How to Be a Stoic • Hacker News Board

Re: How to Be a Stoic

#31

Post by lowpro » Sat, Feb 25, 2017, 11:46 AM UTC

manmal wrote: post #2

One interesting thing I've noticed is that ancient Stoics have not rebuked the concept of god (or "the universe"), a higher power that determines all the things that are not in our control (as a Stoic you very much need to distinguish between things in and outside of your control). I have found it difficult to really, deeply, accept things as out of my control without resorting to some concept of god or "the universe…

You're essentially asking about the difference between active and passive existential nihilism. Or in non-philosophical terms, asking who is resigned to their existence and who actively searches to find meaning in it.

Active nihilism is much more beneficial and relates to stoicism. It holds that you must find your meaning, which is really what everyone does anyway, whether through a super natural being or friends, family, or one's life work (read Man's Search for Meaning by Victor Frankl. The best book I've ever read that relates these ideas as a holocust survivor).

Re: How to Be a Stoic

#32

Post by thisiscurio » Sat, Feb 25, 2017, 11:47 AM UTC

Havoc wrote: post #21

manmal wrote: post #2

One interesting thing I've noticed is that ancient Stoics have not rebuked the concept of god (or "the universe"), a higher power that determines all the things that are not in our control (as a Stoic you very much need to distinguish between things in and outside of your control). I have found it difficult to really, deeply, accept things as out of my control without resorting to some concept of god or "the universe…

>Is there someone among you HNers who has retained a positive outlook by believing that the universe is a bleak, chaotic place with no intrinsic meaning to the things happening in it? Yep. Though I'd suggest you take a closer look at that sentence of yours. Specifically the "bleak, chaotic" part. That's already a very negative judgement and in contradiction with the neutral "no intrinsic meaning" part. >I have found…

This is exactly what I believe the universe is. When people say the universe is uncaring, they equate that as bad; I reckon this is because we want control over our lives. True our agency over our lives is increasing as we progress as a society but it's unlikely that we will reach a point that our cumulative progress would give us control over everything.

The universe doesn't care who you are the same way a benevolent god cares about his subject; the universe cares about you in an impersonal kind of way, that is if you do things according to the reality that is already established, then it'll 'care' about you and give what you want. The giving is likely probabilistic.

Re: How to Be a Stoic

#33

Post by manmal » Sat, Feb 25, 2017, 11:48 AM UTC

njharman wrote: post #20

manmal wrote: post #2

One interesting thing I've noticed is that ancient Stoics have not rebuked the concept of god (or "the universe"), a higher power that determines all the things that are not in our control (as a Stoic you very much need to distinguish between things in and outside of your control). I have found it difficult to really, deeply, accept things as out of my control without resorting to some concept of god or "the universe…

The universe is bleak and uncaring (but it is, probably, deterministic (I'm a pilot wave kind of guy)... getting sidetracked here). And the universe is outside of your control. Therefore you should not let it have any impact on your outlook. Also, wanting a positive outlook is a desire. And desires are suffering. And having a "positive outlook" is pre-judging things, filling up your mind with assumptions. When you sh…

The thing is, my outlook IS under my control. I would not want that outlook, but I would create it. If you don't have any evidence as to whether the universe is cruel or ultimately wellmeaning, then you yourself can choose what to believe about it.

Re: How to Be a Stoic

#34

Post by olavk » Sat, Feb 25, 2017, 11:51 AM UTC

manmal wrote: post #2

One interesting thing I've noticed is that ancient Stoics have not rebuked the concept of god (or "the universe"), a higher power that determines all the things that are not in our control (as a Stoic you very much need to distinguish between things in and outside of your control). I have found it difficult to really, deeply, accept things as out of my control without resorting to some concept of god or "the universe…

Bone cancer in children - if there exist an almighty sentient God, then he is erratic and malicious. The polytheistic concept of gods is actually more realistic (better explains reality) in that there are multiple gods with different agendas and morals acting.

In polytheism the universe is not chaotic and meaningless - things to not happen at random, but because the gods willed it. But the gods does not always act for the benefit of humans, so the universe is not "fair".

If something bad happens to you, is it really a consolation that it is because an allknowing and just God wants you to suffer?

Re: How to Be a Stoic

#35

Post by heisenbit » Sat, Feb 25, 2017, 11:52 AM UTC

Currently also on HN and much deeper article on stoicsm: On Anger, Disgust, and Love: Interview with Martha Nussbaum

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13710672

http://emotionresearcher.com/on-anger-disgust-love/

In a section further down the article she discusses the books "Upheavals of Thoughts" and "Therapy of Desire". There she elaborate how stoicism and emotions relate in a fairly comprehensive way.

Re: How to Be a Stoic

#36

Post by johnchristopher » Sat, Feb 25, 2017, 11:57 AM UTC

manmal wrote: post #2

One interesting thing I've noticed is that ancient Stoics have not rebuked the concept of god (or "the universe"), a higher power that determines all the things that are not in our control (as a Stoic you very much need to distinguish between things in and outside of your control). I have found it difficult to really, deeply, accept things as out of my control without resorting to some concept of god or "the universe…

> Is there someone among you HNers who has retained a positive outlook by believing that the universe is a bleak, chaotic place with no intrinsic meaning to the things happening in it?

Yes, I have. I tend to see myself as an existentialist.

Re: How to Be a Stoic

#37

Post by manmal » Sat, Feb 25, 2017, 11:58 AM UTC

manibatra wrote: post #24

manmal wrote: post #2

One interesting thing I've noticed is that ancient Stoics have not rebuked the concept of god (or "the universe"), a higher power that determines all the things that are not in our control (as a Stoic you very much need to distinguish between things in and outside of your control). I have found it difficult to really, deeply, accept things as out of my control without resorting to some concept of god or "the universe…

Having grown up in a religious household first 22 years of my life I had a lot of trouble with anxiety when I stopped believing in god. I could not continue studying science and believing in god without feeling like a hypocrite (not to say those who do are ). Meditation and being in the moment or at least trying to be in the moment has helped me a lot. There may not be a rhyme or reason to life but that doesn't mean…

Would it be possible that by stopping to believe in god, you stopped believing that you were safe, supported, and being taken care of? Did you stop believing because you wanted to, or was it like science took that belief away because the whole concept is wrong and impossible? For me it was the latter.

Re: How to Be a Stoic

#38

Post by manmal » Sat, Feb 25, 2017, 12:00 PM UTC

f_allwein wrote: post #10

manmal wrote: post #2

One interesting thing I've noticed is that ancient Stoics have not rebuked the concept of god (or "the universe"), a higher power that determines all the things that are not in our control (as a Stoic you very much need to distinguish between things in and outside of your control). I have found it difficult to really, deeply, accept things as out of my control without resorting to some concept of god or "the universe…

> I have found it difficult to really, deeply, accept things as out of my control Really? The laws of physics, evolution etc. are all out of our control. Positive outlook? Yes, I suppose. The universe is 15 billion years old and nothing we do will have a big impact on it. But we can still make the best of the time we have in it and try to make things better for others.

I of course accepted things as in "yes it just is this way", but I could not be content with them, as they are not "ok".

Re: How to Be a Stoic

#39

Post by manmal » Sat, Feb 25, 2017, 12:01 PM UTC

lowpro wrote: post #31

manmal wrote: post #2

One interesting thing I've noticed is that ancient Stoics have not rebuked the concept of god (or "the universe"), a higher power that determines all the things that are not in our control (as a Stoic you very much need to distinguish between things in and outside of your control). I have found it difficult to really, deeply, accept things as out of my control without resorting to some concept of god or "the universe…

You're essentially asking about the difference between active and passive existential nihilism. Or in non-philosophical terms, asking who is resigned to their existence and who actively searches to find meaning in it. Active nihilism is much more beneficial and relates to stoicism. It holds that you must find your meaning, which is really what everyone does anyway, whether through a super natural being or friends, fa…

Thank you!

Re: How to Be a Stoic

#40

Post by tim333 » Sat, Feb 25, 2017, 12:04 PM UTC

thisiscurio wrote: post #32

Havoc wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Is there someone among you HNers who has retained a positive outlook by believing that the universe is a bleak, chaotic place with no intrinsic meaning to the things happening in it? Yep. Though I'd suggest you take a closer look at that sentence of yours. Specifically the "bleak, chaotic" part. That's already a very negative judgement and in contradiction with the neutral "no intrinsic meaning" part. >I have found…

This is exactly what I believe the universe is. When people say the universe is uncaring, they equate that as bad; I reckon this is because we want control over our lives. True our agency over our lives is increasing as we progress as a society but it's unlikely that we will reach a point that our cumulative progress would give us control over everything. The universe doesn't care who you are the same way a benevolen…

The "bleak, chaotic place with no intrinsic meaning" conflates two things unfairly. Consider a beautiful sunrise on a tropical beach. It's part of the universe and not bleak and chaotic yet you don't have to believe it has a meaning enjoy it. As an atheist, the survival of us and our ancestors for ~4bn years suggests the universe is not so bleak in parts.