Nono, worry=selfish sensation=Nono in stoicism :D. Only reason.

You’re welcome, I’m also an amateur at best so I hope I was able to help.

Yea that sounds a bit hedonistic and not very utopian to me idk. I think the right approach would be to “create” people that don’t want to act unethically in the first place. Rules wouldn’t even be necessary then.

Nothing matters, just as everything. What comes to you comes to you. Stoicism believes In determinism, the choices you’ll make are the ones that you’re supposed to make and there is no right or wrong about it (the physics).

But since stoics do believe in a chain of cause and effect and logic should be used to predict it. But not to your own good, the ideal teaches altruism. You have (conditional) control about the decisions you make, not about the causal chain though.

“When someone throws a roller onto an inclined plane, he does indeed provide the external impetus for movement; but the actual cause of the roller rolling down lies in its shape, that is, in its own essence”

You can’t predict the future. Maybe you’ll regret no matter what you do.

So back to your example with the liver transplant. Stoic ideal would say to give the money away for the good of society. But you also need to accept that you aren’t the stoic ideal, you are selfish and maybe will regret your decisions. So before thinking about “what would a stoic do in this situation” the focus should be on becoming a stoic? I’m not an expert tho so take what I said with a grain of salt.

So maybe just like in matrix, only less misanthropic, with a simulation that does whatever one of the player wishes, wo each of those being able to harm each other? Or does it need to be “real”?

Humans aren’t purely rational unfortunately. Thats why rational rules and the punishment for breaking them often do not work. Selfishness can take up self destructive dimensions. If people would be rationally selfish, for the most part selfish altruism would be the logical answer.

How is your scenario different from laws we have rn? (Except the punishment)

I don’t think that’ll be possible while having organic bodies. Also a future in which my way of life is viewed as inferior, just bc I like walking and use my body doesn’t sound too utopian 😅.

Do you maybe mean a “every wish is granted” type of future?

What kind of needs?

Like everyone has food, water, a roof above one’s head and receives the needed love?

But humanity without thought isn’t able to survive, is it?

How do you define a utopia though.

Isn’t the term acceptance more suitable? Also setting the limit is very active, isn’t it rather accepting one’s own limit? Also do you mean internal* crisis?

Bc ignorance is a extreme risky incomplete and therefore counterproductive form of peace to me. It also tends to make external crises worse.

Depends on how you define utopia. Utopia is a ideal, something perfect. Something that can’t be reached because humans aren’t perfect.

So I’d say no. Humanity and perfection are contradictory. There’ll be always some kind of struggle.

How is peace ignorance tho? For some, rather many probably but not necessarily.

Not getting something you want might end up in frustration. Same for wanting peace. It is paradox to most bc humans are purpose oriented beings. I think the paradox only exist for those that believe you need to want peace to get it. If you regret you never reached the stoic ideal in the first place. Also you’ll never know if you’re going to regret, that’s why you should let go of thinking about it. Wanting to live is also a desire btw. To your second question, according to stoicism content comes from inside. External things, like the possibility to travel are never guaranteed and so is your peace.

Remember tho this is just an ideal.