Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Stoicism's appeal to the rich and powerful (2019)

exurbe.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 338 posts

Re: Stoicism's appeal to the rich and powerful (2019)

#131

Post by taylorlapeyre »

thanhhaimai wrote: post #113
samspot wrote: post #81

"But on the negative side, stoicism’s Providential claim that everything in the universe is already perfect and that things which seem bad or unjust are secretly good underneath (a claim Christianity borrowed from Stoicism) can be used to justify the idea that the rich and powerful are meant to be rich and powerful, that the poor and downtrodden are meant to be poor and downtrodden, and that even the worst actions ar…

> For one, that all bad things are actually good is not a tenet of Christianity and is not in the Bible Just for my own learning, if it's not considered a tenet, why do I see this line of thought so often portrayed: "This is not bad. God made is so to test my faith."

This is one of three major answers to the problem of Theodicy (justifying God in the face of evil) in Christian theology. They are:

1. Pedagogical (the one you mentioned) - Evil exists so that we may grow and learn. All evil will be used to create even greater good. Quintessential example would be the story of Job in the Old Testament.

2. Eschatological — Evil is a by-product of having any creation in time whatsoever, and will be fully restored at the end of all things. Another way of thinking of this one is that evil is "non-being", the absence of the good. A lack, a privation. Espoused by Augustine (and before him, Neoplatonism in general), and Aquinas.

3. Freedom-oriented — Evil (even natural evil) is a broken state of affairs caused by the freedom of people, who use that freedom against God. God nonetheless allows this because he allows us the dignity to choose. The official teaching of the Catholic Church. The straightforward reading of Genesis 2.

None of these say that "This is not bad" - Christianity acknowledges the existence of evil "as evil". However, with God's grace, evil may be healed or made to serve higher purposes.

Re: Stoicism's appeal to the rich and powerful (2019)

#132

Post by brushfoot »

lupusreal wrote: post #109
mjburgess wrote: post #4

It's no accident that a roman emperor (tyrant, mass murderer, and courtier) is the premier famous stoic. Nor is it an accident that the next most famous case is that of British empire public schooling, british "stiff upper lip" stocisim. (EDIT: Marcus Aurelius) himself was no stoic philosopher, he merely wrote diaries to himself in his late days -- diaries he wanted burned, not published. And these were rehresals of…

In my personal life, work and home, I am surrounded by people who are constantly in a state of distress, ranging from frustration to simmering rage, about things which are completely beyond their ability to change. I never see it do them any good, nor cause any constructive change for society. My personal understanding of stoicism is focus on changing the things I can change, and not spend my time being miserable abo…

I've read the Meditations -- in the Emperor's Handbook translation -- and they're nothing like GP is making them out to be.

In their original, unedited comment, they didn't even get Marcus Aurelius's name right, attributing the Meditations to Mark Antony.

Their take is such a wild and inaccurate mischaracterization of Stoicism that it's frankly not worth engaging with -- written absentmindedly while "listening to corporate policy announcements." Take it with a grain of salt.

Re: Stoicism's appeal to the rich and powerful (2019)

#133

Post by freedomben »

andoando wrote: post #120
andrewmutz wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's all great and it sounds like stoicism isn't for you. But that doesn't mean that it's "a deeply hollow, dissociative, nihilistic philosophy which dresses up the status quo as 'God's plan' -- a rationalization of interest to the elite above all others." Virtues like prudence, fortitude, temperance, and justice can improve the lives of people of any part of society, not just the elites.

I was a staunch Stoic, and a hollow disassociative mess is exactly what I became. Think of the end goal of the Stoic and what it takes to achieve it. At every misfortune, you rationalize and deny your natural emotions. If you do it well, you're an all understanding guru of life, sharing oneness with everything, and becoming nothing in particular. We have to accept that we too are a part of nature and flawed imperfect…

These are genuine questions, but please don't feel obligated to answer if you aren't comfortable. I'm fascinated to hear your story though.

Are you generally a pretty gung-ho person? Do you feel drawn to strive toward perfection?

Were you or are you previously religious with Christianity, Islam, or other world religion?

Do you view stoicism as an all-or-nothing thing? I.e. do you think a person applying stoicism in a light-weight or even casual manner is useful, or would you still recommend avoiding it?

Re: Stoicism's appeal to the rich and powerful (2019)

#134

Post by tekla »

betenoire wrote: post #93
pj_mukh wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always saw Stoicism as “things around you are going to be really screwed up and panicking about it will make it worse” The first part of that sentence is opposite to what the author here suggests.

both "screwed up" and "perfect" are judgements calls/perspectives, and panicking isn't going to change things (panic doesn't necessarily make something worse either)

Panic always makes things worse

Re: Stoicism's appeal to the rich and powerful (2019)

#135

Post by josephstalinOk »

codexb wrote: post #55
adamnemecek wrote: post #2

I wonder what caused the current obsession with stoicism. It seems vacant.

It's a remarkably good set of strategies and mindset for dealing with conflict, anxiety, and having to make a large number of difficult decisions. The core of stoicism (stressed more by Epictetus, a former slave, than Marcus Aurelius) is that we should not focus or worry on things we can't control. We can't control other people, or societies, or the unforeseen tragic events we may experience, but we can control our o…

[dead]

Re: Stoicism's appeal to the rich and powerful (2019)

#136

Post by overgard »

mjburgess wrote: post #73
codexb wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think your last example demonstrates the value of stoicism. In many cases, our untrained emotional response to life prevents us from achieving more or enjoying life. Instead of screaming, you could spend the time enjoying your loved ones for as long as possible. You could try to find a way to stop the plane from falling or work on bracing yourself to survive the impact. Stoicism is a realizing that many of our inst…

I suspect that screaming at a person who has done you wrong, in the vast majority of cases, has both the intended effect and a desirable one. If you are in an elite position of leadership, and otherwise have more Machiavellian options, then you can always try to calculate revenge instead -- or forgive endlessly and be exploited. I'd say in the majority of cases, for most adult people with some life experience, shouti…

> I suspect that screaming at a person who has done you wrong, in the vast majority of cases, has both the intended effect and a desirable one.

Not usually. Just some examples:

Customer service people tend to be trained to de-escalate and send things up a level. Sometimes they call it "killing with kindness"; basically you repeat your stance with a smile on your face until the person going wild either calms down on their own or leaves. Either way, the person yelling does not get what they want. On the other hand, if you're charming to customer service people, a lot of times they'll bend the rules for you if they can, and if they can't -- well, you don't have to have on your conscience: "ruined the day of someone making minimum wage"

In long term relationships (say, work relationships or family relationships) this sort of excessive emotionality doesn't work either. In a job, you'll probably just get fired, or if you're the boss, people will avoid telling you things. Your family can't fire you, but they can set a boundary and stop dealing with you.

Basically, what I'm trying to get across is that uncorked rage is very rarely effective. It may work once or twice but it's a bad overall strategy.

If you don't want to be exploited, a controlled show of mild anger is a lot more effective. People who are not in control of their emotions can be easily exploited, but those who are in control of their emotions are not. I think you think there's this axis of Rage-a-holic Door-Mat, but the problem is both ends of those axes have people that aren't in control of their feelings. The door mat lacks control also, but in their case it presents as withdrawing from the world.

> If you are in an elite position of leadership, and otherwise have more Machiavellian options, then you can always try to calculate revenge instead -- or forgive endlessly and be exploited.

Yikes dude.

Re: Stoicism's appeal to the rich and powerful (2019)

#137

Post by taylorlapeyre »

scantis wrote: post #111
samspot wrote: post #81

"But on the negative side, stoicism’s Providential claim that everything in the universe is already perfect and that things which seem bad or unjust are secretly good underneath (a claim Christianity borrowed from Stoicism) can be used to justify the idea that the rich and powerful are meant to be rich and powerful, that the poor and downtrodden are meant to be poor and downtrodden, and that even the worst actions ar…

In the story oh Hiob/Job,he is unaffected in his behavior and the trust instilled in him from others, which clearly discouble his person from his misfortune. In the original there is no word for faith, believe or trust only for character. Job is of good character despite his misfortune, that makes him a man of God.

Technically correct, but quite misleading. The idea of "trust in God" or "faithfulness" is completely central to Job. The story doesn't concern itself with "doctrinal faith", but it implicitly discusses "faith" in the general sense of trust in the providence of God in the face of challenges that might make one abandon Him.

Re: Stoicism's appeal to the rich and powerful (2019)

#138

Post by adamtaylor_13 »

thanhhaimai wrote: post #113
samspot wrote: post #81

"But on the negative side, stoicism’s Providential claim that everything in the universe is already perfect and that things which seem bad or unjust are secretly good underneath (a claim Christianity borrowed from Stoicism) can be used to justify the idea that the rich and powerful are meant to be rich and powerful, that the poor and downtrodden are meant to be poor and downtrodden, and that even the worst actions ar…

> For one, that all bad things are actually good is not a tenet of Christianity and is not in the Bible Just for my own learning, if it's not considered a tenet, why do I see this line of thought so often portrayed: "This is not bad. God made is so to test my faith."

Them be some deep theological waters you're wading into.

It's not a tenet, because it's not presented as a teaching that "bad things are good things".

However, we often label things as "good" and "bad," which are overly simplistic for many things in life. A child dying is unequivocally a bad thing. But if your faith deepens through the course of grieving, then a good thing happens from that bad thing. It doesn't nullify the bad thing. It doesn't magically transform it into a good thing. But your faith being made stronger is a good thing, while your child dying is a bad thing.

My understanding is this is the Biblical principle of redemption. Not to be confused with salvation. It's used to refer to God's ability to make good happen from a bad thing, or to "redeem" a bad thing. In this way, redemption can also refer to salvation because man is inherently bad, but through Jesus's death on the cross, man can be redeemed. Once again, bad things happen, but good things can come from them.

Again, it's important to note that the Bible does not teach BAD == GOOD. It teaches that bad things can be redeemed for good outcomes.

I am not a theologian, but that's my understanding of it.

Re: Stoicism's appeal to the rich and powerful (2019)

#139

Post by engels_gibs »

The first, true and only philosophy for the working class, the exploited, the proletarians and the dispossessed is marxism. Teaching "stoicism" to people who barely can afford food, to slaves in the Congo, to overworked uber eats cyclists that work 12 hours a day for pennies, is not only ridiculous, it's criminal.

Standing silent or content in the face of exploitation, injustice and the threat of destruction of humanity is indeed an ethics that benefit the rich and powerful. "Be content, stay quiet, dont make noise, dont revolt, dont organize, accept your place in the universe.".

Marx was the first philosopher that recognized that philosophy is a product of material conditions, and that it servers the interests of the economic system that contains it. That's why marxism would have been impossible in ancient greece and there was never a greek philosopher that advocated revolution or seizing political power.

Post reply on HN