What Stoicism Actually Is and What It Is Not

Ancient Wisdom - Season 2, Week 1

(Estimated Reading time: 6 minutes)

Stoicism has become quite an influential and popular form of moral philosophy in our society today. Modern Stoics have found platforms such as Substack to be conducive for developing Stoic ideals and continuing to share their philosophical ideas with others.

But, yes there is a but, as popularised today, Stoicism is commonly expressed in the way of showing no feelings, not wanting anything, and enduring whatever will happen and calling it strength.

The reason this appeal is so easy to accept is because this set of beliefs makes Stoicism look so efficient and, therefore, makes sense.

Furthermore, this perception of Stoicism turns one of the most challenging moral philosophies from antiquity into a hiding place from feeling.

With the greatest respect to the modern Stoics, this is not what Stoicism is designed to accomplish.

Stoicism originated in the early days of Hellenistic culture, specifically around the start of the 3rd century BCE by a Zeno of Citium.

Stoicism articulates a cohesive view of logic, nature, and philosophy regarding how a rational being should live in a world they cannot control. The Stoic method does not involve retreating from the reality, instead it recommends disciplined involvement in society and living life according to sound judgement of oneself.

Stoics encourage humanity to view the world as it truly exists, to carefully fashion sound judgement, and to fulfil one’s responsibilities without compromising one’s character out of fear, anger, status, or some unattainable goal. The Stoics suggest that all of the aforementioned behaviours will exist with ease and be viewed by many as complete perfection from an external perspective.

A philosophy of virtue and not a productivity technique

For ancient Stoics, the ultimate goal of human life was Eudaimonia, a state of happiness attained through a life of virtue. In their view, only virtue (as evidenced by the living of practical wisdom, Justice, Courage, and Self-Control) has strict moral value and therefore is the only true Good. I agree wholeheartedly with this view. Therefore, although Health, Wealth, Reputation, Office, Physical Safety, and even Death do have relevance/meaning, they are all viewed as Indifferent - i.e. they do not in and of themselves determine the Moral Goodness or Badness of an individual, however, there are some Indifferent things that can be reasonably preferred and responsibly chosen.

The confusion often arises from misunderstanding the term Indifferent; it does not equate with “I don’t care.” It means that “I will not compromise My Judgement, Justice, Integrity, etc., to acquire it”. Clearly, a Stoic can have a preference for Health versus Illness or Safety and Security versus risk of Danger, Professional Success versus Professional Failure. The determining factor in these situations will always be whether the way in which someone pursues a particular Indifferent will corrupt them. Isn’t this dilemma prevalent in today’s society?

Modern society’s claim that “nothing matters” misrepresents the Stoics. For the Stoics, every external outcome has value, but Virtue is the sole measure of an Individual’s Moral Value and Worthiness.

Therefore, Practically speaking, We should seek after worthy endeavours without allowing our character to be dependent upon the outcome of winning. Society insists that We “control Every Aspect” of what We do; however, Society as a whole ignores the stoic instruction to only focus Upon the Quality of Our Judgement/Choice/Action. Outcomes are not fully within Our Control; therefore, We must Prepare Extensively, Act Decisively, and Release the Need for Certainty.

In the same way that the Stoic Instruction “Feel Nothing” is Distorted, the Stoic challenge is to Nurture a Rational Appropriate Emotion instead of Experiencing Emotional Emptiness.

Practically speaking, this means that We should Notice a Feeling and then Reflect on the Story that is Associated with the Feeling and then “Act out of the Feeling”, rather than Allowing Myself to be Ruled by the Feeling.

To Suggest that a Stoic is required to “Be Silent in Suffering”, Continually Ignores the Stoic Belief in Human Duty, to One Another, and that We are All Part of a Larger Moral Community.

Therefore, the Stoic also Responds to the World By:

Speaking honestly about what you are Seeing;

Helping where you can; and

Accepting Responsibility for the next “right action” that you Intend to take.

The agency distinction is not permission to be passive

The opening of Enchiridion is a key thought often cited and distorted by some of what is known today as “modern Stoicism”. Epictetus writes in Elizabeth Carter’s classic translation:

“Some things are within our power, while other things are out of our power. What is in our power is our opinion, goal, desire, dislike, and what we might call all our actions. What is out of our power is your body, property, esteem, orders, and we can say whatever is outside of our actions.” - Epictetus, Enchiridion 1

The question you want to ask yourself is NOT, “Can I make happen the outcome I want,” rather you want to know, “What is it that I am responsible for here?”

You have NO control over whether or not your proposal gets accepted by your future employer.

You DO have control of what you do, how you prepare, how clearly you articulate your case, and how you take the decision professionally, without self-lies or spite.

You do NOT have control over the weather, economy, someone’s esteem, or historical events.

You DO have control over how you take care of your job, the truth you tell, the help you provide and what you do next.

This is the distinction of agency. It changes our efforts from destructive attempts to control the external world and redirects our efforts to the part of the situation for which we can be morally accountable.

The Stoic task is not to master the storm, but to meet it with right judgement and responsible action.

Stoicism is not emotional suppression

The Stoics did not claim to deny that emotional states like fear and sadness and anger and attraction exist, rather they made the much bolder assertion that the overwhelming emotions that we feel include involvements of judgement - an interpretation of an event and its means.

To put it more plainly Epictetus said:

“Men are disturbed, not by things; but by the judgement and notions they have of things.” (Epictetus Enchiridion 5)

This is not, therefore, a statement directing one to disregard one’s suffering or to place blame on oneself or others for their suffering. It is an invitation to discover what creates an oppressive experience of an event, the judgement that causes it.

The Stoics did not hope to make themselves “less human,” but to free themselves from distorted perceptions about that which is human. The scholarly literature concerning Stoic psychological states, differentiates between the irrational passions of man and the “good feelings” of virtuous people, which constitute rational joy and appropriate caution.

In practice, it is important to distinguish between the two. The statement “I must not feel fear” simply states that one must suppress one’s emotional experience, whereas Stoic training states that one must “ask oneself what is the judgement I am making of what is at risk? Is that judgement true? What does it require to be courageous right now?” One merely conceals one’s reaction to an event; while the other converts one’s emotional experience of an event into the next steps of inquiry and action.

A discipline of duty in public life

Stoicism is not a form of isolationism. The Stoics viewed all people as members of a single moral community, and Justice was central to their understanding of virtue. Marcus Aurelius never intended his writings to be a “feel good” philosophy. He wrote in the context of being Emperor of Rome.

In Book 5 of the Meditations, he calls himself out for wanting to stay in bed instead of getting back to work. He asks himself:

“Is it right for you to just ‘pass the time,’ without performing any useful work or action? Or are the things that you could do for your fellow man less deserving of your time and energy than your own pleasures?” - Marcus Aurelius, Meditations 5

That is an intentionally provocative statement.

So you see that Stoic calmness is not the tranquillity of someone who chooses not to engage! It is the confidence and stability to act in times of extreme difficulty, against a hostile audience and with uncertain results.

A Stoic does not equate acceptance of a situation with agreement.

A Stoic can accept what has happened while working diligently to remedy its effects or oppose an injustice; defend someone else; or tell someone the truth that is hard to hear.

The first practical test

The best question one can ask to improve oneself through Stoicism isn’t “how can I improve my stoicism?”; however, it’s “what aspect of this situation calls for my most rational thoughts and my most responsible actions?”

Beginning with a description of the issue and removing any drama associated with predictions or insults, will allow you to see the issue more clearly.

First, determine what outcome that is beyond your control. Then, ascertain what options remain available to you, including having discussions, gathering evidence, setting boundaries, apologizing (crucial to take responsibility and overcome your ego), or completing your overdue tasks.

Also evaluate the actions taken against one’s character, not whether they are comfortable. Are the actions honest, fair, and show courage without being rash?

This way of thinking is closer to Stoicism than any quotation posted over a marble bust. It is not passive and it clearly is not numb. But, also, it is not easy. It requires a daily practice of meeting the world AS IT IS, while refusing to abandon the part of oneself that must choose how to meet it.

By Dr Ioannis Syrigos