
Ask HN: Why so much Stoics on HN? - yesenadam
Almost every day, or multiple times a day, I read mention of Stoicism—usually M Aurelius, occasionally Seneca—on HN. And almost never any other type of philosophy, in the <i>wisdom of life</i> sense, ever gets a mention, unless I&#x27;m forgetting some. Well, I guess Ayn Rand&#x27;s been mentioned a few times.<p>I wonder why that is. Anyone know where this trend came from? It&#x27;s surprising because I don&#x27;t think I came across anything about Stoicism more than once every year or two before I came on here. And I didn&#x27;t realize many people were into Stoicism anywhere these days.
======
lettergram
Honestly, it seems to fit with more of the "Hacker Culture" than many other
philosophies. That being said, I honestly haven't seen it mentioned on HN in a
while, but idk perhaps I've missed it.

> Stoicism is predominantly a philosophy of personal ethics which is informed
> by its system of logic and its views on the natural world. According to its
> teachings, as social beings, the path to happiness for humans is found in
> accepting this moment as it presents itself, by not allowing ourselves to be
> controlled by our desire for pleasure or our fear of pain, by using our
> minds to understand the world around us and to do our part in nature's plan,
> and by working together and treating others in a fair and just manner. [1]

[1]
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoicism](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoicism)

~~~
yesenadam
Thanks. I didn't mean "so much" compared to stories about BTC or Uber or
Facebook.. :-) Well, this originated as my similar off-topic comment on an
AskHN today about..what to do about cryptocurrency losses[0], after someone
advised Stoicism. (I thought it would be better as an AskHN.) Yesterday Marcus
Aurelius was mentioned a few times in the AskHN on books you wished you read
earlier, and many more times (+ Seneca once) in some older AskHNs linked to on
that page.

[0][https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16309263](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16309263)

------
folknor
I can only speak for myself, of course, and my primary motivation for ditching
places like Slashdot (among others) in favor of HN was to get away from the
blatant, fervent, and persistent editorializing of their staff (which is a new
phenomenon, from their relatively recent hires like BeauHD and msmash), and
the ideological push I see from journalists everywhere.

This can easily be explained by stoicism - both in the wish to remain clear
and unbiased, and objectively reasoned.

I don't mind bias from a source, if the source wears it on their sleeve. The
best newspaper in my country is a radical one on the far end of a spectrum,
and it's essentially one of 3 that still do any kind of investigative
journalism. They advertise their bias in their header.

~~~
yesenadam
Sorry, _what_ can be explained? Why you came here, or why they got like that?

Which ideology is being pushed? (I dont know /.)

I don't really believe in that biased/unbiased thing. 'Unbiased' I think means
you agree with them, with their 'bias' if you use that word. Same with
'objective'. In fields as unscientific as politics anyway. And any time anyone
speaks, they speak with their own personal 'bias', don't they? Hopefully
anyway.

~~~
folknor
Why I came here can be explained easily by some of the principles of stoicism,
is what I wanted to point out.

I'm not sure why I've been downvoted for simply explaining one of the reasons
why I joined HN. Perhaps that means the person who downvoted me doesn't want
me here, or thinks that my reasons for joining HN are not worthy.

The ideology being pushed by the editors I mentioned on /. is radical left-
wing identitarian politics. Virtue-signaling and victimhood narratives. You
might ask for examples - but I won't give you any. I've been on slashdot for
decades, and it's over the past two years I noticed this trend. I've commented
anonymously on at least 3 of their posts about this very thing - and calling
them out explicitly and by name, and I've not gotten any response.

If I used an account, I could have found those comments again. I realise the
onus is still on me to prove something, if requested - but all I said was
"this is what I feel, and this is the reason I joined HN".

A biased journalist comes to the story with a predisposition and/or
presupposition as to how their reporting on a matter will conclude, in a way
that might lead to narrowing their field of vision such that they only pick up
on things that confirm the narrative they're interested in subscribing to, or
that fits in their view of the world.

Newspapers are rank with it in war reports, for example. And like I said, it's
fine if you wear it on your sleeve.

You might be right that "unbiased means I agree" \- that's certainly true more
often than not. All I can say is I purposefully and actively work for that to
not apply to me.

Of course I fail often.

~~~
yesenadam
Thanks, interesting. Well, I'm pretty new here too. Maybe you offended some /.
people, ya think?! Why name names like that. You sounded very bitter. Anyway,
you can edit a comment to ask the downvoters why they did so. I find it
annoying sometimes not to know why. But I'd say that's why. No-one wants to
read that kind of angry rant on here.

Ohh, you mean, can be explained by _your_ stoic principles. Gotcha.

I'm always amused when I hear people in the US talk about "radical left-wing",
and calling anything left of far-right, "communist". I guess I don't think
they know what left or left-wing means. That stuff you decribe sounds more
like "stupid" or "ignorant" than any particular left/right thing. Hmm well,
using those bad-faith labels ("virtue-signaling", "victimhood narratives")
might be satisfying, but no-one thinks they're doing that, (like people never
think they're being unfair, unjust etc) so I imagine it would make further
dialogue impossible. You don't win just by having a label for something.

But yeah, I've seen appalling videos of the kind of thing you're talking
about. I was once called 'sexist' (by a girlfriend! ha) for saying men and
women are different - that men have penises, women have vaginas. It was
confusion acquired from confused post-modern university arts lecturers, I
think. But yeah, it has gotten pretty stupid. Well, there have always been
stupid thought fads like that. HL Mencken is good on keeping perspective, not
letting that bug you too much.

Even scientists usually come to an experiment/survey with some hypothesis
about how things will turn out, which is why they're doing it. Sure, we try to
be more accurate, have better information, not let our baggage cloud our
perception, but I think this 'unbiased' person is a myth and unattainable, and
not very useful to aim for. To be 'expert' in anything, in the sense that is
possible in our lives, is to be biased. (I see why I have a problem with the
very word 'biased' \- it takes for granted that 'unbiased' is a real thing.)

“It is only about things that do not interest one, that one can give a really
unbiased opinion; and this is no doubt the reason why an unbiased opinion is
always valueless.” - Oscar Wilde

Actually that quote's worth giving in context. From _The Critic as Artist_ :

 _Ernest:_ Well, I should say that a critic should above all things be fair.

 _Gilbert:_ Ah! not fair. A critic cannot be fair in the ordinary sense of the
word. It is only about things that do not interest one that one can give a
really unbiased opinion, which is no doubt the reason why an unbiased opinion
is always absolutely valueless. The man who sees both sides of a question, is
a man who sees absolutely nothing at all. Art is a passion, and, in matters of
art, Thought is inevitably coloured by emotion, and so is fluid rather than
fixed, and, depending upon fine moods and exquisite moments, cannot be
narrowed into the rigidity of a scientific formula or a theological dogma. It
is to the soul that Art speaks, and the soul may be made the prisoner of the
mind as well as of the body. One should, of course, have no prejudices; but,
as a great Frenchman remarked a hundred years ago, it is one's business in
such matters to have preferences, and when one has preferences one ceases to
be fair. It is only an auctioneer who can equally and impartially admire all
schools of Art.

------
tomhoward
It's a simple, practical philosophy for living well, that doesn't involve much
in the way of _spiritual mumbo jumbo_ that turns a lot of hackers away from
other belief systems like Buddhism or the theistic religions. It's often said
that Stoicism is similar to Buddhism, but more grounded in material realism,
which lends itself to being more palatable to hacker types.

It's also been popularised by such public figures as Tim Ferris, Nassim Taleb,
James Altucher and Ryan Holiday, whose audiences include many from the hacker
world.

------
mikekchar
I think it's more that people on HN are well read. I see lots of references to
taoism too. As it's an interest for me, it's easy to pick out the references.
M Aurelius is basically required reading for anyone interested in western
classic philosophy (as the I Jing or Dao de jing is for eastern classical
philosophy). Rather than being surprised to see that, I'm actually surprised I
don't see more references to things like Machiavelli.

~~~
yesenadam
hehe I don't think so, not in the (wisdom) philosophy classics department
anyway. I get the strong impression it's that they've read nothing in the
field _but_ Marcus Aurelius and perhaps Ayn Rand. (Which is pretty sad.) I
just wondered, why Marcus Aurelius and not one of the many dozens of other
classics that it might have been instead. I guess it's close to what Hackers™
believe anyway. And well, Machiavelli isn't about one's individual philosophy
of/outlook on life. (Maybe his comedies are, haven't read them.) If you want
ruthless, I've seen some Sun Tzu, not to mention Rand. I find Aurelius rather
bleak and..dusty. (I don't recall ever seeing Taoism or Laotzu mentioned on
here, but I'm pretty new.)

------
rainbowmverse
Seneca was bored and annoyed with life, so he drove his boyfriend up the wall
by sending him lots of preachy letters. A lot of people in tech find this
highly relatable.

~~~
yesenadam
haha funny, but I doubt that's it. Why's that, do a lot of guys in tech have
boyfriends?

~~~
yesenadam
Could the downvoter explain why? Thanks. Sometimes I really have no idea what
the problem is. (Probably I should just relax and not worry about every lil
downvote. But I do like to keep my readers happy if possible.)

