The Stoicism Thread

[slingshot]

Interesting thread! I recently subscribed to Ryan Holiday's blog/newsletter and he has an excellent (IMO) reading list

 

[ER Eddie]

Started into Epictetus. Good stuff. Here's one that I had to apply just yesterday:

"Circumstances do not rise to meet our expectations. Events happen as they do. People behave as they are."

How true.

--

Also, I've noticed that you have to be very careful about which edition you choose, in this area. I got an edition that has been "freshened up" into modern English, and it loses some of its power.

For example, I read stuff like, 'No shame. No blame," which I'm certain is something Epictetus would not say. It sounds like something you'd read in a pop psych book. Maybe it's the same idea, but I want to hear it in HIS words, not in the form of casual modern speech.

Part of the magic of reading these Stoic philosophers is the feeling of stepping back in time. The words have a gravity and nobility that modern, casual English lacks. To put things in modern idiom is to strip the language of its power. At least that's my reaction.

So now I'm hunting for another edition. I'm seeing comments about other editions such as, "This is not the actual book, it's just the author's interpretation."

So, the moral of the story is, be careful what editions you choose.

 

[Elbata]

Regarding the "handling of emotions". When younger and early in my career I was prone to blurt out the first thing in my head. I began to recognize that that wasn't the best thing to do in order to get your ideas across. What I learned was that emotional outbursts are accompanied by physical symptoms. Call it energy or blood boiling or whatever. You can feel it. If you can recognize the symptoms you can train yourself to hesitate before action. In my case, just keep my mouth shut, take a breath, think about what I just heard and then respond (or not). It has been enormously helpful throughout my life..

I'm now pretty good at hesitating and keeping my mouth shut. What happens to me though is that so much goes through my mind and I don't think clearly or can come back quickly enough with a good argument.

 

[ER Eddie]

Epictetus is really good. The Enchiridion (The Manual) is excellent. It's a collection of short pieces -- the "best of," culled from his larger works. It's brief -- less than 50 pages -- and so you can read it in a day or two. The Roman army used to take it into battle with them. This is no high-level philosophical abstraction, like you get in Seneca sometimes -- this is down-to-earth, practical life philosophy.

It's packed with wisdom. Page for page, I'd say it has some of the most practical, applicable wisdom of just about any book I've ever read, and I've read thousands. To use the modern phrase, Epictetus "drops truth bombs" on every page. I often finish a passage and say to myself, "Damn. That was good." Like Nietzsche, he uses an economy of language; he says a lot in very few words.

I continue to be impressed at how "stoicism" is not merely about controlling your emotions or "sucking it up." It's so much deeper and more interesting than that. It is about wisdom, spiritual progress, virtue, and living a good, tranquil life.

Of course, there are different versions of stoicism, depending on the writer. Epictetus himself has an almost therapeutic effect on me. I feel calmer and wiser after reading him. He has a cool backstory as well. He was a slave who distinguished himself, and eventually he earned his way out of slavery. He became a teacher of many, including Marcus Aurelius. When you read the Marcus' Meditations, you're hearing the influence of Epictetus.

Highly recommended for anyone into stoicism.

 

[deserat]

If I may add yet another dimension of the Stoic attitude towards misfortune.

It's that maintaining a sustained negative emotional reaction to a situation (e.g. worrying, panicking, catastrophizing) only makes the situation more difficult, and will cloud one's judgment and ability to respond effectively. So it is in one's best interest to accept the situation, and proceed calmly and rationally.

Donald Robertson covers this notion in detail in his book How to Think Like a Roman Emperor. He's the same gentleman conducting the Stoic class previously mentioned in this thread.

I'm just finishing up Donald Robertson's class - a four week class on how to apply Stoicism principles to everyday life. Very interesting and useful. The website is called Modern Stoicism.

Eddie ER - Epictetus and his Enchiridion is quoted quite a lot in the class. The Serenity Prayer is referenced as possible derivative of the Stoic principles; Mr Robertson emphasizes that it's not what happens to us, but how we respond. Also, that our response is based on the judgment or value we give to what happens. If we pause or remove that judgment, it allows us to pause the emotional and/or physical response. The Stoics also believed that we only control our actions; I would modify that we control our actions but that over time those actions change us internally; additionally, our actions influence our environment as well, which can then also influence our actions.

 

[bmcgonig]

Epictetus is really good. The Enchiridion (The Manual) is excellent. It's a collection of short pieces -- the "best of," culled from his larger works. It's brief -- less than 50 pages -- and so you can read it in a day or two. The Roman army used to take it into battle with them. This is no high-level philosophical abstraction, like you get in Seneca sometimes -- this is down-to-earth, practical life philosophy.

It's packed with wisdom. Page for page, I'd say it has some of the most practical, applicable wisdom of just about any book I've ever read, and I've read thousands. To use the modern phrase, Epictetus "drops truth bombs" on every page. I often finish a passage and say to myself, "Damn. That was good." Like Nietzsche, he uses an economy of language; he says a lot in very few words.

I continue to be impressed at how "stoicism" is not merely about controlling your emotions or "sucking it up." It's so much deeper and more interesting than that. It is about wisdom, spiritual progress, virtue, and living a good, tranquil life.

Of course, there are different versions of stoicism, depending on the writer. Epictetus himself has an almost therapeutic effect on me. I feel calmer and wiser after reading him. He has a cool backstory as well. He was a slave who distinguished himself, and eventually he earned his way out of slavery. He became a teacher of many, including Marcus Aurelius. When you read the Marcus' Meditations, you're hearing the influence of Epictetus.

Highly recommended for anyone into stoicism.

The part about hugging your kids like they're just a human so that you won't miss them when they die is pretty weird and ambitious. I get the reasoning of course. Don't get attached to anyone so much that you will miss them when they die? But wouldn't that be a strange life?

 

[donheff]

All right, you peaked my interest enough. I was able to download the Duke Classic of The Enchiridion from the library. Once I finish with Say Nothing (the troubles in N Ireland) I will turn to stoicism.

 

[sengsational]

The part about hugging your kids like they're just a human so that you won't miss them when they die is pretty weird and ambitious. I get the reasoning of course. Don't get attached to anyone so much that you will miss them when they die? But wouldn't that be a strange life?

I think that one's life relationships with people are enhanced by living by Stoic principles. One common technique is to imagine the world without that person. Not dwell on it, but imagine a world without that person. Now return to reality and really appreciate the person. I bet the next encounter you have with them will be richer. I'm not sure that the Stoics would agree that a distancing approach to relationships is really central to the philosophy.

 

[Rianne]

Just started reading "The Teaching of Epictetus." I especially connect to chapter 5, so far anyway. It brings me back to the long discussions into the wee hours of the morning during college and with my older DB who is a professor. And coincides with Bible studies when I dabbled in Evangelical Christianity. That didn't last very long as I didn't appreciate anyone telling me my interpretations and beliefs were wrong. That I must think and behave a certain way to thread that needle into heaven.

Epictetus stretches my comfort zone of judgement of others and circumstances out of my control and what is and is not in my power. If I can harness this wisdom and refer to it as I encounter circumstances and behavior out of my control, maybe I'll be a better person.

I'll try to put on my deep thinking hat and try not to think of Saturday Night Lives version of Deep Thoughts by Jack Handy and Stuart Smiley. Sorry had to post this one since "Last Dance" is so popular these days.

 

[ER Eddie]

The part about hugging your kids like they're just a human so that you won't miss them when they die is pretty weird and ambitious. I get the reasoning of course. Don't get attached to anyone so much that you will miss them when they die? But wouldn't that be a strange life?

I don't remember that bit, but there certainly are parts I disagree with. I will have the reaction, "Yeah but..." or "Hold on, Epictetus, it's more complicated than that." With almost any book I read, I find things I disagree with or want to add nuance to. That's fine.

Overall, though, I find it helpful. It's good nutrition for the mind, without a lot of junk added. It stimulates my thinking and reminds me of fundamentals that I tend to forget. It's a course corrector. Seneca would talk about the philosopher as being like a doctor to a sick person, and Epictetus seems like an exemplar of that, very practical and therapeutic.

 

[Nemo2]

From the history of the SAS book I'm currently reading, a quote from Lt. André Zirnheld a French ex-professor of philosopy which may be apropos to this thread:

"I need not complain about the war. Because of it, I have had to learn to live through anything....After the war, the problem will be to discover s similar peace."

 

[bmcgonig]

I don't remember that bit, but there certainly are parts I disagree with. I will have the reaction, "Yeah but..." or "Hold on, Epictetus, it's more complicated than that." With almost any book I read, I find things I disagree with or want to add nuance to. That's fine.

Overall, though, I find it helpful. It's good nutrition for the mind, without a lot of junk added. It stimulates my thinking and reminds me of fundamentals that I tend to forget. It's a course corrector. Seneca would talk about the philosopher as being like a doctor to a sick person, and Epictetus seems like an exemplar of that, very practical and therapeutic.

I totally agree. I find Stoicism and Buddhist philosophy very helpful as a way of looking at life. Not always successfully (hardly ever?) put into practice by me of course. But both have helped me reframe situations where the new framing has immediately helped my mood.

Just realizing that it's not a situation, but my reaction to it, is what really matters is a game changer sometimes. Then I came across these quotes which drilled it into my head:

Shakespeare quote : "for there is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so."

Milton : “The mind is its own place, and in itself can make a heaven of hell, a hell of heaven..”

 

[bmcgonig]

I think that one's life relationships with people are enhanced by living by Stoic principles. One common technique is to imagine the world without that person. Not dwell on it, but imagine a world without that person. Now return to reality and really appreciate the person. I bet the next encounter you have with them will be richer. I'm not sure that the Stoics would agree that a distancing approach to relationships is really central to the philosophy.

You're absolutely right. It's just that when I read that part I just feel that I have a long way to go to be really stoic [emoji4]

 

[48Fire]

I am REALLY enjoying this thread. Thank you to everyone who has contributed. I'll post more later when I have a laptop and more time

 

[dixonge]

Seneca on the value of retirement:

"Encourage your friend to despise stout-heartedly those who upbraid him because he has sought the shade of retirement and has abdicated his career of honors, and, though he might have attained more, has preferred tranquility to them all. Let him prove daily to these detractors how wisely he has looked out for his own interests...."

Well there you go. Seneca, the patron saint of ER!

Who knew?

 

[deserat]

I totally agree. I find Stoicism and Buddhist philosophy very helpful as a way of looking at life. Not always successfully (hardly ever?) put into practice by me of course. But both have helped me reframe situations where the new framing has immediately helped my mood.

Just realizing that it's not a situation, but my reaction to it, is what really matters is a game changer sometimes. Then I came across these quotes which drilled it into my head:

Shakespeare quote : "for there is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so."

Milton : “The mind is its own place, and in itself can make a heaven of hell, a hell of heaven..”

Oh, excellent quotes! Thanks. Just finished the last lesson in the Stoic class. Have lots of nice tools - this week's lesson was on praemeditatio moalorum - premeditation of adversity. It's like strength training for your mind. Very good. And like strength training, you get stronger and more resilient when faced with adversity. Or as one of the previous poster's said you can appreciate that person or situation did not happen and be happier. Bi-directional both in your mental approach both for strengthening and then using that strength.

 

[dixonge]

Just read a bit of history of Seneca's life and I have to say it greatly tempered my opinion of him. Like a lot of things, "It's complicated." Here is a review of a book about him:

The Two Sides of Seneca

This is the book:

Dying Every Day: Seneca in the Court of Nero

I think this may be a great example of a couple of sayings:

1. Never meet your heroes.

2. "If you meet the Buddha, kill him"

 

[Nemo2]

Poets & Songwriters have said it all:

There is a road, no simple highway
Between the dawn and the dark of night
And if you go no one may follow
That path is for your steps alone
Ripple in still water
When there is no pebble tossed
Nor wind to blow
You who choose to lead must follow
But if you fall you fall alone

Ripple

 

[ER Eddie]

A note about Epictetus and two different versions of the Enchiridion (The Manual). I had earlier commented that Lebell's version seemed too casual for me, but I want to update my impressions, especially since it sounds like some people might be shopping for Epictetus.

The first version I picked up was Sharon Lebell's The Art of Living (this is apparently an expanded version of her earlier work, The Manual for Living). She says that she set out to do what Stephen Mitchell did for the Tao -- provide an accessible interpretation for modern readers. Note the "interpretation" part. This isn't a word-for-word translation; it's her interpretation.

Now that I have a more faithful translation of the original (see below), I've been able to compare her interpretation to the original. I think she captures the essence of his ideas. She gets the gist. She does add things -- for example, at times Epictetus can be rather brief, and you think, "Uh, that doesn't sound right," but she explains what he is getting at, and she adds the necessary nuance. Occasionally, she does omit parts of the original (e.g., stuff about how to treat your slaves). And sometimes, in her effort to make the language accessible, she makes it too casual, too modern. You lose the sense that you're listening to an ancient, and you lose the gravitas of his personal character.

But overall, she does a good job. She gets the gist of what he's saying; she adds some nuance, and she breaks some of the larger ideas into digestible chunks.

The other version I have, which I got more recently, is the Dover Thrift edition of The Enchiridion. It is translated by George Long. It is a more faithful, word-for-word translation of the original text.

A more literal translation has advantages. You hear from Epictetus more directly. You get a feel for his personality and character. Nothing is added to what he said, and nothing subtracted.

However, it also has disadvantages. The main one is that it's harder to read. It places more burden on the reader. Here's one example, on the second page:

"Remember that desire contains in it the profession (hope) of obtaining that which you desire; and the profession (hope) in aversion (turning from a thing) is that you will not fall into that which you attempt to avoid: and he who fails in his desire is unfortunate; and he who falls into that which he would avoid, is unhappy. If then you attempt to avoid only the things contrary to nature which are within your power, you will not be involved in any of the things which you would avoid."

When I read that, my first reaction was, "What?" I had to read it several times before I could untangle what he was saying. The sentence structure is complicated, the parenthetical insertions are distracting, and the double/triple negatives aren't much help, either.

Sharon Lebell's version of the same section, by contrast, is easy to read and understand.


So, after reading a more literal translation, I'm more appreciative of Lebell's version. Reading the more faithful translation can be a bit of a slog at times. After all, this is language from 2000 years ago, so some of it can be a little difficult to unpack.

It's nice to have both versions, but I think I prefer Lebell's.

 

[Rianne]

I hope this thread has many pages. I always click on it first

 

[sengsational]

I'd need the extra interpretation of the Lebell version because I tend not to have the patience and/or brains to groc the more native stuff. But if I had both versions, and the ability to read pairs of passages, maybe I'd expand my capabilities. Hmmm. I wonder when the library with start lending again.

 

[ER Eddie]

Just read a bit of history of Seneca's life and I have to say it greatly tempered my opinion of him. Like a lot of things, "It's complicated." [....]
I think this may be a great example of a couple of sayings:

1. Never meet your heroes.

2. "If you meet the Buddha, kill him"

Funny, I had a different reaction to reading that article. It seemed to me that it was a perfect exemplification of what we've been saying here -- there are multiple interpretations of any event, and your reaction will depend on how you choose to view it. The writer says as much -- you can make two different interpretations of how Seneca behaved: one noble, and the other manipulative.

As the writer says, "But isn’t this the case with all of us?

"Well-intended actions can be viewed through a lens of deception and manipulation just as outright manipulation can be viewed as aid. The truth is more complicated than binary answers. Debates about outright altruism still carry on today."


Btw, if you read Seneca, you won't come away with the impression that he is some altruistic saint or Buddha figure. Not at all. He's quite harsh at times, talks about the virtue of "despising" this and that, sometimes has a contemptuous tone, and often insults the person he's writing to. He's a tough guy ... probably had to be, given the society he lived in and the people he knew.

 

[bmcgonig]

A note about Epictetus and two different versions of the Enchiridion (The Manual). I had earlier commented that Lebell's version seemed too casual for me, but I want to update my impressions, especially since it sounds like some people might be shopping for Epictetus.

The first version I picked up was Sharon Lebell's The Art of Living (this is apparently an expanded version of her earlier work, The Manual for Living). She says that she set out to do what Stephen Mitchell did for the Tao -- provide an accessible interpretation for modern readers. Note the "interpretation" part. This isn't a word-for-word translation; it's her interpretation.

Now that I have a more faithful translation of the original (see below), I've been able to compare her interpretation to the original. I think she captures the essence of his ideas. She gets the gist. She does add things -- for example, at times Epictetus can be rather brief, and you think, "Uh, that doesn't sound right," but she explains what he is getting at, and she adds the necessary nuance. Occasionally, she does omit parts of the original (e.g., stuff about how to treat your slaves). And sometimes, in her effort to make the language accessible, she makes it too casual, too modern. You lose the sense that you're listening to an ancient, and you lose the gravitas of his personal character.

But overall, she does a good job. She gets the gist of what he's saying; she adds some nuance, and she breaks some of the larger ideas into digestible chunks.

The other version I have, which I got more recently, is the Dover Thrift edition of The Enchiridion. It is translated by George Long. It is a more faithful, word-for-word translation of the original text.

A more literal translation has advantages. You hear from Epictetus more directly. You get a feel for his personality and character. Nothing is added to what he said, and nothing subtracted.

However, it also has disadvantages. The main one is that it's harder to read. It places more burden on the reader. Here's one example, on the second page:

"Remember that desire contains in it the profession (hope) of obtaining that which you desire; and the profession (hope) in aversion (turning from a thing) is that you will not fall into that which you attempt to avoid: and he who fails in his desire is unfortunate; and he who falls into that which he would avoid, is unhappy. If then you attempt to avoid only the things contrary to nature which are within your power, you will not be involved in any of the things which you would avoid."

When I read that, my first reaction was, "What?" I had to read it several times before I could untangle what he was saying. The sentence structure is complicated, the parenthetical insertions are distracting, and the double/triple negatives aren't much help, either.

Sharon Lebell's version of the same section, by contrast, is easy to read and understand.


So, after reading a more literal translation, I'm more appreciative of Lebell's version. Reading the more faithful translation can be a bit of a slog at times. After all, this is language from 2000 years ago, so some of it can be a little difficult to unpack.

It's nice to have both versions, but I think I prefer Lebell's.

Here's a freebie that seems easy enough:

2.Remember that following desire promises the attainment of that of which you are desirous; and aversion promises the avoiding that to which you are averse. However, he who fails to obtain the object of his desire is disappointed, and he who incurs the object of his aversion wretched


http://classics.mit.edu/Epictetus/epicench.html

 

[ER Eddie]

Yeah, I'm sure there are dozens of different versions out there. I'm just commenting on the two that I have.

I wonder what sort of royalties the heirs of Epictetus get from all these different books. Probably just an obolus or two. (An obolus is the sixth part of a drachma, according to a footnote. You never know when that information may come in handy.)

 

[dixonge]

As the writer says, "But isn’t this the case with all of us?

"Well-intended actions can be viewed through a lens of deception and manipulation just as outright manipulation can be viewed as aid. The truth is more complicated than binary answers. Debates about outright altruism still carry on today."

Or, put another way, "we judge ourselves by our intentions but others by their actions." Much easier to judge Seneca from a distance, harder to put yourself in his shoes...