I think a lot of modern day stoicism is stoicism-without-hardship. And I think hardship is necessary for stoicism - otherwise all you have is determined detachment, which is something else entirely.
Indifference is a power (2015)
151–160 of 241 posts
Re: Indifference is a power (2015)
#152My absolute favorite (this is irony) form of stoicism in the modern era is when a company director paid some multiple of your salary sends a daily stoic quote to everyone in the organization that amounts to telling people to work longer hours and accept more abuse and to shut up about not getting even cost-of-living raises because they should be grateful that they're employed at all. Should people be grateful for employment? Mmmmm....debatable. Should that be the chosen form of interaction from a position of imbalanced power? My fucking god, no. Try being slightly less of a sociopath.
Re: Indifference is a power (2015)
#153I 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…
This is one of those rare cases where I believe young men would benefit from reading more Nietzsche. "Do you want to live 'according to nature'? O you noble Stoics, what a verbal swindle! Imagine a being like nature - extravagant without limit, indifferent without limit, without purposes and consideration, without pity and justice, simultaneously fruitful, desolate, and unknown - imagine this indifference itself as a…
This just shows that Nietzsche did not understand stoicism on any deep level
Re: Indifference is a power (2015)
#154I 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…
Proper Stoicism is not about dodging your emotions, it's very much about dodging the adverse behavioral effects of your emotions. You're encouraged to work through your emotions proactively and in depth (the Stoics encouraged askesis which literally means 'training' or 'exercise') so that they don't adversely affect you and others down the road. Of course, you should also learn how to counter these effects in the mom…
It's learning to not burden yourself with things you cannot control.
Re: Indifference is a power (2015)
#155Actual 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…
My initial reaction was to disagree, but the man did allegedly take in an abandoned infant. And a woman to care for it[1]. And, our readings[2] of that quote (acceptance vs altruism) aren't in any way incompatible.
[1] You absolutely don't want to be a single woman in 1st century AD.
[2] acceptance vs altruism
Re: Indifference is a power (2015)
#156Earlier quoted context omitted.
The modern/online resurgence of stoicism isn’t driven by people that have studied actual books. It’s being driven by people that are making tiktoks after they learned about it by watching a five minute YouTube video. It’s a very lossy game of telephone.
Pop philosophy being turned into AI audio transcribed by a cool video game character (also being mostly AI generated) is clearly the crowning jewel of our civilization.
Where can I find this AI generated cool video game character spewing out pop philosophy? Sounds like fun!
Re: Indifference is a power (2015)
#157Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m tired of the whole “toxic masculinity” framing. First, it’s sloppy. Plenty of genuinely harmful traits exist, but trying to pin them to “masculine” or “feminine” archetypes is more ideology than analysis. If the problem is bad behavior, just call it bad behavior. Adding a gender label doesn’t improve clarity, it just adds noise. Second, it’s selectively applied. Many traits that are equally destructive are rarely…
I use the term not for traits and behaviours I think are masculine, but are sold as being masculine, which are toxic. An example would be that it's masculine to not cry or show emotions (whereas woman are labeled as "emotional"). Suppressing emotions is nothing gender specific of course, but when certain groups promote that as "masculine", calling that "toxic masculinity" makes sense IMO.
I still think this is where the framing quietly breaks down.
What you’re describing is not “masculinity” being toxic, but a particular sales pitch that smuggles bad norms under the masculinity label. Historically, this is exactly how language like “that’s so gay” operated. People didn’t mean “homosexual” in any literal sense. They meant weak, unserious, emotionally incontinent, indulgent. If pressed, the defense was always the same: I’m not talking about gay people, I’m talking about the stereotype society wrongly attaches to them.
The move is familiar because it works rhetorically. You get to criticize a behavior while outsourcing the moral weight to an identity category. The identity absorbs the stain, even if everyone insists that’s not what they meant.
We’ve seen this pattern over and over: “Real men don’t cry.” “Be a man” meaning suppress emotion, not develop discipline. “That’s gay” meaning fragile or contemptible. “Masculine energy” marketed as dominance without responsibility. “Feminine energy” marketed as intuition without accountability.
In every case, the failure isn’t gendered. It’s human. But the label does the work of making it feel natural to aim the critique at a group rather than the behavior itself.
This is why the analogy matters. Society eventually realized that using “gay” as a stand-in for negative traits was lazy at best and corrosive at worst, even when people swore they weren’t talking about actual gay people. The word still carried the freight.
I’m just applying the same standard here, as a proud champion of masculinity and part-time custodian of its reputation.
If the problem is emotional suppression, call it emotional suppression. If the problem is social pressure to perform invulnerability, call that out. If the problem is dominance without accountability, say so plainly.
Masculinity, like femininity, is a broad distribution of traits, not a slogan. Strength and restraint. Risk-taking and responsibility. Stoicism and emotional regulation. The pathologies show up when any of those lose balance, not because they’re “masculine.”
We spent decades correctly arguing that femininity itself wasn’t the problem, only the caricatures imposed on it. I’m simply extending that courtesy to masculinity, which seems overdue.
As a non-toxic, extremely moral male biological specimen and self-appointed advocate for masculine dignity, I’m fully in favor of men crying, feeling, and communicating. I just don’t think masculinity needs to be rhetorically sacrificed to achieve that outcome.
If anything, masculinity should be defended, rehabilitated, and held to a higher standard, not permanently prefixed with an asterisk.
Re: Indifference is a power (2015)
#158Ada Palmer has a great blog post on why Stocism is so appealing to rich folks. Her writing is always excellent.
https://www.exurbe.com/stoicisms-appeal-to-the-rich-and-powe...
Re: Indifference is a power (2015)
#159My favourite part of stoicism is needing to use the example of an emperor ruling over people trying to stay grounded as he can given the unfortunate circumstances of being the ruler of everything as the way forward for every average man to deeply relate to.
Stoicism has its definite positives, but balancing the privileged emperor is always worth being mindful and expressive of.
Re: Indifference is a power (2015)
#160Earlier 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.
Crime is also overwhelmingly associated with race. Intelligence quotient as well. We don’t characterize race by statistical facts because we would offend the outliers.
I think it’s important to follow etiquette in common language rather then label entire minorities or groups based off of statistics.