Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

FeelsCoolMan1 t1_iv2wbph wrote

a thing about stoicism i’ve always had a bone to pick with is the idea that what you cannot control you do not need to think about.

The quest to control that perceived as ‘uncontrollable’ is the leading cause for human benchmarks and achievements.

7

Haunting_Visual_2069 t1_iv45785 wrote

Good point.

I always thought of stoicism's bread and butter as identifying the dichotomy of control. I would think a stoic striving for those achevments would deem them as controllable. Not to be confused with probable.

1

Tylerich t1_iw6hwno wrote

I don't think there have been very many (if any) human achievements were achieved by people that thought they were impossible/uncontrollable. Very difficult,almost impossible sure, but not impossible.

To give an example: People have been working on nuclear fusion for many decades without any real success yet. So it's surely one of the, if not the hardest problem humans have ever worked on. However, I highly dought anyone working on fusion genuinely thinks it's impossible/uncontrollable. Just very very hard.

1

YoushaTheRose t1_iv336mm wrote

Bro, stoicism is a simple tool for the everyday person to not lose their sanity. The extremely driven, smart, daring, somewhat crazy pioneers are too busy to think about stoicism. They are the extreme minority. They will do what they do best. Stoicism will most likely not resonate with them.

0

FeelsCoolMan1 t1_iv33ldx wrote

Don’t you think that anyone can achieve something they thought to be impossible because they actually put their mind to it and didn’t go “oh well it’s too hard/ not in my control bether just deal with it”

3

FeelsCoolMan1 t1_iv33oz5 wrote

then why was stoicism founded by driven and smart people if it doesn’t apply to them

2

YoushaTheRose t1_iv3e7yi wrote

Smart philosophers, not cutting edge scientist trying do something impossible until possible. Different times, different kinds. Apples and pears. Stoicism logic is not meant for when you are trying to break through in your scientific field. Stoicism is not to hold down science. Stoicism is to keep your emotional outbursts in check and be a bit more sane, reasonable and calm. And I mean by stoicism the practical parts of stoicism. Not the fringe religious type stuff.

2

FeelsCoolMan1 t1_iv55o7o wrote

Isn’t the whole point of stoicism how it’s relevant in modern and ancient society? Also you say this as though people are born as scientists and will always become them, albert einstein could have easily not been a scientist if he was a stoic at those lectures not question the things deemed ad obvious set truths and instead living in accordance to them

2

YoushaTheRose t1_iv64stv wrote

  1. No, stoicism’s whole point is not relevance, it is to accept that which is truly out of your control like death. 2. People are born as needy babies. Not as a grown successful pioneer. And, DNA does not determine all. Effort and will determines a person greatness. A true great person would not let a doctrine such as stoicism stand in his way. Again stoicism doesn’t resonate with the freakish driven crazy achievers.
1

FeelsCoolMan1 t1_iv6bjmk wrote

  1. my bad i should have been clearer , i should have said the reason it’s still talked about and used is because it’s incredibly timeless and still applies today 2. Maybe you are right, but i still think if i implemented stoicism in my life i would limit what i’m able to achieve but i can’t speak for anyone else
1

YoushaTheRose t1_iv6evxu wrote

Yeah exactly that is the hard part about practicing stoicism, knowing where you can’t push or where you should push. But personally, I see it as this: for emotional angry interactions with others I use stoicism 100%, but for personal goals I dial it back to 60%.

1

breadandbuttercreek t1_iv2edez wrote

The good thing about this article is that it shows how much the stoics were opposed to consumer culture. We become so attached to our possessions and wealth we lose a lot of our appreciation for what is really important. People have been saying that for a long time but consumer culture is so seductive. I think you can follow stoic teachings without being determinist.

2

DirtyOldPanties OP t1_iv2rjus wrote

What exactly do you mean by consumer culture? Or being attached to wealth that one loses appreciation "for what is really important"? I would think wealth is fundamentally really important to people in the first place.

2

YoushaTheRose t1_iv32pp5 wrote

To tie your happiness to material possessions, is so not stoicism. Virtue is the thing they want.

3

breadandbuttercreek t1_iv47659 wrote

I didn't think the phrase needed explanation. Measuring your happiness by your wealth and consumption of goods is obviously a very popular choice, but some people try to pursue happiness other ways.

2

Northfir t1_iv3imuq wrote

I suggest you listen on Spotify or Apple Podcast “Stoicism On Fire”. Everything in this articule is debunked. That Ryan guy use Stoicism in a mean to achieve fame and money. And it’s not what’s Stoicism is about

2