Why I am Not a Stoic: The Problem and the Alternative

Рет қаралды 1,192

Күн бұрын

Stoicism is a modern phenomenon. With thousands of books on the ancient Greek philosophy being published and millions following The Daily Stoic, the philosophy is more popular now than ever in history. And there is a lot to like about it - I mean a lot to like. Yet I don’t consider myself a Stoic, and while I think you could do a lot worse than Stoicism as a philosophy for life, I also think you could do a lot better.
Now some might assume that I’m going to make a superficial attack on the philosophy, with tired criticisms like “oh I don’t think we should suppress our emotions,” which is largely a misconception based on the modern use of the word “stoic.” But I’m coming at this from a standpoint of deep familiarity. I’ve been studying Stoicism for well over a decade, and I’m going to share the legitimate issues I see with the philosophy, and why I don’t think you should become a devotee.
Read the blog post with the full transcript: designingthemi...
The Book of Self-Mastery (free paperback): designingthemind.org/free-paperback
Become Who You Are: designingthemind.org/become-who-you-are
Join the community of psychitects: designingthemind.org
Transcript

Пікірлер: 10

@crocodiletom9292 5 ай бұрын

I follow the advice of Bruce Lee: "Take what is useful, reject what is useless, and add what is your own". With that said, I take what is useful mostly from Stoicism.

@NonoNagurimono 5 ай бұрын

I completely understand your points about Stoicism in your video; actually, I've had similar concerns about its limitations and conflicts with modern science and circumstances. I honestly think they're all valid criticisms. That said, just to play devil's advocate, I think aligning with an ideological movement, be it a religion or a philosophy like Stoicism, can sometimes offer individuals a more structured path. It provides a comprehensive framework of rules and guidelines that can be easier to follow when taken as a whole package. A somewhat related example that comes to mind is Jordan Peterson's response when asked if he believes in God: 'I don't know, but I act as though he exists.' It's a way of finding practical utility in a belief system even if it doesn't always align perfectly with contemporary thought.

@DesigningtheMind 5 ай бұрын

I fully agree with this - one of the things I think vocal atheists commonly throw out with the bathwater is the psychological need for a normative compass to navigate our lives with. Christianity provided me with a lot of stability, direction, and comfort at one point in my life. After leaving that, I essentially spent years crafting my own system of belief and value to do the same job without the faith. But not everyone has the inclination to construct a coherent philosophical system of their own. There are a few car enthusiasts who want to build their own cars, but for everyone else, there needs to be an mass-manufactured option that just works. That's why one of my highest ambitions is to create and distribute that new secular "religion" that can guide us to the good life, individually and collectively. I see each of my books as a puzzle piece in a new practical philosophy I'm building for the future. Whether I can fully deliver on that ambition is another question, and as I suggest in the video, I think it's possible that any ready-made philosophy would inevitably promote dogmatism and tribalism. I also sometimes think it would be ideal to encourage people "graduate" from the philosophy when they've inquired enough to create their own. One way or the other, this is why I say I think you could do a lot worse than adopting Stoicism as a complete philosophy for life. I put it right up there with Buddhism as the best plug-and-play options available today. But with the right aims, I think we're more than capable of creating something better.

@256CSB 6 ай бұрын

I saw Alfred Korzybsky who created the movement "General Semantics" in the video can you please tell us, what's your take on him.

@DesigningtheMind 6 ай бұрын

He coined the phrase “the map is not the territory,” which is a key concept in my books, as well as my Nonduality video.

@kdud2799 6 ай бұрын

I think you have a misunderstanding of stoicism. I don't really know much about stoicism as you do, in fact I just discovered the depth of it's teachings and it kinda spoke to me. Stoicism is not a religion as you presented it in your arguments against it. It's not even a way of life but a guide. Just as you've correctly stated towards the end of the video, stoicism is about adaptation, while maintaining an inner peace and calm. It is about drawing strength, happiness, fulfillment and even purpose through your inner self. It is not completely averse to emotions, but encourages emotions that aligns with your inner tranquility while looking out for the good of the whole. The early philosophers clearly stated that, they shouldn't be followed without questioning. What they did was to give their views on issues about the world and provide a guide in building inner strength and resilience against the vices of life, while staying calm and happy. They say do not chase happiness because it's already in you, not because it's irrelevant... Even then, again, they strongly oppose taking their word for it, and encourages everyone to develop their philosophy about life. For the mere fact that you are attacking stoicism based on your own philosophy makes you a Stoic. The major message about stoicism is to be yourself, and find strength, happiness, fulfillment, purpose, and whatever you may wish for from your inner self, and not external. They are not against socializing, but only doing so because it aligns with your inner values. They do not advocate destroying or ignoring your emotions, but mastering it and controlling it to serve your purpose, and you can successfully do this through reason (logic). Even when you allow yourself to indulge carelessly in your emotions, you can still apply reason to help get back on your feet. That is stoicism! ....that nature prescribed illness, and the doctor prescribed medicine...: A logical argument to it would be, nature prescribed illness and the doctor, and the doctor prescribed medicine to treat the illness. So in a way, nature prescribed illness to inflict the body, and also prescribed medicine to treat the illness, what matters is what you do with them, your choice. The way of the Stoic is understanding that everything is natural, nothing is truly artificial or synthetic. That something is made by man doesn't mean it's not from nature: first of all man is natural, the knowledge is natural, and even the ingredients used in production are all natural! To live according to nature is having this understanding, and using other available natural resources around you to improve your nature through your state of mind.

@DesigningtheMind 6 ай бұрын

I'm not sure where the misunderstanding is - you've got a mix of good and bad takes on Stoicism here that have almost nothing to do with my arguments. I didn't suggest that Stoics were against emotions or socializing, and I make quite clear in the video that the founders of Stoicism and many other philosophies did not want their ideas ideas accepted dogmatically 15:20.