Stoicism

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

^Could you elaborate on exactly how an individual practicing the Stoic virtues benefits society as a whole?

Boru

[Jillybean]

Stoicism is actually extremely altruistic - the focus is on being moral yourself but not requiring or expecting that others meet the moral standards you set for yourself.  That said, I find it most helpful in the way you mention, as self improvement and a psychological tool for dealing with life.  

I agree that empathy and the "golden rule" of treating others how you would like to be treated is how I see the foundation for any interpersonal ethics.

Yes, I agree that the goal of a life lived by Stoic principles will be very virtuous toward others. Living a selfish, cruel life would certainly violate Stoicism.

As I said, Stoics hold that there is a set of principles according to which the world works. The goal is to live in accordance with this set of principles. Since man is a social animal, and justice is a part of the Logos, a Stoic would certainly take account of justice and of the people around him, and refrain as far as humanly possible from harming anyone. And to the extent that everyone is lifted up by mutual aid, it is virtuous and reasonable to assist others. 

Plutarch, Cicero, Hierocles, Marcus Aurelius, Arius Didymus, and other Stoic writers discuss a universal cosmopolitanism. This extends our responsibility to others beyond our own family or polis to cover all of humanity. It may be different from what we modern people think of as compassion -- Stoics wouldn't necessarily "feel your pain." But they would acknowledge others' pain and feel a mutual responsibility. 

I think you've hit the nail on the head by pointing out that the focus is on being moral yourself. Personal virtue is the goal. But personal virtue absolutely excludes selfishness, greed, and cruelty. What may be misleading people is the very wise (I think) belief that we don't have control over other people -- only ourselves. So our duty is to make ourselves as virtuous as possible. Some people take it as a given that being virtuous means trying to change other people -- scolding them, judging them, telling them what you think of them. Stoics don't think that this is what makes you virtuous. 

So Stoicism is about working on oneself, but the goal is that all benefit when virtue is increased.

Thanks for this post that greatly enhances the discussion. I appreciate your comments, and this is definitely how I see Stoicism - not as indifferent to others at all, but simply acknowledging that we can't control (or often even understand) others' behaviour, so we should focus on making our own behaviour the best it can be.

[Jillybean]

@Belacqua wrote "
Plutarch, Cicero, Hierocles, Marcus Aurelius, Arius Didymus, and other Stoic writers discuss a universal cosmopolitanism. This extends our responsibility to others beyond our own family or polis to cover all of humanity. It may be different from what we modern people think of as compassion -- Stoics wouldn't necessarily "feel your pain." But they would acknowledge others' pain and feel a mutual responsibility.

I think you've hit the nail on the head by pointing out that the focus is on being moral yourself. Personal virtue is the goal. But personal virtue absolutely excludes selfishness, greed, and cruelty. "

- Honestly I wish that the Stoics had included Compassion among the virtues, however from my reading it seems like many Stoics were naturally sensitive, empathetic people who may have suffered somewhat from this trait and were sort of arming themselves against undue suffering by focusing on other virtues. Ryan Holiday points out that many Stoics endured losses most of us will not experience in the modern world (at least in developed nations) like the deaths of several of their own young children. I'm currently reading Marcus Aurelius (Meditations) and I find him to be perhaps my favourite Stoic -- not just because of what he said and did, but what he did NOT do. Obviously other Roman Emperors used their power to fully indulge themselves, including in vices like lust, intemperance and cruelty. MA fought against even allowing himself to linger in bed in the mornings! I'm not sure I would have that kind of virtue in his position, lol.

[Belacqua]

Thanks for this post that greatly enhances the discussion.  I appreciate your comments, and this is definitely how I see Stoicism - not as indifferent to others at all, but simply acknowledging that we can't control (or often even understand) others' behaviour, so we should focus on making our own behaviour the best it can be.

Thank you for your kind words here! I really do enjoy good grownup give-and-take on these issues, so I appreciate your starting threads on these good topics. 

- Honestly I wish that the Stoics had included Compassion among the virtues, however from my reading it seems like many Stoics were naturally sensitive, empathetic people who may have suffered somewhat from this trait and were sort of arming themselves against undue suffering by focusing on other virtues. Ryan Holiday points out that many Stoics endured losses most of us will not experience in the modern world (at least in developed nations) like the deaths of several of their own young children. I'm currently reading Marcus Aurelius (Meditations) and I find him to be perhaps my favourite Stoic -- not just because of what he said and did, but what he did NOT do. Obviously other Roman Emperors used their power to fully indulge themselves, including in vices like lust, intemperance and cruelty. MA fought against even allowing himself to linger in bed in the mornings! I'm not sure I would have that kind of virtue in his position, lol.

Yes, I think we (mostly) live in very fortunate times and places. Obviously there are people suffering now as much as anyone has ever suffered, but I have had the great good luck to be secure and away from those things. Reading about the Greeks and Romans, in what we consider to be their Golden Ages, it's shocking to see how close they always were to total loss. Not just because an abscessed tooth could kill you, but because it really was possible to be on the losing side of a political argument and get sold into slavery. 

What you say about Marcus Aurelius ties into what we were saying about how the Stoic works on himself. No doubt many powerful people in history have lectured the rank and file on good behavior, while living decadent lives at home. An outward-oriented morality, which focusses on scolding others, seems unlikely to inspire loyalty. 

Naturally I think that if I were emperor, I would be a good and wise one. But given the opportunity it's just as likely that I'd hand over power to a regent, buy myself a palazzo in Venice, and hire a large staff of beautiful women. Not Stoic, in other words.

[Silver]

Don't take it personally ~ Buddhism

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Don't take it personally ~ Buddhism

Take it personally, because it is ~ Borudhism

Boru

[Silver]

Don't take it personally ~ Buddhism

Take it personally, because it is ~ Borudhism

Boru

---

I can see how you might think it is all about you. My one-liner was actually directed to the other person, who seems to me to have overreacted.

---

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Take it personally, because it is ~ Borudhism

Boru

---

I can see how you might think it is all about you. My one-liner was actually directed to the other person, who seems to me to have overreacted.

---

lol, I didn’t think that at all, sorry if I gave that impression.

The other person has me on ignore, which seems to indicate that I may have been right about the inherent selfishness of stoicism.

Boru