The lure of Stoicism

[Maryam]

Hello…I was wondering if anyone here is well-versed on Stoic philosophy? I find it very appealing and its allure is a major stepping block to my coming fully back to the Catholic Church after having given up on going to church for over 8 months.

I must admit that for most of those 8 months I lived my life with an Atheistic mentality and in the last month and a half I slowly got drawn into thinking about God again but in the Stoicist form of what God is…

For those of you who don’t know…Stoicism is a philosophy where nature itself is God. You can describe it as a form of Pantheism where God is in everything. The goal of being a Stoicist is to live a life of virtue where no matter what suffering or obstacles you may face in life…you will remain moderate and calm in how you respond to these happenings. That way you are living according to nature.

My dilemma is the appeal of living ones life in a way where you can live a life of virtue sans the religion. On top of this many of the Stoicist sayings are very similar to the sayings Christ. So in my mind it is hard to dismiss the fact that in Stoicism being so much older a philosophy than the Christian faith, I find myself getting into the “well, they were saying this hundreds of years before Christians so Christians probably stole it from the Stoicists” kind of mindset.

Can anyone help me through this doubt? I am on the fence and all I can do is go to Confession tomorrow. And I honestly don’t know if I can be sincere in my confession since all of the above is troubling me greatly.

Thank you for your time.

 

[JDaniel]

Hello…I was wondering if anyone here is well-versed on Stoic philosophy? I find it very appealing and its allure is a major stepping block to my coming fully back to the Catholic Church after having given up on going to church for over 8 months.

I must admit that for most of those 8 months I lived my life with an Atheistic mentality and in the last month and a half I slowly got drawn into thinking about God again but in the Stoicist form of what God is…

For those of you who don’t know…Stoicism is a philosophy where nature itself is God. You can describe it as a form of Pantheism where God is in everything. The goal of being a Stoicist is to live a life of virtue where no matter what suffering or obstacles you may face in life…you will remain moderate and calm in how you respond to these happenings. That way you are living according to nature.

My dilemma is the appeal of living ones life in a way where you can live a life of virtue sans the religion. On top of this many of the Stoicist sayings are very similar to the sayings Christ. So in my mind it is hard to dismiss the fact that in Stoicism being so much older a philosophy than the Christian faith, I find myself getting into the “well, they were saying this hundreds of years before Christians so Christians probably stole it from the Stoicists” kind of mindset.

Can anyone help me through this doubt? I am on the fence and all I can do is go to Confession tomorrow. And I honestly don’t know if I can be sincere in my confession since all of the above is troubling me greatly.

Thank you for your time.

I should think the BIGGEST thing would be that God is not nature and nature is not God. So where exactly would God fit into the Stoic picture? For the Stoic there’s no need for the Bible; no need for community; no need for family; no need for anything except virtue. All of revelation can actually be tossed. All of the liturgy can actually be tossed. Even the Sacrifice becomes meaningless.

“All you need is virtue.” (Sort of like the song, “All you need is love,” but we know from reality that that’s just wishful thinking.) Virtue can exact a very heavy toll at times. It can cause us to be heroic when heroism is not called for. Even the Golden Rule asks that we do unto others as we would want them to do unto us. Not more than… It can have us standing firm as the world crashes and burns around us. That might be nice, but, will we be truly happy if it does?

Virtue is a means to an end. It is not the end itself. Stoicism completely misunderstands the idea of “virtue”. Well, what does virtue consist of? Virtue consists of morally good habits. Why are they called “good” habits? Precisely because when practiced, they help lead man to his final end. Virtue is a road, or, better yet, a direction to be taken. You don’t take a road or a direction just to end on that road or in that direction do you? Unless the good habits lead us to some other object, there is no reason why they should be any different than any other habits, or so-called virtues. The “goodness” of the acts derive precisely from the end to which they lead us. They are not the end itself.

Another important consideration is that there’s nothing easy about living a life of virtue. Consider the demands for self-sacrifice and self-control it places on us. As admirable as that might be as a way to live ones life, wouldn’t one be happier if one could attain the same end without all that pain and difficulty?

As to your other topic, which came first, the chicken or the egg? Did Christianity steal the lines from the Stoics, or did the Stoics steal the lines from the Messianic prophecies many of which were foretold a thousand years before the Stoics arrived on the scene. Even the idea of a coming Messiah had an effect on the talk of the day during those times.

I will say some prayers for your safe return.

jd

 

[TheWhim]

Undoubtedly Stoicism has great attraction.

I think the main reason that Stoicism has clung to virtue is that it was thought to be the safest way to inner peace. Seneca often says so. External circumstances change forever and if we place our happiness in them we will inevitably be deceived if circumstances turn out to be disfavourable. Therefore, we should not think it happiness how much pleasure we get, or how luckily we have been spared of obstacles since, but rather we should think it happiness to live according to the laws of virtue because irrespective of the misery we will find ourselves in, we will never lose the opportunity to act and to think in accordance with virtue – and if therein lies our happiness, we will never be sad or afflicted again. Well, this may be a great practice to achieve inner peace but it has no claim to be the only practice – think of someone who will so alter his mental structures by an awful act of the will so as to perceive happiness only to lie in malice henceforth. He could achieve the same benefits as the Stoic relying on virtue because however unfavourable the external cirmumstances may be, you will never fall short of the pleasure of pursuing evil thoughts and actions. (One might interject that malice is incompatible with inner peace but I rather think this is a matter of mental training, though very vigorous training of course – besides, you can be sure of finding some deranged criminals who get into a state of inner excitation and restlessness not by thinking of malice but by thinking of virtue).

I think you are not so much attracted by Stoicism because it is a sure way to inner beatitude but rather because it seems to be an objective, truthful system that allows one to choose the virtuous life much like one chooses a scientific principle, without an appeal to spiritual mumbo-jumbo(like a transcendental God).
Well, let’s put it plainly: it is highly doubtful that one lives according to nature when living a virtuous life. To claim that nature is patterned according to such a superstructure of virtue is to be committed to an act of faith that in no way falls short of the amount of faith one has to gather to believe in a transcendental God.

Therefore, the Stoic puts a great deal into nature – like the proposition that it is man’s nature to live in inner calm, that the only way nature has designed to experience such inner calm is by being virtuous, that man’s nature, in conclusion, is structured according to the principles of virtue, as if virtue would be the inner or hidden truth of nature. And all this he puts into nature merely by an act of faith – well, to me this looks a little like spiritual mumbo-jumbo.

This I wanted to point out in reply to the assumption that Stoicism, compared to Christianity, is the more scientific religion in regard to providing a sure ground for virtue.

 

[TheWhim]

Next I’d like to say that Stoicism is by no means so happy a philosophy as it might appear on first look. Each philosophy must be tried by one final test: what is it’s attitude towards suicide? I think we should not live so unprincipled and incoherently as to embrace a philosophy of secret pessimism while striving to continue to live happily. Stoicism always exhorts us to live in total compliance with reason – and if suicide is an option, it must also be virtuous – so why not simply commiting suicide instead of wrenching one’s mind with all this aweful and almost superhuman mental training? I remember Seneca saying that the question of suicide is a difficult one to deal with – for if suffering seems insupportable, it might by appropriate to put an end to it by a free choice of will. Such sort of indecision you’ll certainly not find in Christianity – Christianity, somehow, is pure optimism. It embraces life. Chesterton has written a lot about this, I believe(that is, about ‘the great doctrine of the livability of life’ and how Christianity fits to this). I copy here an extract from his short essay “Why I believe in Christianity”:

It is not a question between mysticism and rationality. It is a question between mysticism and madness. For mysticism, and mysticism alone, has kept men sane from the beginning of the world. All the straight roads of logic lead to some Bedlam, to Anarchism or to passive obedience, to treating the universe as a clockwork of matter or else as a delusion of mind. It is only the Mystic, the man who accepts the contradictions, who can laugh and walk easily through the world.

(…) All the great Christian doctrines are of this kind. Look at them carefully and fairly for yourselves. I have only space for two examples. The first is the Christian idea of God. Just as we have all been Agnostics so we have all been Pantheists. In the godhood of youth it seems so easy to say, “Why cannot a man see God in a bird flying and be content?” But then comes a time when we go on and say, “If God is in the birds, let us be not only as beautiful as the birds; let us be as cruel as the birds; let us live the mad, red life of nature.” And something that is wholesome in us resists and says, “My friend, you are going mad.”

Then comes the other side and we say: “The birds are hateful, the flowers are shameful. I will give no praise to so base an universe.” And the wholesome thing in us says: “My friend, you are going mad.”

Then comes a fantastic thing and says to us: “You are right to enjoy the birds, but wicked to copy them. There is a good thing behind all these things, yet all these things are lower than you. The Universe is right: but the World is wicked. The thing behind all is not cruel, like a bird: but good, like a man.” And the wholesome thing in us says. “I have found the high road.”

Now when Christianity came, the ancient world had just reached this dilemma. It heard the Voice of Nature-Worship crying, “All natural things are good. War is as healthy as he flowers. Lust is as clean as the stars.” And it heard also the cry of the hopeless Stoics
and Idealists: “The flowers are at war: the stars are unclean: nothing but man’s conscience is right and that is utterly defeated.”

Both views were consistent, philosophical and exalted: their only disadvantage was that the first leads logically to murder and the second to suicide. After an agony of thought the world saw the sane path between the two. It was the Christian God. He made Nature but He was Man.

(full text: chesterton.org/gkc/theologian/whychristian.htm)

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

Hello…I was wondering if anyone here is well-versed on Stoic philosophy? I find it very appealing and its allure is a major stepping block to my coming fully back to the Catholic Church after having given up on going to church for over 8 months.

I must admit that for most of those 8 months I lived my life with an Atheistic mentality and in the last month and a half I slowly got drawn into thinking about God again but in the Stoicist form of what God is…

For those of you who don’t know…Stoicism is a philosophy where nature itself is God. You can describe it as a form of Pantheism where God is in everything. The goal of being a Stoicist is to live a life of virtue where no matter what suffering or obstacles you may face in life…you will remain moderate and calm in how you respond to these happenings. That way you are living according to nature.

My dilemma is the appeal of living ones life in a way where you can live a life of virtue sans the religion. On top of this many of the Stoicist sayings are very similar to the sayings Christ. So in my mind it is hard to dismiss the fact that in Stoicism being so much older a philosophy than the Christian faith, I find myself getting into the “well, they were saying this hundreds of years before Christians so Christians probably stole it from the Stoicists” kind of mindset.

Can anyone help me through this doubt? I am on the fence and all I can do is go to Confession tomorrow. And I honestly don’t know if I can be sincere in my confession since all of the above is troubling me greatly.

Thank you for your time.

Stoicism requires more strength of character than I have; so I prefer Epicurus . As to confession - tell the priest what you’ve written here.​

As to your doubt: priority does not necessarily =/= adequacy. An example: 14th century spectacles are earlier than varifocals, which are a very recent innovation: but which is better for the eyes ? The older spectacles, or the much more recent ? Most people would say the latter, because these later ones are far superior to those of 600 years ago; as one would expect. Later is not always better - but it often is.

 

[warpspeedpetey]

Hello…I was wondering if anyone here is well-versed on Stoic philosophy? I find it very appealing and its allure is a major stepping block to my coming fully back to the Catholic Church after having given up on going to church for over 8 months.

I must admit that for most of those 8 months I lived my life with an Atheistic mentality and in the last month and a half I slowly got drawn into thinking about God again but in the Stoicist form of what God is…

For those of you who don’t know…Stoicism is a philosophy where nature itself is God. You can describe it as a form of Pantheism where God is in everything. The goal of being a Stoicist is to live a life of virtue where no matter what suffering or obstacles you may face in life…you will remain moderate and calm in how you respond to these happenings. That way you are living according to nature.

My dilemma is the appeal of living ones life in a way where you can live a life of virtue sans the religion. On top of this many of the Stoicist sayings are very similar to the sayings Christ. So in my mind it is hard to dismiss the fact that in Stoicism being so much older a philosophy than the Christian faith, I find myself getting into the “well, they were saying this hundreds of years before Christians so Christians probably stole it from the Stoicists” kind of mindset.

Can anyone help me through this doubt? I am on the fence and all I can do is go to Confession tomorrow. And I honestly don’t know if I can be sincere in my confession since all of the above is troubling me greatly.

Thank you for your time.

how about not trying to choose some philosophy to live by,

that is really just trying to make the G-d you want instead of serving the G-d you have.

instead of focusing on your own feelings, thoughts and desires to fit everything into some framework that satisfies your intellect, why dont you consider that time wasted and use it in service to others?

you know, life isn’t really about us. i like to blacksmith for a hobby, i make things, tools, to do something, sometimes i make a little chopper to weed the garden, or tongs to hold a crucible, i made a rocket stove out of sheet metal for this summers camping trips, last week.

but everything i made, i made to serve for some purpose i have. i didnt make a chopper, or a set of tongs, or a stove just so those things exist, i made them to do something for me

in the same way, G-d didn’t make us just to exist, we too have a purpose, and our common purpose is to serve G-d, which you can do by serving others.

so if you begin doing your best to be a good servant to G-d, by serving others, than you wouldn’t have time to worry so much about your own desires to understand, and in that stillness, you might be quite enough to hear G-d calling you.

 

[JDaniel]

how about not trying to choose some philosophy to live by,

that is really just trying to make the G-d you want instead of serving the G-d you have.

instead of focusing on your own feelings, thoughts and desires to fit everything into some framework that satisfies your intellect, why dont you consider that time wasted and use it in service to others?

you know, life isn’t really about us. i like to blacksmith for a hobby, i make things, tools, to do something, sometimes i make a little chopper to weed the garden, or tongs to hold a crucible, i made a rocket stove out of sheet metal for this summers camping trips, last week.

but everything i made, i made to serve for some purpose i have. i didnt make a chopper, or a set of tongs, or a stove just so those things exist, i made them to do something for me

in the same way, G-d didn’t make us just to exist, we too have a purpose, and our common purpose is to serve G-d, which you can do by serving others.

so if you begin doing your best to be a good servant to G-d, by serving others, than you wouldn’t have time to worry so much about your own desires to understand, and in that stillness, you might be quite enough to hear G-d calling you.

Thanks to the OP for this thread. Your past few sentences have been very helpful with regard to the quest I am presently on. This is kind of what I’m looking for. This is grounding advice. I still have questions for you. I asked on another thread. I hope.

Thanks friend.

 

[SedesDomi]

My dilemma is the appeal of living ones life in a way where you can live a life of virtue sans the religion.

Since you are of a scientific bent of mind, I suggest actually living as if you were a Stoic (for maybe a week or so), and actually see if your life becomes more virtuous or not. Consider it an experiment in living.