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

Indifference is a power (2015)

aeon.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 241 posts

Re: Indifference is a power (2015)

#61

Post by lern_too_spel »

parpfish wrote: post #4

I can’t help but think that the rise in stoicisms popularity among manosphere types because it lets them repackage a lot of more undesirable masculine traits under a legitimate label— You’re not allowed to feel things. Emotions make you weak. Just suck it up and power through. Bottle it up. Whether those traits a “real stoicism” or not doesn’t matter, because that’s the way it gets spread through TikTok length discou…

No, the new wave of popularity for Stoicism can be traced back to Tom Wolfe's 1998 bestseller, A Man in Full. https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Tom-Wolfe-s-Book-A-Man-i...

Re: Indifference is a power (2015)

#62

Post by solumunus »

bsoles wrote: post #53
everdrive wrote: post #11

Actual stoicism is kind of darkly funny. Here's a word-for-word (translated, of course) excerpt from Epictetus: "It's possible to understand what nature wants from situations where we're no different from other people. For example, when a slave breaks someone else's cup we're instantly ready to say 'These things happen.' So when it's a cup of yours that gets broken, appreciate that you have the same attitude as when…

> You should feel the same about your wife or child as someone else's. I don't see why it should be so. It makes perfect sense to sympathize(?) and understand that somebody is grieving and is likely going through pain/emotions that I would have gone through if my wife/child has died. But that is not the same thing as me feeling those emotions. Isn't this the distinction between empathy and sympathy?

They were pointing out the implication in the source material but not agreeing with it.

Re: Indifference is a power (2015)

#63

Post by zxcvasd »

naasking wrote: post #54
jezzamon wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you should understand the terms as "toxic masculinity" as opposed to "positive masculinity". It's not saying masculinity is toxic. Or if you want, as opposed to "true masculinity" - reframing masculinity as a positive thing when expressed correctly.

Why do undesirable or desirable behaviours need a sex/gender label at all? Asshole behaviour isn't gender-specific. Maybe people should just focus on criticizing specific undesirable behaviours, and praising specific desirable behaviours.

The group of traits often described by "toxic masculinity" are overwhelmingly displayed only by males, so... it makes sense?

If you aren't someone who displays that specific bundle of traits/behaviors, I would suggest being stoic about it and not taking the term personally.

Re: Indifference is a power (2015)

#64

Post by lifis »

everdrive wrote: post #11

Actual stoicism is kind of darkly funny. Here's a word-for-word (translated, of course) excerpt from Epictetus: "It's possible to understand what nature wants from situations where we're no different from other people. For example, when a slave breaks someone else's cup we're instantly ready to say 'These things happen.' So when it's a cup of yours that gets broken, appreciate that you have the same attitude as when…

It is the teaching of acceptable of impermanence also found in Buddhism and other eastern lineages.

Re: Indifference is a power (2015)

#65

Post by alansaber »

everdrive wrote: post #22
throwaw12 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMO, its not dark. How I perceived it, Epictetus wants to say: things happen and you are on a spectrum of emotions based on the context (in case of death, how close you were to the person), try to minimize the length of the spectrum.

I agree in part. You could read Epictetus as saying "just try not caring about people," which I think is the incorrect reading. Instead, I think he's saying something like "take a step back and realize that your deep personal attachments don't look so important when you step outside your perspective. You can use this realization to help get past the deep emotional pain that is normal for people to feel." However, the…

Our environment is simply far less brutal. This is closely aligned to the mentality of people in war torn countries, to the present day.

Re: Indifference is a power (2015)

#66

Post by Aurornis »

I find classic Stoicism interesting, but these modern social media and influencer versions of Stoicism feel like something else entirely.

The heading and subheading of this article invoke ideas of indifference and warriors and prisoners. This appeals to frustrated people, more often men, who are struggling with emotional regulation and want a solution that feels like a tough response.

Maybe there’s something useful in here, but more often than not when I see younger people I work with invoke stoicism it’s as a weak defensive mechanism to dodge their emotions for a while rather than deal with them. The modern simplified ideal of stoicism is just being too tough to care and flexing to show others that you don’t care.

Anecdotally, I haven’t seen anyone embrace this social media version of stoicism and thrive on it long term. At best it’s just a phase that helps them get past something temporary, but at worst it’s a misleading ideal that leads them to bottling up and ignoring problems until they become too unbearable to ignore. Some times you do have to care and you have to address the root cause, not just listen to some influencers telling you to be so tough you don’t care like legions of warriors and prisoners in past literature.

Re: Indifference is a power (2015)

#67

Post by zeroonetwothree »

dot_treo wrote: post #26

In the past I've been trying to adopt the stoic mindset, but always struggled. But I continued to read and learn about it. Unrelatedly, I came across a recomendation for David Burns "Feeling Good" here on hackernews a couple of years ago. Reading it with my interest in stoicism in mind, I honestly found it to be probably the best modern day handbook to actually adopting the stoic mindset - without ever mentioning it.…

Love that book. It changed my life.

Re: Indifference is a power (2015)

#68

Post by tsunamifury »

While stoicism was not invented by Marcus Aurelius the particular flavor referred to these days was and let’s be absolutely clear what it was:

Stoicism was Aurelius ways to justify mass death and conquering of an empire while creating a mental patterns that roughly said “don’t worry too much about.”

Re: Indifference is a power (2015)

#69

Post by jvanderbot »

Aurornis wrote: post #66

I find classic Stoicism interesting, but these modern social media and influencer versions of Stoicism feel like something else entirely. The heading and subheading of this article invoke ideas of indifference and warriors and prisoners. This appeals to frustrated people, more often men, who are struggling with emotional regulation and want a solution that feels like a tough response. Maybe there’s something useful i…

I think of the "tough warrior philosopher" messaging as the installation medium for this hack. All hacks need an attractive bait/installer.

Once the hack sets in, you start reading more b/c you identify partially as "philosopher", and you start to see more of the genuine, peaceful, forgiving side, like in Meditations. The "we are all flawed men" kind of thing.

Re: Indifference is a power (2015)

#70

Post by mock-possum »

everdrive wrote: post #11

Actual stoicism is kind of darkly funny. Here's a word-for-word (translated, of course) excerpt from Epictetus: "It's possible to understand what nature wants from situations where we're no different from other people. For example, when a slave breaks someone else's cup we're instantly ready to say 'These things happen.' So when it's a cup of yours that gets broken, appreciate that you have the same attitude as when…

I think that’s the wrong takeaway - the point is that when it’s happening to someone else, it’s easier to see the ‘right’ attitude to take regarding misfortune.

Of course it’s awful to have your child die, but also it’s fairly commonly understood, that it can’t be the end of your life as well, you take the time you need to grieve, and then you go on living. “So it goes.”

The point with the cup is the same: it’s easier to council patience and forgiveness when your lap isn’t soaked with wine, when shards of your cup don’t litter the floor.

It’s demonstrating a route to removing yourself from the emotion of the present situation, to examine things rationally, dispassionately, like you would if they were happening to someone else, because it’s easier to see the right thing to do that way.

Post reply on HN