Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Whoa! Had to look up the exact word of "Stoicism" on the Google search engine. lol:
"Stoicism teaches the development of self-control and fortitude as a means of overcoming destructive emotions; the philosophy holds that becoming a clear and unbiased thinker allows one to understand the universal reason (logos)."
"The Stoics elaborated a detailed taxonomy of virtue, dividing virtue into four main types: wisdom, justice, courage, and moderation."
A complex Philosophical terminological label.
Careful reserve expression of emotion can almost be impossible. Kind of unnatural if beginning to final/birth to death happening absolutely every second, at that point. Are national societies that have high amount of status quo conformity closer to reaching this standard? Can discourage overly responsive sensitivity of stimulii, or eccentric neurosis when we tell people what to fulfill. Teach people how to behave. Like cats, dogs, birds, pets.
I've thought quite a bit about this idea in an historical context. I think we could make a case for advanced nations with all the comparative luxuries we enjoy today becoming vulnerable to oversensitivity to concern over our feelings.
Societies which dwell in a state of life and death concerns probably have less issue with this? It seems ironic to me that prosperity can breed a sort of emotional preoccupation that can be problematic.
I also notice that some of the strongest critics of other people's emotional patterns tend to easily unravel whenever the spotlight is on them, or they become triggered by something said that hits close to home. You'd think that, as a result, they'd have more empathy.
Is it perhaps a defense mechanism? A response to past trauma in their own lives? Did they develop the hard exterior to convey a stronger sense that they are in control, have it together, etc.?
Exactly. A lot of people call themselves "old souls" to justify their messed up personalities and the fact they might be different from the majority or feel like an outcast. Being able to be self aware and see things from someone else's viewpoint are valuable skills for personal growth, acceptance of self, and acceptance of others.
A lot of conservatives and who are heavy conspiracy theorists get into the trap of judging the "sheep" as they call them for their lack of self awareness. In truth, any form of negative judgment is a trap within reason that is. I think a lot of stoics are like this.
The extreme ends of the political spectrum just tend to be more messed up with lots of hangups, insecurities, and whatnot.
06-23-2022, 05:53 AM
4,640 posts, read 13,957,914 times
Reputation: 4052
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lodestar
I've thought quite a bit about this idea in an historical context. I think we could make a case for advanced nations with all the comparative luxuries we enjoy today becoming vulnerable to oversensitivity to concern over our feelings.
Societies which dwell in a state of life and death concerns probably have less issue with this? It seems ironic to me that prosperity can breed a sort of emotional preoccupation that can be problematic.
Economic wealth with high amount of consumerism power isn't something to cancel out. Just appropriately encourage citizens to behave/act right. Including even of course psychologically. Count their own blessings. Never take anything for granted.
Anyone with not much money or dirt poor poverty are still going to complain, anyways. Because, then the problems are more severe. Getting into even the most hard headed of individuals in all 198 countries.
Give us the $$$, and that continues to be the most ideal scenario. Society is going to learn how to operate best. Planet Earth actually didn't reach the right amount of it yet.
The good news is there are wealthy Middle East republics that appear to display high amount of Stoicism. And of course East Asian versions. Equal amount. Careful reserve. Europe, Americas, Oceania can perform well with that.
I often see people criticize other people for feeling a certain way, as if it's petty, trivial, and it's generally beneath their superior ability to handle conflict and emotions.
But then I see the same people get tripped up and triggered over an issue that is near and dear to their own hearts, and observe how they succumb to the same emotive patterns as the person they once criticized.
Why do people pretend to be so stoic when it comes to other people's issues, when it's clear that they are triggered by their own issues? It seems so hypocritical, and lacking in self-awareness. Why is it viewed so negatively to acknowledge that we all have our own, unique vulnerabilities?
There’s a difference between being ‘triggered’ (and reacting in an unhealthy way as a result) vs. understanding/dealing with one’s emotions in a constructive/problem-solving manner. Sometimes it’s as simple as acknowledging how we feel (self-awareness), while at the same time placing it into perspective i.e. does it matter, or what can we do about it? Other times constructive action is necessary.
In other words, it’s not that one feels emotion that is the problem (as we all do); it’s allowing yourself to be ‘triggered’ or ‘buttons pushed’ into action which is psychologically unwell. Obviously, we all get angry at times; but for most of us, it’s over when it’s over. It’s those who carry around their anger for years who may be ticking time-bombs, so to speak, as to when they will next be ‘triggered’. They don’t hurt anyone but themselves, in terms of their own quality of life.
Exactly. A lot of people call themselves "old souls" to justify their messed up personalities and the fact they might be different from the majority or feel like an outcast. Being able to be self aware and see things from someone else's viewpoint are valuable skills for personal growth, acceptance of self, and acceptance of others.
A lot of conservatives and who are heavy conspiracy theorists get into the trap of judging the "sheep" as they call them for their lack of self awareness. In truth, any form of negative judgment is a trap within reason that is. I think a lot of stoics are like this.
The extreme ends of the political spectrum just tend to be more messed up with lots of hangups, insecurities, and whatnot.
You're conflating stoicism with conservatism. I think we could have a whole thread about why that doesn't hold true.
And I don't agree that a better distribution of material goods will create more peace of mind for more people. Being troubled by one's feelings has nothing to do with what we own. It's about learning to live well with uncomfortable feelings. We all have uncomfortable feelings unless we're damaged.
It's not about external factors or other peoples' behavior. It's all on us and how well we manage things that bother us. That's pretty much the saving grace of good psychological practice and it is available to the majority of us who are willing to take a hard look at our judgmentalism, our impatience, our narcissistic tendencies, our immaturity, our longings for more and better. We got that stuff in our childhood and it follows us into adulthood.
First a person has to weigh what they will have to give up to have peace of mind and the above are a pretty good list. We don't like letting go of those thing because they all have their twisted rewards. And it's messy business looking at our baser urges. LOL
It's not about external factors or other peoples' behavior. It's all on us and how well we manage things that bother us. That's pretty much the saving grace of good psychological practice and it is available to the majority of us who are willing to take a hard look at our judgmentalism, our impatience, our narcissistic tendencies, our immaturity, our longings for more and better. We got that stuff in our childhood and it follows us into adulthood.
First a person has to weigh what they will have to give up to have peace of mind and the above are a pretty good list. We don't like letting go of those thing because they all have their twisted rewards. And it's messy business looking at our baser urges. LOL
This is a little bit of a tangent on my part, but...
While I don't think you're wrong, per se, I do get tired/frustrated of hearing about how it is incumbent upon us to accommodate the sociopaths, the vitriol and rudeness directed at us, and the other uncompromising whackadoos among us who are usually the loudest and most insufferable.
Shouldn't the onus be on the perpetrators of these unsavory qualities? Shouldn't we make it harder on them to live among us, rather than the other way around, where it's us who needs to avoid, cope, go to therapy, think about things differently, etc., etc., etc.
I often wonder if this is an American problem (pull yourself up by your bootstraps!), or if it's a pervasive attitude across the globe. I won't call it victim blaming--that might be too strong, but maybe victim culpability. Like we're responsible for being the better person while it "just is what it is" as it pertains to those actually inflicting the pain and suffering.
This is a little bit of a tangent on my part, but...
While I don't think you're wrong, per se, I do get tired/frustrated of hearing about how it is incumbent upon us to accommodate the sociopaths, the vitriol and rudeness directed at us, and the other uncompromising whackadoos among us who are usually the loudest and most insufferable.
Shouldn't the onus be on the perpetrators of these unsavory qualities? Shouldn't we make it harder on them to live among us, rather than the other way around, where it's us who needs to avoid, cope, go to therapy, think about things differently, etc., etc., etc.
I often wonder if this is an American problem (pull yourself up by your bootstraps!), or if it's a pervasive attitude across the globe. I won't call it victim blaming--that might be too strong, but maybe victim culpability. Like we're responsible for being the better person while it "just is what it is" as it pertains to those actually inflicting the pain and suffering.
Yeah, I agree. Like I said before, it's irritating that some people don't hold up their end of the social contract and I don't like it when someone else irritates me. It means if I want a peaceful path I'm going to have to do extra work. The good news is that practice makes the chore quicker over time.
But I don't have to do it if I don't want to. I can live as irritated as I want to. And I can live as hopeful that someone will straighten the other person out as I want to, also. But it's probably a set up for more irritation.
In the end it's all a moot point. My reality is that there are people who don't get the consequences they need to modify their behavior. It's not fair. I am not willing to allow them to affect my enjoyment of life and am willing to keep things comfortable for myself.
Yes, sometimes I get tired of it also. But I have learned I have very little control over other peoples' behavior as much as I'd like to snap my fingers and create perfection. It's just a realistic attitude for me.
I think people in other parts of the world recognize that we are born alone and that we die alone and if we are very, very lucky we might have a few people who have our back in between. That helps.
I don't think you are alone in your thinking. A lot of us would like the world to be a nicer place but it requires everyone to think that to make it happen.
Some of the nastiest things I've ever read on line come from the "good people" about what they'd like to do to the "bad people." What to make of that?
It is not incumbent on us to "accommodate" problematic people. In my wellness plan it is incumbent on me to live the least emotionally chaotic life possible. Emotional stress wreaks havoc with a person's health. And the more peace I can create the more people can benefit from not getting sucked into the drama. (Some don't though. It's just so irresistible. Habit-forming, even.)
I leave the consequence application to people who are hired to do it. Some of them have the personality types that tolerate that kind of daily stress. A serious thought - maybe you'd be satisfied and do well in a profession like that?
Just made myself smile with the thought that if we could all make a list of everyone we thought should be removed from polite society I wonder how many of us would be left!
It's just narcissistic manipulation in some form. Make yourself look stronger than you are, beat the weak when they show weakness, and mock them for it while you hide your own wounds. It's human nature, we all do it. Sometimes we are aware of it, sometimes we aren't. Stoicism is arguably very conflicting with human nature.
IMO stoicism is a very negative trait and all should strive to never act in such a way.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
