/lit/ - Literature

>>15302030
Expand. Why do you think that is the logical conclusion of stoicism?

That's not what it's about, you dumb fucking redditor cunt.

>>15302030
stoicism

>>15302030
One could by inaction allow vice to happen and thus not practice virtue and not live according to Nature that binds us together. We do things because they are good not only for ourselves but also for others and thus we put ourselves in the service of others. Our Nature is that we must help one another and to help another is to act.

>>15302030
>If I take stoicism to its logical conclusion, what is the point of doing anything?
In stoic thought, the universe is established according to divine providence. Reality is set up to allow the pursuit of virtue, so is doing nothing a virtuous act? Definitely not, it is just inactivity.

>>15302030
stoicism is the rule of nature. It is your baseline.

You use it to break it and return to normalcy after.

>>15302030

You should read books about Stoicism before making any conclusion. Stoic icons like Cato worked their ass off their whole life to change the status quo.

>>15302030
>haha stoicism teaches you to become a vegetable, amrite?

>treating logic as an end in its self and not a means to an end

double digit IQ post

>>15302030
This 'logical conclusion' drivel is so indicative of these fucking plebs having a surface level understanding of philosophy. Get off wikipedia and read some whole books jackass.

Duty. Read the fucking books.

>>15302030
Stoicism comes off as a cope philosophy. Can't change something? Afraid something might hurt you? Well have no fear, that thing doesn't matter. Hegel considered the oppressive government of Rome to be the origin of stoic philosophy. Stoics cloister themselves away inside their skulls, safe from animal worries. The opposite side of that coin is of course that all pleasures must be acknowledged as worthless. Tasty food, nice weather, poetry, your children, all vain and ultimately unsubstantial pleasures. Or at least, having read Meditations, that's the impression I got. Boethius isn't considered a stoic but his book struck me as very similar. The Consolation of Philosophy is also about rationalizing and minimizing life's sorrows. Though Boethius presents some things of positive value (granted his philosophy was bogus in its own ways, but those flaws have nothing to do with Stoicism).
I don't know much about anything though so if I'm retarded just fill me in on what I'm missing.

>>15302030
Funny how he looks like Assad

>>15302030
>a single quote from a single man is the definition of stoicism
Why are critics of stoicism so dishonest?

>>15304329
>Well have no fear, that thing doesn't matter.
It doesn't matter precisely because you can't do anything about it. If you've given it your all, why worry? It doesn't seem to be a cope, it's rational thinking

>>15304329

There is definitely something to be said about the level of cope to be found in Stoicism, but thats true about everything used to justify or disassociate. If you are willing to dig through the insufferable (in any material) you will find practical. Its way more than just "I found a logical way to justify not having an emotional investment" for autists.

>>15304329
>Can't change something? Afraid something might hurt you? Well have no fear, that thing doesn't matter.
well it doesn't
if you are not part of the illuminati elite you are just a puppet anyway
the world doesn't care about your wishes

>>15302030
You need to come to the realisation that all philosophy is abjectly useless and inapplicable to real life. Then you'll stop asking these questions and stop browsing this board.