What Stoicism Gets Wrong
Вставка
- Опубліковано 11 кві 2024
- Go to my sponsor aura.com/dailystoic to get a 2 week free trial and see if your personal information has been leaked online.
✉️ Want Stoic wisdom delivered to your inbox daily? Sign up for the FREE Daily Stoic email at dailystoic.com/dailyemail
🏛 Get Stoic inspired books, medallions, and prints to remember these lessons at the Daily Stoic Store: store.dailystoic.com/
🤝 Join the largest community of Stoics ever in history and get exclusive bonuses at dailystoiclife.com
Instagram: / dailystoic
Twitter: / dailystoic
Facebook: / dailystoic
TikTok: / daily_stoic
#Stoicism #DailyStoic #RyanHoliday
I must applaud you for making this video, Ryan. I happened upon Stoicism by chance shortly after commencing my study of Classical Latin and Ancient Greek, and everyday I consider myself blessed to have discovered it. It enriches my life, instructs me morally, and guides my habits and perspectives. But there is no doubt that, like any product of humanity, Stoicism, as a philosophy for life, contains flaws and inconsistencies. How could it not? It is a system composed by different people, with different ideas, at different times.
To acknowledge Stoicism's flaws lends its practitioners a greater degree of credibility. Take from it all that is good and worthy, and consider for yourself those aspects which appear inconsistent. After all, Seneca himself encouraged Lucilius to move beyond mere maxims and to trust his own contemplations.
Those Flaws and inconsistencies are your perceptions of reality, imagine that a thousand years from now someone attacks your name because of actions that today are considered to be totally normal? , no real philosopher would get on his high horse and judge actions of men that lived thousands of years ago…
The greatest problem with modern self help culture (especially for men) is that self improvement has become selfish. We learn about self discipline and personal responsibility but then use that as a weapon to judge and beat others down with, and we use self help as a blindfold to ignore the plight of others and the systemic problems of society. When people hear “justice” they often only think of retributive justice - punishment for wrongdoing. They want to ignore the empathetic justice of caring for and helping others in need. There is far too much of “if it isn’t happening to me, it isn’t happening” in our society and we are becoming a nation that glorifies selfishness.
Well said.
Don’t use the word justice to mean helping others. There is always an implicit motive of punishing someone who causes that person’s suffering. In other words it means a zero sum game. If you look at the psychological literature around political/ideological psychology, you’ll find that zero sum game assumptions are the cause of hatred and violence in politics. You’ll also find that social justice types are mostly motivated by tearing down the powerful, not helping the non-powerful. In other words, resentment, envy, etc. An often overlooked consequence of this is that they have to make sure that the powerless continue to be powerless so they can continue to resent the powerful.
This is why it has always evolved. This is why we have Modern Stoicism. We build on the wisdom of the Wise and imperfect in a collaboration between cultures, personalities, and eras.
What will never be wrong is the Pursuit of Areté. Of living a life of Virtue. Maybe we can never reach that standard perfectly, but we sure can fucking try.
And not only our life, but all of our lives, will be better for even one person following the core responsibility of a Stoic.
The Dichotomy of Control will never change. We are mortals. We need to learn to accept that the only thing we control is our own judgments and decisions.
Yes. There is definitely a difference between Modern and Ancient Stoicism. Their “physics” was dead wrong. The four elements model of the physical world is completely overshadowed by the periodic table of elements. The four humors theory of disease has been proven to be dead wrong and the germ theory of disease, while an incomplete explanation of disease states, is far superior and more fact based than the idea that all diseases are caused by an “imbalance” of four liquids in the body.
Brilliant comment ❤🎉
Traditional is just as valuable as modern
Compassion starts with having compassion for ourselves...
This is the best video on Stoicism I have seen. By critically examining the philosophy and challenging dogma, it allows for improvements and gives Stoicism a vitality that a more static outlook lacks.
Much needed discussion. The problem with 'isms' is they always get highjacked by sociopaths that magnify certain aspects and downplay others. Classical Mainline Religion has the same problem. ( Jesus and Budhah both spoke on this ) Ryan to his credit, gets this...this is what intellectual honesty looks like in practice...lost subscribers. One might gain the world, but if you loose your soul in the process, you've actually gained nothing.
'This is what intellectual honesty looks like in practice...lost subscribers. One might gain the world, but if you lose your soul in the process, you've actually gained nothing.'
Worthy words, sir. To act with integrity, particularly when doing so is detrimental to one's own interests, is the mark of a truly great man, and a quality that is in decline.
Is it possible that your perhaps modernized and genuinely intellectual filter for "isms" is associated with our own zeitgeist?
I absolutely agree that philosophy and religious practices should be carefully interpreted for present day realities.
It seems to me that the culture war, politics, and the watering down of discipline and challenges is producing the same results it always has in history.
Perhaps we can interpret that message as well. Let us not insert politics into philosophy, eat drink and be merry, (Epicurus) and repeat the very same post modern ideologies that served to bring down the very empires we study and admire.
@@charleschapman4744 Thank you, it’s a paraphrase attributed to Jesus….a stoic if one wants to read him that way.
@@adamwright1783 Thanks Adam, yeah I’m sure I do have a bias…. Lots… I’m really old!! I see Stoicism as a template for life, but It shouldn’t be a substitute for a deep spiritual life and mystical transcendence. It doesn’t make stoicism lacking, it’s just a different thing, that’s all. I watched the video because I respect Ryan’s work and was curious about his thoughts about the limits of S and how he was going to parse that. Cheers
Do you believe in Jesus and religion and all of that? @@LouisFPak
This is one of more important videos you've made. I've been an avid follower of yours for a while now and I've wrestled with some of these ideas on my own. Thank you for what you do. Keep up the good work.
And your perception of what they get wrong is just a product of your time, also.
Dude…
That very literally just paralyzed my mind with shock to see it from that paradigm. That blew my mind.
This comment deserves to be pinned.
Nah dude. Slavery is objectively wrong no matter what time period you’re in
#agreed 100%
Perhaps
I'm glad to see this video it's important to remember that any person you study is human, and they have flaws and incorrect views on different topics we all deal with.
I have so much respect for honest people
thank you dude. This is so awesome. As a girl and scientist -reading early stoics (like lots of modern things) you have to take time and place into account and then start understanding zoomed out from yourself already and a non existent history - this video was super impactful because your words are my thoughts, which is pretty rad when not something in a Stoic book ('cept yours). Thanks again.
One of the best videos you've ever made, Mr. Holiday. Cheers!
This was amazing Ryan, it speaks a lot to the legitimacy of your platform that you are able to stand so surely by something and critique it in the same breath. It is so powerful for you and for your marginalized followers when you call out misogyny and racism that associates itself with stoicism. I have found it difficult to situate myself in something like stoicism and it is great to have space opened up by you. It's amazing to hear you do the right thing, even at the cost of subscribers and likely money.
I would add one: the dichotomy of control leaves the impression that we control (or don’t control) all or most situations. The reality is that we have absolute control over almost nothing (outside of our own reactions), but we have influence over most things. These “shades of grey” areas make up most of the situations we encounter.
Calling out the worst of your people is exactly what I expect of you. You did it beautifully. You don't need to be an ahole to be strong. Cowards will weaponized self mastery.
It's important for all people not just stoics to care for and take care of one another. We as a species are only here today because of our ability to have compassion and empathy and helps others in need. Only we fall, but together we are unstoppable. We all make up for others shortfallings.
Well done. Valuable. Insightful Thank you for this (and of course other) video. I do have in my notes from other videos you've done that the objective of a Stoic is to help others, in particular others who can't help themselves. I don't recall when you said that, but I didn't make it up.
That corresponds to the 4th Stoic principle you cite in this video.
Sometime I think that too much knowledge (detail) can help one lose sight of the core principles, which you also cite- preparation and performance. Stoicism helps prepare you to deal with the world, and provides you with the means to focus on your objective - to help others Stoicism allows you (prepares you) to keep focused on your objective - to help others (to perform.
St. Thomas Acquinas (paraphrasing a bit here) - "The good, as understood, moves the will". "The proper function of man is to understand". Again, preparation (understand what is good), and use that understanding to act (perform).
That all works for me. And I thank you for confirming what is good, and how to stay focused on the good.
We are so lucky, as humans - we can create in our minds "the good", and live a purpose-focused life, and not simply act in response to instinct and emotion.
Thank you for this.
I think what people miss the most about Stoicism is just how awful everyday life was when it was written. I think Stoicism is more about how to survive how awful everyday life was for their time. I also think one of the problems with Stoic writings are that they are written from a polytheistic lens and is meant to compliment that view. The things that are "missing"in Stoicism were, at the time, addressed by the pantheon of other gods and their religion. The, mostly, men writing down Stoicism were not writing in a vacuum. I think that is why Stoicism is important. It deals with the intersection of multiple aspects of living a good life in spite of how awful the people and the environment is.
You’re not wrong… but, I’m not sure that Marcus Aurelius, for example, would have seen his own life as particularly awful. He was after all the most powerful man alive in his society.
I am very happy to see this and look forward to Ryan's perspective. We all know, or ought to know, nothing is petfect. This is gonna be interesting.
Thank you. Yes!
This was great. There is much to built on and to build with.
So much to learn
I love that you highlight that this great book you revere is not infallible or gospel. I wish more people could view the Bible that way. There are some good ideas but there’s also some fallible ideas especially when placed upon our modern times.
I have found that having standards for myself and living in my integrity can occasionally result in someone thinking that *I believe I'm better than them* - even though I've said nothing nor indicated such a thing in any way.
Now, I know that this is their problem. I have ignored it, but, it has also shown me who I don't need in my life.
I think these people know right from wrong and when they see a positive, humanitarian behavior they may feel badly that they did not do the same.
A guilty conscience, maybe.
It gives me hope that they may decide to do the good thing next time.
Great video! Thank you for steel-manning the arguments against stoicism. Stoicism, as great as the philosophy is to me, has its flaws and understanding them only makes its practitioners better.
Great meditation to start the day=]
Great video. Interesting with the mention of Jordan Peterson, too. I find him very compelling, like many men do, and it's just good to get many angles of philosophies and reasoning. Like you do. Thanks for looking at stoicism from different angles.
I find the criticism of Stoicism as lacking or missing compassion deeply perplexing. In my mind, Stoicism is centered on compassion; indeed the etymology of the term compassion shares a literal correspondence with the Stoic concept of "sympatheia." The idea that we are all connected; that our fate is bound together; that what is good in me is also what is good in you (i.e. our ability to reason and use reason to make the world better) - this is what gives spiritual purpose and necessity to living virtuously for the Stoics. Indulging in the negative passions (anger, worry, fear, desire, etc.), for the Stoics, is precisely what keep us from feeling compassion. In other words, it's hard to feel connected to and compassion towards others when you feel angry, afraid, lustful, worried, etc. towards them.
This ties into another unfair criticism of Stoicism as trying to promote being emotionless. The Stoics were not against emotion; they were against 1) not processing one's emotions, which leads to 2) emotions driving one's decision-making. Emotions come with their own set of values. Anger, for example, values revenge; fear values avoidance; hedonism values impulsivity and short-term reward, etc. When you do not process your emotions, then these values start to take over your view and you begin to act in accordance with these emotions. That you feel angry, for example, because of such and such an incident, the Stoics do not have an issue with. That you let the anger simmer so that it ruins the rest of your day or pushes you to treat others unfairly - that is what the Stoics want to avoid.
I find the critique of Stoicism as not providing a robust toolkit for collective action interesting. It brings up the central question of: is collective action a necessary condition for happiness? For the Stoics, only virtue is necessary and sufficient for happiness; collective action would be an indifferent (if preferred). Indeed, it is very possible for people to take collective action for what one might consider "unjust" ends and many peoples have done so in the past. For the Stoics, the question they would ask is, "What is the basis for that collective action? Is it virtue? Would I have to sacrifice virtue in order for us to achieve our objectives?" I don't think the Stoics would be against taking collective action, especially if taking such action can help one cultivate virtue. But if it requires sacrificing one's sense of virtue (i.e. doing something morally questionable for the "greater good"), I imagine they would not be in support of it.
To me, the criticism of Stoicism (by a Stoic) as lacking a toolkit for collective action is only valid if we admit that collective action, strategic thinking, etc. are necessary components to living a good, happy life.
Is living a virtuous life, which sets an inspirational example for others to follow, in itself a form of collective action?
@@ck-4203You bring up an interesting question. Collective action, as I think Ryan is understanding it, refers to taking the same or similar actions together as a group (e.g. protesting, campaigning, boycotting, etc.) for the purpose of enacting some sort of change in the world. The Stoics do not live a virtuous life in order to change the world. Changing the world is indifferent to them. They strive to live a virtuous life because it is the most rational, and natural, way to live. Regardless of whether someone is inspired by their example, the true Stoic would still strive to live virtuously.
@@theprofmusicthat's aptly put
Thank you Ryan Holiday for not pandering & calling it out. Way too many creators doing that & people who are searching for validation. I absolutely want to learn from creators BUT I also take those ideas w a grain of salt. I’ve got to check in w myself & possibly other sources to validate an idea or not.
any idea which episode that Donald Robertson interview is from? In the clip they are in person, but the only interview I can find is the one where they are remote because of the pandemic.
Does anyone have a link to that interview with Donald Robertson seen in this video? I can only find the old video?
The preserving of old books is and takes a very high priority and is a cosmic law that shall not be infringed .
Everytime I give out "Manual" from Epictetus to friends, they always trip on the quote about sex before marriage.
Gay man mostly. I always need to explain this pregorative was necessary before the birth pill in 1969 because there was real issue of poverty for women and children if they were not protected by marriage contract. (and all the burden to raise a children alone). So you scare people about sex.
Actually, that was nothing to do with morals- catholic made it a ethic moral matter- but it was probably the most feminist stuff before science rules out the problem of getting pregnant easily. Don't forget, stoicism is all about reason, not morals.
It was not really about "sex is bad"...that was something for stability of society.
Indeed. And this only increases if we take into account the massive power difference between men and women especially in the Roman empire.
Getting an unmarried woman, especially when their house leader was of lower status than you, into bed was probably a lot easier. There was a power dynamic there that made pretty much any interaction far closer to coercion.
So as a result of the society, it was pretty much ONLY the mans job, to not do it. Because they were the one who held the power.
And on the contrary for men of lower social status, it was a life preserverving necessity. If they had relations with a woman of higher status that resulted in children, they were done for.
This was a video that you needed to make.
learning from historical figures includes understanding their flaws as well as their virtues. Embracing this nuanced view can lead to a more compassionate and emotionally aware application of their teachings in today's complex world. 👍
I think that stoicism is than the coldness that people hear from the harder sayings about death, slavery, womanishness, and emotions I believe that they are missing the point. The point is that character is more important than reputation, that (manliness) courage is greater than anger, that life is more than money, that reason makes us free. The Stoics were not perfect but they got it more right than we are now, where justice is placed in the context of kindness. We now say you have to be cruel to be kind but truthfully justice is sometimes necessarily cruel. Now we say love and compassion are important but isn’t love and tolerance a little too inclusive? Wisdom does not tolerate foolishness. To live in a society where a man can’t be loving if he is wise is a terrible state! The Stoics have it more right than we do!
Mr Holiday, the gentleman interviewing is asking questions about emotions....and that the world should be ran with them. Does he really understand what Stoicism is? It's about meeting life and difficult situations, acknowledging the natural man( feel fear, angry, joy etc..) but when the moment has a call to action, just as you state it best, the stoic teaches the individual to pause in the moment and choose rational options. Compassion is a humble virtue. Yes, its value along with the action of charity that will 'never faileth'. Adding this Christlike virtue is important. However, the idea of the world acting upon "emotions " with create confusion and lead to chaos. The stoics journal words of wisdom on consistency, stability, thinking logic and having healthy boundaries.
I also get the impression your interviewer does not have touch with reality.
*You made a good point adding this interview to answer the questions of your topic. He gives you a space for you to answer 'emotions ' in our Western culture.
Thank you for all your videos, books and lectures. I believe you add value to so many with your willingness to share these timeless stoics to our modern minds! Stay the course!!!
It’s unfortunate that you never seem to mention A New Stoicism, by Becker. This would have been the perfect video to bring it up in; it attempts to “update” stoicism to meet some of the challenges modern philosophy and thinking bring to stoicism. It might be a little academic at times, but the end of the video in particular is a subject that book discusses quite well.
So bummed when I heard Ryan say numbers drop when diving into matters of justice. Of course that would be the case.
I believe stoicism is a good starting point, but we should also try building upon it and not just take it at face value.
They hold forth about free will while at the same time being quite fatalistic. Of course the time they lived in a time with almost no social mobility.
Nietzche said something very pertinent about free will and its non-existence, along the lines of that the servant can't also be the master.
Very good
2:52 'Some old dead white guys ...' sounds like something a woke ideologue would say.
This is where you see the difference between the wisdom being transmitted and the messenger doing the transmission.
Yeah when that was said I started to question how this video was going to go.
I think it reveals that he is a progressive in the American political sense. Not my political preference, but the debate and discussion is worthwhile nonetheless.
Have you read Daily Cornbread by Stephanie Stokes Oliver?
Bravo Ryan! Much needed video. Keep questionig and evolving as we all hooefully do individually and collectively. Modern science of emotions, thoughts and feelings. Cognitive reframing. Mental training. Compassion is limitless versus empathy/sympathy. Lots to improve on an amazing philosophical basis. Justice may be be the weakest virtue as the feeling of injutice has a neuroanatomical basis and may lead to let compassion then we think. Compassion is more important than justice yet action is paramount for change.
@Arthur Brooks; dead on. While reading the Daily Stoic in conjunction with James Martin's "The Jesuit Guide to (Almost) Everything, it became apparent how much Catholicism & Stoicism had in common, and it became apparent where the Stoics were lacking and that was Love & Compassion. There can be no doubt the appeal of Jesus Christ and Christianity was that it was a philosophy in direct opposition to Roman brutality .
But catholicism is bs
How is your leg now?
I hope you are getting better.
Great
0:31 Zeno in 495 BCE? That's way earlier than when he was born. He didn't even pick up philosophy until after reading about Xenophon's memoirs about Socrates, and Socrates died in 399 BCE
Why does it matter how much melanin they had in there skin?
This video made me subscribe. I don't know why men don't subscribe more to channels like this instead of toxic ones like Andrew Tate and Jordan Peterson. I hope this channel grows in order to become one of the biggest. I'm a woman and I appreciate the fact that modern stoicism is finally more inclusive to us. Keep up the good work!
Eff both of those guys
There is nothing toxic about SELF IMPROVEMENT!
Jordan Peterson is “toxic”?!
Have you actually listened to him in any depth, or do you just listen to those who hate him? Or maybe snippets those people put together of his worst or off moments?
How can you compare Tate with Peterson??
1. Slavery is as old as mankind and spans the globe. It is not propagated just by old white men. 2. Compassion is important but not the end all. Focus on kindness and fairness. That will fix compassion.
Exactly! I'm not getting this video or else Ryan is Changing hmmmm.
@@Cinemagoer_64 Same here. Slavery has always existed and still does. Often based on debt. That and the "just some dead white guy" really turned me off. So someone is lesser cause he's dead or cause he's white or both? I have better video's to watch.
I look at these ancient writings for what they are. The big picture without presentism. The basic truths. The wisdom and how it can be applied today. Don’t kill the messenger. PS: I’m a proud atheist. I don’t need religion to be a good moral person. Stoicism does not need religion.
False idols are always wrong, but advice from wise people can be taken into consideration.
All I have to say to say is this: my wife cheated on me. Stoicism has helped me get to a place where I could forgive her, and continue the marriage. Marcus was instrumental in that ability. That is all I will say.
Stoics were not anti-women. Listen to Musonius Rufus. Also the whole womanly soul has nothing to do with actual women it is just a way of contrasting what is a good man. So really it has nothing to do with women but is a way of clearly expressing what a man is.
💯
I wonder how much religion and modern philosophy of the 21st century and today gets wrong
and how some future philosopher several 100 years from now will make some visual feature about what we got wrong and silly appalling things we do
Rinse and repeat
I also wonder if there are actually philosophers back then who feel they were born too early for their time. Because as much as most people are products of their time, there are people who are "ahead of their time", and they may have had a completely different effect (or lack therof) on history had they been born later, where their beliefs may be regarded differently
The dude just made up his own definition of faith, and that's not reasonable for communication with others.
Doggin on JB? Damn man. You and him have both changed my life. That dude help as man people as you have man. Tate is a whole other story tho..
Agreed. Jordan Peterson isn't perfect. And is human. But has a lot of valid observations on life and the world. Tate on the other hand. I get weird energy from hearing him talk. Something is definitely off
I’d like to point out the problem of Stoic Physics in ancient Stoicism. Ancient Stoics thought that physics was one of the three pillars of their philosophy. That their ethics depended on them getting their physics right. The problem there is that their “physics” was dead wrong. The four elements model of the physical world is completely overshadowed by the periodic table of elements. In fact Ancient Stoics flatly disagreed with the idea that physical matter is made of atoms; an idea espoused by Epicureans whom ancient Stoics unjustly slandered. An idea later proven to be correct and forms the foundations of chemistry, biology, and even quantum physics. The four elements model is inadequate for explaining physical matter and physical forces. It’s sort of functional for relativity primitive people who don’t know better, but it is not good science.
The four humors theory of disease has been proven to be dead wrong and the germ theory of disease, while an incomplete explanation of disease states, is far superior and more fact based than the idea that all diseases are caused by an “imbalance” of four liquids in the body. The four humors theory of disease doesn’t explain contagious diseases in a manner that is either predictive, satisfactory, or even evidence based. In fact the western world’s medical system was held back for centuries because everyone engaged in an appeal to authority fallacy with Galen, Marcus Aurelius’es physician, as the authority that people and physicians weren’t allowed to question. It took hundreds of years for someone to start to realize that Galen never even performed an autopsy on a human body and based all his ideas of human biology off of dogs. There’s enough homology between humans and dogs to get many things correct, but there are differences you will miss if you never look at what’s inside a human body. Louis Pasteur had to fight against the prevailing acceptance of the four humors theory of disease in order to convince the academic community of the germ theory of disease, and that’s despite living in a time where microscopes exist! People had a hard time believing that a creature smaller than an ant could hurt them!
Best video, people adopting false stoicism thinking it's strength, they're shooting themselves in the foot.
Bro every human on Earth is currently a slave too!
I have no childhood faith tradition. I wonder how important he thinks that is if choosing a religion.
Hi all, I'm trying to find out who the gentleman that Ryan is interviewing at the 15:20 mark in this video..... sorry if that's obvious, I'm new here.
Donald Robertson! It says so at min 14:01
I was too, had to ctrl f "who" to find your comment! Glad he landed with someone else as well
Thanks gents!
I'm pretty sure they said Buddhas love was bottomless
😑😑😑
I don t believe of 1 Guy say s this is not right, we should believe him.. that s for me to decide.
It troubles me that you say “just some dead white guy.” You’re attaching a descriptive term that has no bearing on his philosophy. If he was an African philosopher, would you have said “just some dead black guy”? I think not, you’re playing into the contemporary race narrative that has all of us divided black vs white, it’s ridiculous.
Get over yourself. It’s just a saying. You’re attaching too much weight to it. He was just stating fact. Most power then like today lies with white men.
I agree Patrick. Ryan is as much a product of his time as he said of the older stoics.
I thought the same thing man. The color of his skin has nothing to do with the philosophy. That left a bad taste in my mouth for the rest of the video
Well like all "progressive" liberals Ryan is biased against ethnic Europeans/Americans while being in favor of blacks and people of color generally. That's why he talks positively about MLK and the civil rights movement in a lot of his videos. As if the africanization of places like Detroit and Baltimore is some positive thing. Hindsight is 20 20 I guess.
@@emiliog.4432you show your racial bias as well by completely discounting Asian, South American and African power and further prove my point. Not to mention America and Europe’s diversity in their governments. No need to be rude and rescue Ryan, who I was addressing, he’s a big boy.
“…some old WHITE dude said…”. Why did you name the color of his skin? I’m curious.
Btw, slavery=todays employment. Same principle. Applied differently.
This is what troubled me, ultimately Stoicism is a tool, not an identity.
The Stoics missed a virtue. In addition to courage, temperance, justice, and wisdom, there is also humanity. Humanity is compassion and love for oneself, others, and even for humanity in general.
That's justice.
@@RyanHolidayYT No, it really isn’t. Love and compassion are distinct from justice. Look at Seligman and Peterson’s work on these categories in the psych literature.
@@NousNoesis225 K but in the cardinal virtues they are not.
@@RyanHolidayYT Not really. Otherwise, why would the Christian tradition have created a separate category of theological virtues, including love, if love were covered under justice? Secondly, Seligman and Peterson’s work is a more scholarly and comprehensive analysis of how virtue is categorized across cultures.
And third, just ask ten random people, both men and women, if they think love is just a part of justice, or if it should be in its own category.
Popular and scholarly opinion go in my direction on this, I think, Ryan. Love your work, but I think this might be a blind spot?
Great video. Stoicism is a tool. I've learned from it but I must move on.
Though I understand where you are coming from, the philosophy of strength, virtue, and self control have no space for embracing duality, emotions, and Liberal politics in my opinion.
Discipline is destiny. Stoicism is strength. Virtue is doing the right thing, nothing else matters. (Which includes kindness, charity, justice for every race, gender, religion, and creed. For all.)
Please don't make that fatal mistake so many have and get political. You halve your audience for no reason.
I follow you and buy your books for guidance on how to live my best life. Leave the woke crap out please.
👌👍👏👏👏💜🙏☮️🕊️🕯️
About point 2... If you want the stoics to show more emotions then it won't be stoicism anymore. Furthermore, the stoicism is more about controlling your feelings and about when and how you will display them. I don't think blindly showing what you feel in front of people will be a good think
You clearly have no idea what you're talking about.
Follow the faith of your youth is questionable advice. 😬 I’d say examine the faith of your youth.
they were right about women being diff though
Facts….not better or worst but different.
Why are we even bringing Christianity into it? Religion ain't it.
How come your eyes are blue but hair is black?
0:52 And you think "the gospel" is the word of anything?
hahahahahaha
ryan ryan... 👃
The way he talks just tells the level if degeneracy he fallen into...you lost the true path my man😢
Then you should find an echo chamber that you are comfortable in.
I think that even the "gospel" and the "word of God" has a chance of being flawed. Even if it originally came from a divine, perfect source, it had to pass through flawed, human minds and hands to get to us. Take everything with a grain of salt.
(Edited to soften tone.)
Yeah lol. Read the bible.
I prefer non fiction
Lol Jordan Peterson never meant nothing like that. It's very easy to take one single phrase and take it out of context. Dam I thoght people knew that by now..
He ain't never meant nothing like that lol.
Christianity is stoicism 2.0. You take the best practice and turn them into a religion that people can practice at all level of intelectual developpement.
Then you create hollidays, community, chants, practices to make you better week after week, year after year.
The most productive society are all christian, there is no stoic society.
Japan and South Korea are Christian?
@@Zack-xz1phIncreasingly so, yes.
Christianity is corrupted stoicism.
Don’t bash Jordan Peterson he’s helped more people than you’ve met. Come with a better answer or don’t take away the one people have..
You should find an echo chamber that you are comfortable in.
The jab at Jordan Peterson seems off brand for you and I found it remarkably distasteful.
Nobody cares. You are defending somebody you don't know from another person you don't know. Sad that's what you gained from this. You are very easily triggered and you should work on yourself.
This kinda sucked
Point one. We enjoy an "entitlement" perspective on the slavery issue with todays "modern view". Slavery has been around for thousands of years (doesn't mean I agree with it). The fact that Marcus didn't take advantage of his slaves as having power of them is flippin amazing and shows his self control. Let's be honest of how many men in power like to enjoy the company of beautiful woman. Common. Look at leaders. Remember billy Clinton
Point 2. Soy boy stoicism is not for you. Go paint a rainbow.
Point 3. No point. Weak argument.
Point 4. You don't know what stoicism is by emotion suppression. Modern psychology is a quagmire of intellectuals and charlatans peddling science for prestige and payment.
Andrew tate bashing. Really? Think your jealous. Let's be honest. That's why these experts are quacks.
5. Point 5. Being a jerk turns on woman. Lol. You blue pillers won't see it. That's OK you probably don't agree anyways.
Dude, are we really doing that thing where we judge people that lived thousands of years ago by today's standards? Btw when you are talking about philosophy what you deem “Right and wrong” is your own perception, as is anything you can't factually prove that is true, it's easy to judge today I bet if you were living in that time you wouldn't even think about going out and protesting these things
"Old white guys" huh?
These are Mediterranean people, thousands of years before the European colonial period, in a time when slaves were the same ethnicity as their masters.
Who is that gratuitous placating even for?
You should find someplace new to go.
I posed a question. You replied without addressing it. Like some sort of intellectual coward. You should find someplace new to go.
The extension of this concept is that there's literally at EVERY point in history been things which were morally accepted and unquestioned which we now consider "wrong." And the further exception is that it's very unlikely our time is the exception, that all of the things we uncontroversially accept as "not wrong"... inevitably include some which are, or which we at the very least will decide to have been