5 ms·

You keep references armies of servants or other BS as if somehow that makes adopting stoicism more likely. Stoicism is there specifically for when life is diffi

You keep references armies of servants or other BS as if somehow that makes adopting stoicism more likely. Stoicism is there specifically for when life is difficult. Why do you not understand this? If you have an emotional hissy fit whenever you need to do something difficult, then perhaps you should adopt a more stoic attitude and just get it done.

coldtea 7y ago
>You keep references armies of servants or other BS as if somehow that makes adopting stoicism more likely. Err, TFA is about how rich and powerful adopt stoicism as a fashion (back to the times of Rome). So, yeah, I guess it does make it more likely. Seneca was a stoic. His slaves, not so much. >Stoicism is there specifically for when life is difficult. Why do you not understand this? Because what something is supposed to be for, and what people adopt it for are two different things. Christianity is also supposed to be a "religion of peace", but that's not what many of it adherents use it as...
- RandomInteger4 7y ago
  You understand absolutely nothing about what there is to criticize in the various religious and how that is completely separate a personal, non-religious philosophy like Stoicism. Furthermore, nobody adopts Stoicism as a fashion. I don't know where you're getting this from. Waking up early, eating right, going to the gym, etc. are not things exclusive to Stoicism if that's what you're implying. That is ridiculous. Just because people talk about it does not mean they're virtue signalling (a concept that comes from various philosophies and religions [Stoicism, Taoism, etc.]) about how Stoic they are. Nobody is making laws that hurt the poor, which are based on Stoicism. I don't care about Seneca or his slaves. That's not relevant to Stoicism. I don't even know how you could even attempt to make the connection between these two things. It's like if someone who regularly went around kicking homeless people said "You should feed and take care of the homeless", would you then be opposed to feeding and taking care of the homeless? That's absurd. There's no rational connection between those two things, but that's what you're trying to do with respect to Stoicism and folks like Seneca.

coldtea 7y ago

>You keep references armies of servants or other BS as if somehow that makes adopting stoicism more likely. Err, TFA is about how rich and powerful adopt stoicism as a fashion (back to the times of Rome). So, yeah, I guess it does make it more likely. Seneca was a stoic. His slaves, not so much. >Stoicism is there specifically for when life is difficult. Why do you not understand this? Because what something is supposed to be for, and what people adopt it for are two different things. Christianity is also supposed to be a "religion of peace", but that's not what many of it adherents use it as...

RandomInteger4 7y ago
You understand absolutely nothing about what there is to criticize in the various religious and how that is completely separate a personal, non-religious philosophy like Stoicism. Furthermore, nobody adopts Stoicism as a fashion. I don't know where you're getting this from. Waking up early, eating right, going to the gym, etc. are not things exclusive to Stoicism if that's what you're implying. That is ridiculous. Just because people talk about it does not mean they're virtue signalling (a concept that comes from various philosophies and religions [Stoicism, Taoism, etc.]) about how Stoic they are. Nobody is making laws that hurt the poor, which are based on Stoicism. I don't care about Seneca or his slaves. That's not relevant to Stoicism. I don't even know how you could even attempt to make the connection between these two things. It's like if someone who regularly went around kicking homeless people said "You should feed and take care of the homeless", would you then be opposed to feeding and taking care of the homeless? That's absurd. There's no rational connection between those two things, but that's what you're trying to do with respect to Stoicism and folks like Seneca.