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

191–200 of 338 posts

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

#191

Post by andoando »

mjburgess wrote: post #66
dmichulke wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If the plane is falling from the sky, i envy the people screaming -- they have the right levels of attachemnt to their own lives. Are you saying that happier people scream more (shortly before dying)?

Happiness is only one meta-value, and at the level of "what the right meta" is, I'm somewhere between a nihilist and an aristotleian-sort-of-biologist: I only think that the people who are screaming when they are about to die are living like a healthy animal. And in the absence of any objective meta-values, it kinda seems like we might well just be what we are. Denying's one's instincts is an interesting exercise, an…

I think what youd ultimately agree with is that it's healthy to be aligned with your emotional, instinctual reactions.

Though I am not totally sure one cannot fully accept snd fully align their being with the absurdity of life - celebrating their life/death rather than wallowing in it.

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

#192

Post by rustyminnow »

codexb wrote: post #75
skwee357 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My guess why Aurelius is considered as the face of stoicism is due to the fact he was an emperor/powerful man. I doubt that the twisted way in which stoicism is viewed today would benefit from selling it as a philosophy of Zeno, who was a foreigner. What I mean by that is that stoicism in its modern iteration seems a brosphere/manosphere thing that will help you to become rich/powerful/successful/buy a lambo, while i…

I think it's just one of the few therapeutic skills that are generally offered to men and that genuinely considers the problems that men face. The problems and issues that men face are largely ignored or downplayed compared with women and there's little offered to men in dealing with it. The traditional outlets like men-only clubs and spaces have been torn down in the name of equality. In that environment, literally…

> one of the few therapeutic skills that are generally offered to men and that genuinely considers the problems that men face.

These things are not OFFERED to men, they are available for the taking if one is so inclined. Your options do not depend on your gender, but many will reject them as if they do. Therapy? It's not just for sissies. If men are so tough, why do they need society to OFFER solutions to their problems?

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

#193

Post by mjburgess »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #154
mjburgess wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. But you'll note one of my professed virtues is conflict, so I'm "participating in the world" by expressing a social emotion (contempt) towards a value system I disagree with in order to change the social environment. This makes me a political animal. This is why I express my view in this way. If I wanted to be a stoic, or nearly equivalently a contemporary academic, I'd present some anemic "balanced view" in…

It took me a while to to figure out why I find your position so disgusting. I think a lot of people perceive this contempt as intentional distortion, dishonest, socially hostile. I dont think we need more stoking of conflict and contempt, but need more good faith and balanced information sharing. I don't think your have correctly modeled the effects of your approach.

The contents of people's replies (, votes) is a measure of my effect, so post-facto, no modelling is required.

I'm clearly aware of the existence of people who want an "objective (unemotive) presentation", and clearly aware of what effect emoting has on those people. I haven't failed to model it. On many issues I'm quick to suspend this expression, and engage in a more dispassionate way with a person who wants me to, if I see some value in it. But I'm loathe to give up expressing my feelings, because that is part of the purpose of expression.

I am only doing what you are here in this comment -- you express your contempt in much more extreme terms ("disgust") than I, in order that I may take your feelings into account.

Likewise, when appraising stoicism, I think there's value in others taking my feelings on the matter into account. If only as a means of a kind of reflexive emotional equilibrium modulated by surprise: there's too little contempt towards stocisim in my view, and in its absense, has grown a cult around figures like aurelius.

I've been to the cult meetings in which he is read in a religious manner, cherrypicked and deliberately misunderstood. I'm here out in the world you see, participating -- and I wish to reflect that in my thinking and feelings on the world.

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

#194

Post by svnt »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #154
mjburgess wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. But you'll note one of my professed virtues is conflict, so I'm "participating in the world" by expressing a social emotion (contempt) towards a value system I disagree with in order to change the social environment. This makes me a political animal. This is why I express my view in this way. If I wanted to be a stoic, or nearly equivalently a contemporary academic, I'd present some anemic "balanced view" in…

It took me a while to to figure out why I find your position so disgusting. I think a lot of people perceive this contempt as intentional distortion, dishonest, socially hostile. I dont think we need more stoking of conflict and contempt, but need more good faith and balanced information sharing. I don't think your have correctly modeled the effects of your approach.

I think you hit on it, but the total reason why is slightly different, and the key is in its trigger of your disgust mechanism:

Conflict does not need philosophical reinforcement because it is a major biological default. Using our higher abilities to reinforce these prerequisite (but not higher/good) positions triggers disgust because it leads to traumatic outcomes. That is why disgust exists: to cause us to avoid actions that lead to traumatic outcomes. Sometimes the arm of perception of our disgust reaction reaches further than our comprehension.

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

#195

Post by FredPret »

rexpop wrote: post #178
FredPret wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a roman emperor (tyrant, mass murderer, and courtier) It's interesting to read up on the lives of famous ancients like Julius Caesar and Alexander. I know it was a different time, but the regular and casual war crimes and mass murders sticks in one's craw.

> the regular and casual war crimes and mass murders It's phenomenal to read about these revered historical figures! They turn out be privileged thugs. We should be extremely reluctant to extol their virtues.

The best thing about the arc of history so far is that by and large it decentralized power (with some horrific exceptions)

God-kings / pharaohs / caesars -> a handful of feudalists -> millions of millionaires vs voters vs large governments all competing in a much less violent and more stable balance of power

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

#196

Post by laserlight »

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…

> deny your natural emotions.

That is the opposite of Stoic practice. I have never heard Stoics denying things. What does it mean to deny things that happen? Emotions are not in one's control. Whenever they come up, one would observe and act according to Stoic virtues. If one has failed to observe, then they reflect on the failure and intend to observe in the future.

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

#197

Post by svnt »

mjburgess wrote: post #107
PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'd say in the majority of cases, for most adult people with some life experience, shouting when you want to shout is probably a healthy thing. Sure, and that is totally fine. But Stoic philosophy disagrees with that. Just as with many other fundamental questions about how to live life, there are different answers/points of view. You don't agree with the Stoic one, and you even offer some reasons why you think it m…

I agree. But you'll note one of my professed virtues is conflict, so I'm "participating in the world" by expressing a social emotion (contempt) towards a value system I disagree with in order to change the social environment. This makes me a political animal. This is why I express my view in this way. If I wanted to be a stoic, or nearly equivalently a contemporary academic, I'd present some anemic "balanced view" in…

If I can speculate: your perspective seems to be at least a second, maybe third-order perspective, of someone in an atypical environment surrounded by would-be stoics, who are all participating in order to succeed in e.g. middle management. This corporate stoicism produces suboptimal product results because while stoicism is perhaps necessary and valuable to hold a position, as you noted it is fundamentally detached and dishonest.

But until someone lives in your version of the social environment, they cannot see the relative value of a return to “radical candor” and so you get rejections, both from people behind you in their profession into stoic corporatism and from those who make their living from behaving in accord with it and believe they are superior for it.

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

#198

Post by volkl48 »

mjburgess wrote: post #66
dmichulke wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If the plane is falling from the sky, i envy the people screaming -- they have the right levels of attachemnt to their own lives. Are you saying that happier people scream more (shortly before dying)?

Happiness is only one meta-value, and at the level of "what the right meta" is, I'm somewhere between a nihilist and an aristotleian-sort-of-biologist: I only think that the people who are screaming when they are about to die are living like a healthy animal. And in the absence of any objective meta-values, it kinda seems like we might well just be what we are. Denying's one's instincts is an interesting exercise, an…

A crashing plane has roughly two possibilities, screaming wildly seems like the least useful and least pleasant option for either:

- You are going down in a way that might be survivable - If you want to live, you want to shut up and prepare yourself and your peers as best you can. If you're completely prepared and have time to kill, see below as long as it doesn't impair being ready when the time comes.

- You are going down in a way that obviously isn't going to be survivable - Your remaining lifespan has been suddenly reduced to minutes or seconds and there's no solving it. The only choice you have left is how to spend that time. Accepting the hand you've been dealt quickly and doing the best you can with the choices available to you rather than panicking or raging about things out of your control, is....sensible. Taking a last view of the world out the window, listening to a favorite song, a conversation with a loved one or even a stranger, etc, all seem like far more satisfying ways to spend your final moments than screaming like it's going to do anything.

> I only think that the people who are screaming when they are about to die are living like a healthy animal.

I'm not much of a biologist, but there seem to be plenty of animals, especially more intelligent ones, that pretty much calm down and await death when they recognize they are not long for the world for reasons they can't control and have no hope of escaping. (age, illness, etc).

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

#199

Post by [deleted] »

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…

[deleted]

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

#200

Post by Gud »

FredPret wrote: post #177
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…

> a roman emperor (tyrant, mass murderer, and courtier) It's interesting to read up on the lives of famous ancients like Julius Caesar and Alexander. I know it was a different time, but the regular and casual war crimes and mass murders sticks in one's craw.

Say what you will about Julius Caesar, at least he fought in the trenches. Many times were the battle was the toughest.

My reptile brain can appreciate that, at least!

Post reply on HN