Who are you? Who am I? | Week 28

July | Philosophy and Religion | Week 28 | 7/16/2023
Deep dive on Stoicism

Looking to annals of history, it's abundantly clear that the most common motif of conscious experience is suffering (to be continued in the Buddhism deep dive). Many great novels, documentaries and cinematic representations have highlighted the brutality of life on Earth, be it animal, insect, or man. However, the consciousness with which we've been gifted confers in us the ability to recognize the suffering of brutal reality, and in many cases, paradoxically, create it ourselves. So it is no surprise that religions and philosophies alike have sought to address this fundamental element of conscious experience. The Nihilists attempt to pad themselves by proclaiming zero meaning in reality, whereby they can take solace in the passage of time until their final hour, relieving them of the burden of life. The Confucians use the collective diligence and work ethic of establishing social order as the antidote to harsh realities. The Buddhists deal with suffering by attempting to override their wandering minds, relinquishing worldly possessions and ego in favor of a perpetual, animalistic bliss. Their motto: reject the past, reject the future, focus on the present. The Christians address suffering through seeking to adopt responsibility for the fate of the world and voluntarily engage with the evil that causes suffering. Their motto: model the right behavior from the past, in the present, in order to create a better future. The Stoics take an approach towards conscious suffering which I see as the intersection of Buddhism and Christianity. Their motto: in the present, it is necessary to accept one's past and accept one's future, then act in accordance with a set of productive behaviors, including the relinquishment of ego, the focus on the mind, and the internalization of virtue, in order to create a better future and honor one's past. 

In my opinion, the Buddhists were correct in their assessment of humanity's uncanny ability to create suffering - both physically and psychologically - and that the improvement of the mind is crucial towards its end. The Christians were correct in their assessment of a universal, divine morality as the precondition for the improvement of the individual, and therefore the betterment of humanity. And I believe the Stoics were correct in their emphasis on the acceptance of reality, an almost Taoist response to the acceptance of flow, controlling what is within our control and making the best out of any situation. Implicit in Stoicism is the acknowledgement of a Buddhist propositional basis for suffering and a Christian propositional basis for universal morality. Which is why, as a behavioral and practical doctrine, Stoicism is perhaps the best conceived philosophical platform for an individual (note: "philosophical" and not religious). 

Stoicism, as I understand it, is an amalgam of Eastern and Western philosophy. It contains a conceptual premise similar to Existentialists and Nihilists, and similar behavioral practices to Buddhists and Taoists, yet it's distinct as a philosophy, and non theistic. According to Ryan Holiday, The Daily Stoic, these are the 9 Core Stoic Beliefs. 

[1] Live according to nature for a smooth life - This comes back to acceptance of ones reality (Amor Fati) and is synonymous with the Taoist ideas of Wu Wei, or effortless action, and Ziran, or naturalness. The wisdom in this sentiment is that fighting nature is a losing battle, and that working with your own nature and the nature of others is akin to learning the rules of the game instead of getting frustrated with the game. 

[2] Happiness can be found in virtuous living, not in material possession - A very Buddhist idea at its face, but deeply Christian as well. In John 2:15, Christ says "Do not love the world, or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the father is not in him." In the Buddhist doctrine, worldly possessions lead to inevitable suffering, and in the Christian view, worldly possessions are the wrong place of directing one's love. Stoicism realizes the intersection of both and correlates a fulfilled life to a life aligned to virtue and not towards the pursuit of, or love of material possession. 

[3] All we can control are our thoughts, actions and decisions, not external events - This is a uniquely Stoic insight and the most often cited motif of Stoicism. Exercising control over our thoughts, actions and decisions implies agency and free will, which aligns well with the Christians, and it also implies a certain intrinsic benefit, away from suffering, which aligns well with the Buddhists, but as far as I'm concerned, it isn't explicit as a core tenet in either religion. It has been most justified by the learnings of cognitive behavioral therapy as an antidote to psychological suffering and as a strategy for sustained positive affect. It's also the basis for Alcoholics Anonymous' creed, "God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, courage to change the things I can, and wisdom to know the difference."

[4] We have everything we need inside us to thrive - Depending on your interpretation, this can be a very Eastern or Western idea. Eastern philosophies and religions would agree with this sentiment and argue that a natural lifestyle, away from the material world, in harmony with your mind would lend itself to a successful life. The Christians would argue that being made in the image of God and having a close relationship with the Lord inside our hearts would lend itself to a successful life. Either way, what is endowed to us either by nature or by a creator, is a sufficient well to draw from. The Stoics believed that discipline over the mind, connection to nature, and gratitude for each day were inherent tools we had that when tapped into, would lead to a thriving life. 

[5] Remove the influence of unproductive and counterproductive emotions - The stoics recognize a fundamental human truth, that we can be hijacked by our emotions, both good and bad. We can be willfully blinded by hope or recklessly incautionate through emotions like fear and anger. To eliminate emotions is to fight against nature, being that emotions are a byproduct of our biology. However, removing their influence on our decisions is a difficult task but achievable. Recognition of unproductive or counterproductive emotions in favor of logic is a skillset. The Buddhists and Christians share in this worldview, prioritizing productive states of emotion such as love, gratitude, charity and companionship. The Eightfold Path and the 7 Virtues of Christianity detail those productive states of emotion, whilst Hell is the representation of focus on unproductive emotions in abundance and in perpetuity. 

[6] We must remain a unified, rational self, taking accountability for our lives - At first glance this is neither Buddhist or Christian, but wholly Stoic. As I've understood it, Buddhism prioritizes the transcendent potential of the mind outside or separate than rationality. In the Christian faith, the rationality we're granted is by God and therefore we're not unified through our rationality and behavior by through our rationality and the transcendent giver of such. This lines up quite well with Teleology which arises out of the Hellenistic tradition of ancient Greece. Teleology posits that a natural object has a Telos, or rational purpose, which we employ our rationality to investigate and make sense of. 

Despite all the aforementioned, I would still argue that there is deep crossover with the Eastern and Western religious thinking. In all three views, we are accountable for our lives, we have agency, we have rationality, and we are responsible for our decisions. In this way, it matters not where the rationality is obtained or for what purpose, but the result of its inheritance or existence is the same: we must take responsibility for the life we have. This is Jocko Willink's Extreme Ownership doctrine. The idea boils down to the following: individual responsibility is the gateway to freedom, not to enslavement. 

[7] No man is an island - A common understanding of this quote may be that we rely on each other for a sense of community, a sense of purpose, for knowledge sharing and that no matter how hard we fight it, we're biologically hardwired to need others. I think this is right, and it is a reminder to both express gratitude for those individuals who helped you get to where you are and also to engage with those people around you who elicit the attributes I mentioned earlier. When I read this Stoic belief, a quote by Dostoyevsky comes to mind, "Everyone is really responsible to all men, for all men, and for everything." In other words, we are accountable for the actions of all men and accountable to all men for our actions, because no man is an island. Dr. Jordan Peterson, who studied the works of Dostoyevsky and other 20th century writers, synthesized this point even more accurately in 12 Rules for Life, "We outsource the problem of sanity. People remain mentally healthy not merely because of the integrity of their own minds, but because they are constantly being reminded how to think, act and speak by those around them." In other words, we achieve and maintain our sanity in part thanks to those around us, further emphasizing that we are not an island. 

[8] We develop personally in our relationships with others - Building on the previous two sentiments, we are accountable for our own lives and we are not an island. So too are we accountable for the lives of others. Therefore, we grow when we accept that presupposition and bound ourselves to others. The Stoics were keen on apprentice/master relationships and many of the great Stoic thinkers were students of great thinkers themselves. We also see this across disciplines and throughout time: Socrates trained Plato who trained Aristotle. Carl Jung was a student of Freud. Oppenheimer studied under Bohr and had a relationship with Einstein. This is the practical element to this sentiment of Stoicism, which prides itself on practicality. The more implicit element in this sentiment is the formation of wisdom, the unleashing of potential, and the passage of tradition, which all come from the one's nested relationships with others, concepts which the Stoics cherished. 

[9] Aim for progress, not perfection; persist and resist - The Stoics were common men, statesmen, craftsmen and military men and they figured out one thing is in common for all men, progress is the ultimate goal of the individual and the collective. They also realized that progress can only be achieved through persisting and resisting; employing proper discernment, knowing when to push through hardship, when to resist bad ideas and wrong directions, and how to continuously audit one's own discretion and judgement. Finally, they realized that putting perfection on a pedestal is the quickest way to stall progress. Progress is 2 seconds faster on the mile run, 1 extra rep on squat, slightly less stress writing a complicated email, and 1% more clarity upon waking with better rest. My boss calls it systematic incrementalism; the continuous and progressive improvement of doing little things more and more correct, day after day, month after month, year after year.