@Deleted User What do you think?^
(I couldn't talk about philosophy yesterday, but today I can :>)

Stoicism has some great elements, at work I train myself to not shy away from the large tasks, or anything painful I just decide to recognize it won't kill me so I shouldn't try to avoid it.

masturbating wont kill you

Anything that makes you tougher prepares you for what you are going to face. And that's a very good reason why parenting should promote Stoicism.

I've heard some people calling Stoicism a "masochist" philosophical ideology, which is one of the most stupid things I've ever heard. Knowing what's out there, and how to face it, is way better than avoiding pain to live a happy life. Because one day, maybe you have to follow only one path, full of pain. And you won't have any other choices. Stoicism prepares you for following that painful path.

I'm not advocating what doesn't kill you makes you stronger type stuff of course. I'm saying if you can take a burden to help out others, you should take it without regret.

When it involves helping others, it's obvious that you should take it. But the "rivals" of Stoicism focus on the cases when people follow Stoicism without having experienced a lot of pain in their life. They basically think it's useless and unnecessary.

@Maksim What's your opinion on Stoicism?

Would Marcus Aurelius himself be subject to that criticism?

I'm not sure about his history

Yes, many criticize him for being a fanatical Stoicist.

I was more asking whether or not he had a painful past

Or if he was an armchair stoicist so to speak

Yeah well, his parents died, then he was adopted, then again many family members of his and close friends died as well, but that wasn't the primary reason why he was a Stoic. It was the fact that he became a Ceasar, ruling one of the Greatest Empires the world had ever met. Not to mention that his reign was marked by a couple of military conflicts, and in order to face the huge amount of weight he had to carry on his back, he became a Stoic, and he actually succeeded.

I used to be big in the Stoicism scene teeheehee... I've read pretty much all of Marcus Aurelius and Epictetus (not that there is much of their writing to begin with). I think people too often conflate a robotic, unfeeling nature with the logical consequences of Stoicism. Marcus Aurelius and Epictetus stress that the universe follows an intelligible plan and design, and that the logos (or reasonable soul) conferred on humanity allows us to transcend the mundane suffering of the body by having us perceive this intelligibility that the universe abides by (and Marcus would tell us, in pantheistic fashion, that the universe IS God). Because we partake in divinity through the logos, and the divine is eternal and cannot be harmed, then to use reason - which is not dependent on the material - is to partake in a joy which can never be deprived. I think this is a beautiful concept but I don't like the fatalistic interpretations associated with it. Recognition of the divine plan doesn't mean we should be non-actors.... I think to stand by and not apply the body, the vehicle of our logos, into the world of the material is like hedonism - sad and boring. No fatalism for me sir

But yeah "anti-fragility" (modern Stoicism movement?) politics is totally spot on in my mind and is why I am close to a free-speech absolutist

@Ater Votum based

To be honest, I don't really like the way that many Stoic philosophers connect Stoicism with the Divine, although such connection is very well justified. The reason why I am a Stoic myself is because of the benefits that come with it, in real life, and even in the modern world, which is a world of image and fragility. And I also believe that Stoicism should be involved with parenting, especially in the modern times, due to what a jungle the modern world is. It is important for the child to be tough, and to realize that in order to survive out there, it needs to go through pain, not avoid it, but see it as a challenge. One of the many goals of humanity is to achieve eternal happiness, which may never be achieved, but through Stoicism, fragility and unhappiness are eradicated completely.

And yet there are some uneducated, irrational individuals, who claim that Stoicism is a synonym for masochism, and that it should be avoided.

That is simply disgraceful.

When your affirmation for life is contingent on materials outside your body (such as wealth, attention, or drugs), then if you are deprived of that material then you can no longer affirm life

> If you are distressed by anything external, the pain is not due to the thing itself, but to your estimate of it; and this you have the power to revoke at any moment.
-Marcus Aurelius.

The one who affirms their life through being virtuous can never be willingly deprived of their joy.

Based.

You shouldn't keep emotions under wraps

bottling up emotions is one of the worse things you can do

stoicism isnt about "bottling up emotions" lmao

^

that is exactly what it is, hiding your emotions

Stoicism is about facing and enduring pain.

Which is unhealthy

How?

everyone deals with pain differently

Obviously.

But Stoicism is the best way to deal with pain, in my opinion.

maybe in your case

Kinda right not everyone does

Stoicism might seem unhealthy at an X moment, but when in a Y moment, you face pain again, you're stronger, you can face the pain more easily and not let it affect you, so in the long-term, it's healthy. @moira

Not exactly

everyone deals with pain differently

some people deal with it better by talking to people