![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
Can a Ideal Stoic Exist in Modern Society?
A post from Reddit I found to be quite interesting:
My response:
A person who enacts Stoicism into their daily conduct and rhythms is a walking refutation of people who very easily give in to an emotion-driven mob mentality. Without even uttering a single word, such a person is a reminder of what the emotionally-incontinent person is not. And thus, projection onto the former from the latter person is a very likely reaction to occur. Especially in this current mini-era of hyper-partisanship, shrill ideological tribalism and crazy moral panics, the mere refusal to join in whatever chorus of howls is taking place at the moment immediately elicits suspicions of the stoic non-participant being "the enemy" or whatever other out-group designation the mob might assign to the person refusing to get with their program. Human herd behavior is quite primal and dangerous, and getting caught in the stampede can be deadly.
To answer your question: I do believe YES, they can certainly exist in today's culture, but they must tread carefully and be very selective about whom they interact with. Though this is true really of any era or cultural environment.
Can a person who has gained their full nature and happiness through stoic philosophy exist in modern western culture that has beliefs in unregulated catharsis, constant hedonistic forms of media and a strong belief in that external values dictate happiness?
The ideal stoic would most likely if they are a honest person be problematic to their social circles. When a group is angry or sad it is often seen as apathy or even hostility when a person within that group is calm and collected.
Let’s say person gets sick and they ask a ideal stoic “Why me?” and the ideal stoic responses with “Why not you, you haven’t been born special or superior to others who had just as much chance at getting sick as you, nothing wrong or out of the ordinary happened here.” In my opinion two reactions will happen, they will thank the ideal stoic for the logical and calming advice or they will see this as apathy and be offended that they aren’t illogically taking their minor and inconsequential problems as major ones.
“A good man is not prostrated at the loss of children nor fortune. Neither is death terrible to him; and therefore lamentations over the dead should not be practised.” - Plato’s Republic
Not a work of a stoic, however, better yet a message coming one of three of the most valuable philosophers (Socrates, Plato and Aristotle) this message is not anti caring about children or to be suicidal much rather a virtuous person would want life for everyone to choose, however, this simply shows that there is a different level of reality and reason with a person who is a ideal stoic, because of this misunderstanding of the ideal stoic I argue that he/she would most likely be seen as apathetic or psychopathic.
I would like to see any problems with my reasoning.
My response:
A person who enacts Stoicism into their daily conduct and rhythms is a walking refutation of people who very easily give in to an emotion-driven mob mentality. Without even uttering a single word, such a person is a reminder of what the emotionally-incontinent person is not. And thus, projection onto the former from the latter person is a very likely reaction to occur. Especially in this current mini-era of hyper-partisanship, shrill ideological tribalism and crazy moral panics, the mere refusal to join in whatever chorus of howls is taking place at the moment immediately elicits suspicions of the stoic non-participant being "the enemy" or whatever other out-group designation the mob might assign to the person refusing to get with their program. Human herd behavior is quite primal and dangerous, and getting caught in the stampede can be deadly.
To answer your question: I do believe YES, they can certainly exist in today's culture, but they must tread carefully and be very selective about whom they interact with. Though this is true really of any era or cultural environment.