Stoics: Villains of the Empire?

[guy]

Stoicism - Stoticism is a school of Hellenistic Philosophy founded in Athens by Zeno Citium in the early 3rd century BCE. It’s a philosophy of life that maximizes positive emotions, reduces negative emotions and helps individuals to hone their virtues of character.

 

This is an interesting (but unpersuasive) article about the stoics and their pernicious effects on the Empire. The article focuses on three of the great Roman stoics: Seneca, Epictetus, and Aurelius.

 

Quote

Seneca, Epictetus and Aurelius all lived centuries after the Stoic movement appeared. They represent a Stoicism that had been adopted as something like the official state philosophy of the Roman governing class. The flowering of Roman Stoicism corresponded with the period in which Rome’s nominally republican form of government (a senate, popular assemblies, elections, bribery scandals) ceded to a hereditary monarchy (rule by an emperor, capricious executions). As the republic collapsed, Stoicism became the philosophy of choice for Roman elites who had lost their roles in governing the republic and could govern only the ‘inner empire’ of their souls. Roman Stoicism, linked to the shift from a republic to monarchy, is in essence a philosophy of collaborators.

 

 

https://psyche.co/ideas/dont-be-stoic-roman-stoicisms-origins-show-its-perniciousness

Edited June 15, 2022 by guy

[caldrail]

Unconvincing not least because the author attemnpts to tie stoicism with changes in the Roman Republic that he overstresses. SPQR was officially, to the very end in the West, the Roman Republic, which never fell, just accepted single person leadership into the old regime.

However, Roman writers talk about a 'fall of the republic' but be careful because the meaning is misunderstood. Republic is to us a form of government, but not to the Romans, who saw it as res publica (For the People), the obligation of privilege to care for those without. Granted many elite Romans paid lip service only to the concept of civic duty, but that what the Roman Republic was supposed to be about. In the Principate, this was finally superseded by personal ambition and profit, the public fobbed off with panem et circuses, although to be fair Rome was unusually supportive of their poorest citizens compared to other cultures of the time. 

Is stoicism really a factor in politics? It seems to me more of a reaction against the competitive nature of society as a whole, seeking a more considered approach to life that tries to avoid the stress of the Roman rat race. You may well disagree.

[guy]

On 6/16/2022 at 8:24 AM, caldrail said:

Is stoicism really a factor in politics? It seems to me more of a reaction against the competitive nature of society as a whole, seeking a more considered approach to life that tries to avoid the stress of the Roman rat race. You may well disagree.

Thank you for reading this article. It seems to me that the author of the article is a well-meaning activist who feels that any action, no matter how ineffectual, is better than resignation to the unavoidable and unchangeable. 

This quote from the article is very telling:

Quote

It is not easy to feel grief, and it is tempting to seek out exercises to suppress it. But to look around the world and feel the pain of injustice, to understand and wallow in the hurt of the natural world – this is not a sign of weakness. It is a sign of humanity, and the first step towards taking action. Because if you accept your fate joyfully, as a Stoic sage should, you’ll never try to change it.

 

Edited June 19, 2022 by guy

[caldrail]

Do not be anxious. Everything is in accord with the nature of the universe. In just a little while, you will be nothing, like Hadrian. Marcus Aurelius.