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

121–130 of 241 posts

Re: Indifference is a power (2015)

#121

Post by Aurornis »

andsoitis wrote: post #108
Aurornis wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Proper Stoicism is not about dodging your emotions, it's very much about dodging the adverse behavioral effects of your emotions. I’m not disagreeing with this. I understand classic stoicism, but I’ve also seen the effects of modern pseudo-stoicism as pushed by influencers and social media. Focusing on stoicism and trying to dodge the effects of your emotions is a reasonable strategy for someone who is truly stuck…

It isn’t the fault of an ancient philosophy that modern humans twist it into superficial slob. It certainly isn’t an indictment against Stoicism.

> It isn’t the fault of an ancient philosophy

As I said, I’m talking about the article and the pseudo-stoicism pushed on social media

Re: Indifference is a power (2015)

#122

Post by fc417fc802 »

zxcvasd wrote: post #63
naasking wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

If you replaced "males" in that sentence with ... well, let's be honest here, pretty much any other category, the statement would likely be deemed entirely unacceptable and the comment censored (ie [flagged][dead]) in short order.

Regardless of how the statistics for that specific set of behaviors break down my personal experience is that both the application and acceptance of such terminology (ie referring to various sets of behaviors which it might make sense to group together based on whatever metric) is highly selective in a manner that's convenient for the party expressing it. The statement is often true but the grouping superfluous, included only (seemingly) to push an agenda.

Re: Indifference is a power (2015)

#123

Post by exe34 »

jasonlotito wrote: post #51
SirFatty wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Just suck it up and power through" I don't feel that is a "undesirable masculine trait", I live by that and still "feel things" and have emotions.

That slave mindset is not good, though. It's not about not having feelings. It's about ignoring your feelings. Why do your opinions not matter?

Even better, where did you get the opinions? are they definitely your own, did you choose them from all available options by picking the ones that were best for you, or did you passively absorb them from people who can profit from giving you those opinions?

Re: Indifference is a power (2015)

#124

Post by b00ty4breakfast »

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…

it's Broicism; Modern self-help for dudes that think enjoying sex is feminine and washing your bung is homoerotic. The primary consumer is unlikely to read the entirety of The Meditations and prefers short, punchy aphorisms they can memorize.

Re: Indifference is a power (2015)

#125

Post by LanceH »

zxcvasd wrote: post #63
naasking wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

But there is no corresponding discussion of "toxic femininity", or if there is, it is that discussion is framed as more "toxic masculinity" from the "manosphere".

It's a term used to apply guilt across all males to subvert any actual debate.

Re: Indifference is a power (2015)

#126

Post by poulpy123 »

lr4444lr wrote: post #46
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…

As I get older, I read this entirely differently (as an appeal to empathy) than I did when I was younger (as an appeal to stolidity). In other words, you should be pained for your neighbor when his slave breaks his cup. Maybe his grandmother left him that cup, and he's developed many fond memories around which he drank a soothing beverage in that heirloom. That empathy how we connect with people, build meaning, and m…

From just the quote above, I understand more as something intermediate : don't be pained when your cup is broken, like if it it was the cup of some else but be pained when someone else wife or child die, like if it was your

Re: Indifference is a power (2015)

#127

Post by exe34 »

everdrive wrote: post #55
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.

In practice, the term is never used this way. It's used as a cudgel.

citations needed. (give five examples).

Re: Indifference is a power (2015)

#128

Post by ertgbnm »

Stoicism has always struck me as cognitive behavioural therapy (specifically the cognitive triangle) but for boys who think therapy is for women and is rife for misuse from people who don't understand it.

I understand stoicism is deeply entwined with modern CBT and the roots can be traced back basically, but why misuse the ancient form when we have decades of evolution and study on CBT?

Re: Indifference is a power (2015)

#130

Post by tsunamifury »

raffael_de wrote: post #98
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…

Very well put. I'd add the psychological concept of dissociation which seems to be central to the hackernews version of stoicism. Instead of connecting to your emotions it encourages pushing them down. That's just going to postpone the moment when you have to deal with them. Either because of psychosomatic illness, depression, burn out or mental breakdown. Attempting to influence, change, control feelings/emotions by…

As someone who has run multiple “empire tier” tech platforms, I’ve learned personally why you tend to develop this mindset.

This brand of stoicism you refer to is high order “cope” with your emotional self telling you it is wrong.

Post reply on HN