[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 198 KB, 1536x1028, What-is-Stoicism-1536x1028.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
23500587 No.23500587 [Reply] [Original]

The path to living a good life is not shying away from the outside world.
You have to experience the brutal and terrifying nature of the outside world, understand it, then fix it.
Deaths from childbirth, from disease, from other things were conquered by human labor and technology.
As Trotsky once said, faith can claim to move mountains, but it's only technology that actually moves and cuts down mountains.
The world is terrible. But we have to fix it.

>> No.23500612

>>23500587
BASED, can we hear a fuck mods, fuck jannies, fuck stoicism and fuck nature, brothers?

>> No.23500620
File: 48 KB, 668x960, 1655150528568.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
23500620

>>23500587
>he doesn't sustine et abstine

>> No.23500638

>>23500587
>>You have to experience the brutal and terrifying nature of the outside world, understand it, then fix it.
the smart guy lets the peons do that and does nothing but reaps the benefits of the whatever they find

>> No.23500653

>>23500587
That's right, that's why need technology. It's why all the Amish are so miserable and hate life... oh wait...

>> No.23500659

>>23500587
The man you posted on your picture was a Roman Emperor who spent his entire life protecting Rome and trying to improve it.

What have you done?

Also, what would be a better society?

>> No.23500660

>>23500587
The only people who preach stoicism are those who have never experienced any suffering.
It's always emperors and rich aristocrats.
Even when it is someone who's poor, they atleat live a simple poor life without any strife.
The moment anyone actually experiences any suffering, they drop stoicism instantly.

>> No.23500665

>>23500660
Nah, it is a retard thing. Anyone who wouldn't revolt against nature is a retard.

>> No.23500669

>>23500660
why's that so?
has it happened to you experience?
if so what convinced you stoicism was unworthy?

>> No.23500672

>>23500669
>has it happened to you experience?
fuck my brain, i meant did you have such "stoic phase" ruined?

>> No.23500750

Stoicism is just CBT. Its egoic self-soothing instead of actually embracing meaning and feeling.

>> No.23500807

Again and again there appears this type of strong-minded, completely non-metaphysical man, and in the hands of this type lies the intellectual and material destiny of each and every "late” period. Such are the men who carried through the Babylonian, the Egyptian, the Indian, the Chinese, the Roman Civilizations, and in such periods do Buddhism, Stoicism, Socialism ripen into definitive world-conceptions which enable a moribund humanity to be attacked and re-formed in its intimate structure. Pure Civilization, as a historical process, consists in a progressive taking-down of forms that have become inorganic or dead.

>> No.23500832

>>23500638
Tough shit, if you don't work you don't eat. That is the reality of life.
>>23500653
As far as I recall, anyone can leave their communities. Their societies still depend on the strength of the US and the world economy. You can't live in 1700s conditions without global trade.
>>23500660
If I recall correctly, Marcus Aurelius mentioned that he is a Stoic by not reacting to the bad smell of a servan'ts mouth? That is his suffering.
>>23500750
I agree completely. Therapy is pushed today in order to try and stop people from genuinely improving the state of affairs. It keeps them in the system and in the ideology.

>> No.23500868

>>23500587
How is any of that something a stoic is against...?

>> No.23500880

>>23500868
Stoics think that there are things you cannot change and you should accept that.
But today, we have defeated many of the things they thought were impossible to be destroyed.

>> No.23500892

so what alternatives are there to Stoicism?

>> No.23500931

>>23500880
Are you proposing that everything can be changed?

>> No.23500935

>>23500892
Not even joking, science. Having goals, holding yourself accountable somehow and working towards them. And thinking and worrying about EVERYTHING. Assessing the possible improvements and the actual possible cost to change everything and so on.

>> No.23500955

>>23500587
Stoicism tells me to ignore whiny bitches like you

>> No.23500994

Truth is most people can't deal with the psychologic burden of being able to think. This is how things work, the Stoic can't handle things such as existential dread or anything of that sort, so it turns into the known things and easily actionable goals. It will make him walk around the globe, but will never take him to the moon.

>> No.23501052

Ignorant, repetitive, stupid - boring. Yep, it's a /lit/ thread.

>> No.23501519

>>23500587
It’s better to try and fail then not try at all, but don’t come back crying if you end up as sisyphus. Stoicism is more about handling those negative emotions.

>> No.23501532

>>23500807
> Pure Civilization, as a historical process, consists in a progressive taking-down of forms that have become inorganic or dead
Was Hitler one of those men?

>> No.23501584

>>23500880
Have you discovered how to change the past?

>> No.23501608

>>23500587
>Fuck Stoicism
>Describes Stoicism as the way to live

>> No.23501610

>>23500587
>shying away from the outside world
That's not stoicism though.

>> No.23501618

>>23500587
Why do we "have" to fix it? How would it even be fixed in your totally objective and level-headed mind?
>>23500660
Epictetus was a slave...

>> No.23501664

>>23500807
what the fuck is an "inorganic" form? Also, this>>23501532
Also, what the fuck is "pure" civilization? Do you think that you have any connection at all with the roman fucking empire, you who don't even sacrifice to your ancestors' flame? Do you think there is any commonality or connection? Because they would not. They would think that they are completely and utterly dead in your time, with not living remnant spirit left to linger in your museums where you gawk at their works like a monkey. Why? isn't it obvious? Do you see the Vestal flame burning? No, that means that Rome does not exist, just like your poor-excuse of a family. Not even your petty mutterings about roman law and "legacy" have any meaning because doom had come to Rome. Your view of history, which is actually an opinion as to what you think should be done, is that every day, people should re-begin the work of the first day under the guise that it is somehow "novel" or more "pure".

>> No.23501679

>>23500935
wow, it's like you know jack shit about Stoicism or that it had a materialist conception of the world. All Stoics think is that what you really have control over is your mindset. You don't even know what you want to change. You just worship it like some illusion.

>> No.23501689

>>23500832
Imagine, thinking that you want to "improve" the "state of affairs"
Pussy, the goal is to do whatever you fucking want.

>> No.23501697
File: 66 KB, 660x1000, 71-IR281jdL._AC_UF1000,1000_QL80_.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
23501697

>>23501679
>don't even know what I want to change
It is about poking things around and feeling PLEASURE in finding out how things work for the SAKE of it. You are a retard.

>> No.23501716

>>23500587
Is it stoics or ism?
Personal dislike of isms in general here.

>> No.23501752

https://streamable.com/cnozq0

>> No.23501774

>>23501697
Ok, so it's not about changing things. Got it.

>> No.23501780

>>23501774
It is literally about going after the unknown, instead of doing what is expected of you. You wouldn't understand. Stoicism is something fits retards like a glove.

>> No.23501798

Wow, that makes a lot of sense, that is why people love that, they are actually retards that WANT people to tell them what to do and what to want. They wouldn't know what to do if they didn't had society putting its expectations over them.

>> No.23501826

>>23501780
I don't think you understand stoicism. Where does stoicism say "new thing bad"? You sound needlessly angry.

>> No.23501828

>>23501798
But you definitely are a 100% original individual with absolutely no influences in your life, known or unknown.
Also, you have to be 18 to post here.

>> No.23501877

>>23501826
It is mostly about ignoring things that you can't change. And I've seen a lot of people swearing by it, that this gave them peace and so on. They are so stupid that they don't even realize that, everything in stoicism is some kind of Christianity v0.1.
>>23501828
I'm just saying straight up facts, most people hate thinking. That is how it goes. They would rather mindless do the same thing over and over, and eventually get to the good result thing for their work.
Try making people think and they will start to get mad at you. That is how it works. You don't get it.

>> No.23501887

>>23501608
Kek I always see this cope.
>No Stoicism doesn't say to not take action, it just says to calm down, think away your emotions, and stunt yourself into inaction because it's stupid to care too much about things, you have to care the exact right amount about things, but if you really think about it nothing reeeallyy matters so you shouldn't really get mad about anything... but stop accusing stoicism of things it doesn't encourage like suppression and apathy! Stoicism means everything that is good and nothing that is bad and this is totally attainable through mindset alone!!!
Get real

>> No.23501893

>>23501887
It's about not being moved by externals. Where's the issue? Caring about things is lame and the source of all suffering.

>> No.23501918

>>23501887
I always see this ignorance. On a channel literally about books, and you haven't read them.

Stoicism is about reacting appropriately to external events. You reacted by vomiting inaccurate bad faith greentext.

Maybe you should back to your other philosophy books that ask nothing of you.

>> No.23501926

When you shitpost about Plato creating strawmen, remember retards like OP were out and about thinking they're wise

>> No.23501928

>>23501887
Thanks for sharing your infantile understanding of an antique philosophy you've never studied.

>> No.23501971

>>23500935
>Not even joking, science. Having goals, holding yourself accountable somehow and working towards them. And thinking and worrying about EVERYTHING. Assessing the possible improvements and the actual possible cost to change everything and so on.

But what would you gain by doing so?

>> No.23501975

>>23500880
>Stoics think that there are things you cannot change and you should accept that.
>But today, we have defeated many of the things they thought were impossible to be destroyed.
We... Certainly didn't do that and you clearly don't understand what the Stoics thought.

>> No.23501980

>>23501887
Nah, it's more about not throwing a temper tantrum in public just because you missed your train.

>> No.23501981

>>23501877
>Try making people think and they will start to get mad at you. That is how it works. You don't get it.
Where did you get this high opinion of yourself?

>> No.23501987

>>23501664
Did you even read the quote or did you just see the word "Roman" and have a fit of apoplexy?

>> No.23501995

>>23501987
No. I genuinely enjoy writing screeds. It's good practice

>> No.23502003

>>23501918
>Stoicism is about reacting appropriately to external events.

>just react appropriately bro it's that easy
>what's appropriate? It's what the cool guy does in the movie
>but I'm not that guy
>well think your way into being that guy
>wtf I did it and now I'm that guy why didn't I think of this I didn't know I could literally just choose to be a demigod good thing I read that statue guy

Stoics genuinely believe humans work like this

>> No.23502016

>>23502003
you're overcomplicating it for meme points. I like the metaphor of the doctor who doesn't get worked up about anything because he's seen it all. that is the Stoic ideal.

>> No.23502017

>>23502003
Damn, Zeno btfo just like that.

>> No.23502091

>>23501981
Most people dislike thinking. They would rather be told what to do instead of understanding things and thinking about it themselves.
>>23501971
This is not even joking like a superpower. Seriously, it is impressive how people manage their lives and businesses without any kind of scientific approach.

>> No.23502113

>>23502091
But what would you gain by having this superpower of science?

>> No.23502121

>>23501877
>>23501887
As always, people who shit the hardest on stoicism literally prove they don't understand it whatsoever.

>> No.23502125

>>23502121
I never ever got why it’s shit on in the first place besides the obvious misunderstanding. It seems like an ulterior motive is afoot

>> No.23502127
File: 1.22 MB, 360x203, pensando.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
23502127

>>23502113
What do you mean? It is just another thing that you can use. That is the thing. A stoic is just a stoic, and will be stoic. Someone like that could be a stoic, test it against other philosophical frames and see how it stands compared to whatever and so on. This is what a scientist would do.

>> No.23502128

>>23502113
You gain the superpower of being able to think of yourself as an "I heckin' luv science" guy.

>> No.23502133

>>23502125
If the only way they can criticize it is to intentionally misrepresent it, it can't be that bad of a philosophy.

>> No.23502135

>>23502121
http://www.usethefuckinggoogle.com/?q=how+stoicism+inspired+christianity

>> No.23502137

>>23502133
Ask any of the critics if they know the meaning of terms like "phantasiai" or "kataleptic."

>> No.23502149

>>23502135
As always, you instantaneously cease attempting to argue upon the actual content of stoicism (because you can't without using fallacious logic), and instead point to google for some articles written by undergrad students about some tangential relationship between Christianity and stoicism, whose connection nobody talks about or cares about.
You are perhaps the most literal midwit in this thread.

>> No.23502160

>>23502127
But what do you gain by doing so?

>> No.23502221

>>23502003
Affirmations are a thing. Fake it till you make it, is a thing. Placebo and self hypnosis are things.

You just have excuses.

>> No.23502225

>>23502091
>Most people dislike thinking
Yeah I understood the first time you said people don't like thinking.

>> No.23502234

>>23502160
Being a better human? Being more comfortable with your self and decisions? Be less anxious and more proactive?

Nah, fuck it. Just keep reading all those other philosophers, they probably have the answer.

>> No.23502251

>>23502234
>Being a better human?
What is a better human?

>Being more comfortable with your self and decisions? Be less anxious and more proactive?
How is science better than Stoicism for this? And why would this be good?

>> No.23502289

>>23502149
What is so different about it? I literally just said that I can't tell the difference between it and a secularized version of Christianity. This is what:
>everything in stoicism is some kind of Christianity v0.1
Is supposed to mean.
>>23502160
You get multiple views instead of a single one. If you aren't a (insert school of thought), you might as well try multiple ones on different contexts and check out how they fare against each other. It is like having a box of tools instead of just a screwdriver or something.
>>23502225
And what does that have to do with me? You clearly dislike people who think. And anti-intellectualism is a thing since forever.

>> No.23502343

>>23502289
>You get multiple views instead of a single one. If you aren't a (insert school of thought), you might as well try multiple ones on different contexts and check out how they fare against each other. It is like having a box of tools instead of just a screwdriver or something.
But weren't you arguing that people should ignore Stoicism and follow Science?
And I don't get your point. The tools are better for what?

>> No.23502362

>>23502343
No, it is more about not embracing stoicism at all. And also due to the fact that while learning it, I honestly couldn't tell any practical difference between it and Christianity considering my 'scientifical' approach to both of them.
>And I don't get your point. The tools are better for what?
Well, I came to the conclusion that both Christianity and Stoicism are practically the same. And I would rather LARP as a Christian and not be some odd person that lives by some weird ancient philosophy. In a way, I'm potentially better adjusted.

>> No.23502386

>>23502121
Real stoicism is the same as real communism at this point. Any obvious failures practically or philosophically are defended by saying you misunderstand the real version of [my ideology], yet everyone gives a different answer as to what it really means and every answer allows its defender to handwave away inconvenient criticisms

>> No.23502427

>>23502362
Honestly, you look like a fool when you speak of a "scientific approach" to this.
Science (in the normal meaning of the term) can't tell you what is the good or not for human beings. You have a bunch of implicit assumptions you are not tackling. Those implicit assumptions are the really important things to question, which is where Stoicism, Christianity, Platonism become important.

Don't be like Sam Harris.

>> No.23502445

>>23502427
That is why I'm using quotes. It is my own subjective experience using one vs the other philosophical frame. I'm just saying that before adopting something like that people should honestly compare with other things, because I couldn't tell the difference between one and the other.
>implicit assumptions
Yes, that is why I haven't said that they are the same. I'm just saying that they felt like the same thing. Suppose that I have a pair of stoic glasses and christian glasses, they felt somewhat the same. And while I haven't fully tested it, I think that the stoic glasses are a tad bit worse than the christian ones because of not having faith that the world was made by someone good and for the good.

>> No.23502481

>>23502445
Disclaimer: I'm Christian, not Stoic

Stoicism does believe in Divine Providence. You can't be a Stoic Atheist. They believed that the universe had a divine, benevolent soul who controlled everything. That what is in your power is to assent to this. Hence, living according to nature. This is basically Stoic Ethics. If you read Epictetus, this is the basis of his philosophy. Atheists claiming to be Stoics are just embarrassed Epicureans.

I'm Christian. I don't believe in Stoic pantheism. I believe in the Christian view of reality. And from this comes Christian morality.

It is not an issue of "if I believe in Marxism, I will sleep with leftist chicks, if I believe in Stoicism I will become a better soldier, etc"
But will sleeping with leftist chicks really be what is good for me? Should I really become a soldier? And so on.

>> No.23502493

>>23502445
I'm >>23502481
And sorry for being a poor example of a Christian. Believe me I have a lot to learn. I just don't know how to write in a better, more charitable way. I guess years of internet discussions made me a rude person who doesn't know a better way to write.

But I hope you understand where I'm coming from.

>> No.23502537

>>23502481
>you can't be a Stoic Atheist
Yes, this is something I keep telling people here: that you are supposed to get 'the whole package'. If you aren't using their metaphysics, then it is something else, you are not a Stoic. Exactly because metaphysics deeply change how you are going to view things in general.
I don't get this thing, ultimately I think that people adopt things that make sense to them. You adopted Christianity because you think it is better for you. This is the same with everything else, unless someone is sick, depressed and suicidal, then they will seek things that will harm them.
But the thing with Stoicism is that, God doesn't love you there, everything isn't made for the better, you won't have eternal life and be rewarded for following your philosophy and so on, plus most people were raised in Christian families.
This is what I'm talking about, why be a Stoic when you have Christianity?

>> No.23502553

>>23502493
You don't have to apologize. We are on 4chan ffs, stop with this shit. Come on... but one thing that I notice that kinda changes how things feel is Monism. This definitely felt very different from Christianity, but that was it, and you can have Monism in Christianity if you check Leibniz philosophy, so... I don't get it why someone would bother with being a stoic.

>> No.23502586

>>23502537
I "adopted" Christianity because I believe it is true... The whole Apostle's Creed.
In my opinion, belief about reality is what informs morality.
If I believed in Stoic pantheism, I would be a Stoic.
And yeah, we are in agreement that Stoics who don't believe in their metaphysics/physics are not really Stoics.

>>23502553
I'm trying to be less aggressive. It is not good for a Christian to be rude. Trying to fix old habits.

>> No.23502617

>>23502586
That is the thing, I don't get why people bother with being Stoic when there's Leibniz, unless they are ignorant. But again, there are people who study philosophy, more than myself, and they are stoics. So if someone else reading this and is a stoic... why?

>> No.23502661

>>23500587
Another thread misrepresenting Stoicism because it's le popular.
Stoicism says a million times: Change what you can, don't bother with what you can't. People always mistakenly interpret this as "Don't change anything".

>> No.23502675

>>23502661
What is the appeal of that compared to "doing your best and leaving matters in God's hands"? This is one of those things that I just don't get it. People usually get into Stoicism for the dumbest reasons ever. I would totally get if it were for the Monism.

>> No.23502702
File: 26 KB, 474x474, th.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
23502702

>>23501584
Not yet, but I will Aku. I swear it.

>> No.23502710

>>23502675
So “god” is the big hang up for you? You do your thing and let other people do theirs. The thought process is similar

>> No.23502722

>>23502710
I'm Agnostic, I just like knowing things and the reason why they happen. I'm talking about my own practical standpoint, and I'm interested in knowing other people's practical standpoints, because this might get me closer to understanding people better. And I think that this is a cornerstone for a good mental health, not even joking. People probably have certain types of philosophical systems that are better for them.

>> No.23503043

>>23502386
>Any obvious failures
What are the obvious failures? Every single criticism against it on this board resorts to making up a hypothetical scenario and confidently affirming that a stoic would react to it in the worst possible way. But you guys NEVER substantiate your hypothetical stoic's reaction. I've never once seen you guys point to actual source text to explain why your hypothetical stoic is reacting so stupidly.
Example: Months ago one of your brain-dead criticisms was, "if a nigger tried to rape a stoic, the stoic would just let him." Where does this even come from?

>> No.23503177

>>23500832
>if you don't work you don't eat
I feel like there's a whole class of people for which this has been consistently untrue throughout history. In fact those guys seemed to be eating even when people that worked didn't get to eat, so by all accounts working is actually a pretty bad predictor for having enough food. Why else would the lowest class be called "the working class"?

>> No.23503182

>>23502702
He was robbed by that last season, ROBBED.
They swept that ending under the rug so damn quick.

>> No.23503204

>>23502289
>And anti-intellectualism is a thing since forever
Yes, you do persist.

>> No.23503219

>>23502481
>You can't be a Stoic Atheist.
You absolutely can.
>They believed that the universe had a divine, benevolent soul who controlled everything.
Benevolent is pushing things considering all the malevolent will in the universe.You can believe that the drive for life and order from chaos is inherently good.
>It is not an issue of "if I believe in Marxism, I will sleep with leftist chicks, if I believe in Stoicism I will become a better soldier, etc"
So you don't have to believe in a divine force at all to be a better person.

Are you just gatekeeping a morality that doesn't even belong to you?

>> No.23503227

>>23502537
>This is what I'm talking about, why be a Stoic when you have Christianity?
You assume atheists (and presumably other religieons) don't also need guidance, and that morality is exclusive to religious belief.

I'm sorry to say neither is true, and good has existed before religion.

>> No.23503231

>>23502251
>What is a better human?
I know social media has rotted the focus center of your brain, but try reading past the first sentence.

>> No.23503366

>>23500587
>The path to living a good life is not shying away from the outside world.
Where in stoicism is this contested

>> No.23503505

>>23500660
cope

>> No.23503523

>>23500880
I dont think you understand stoicism lmao

>> No.23503544

>>23502675
>"doing your best and leaving matters in God's hands"?

This is literally a stoic statement?

>> No.23503568

>>23500638
The smart guy you speak of can’t survive on his own and is a stumbling block for his society. The workers of society, or as you call them, “peons,” will eventually find a solution to him as they did with the previous problems.

>> No.23503581

>>23500935
So material improvement... very American

>> No.23503916

>>23503581
>>23502722
Does this sound like material improvement?
>>23503227
No, I'm just saying that you have to embrace the whole package to be a (insert school of thought). I'm not even implying that you can't have a moral without metaphysics because even if you don't have a metaphysical system or whatever, you still are going to have some kind of model of reality while thinking about things. Whether it is aligned with science or anything, it doesn't matter.
And that most people have decent solutions to problems in their own cultural contexts. So if you are going to rip off Stoicism, why aren't people just doing that to Christianity? This is what puzzles me, what there is to Stoicism that you couldn't have in Christianity in an improved version?

>> No.23504004

>>23503219
You can't be a Stoic Atheist by definition. Stoic morality is based on Stoic theological beliefs.

>> No.23504285

>>23503544
Yes kinda. The things is that Christian God actually loves you, compared to Stoicism which considers a monistic metaphysics, so you are part of god and everything else. This is a difference, but I don't think I ever saw anyone mentioning that.
Basically what not even joking puzzles me is: What is there in Stoicism that you didn't had in Christianity? I'm not even Christian, I'm Agnostic, but this doesn't make much sense to me.

>> No.23504321

>>23504285
Not that anon.
Christianity unfortunately has become kind of "forbidden" to some academic types.
Stoicism is kind of removed, so it doesn't have this problem.

That said, at least Stoicism (even in its bastardized form) is better than the modern liberal morality of hedonism.

>> No.23504341
File: 164 KB, 870x598, 1693231722117.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
23504341

>>23504285
God hates most people.

Sure, there's a common grace and love he gives to all men, even to the wicked; but that won't last forever and that doesn't pardon the sins of the unrepentant and unbelieving. Sure, "for God so loved the world..." and "while we were yet sinners Christ died for us", but that doesn't say God loves sinners (anyone that's sinning, the Bible rather calls such people children of the devil and has no kind words to say about them). And never once did Christ tell anyone "God loves you" (certainly not to the religious hypocrites, or the lukewarm, or the cowardly and unbelieving). And you don't see the apostles preaching the love of God in the book of Acts even once (the word itself isn't even present in the book), but they did preach the fear of God as Solomon did that the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom.

The Bible plainly teaches God is full of hate and wrath for evil men, and every day they continue in sin they're storing up yet more wrath for the day of judgment. And many of the passages I'm referencing are from the NT. And God personally killed two people in the NT for lying to the Holy Spirit for their love of money, Ananias and Sapphira, for those hypocrites and apostates who'd try to claim it's a different God from the OT.

Those apostates and hippies you probably heard lied, because God hates the sin AND the sinner.
>Psalms 5:5 The foolish shall not stand in thy sight: thou hatest all workers of iniquity.
>Psalms 7:11 God judgeth the righteous, and God is angry with the wicked every day.
>Psalms 11:5 The LORD trieth the righteous: but the wicked and him that loveth violence his soul hateth.
I could get more verses to prove my point, but that should be enough. There's a guy who made an article series on his site about the various things God hates, and one of his articles was showing that God hates wicked people and not only their sins.

God is not some easy-go-lucky hippie. When people hear "God loves you" and that's all, what they take away is that there's nothing they're doing that offends God, that God would accept them as they are. That's just not true. Jesus Christ isn't Kurt Cobain, he never said "come as you are", but he did say "except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish".

>>23504321
>Christianity unfortunately has become kind of "forbidden" to some academic types.
>kind of "forbidden"
That's one way of putting it.

They had a movement a while ago, trying to get degrees rescinded from any Christians who actually believe the Bible rather than their scientifically-impossible evolution mythology which is proven impossible by mathematics. They don't care about truth otherwise they'd stop indoctrinating kids with proven lies (and this isn't including the "evidences" for evolution that are also proven frauds), in fact, they hate the truth because they have pleasure in unrighteousness. As much as the apostates love John 3:16, they really ought to read the following verses, specifically 19-21.

>> No.23504349

>>23500660
Lol nah, you're just weak

>> No.23504353

>>23500955
THIS

>> No.23504356

>>23501928
Shut UP bitch

>> No.23504361

>23504349
>23504353
>23504356
You can reply to more than one poster at a time, newfag.

>> No.23504380

>>23504341
Yes, but you aren't considering that "rip off" post. God is somewhat like you said, but that doesn't mean that people can't roll their own thing. This is literally what every new church does in some way or another.
>So if you are going to rip off Stoicism, why aren't people just doing that to Christianity? This is what puzzles me, what there is to Stoicism that you couldn't have in Christianity in an improved version?
>>23503916
This is what truly bothers me, why people aren't ripping off what is right in front of them? Are we getting dumber?

>> No.23504392

>>23503043
Seneca and others have quotes such as the following:
>In the next place, anger has nothing useful in itself, and does not rouse up the mind to warlike deeds: for a virtue, being self-sufficient, never needs the assistance of a vice: whenever it needs an impetuous effort, it does not become angry, but rises to the occasion, and excites or soothes itself as far as it deems requisite, just as the machines which hurl darts may be twisted to a greater or lesser degree of tension at the manager's pleasure. "Anger," says Aristotle, "is necessary, nor can any fight be won without it, unless it fills the mind, and kindles up the spirit. It must, however, be made use of, not as a general, but as a soldier." Now this is untrue; for if it listens to reason and follows whither reason leads, it is no longer anger, whose characteristic is obstinacy: if, again, it is disobedient and will not be quiet when ordered, but is carried away by its own willful and headstrong spirit, it is then as useless an aid to the mind as a soldier who disregards the sounding of the retreat would be to a general.

Aristotle is clearly right here. Seneca has a flawed and idealistic idea of how humans work and his ideas on anger clearly lead to suppression and repression. It can be argued that it's irrational to care about literally anything so Stoicism leads to thought loops, shame, and inaction. Consciousness, rationality, problem-solving, etc. are just small aspects of most people's psychology; emotions reign supreme. If your gf cheats on you you can tell yourself you're an epic stoic who doesn't get upset by such silly things, but thats not gonna help you sleep any better. The hurt will stay. So my issue is that it misunderstands how psychology works.

>> No.23504418

>>23504380
>Yes, but you aren't considering that "rip off" post.
What about it?

>God is somewhat like you said, but that doesn't mean that people can't roll their own thing.
Why are you trying to tell me about God when you clearly don't know him? Yeah, "roll your own thing" and then be cast into the lake of fire. Maybe read those verses about man doing what is right in his own eyes, or just stop talking about something you've clearly never studied. It's not like you accept correction from someone more knowledgeable than you in the subject. You just want to make a false god in your image that will condone your sin.

>This is literally what every new church does in some way or another.
That's not only a lie, but what man does isn't the standard set in Scripture. Why do you even speak if you're just going to say such meaningless nothings and stupid lies? These are all rhetorical questions, I really don't want to hear more stupidity from you.

>> No.23504456

>>23504392
>If your gf cheats on you you can tell yourself you're an epic stoic who doesn't get upset by such silly things
There it is, yet again.

>> No.23504470

>>23504456
Following in line with Seneca's quote that's exactly what a stoic would do retard.

>> No.23504480

>>23504470
Uh huh, and let me guess: the stoic would do absolutely nothing about his girlfriend cheating on him, right? In fact, I'm sure the stoic would even encourage his girlfriend to cheat more, right?

>> No.23504499

>>23504418
>a retard that can't make sense out of simple phrases
KEK
>tell you about God
KEK I literally just agreed with whatever you said about it. That is the only way to talk about anything related to God and religion around religitards

>> No.23504517

The 'problem' with Christianity is that Stoics probably don't want anything to do with certain people. That makes a lot of sense.

>> No.23504525

>>23504480
What would a stoic do then? And why?

>> No.23504593

>>23503916
Yes, it does. Mental health is the only purpose you mention

>> No.23504604

>>23504525
Nta but I guess a stoic would punish his wife or leave her because she is acting against nature. Not a very good answer I admit

>> No.23504610

>>23504499
Nta, but I think that people don't rip off christianity because the entire metaphysics behind it are old and rotting today, as Nietzche says. Probably a poor education and general malaise is part of it too, so people just try to find a readymade alternative

>> No.23504809

>>23503916
>I'm just saying that you have to embrace the whole package
I'm saying you don't, and you don't believe that either. You're a Christian, you should know you don't have to accept everything from ancient texts of their time, translated and retranslated.

I don't understand why your piecemeal following of a religion (heavily inspired by stoicism) gets a pass, but stoicism (which has no key central dogma) does not.

>> No.23504838

>>23504004
>Stoic theological beliefs
What were they then, and how did they inform morality?

>> No.23504844

>>23504809
>I'm a Christian
I'm not. You are a retard. This conversation is pointless.
>gets a pass
Just call it something else. There are catholics, protestants, neopentecostalists and all sorts of christcuckery bullshit.
This place is filled with retards. It would be pointless wasting more time here.

>> No.23504904

>>23504844
>It would be pointless wasting more time here.
Your first stoic though.

>> No.23504945

No one ITT understands stoicism. Stop getting your philosophy from tiktok

>> No.23504985

>>23504904
What that has to do with Stoicism? I just want to talk to people about things and I can't talk with religitards and it looks like they made their way in here. So yeah...

>> No.23505121

>>23504985
Well you know, if everybody you meet is retarded, maybe the problem isn't them.

>> No.23505159

>>23505121
>coming up with a stupid generalization
>"no u"

>> No.23506077

>>23500587
Technology has never moved or cut down a single mountain

>> No.23506094

>>23500880
You are going to die of famine sooner than you think, ignorant techno-whore that you are. We've done nothing but burn lots of oil rather fast and our so-called "progress" is illusory and transient!
Futurists deserve indescribable torments beyond the purview of any mythological hells

>> No.23506116

>>23504610
Christian metaphysical beliefs are not bad at all.
People who claim so are just ignorant.

>>23504838
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoic_physics

Meditate on what "living in accordance to nature" is and you will find that it is deeply theological.

Stoicism is incompatible with atheism.

>> No.23506253

>>23504285
A mechanistic understanding of the universe is more intuitive, and you don't have to think about weird bullshit like the trinity or jesus being a demigod/god/man thing

>> No.23506409
File: 45 KB, 474x333, OIP (4).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
23506409

>>23506253
It is, I'm not that well-versed on those things to have thought them through and realize their implications, but you have to take metaphysics into account when you are considering any philosophical school.
Suppose that you hold a materialistic view of the world. Death gets a whole new meaning, murder and other life related things too. But consider:
>How totally different did the world appear to medieval man! For him the
>earth was eternally fixed and at rest in the center of the universe, encircled
>by the course of a sun that solicitously bestowed its warmth. Men were all
>children of God under the loving care of the Most High, who prepared
>them for eternal blessedness; and all knew exactly what they should do
>and how they should conduct themselves in order to rise from a
>corruptible world to an incorruptible and joyous existence. Such a life no
>longer seems real to us, even in our dreams. Natural science has long ago
>torn this lovely veil to shreds.
This is completely different from a regular Christian experience on the contemporary world. The hard part to talk about this is that people automatically assume that one must be better than the other or whatever, I have a hard time thinking which one would be better, even considering 'God's standpoint'. What I think that people should pay attention to is: that there is a dramatical difference, and that maybe it is on people's best interest to be able to 'turn a switch inside their brains' to revert to an 'older and primitive' view of the world when they are considering certain religious things. Specially if they feel that they aren't in touch with God or the divine, since this mechanistic understanding of things was heavily criticized by a lot of people back when it was being invented.

>> No.23506421

>>23500587
>fix it
you can't fix shit. never trust someone who wants to change the world.

>> No.23506508

>>23500587
The world was always going to end, there is no fixing it. Get right with Christ brother.

>> No.23507019

>>23506116
>living in accordance to nature
And that not incompatible with being atheist. The universe is an uncaring place is the same thing as recognising it isn't good or bad. And nature's way for humans is to be good and caring, else we would not have survived.

You have to believe in God to be Christian: he holds your reward and punishment. There is no such reward in stoicism. And if the universe is uncaring, it certainly isn't going to get angry in me if I don't believe it has magical breath.

You also didn't mention or site any morals so I guess there aren't any to learn?

Your arguments aren't convincing. Sorry.

>> No.23507077

>neonatal deaths were conquered by technology
>over 40 million abortions since 1980

>> No.23507079

>>23500660
Smells of cope

>> No.23507115

>>23500660
Epictetus was a literal slave whose owner beat him and broke his leg.

>> No.23507227

>>23502481
>Stoicism does believe in Divine Providence. You can't be a Stoic Atheist. Divine providence is used to describe an external element affecting you that's unexplainable in the physical world.
It can be called "god" but limiting it to theism is retarded. It's being conflated due to many stoics being theists themselves. You can absolutely be an atheist and accept that some elements you don't comprehend have an impact on you. I don't know what's difficult to understand about it.
"There's this thing I don't understand but I can accept not knowing and don't have to resort to literally inventing a superior being that would be the cause of all this" is pretty much what atheism is about

>> No.23507423

>>23507227
Sure, but then why should an atheist stoic live according to their nature if there is no God? Is a cold unfeeling universe something that you should try to emulate?

>> No.23507560

>>23507423
>cold unfeeling universe
The universe isn't cold and unfeeling though ? It is in the sense that it doesn't have a purpose in store for you, but the phrase implies something unpleasant and pejorative.
You are to make your own purpose in life, according to your conditions. You are to make the best of what you are given by your circumstances. Not relying on god as your moral compass implies that you have to pick up the responsibility and decide what's moral.
The only difference between a theist or non theist stoic is that the first decides to adopt another's moral code while the second one decides to make his own
You don't need god to be compassionate, you don't need god to be of help to yourself and others, you don't need god to be loyal and a good father.
My personal opinion is that gods are an invention of weak men that created this "perfect" figure that supposedly made them imperfect and justify their shortcomings. God is a crutch for those who fear to be judged unworthy

>> No.23507712

>>23507019
You are not a Stoic. Stoicism is literally based on Divine Providence by a benevolent universe.
Tell me, what do you believe the good to be?

>> No.23507717

>>23500587
Stoicism doesn't mean ignoring any interaction with the world. It just means to maintain a cool and calm demeanor as you do it.

>> No.23508422

>>23507712
>Divine Providence by a benevolent universe.
Such a deity is unworthy of me if it depends on my belief.

Just doesn't add up, friend. You keep repeating the same thing, because you don't know. You don't even know why you are good.

I'm afraid you just can't conceptualise of something outside your limited Christian upbringing:

https://thewisemind.net/do-stoics-believe-in-god/
>It’s important to note that Stoics do not see God metaphysically. Their vision of God isn’t that of a physical entity; rather, they conceptualise God as a system of order and logic. The reason they don’t believe in God in the traditional sense is because there is no way of conceiving God with the resources humans have. According to Stoics, we are not knowledgeable enough and don’t even have the proper words to define this primary cause of all things. Being named the primary cause of all things is the closest they can come to defining God.

Not to mention of the stoic sage, the embodiment of the perfect stoic. We strive to be like him, but do not punish ourselves if we fail. He is an ideal, not a rod for our backs.

>> No.23508449

>>23508422
If I had a time machine I would translate your posts to Ancient Greek and show them to Epictetus and Chrysippus.

You are not a Stoic. You are a mixture of an Epicurean and maybe a Nietzschean.

Tell me, what is virtue? Are you like the Modern Stoicism folks who would define it as "whatever an American progressive thinks to be what a nice guy would do?"

>> No.23508474

>>23508449
>Tell me, what is virtue? Are you like the Modern Stoicism folks who would define it as "whatever an American progressive thinks to be what a nice guy would do?"
How embarrassing for you, you seem have let your mask slip.

Not a Christian, not good person, but asking others to prove their worth? The virtues are very easy to find and understand, you use Wikipedia of all places, why would it matter if I listed them? would they sate your jealousy! What would?

The most stoic thing I could say about you is, neither you nor your opinion matter.

I'll leave this conversation having bested another challenge. You'll leave it having not convinced another person they're wrong about a philosophy you only have a very basic understanding thereof.

I hope you find happiness one day.

>> No.23508479

>>23507712
>I may become a poor man; I shall then be one among many. I may be exiled; I shall then regard myself as born in the place to which I shall be sent. They may put me in chains. What then? Am I free from bonds now? Behold this clogging burden of a body, to which nature has fettered me! "I shall die," you say; you mean to say "I shall cease to run the risk of sickness; I shall cease to run the risk of imprisonment; I shall cease to run the risk of death."

>I am not so foolish as to go through at this juncture the arguments which Epicurus harps upon, and say that the terrors of the world below are idle, – that Ixion does not whirl round on his wheel, that Sisyphus does not shoulder his stone uphill, that a man's entrails cannot be restored and devoured every day; no one is so childish as to fear Cerberus, or the shadows, or the spectral garb of those who are held together by naught but their unfleshed bones. Death either annihilates us or strips us bare. If we are then released, there remains the better part, after the burden has been withdrawn; if we are annihilated, nothing remains; good and bad are alike removed.

>> No.23508509

>>23500660
Epictetus was a slave.

>> No.23508510

>>23501618
>Epictetus
wow... 1 (one) guy 2000 years ago...

>> No.23508563

>>23508474
I'm not the poster who claimed he was not a Christian. I'm extremely sympathetic to Stoicism.

But Stoicism is not compatible with Atheism. Here we have Big E:

>The philosophers say that the first thing that needs to be learned is the following, that there is a God, and a God who exercises providential care for the universe, and that it is impossible to conceal from him not only our actions, but even our thoughts and intentions. The next thing to be considered is what the gods are like; for whatever they’re discovered to be, one who wishes to please and obey them must try to resemble them as far as possible

>What are we to do, then? To make the best of what lies within our power, and deal with everything else as it comes. ‘How does it come, then?’ As God wills

And
>How does it come about, then, that you’re not shut out?— Because if I’m not admitted, I have no wish to go in, but rather, I always want what actually comes about; for I judge whatever God wants as being better than what I want; I’ll attach myself to him as a servant and follower, I’ll share his impulses, I’ll share his desires, and in a word, make his will my will.

>> No.23508587

>>23500587
The most retarded aspect of Stoicism is that it says you can control your thoughts and force yourself to think in a virtuous way. Not how human psychology actually works, even Plato and Aristotle understood this.

>> No.23509619

>>23508587
Sasuga, anon-sama.

>> No.23509774

>>23500587
funny cuz you live the fullest by being apathetic to life
reals stoics are admirable monsters who handle life way better than any emotional man
you want to fix the world but you can't even fix yourself first

>> No.23510867

>>23509774
There's nothing wrong with emotions. Courage is doing something despite being scared. If you don't feel any fear, you are just a fool.