
The Modern Man Is Getting Stoicism All Wrong - paulpauper
https://melmagazine.com/en-us/story/the-modern-man-is-getting-stoicism-all-wrong
======
steve19
> "Stoic philosophy, Sherman tells me, isn’t a “black and white picture.” “You
> can cherry-pick as much as you like in order to get the picture you want,”
> she says. “But to use Stoicism for a political agenda... "

Which is exactly what this article and author is doing.

Sotcism isn't about expressing emotion (cry when appropriate, then stop would
be the stoic message, and don't encourage grief in others)

It isn't about red pill philosophy.

It is, as expressed in the classic texts, almost exclusively about not
worrying about bad circumstances, such as being exiled, being a cripple or
being the ruler of the world but being surrounded by terrible people.

It is probably applicable to every woman and man alive. We all suffer set
backs, sadness, mortality and loss.

Throughout history people have tried making it into other things. Fortunately
we have the classic texts and they are amazing. My favorite being Senecas
letters to his brother.

~~~
voxl
In other words, stoicism is completely dependent on morality, and being a
moral relativist, that means stoicism is not only useless to me, but
completely wrong.

~~~
mikelyons
There is no morality but the one you absorbed from your parents and culture,
and then imbued with your own God authority by believing, whether that was a
conscious choice or not. Moral relativism may be useless in your paradigm, but
it is the absolute Truth that you made it up!

------
colechristensen
The title is the summary of most writing you can find about stoicism. That is
it's hard to find stoic writing and easy to find writing about stoicism and
specifically how modern ideas about it are all wrong. I can't say I've found
much of the counterarguments they're all trying so hard to refute.

It's like trying to find a recipe for cake and finding only cookbook reviews.

~~~
xamuel
People mistakenly extrapolate technological progress to progress everywhere
else. Thus, they reason, surely the best source for Stoicism (or any other
ancient practice: Christianity; Zen; Platonism; etc etc) is something written
in the 21st century. After all, something written in the 21st century must be
better because it's had so much more time to advance and be improved on!

But actually a lot of the time, the original sources are the absolute best. In
some sense, you can use survivorship bias to your advantage. A book written in
the 21st century _might_ be so good that it will be remembered thousands of
years from now (the odds are small although nonzero). A book written thousands
of years ago, and remembered today, has, by definition, already passed that
test.

~~~
throwaway123x2
21st Century books are for 21st Century audiences. They can explain, for
example, a cultural / sociopolitical / religious context that the original
author took for granted.

~~~
rjf72
It's quite unusual how little this is really necessary. For instance a read I
found incredibly fascinating was _Konungs skuggsjá_ \- The King's Mirror [1].
It was a book written for the education of the heir of King Haakon IV of
Norway, in the 1200s. It takes the form of hypothetical questions from the son
and prepared answers from the father.

It covers a wide array of training and topics. And you'd think you'd need an
encyclopedia of references aside to understand the day and age of which it
spoke. It features extensive religious and political references, yet the weird
thing is a book written for royalty around 800 years ago feels oddly familiar.
And in reality I found a good deal of the advice and knowledge it shared not
only interesting but actually quite useful and wise. It also rather gives
proof to the meaning of the tale of Damocles, without in any way intending to
do such!

[1 - actual book] -
[http://www.mediumaevum.com/75years/mirror/index.html](http://www.mediumaevum.com/75years/mirror/index.html)

[1 - wiki overview] -
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Konungs_skuggsj%C3%A1](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Konungs_skuggsj%C3%A1)

~~~
d1zzy
It is shocking how familiar/similar the thoughts/feelings and fears of ancient
people are to that of my own mind today. It was such an eye opener when going
through Eliade's History of Religious Ideas.

------
firasd
A couple weeks ago, a friend going through tough times asked if I’ve ever been
really down in life, and how I dealt with it. I responded that in a pragmatic
sense what has helped me most is staying in the present instead of worrying
about the past or future too much. (Oddly I once found solace in that exchange
from Kung Fu panda where his guru says, “Quit, don’t quit? Noodles, don’t
noodles? You are too concerned about what was and what will be.”)

I think Stoicism has an overlap with Buddhism and Existentialism in
encouraging this type of grounding oneself in the present. Hence its
perseverance and revival.

In fact I was going to an appointment yesterday and thinking that I should not
worry in the car about what the person I’m meeting is going to ask me. I’ll
deal with it when I get there. There’s a Marcus Aurelius quote among those
lines: "Let not future things disturb thee, for thou wilt come to them...
having with thee the same reason which now thou usest."

~~~
agumonkey
There's a thing with sedentarism and estate/capital that you accumulate
weight. When nomad you just go where you feel is the best and leave the
"past". It's quite freeing

~~~
cheeko1234
> It's quite freeing

You're implementing a nomadic lifestyle? Care to elaborate?

~~~
agumonkey
Oh no far from that. I've just been walking a lot carelessly in the woods. And
there's something to nature where you can just go where you feel, stay where
you feel like it.

There's this feeling that, your legs are your best friends, whenever something
is not good enough, or good anymore, just move, don't think.

------
Alex63
My knowledge of Stoicism (in the philosophical sense, not behavioral) is based
on recently reading The Practicing Stoic, by Ward Farnsworth
([https://www.amazon.com/Practicing-Stoic-Philosophical-
Users-...](https://www.amazon.com/Practicing-Stoic-Philosophical-Users-
Manual/dp/1567926118)). I recommend the book as a good introduction to
incorporating Stoicism into one's life, and I think readers would be hard-
pressed to see an endorsement of "toxic ideology" in the thoughts of Seneca,
Epictetus, Marcus Aurelius, and other Stoic thinkers.

------
peterwwillis
> And it’s certainly important to not use a mistaken view of Stoicism as an
> excuse for, basically, being a shithead.

People all over the world use mistaken views of complex ideas to justify their
shitty behavior. Pop science, pop psychology, pop philosophy, all of it used
to justify the stupid things people do. Is it 'important' to recognize this?
Sure, I guess, but that isn't going to make those lazy, stupid people any more
likely to learn the subject for real. They're just going to pick up a pop
version of some other concept, because they don't actually want to better
themselves: they want a justification for their shittiness.

------
Pamar
I mantain a small page about Stoicism: [http://pa-
mar.net/Lifestyle/Stoicism.html](http://pa-mar.net/Lifestyle/Stoicism.html)

I would not consider myself an expert but I think that the original texts are
perfectly fine (in a recent translation, of course) and do not really need
neither transposing the examples to modern times, nor a lot of interpretation.

They were designed to work for humans, no matter what power they had (i.e.
they can be useful to a slave or an emperor, and anything in between) and are
pretty pragmatic without any need for elaborate conceptual frameworks.

------
notus
Stoicism is basically cognitive behavioral therapy before cognitive behavioral
therapy existed.

------
gremlinsinc
I'm not a stoic but after losing my faith in religion, I needed something to
replace it, and also found stoicism helped w/ depression, but I namely only
focused on a few main things.

1\. There are 3 types of worries: What we have power over, what we share power
over to change, and what we have zero power over. Stress goes down if we use 0
mental energy on group 3, 25% on group 2, and the rest on group 1.

2\. Spend a few minutes a day to ponder the fact that one day I'll die. Am I
doing everything I can to maximize my time here?

3\. Don't push emotions away, but try to understand the triggers behind them.
I'm rational anyways so this makes sense to me.

I think people of different beliefs and political backgrounds of course can go
different ways w/ some of the teachings for sure... my therapist looked over
my notes on stoicism and basically said it's CBT just under a new umbrella.

I'm a progressive, I support equality of wages (to a point) -- everyone should
make enough to support a family, and have basic needs met if they put in 40
hours per week. Whether they work at Facebook or McDonald's.

I also have ADD so stoicism is just one part of the many things I focus on so
I still have many things in my life 'not' in control, but I have a lot less
stress because I worry less about things out of my control. I also have more
joy because I realize I'm going to die, and it makes me want to enjoy my kids
more cause I don't know when that day will come.

Honestly, I've felt more inspiration, love, hope, and in awe of the universe
since I left the Mormon church, than I ever felt in it's grasp. I thank
therapy, stoicism, crossfit, and ADD medication for that. Though I need to go
back to crossfit --it's been a few months.

------
aazaa
> In other words, Stoic philosophy doesn’t declare that a person should
> suppress emotions like grief, joy, pity or even shame, but rather that they
> should examine their origins. “You try to understand where they come from,”
> says Nancy Sherman, author of Stoic Warriors: The Ancient Philosophy Behind
> the Military Mind and philosophy professor at Georgetown University.

The article expends a lot effort repeating this claim, without once citing a
source clearly promoting stoicism (with a lower-case "s") as emotional
suppression.

What looks like it might fit the bill doesn't:

> Case in point: Canadian writer Jordan Peterson — a man who believes that the
> patriarchy is Western civilization and claims “the masculine spirit is under
> assault” and therefore advocates for a return to 1950s gender roles — is
> often cited as one such truth-telling sage whose writings have been touted
> as a return to the Stoics.

Despite the reference to Peterson's work (the only specific citation of an
alleged "stoic" I could find in the article), there's not one shred of
evidence given to support the claim that Peterson specifically advocates
suppression of emotion.

I didn't bother to follow the links - maybe it's explained there. But that's
not the point. If you're going to say somebody is promoting a harmful approach
to life, your duty as a writer is to prove that to the reader. This article
doesn't do it.

Later on:

> Massimo Pigliucci, a professor of philosophy at City College of New York,
> refutes Vacula’s essay in a different article on the same site, arguing that
> Vacula’s assessment of Peterson’s writings, which contend that “white
> privilege is a myth,” is inherently not Stoic. ...

This really deserves an explanation but the essay does little to show the
disconnect.

------
Yajirobe
Why are first world middle-upper class people suddenly so interested in
stoicism?

~~~
mntmoss
The world feels very uncertain for the middle-class these days, especially in
an economic sense, which is one that strikes right at the heart of one's
"locus of control". It doesn't offer the same kind of promise or opportunity
as it did 40 years ago, and risks are advertised constantly. Stoic teachings
have broad applicability: Epictitus(my favorite flavor) says to control the
things you can control, and to not worry about the rest.

There is a patriarchal thread to some of this, as Stoicism could be
interpreted in a "men's rights" sense of asserting dominion and gender roles.
But focusing on "the way things should be" is rather a false way of going
about it, since there's also a thread of mutually respecting struggle and
self-mastery in the Stoic philosophers. There isn't a point in Stoicism where
the status quo ever becomes OK, where you are "good enough". There is only
another form of struggle to be had.

~~~
gingabriska
In my case it's not about uncertainty. I am rich, I've got cash, I've assets.
I can buy whatever I want, I can use and consume any forbidden drug.

They sell me fake world. Then my fake world breaks like a shattered mirror and
suddenly I am helpless, feeling pain, depressed, turning towards drugs.

Why I am so unhappy with my life? Because I am not born with exceptionally
good looks, I see my girlfriend chasing guy who looks better than me but isn't
as successful as me? Should I be happy about it? The girls who come for me,
want resources - they fake love well. Suddenly, love disappears if I stop
paying bills.

As a man with means, I can choose to take mind altering drug and numb myself
down but I choose to handle psychological pain through philosophy and self
realization.

I want to accept things as they are. I don't feel wronged, betrayed, I don't
hold grudge towards anyone. I accepted the fact, what people are doing around
me are doing whatever they want to do, whatever they feel serves their
interest. This way of thinking can't be toxic.

The ones I thought I loved, cheated on me with prisoner (life destroyed but
looks big and dangerous), another cheated with some banker (huge debts but
exceptionally good looks)

~~~
dictum
Here's a certainly not contemplative answer which would suit HN best:

If money is no problem and you've correctly narrowed your problems down to
your looks (here's where you might be wrong), plastic surgery is very
effective.

~~~
gingabriska
I am happy with my looks, there will always be people far more successful, far
more handsome - I've made peace with that long ago.

I am in A++ health, won't risk it for any surgery.

~~~
bitcoinmoney
Are you ugly looking? You’re probably just exposed in the wrong crowd of girls

------
dangoljames
While I do agree with the central tenets of the article, the author lost me in
quoting someone as saying that neostoicism is '...based on the shallowness of
the internet.'

I was around long before the internet, and I can promise you that so-called
neostoicism was alive and well long before the internet was an idea, much less
technically possible.

------
rdiddly
Pretty bad misrepresentation of Jordan Peterson there, and of modern "small-s
stoicism" and of classical Stoicism for that matter. I was about to ask "What
else does he get wrong?" but there's not really much left besides that.

You wouldn't think ignoring all articles that start with "I learned how to
masturbate..." would be a sound or rationally supportable screening method,
and yet...

~~~
ta1133
Yes, but as your downvotes show, it's pointless defending him in "civilized"
company.

TFA quoting JBP: "patriarchy is Western civilization"

Actual JBP quote: "...the really, real radicals on the left who are opposed to
the patriarchy - the patriarchy is western civilization make no mistake about
it - _patriarchy is just a code word for that_ \- and governed by their neo
marxist dogma and postmodern dogma they believe that it needs to be retooled
right from the bottom up and that's exactly what they're doing and that makes
them natural allies I would say of any other system that opposes our system"

I.e. not "western civilization exists because of patriarchy" but "when they
say patriarchy they mean all of western civilization".

~~~
Pils
The actual quote makes Peterson look worse? The whole "patriarchy is Western
civilization" is an idea that can be traced through Christian theology,
Monarchism up to more modern Conservative philosophers like Leo Strauss and
Roger Scruton. The quote itself is a strawman/buzzword soup. He sounds
completely unhinged.

~~~
badpun
He's saying that about "real radicals". I'm not really following fringe
radical left movements, but it wouldn't surprise me that if people who wanted
to see our world demolishedn existed in there. There were such people in
Russia before the October Revolution, or in China, or in Cambodia... The
resentful, manipulative and power-hungry radical left was a major fixture in
the recent history and I don't see a reason for why they'd suddently stop
existing.

------
ccarpenterg
"The world is a transformation, and life is mere opinion", Marcus Aurelius.

------
programminggeek
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman)

------
HNLurker2
Wow I've never read a more shitty article in my entire life. tl;dr They blame
Stoic philosophy for the growing mass shooting from USA. And even try to make
a pseudo-philosophical parallel with modern feminism.

------
meijer
"Stoicism" got a bad rep 1700 years ago when I was defamed by Roman
christians. I think it still suffers from this.

~~~
bobthechef
Citations? Because that sounds completely wrong[0].

[0] [https://catholicexchange.com/christianity-and-
stoicism](https://catholicexchange.com/christianity-and-stoicism)

------
non-entity
My issue is that it seems that this "modern stoicism" always seems to be
coupled with another toxic ideology. At least from what I've seen online.

~~~
bobthechef
It seems to be a phenomenon across the board. Christianity, Buddhism,
Hinduism, etc, etc, all have silly modern counterfeits floating around. Think
of how a Hindu belief like "I am God" may be read by a traditional Hinduism
vs. some New Agey American counterfeit Hinduism. In Catholicism, there's even
the heretical cluster of views under the name of Americanism[0].

Not that this article gets stoicism right either.

[0]
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americanism_(heresy)](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americanism_\(heresy\))

------
henryw
Stoicism is the first of nine "masks" in the book The Mask of Masculinity.

[https://www.amazon.com/Mask-Masculinity-Embrace-
Vulnerabilit...](https://www.amazon.com/Mask-Masculinity-Embrace-
Vulnerability-Relationships-ebook/dp/B06Y1ZDCCQ)

~~~
jessaustin
Surely that's an indictment not of stoicism but of that particular "self-help"
volume?

