The Stoic News Cycle

Whenever some disturbing news is reported to you, you ought to have ready at hand the following principle: News, on any subject, never falls within the sphere of the moral purpose.

-Epictetus' Discourses 3.18.1

Urgency fuels so much of modern life. We need to know that, have that, or respond to that now. Alerts vibrate phones 24/7 and it's unlikely any of us make it through the day without someone saying, "did you hear about..." Without the right response to this environment, it's easy to get our blood pressure rising.

Epictetus's quote up top is pretty definitive. News, by its very nature, does not concern our moral purpose. From a stoic point of view that's rather obvious. I still found it striking. I guess the constant bombardment of modern media has left me a bit blind to my habituated response. It's very easy to play along with the narrative of urgency and concern that is spouted every day. To the stoic mind, however, all news is indifferent news.

Epictetus continues, "can anyone bring you word that you have been wrong in an assumption or in a desire? -By no means." No one can see into your inner thoughts. They can't tell you if you're acting through virtue or vice. For us Stoics, virtue is the only good and vice the only evil, so where's that leave news? News is indifferent, firmly in the camp of thing we can not control. 

And Epictetus doesn't pull punches. He goes on to say, "but he can bring you news that someone is dead. Very well, what is that to you? That someone is speaking ill of you. Very well, what is that to you?" His point is that no news, however personal, can dictate your judgments for you. In the case of news like the death of a friend, only you can decide how to respond. In the case of someone else disparaging you, that vicious act is on them. It's their evil, why would it affect you? The stoic viewpoint doesn't extinguish the significance of such events, it simply frees us to respond appropriately to the news.

I've had a lot of time to think about my daughter, who's arriving in a few short weeks. My wife and I have dealt with some rough news from doctors, received more information than was really helpful, and lived with the constant joy that at each check-up the little girl has been doing the best we can hope for. I could easily feel weighed down right now, if I had been constantly inflating the weight of what I know with my images of the worst outcomes. Why would I do that? I can instead find joy in all the moments we've had knowing our daughter even in the womb. I can take information and prepare for the future in a reasonable way. I can love my daughter, knowing that love doesn't require me to protect her from an imagined future. In fact, such an approach deprives my daughter and wife of my presence. I'd be spending my thoughts on a dream life. Neither dreams nor nightmares deserve my investment. Love asks me to be fully present now.

I think there's more here than I can find time to say. I suppose I'll return to it later. In any case, Discourses 3.18 is worth a read. It's definitely modern advice, even if it's from around 60 C.E. 

Citizen of the World

Let us take hold of the fact that there are two communities — the one, which is great and truly common, embracing gods and humans, in which we look neither to this corner nor to that, but measure the boundaries of our citizenship by the sun; the other, the one to which we have been assigned by the accident of our birth.

-Seneca

The ancient Stoics were the first known Western philosophy to advocate cosmopolitanism, the idea that we are citizens of the world. They insisted that rational beings are bonded through our similar needs and goals and, therefore, we should live for the well being of all. Stoicism is meant to expand our affection for one another until there is no one who is "other." Epictetus states in Discourses 2.10 that a Stoic will, "hold nothing as profitable to himself and deliberate about nothing as if he were detached from the community, but act as the hand or foot would do, if they had reason and understood the constitution of nature, for they would never put themselves in motion nor desire anything, otherwise than with reference to the whole." The Stoic perspective is a communal and universal one. Many of our exercises, e.g. The View From Above, serve to bake that all encompassing worldview into our mind. It is, therefore, the duty of every Stoic to reject the constant othering that society perpetuates and instead accept all people as they are.

When we consider ourselves "right," we consider ourselves better. At least, that's what online conversations about opposing political parties, religious views, and the like seem to suggest. Did you know that everyone else is an idiot at best, evil at worst? Twitter and Facebook sure do. We live in a world that comes together through exclusion. Stoics are not meant to think that way. We should not believe ourselves better, we should believe ourselves blessed.

Actually, I'd prefer to call myself fortunate, but blessed made for decent alliteration. I am fortunate to be practicing a philosophy that brings such contentment. Not everyone has the same foundation to stand on. Marcus Aurelius told himself to, "begin each day by telling yourself: Today I will be meeting with interference, ingratitude, insolence, disloyalty, ill-will, and selfishness - all of this due to the offenders' ignorance of what is good and what is evil." Stoics believe wrong action comes from ignorance of a better way.  Ignorance is unfortunate, and sometimes tragic, but it's not worth disparaging those who are ignorant. In fact, Epictetus considered forbearance of others intimately linked to Stoicism's central tenets.

Let me state once again the basic rule of our philosophy: the greatest harm a person can suffer is the loss of his most valuable possession, his Reason. The harm he creates for himself is not transferred to others. Therefore, there is no reason for others to become angry because a person commits a crime against himself.

Discourses 1.18.1-10

I address this because there is a tendency among armchair philosophers to build up their "wisdom" by disparaging others. Practicing Stoics should be outside of that conversation. Aurelius said, "People exist for the sake of one another. Teach them then, or bear with them." Bear with them. It isn't even a high calling. We're not being asked to hold a Free Hugs sign. We're being asked to live as Stoics.

The ideals of Stoicism are perfectly suited for the world in which we're living. They've just been sadly under utilized since 300 B.C.E. Stoic cosmopolitanism demands more than lip service. Stoics engage with the world. Our philosophy was born in the public square, and it's meant to stay there. That engagement has to stem from virtue. We're not meant to be protesters waving signs in people's faces telling them they're wrong. We're meant to be building something true and lasting; adding to the well being of our local and global community. Find contentment in wisdom itself, not in the tangential belief that Stoicism means you're on the right side. Bear this life as a Stoic.

Talk like a Stoic

If you ever say, "that was such a stressful situation," you're not talking like a Stoic. To Stoics, emotional stress is generated from within ourselves. It's understandable that at times we evaluate a situation as stress inducing, but from a Stoic perspective we're choosing to stress ourselves out. I definitely use non-stoic phrases all the time. It's part of the way American English speakers talk. We constantly attribute our emotional states to outside influences. That makes me so happy! Stop depressing me. She really pissed me off. None of these statements could be considered reasonable from a Stoic viewpoint. Still, we say them. At least, I know I do. Which has me thinking about how to talk like a Stoic.

There guys would have great conversations. Original photo by J.D. Falk.

I'm not concerned with the specialized language that can be found in every group. Many organizations talk in acronyms. Slang peppers the sentences of every sub-culture. Religious people toss off meaning-stuffed words like grace, karma, and forgiveness, that may not unpack fully in the ears of the uninitiated. Stoics can turn to a long list of Greek and Latin terms when talking to one another*. Such specialized language is a useful shorthand. I'm thinking about language that frames a worldview.

Some phrases illuminate our perspective. She really pissed me off. Apparently someone has the power to shape my mental state? Stoicism disagrees. I should instead recognize that, "I felt angry when she said that." That's simply true. I did feel angry. I also have the power to evaluate why I was angry so that in the future I might react more reasonably. And that's the thing I'm working on. I have already incorporated exercises like the evening Review, but I have not been actively aware of my speech. How often do I reinforce the false power of indifferents through my language? How often do all of us?

I'm not advocating stilted speech, just thoughtful use of it. It's simple enough to call on our particular worldview during long discussions about things philosophical. Minute by minute attention to our everyday speech is more taxing. However, I suspect it would pay off. The practice of paying attention to our words could only encourage us to see the world through a more stoic lens.

One last thing. Immoderate Stoic now has a Facebook page all it's own at https://www.facebook.com/TheImmoderateStoic . Clicking the Like button may be a simpler way of keeping tabs on this site rather than coming here and noticing my lazy, lazy posting rate. Not that I don't appreciate people checking up on me. It's motivating!

*It would be unfortunate if any Stoic spent her day constantly spewing Greek into the world, that sort of affectation isn't going to grow our numbers.