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

211–220 of 338 posts

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

#211

Post by laserlight »

andoando wrote: post #203
laserlight wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

>Whenever they come up, one would observe and act according to Stoic virtues. I am talking about precisely this. If something happens that angers you or makes you sad, you can always stop and try to alter your natural reaction/thoughts to be more aligned with a more forgiving/serene/understanding nature. What I am saying is if you do this really well, everything in life just becomes "it just is", and in turn becomes…

> everything in life just becomes "it just is", and in turn becomes nothing at all

I've found that this liberates me. If this is not aligned with your values, though, I don't see anything wrong with that.

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

#212

Post by cantrecallmypwd »

kittikitti wrote: post #148

I absolutely hate Stoicism. It's used by people as a way to shut me up when I'm expressing negativity about something "I can't control". Almost everything about our lives, especially as we transition to this rent based economy, is out of our control. Stoicism just creates lonely people who are obsessed with controlling things and others.

Forget all -ists and -isms.

There is are discontinuous, spectrum of limits to locus-of-control. It's important not to fall into either trap of absolutist internal or external LoC. I think there are generally too many people in wider humanity who adopt defeatist, learned helplessness, external local-of-control attitudes through sayings like "it's God's will" or "you can't fight city hall".

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

#213

Post by [deleted] »

btilly wrote: post #116
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…

I have read Meditations by Marcus Aurelius. Your description of how bitter and resentful they are is utterly bizarre, and bears no relation to the book that I read.

[deleted]

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

#214

Post by mjburgess »

antisthenes wrote: post #165
mjburgess wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean I'm more responding to Marcus Aurellius and other formalisations of historical stoicism, than the pretty widely understood idea that "somethings are important, some arent" and "care most about what you can change, and least about what you cant" These sort of bits of old wisdom also come in their opposites ("you never know when something is important", "your passions can define your life, and create opportuniti…

> These sort of bits of old wisdom also come in their opposites ("you never know when something is important", "your passions can define your life, and create opportunities") etc. But they don't. They're typically not used in such a way, because they're nonsense. > you never know when something is important This is just resigning yourself to ignorance and chance. It's an unfalsifiable truism, because you can point to…

You're agreeing with me. Those are all my views.

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

#215

Post by rayiner »

mjburgess wrote: post #38
andrewmutz wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your perceptions of stoicism are so detatched from mine, I have to ask, what does stoicism mean to you? The wikipedia entry describes it like this: "The Stoics believed that the practice of virtue is enough to achieve eudaimonia: a well-lived life. The Stoics identified the path to achieving it with a life spent practicing the four cardinal virtues in everyday life — prudence, fortitude, temperance, and justice — as…

> prudence, fortitude, temperance, and justice I adopt rather the opposite virutes. Imprudence, risk, throwing-your-self-at-a-wall-until-you-cant, intemperance (conflict, debate, disagreement, competition) and pragmatism (address what is rather than what should be). Behind each of the stoic virutues is a psychological position to dettach, dissociate and live in a more abstracted conceptual space. This can be theraput…

[flagged]

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

#216

Post by ctrlp »

mjburgess wrote: post #38
andrewmutz wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your perceptions of stoicism are so detatched from mine, I have to ask, what does stoicism mean to you? The wikipedia entry describes it like this: "The Stoics believed that the practice of virtue is enough to achieve eudaimonia: a well-lived life. The Stoics identified the path to achieving it with a life spent practicing the four cardinal virtues in everyday life — prudence, fortitude, temperance, and justice — as…

> prudence, fortitude, temperance, and justice I adopt rather the opposite virutes. Imprudence, risk, throwing-your-self-at-a-wall-until-you-cant, intemperance (conflict, debate, disagreement, competition) and pragmatism (address what is rather than what should be). Behind each of the stoic virutues is a psychological position to dettach, dissociate and live in a more abstracted conceptual space. This can be theraput…

You must be quite young to hold such beliefs. Whether you approve of stoicism or not, we all will die one day. Someone once said that to philosophize is to learn how to die. I hope you don't spend the last moments of your life screaming in anguish and fear.

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

#217

Post by andoando »

laserlight wrote: post #211
andoando wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Whenever they come up, one would observe and act according to Stoic virtues. I am talking about precisely this. If something happens that angers you or makes you sad, you can always stop and try to alter your natural reaction/thoughts to be more aligned with a more forgiving/serene/understanding nature. What I am saying is if you do this really well, everything in life just becomes "it just is", and in turn becomes…

> everything in life just becomes "it just is", and in turn becomes nothing at all I've found that this liberates me. If this is not aligned with your values, though, I don't see anything wrong with that.

It does and it did in a world where I can actually be devoid and detatched from everything. But I got bored of being alone and it makes it hard to connect with anyone when youre living in your own world.

But I dunno sometimes I think all this thinking is useless cause you never really know what caused what

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

#218

Post by throw4847285 »

Matticus_Rex wrote: post #169
throw4847285 wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, it's an especially odd claim because early Christianity was apocalyptic. The Second Coming was imminent. The world would be radically remade. I think the author is confusing early Christianity with Calvinism.

The author's claims are not generally true of Calvinism, either.

Fair. I guess I was thinking of a certain kind of prosperity theology which people blame on Calvinism, but that isn't fair. That's not how unconditional election actually works.

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

#219

Post by lupusreal »

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.

From what I understand, the Roman Senate accused Julius Caesar of war crimes or the contemporary equivalent for his Gallic wars.

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

#220

Post by FredPret »

Gud wrote: post #200
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.

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!

He also ordered a decimation on his own troops. Utterly barbaric.
Post reply on HN