@ash8207

1 year ago

Very interesting! I studied Stoicism for a couple of years & found it very helpful in many regards. Marcus Aurelius teaches to be independent & indifferent to external opinions, to be our own selves. And to also not fear for the future & to trust our weapons of reason & logic. Great wisdom really. Seneca teaches to enjoy the moment, because that's where true happiness lies. And that the greatest wealth comes from being happy with less desires. In other words, to focus less on wealth & material consumerism, and more on simple virtues or natural pleasures. Again, great wisdom. But some of the other Stoic concepts also seemed outdated, subjective & unfit for our more liberal modern societies. I found some of their teachings very judgmental, harsh & at times sanctimonious (particularly Epictetus who came across as unreasonably harsh), especially when it came to matters of love, sex & lust. Of course it makes logical sense to not be excessive or dependent on anything external for our happiness. But as a free, independent spirit who believes in love, familial relationships & enjoys our modern sexual freedoms & other civil liberties, I found some of the Stoics' philosophical views too conservative, close-minded & unappealing. Some of it really just comes off as philosophical dogma, not much different than oppressive religious dogma. So it's a mixed bag for me. Some Stoic principles are very positive, sensible & logical. They make sense & can be applied to become a happier & better person. Others though, are more subjective & conservatively dogmatic. The problem is we don't live in ancient times. The Roman & Greek concepts of morality & justice were vastly different than ours today. We can't just apply Roman morality to modern times, that makes no logical sense. And that is the fatal flaw in Stoicism that simply can't be ignored. Whereas I found Epicurean philosophy more open minded & relatable, at least to a certain extent. So to try and emulate the ancient Stoics in the modern world, without being nuanced & taking modern values & liberties into account, just seems very foolish & ignorant. My view is to learn, analyze & adopt from Stoicism (as well as other religions, philosophies, etc.) what makes sense to you & disregard what doesn't or what is unreasonably dogmatic. That's the only way anyone can truly be free & independent. And to also keep in mind that experiencing external pleasures & experiences are also valid sources of happiness, just like our own sense of inner peace & tranquility. To deny this reality in pursuit of some ideal Stoic virtues from the past, some of which are obsolete, just comes off as sanctimonious & unrealistic. There needs to be balance, nuance & moderation when applying any ancient philosophy to modern life. As far as Nietzsche is concerned, his concept of the Übermensch is interesting but too vague & undefined, unfortunately. There's nothing wrong with people developing their own personal philosophies, while rejecting the old traditional values & religious dogma, to try to evolve to a higher state of consciousness. In that regard, I actually agree with Nietzsche. But with that said, he never defined what an Übermensch actually looks like, so it's very open to debate & interpretation. And sadly it's also open to very dark & dangerous misinterpretations, much like the Nazis abused his teachings for all the wrong reasons. Anyway, just my thoughts. I appreciate the informative facts & perspectives here, it aided me in understanding more about Nietzsche & his criticisms of the Stoics. Nicely done! As with any religion or philosophy, I always encourage everyone to be critical, independent thinkers. We all have our own biases, subjective views, opinions & perspectives when it comes to the mysteries of life & the universe. We should strive to use logic & reason as best we can, but also humbly accept the reality that knowledge & wisdom also implies that there's also much we don't know & probably won't know also. Let's keep our minds open & our hearts free. Peace out!!

11 |