"Was Marcus [Aurelius] the Adam22 of his time" might be the single most hysterical question I've ever seen a redditor debatelord ask
Incels were the worst thing to happen to Stoicism. Then the best thing.
2000+ years of philosophy annihilated because of one pack of thirsty misogynists.
Is Stoicism actually worth anything? Should I read Meditations or is it shit? I’ve never looked into it cuz of its association with the alt-right. But I know that’s not the fault of a philosophy that existed for 2,000 years. But also, that doesn’t mean that philosophy is good or practical today.
Yes and no. Stoicism is useful as a method of practical philosophy, it helps quell existential angst. That said, while the particular stoic method advocated by Meditations is very civic minded, it also is very rich-guy oriented (which written by an emperor for the benefit of his successors, so duh) and therefore does not contain useful specific advice.
Most incel stoics completely ignore the civic aspects of stoicism. Marcus Aurelius indicates, for example, you should not trouble yourself with ending homelessness, but you can and should spend your time trying to end homelessness in your community. Or at least on your block, etc. The point is to create definable goals and achieve them, not worry about the big picture until you actually have the means to tackle it. However, it is again oriented towards the moral and honorable wealthy individual, not towards community action.
Marcus Aurelius indicates, for example, you should not trouble yourself with ending homelessness, but you can and should spend your time trying to end homelessness in your community. Or at least on your block, etc.
how'd that go marcus
for real there's something so ghoulish about aurelius, sitting in your opulence posting about how um actually slavery is wrong while you are emperor of fucking rome
literally roman obama
To be fair to Aurelius, which we really needn't be, it would have been impossible for him to abolish slavery. He would have been killed and replaced almost immediately. He did do some stuff to lessen the burden of indentured servitude for Roman citizens though.
He's Roman Obama, but a) never actually spoke about these things in public, and b) absolutely and completely understood where his bread was buttered (with legionary and aristocratic support, which means having to support slavery).
The way he was really Roman Obama was how he treated the Senate, making them feel important even though he made all of the decisions.
He did do some stuff to lessen the burden of indentured servitude for Roman citizens though.
don't let the perfectus be the enemy of the bonus, this is the most important emperor of our lives
It's really just like a painkiller imo. Stoicism really doesn't have any structural approach to society (since it's a ruling class ideology). If you're oppressed, all you can do is change your reaction to oppression, not the oppression itself.
Now, this is fine as a local strategy -- when, say, you're by yourself and harried by the state or some reactionary fuckers. A stoic comportment where you endure the "slings and arrows" as it were can help, especially if it allows you to create change with others in the future.
However, I think the thing about this is -- are you "happy" when the cop stops you/arrests you? I think that's where stoicism is entirely up its ass. Instead of deluding yourself that whatever happens to you, you can be happy, the rage against the injustice should be what keeps you going. Now, stoic attitudes can help you manage that rage (for instance, you think about the future happiness when the revolution ends this bullshit), but I think stoicism's "consider yourself happy even when suffering" is total fucking cope. Especially since it's not like there's any "change the world that's oppressing you/making you suffer" followup.
I'd say it's still very much practical today, as that was kinda their whole point (as in, actually do the shit, don't just debate it), but whether or not it's going to be anything new for you? Probably not, there's nothing really earth shattering about it, today. Still, Meditations might be an interesting read for you anyway, but you could try out some Epictetus, for a shorter, more to the point book. As long as you avoid the modern $toics, like Holiday and such.
i think it's a cool read, and you should pair it with the tao te ching or similar, don't expect life-changing wisdom or anything, more food for thought
Like how he's able to be stoic about homelessness existing or whatever, probably, but a woman cheating on him is where life becomes unbearable.
"I was down with stoicism when it involved other people being planetarily languished into ash by universal horrors, but if I my masculinity gets harmed I couldn't bear it."
Something something one's own material conditions informing one's politics something something
reddit bro stoicism is all about accepting shitty conditions, and is therefore extremely "cuck"
Look I may be getting fucked in the ass by my insurance company and my boss, but at least my wife is a pure nubile virgin kitten
Marcus Aurelius famously wrote "I am not owned" (contemporary histories make note of how he was shrinking into a corncob)
Marcus Aurelius was an Emperor, which means that he would have had a slew of what were essentially concubines. This would have been expected, and was so unremarkable that nobody would have even thought to comment on it. His enemies would have commented on his wife cheating because it undermines the idea that he is the authority of his house, him sleeping around would have affirmed it.
Even the most wife-guy emperors had mistresses. It was only commented on when the emperor was particularly disliked by the senate historians, they supposedly got particularly weird with it or everything was falling apart while they were around.
Guy who is cut up & enraged, BESIDE HIMSELF, about the potential sexual practices of a guy from ~2000 years ago
man, the creepiest part of this imo is that he casually/instinctively characterizes the aurelius' wife choosing to get down with a gladiator as her being "brutalized".
This reads like a troll post meant to dig at the insecurities of the kind of people on r/stoic. The word choice there is intentional.
Maybe Marcus Aurelius was into that shit you don't know Marcus Aurelius bro
Maybe he calmly sat and chose how to react to his wife getting plowed by fat gladiator hog
Putting a lot of stock in stories told about a famous guy in a society where they'd routinely make up stories about famous guys, oh and also this shit is 1000 years older than the King Arthur mythos
You’re telling me all those philosophers didn’t debate other dead philosophers that came before them? You’re saying it’s all fake?
Richest men in the world wives leave them all the time.
Most powerful people in the world still stub their toes.
And who would trust a stoic that hadn't truly suffered from love ?
Techbros catching up to Augustine 1700 years after the fact.
Stay losing losers.
That their “wise man” (that is, the wise man as described by them in their amazing idiocy), even if he goes blind, deaf, and dumb, even if enfeebled in limb and tormented with pain, and the victim of every other kind of ill that could be mentioned or imagined, and thus is driven to do himself to death – that such a man would not blush to call that life of his, in the setting of all those ills, a life of happiness! What a life of bliss, that seeks the aid of death to end it! If this is happiness, let him continue in it!
From Augustine City of God XIX.4
what an wild ass thought process. who cares if some dude's wife had a boyfriend, the fuck are you talking about man
