Whatever happened to the Stoics?

wegs

wegs

Matter and Pixie Dust
Valued Senior Member
I've extracted this straight from Wikipedia, as I didn't want to paraphrase, and miss any wording that will be helpful for this discussion.

According to the Stoics, the Universe is a material, reasoning substance, known as God or Nature, which the Stoics divided into two classes, the active and the passive. The passive substance is matter, which "lies sluggish, a substance ready for any use, but sure to remain unemployed if no one sets it in motion".[19] The active substance, which can be called Fate or Universal Reason (Logos), is an intelligent aether or primordial fire, which acts on the passive matter:

The universe itself is God and the universal outpouring of its soul; it is this same world's guiding principle, operating in mind and reason, together with the common nature of things and the totality that embraces all existence; then the foreordained might and necessity of the future; then fire and the principle of aether; then those elements whose natural state is one of flux and transition, such as water, earth, and air; then the sun, the moon, the stars; and the universal existence in which all things are contained.

— Chrysippus, in Cicero, De Natura Deorum, i. 39
Everything is subject to the laws of Fate, for the Universe acts according to its own nature, and the nature of the passive matter it governs. The souls of humans and animals are emanations from this primordial Fire, and are, likewise, subject to Fate:

Constantly regard the universe as one living being, having one substance and one soul; and observe how all things have reference to one perception, the perception of this one living being; and how all things act with one movement; and how all things are the cooperating causes of all things that exist; observe too the continuous spinning of the thread and the structure of the web.

— Marcus Aurelius, Meditations, iv. 40

(end of wikipedia info)


I have a friend who is obsessed with researching the stoics. He believes that Stoicism would make the perfect partner for science, in terms of two schools of thought, that don't contradict one another. But, Primordial Fire? The Universe is God? Fate? Sounds like it most certainly clashes with science and its principles.

What are your thoughts?​
 
was enjoying the read until this sentence
wegs said:
The universe itself is God and the universal outpouring of its soul;
Click to expand...
this is new age christian ideology writing using re-hashed old testament spiritual words
from chatting at some length with the odd theologian, it appears to be the ancient mystacism inside christianitys higher order.
it is no surprise someone might gain access to such philosophy of spiritualism and then try and mix it in with something a little eastern and re-brand it as something wholly new.

each descriptor is used without definition to be assigned to a pre agreed meaning.
:(

the difference in assignment of the element of fire becoming a saintly energy is against the conformist christian ideology of fire being the tool of the devil.

you can see this adoption and interchange of the nature toward fire between different religions.

hindu views fire as very pure, same with satanism(the real satanism not the semi gothic anti christian rebel teenager)

however, adopting a philosophy that maintains a sense of duopoly to force peoples minds into a pre condition to allow conformist control of acceptable outcomes is very
Lau Tzu
& Sun Tzu
to manipulate the enemys ability to win.

life is far more complicated than a simple black or white paradigm
 
Last edited:
RainbowSingularity said:
was enjoying the read until this sentence

this is new age christian ideology writing using re-hashed old testament spiritual words
each descriptor is used without definition to be assigned to a pre agreed meaning.
:(
Click to expand...
A stoic, you shalt not be. :oops:
 
christian evangelicals stealing Greek mythology & eastern philosophy mixing it into secretive christian higher order spiritual philosophy...

notice how some Christians say things like
cleansed in the hell fires...

funny huh
 
RainbowSingularity said:
christian evangelicals stealing Greek mythology & eastern philosophy mixing it into secretive christian higher order spiritual philosophy...

notice how some Christians say things like
cleansed in the hell fires...

funny huh
Click to expand...
Yea, there are eerie parallels for sure.
 
wegs said:
Yea, there are eerie parallels for sure.
Click to expand...

such new era evangelicals also deliberately confuse devil worship with satanism
they are completely different
devil worship is a christian term referring to non monotheism with iconography/idols of gods
while satanism is the religion of Christianity older order of the light bringer.

new era evangelicals are mostly just little hitlers trying to build an army of financial contributors deliberately mixing up moral concepts to suit their own personal issues and hypocrisy's.
 
When I think of stoicism I think of the Swedes. I think of myself somewhat as well as in not getting too emotional over every situation.

I was in Honduras once with a buddy. As soon as I got off the bus I realized that someone (on the bus) had just stolen my wallet. I was pissed off for about 30 seconds. I realized that there wasn't anything I could do about it and then put it out of my mind.

My buddy was still all worked up about it for several minutes and I told him to (politely) shut up. He wasn't the one who had lost anything and he was just making us both upset for no reason. We had a long wait until we could get on the airplane to fly home and he wasn't helping the situation.

I was stoic, he wasn't. :) I was friends with a Swede in grad school. We both had the same temperament. We were both a bit reserved but personally very friendly (and more real in my opinion) than the students from Norway who were very outwardly social and friendly but one on one weren't as "genuine" as the Swede and I (IMO).
 
It's helpful to be stoic I suppose, in certain situations. If everyone is losing their mind about something around you, it's good to have at least one level head. :)

What I'm gleaning from learning about stoicism is that it requires logic over emotion, to reason out situations. To live in the moment, and not as a paranoid emotional wreck. (I've been guilty of anticipating things that never end up happening lol)
 
wegs said:
It's helpful to be stoic I suppose, in certain situations. If everyone is losing their mind about something around you, it's good to have at least one level head. :)

What I'm gleaning from learning about stoicism is that it requires logic over emotion, to reason out situations. To live in the moment, and not as a paranoid emotional wreck. (I've been guilty of anticipating things that never end up happening lol)
Click to expand...

In climbing (rock climbing or gym climbing) people "take" just before the dark part because they are "sure" they can't do it instead of just after the hard part if they didn't make it. It's human nature I guess.

The more life threatening a situation is the more you want to bring out your inner stoic. :)

I know someone who goes hiking with a gun because she is afraid of being eaten by a bear but she goes kayaking without a life vest. Logic is a tricky thing. :)
 
I'd say the ''rules'' of logic are objective. But, if we were to factor in uncertainty, and even sources that we can't rely on, we could still arrive at a logical conclusion (to something). If we use subjective reasoning to reach logical conclusions, then our logic will thereby be subjective. If we use objective reasoning (with objective facts, etc) then our logic will be seen as objective.

An example would be a person who comes to following a particular religion. (not to bring religion into it, but it's a good example of subjectivity) Many religious people feel that their holy books are proof positive that a higher power exists. That would be considered subjective to me, but objective to them. Regardless who here thinks religion itself is irrational, and could never be logical - many religious followers do find that their beliefs are logical. Comprenez vous?
 
Last edited:
wegs said:
I'd say the ''rules'' of logic are objective. But, if we were to factor in uncertainty, and even sources that we can't rely on, we could still arrive at a logical conclusion (to something). If we use subjective reasoning to reach logical conclusions, then our logic will thereby be subjective. If we use objective reasoning (with objective facts, etc) then our logic will be seen as objective.

An example would be a person who comes to following a particular religion. (not to bring religion into it, but it's a good example of subjectivity) Many religious people feel that their holy books are proof positive that a higher power exists. That would be considered subjective to me, but objective to them. Regardless who here thinks religion itself is irrational, and could never be logical - many religious followers do find that their beliefs are logical. Comprenez vous?
Click to expand...
Je comprend. However, as usual :) you are playing around with the definitions to serve your case.

Formal logic is what I meant by logic. We can talk about a "theory" in science and then you can use it to mean "I have a theory that the Moon is made out of cheese" and then we will be using "theory" in two distinctly different ways and to compare that usage becomes nonsensical.

Of course just using the word "logic" doesn't imply objectivity if you going to use it in the following way "I find it logical to assume the Moon is made of cheese". However in that case there is really no point in bringing up this subject for discussion.:)
 
Seattle said:
Je comprend. However, as usual :) you are playing around with the definitions to serve your case.
Click to expand...
But, it's fun.

Formal logic is what I meant by logic. We can talk about a "theory" in science and then you can use it to mean "I have a theory that the Moon is made out of cheese" and then we will be using "theory" in two distinctly different ways and to compare that usage becomes nonsensical.
Click to expand...
Aw, don't be pedantic your entire life.

Of course just using the word "logic" doesn't imply objectivity if you going to use it in the following way "I find it logical to assume the Moon is made of cheese". However in that case there is really no point in bringing up this subject for discussion.:)
Click to expand...
Okay, then...good bye. Hope you find the door. :)
 
wegs said:
But, it's fun.

Aw, don't be pedantic your entire life.

Okay, then...good bye. Hope you find the door. :)
Click to expand...
My life isn't over (unless you know something I don't) and being pedantic is fun (even if you are misusing pedantic).
 
Seattle said:
My life isn't over (unless you know something I don't) and being pedantic is fun (even if you are misusing pedantic).
Click to expand...
I'm not misusing it. lol Your posts often illustrate hairsplitting.

Oh, I thought you were implying that you didn't see the need to discuss this? That's why I replied, "good bye". You know, to be polite. :)


Anyway, stoicism suggests that one can endure pain and various trials in life, without complaint. But, psychologically, wouldn't that build up of angst eventually manifest itself in other ways? I don't think we should spend our lives dwelling on our troubles, we should look for solutions. But, I'm very curious as to how the stoics pushed through their difficulties without complaint.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top