The failure of today’s Stoics

I am often reproached that my theses have little to do with Stoicism. Now I feel the necessity of clarifying this once and for all.

First of all, what makes one Stoic?

We all know the history of Stoicism. You can check it yourself by using the Wikipedia. ‘Living in accordance with nature’ in nutshell. So it’s a system of ethics and logic.

Stoicism, on the other hand, disappeared at late antiquity. Even the Christianity is by no means the same as was at the late antiquity. But unlike Christianity Stoicism has no continuity. First of all, Stoicism is not a religion, but a philosophical stream. That means there’s always room for further improvement, because the nature of philosophy is not static, but dynamic.

Stoicism has become popular again these days, which I have already mentioned in my previous writings. It’s incredibly attractive nowadays, which is very good. Because it is a clear sign that those who are attracted to it want to improve their lives in creative way. They are willing to think outside the box, seemingly.

The problem is however that near two millennials elapsed since, and there are no new thoughts in this stream. Stoicism did not adapt to challenges of our times. Which is no wonder, because Stoicism no matter how popular is today, virtually doesn’t exist. Today’s thinkers who are labeling themselves Stoic, improve Stoicism with nothing. They improve their lives with ancient advices of Stoicism which is great, but it’s not sufficient enough to make Stoicism an existing phenomenon. However we don’t need to resurrect Stoicism for some infantilist nostalgia. It is enough to use it in a symbolic sense, or in aesthetic terms.

They have no answer to such challenges like Christianity, Islam, Nietzsche, abortion, political ideologies, modern science, modernism, and so on. Because these issues didn’t even exist in the time of Stoicism. Instead of finding answers for these issues, they desperately try to force themselves into an ancient box, hovering over everything untouched by today’s reality. Thus they just change box. Nothing goes into this box and nothing comes out. There have been so many new thinkers ever since, who improved philosophy radically, but today’s Stoics ignore them completely. As if nothing would have happened in the last two millennials.

They use Stoicism as method of thinking, actually as a sample, template, blueprint. But there’s no such method of thinking, since thinking IS the method. If we have already decided on the basis of which scheme we should think, then we already know what kind of answer we will find before we even start looking. This is the nature of ideologies and religions, but not of the philosophy. This is why Nietzsche considered Stoicism self-tyranization. If we allow this, we unintentionally degrade Stoicism to a cabala, a cliché, which is everything but not a system of ethics and virtue. The weird irony that today’s Stoics sacrifice their authenticity while looking for authenticity, unnoticedly.

Now I tell you how I became Stoic Spirit, and why. Because I interpret Stoicism as a benevolent synonym for the discovery of truth. And as such it was one of the first human attempts if not the first attempt for uniting ethic and logic. It’s an ancient and charismatic synonym of thinking, and not the way of thinking. Because thinking IS the way. There’s no predetermined blueprint of thinking. At least we should do everything in ethical way. What is ethical way? Not to harm others. And that’s basically it. If I can sum up the essence of Stoicism in my own words, this is it. Everything additional just degrades its value.

Of course, no one claims that the ancient Stoic thinkers were flawless, their intention was flawless. They made mistakes. But one of the reasons for this, because they didn’t possess, because they couldn’t possess that collective knowledge we possess. Another reason, because they were humans just like us, that means imperfect by nature. But Stoicism is by no means superior thinking the way today’s Stoics would think. Since thinking IS the superior with no label.

But the biggest mistake that today’s Stoics can make is not giving way to free thinking. They just try to explore ancient Stoic thoughts they attract to, and force today’s reality into this box. However they fail the grasp the very basic essence of Stoicism, which is not about creating fancy cabalas, clichés, and blueprint of thinking. This falsifies the purpose of philosophy.

The essence of Stoicism is not only thinking, but learning how to think. How to unite reason and evidence with virtue. But if you use schemes, all you’ll learn is how not to think. The Stoicism IS the philosophy itself in ancient garb. It’s just a synonym of thinking and trying to be virtuous. No less no more. Every one who strives to achieve this is considered Stoic in ancient sense without even knowing it. And if Stoicism is not about this, then it has no meaning.

As a result, it is not inconceivable that with new knowledge you will refute Stoic thinkers such as Zeno and Epictetus. But that’s perfectly okay. Do not shy back from this challenge, just because you don’t want to seem like betrayer of Stoicism. You will not become one as long as you try to remain virtuous and logical. But even the best ideas must be challenged.

If we consider Stoicism as philosophy, this self-refuting nature is the philosophy, thus it perfectly fits Stoicism. Of course, there are some basic ethical issues on which we do not compromise, but I don’t see any more ‘obstacles’ than that.

Thank you very much for reading! If you have any thoughts or new ideas please do not hesitate to share.