Stoicism: Indifference is a power
aeon.co
aeon.co
"Human life the Stoics appear to have considered as a game of great skill; in which, however, there was a mixture of chance [...] In such games the stake is commonly a trifle, and the whole pleasure of the game arises from playing well, from playing fairly, and playing skilfully. If notwithstanding all his skill, however, the good player should, by the influence of chance, happen to lose, the loss ought to be a matter, rather of merriment, than of serious sorrow. He has made no false stroke; he has done nothing which he ought to be ashamed of; he has enjoyed completely the whole pleasure of the game. [...]
Our only anxious concern ought to be, not about the stake, but about the proper method of playing. If we placed our happiness in winning the stake, we placed it in what depended upon causes beyond our power, and out of our direction. We necessarily exposed ourselves to perpetual fear and uneasiness, and frequently to grievous and mortifying disappointments. If we placed it in playing well, in playing fairly, in playing wisely and skilfully; in the propriety of our own conduct in short; we placed it in what, by proper discipline, education, and attention, might be altogether in our own power, and under our own direction. Our happiness was perfectly secure, and beyond the reach of fortune."
And, as I should have expected, Adam Smith has anticipated us all. I find it pretty funny that Smith doesn't even get a mention in Russell's history of western philosophy.
> Stoicism means never having to say, "Gee, I really lost my sh*t back there."
Or in more general terms, focusing on the journey instead of the goal leads to complete detachment from reality - running in circles and enjoying the patterns of your own thoughts, like a stoned hippie. It's vegetation, not life.
I do read Adam Smith's quote differently - the way I understand it, it says to focus on a goal, but to derive happiness from the process and make that happiness independent of whether or not the goal will be ultimately achieved. An impossible thing to do in full, but definitely worth pursuing.
Sounds pretty attractive to me
Edit to add: Just noticed one of your other comments, on paying attention to driving :)
(Then again, we wouldn't have most of our problems in this world if we just stuck to being stoned hippie self-wireheaded cavedwellers ;).)
It's sad how much knowledge and social/ethical advancement is being forgotten. Our schools and universities are failing society. We're just going to keep making the same mistakes.
Edit: 10 volumes.
Any recommendations?
https://archive.org/details/worldsbestessays01brew https://archive.org/details/worldsbestessays02brew https://archive.org/details/worldsbestessays03brew https://archive.org/details/worldsbestessays04brew https://archive.org/details/worldsbestessays05brew https://archive.org/details/worldsbestessays06brew https://archive.org/details/worldsbestessays07brew https://archive.org/details/worldsbestessays08brew https://archive.org/details/worldsbestessays09brew https://archive.org/details/worldsbestessays10brew
for i in {01..10}; do curl -LO https://archive.org/download/worldsbestessays${i}brew/worldsbestessays${i}brew.pdf; done(If you don't know, you're probably running bash.)
1..10 |%{ $s = 'worldsbestessays{0:d2}brew' -f $_; iwr "https://archive.org/download/$s/$s.pdf" -O "$s.pdf" }
(% -> ForEach-Object; -f -> string format operator; iwr -> Invoke-WebRequest; -O -> -OutputFile parameter)I feel like at best one could argue that those elites have less influence on the deciders of the world (at least those that are not part of them).
It's just that mass culture has blown up so big so fast - driven by technological change - that it seems to get smaller.
It doesn't help that the Stoics were explicitly targeted by the Christians early in the Christianized Byzantine Roman Empire. You can see this in action in YouTube videos of Christopher Hitchens debating various Christian thinkers.
On a side note, this sounds a lot like The Bhagvad Gita[1]. Is there a relationship between these two works, or is it just great minds thinking alike?
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhagavad_Gita#Karma_yoga
[EDIT]: Grammer
(Sorry)
The mind can generate demons in most any form.
I was asked what my technique is during a run, do I concentrate on pain or ignore it. Of course there isn't always pain and pain during a run can vary greatly, so I explained my answer is simply, yes. I have tried everything and nothing works, I explained like everyone some days I dominate and some days I struggle, but I'm always thankful for my character building days and hopeful I'll have new thought processes to try.
I don't know if it's stoic or not, but a cool way to be introduced to the philosophy. Then, I explained a specific thought I sometimes embrace during very difficult runs, I remember when I did a back to back half/full marathons, and on day 2 I was feeling great like there was nothing I couldn't do and just before the race I was introduced to a 67 year old cancer survivor running her first marathon, to this day the thought brings chills and humbles me.
There is a great story that I took a liking to, it centers around the idea that "this too shall pass"[0]. It resonated with me because regardless of how (un)happy you are, it shall pass, a new day will begin. The current state is simply current, it does not resonate over a span of a week, or month, year, decade, etc. Our current state should be approached in a stateless manner as to refrain being too high or too low.
In that frame of reference, all success/failure is part of the journey and doesn't defy ourselves.
I always remember my first motorbike accident (vs Bus), my foot was p mangled. I remember the first burst of the pain, I screamed a bit, and I distinctly remember thinking "So this is why people scream. Not because it makes things better, but because there's nothing else to do".
OP is referring, however, to the "life hack" promoted by the article's author which suggests keeping our baseline low so that we are constantly surprised to the upside.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/dhamma...
Don't give way to heedlessness
or to intimacy
with sensual delight —
for a heedful person,
absorbed in [concentration],
attains an abundance of ease.
When the wise person drives out
heedlessness
with heedfulness,
having climbed the high tower
of discernment,
sorrow-free,
he observes the sorrowing crowd —
as the enlightened man,
having scaled
a summit,
the fools on the ground below.Grant me the serenity
To accept the things I cannot change;
Courage to change the things I can;
And wisdom to know the difference.
“Karma is the beginning of knowledge. Next is patience. Patience is very important. The strong are the patient ones, Anjin-san. patience means holding back your inclination to the seven emotions: hate, adoration, joy, anxiety, anger, grief, fear. If you don't give way to the seven, you're patient, then you'll soon understand all manner of things and be in harmony with Eternity.”
http://www.columbia.edu/~hds2/learning/Learning_from_shogun_...
In so many situations in life, it really only comes down to how you view the situation.
If you see it as a pain in the ass and horrible, it is.
If you see it as a challenge and enjoyable and something to learn from, it is.
Your happiness really is your choice.
That is a first-world perspective: Claiming that only first-world-ers can be happy through adversity.
I think the claim is that it's easier to find first-world-ers which experience less adversity.
What kind of adversity?
Of course. Water sanitation is a big thing. Access to affordable food, the list goes on ...
You should remember that stoicism was concieved amongst the elite of their time and place, who worried least.
Modern population density also makes comparisons of the contemporary 3rd world with ancient Greece rather far-fetched.
This can be said about decadence also!
If you read Seneca, Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius, three of the main authors of the Stoa, that is probably the last conclusion you would come to. Seneca was accused of conspiracy and forced to suicide by Nero. Epictetus was a slave who was "so poor that he didn't have to lock up his house". Marcus Aurelius spent the last years of his life (when he wrote the "Meditations") on the battlefield. They were meant as self-reassurance in a very troubled time.
>Modern population density also makes comparisons of the contemporary 3rd world with ancient Greece rather far-fetched.
Rome, btw. Which was already relatively densely populated.
I would say, on the whole, people here are happier than people in Australia / Canada / USA (where I have lived).
Obviously there are some severely sick or malnourished people where that is not true, but it's actually extremely uncommon. There is a lot of food and water here.
Not really - it's about mental reframing. I was in the hills yesterday, moving fast with 45lbs on my back. Many people don't like cold, they avoid it and fear it. But in my mind the cold is my friend, it keeps me awake and alert. Many people, even serious runners, hate and avoid uphills, but in my mind they are a gift, sent to make me stronger. Teach yourself to believe these things - actually say them out loud - and your perspective on what is an ordeal will surely change.
And even worse encourages them to be satisfied and tolerant of their repression and not take action.
Why vote? Why criticise? Why try to fight injustice?
This is what Tyrants want people to believe.
I think negative feelings exist for a reason whether its internal or external reasons and the only healthy way to handle them is not to try to change them into some positive force, but bear it until you can change it.
In contrast, the examples you gave are situations in which the person does have some manner of control, no matter how small. Even those oppressed by tyrants can rise up and overthrow them.
But also completely outside your control is the wrong bar. You should triage and fix the things that are most fixable. And even then, there is no point wallowing in angst when fate stymies your efforts.
> In contrast, the examples you gave are situations in which the person does have some manner of control, no matter how small.
I thought it could be interesting to ask for clarification of what needs to be accepted according to that guideline.
They would take part on actions against injustices. But they would try to be guided by reason rather than emotions.
My beef is with the pop philosophy idea of 'your happiness is your choice'.
I can give to charity, and be happy with my own life at the same time, even knowing that others are suffering.
You should read up on Cato the younger, who for generations was held up by stoics as an example of a very virtuous person, and his fight against Caesar and tyranny.
> Tathagata Buddha, the Father Buddha, said, "With our thoughts, we make the world."
Highly recommend 'Meditations' next
That person who just cut in line in front of you? Say something, or let it go. That guy on the plane obnoxiously tilting his seat way too far back? Say something or let it go.
As soon as I think that to myself, I let go and feel a wave of indifference and serenity.
These are of course pretty minor examples, but also really common everyday occurrences. Like, practice.
"Stockdale rejected the false optimism proffered by Christianity, because he knew, from direct observation, that false hope is how you went insane in that prison."
Perhaps the author is interjecting something.
Stoicism and Christianity share many traits. Consider, as but one example, this statement by James:
"Consider it pure joy, my brothers and sisters, whenever you face trials of many kinds, because you know that the testing of your faith produces perseverance. Let perseverance finish its work so that you may be mature and complete, not lacking anything."
In it, Taleb describes how a process or event can be misperceived as strengthening those who go through it, when actually it weakens all of them, killing some.
His example is submitting a cohort of rats to radiation. As they are subjected to higher and higher levels of radiation, more will die, the ones who are naturally stronger will survive. Our cohort will appear stronger and stronger as the radiation increases and the dead drop out of the group. But crucially, all will have been weaker after the radiation than before it.
But since we observed a stronger group the more we increased the radiation, we may say that it "hardened" them, in the sense of "that which doesn't kill one makes one stronger".
Does anyone know of a good and concise summary of the main points of Stoicism?
https://philosophy-of-cbt.com/2012/10/18/the-system-of-stoic...
And "Stoicism and the Art of Happiness" by Donald Robertson is great book.
You could just try reading Aurelius' Meditations. It's quite a short book. There is an English translation at http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/2680.
Not sure if it will change your life but it certainly brings some things into focus.
but the Gutenberg translation is trash. I much prefer the George Long translation, available for free here: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Thoughts_of_the_Emperor_M...
I'm also pretty sure Meditations is available free on the Kindle store.
Unfortunately, the Gutenberg version is mangled in places. Ctrl-F for the "~" character, or check out this example:
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/2680/2680-h/2680-h.htm#link2H...
>There is only one way to happiness and that is to cease worrying about things which are beyond the power or our will.
-Epictetus
Here is a paragraph from Marcus Aurelius:
XVII. So live as indifferent to the world and all worldly objects, as
one who liveth by himself alone upon some desert hill. For whether here, or there, if the whole world be but as one town, it matters not much for the place. Let them behold and see a man, that is a man indeed, living according to the true nature of man. If they cannot bear with me, let them kill me. For better were it to die, than so to live as they would have thee.
Remember, Aurelius was a soldier and emperor. These are not the words of someone given to apathy. It's all about taking control of oneself.
heard it hundreds of times during my vipassana retreat.
Ecclesiastes (contained in the Tanakh and the Old Testament) has a streak of stoicism. Written around 25 centuries ago, author unknown. Here is the NJB translation of a part of 1 and 2:
"I, Qoheleth, have reigned over Israel in Jerusalem. Wisely I have applied myself to investigation and exploration of everything that happens under heaven. What a wearisome task God has given humanity to keep us busy! I have seen everything that is done under the sun: how futile it all is, mere chasing after the wind! What is twisted cannot be straightened, what is not there cannot be counted.
I thought to myself: I have acquired a greater stock of wisdom than anyone before me in Jerusalem. I myself have mastered every kind of wisdom and science. I have applied myself to understanding philosophy and science, stupidity and folly, and I now realise that all this too is chasing after the wind. Much wisdom, much grief; the more knowledge, the more sorrow.
I thought to myself, 'Very well, I will try pleasure and see what enjoyment has to offer.' And this was futile too. This laughter, I reflected, is a madness, this pleasure no use at all. I decided to hand my body over to drinking wine, my mind still guiding me in wisdom; I resolved to embrace folly, to discover the best way for people to spend their days under the sun. I worked on a grand scale: built myself palaces, planted vineyards; made myself gardens and orchards, planting every kind of fruit tree in them; had pools made for watering the young trees of my plantations. I bought slaves, male and female, had home-born slaves as well; herds and flocks I had too, more than anyone in Jerusalem before me. I amassed silver and gold, the treasures of kings and provinces; acquired singers, men and women, and every human luxury, chest upon chest of it. So I grew great, greater than anyone in Jerusalem before me; nor did my wisdom leave me. I denied my eyes nothing that they desired, refused my heart no pleasure, for I found all my hard work a pleasure, such was the return for all my efforts.
I then reflected on all that my hands had achieved and all the effort I had put into its achieving. What futility it all was, what chasing after the wind! There is nothing to be gained under the sun. My reflections then turned to wisdom, stupidity and folly. For instance, what can the successor of a king do? What has been done already.
More is to be gained from wisdom than from folly, just as one gains more from light than from darkness; this, of course, I see: The wise have their eyes open, the fool walks in the dark. No doubt! But I know, too, that one fate awaits them both. 'Since the fool's fate', I thought to myself, 'will be my fate too, what is the point of my having been wise?' I realised that this too is futile. For there is no lasting memory for the wise or the fool, and in the days to come both will be forgotten; the wise, no less than the fool, must die.
Life I have come to hate, for what is done under the sun disgusts me, since all is futility and chasing after the wind. All I have toiled for under the sun and now bequeath to my successor I have come to hate; who knows whether he will be wise or a fool? Yet he will be master of all the work into which I have put my efforts and wisdom under the sun. That is futile too.
I have come to despair of all the efforts I have expended under the sun. For here is one who has laboured wisely, skilfully and successfully and must leave what is his own to someone who has not toiled for it at all. This is futile too, and grossly unjust; for what does he gain for all the toil and strain that he has undergone under the sun since his days are full of sorrow, his work is full of stress and even at night he has no peace of mind? This is futile too.
There is no happiness except in eating and drinking, and in enjoying one's achievements; and I see that this too comes from God's hand; for who would get anything to eat or drink, unless all this came from him? Wisdom, knowledge and joy, God gives to those who please him, but on the sinner he lays the task of gathering and storing up for someone else who is pleasing to him. This too is futility and chasing after the wind."
==
For a contemporary take on Ecclesiastes see "American Beauty" or read "Beyond Futility, American Beauty and the Book of Ecclesiastes' by Robert Johnston in "The Gift of Story: Narrating Hope in a Postmodern World" https://books.google.nl/books?id=2WP_KMBmf7UC&pg=PA85
Nothing matters so just do the short term things that bring pleasure, or do long term things, nothing really matters (including the fact that nothing matters).
Eric S. Christianson-Ecclesiastes (Blackwell Bible Commentaries)-Blackwell (2005) academically show how various commentators perceived Ecclesiastes over the last few millenia.
Understandably up to mid 17-18th century most writers/commentators tried to show that Ecclesiastes was being critical of this nihilism / proto existentialism.
However, once you realize that Epilogue (12:9–14) is a tacked on commentary itself, then you are back to nihilism.
How do you progress beyond futily?
http://becomingeden.com/summary-of-a-guide-to-the-good-life/
Accepting reality as the only possible (and thus, best) reality works a lot better for me.
Identifying misalignments in my views of other people (or the world), which lead to negative knee-jerk emotions or general low-tune malaise, is another "mind hack" that works for me, but I would not necessarily call this stoic - but a CBT therapist might suggest that.
"By keeping the very worst that can happen in our heads constantly, the Stoics tell us, we immunise ourselves from the dangers of too much so-called ‘positive thinking’"
In other words: every day I will meet with sinners - but additionally "just as I myself am a sinner"
Christianity understands this much better than the stoics. The problem of the world is sin and what is the remedy?
Jesus Christ
> he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.
or
> For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.
The foolishness of God is wiser than the wisdom of the world
(I should know...)
Why is meditation and Stoicism so hyped these days?
Stoicism is not taught in public schools because it would make citizens ungovernable. Most education today is about training dependents, where stoicism teaches a kind of spiritual freedom. No grand conspiracy or anything. When education was elite, students learned elite ideas. Now that it is common, for cohesion they must learn common ones instead. Universities wouldn't have survived centuries if they produced graduates who would overthrow their governments, or obviate them entirely.
To cosmopolitanism, great and principled men are dangerous and anathema. Irony is that its most prominent works were by the rulers and elites of city states. Some people on the alt-right spectrum have taken that strain and created a kind of genre-philosophy out of it, like what John Williams is to classical music, some alt right thinkers are to classical philosophy.
What is "it" here? And if it's the Bible, can you point to other resources to explore that connection?
Could you please explain how?
The reason why it's not widely taught may come from that Stoicism hasn't growth wired into it, like Christianity or Islam has. If a Stoic is content with a world outside of his power, then he has no need to convert others to Stoicism.
>I must die. Must I then die lamenting? I must be put in chains. Must I then also lament? I must go into exile. Does any man then hinder me from going with smiles and cheerfulness and contentment?
Perhaps author should check history of Roman Empire and relation between stoicism and Christianity.
> Someone who does not give a shit about the stupid things in this world that most people care so much about. Stoics do have emotions, but only for the things in this world that really matter.
Best definition I've seen of 'stoic' yet :)
Google 'Stoicism and Trump' for some interesting other opinions.
I don't think he cares, so in that sense Trump is stoic w.r.t. stoics.
Seriously tho, I couldn't sleep on Election at the thought of all the hateful, racist, anti-immigrant rhetoric that put him in office. The next day, I felt physically ill and that's when my Dad told me "Beta (son), stop worrying about sh_t that you have no control over. Just ride out the next 8 years* , stop watching news and stop reacting and arguing about it, because all said and done, he was DEMOCRATICALLY Elected into Office by a Majority of Voters who got off their butts and cast their vote."
* 8 years = My dad believes that Trump, like Dubya, will get re-elected no matter how bad his Presidency is, because in his own words "When a White Republican President sh*ts, People call it Honey"
It is turtles all the way down once you start peeling.
https://www.amazon.com/The-Shape-Ancient-Thought-Philosophie...
But I wouldn't say that Buddhism was some Indian equivalent of Stocism. I also read about Epicurianism or even Cynisym and say "hey, that idea is totally the Buddhist, POV". I suspect the same can be done for other Indian schools.
Sages of the axial age from around the old world discovered many similar good ideas, and people later built philosophical schools around them combining things in different ways.
This is why I don't think there was much idea transfer between India and the West. They simply had the same good ideas. (But I am sure the Greek Buddhists of Ghandhara had a field day with the parallels. I wish we had written records of their ideas, to go with their art.)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greco-Buddhism
And Zeno of Citium, who founded stoicism, was born in 334 BC. So some influence is possible.
but to say: "No wonder the Stoic sage, in Western culture, has never obtained the popularity of the Zen master."
I think is pushing it a little far.
There are a lot of Christian Monks - now and throughought the ages who would be borderline stoics. And many big thinkers as well.
We (Westerners) just didn't define it very well :)
Who, I just learned, renamed Rome and all of the months of the year after himself. He was assassinated in the first year of his new calendar.
> You don't have to live on bread and water to be a Stoic.
An ancient European philosophy we know of today thanks to written language and a European civilization that developed, preserved and cultivated countless worldchanging ideas.(like the controlled conveyance of photons into your eyes relaying this information)
Written language was never even devised in sub-Saharan Africa!
These agenda driven, Magical Negro juxtapositions are becoming obscene.
In addition, consider the story of Admiral James Stockdale, who was kept in a P.O.W camp in Vietnam for 7 years. His memoir explicitly mentions Stoic philosophy as having been key to his ability to endure.
“Everything can be taken from a man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms—to choose one’s attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one’s own way.”
In other words, some people wind up cherry-picking pieces of Stoicism, like equanimity in the face of misfortune, and ignoring others, like cosmopolitanism and considering virtue as the highest/sole good.