[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/his/ - History & Humanities



Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.



File: stoa.jpg (133 KB, 1200x900)
133 KB
133 KB JPG
i finished reading Marcus Aurelius' Meditations, Epictetus' Discourses and Enchridion, Seneca's Letters from a Stoic, and Plato's Republic for good measure
Stoicism seems like one of the more popular philosophies around here, so AMA and discuss stoicism and it's daily application.
>>
>>4837322
Still needs Musonius Rufus' lectures.
>>
>>4837648
what the fuck i just learned of this, buying now
>>
Ive thought about this a couple times, Ive read through and marked up Marcus' work and another by Massimo Pigliucci called How to be a Stoic (pick up a copy, its great). Seneca is sitting on my shelf but I just bought a copy of his a week ago so Ill get to it in time.
My question is this:
How, as a stoic, are we to deal with failure? How do we cope with having knowingly failed, or knowingly failing in the present? I know that its not whether you win or lose but how you play the game, but what happens when you know you played badly?
>>
>>4837322
>Seneca's Letters from a Stoic,

If that's the Penguin version, keep in mind that's a "best of". It only contains like half the letters. Also Seneca wrote a LOT of essays.

Cicero's phil works are either stoic or stoic influenced. "On Aging", "On Friendship", Stoic Paradoxes, come to mind.
>>
>>4837692
You learn from your mistakes and move on without becoming bitter.

I think stoicism is neat as a base for a clear mindset enabling you to evaluate the current situation and deciding with a clear head. I like the idea of an untouchable soul that only yourself can move. What I don't like is the numbness that can come with it.
>>
>>4837692
I think that Massimo Pigliucci's kind of philosophy is very different from Stoicism.
What do you mean by failure?
>>
>>4837670
Some of the early lectures are kind of weird. But after them, the other ones are quite good.
>>
>>4837692
>How, as a stoic, are we to deal with failure?

Externals are indifferent, and the only thing that matters is your soul. Your end game is to die a death of zero regrets, not win. That means not getting worked up over failures.

The application of such a mindset is that you'll fail a lot, but also succeed. Many people are too scared to try so they never succeed, or are burned out by a few failures.
>>
File: 1515281630610.jpg (1.05 MB, 2475x3787)
1.05 MB
1.05 MB JPG
>>
>>4837720
He does a really great job in my opinion of trying to modernize the philosophy. I appreciate that.
If I were to just read Marcus or Seneca and take it at face value, there would be a lot I would disagree with, partly because Its a two thousand year old philosophy. What I like about Pigliucci's book is he opens it up to interpretation instead of simply taking everything at face value.

Anyways, by failure I mean a couple things. Failure to accomplish a task, failure to be a good stoic and utilize the tools you have to get through something, failure to make the right evaluations about something.
>>4837709
I appreciate that idea too. I dont believe that Stoicism inspires a numbness though, I think thats a misconception. The point is not just to throw out bad feelings, but also to cultivate good ones. The Stoic ideal would be to be happy in all things and situations (because you control your own thoughts/ feelings), as long as you are not sacrificing your own virtue.
>>
>>4837776
>He does a really great job in my opinion of trying to modernize the philosophy. I appreciate that.
>If I were to just read Marcus or Seneca and take it at face value, there would be a lot I would disagree with, partly because Its a two thousand year old philosophy. What I like about Pigliucci's book is he opens it up to interpretation instead of simply taking everything at face value.

The problem with Massimo, is that he considers pleasure to be a good. I frankly think that deep down he is an utilitarian.

>Anyways, by failure I mean a couple things. Failure to accomplish a task, failure to be a good stoic and utilize the tools you have to get through something, failure to make the right evaluations about something.

Failure/success in most of those things are outside your control. "Being a good stoic" is something that takes practice.
>>
>>4837776
>If I were to just read Marcus or Seneca and take it at face value, there would be a lot I would disagree with, partly because Its a two thousand year old philosophy.

If you disagree with Marcus or Seneca on Ethics, chances are, you are the one who is wrong. They had a better education on Ethics (in the ancient meaning) than... probably any man alive in the last 1,000 years. In Ethics we actually have lost a lot of knowledge.
>>
>>4837805
There is nothing that says that pleasure is a bad thing. "There is great difference between joy and pain; if I am asked to choose, I shall seek the former and avoid the latter"
Its the excess of pleasure, that is to say when indulgence in anything compromises your virtue, which is the problem.
Its probably important to keep in mind though that, as an athiest, Pigliucci's ideas are somewhat backed by the fact that he rejects ideas like "the soul" and "nature" for more abstract interpretations. Nature, to an athiest, being not a godly plan but rather the orders and natural laws that govern the universe. Time, space, constraints, etc.
>Failure success is outside of your control
Fair enough. The outside your control thing takes some getting used to in rewiring your brain but is appealing to me. Reasonably, it is unrealistic to expect that anyone could be a perfect Stoic from the start.
>>
File: 1527396151454.png (1.17 MB, 1016x1151)
1.17 MB
1.17 MB PNG
>>
>>4837850
>There is nothing that says that pleasure is a bad thing. "There is great difference between joy and pain; if I am asked to choose, I shall seek the former and avoid the latter"

In Stoicism, pleasure is neither a good or a bad. Massimo seems to consider it a good.

>Its the excess of pleasure, that is to say when indulgence in anything compromises your virtue, which is the problem.

Believing that pleasure is a good, being someone who tries to get pleasure for its own sake is considered vicious in Stoicism.

>Its probably important to keep in mind though that, as an athiest, Pigliucci's ideas are somewhat backed by the fact that he rejects ideas like "the soul" and "nature" for more abstract interpretations. Nature, to an athiest, being not a godly plan but rather the orders and natural laws that govern the universe. Time, space, constraints, etc.

Being an atheist is no excuse to be an hedonist.
>>
>punch a stoic and walk away

>he doesn't punch back
>>
>>4837880

Stoics aren't pacifists. They lean that way, but there's no strict prohibition on violence. Half these guys were generals, aristocrats, or Emperors in an expansionist empire mind you.
>>
>>4837854
so what should I be reading
>>
>>4837895
If a guy does violence to you and then poses no further threat a "true" stoic would not pursue or attack him
>>
>>4837903

They'd go to the police so that you can be administered justice. ;)
>>
>>4837766
>read this
>damn that's true
>continue to be an unsociable neet
>>
>>4837871
He considers it a "preferred indifferent". In this category is everything, including your own physical health, apart from your virtuous "soul". Basically he says that while we are allowed to prefer pleasure and happiness, it should never come at the sacrifice of virtue.
That last quote by the way ("There is great difference...") is Seneca's, by the way, not Pigliucci's. The Stoic writings back up the ideas of preferred indifferents.
>>
>>4837902
Nothing.
Books are the work of the devil.
>>
>>4837928

At least you get to keep your coins, and don't have to interact with lackeys.
>>
>>4837949
>>4837928
>>4837766

Implying marcus fuckign aurelius was never not invited to a party he wanted to attend or even needed an invitation
>>
>>4837962

Written by Epictetus dipshit. Or rather, Flavius Arrianus transcribing his lectures.
>>
>>4837692
I tend to manage failure with the "viel feind, viel ehr'" principle.
If you set yourself high goals, it wont hurt as much if you fail completely, and if you do manage to beat the odds, the satisfaction is that much greater.
>>
>>4837975
you sound pretty angry, aren't stoics meant to control their emotions or something
>>
>>4837989
Check mate
To the original question though, its very clearly not just about parties, its about envy.
>>
>>4837932
The thing about preferred indifferents is that they are... Indifferent. They are not considered goods. And Massimo seems to consider pleasure to be a good.

And pleasure is not a preferred or "dispreferred" indifferent.

Also, where is that quote on Seneca?
>>
>>4837999
what's wrong with envy, wouldn't someone envious of say... someone's physhique potentially be inspired to work out or eat better or something.
>>
>>4838023
Stoicism says that any inspiration to work out and eat better should come from you, and not external circumstances. You should do these things so you can be a better person, not so that other people see you as one.
As long as, of course, eating better and becoming fitter does not compromise your virtue.
>>4838006
Its the quote that Massimo uses, let me dig up the actual citation from the Loeb library.
He definitely considers pleasure good, just not necessary for a good life. The only thing necessary for a good life being virtue.
>>
>>4837854
accurate
>>
>>4838023
read the image a second time
>>
>>4837903
>>4837880
justice necessitates violence sometimes
>>
File: w2jz4lbpo7i01.jpg (302 KB, 1588x2246)
302 KB
302 KB JPG
Though stoics hate to admit it, JP takes a lot from stoicicsm.
>>
>>4838070
i think the guy is overhyped (sorta), but i don't hate him though
>>
>>4838066
If justice is necessary then the guilty party is still a threat.
If a child came up to you and hit you in the face, would you hit him/her back?
The point is that Stoicism does not advocate violence for violence's sake.
>>
>>4838006
Seneca, On various aspects of virtue, 18.
If youre reading the Loeb version, its Epistle LXVI.
>>
File: 13-wojak_00.w190.h190.jpg (11 KB, 190x190)
11 KB
11 KB JPG
>>4837322
its pride and leads to sinful downfall

you wasted your time but at least work a day in ur life else how can u possibly know what there day to day application and justification was for the philosophies though. go lift

ill tell u again u wasted ur time though

look at expected utility theory (1) in behavioural finance and economic theory and understand human action (2) praxeology next if u actually want to learn something

(1) https://mises.org/library/theory-political-economy
(2) https://mises.org/library/human-action-0
>>
>>4838053
>He definitely considers pleasure good

That's my impression. Which would mean his philosophy is not Stoicism
>>
>>4838070
>loose
>>
>>4838145
I didn't find this in that letter.
>>
>>4838190
What I mean to say by "good" is that pleasures inherently feel good. Pigliucci advocates for the idea that you can have pleasure in your life, just so long as it does not compromise other things (namely your virtue).
See the last Seneca quote. No same man, including a stoic, would seek out pain over pleasure.
>>
>>4838206
He seems to consider that pleasure is a good in itself. Even virtue seems to have an utilitarian meaning in his case.
>>
>>4838203
The Loeb version has it on page 15.
Paragraph starts with "I know what you may reply to me at this point".
Basically what Seneca seems to be saying in that (and the preceding paragraphs) is you should not need pleasure, just as you should not need to be without pain. Any sane man would prefer to have a joyous life, but you can live an equally good life enduring hardship and pain.
Hence preferred indifferents. Things which you can prefer to have, but which are not necessary for a virtuous life.
>>
>>4838090
agreed
>>
what is the stoic take on pornography?
>>
>>4837322
I have meditations and was considering reading it fully, but I feel like if I followed all the advice there, Id just become really bland. From what Ive read so far of stoicism in general, I just imagine people who follow the advice of stoicism seriously, will just become really bland and boring.
>>
>>4838472
What do you mean by bland and boring?
>>
>>4838472
i wouldn't say that to be true
what you would be is gathered and composed, not unable to be friendly and fun
>>
>>4838472
Stoicism isnt about rejecting ALL emotins
Its about rejecting the negative ones, the ones which will impact your virtue and well being in a negative way.
>>
>>4838841
In some sense, yes. But notice that negative emotions for the Stoics had a different meaning than they do to most people.




Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.