Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The Wiki article on it is pretty straight forward and even has a section in regards to Christianity. There are some right ideas within the school.
Dear Sean,Can anybody inform me on Stoicism?
As that Stoicism has been a popular order of philosophy in history and influential (regrettably) even up to this day, and as it has had many many followers, and probably not a few writings left in its wake, I am confident that Yes, someone, somewhere can inform you on the subject. I hope to have exhaustively and sufficiently answered your question and - in all sincerity - hope that you rest in sweet slumber tonight knowing that your inquiry has been fully addressed.
Sincerely,
Dear Sean,Can anybody inform me on Stoicism?
As that Stoicism has been a popular order of philosophy in history and influential (regrettably) even up to this day, and as it has had many many followers, and probably not a few writings left in its wake, I am confident that Yes, someone, somewhere can inform you on the subject. I hope to have exhaustively and sufficiently answered your question and - in all sincerity - hope that you rest in sweet slumber tonight knowing that your inquiry has been fully addressed.
Sincerely,
N.F. Tyler, I believe your construction of Stoicism is Christianized. To adduce providence without greater contextualization as that upon which Stoics rely is misleading. The Christian doctrine of providence is based on a personal God (the Blessed, Holy Undivided Trinity) as taught in Holy Writ. The Stoics view is materialistic and impersonal.
I do not deny that Stoics speak of providence, but they identify it entirely with "fate." To quote the Oxford Classical Dictionary: "Stoic physics gives an account of the world which is strongly materialist. It is also determinist; the world as a whole is made up of material objects and their interactions , which occur according to exceptionless laws, which are called fate." To be sure, as noted above, Stoics identify this "fate" with providence. But it is entirely impersonal. And any conception of God is material. This is all quite different than the Christian concept of providence. I am not suggesting that you would disagree with any of this. However, simply to say that Stoics believe in providence (with a capital P no less!) is potentially misleading.
The early church fathers battled mightily against Stoicism, which, with Middle or neo-Platonism, was likely the most popular philosophy of the day. Justin Martyr (martyed, btw, under the great Stoic emperor, Marcus Aurelius) , Tertullian, and others stressed personal responsibility and freedom of the will to the extent that they did (and this is often missed), at least in part, because they were seeking to combat the notion of this all-pervasive, impersonal fate. This is helpful to keep in mind: these men were not merely proto-Pelagians, but rather were combatting this stultifying Stoicism that taught apatheia as the response to tragedy and suffering.
This is all quite different than what we read about the Emotional Life of our Lord in Warfield, for example. Stoicism apes certain Christian virtues, as do most philosophies at some point, but falls woefully short of the rich, satisfying life (including our emotional life) that we are called to in Christ.
Peace,
Alan
I agree with this post. I'm no Stoic, but I still understood and appreciated a lot of the things Epictetus had to say, anyway. I'd echo FCC's comment about reading with discernment, etc., and recommend you read The Discourses, The Internet Classics Archive | The Discourses by Epictetus. I, for one, really enjoyed it."Accept the things to which fate binds you, and love the people with whom fate brings you together, but do so with all your heart."
"Be content with what you are, and wish not change; nor dread your last day, nor long for it."
Marcus Aurelius
Some short quotes by Aurelius, whose book, Meditations, would be a good read if you are looking for insight into stoicism. Read with discernment and compare the writings to Scripture! Only in the Word of God can we find truth.
I am vexed with seeming insurmountable incredulity, Sean, that you have not heaped praises and thank yous upon me, considering I'm really the only person to have directly, succinctly, yet exhaustively answered your question. Hmmph.
Dear Brother,
You asked if anyone could inform you on Stoicism. I said with great confidence and solidarity, "Yes." How my response did not, in your mind, sufficiently quell all doubts, is beyond me. I am hurt, offended, and subsequently crushed. Of course, such betrays any notion that, at least in practice, could ever be a Stoic.
Dear Sean,
Whilst you have shown apparent disdain for my answer to your original post, I shall now make an attempt to answer this question as well. Given that there are positive reviews on writings of different Stoics throughout history, as is evidenced by reviews on Amazon.com (that is, if we are to grant charity to those who say they've read the writings), I can confidently answer in the affirmative that, Yes. Someone else, somewhere, recommends such. Given that I, myself, along with myriad others of hoards of folks have not read the writings, nor left reviews on said writings, it may thereby be reasonably deduced that there are others, who by their silence on said writings, do not recommend such. So I can answer in the affirmative on that question as well.
Again, I hope this satisfactorily answers your seeds of inquiry. Be at peace.
I am vexed with seeming insurmountable incredulity, Sean, that you have not heaped praises and thank yous upon me, considering I'm really the only person to have directly, succinctly, yet exhaustively answered your question. Hmmph.
I still don't understand.
I have a hard time following whatever in he says in general myself, so you're not alone.
Joshua has employed a common joke. It is part of the talk of the rabble that is to be despised by those who are allowed to enter heaven.
We can all come up with witty responses
We can all come up with witty responses
I'm not so sure that we can.
I appreciate, however, you thinking they're witty, as I'd never think to ascribe such grandeur to them.
It is not only not wrong to embrace all things as God's Providential dealings, but we are required to give Him thanks in all things and to realize that all evils that befall us are:
1. Better than what we deserve.
2. For God's glory.
3. Ultimately, for our good.
For whom the Lord loves, He chastens. We are not bastards, but sons. No matter what happens to us, it's not nearly as bad as what we deserve; yet, in Christ, all hard providences brought our way are of a redeeming and valuable purpose. This - by no means - is to be confused with Stoicism. A cursory glance at the expression of emotions in the Psalter should alone dispel such a silly notion.
Sean:
And what makes your response to the rain, or whatever, as a Christian, and Joshua's beautiful words so very different from anything that the Stoics could ever imagine is that all that comes to pass comes from the hand of your gracious Father, who works all things for your good and His glory (Romans 8:28). Nothing impersonal or material but the most real thing in the universe, a personal God who before time and space decreed all that comes to pass, again, for His glory and your good. Loved eternally in the Beloved.
There is a grand Trinitarian conspiracy--if you will--Ephesians 1:3-14: God the Father appoints our salvation, God the Son accomplishes it and God the Spirit applies it. All for our everlasting rest and His everlasting glory. And the wonder of it all is that which most makes for His glory most makes for our good. All is so ordered by one who loves us so much that He gives us His only begotten Son. Stoicism knows nothing of this.
Stoicism's apatheia as one of its purported secrets to pain-free living is a sad echo of the saint resting in the beautiful providence of His Father (who truly knows best!), his Father who is great, good, and wise (I Tim. 1:17). Even in the most painful things (and we don't deny evil and we don't deny pain--about this Stoicism can't handle the truth), we confess, through tears and crying "how long?" that God does wisely and well. The Book of Job isn't Stoicism and Job would not have done better as a Stoic. Many apsects of Hinduism and especially Buddhism attempt to take similar approaches but are all bound to fail.
Stoicism is one of man's ways of trying to handle this life in a fallen world without Christ. It's like a band-aid on a gaping wound. We are far worse off than Stoicism, Buddhism or any like approach can begin to deal with. We need a divine rescue mission not ways of figuring out how to cope by human wisdom. God offer us so much more than that in Christ and in His Word.
These approaches deal with emotions by corraling them. Christianity deals with them by sanctifying them and developing them. Stoicism denies something essential to our humanity in order to deal with the pain. Christianity, in sanctifying us, does not need to make us less human to deal with the pain; sanctification makes us most truly human and brings us into the fullest flowering of our humanity, begun here and consummated hereafter.
Peace,
Alan