indifferent to emotion.
The word "stoic" is an adjective, NOT and emotion.
link
According to this, it can be used as a noun, adjective, or adverb.
Originally posted by muzzleflash
Originally posted by arpgme
Originally posted by muzzleflash
If you are feeling stoic, than you cannot possibly be stoic. Because you are not indifferent to Stoicism now are you?
Technically, you can't feel "stoic" because "stoic" means being indifferent to emotion.
The word "stoic" is an adjective, NOT and emotion.
Think about it, a stoic claims to be unmoved by the events around them. But this is a paradox within itself, because obviously they were moved by the events surrounding them to become a stoic in the first place.
Originally posted by dashen
Knowing that other people care, and beleiving that other people actually feel these things that they describe.
Originally posted by dashen
reply to post by arpgme
The fact that we have our humanity in common, that should matter. Are you sure you're asking about stoics or sociopaths?
Originally posted by muzzleflash
One who chooses a state of indecisiveness has still been decisive.
By the mere action of choosing to not choose, you have still chosen.
In order to maintain the state of not choosing, you are still having to make a choice.
It is a contradiction.
There is no way to escape this fate.
The state of not being was still a state of being in the end.
Stoicism was one of the new philosophical movements of the Hellenistic period.
The name derives from the porch (stoa poikilê) in the Agora at Athens decorated with mural paintings, where the members of the school congregated, and their lectures were held. Unlike ‘epicurean,’ the sense of the English adjective ‘stoical’ is not utterly misleading with regard to its philosophical origins. The Stoics did, in fact, hold that emotions like fear or envy (or impassioned sexual attachments, or passionate love of anything whatsoever) either were, or arose from, false judgements and that the sage—a person who had attained moral and intellectual perfection—would not undergo them.
The later Stoics of Roman Imperial times, Seneca and Epictetus, emphasise the doctrines (already central to the early Stoics' teachings) that the sage is utterly immune to misfortune and that virtue is sufficient for happiness. Our phrase ‘stoic calm’ perhaps encapsulates the general drift of these claims. It does not, however, hint at the even more radical ethical views which the Stoics defended, e.g. that only the sage is free while all others are slaves, or that all those who are morally vicious are equally so.
Though it seems clear that some Stoics took a kind of perverse joy in advocating views which seem so at odds with common sense, they did not do so simply to shock. Stoic ethics achieves a certain plausibility within the context of their physical theory and psychology, and within the framework of Greek ethical theory as that was handed down to them from Plato and Aristotle. It seems that they were well aware of the mutually interdependent nature of their philosophical views, likening philosophy itself to a living animal in which logic is bones and sinews; ethics and physics, the flesh and the soul respectively (another version reverses this assignment, making ethics the soul). Their views in logic and physics are no less distinctive and interesting than those in ethics itself.
Originally posted by arpgme
If you can't feel the happiness of your success, why bother?
If you can't feel the empathy of your own family members or friends or anyone else, why bother?
If you can't feel excitement about the new stuff in life, why bother?
If you can't feel pain and suffering why do you care about your body at all?
I'm not understanding Stoicism
Originally posted by Forevever
I think you confuse a general idea of "stoic" with an extreme one
some people choose not to wear their hearts on their sleeves, doesn't necessarily mean they don't care about anything
I personally only care about my kids.
Thats why I continue to breathe, and I won't allow anything else to affect me.
Originally posted by Heartisblack
Originally posted by arpgme
If you can't feel the happiness of your success, why bother?
If you can't feel the empathy of your own family members or friends or anyone else, why bother?
If you can't feel excitement about the new stuff in life, why bother?
If you can't feel pain and suffering why do you care about your body at all?
I'm not understanding Stoicism
You described my life in under five minutes, well done OP. I have the inability to feel.
sto·ic/ˈstō-ik/Noun: A person who can endure pain or hardship without showing their feelings or complaining.
The Stoics believed that destructive emotions resulted from errors in judgment, and that a sage, or person of "moral and intellectual perfection," would not suffer such emotions.
one apparently or professedly indifferent to pleasure or pain