(March 5, 2024 at 1:58 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:(March 5, 2024 at 1:20 pm)emjay Wrote: Looks like I misunderstood what you were calling selfish, Boru. I don't know much about the underlying philosophy of Stoicism, but I was just thinking about the practical aspect of it, of, similar to Buddhism, not trying to control the external environment but rather how you respond to it. I don't see that as selfish or not just a useful tool or perspective to have on the world.
When I said ‘selfish’ I didn’t mean as in the sense of greedy or spiteful, just that stoicism’s primary focus is on improving the Self. There’s nothing particularly wrong with that (we could all do with some self-improvement), but I’m not convinced that individuals living virtuously will necessarily extend that virtue to society as a whole.
Utilitarianism, on the other hand is just the opposite. While bits of it are certainly problematic, its focus is the greatest good for the greatest number in order to reach maximal happiness for as many people as possible. It’s a goal I find to be more laudable and useful than stoicism.
Boru
I don't know about Stoicism in particular, but Buddhism does try to cultivate compassion for others just as much as internal mastery over the mind, so that might perhaps be more agreeable to you on those terms, but I see what you're saying. I suppose it would be fair to say that my interest in these things tends to be in the self improvement sense - as psychological tools for dealing with life - more than as ethical theories... so I guess I'd say my interest in it (Buddhism or Stoicism) is selfish in the way you're meaning it. I don't really have any particular ethical theory that I adhere to beyond just trying to be empathetic.
