Lately this sub has become flooded with questions like:
1: My dog died, how do I not feel sorrow?
2: I want to be rich and sexy and for everybody to like me. But Marcus Aurelius says it isn't cool, so I don't wanna be like that.
3: I can't let go of a girl and it hurts.

While all of these are legitimate problems, they're missing what stoicism is.
Stoicism is all about "what is ideal". It provides a logically sound framework of how to live a meaningful and fulfilling life in tune with Logos.

What the Stoics of old don't do, is delve deep into "how to achieve the ideal". They provide rather shallow solutions like: Meditate, remember XYZ, ask the gods for wisdom or 'live with it'.

Meditation and asking the gods for wisdom is great, but these things require time and experience. They're skills one acquires over a long period of time. You can't read Mediations on monday and be healthy by wedsneday, my dude.

For those seeking the how, I think the answer too often is therapy. Go get a therapist, set stoic principals/ideals as your goal, and work towards it.
For too often, it's our inner trauma/bullshit that's preventing us from embodying the stoic principles. And thus, y'all should go to therapy to deal with it.

P.S. People who ask "How can stoicism help me in this situation" are even worse. It's like shopping for self help methodologies. Which Stoicism isn't.

/rant off

I believe that Stoic philosophy is just as relevant today as it was in 2nd AD century Rome, or even 3rd century BC Athens. Ask me anything you want, especially about Stoicism or Marcus Aurelius. I’m an expert on how psychological techniques from ancient philosophy can help us to improve our emotional resilience today.

Who am I? I wrote a popular self-help book about Marcus Aurelius called , which has been translated into eighteen languages. I’ve also written a prose biography of his life for Yale University Press’ Ancient Lives forthcoming series. My graphic novel, , will be published on 12th July by Macmillan. I also edited the Capstone Classics edition of Marcus Aurelius’ Meditations, based on the classic George Long translation, which I modernized and contributed a biographical essay to. I’ve written a chapter on Marcus Aurelius and modern psychotherapy for the forthcoming Cambridge Companion to the Meditations of Marcus Aurelius edited by John Sellars. I’m one of the founders of the Modern Stoicism nonprofit organization and the founder and president of the Plato’s Academy Centre, a nonprofit based in Athens, Greece.

Proof:

In this post, when I refer to the term "Stoicism", I mean Stoicism as a whole, which refers not just to the ethical component, but also the logical and physical components, or what is known as "traditional Stoicism" in the modern context.

To start off this discussion, I would like to explain my view on the topic, first of all: Stoicism is indeed a religion.

Let's define religion. There are many, many different definitions of religion, but generally they follow the same principle.

I will be using the Collins Dictionary version of the term "religion".

Religion is belief in a god or gods and the activities that are connected with this belief, such as praying or worshiping in a building such as a church or temple.

A religion is a particular system of belief in a god or gods and the activities that are connected with this system.

Stoicism has a god. This god may not be the Abrahamic god that many in the Western world are familiar with, but it is nonetheless a god. This god is the entire universe. The entire universe is nature. Nature is God. You will see many references to this god in the Big 3 Stoics that we read (Marcus Aurelius, Seneca, and most especially Epictetus). God in this case is not a metaphor. When Epictetus refers to God, he absolutely means God. The Stoic God is perfectly rational and perfectly creative, and since this god is the universe itself, then the universe is perfectly rational and perfectly creative.

It is impossible to separate the Stoic God from the Stoic ethics without dismantling Stoicism entirely. The Stoics talked of aligning ourselves with nature, but what does that mean if the universe just came about randomly? No rhyme or reason or anything like that, just some atoms randomly dancing around each other until the Big Bang happened? And these atoms are still random today? How can we, as creatures with free will, align ourselves with such a thing? How can *we* be random? Therefore, the Stoics believed that nature had a rational order. And in order for human rationality to exist in the first place, the blueprints for such a thing had to have been there from the very beginning. A supposed randomness of the universe is fundamentally incompatible with Stoicism.

And this is where Stoic ethics come into play. Since the Stoic God is perfectly rational and the universe and nature are perfectly rational, then we should be rational too. *That* is how we align ourselves with nature. The ethics of the Stoics is not only connected to the belief of God, but it is inseparable. They are dependent on each other. Removing God from Stoicism is like removing God from Christianity. Without the Stoic God, the Stoic ethics that we all hold dear, such as *amor fati,* aligning ourselves with nature, knowing what is in our control, etc would be incomplete, for they *are* the activities that are connected to this system of beliefs.

The Stoic worships God by aligning himself with nature.

I would like to hear people's arguments for or against Stoicism's status as a religion. Whether you respond to my argument in particular or not is up to you.

I don't think there's enough emphasis on the cultivation of healthy emotions in modern self-help books on Stoicism.

I think, to be clear, that it's a mistake to translate eudaimonia as "happiness". The Stoics, in particular, mean something more like "flourishing". The English word "happy" used to mean fortunate or blessed but its meaning became degraded over time until people now say, e.g., that eating chocolate makes them more "happy" than anything. We still retain a trace of the original meaning in the antonym "hapless", which means wretched or unfortunate. A heroin addict, e.g., might be a truly hapless individual who nevertheless feels very "happy" at times. Being hapless is the opposite of being eudaimon, broadly speaking. This is why the Stoics say that eudaimonia is virtually synonymous with virtue (arete), which I think is better translated as "moral wisdom". To become morally wise (virtuous) is the opposite of being hapless - it's the optimum condition of a human being, it's flourishing.

"Feeling better is not the same as getting better" - that's a saying from Albert Ellis, one of the pioneers of modern cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT). The Stoics, by whom he was influenced, would agree. Nevertheless, positive, healthy feelings do play some role in ancient Stoicism. Marcus Aurelius describes three ways in which Stoicism helps us to cultivate good emotions, which he returns to several times in the Meditations.

1. We experience a sort of healthy sense of fulfilment, perhaps even rational self-esteem or the "pride" that Stoics were accused of by Christians, by contemplating our own progress toward moral wisdom - he clearly thinks this is the most important healthy emotion as it's object is more directly under our own control

2. There's a healthy admiration or sense of friendship, love or affection, which comes from contemplating the qualities we find most inspiring in other people - we see this exhibited, and being practiced, at length in Book One of the Meditations

3. Marcus also alludes to a feeling of gratitude that we should cultivate in relation to external events, presumably specific "preferred" ones, such as our own health, but perhaps also life in general - he tells us he does this by contemplating their transience or absence, something he practices countless times in the Meditations

I've written a more detailed discussion elsewhere with excerpts from the Meditations, but just want to discuss the key concepts here.

[Marcus' mother, Domitia Lucilla, was a very wealthy and independent woman, a woman of culture, exceptionally fluent in Greek, who surrounded herself with leading intellectuals, and was held in high regard by her circle. She probably played a key role in selecting Marcus' tutors, among whom Greek rhetoricians and Stoic philosophers feature prominently - perhaps her choice. Marcus refers in passing to a letter sent to her by Junius Rusticus, his main Stoic tutor - were they perhaps old friends? Finally, Marcus mentions a man who was a devoted student of Stoicism, and happens to share his mother's family name - were other men in her family already Stoics? (Marcus: "be ready to speak well of teachers, as it is reported of Domitius and [the Stoic teacher] Athenodotus.") We can't answer this question for sure, we can only speculate, but it's certainly one possible interpretation that she played some role in guiding her son toward Stoicism. Below is an excerpt from my forthcoming biography, Marcus Aurelius: The Stoic Emperor. Hope it's okay to share. Please let me know your thoughts. - Donald Robertson]

“Piety and kindness,” writes his frail hand, listing qualities the author learned from his mother, “and abstinence not only from evil deeds, but even from evil thoughts.” Marcus Aurelius is in his fifties. It is late at night and the frigid winter air of Aquincum (modern-day Budapest) has brought on his familiar hacking cough. As usual, he has difficulty sleeping. Outside the praetorium, his headquarters at the center of the legionary fortress, everything is deceptively silent. The Praetorians, his personal regiment, are camped in nearby barracks. The whole empire has been devastated by a horrific pandemic, which would eventually be named the Antonine Plague, after Marcus Aurelius Antoninus’s imperial dynasty. The First Marcomannic War still rages along the Danube frontier. The army is exhausted from fighting one battle after another against the enemy tribes, the Quadi and Iazyges, on the other side of the river. In the midst of all these troubles, the emperor is writing his personal notes on the application of Stoic philosophy. He pauses momentarily to gaze upon a wood-panel portrait of Lucilla, his mother. Slowly turning over the lesson that he learned from her half a century earlier, he must have asked himself, How can a man learn to abstain even from the very thought of doing wrong?

Domitia Lucilla, also known as Domitia Calvilla, gave birth to her first child, Marcus Annius Verus—the future Roman emperor Marcus Aurelius—on April 26, 121 CE. His only sibling, a sister named Annia Cornificia Faustina, arrived a year later. The children were born into a wealthy patrician family with close ties to Hadrian, the ruling emperor. Later, Marcus would study under several of Rome’s finest rhetoricians and philosophers, but Lucilla, his mother, would have been his first teacher.

They were clearly very close. Long before Marcus began any formal education, his mother had sown within him the seeds of a love for Greek literature and philosophy. She also taught him to pay close attention to his thoughts and look deep within himself, examining his own motives and values. Doing good outwardly is not enough; the real goal of life is to be good in ourselves.

“Look within. Within is the fountain of good, and it will ever bubble up, if you will ever dig.”

Lucilla’s early concern with moral self-examination bore fruit for her son throughout his life, but most notably decades later, when he began writing the Meditations.

“My little mother,” Marcus calls her affectionately in his letters, but she must have commanded great respect as one of the wealthiest and most powerful women in Rome. From her parents she had inherited extensive clay fields, and a large brick-and-tile factory on the banks of the Tiber, which had produced the materials used in the construction of the Colosseum, Pantheon, and Market of Trajan. Archaeologists have unearthed many bricks with her name stamped on them; it would appear that Marcus’s “little mother” was one of the leading magnates of the Roman construction industry at the start of the second century CE. Marcus admired her exceptional generosity (today we would call her a philanthropist), and he later expressed gratitude that thanks to her he had the resources to help those who were short of money or needed other forms of assistance.

Marcus grew up around his mother’s circle of friends, who included some of the leading intellectuals in the empire. Lucilla was a natural Hellenophile. Indeed, her side of the family claimed descent from a legendary king, Malemnius, who founded a prominent city on Italy’s Salentine peninsula, Lupiae, where Greek colonists had settled in the distant past. (The surrounding region to this day retains strong cultural ties to Greece.) Roman Hellenism ran in her veins, and she was known for her exceptional grasp of the Greek language. Fluency in Greek had been fashionable since the latter part of Nero’s reign, half a century earlier, when Rome experienced the renaissance in the appreciation of Greek culture known as the Second Sophistic. The Sophists were Greek orators who discussed literature with their students but also claimed to impart moral lessons about virtue. Hence, the word sophistication , the quality that the parents of young Roman nobles hoped their sons might acquire from foreign intellectuals. Although most wealthy Romans at this time were bilingual in the two languages, Lucilla’s exceptional mastery of Greek is evident. Marcus Cornelius Fronto, the preeminent Latin rhetorician of his day, wrote letters in Greek addressed “To the Mother of Caesar” and somewhat pathetically begged Marcus to proofread one: “I have written your mother a letter, such is my assurance, in Greek, and enclose it in my letter to you. Please read it first, and if you detect any barbarism in it, for you are fresher from your Greek than I am, correct it and so hand it over to your mother. I should not like her to look down on me as a goth.”

Practical Stoicism Tools

Stoicism philosophy is on the rise. I have been practising it for a couple of years now and would like to share 3 of the most effective and practical mental exercise/meditations that I have used.

Method One: A view from above##

'You can rid yourself of many useless things among those that disturb you, for they lie entirely in your imagination; and you will then gain for yourself ample space by comprehending the whole universe in your mind, and by contemplating the eternity of time, and observing the rapid change of every part of everything, how short is the time from birth to dissolution, and the illimitable time before birth as well as the equally boundless time after dissolution'

– Marcus Aurelius

Marcus Aurelius advises us to perform an exercise called 'view from above'. This exercise involves us envisioning ourselves from the third person. In this vision, we zoom out while keeping ourselves in the centre. We continue zooming out and contemplating the scale of the universe. For instance, your first zoom might encompass a view of you from above the roof of your house. Increase the magnitude and you might see a view of your street, increase the magnitude and you might see a view of your country. Keep going until you can picture a view of Earth from the stars.

With this scale, we can gain a better perspective on the insignificance of our problems. When compared to the universe whatever problems we might appear incredibly trivial. For instance, if you were feeling down because a girl flaked on you or someone insulted you, try this exercise. It is far easier to overcome the emotional hurdles we experience when we put things into perspective.

Method Two: Negative visualization

'Remember that all we have is “on loan” from Fortune, which can reclaim it without our permission—indeed, without even advance notice. Thus, we should love all our dear ones, but always with the thought that we have no promise that we may keep them forever—nay, no promise even that we may keep them for long.'

- Seneca

Negative visualization despite the name is an exercise that will increase your default level of happiness if practised consistently.The exercise consists of you envisioning what it would feel like if you lost certain things from your life. Some of the things that you could consider during the exercise are:

• How it would feel to not have a roof over your head.

• How it would feel to lose social status.

• How it would feel to live in a third world country.

• How it would feel to have a physical disability.

• How it would feel to lose a loved one.

This exercise is not meant to be dark or morbid, it’s meant to put things into perspective. Allowing you to see how lucky you truly are. It also prepares you for the worst case scenarios in which one of these things does happen. You are not meant to fixate on these thoughts, but consider them from time to time.

This is a very practical way for you to practice gratitude, naturally, when you consider things being removed from your life, you start to gain a sense of gratitude. Now gratitude is important because of a thing called ‘hedonic adaptation’, basically, it’s a term that defines the tendency for humans to always go back to their default level of happiness.

If you won the lotto and became a millionaire, your base level of happiness will increase for a while. However, when you become accustomed to the lifestyle, despite all the new toys, you will return to your base level. Gratitude breaks this pattern, allowing you to enjoy each step on the ladder. You can be grateful when you own a box, and you can be grateful when you own a Lamborghini Avendator.

Method Three: Voluntary Discomfort

'But neither a bull nor a noble-spirited man comes to be what he is all at once; he must undertake hard winter training, and prepare himself, and not propel himself rashly into what is not appropriate to him'

- Epictetus

The last exercise has been advised to us by Epictetus. It is called 'voluntary discomfort'. In this exercise, we are going to deliberately put ourselves through uncomfortable situations. We will do this in order to train ourselves to not hold onto comfort with such high regard. We can perform voluntary discomfort in a number of ways. Some suggestions are:

• Cold Showers

• NoFap

• Exercising in the morning

• Walking in the cold without a jumper

• Fasting for a day

• Sleeping on the floor

All these things will change your relationship with comfort. Once you overcome the need for comfort, life will become much easier. Setting your goals and sticking to them will be far easier. When most people complain about being ‘uncomfortable’, you won’t be able to relate. You are literally training yourself to be like a Navy Seal. This method will harden you up for life.

Eventually shit will hit the fan at some stage during your life. You want to have to mental and physical fortitude to weather the storm.

So those are the three stoic exercises. Stoicism is a practical philosophy that has survived the test of time due to its universal applications. If you practice these stoic meditations, you will be well on your way to the good life.

P.S.

This was originally a post from my where I share the best mental tools which make conquering your life easy.

EDIT: Ryan Holiday has responded to this post. I have pasted the comment at the bottom as I think he raises some good points.

—

A few weeks ago, I received this marketing email from Ryan Holiday's company, The Daily Stoic:

"Seneca said the path to wisdom was best traveled by acquiring one thing each day. Something that fortifies you against adversity, poverty, death, or whatever else life may throw at you. One might assume Seneca is talking about some physical or spiritual object of tremendous gravity, but we can see from his letters to Lucilius that what he was mostly talking about was quotes.

"One quote a day, he was saying (and sharing)—that's all we need to get better and wiser and stronger and more resilient..."

Ryan then urges us to buy his Stoic quote-a-day calendar, one of many items of Stoicism-related merchandise he sells.

But reading "one quote a day" is the precise opposite of what Seneca advocated. See Letter 33: On the Futility of Learning Maxims:

"...give over hoping that you can skim, by means of epitomes, the wisdom of distinguished men. Look into their wisdom as a whole; study it as a whole...

"For a man... to chase after choice extracts and to prop his weakness by the best known and the briefest sayings and to depend upon his memory, is disgraceful..."

I know this is low-hanging fruit, but I felt Holiday should be called out on this particularly egregious misrepresentation of Stoicism.

Personally, I have derived some value from reading out-of-context quotes about Stoicism—including from Holiday himself—but merely skimming the titles of Seneca's letters shows that he did not endorse such activity.

—

EDIT: I have nothing against selling a calendar of Stoic quotes. I was even tempted to buy it. As it happens, I also have nothing against selling a coin with "Momento Mori" written on it. I don't personally like Holiday's books very much—but if you read them, I hope that you enjoyed them. I simply wish to highlight the problem with this particular marketing tactic.

—

EDIT 2: There is a reply to this post from Ryan Holiday. I paste it here as I want to make sure people read it. I think he has a fair point:

Totally cool if you don't agree with me, but I think you are projecting something onto me that is actually rooted in Seneca's tendency to talk in somewhat overlapping or even contradictory terms. In Letter 33, he does talk about the futility of maxims but in Letters 94 and 95, he talks of the importance of precepts (a major source of disagreement between him and Aristo). Also the entire conceit between he and Lucillius is that each day Seneca is providing his friend a quote or a nugget to chew on (as discussed in Letter 2 and quoted by someone else below).

Considering Meditations is effectively a commonplace book of Marcus Aurelius, I'm not sure there is anything particularly 'egregious' about arguing that the Stoics relied on the daily study of quotes on the path to wisdom.

But you're welcome to your take and I appreciate that you get the emails even if you don't always like them.

Hi guys! I've found out about Stoic just a few months ago. I didn't know it exists. As the title, I'm a muslim, but I'm trying to learn about Stoicism without stepping or doing anything against my religion. There's this 2 books I have bought last week

Meditations by Marcus Aurelius

The Daily Stoic by Ryan Holiday and Stephen Hanselman

The reason I found out about Stoic is when I broke up with my girl. I didn't feel anything after breaking up with her, but after how many months I regret my decision and now she got a new man. We've been for together for almost 3 years. I just didn't think that she will see another man right away after we broke up. My life was miserable before but after finding out about this community, makes me feel and knows what to do in life. I'm really sorry if you can't understand my English, it's not my native language. Thank you and I hope you can give me tips and link me some videos to watch about Stoicism. I wanna be the person who can focus on one goal and doesn't give a shit about everybody else except for my family.

Good evening!

Hi , really looking forward to spending our morning chatting with you about Stoic practice, theory, or whatever you have in mind!

A bit about us:

I (Michael) have my PhD in philosophy and a black belt in brazilian jiu-jitsu. I specialize in Stoic strategies for self-improvement. Alongside Caleb, I am a cofounder of Stoa, a Stoic meditation app designed to help people build resiliency through implementing a daily Stoic practice. I also co-run the Stoa Conversations podcast with Caleb. My favourite Stoic is Epictetus.

Caleb earned his MA in philosophy and has worked in startups for the last 6 years in the Bay Area. He specializes in Stoicism and classical futurism (imagining a version of the future inspired by classical antiquity). Caleb is a cofounder of Stoa, and also co-runs the Stoa Conversations podcast. His favorite Stoic is Marcus Aurelius.

Here is an example of our work:

• (Caleb & Michael)

• (Caleb & Michael)

• (Caleb & Michael)

• (Caleb)

• (Michael)

• (Michael)

One of my new years resolutions is to practice and become a better Stoic. Stoicism is a personal life philosophy I have adapted, made famous by the romans like the famous emperor Marcus Aurelius, wherein you strive for happiness by focusing on your own actions and not letting the actions you cannot control dictate your judgement of your actions (this is massively simplified for brevity).

A famous example of how a stoic ought to judge a situation is when he tries to fire an arrow at a target. He should try everything in his power to fire the arrow well; train hard at archery, measure intently, breathe properly, etc. But after the arrow has left his bow, he should be satisfied with the outcome regardless of the external factors that might arise; wind blows the arrow off target, the target moves, etc.

Of course, in Overwatch, this analogy is incredibly relevant with the obvious parallels to say a Hanzo shooting a target and a Mei on your team walling off the target at the same time. The situations in every Overwatch match that might be categorized as external factors is innumerous, and even as an aspiring Stoic, I still find myself tilting into toxicity from time to time.

I have come to the realization that Overwatch is one of the best tools out there to help train the mind for the emotional challenges of external factors and hone the self to judge yourself for your own actions and not dwell too much on the decisions of others.

This mental shift has turned losing or winning Overwatch into a joyous occasion for me, because it's like going to a gym for my own personal ambitions to become more attuned with my personal philosophy. Using the gym example, I find that if you view Overwatch games as mental exercise for the mind, you will find the whole experience rewarding, win lose or draw.

Let me know if you guys agree! You can learn more about stoicism at the or the and all over YouTube. I highly recommend Stoicism as a personal philosophy independent of religious beliefs and social norms and values.

As I'm sure you can imagine, my diagnosis of terminal brain cancer (GBM) in May changed my entire life in an instant. Well, actually, I'm sure you *can't* imagine, 'cos it's a wholly novel exeperience that you can only go through once. Like many people, when I thought of my death, I hoped for something quick. Passing in my sleep, having a heart attack and dying instantly. Instead, I get to look down the barrel of a gun for months, maybe a couple of years if I'm fortunate.

So here I am; I'm dying, and there's SO MUCH to do when you're dying. Arrangements for medical care, living arrangements, getting on disability and Social Security, phone call after phone call, telling folks so they don't hear it second-hand. Making arrangements to meet friends, to plan trips after radiation ends, creative projects I want to do, etc.

And there's not a lick of that work that can be done if I can't keep my mind in a state conformable to nature. And man, let me tell you, having a cancer in your brain'll really shake you, sometimes. But twenty years ago or so, I started reading Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius, and really vibed on what they were laying down. Their points of view on rationality and acceptance of Things That Are naturally fit my mindset, and reading about the formal structures behind the thought system allowed me to develop my own stoic practice of mindfulness that's served me well over the years.

It's been a very informal practice, but it's been pretty constant. My exes all got sick of hearing the phrase "conformable to nature" before the end of our runs! There were some quasi-ritualistic things I'd tell myself--starting the car: "Some people drive too fast, some people cut you off..." and it really helped a lot when those things would occur. And when bad stuff hit out of left field: a breakup, a bad day at work, my car self-combusts in the parking lot of my barbershop, I have it prepared to say, "My first job is to keep my mind in a state conformable to nature," and I heave a sigh and get back to sorting out the wreckage.

But now the rubber has really met the road. Some of the primary drivers behind philosophy and thought systems of any type are considerations of, confrontations with, and concessions to mortality. I picked my team with the Stoics, now how's it gonna work when shit gets real real?

I'm glad to say it's holding well!

When I got my first MRI after going to the ER with symptoms (headaches, nausea, confusion), and the doctor told me they found a mass, my thoughts immediately turned to Stoic ideals. There wasn't a moment of denial or disbelief; the new situation was here and I wrapped my head around it pretty quickly. In fact, I feel like of the classic "stages of grief"--denial, anger, bargaining, depression, acceptance--my Stoic practice has helped me to short-circuit the first three. Denying reality? Getting mad about biology and math? Bargaining with universal truths? Epictetus took me by the hand and led me past all that garbage. Acceptance came quickly, though I'll allow that depression is often close at hand.

But I've been calling on my practice regularly, and I've busted out my copies of the Enchiridion and the Meditations again. I have good days and bad--hell, I have good hours and bad--but I'm able to retain my equanimity as a rule, and to continue to live--and die--according to my values.

A part of Stoic thought that I hadn't spent as much time with before is its attitude toward suicide. I'd duly noted that it wasn't viewed as inherently bad, and could even be the brave, virtuous choice in the face of terminal illness.

I really didn't want this aspect to apply to me, personally, but here I am. Brain cancer is ugly. As much as I fear pain (and I'm not hella into the whole "death" thing), it's the likely effects to my personality and cognitive faculties that really worry me. But the Stoic "Open Door" ideal has really helped me to navigate the concept of ending my life on my own terms.

I not only appreciate the compassionate and thoughtful approach it engenders in contradistinction to many modern attitudes, but Epictetus' asterisk on the Open Door is tremendously motivating: yes, if you're facing undignified, painful, pointless suffering and certain death, then it's entirely rational and virtuous to go out on your own terms, to retain control of your life and your mind while you can.

But! If you choose not to step through the Open Door, you are obligated to keep living according to the virtues. No retreating to a shell, no crawling into a hole and waiting to die: if you're not gonna bail, then you're still in the game, motherfucker. You've got work to do, life to enjoy, people to love. So it's a great comfort to know that the option is on the table if it comes to that, but it also carries a responsibility with it that I accept.

So yeah, I feel like I'm cruising to a solid "B" on my Stoicism Final. I'm not the most formally learned guy around, but I've incorporated the concepts into my core psyche pretty well, and it's been a great solace going through this process.

We know that philosophy was still being taught in Constantinople around the 11th century. Anna Komnene tells us of John Italos:

This man then was the acknowledged master of all philosophy and the youth flocked to him. (For he expounded to them the doctrines of Plato and Proclus, and of the two philosophers, Porphyry and Iamblichus, but especially the rules of Aristotle; and he gave instruction in the system to those who wished, as affording a serviceable tool and it was on this that he rather prided himself and to this he devoted his attention.

But had Stoicism died out completely?

Almost all of the works of the early Stoics were lost. But we have surviving copies of the works of Seneca, Musonius Rufus, Marcus Aurelius, and Epictetus. So did these texts mostly survive in western monasteries, where Monks copied them but didn't really teach them?

Was Stoicism — which has elements of a religion (but then, so does Platonism) — considered heretical, and so couldn't be taught?

Does the survival of the texts we have tell us that it was enjoyed in private by some people of means, but was perhaps dangerous to be associated with?

Or was it just considered less useful than other philosophical systems, and so mostly abandoned?

Hi folks - new here since yesterday. Have been reading (and now academically studying) Stoicism for 2 years, I want to share with you my Enchiridion of books which have been part of my trajectory as a postgrad -- hope they serve you well:

Getting Started with Primary Sources:

1. Epictetus, , Oxford, trans. Christopher Gill

2. Aurelius, , trans. Gregory Hays

3. Seneca, , Oxford, trans. John Davie

4. Rufus, , trans. Cynthia King

5. Hierocles, , trans. David Konstan

Advancing with Primary Sources:

1. Seneca, , , , , .

2. Posidonius, , , , .

3. Diogenes, , trans. Pamela Mensch.

4. Aurelius, , Oxford, trans. Christopher Gill.

My Selection of Secondary Sources:

1. Hadot, , , , .

2. A.A. Long, , .

3. Sellars, , , ,

4. Inwood,

5. Wilson, .

6. McLynn, .

---

Here goes my complete reference guide so far. There are other secondary sources that I did not mention, as they are specific to the subject area being studied (ex: Stoicism & Education, Stoicism & Ancient Philosophy, or Stoicism & Psychology); my area is Ethics Education.

Enjoy! :-)

Hello Stoics,

Ever since my father passed away last year and being a father myself now, I have changed the way I decide how to spend my time. Instead of solely focusing on getting more work done or reading more books, I became curious about how I want my life to have been when I die. When I learned about how Marcus Aurelius meditated on death to become more present I asked myself if there was a way to take advantage of this technique on a daily basis. Since I use Google Chrome everyday, I created a Chrome Extension I'd like to share with you. Meet First Day, the new-tab Chrome extension that encourages you to live a great life day by day.

What you get:

- A visual reminder of how much time you may have left in your life,

- a daily question to help you visualize your day ahead and create positive energy to craft your perfect day,

- a bucket list to help you make plans and have things to look forward to,

- short portraits of inspirational people (because you're never too young or too old to do something great),

- plus lots of customisation options.

This is for You, if You

- value your time and want to spend your time wisely

- want to live life more consciously to experience more fulfilment and create more impact in the world

- are interested in Stoicism and the concept of reflecting on mortality to live in the present moment

I am curious to know if some of you will also find this helpful to live a more stoic life. If you have any improvement ideas please feel free to share.

Website:

Hello everyone,

My name is Kyle Montgomery and I have been a quadriplegic over 2 years now. I recently came across some quotes on Instagram about stoicism. I have never had any faith or belief in religions however you can imagine after a catastrophic injury such as this you seek anything you can to find meaning or purpose.

I felt Buddhism had a lot of theories and ideas to offer but when I saw this post, I felt refreshed in the philosophies I was reading. I am just making this post to ask if there any specific texts I can read relating to trauma and suffering?

I am happy to read any recommended work as I cannot do any physical activities I am trying to get into reading now and I would appreciate any suggestions for a beginner stoic.

I just wanted to introduce myself and now I'm going to go through the subreddit and see if I can find anything relevant.

Thank you for reading and take care.

I see a lot of articles about Stoicism nowadays, and its particularly easy to see many people talking about stoicism have never read a piece of stoic philosophy. The most common hit pieces are:

1. Justifying toxic masculinity, and burying your emotions

2. Used to make wealthy feel better that they were born into their circumstance and shouldn't feel bad about being rich

3. Used by silicon valley leaders to justify overworking

I mean the list goes on. For example look at this quote from articles from Vox and Vice like:

"that traditional masculinity, marked by stoicism, competitiveness, dominance, and aggression, is on the whole harmful."

"I wanted to learn to love. I would rather have attachments and suffer loss and grief and the risk of being rejected or let down things like that. That, for me, was the big limitation of Stoicism.” 

It is just confusing to me, the warping of a philosophy based on virtue, compassion, duty is being warped into modern masculinity, or some version of someone so detached they can't even learn to love or suffer loss? Sometimes I think these people never really understood the concept of Justice and Wisdom. To live just and do the right thing. What part of dominance, aggression, etc has anything to do with what Marcus said in Meditations? Marcus talked about love many times.

These are four principles I've written up for myself regarding Stoic action, expressing my view that Stoicism demands service to others in order to live in accordance with nature.

I've followed each with a personal description and some of my favorite quotes regarding the matter, and included some various links to relevant articles (I <3 Donald Robertson). This is not meant to be a comprehensive defense of that view but sharing my personal reflections on it.

1. —> All our aims and actions should be directed towards benefitting the common good, as is in line with natural conduct and the path of virtuous action. We are temperate and courageous so we may , not for tranquility or our own happiness.

   1. The pursuit of virtue, of justice among people, is that of virtuous action. To act with love, kindness, and compassion towards all others as one humanity; to engage, not withdraw, from public involvement.

   2. “Born for society, [the Stoics] all believed it was their destiny to labor for it; with so much the less fatigue, their rewards were all inside themselves. Happy by their philosophy alone, it seemed as if only the happiness of others could increase theirs.” (Montesquieu, The Spirit of Laws, 1748)

   3. “Revere the gods, and look after each other. Life is short — the fruit of this life is a good character and acts for the common good.” (Marcus Aurelius, Meditations, 6.30)

   4. "The primary mission of the Stoics, in other words, is to be helpful to others and serve the greater good, and they don't do this to make themselves happy. They do it becaues it is the right and natural way to live. But doing it in that spirit, as it turns out, makes them happy." (Ward Farnsworth, The Practicing Stoic, 208)

   5. "[Happiness is found indirectly in the pursuit of other things, which as] proposed by the Stoic consists primarily of a dedication to reason and a commitment to others -- to service, to justice, to helping in the ways one can." (Ward Farnsworth, The Practicing Stoic, 209)

2. —> Engaging with the world of indifferents, we must act with detachment: We shall do our utmost to serve the common good, “Fate permitting.”

   1. To succeed or to fail does not make us virtuous. To act energetically in the name of good intentions is all we have the choice of doing. With a reserve clause, a life of pursuing and falling short of justice is still the noblest path.

   2. “Try persuasion first, but even though men would say to you not to, act when the principles of justice direct you to. If anyone one should obstruct you by force, take refuge in being contented and without emotional pain, and use the obstacle for the display of some other virtue. Remember that the impulse you had was with an “reserve clause”, and your aim was not to do the impossible.” (Meditations, 6.50)

   3. “Though a man may in some sort hinder my activity, yet on my own voluntary impulses and mental attitude no fetters can be put because of the “reserve clause” and their ability to adapt to circumstances. For everything that stands in the way of its activity is adapted and transmuted by the mind into furtherance of it, and that which is a check on this action is converted into a help to it, and that which is a hindrance in our path goes but to make it easier.” (Meditations, 5.20)

3. & through Adversity —> The world provides us with challenges so that we may test ourselves, become more virtuous and capable, and learn to find the value in all that may happen. We have virtues to face challenges; by facing challenges, we become virtuous.

   1. We are to recognize and love the necessity of obstacles; appreciate our natural ability to confront and overcome it; seek the chance to prove and train ourselves, and find the humor and purpose granted by reversals.

   2. We seek to play with care and respect for other players, acknowledge their efforts to defeat us with calm, and exert ourselves fully with skill and neutrality towards the outcome. A challenge to play well, not flip out. (1)

   3. “Good men work, spend and are spent, and they do so willingly. Fortune does not drag them; they follow, and keep step.” (Seneca, On Providence 5.4)

   4. “This is no misfortune,; to bear it nobly, rather, is good fortune.” (Meditations 4.49)

   5. “And yet life, Lucilius, is really a battle. For this reason those who are tossed about at sea, who proceed uphill and downhill over toilsome crags and heights, who go on campaigns that bring the greatest danger, are heroes and front-rank fighters; but persons who live in rotten luxury and ease while others toil, are mere turtle-doves safe only because men despise them.” (Seneca, Moral Letters to Lucilius, 96)

4. —> It is in the activities of virtuous pursuit that we find cause to be joyful regarding our own virtue, the virtues of others, and joy in our lot in the world.

   1. We need not suppress our disappointments and frustrations, but rather recognize that they do not undermine the importance of virtuous action. With detachment and present-mindedness, they are easily endurable.

   2. To the Stoic, virtue alone is sufficient for happiness under any circumstances. It is a rewarding experience to serve others, and enjoy exercising our ability to do so. We may find pleasure in acting out our natural function.

   3. “A man when he has done a good act, does not call out for others to come and see, but he goes on to another act, as a vine goes on to produce again the grapes in season.” (Marcus Aurelius, Meditations 5.6)

   4. "...Happiness is not supposed to be the Stoic goal, not even covertly. The Stoic view, rather, is that one should embrace virtue for its own sake, and that doing so is necessary to get the good side effects of it." (Ward Farnsworth, The Practicing Stoic, 209)

Thanks for reading! Happy to discuss in the comments as usefully as I am able (fate permitting ;).

Also, if you have any good articles on how challenges develop virtue, please share them and I'll add them to this post -- it seems like a major theme for and to my mind, but most articles I found focused on philosophical coping mechanisms rather than Stoic virtue creation.

We generally tend to approach our lives with a few key principles, whether we realize it or not. Sometimes those principles can be things like honesty, decency, integrity, etc. I’ve recently been exploring the depths of Stoic philosophy and found that there are 4 key virtues that allow one to approach life with a stoic mindset and ultimately move closer to a more fulfilling existence.

The 4 Stoic Virtues are:

• Phronêsis or Wisdom

• Dikaiosynê or Justice

• Sôphrosynê or Temperance

• Andreia or Courage

These cardinal virtues are what the stoics explain as pivotal to living a life that brings true happiness and purpose. I explain them in depth here and how one can apply them -

They provide a framework to approach any situation, and if one bears these 4 virtues in mind, it could almost certainly promise a more meaningful and dare I say it…virtuous life.

On a surface level, Stoicism may seem like it's a bruttish, inhumane philosophy, that expects from you to turn into a heartless robot, too preocuppied to make money and be a 'sigma male' in order to have even a brief moment of introspection and of dialogue with itself. And all the on-line morons, too busy posting cringey YouTube Shorts of Andrew Tate or Donald Trump to actually read Marcus Aurelius, those self-styled "Stoics" who couldn't tell you why Chryssipus believed in compatibilism, don't help it very much - in fact, they make it worse, spreading this deformed view of Stoicism to all the 14 years old chronically on-line edgelords eager to sound deep.

I don't think this is a phenomenon that came up out of blue; it surely has some deeper roots. Maybe today's society is a little bit too impulsive and focused on short-term gratification and one-moment desires, after all. Nevertheless, this blalant appropriation of a rich ancient philosophy will not shape a better world for tomorrow, that's clear.

This post was triggered by reading Seneca's 99th Letter to Lucillius, about how to deal with the death of your child. Seneca seems a little to abrasive in the beginning, but he ultimately doesn't advice you to come to your own child's funeral stone-hearted; he doesn't advice you not to cry, since crying does sometimes have therapeutical effects. The Roman Stoa was indeed warmer and more humane than our TikTok grifters would have as believe.

So what's the point, in the end? Not to prolongue your suffering for too long; to not let the pain overcome you, for this is contrary to nature. Stoicism is not about a life without emotion, but about a happy life (eudaimonia), which comes only as a result of virtue. If life throws hardships at you, try accepting them not by becoming robotic - that makes only less of a man, as Seneca hinself recognizes that not showing emotion is a sign of weakness - but by embracing them and trying to see the full half. The city of Lyons burned to the ground? This is life: it takes away in an instant what we've built in a hundred years; think, nevertheless, what a magnificent opportunity for rebuilding Lyons, prettier than it was, we have!

Stoicism is about finding happines not in external factors, but in yourself - for the man who depends on externals for his own happiness is not a free man. A view which - one cannot help but notice - contrasts strongly to the pseudo-Stoic avaricious type of thinking. The Stoics may have been materialists, in the sense that they believe only physical, material things exist (with non-corporeal things merely subsisting), but they were not pathetically greedy, as these clowns are.

Sorry of the long rant, but I became frustrated and I wanted to vent (not very Stoic of me, lol). I also know I'm preaching to the choir here, but where else can I go and be heard and listened to? I'm not even a Stoic, by the way, but a Platonist - and although I reject Stoic physic (materialism and pantheism, among others), I still admire Stoic ethics, not to dissimilar to Platonic ethics, and I try to learn more about this rich tradition every day. Although, admittedly, I know little about it.

End of sermon.

Maybe a bit controversial title. But i think people here should know who is Ryan Holiday.

There is huge part of people that don't really like Ryan. Some complain about his marketing practices, some don't see any benefits in his work, some don't like the "self-help vibe" and some arguments are about his overpriced coins or courses. Every argument is valid, but some of them sounds like envy.

I personally "consume" Ryan on daily basis for few months. I watch reels on Instagram, longer videos every Saturday on YouTube and reading daily stoic book every morning. Few years ago i also read Obstacle is the Way and reread it few weeks ago. So, I would say, I know his work around stoicism quite well.

Some of Ryan's background: he worked in marketing on really high position and wrote critical book about marketing after leaving that field. His mentor is Robert Greene (48 Laws of power, and in few subreddits really popular book Art of seduction). He is married, father of 2 kids, and what he said in his videos he basically maintain relationship with his wife from really young age (around 19 he started dating her, if i remember well). Few years ago he opened really interesting bookstore (i will write more about it later). That's his background in nutshell.

I also "consume" Robert Greene reels and sometimes i watch interview with him or his own 5-10 minutes talking videos on his YouTube channel. I've never finished any of his book, but i listed through 48 Laws and understood what he wants to tell his readers.

I understand why Ryan getting here so much hate. His background from marketing could evoke some negativity, and if you check his courses it seems more like "cult membership" than philosophy learning. Also selling coins with "memento mori" or "amor fati", and some framed quotes seems more like orient style market than serious eshop. Also some people could be disgusted by his cooperation with Robert Greene because "his books are for sociopaths and pick up artists!".

But try to look at him from different angle. He most probably practice what he preaches. Tattoos, he is consistent in what he saying and writing about and he is not changing people that he is friend with in public eye. He is friend with Robert Greene, and he took the right from him like style of writing, historical stories that underline rightness of his point. He is able to maintain monogamous relationship although he is famous and still relatively young. He lives in countryside, so he most probably like animals and nature. He might have lot of money, but he never showed his car, hotel in which he stayed, expensive watch nor vacation destination. He keeps his private life relatively closed from his public life. He never advertised something that is not related to stoicism, only books of other authors, not blender, parfume or restaurant. He opened bookstore with just few hundred books. Books that he consider useful for life. Novel, poetry, original works from stoics, Epicurus, Plutarch, biographies of principled or inspirational historical figures like Zemurray, Frankl, Churchill or Rockefeller. Books that he personally read (some of them even multiple times) and consider them good to sell them in his own bookstore. Have you heard any controversy about him, drugs, fights, drunk driving, affair or sexual abusing? Me neither. (If you want to argue this, just google name "Christopher J. Hadnagy", not really famous writer outside tech community, but he was famous enough to be controversial).

What i wanted to say with that whole novel? To be honest, nothing new or life changing. I understand why people here don't like Ryan, but they most probably don't understand him. He is not typical self-help influencer like Mark Manson or generic "productivity, happiness, and make more money" gurus that are everywhere and they are basically the same, just different faces. He doing great job in terms of making stoicism extremely accessible. Wouldn't that accessibility was goal of every ancient stoic? One was principled emperor (Marcus Aurelius). Epictetus was lecturing slave. Seneca was cool businessman that don't really cared about his fortune, he just enjoyed what he got. But all of them tried to help others prokoptons or just ordinary people around them to live better life. Ryan seems like them. Although his selling practices, we should value him. Just because he did stoicism so accessible. And also, he seems like principled man that don't value consumerism, flexing or advertising anything just because "it pays well". He exclusively advertising his own shit to make living, and i admire that.

You might dont see Ryan as someone beneficial to our community, because you don't need his content to study stoicism. That's great you are so advanced that you understand ancient books without guidance. But you are most probably small minority. Stoicism was always about community study, or mentors lectures. We have this huge community, because it's part of stoicism to discuss and learn from more wise prokoptons. He do positive advertising for us (he also mentioned our community in book Obstacle is the Way). More concerning should be redillers, Andrw Tat* fans or nof*p community. That's not that great advertisement.

Thanks for reading till end.

I just realized a number of important philosophers in Stoicism are INFJs, such as the founder of Stoicism, Zeno of Citium, Seneca, Marcus Aurelios, etc. The Stoicis, contrary of Epicurean, "believed that the practice of virtue is enough to achieve eudaimonia: a well-lived, flourishing life. The Stoics identified the path to achieving it with a life spent practicing certain virtues in everyday life such as courage or temperance and living in accordance with nature." And that's the life principle I'm finding myself drawn to more and more as I grow. What do you think fellas?

I started reading “Daily Stoic” about a year ago, and really enjoy that is is mostly just quotes from original texts of the Stoic Philosophers. I do not really like Ryan Holiday or his anecdotes. Sometimes they are helpful for understanding the passage, but more often than not they seem pointless. So I wanted to read a mix here of modern stoic authors, while also reading some of the primary texts. I used ChatGPT to come up with parts of this syllabus, but the texts and resources chosen are my own. Is this a good staring point?

Course Title: Stoicism: An Exploration of Ancient Wisdom for Modern Living

Course Description: This self-study course on Stoicism delves into the timeless principles of this ancient philosophy, providing students with a comprehensive understanding of Stoic thought and its application in contemporary life. Spanning across three credits, this course invites students on a transformative journey that combines introspection, critical analysis, and practical exercises to cultivate resilience, wisdom, and emotional well-being. Through a carefully curated selection of texts, including the seminal works of Stoic philosophers such as Seneca, Epictetus, and Marcus Aurelius, students will explore the core tenets of Stoicism. They will gain practical insights into leading a life characterized by virtue, tranquility, and the pursuit of personal excellence, regardless of external circumstances. This self-study course encourages students to actively engage with Stoic principles through a variety of mediums, including readings, video lectures, reflective journaling, and guided exercises. By fostering a sense of personal responsibility, this course empowers students to develop actionable strategies for adopting Stoic principles into their own lives.

Key areas of exploration in this course include:

1. The Stoic Mindset: Students will develop an understanding of the Stoic worldview, exploring key concepts such as virtue, nature, and personal discipline. They will examine Stoic teachings on the importance of personal choice, resilience in the face of adversity, and maintaining a focused and rational mind.

2. Emotion and Rationality: Drawing on Stoic insights, students will explore the nature of emotions and how to cultivate emotional well-being through the practice of rational thinking. They will learn to observe and evaluate their own emotional responses, gaining tools to transform negative emotions into opportunities for growth, wisdom, and tranquility.

3. The Art of Acceptance: Stoicism emphasizes accepting and embracing the realities outside of our control, enabling individuals to find peace in the face of life's uncertainties. Students will examine the Stoic concept of indifference to external events and develop strategies to manage stress, overcome obstacles, and live authentically.

4. Relationships and Virtue: Stoicism places a strong emphasis on cultivating virtuous relationships. Students will explore Stoic teachings on friendship, justice, and our responsibilities towards others. They will examine how Stoic ethics can transform their approach to social interactions, enabling them to foster healthier, more meaningful relationships.

5. Stoicism in the Modern World: Applying Stoic teachings to contemporary contexts, students will explore how Stoic philosophy can inform and enhance various aspects of their lives, including career, personal goals, and decision-making. They will analyze real-world examples and case studies, equipping them with practical tools to navigate the challenges of modern life with wisdom and equanimity.

• Reading Assignments: Dive into the above topics, and an overview of these authors.

  • Daily Stoic - Ryan Holiday

  • Enchiridion - Epictetus

  • Meditations - Marcus Aurelius

  • How to Keep Your Cool - Seneca

  • On the Shortness of Life - Seneca

  • Think like a Stoic “Great Course” - 25 Lectures by Massimo Pigliucci

  • The Practicing Stoic - 14 Chapters - Ward Farnsworth

  • A Handbook for New Stoics - Weekly Reading - Massimo Pigliucci

  • Einzelgänger’s Stoic Playlist -

• Interactive Discussions: Engage in online discussion forums to share insights, interpretations, and questions with fellow participants, fostering a sense of community and collaborative learning.

  • Find Forum?

  • Reddit?

  • Discord?

• Critical Analysis Essays: Compose thoughtful essays analyzing various aspects of stoicism, integrating textual evidence and scholarly sources to bolster arguments.

  • Write a 100-500 Word answer to the Great Course : Think Like a Stoic questions.

    • 25 Questions

  • Reflections on Daily Stoic & Handbook for New Stoics

Overall, this self-study course is designed to provide students with an in-depth understanding of Stoic philosophy while empowering them to integrate Stoic principles into their daily lives. By engaging in this exploration of ancient wisdom, students will develop resilience, emotional well-being, and a renewed sense of purpose in navigating life's challenges.

I just finished reading The Prince by Machiavelli. It seems there is an inherent contradiction to Stoicism and the attitude of Marcus Aurelius as a leader, who cherished a peaceful disposition, one in which enemies are not to be avenged.

He valued virtues of courage and justice and was reverent of not showing fear and anger. In the Marcomannic Wars, he sought to never back down nor aggress an attacker. In this way, he adopted a very Stoic approach to war.

In contrast, Machiavelli said "It is better to be feared than loved, if you cannot be both" and that one should inflict as much damage on one's enemies as possible, so that they cannot seek vengeance. On the other hand, Marcus Aurelius said that "the best revenge is to be unlike your enemy or those who have injured you".

Both Stoicism and Machievallianism had a prolific influence on leaders across centuries. However, it seems that being a virtuous leader should not be a manipulative one. I do not mean to misrepresent either view, but it seems there is a disagreement that many modern philosophers fail to consider.

What would be a modern Stoic response to the attitudes espoused by Machiavelli?

It's not unusual for people to (seemingly) get very angry with others online because they disagree with something they've said about Stoicism. Stoicism has no place whatsoever for anger, though.

The Stoics adopted a hard line on anger, mainly because they inherited a cognitive model of emotion that views emotions not just as feelings but also as thoughts and beliefs. To be angry, according to the Stoics, isn't just to feel your blood boil but also to believe that someone has done something unjust, that they've somehow harmed me in so doing, and that they deserve to be punished as a result, or at least to believe something along those lines. Anger, for Stoics, is typically based upon an implicit belief in revenge. Unlike feelings, though, beliefs have propositional value and are either true or false.

The Stoics think we should question, in particular, the belief that we are truly harmed by the actions of another, in this regard. Ironically, although many people think if anger as somehow 'tough" or "manly", anger, for the Stoics, is typically based on a kind of fear and vulnerability. Marcus Aurelius explicitly touches on this in Meditations 11.18 where he argues that kindness, or the desire to help others, is more manly than anger, or the desire to inflict harm and have revenge upon them. (He's almost certainly doing this in response to certain Romans who viewed Greek philosophy as unmanly and argued that anger was somehow a sign of strength.)

The Stoics thought that anger, insofar as it is cognitive in nature, is just based on false beliefs, and therefore, in effect, a sort of moral ignorance. Anger, they say, is temporary madness - losing sight of the ultimate indifference of external things while foolishly sacrificing one's own equanimity for no good reason.

When we started the Modern Stoicism organization, with the first Stoic Week event, around 2012, we assumed that before long there would be an "Epicurean Week" and perhaps then an "Aristotelian Week" or "Platonism Week". (Live Like a Cynic Week, was perhaps doomed from the outset!) But that never happened. I think there are several reasons for this.

First, Stoicism has been way more successful in terms of building online communities. Personally, I think that's because ancient Stoicism (arguably) places more emphasis on genuine social virtue, friendship, and collaboration than Epicureanism does. I know some Epicureans disagree, however, the fact is that Stoicism communities, like this one, have grown much larger than any Epicurean community. I also think the difference is due, in part, to the fact that Stoicism has more accessible ancient writings, such as the Meditations, which are far more popular than any Epicurean writing. Lastly, Stoicism inspired modern cognitive therapy but Epicureanism obviously conflicts with some of the basic principles of modern evidence-based psychotherapy, especially the third-wave approaches. Hence, it's failed to find any real support among modern evidence-based psychotherapists or psychologists involved in related areas of research.

The Modern Stoicism organization began by emphasizing practice. It actually evolved out of a postgrad student workshop called "Live Like Galen", at Exeter University in England. Galen was court physician to Marcus Aurelius. The students of Prof. Christopher Gill also wanted to try living like Marcus Aurelius for a week. This worked out so well that it grew into an annual event that over 20,000 people around the world have now participated in. The focus of Stoic Week was on trying out different Stoic practices each day, with support, and social learning, so that, if people found them useful, they might continue to study Stoicism, and put it into practice, for the rest of their lives.

I think Stoic Week was a massive success. Many of the subsequent self-help books and articles on Stoicism definitely borrowed inspiration from our original training course, often acknowledging that they did so. However, over time, I noticed that there seemed to be a sort of gradual drift away from Stoicism as a practice, even in the self-help discussions I was observing. People were still talking about Stoicism as a philosophy of life, but they weren't talking about actually practising techniques like the View from Above, premeditatio malorum, contemplation of death, contemplation of the Sage, and so on. Very few people writing books and articles on Stoicism were actually talking about the benefits of using these practices in daily life. And some of them didn't actually mention any of these practices at all, somehow.

In my first book on Stoicism, The Philosophy of CBT, I tried to categorize and list all the psychological practices I could find in Stoic literature, and compare them to modern self-help and CBT techniques. I drew heavily on the writings of Pierre Hadot, who classified various "spiritual exercises" he identified in ancient philosophy, especially the Stoics. I counted roughly eighteen distinct psychological practices in the surviving Stoic literature. But really, depending on how you choose to classify them, you could say there are many more, e.g., in one passage, Meditations 11,18, Marcus Aurelius lists 10 distinct cognitive strategies for anger management. If I scooped up all the modern self-help books on Stoicism, though, and tried to extract the practices they cover, I think most of them probably cover at most 2-3 of these eighteen, and some don't include any of them. So, paradoxically, I think this may have actually led over time to a reduction in the overall proportion of readers (or Stoicism fans, if you like) who are familiar with Stoic practices, and actually following them in their daily lives.

I wanted to ask this community, what obstacles do you face when it comes to putting Stoicism into practice in your own life? Are you not familiar with all the practices? Or have you read about them but need more information? Or do you find you're encountering other obstacles? I think by discussing setbacks and obstacles people in the community can help one another to make more progress. What do you think the main advantages might be of discussing how to apply Stoicism in practice? Thanks in advance for your input. - Donald Robertson