How Stoics Treat Jerks

People. What a bunch of bastards!

The IT Crowd

Stoics love people, even the bastards. The heart of our philosophy is love for humankind. The virtue that we seek to cultivate can only be properly expressed in relationship to our human family. We agree with Marcus Aurelius who reminded himself that, "your only joy, and your only rest, is to pass from one action performed in the service of the human community to another action performed in the service of the human community." Stoicism is often framed as a lonely discipline, encouraging men to stand apart from the crowd, but that is so far from the truth. Stoic wisdom is meant to enhance the humanity of those who practice it. We are participating with the crowd. We may not act as the crowd would expect or demand, but we always seek to act with our neighbor's best interest at heart. That said, how are Stoics to respond when faced with disagreeable people?

It is within a man's power to love even those who sin against him. This becomes possible when you realize that they are your brothers, that they wrong you unintentionally or out of ignorance, that in a little while you and they will be dead, and above all, that they have not really hurt you so long as you have not sullied your conscience or damaged your inner self by responding in kind.

Aurelius: Meditations 7:22

Marcus Aurelius spent a lot of time preparing himself to interact with awful people. The Emperor did not find his court to be filled with the most uplifting sorts of citizens. So in many of his meditations he would dwell on the formula found in the quote above;

• humans are all family
• no one intentionally makes an error in judgement
• life is short
• a Stoic can not be morally hurt by others; Stoics can only harm themselves through a vicious response

I've addressed the human family before, so I won't elaborate here. It is worth taking a moment to think about the second point; the Stoic principle that no one means to do wrong. Stoicism considers all immorality to be a form of ignorance. It works something like this;

• only reasoned choices are moral
• all people choose actions that they believe are best for themselves in the moment
• 'evil' choices are never the true best choices
• therefore, a person who does wrong is ignorant of the better way

This way of thinking should have a huge impact on how a Stoic treats disagreeable people. If we truly believe that the people who wrong us are simply ignorant, what is the appropriate response? Epictetus addresses this issue in chapter 42 of the Enchiridion:

"When any person harms you, or speaks badly of you, remember that he acts or speaks from a supposition of its being his duty. Now, it is not possible that he should follow what appears right to you, but what appears so to himself. Therefore, if he judges from a wrong appearance, he is the person hurt, since he too is the person deceived. For if anyone should suppose a true proposition to be false, the proposition is not hurt, but he who is deceived about it. Setting out, then, from these principles, you will meekly bear a person who reviles you, for you will say upon every occasion, 'It seemed so to him.'"

"It seemed so to him." This is a position of sympathy. In Stoicism, ignorance is not reviled, it is simply corrected. Epictetus, like Aurelius, clams that the person who is hurt by immorality is the person who performs it. The Stoic is left unscathed, assuming he reacts appropriately. One last Aurelius quote, "People exist for the sake of one another. Teach them then, or bear with them." I used this quote in the article I linked to earlier. In that post I viewed bear with them as a call for something like patience. I think I was mistaken. The more I dwell on the Stoic insistence that we truly love others, the more it sounds like a call to shoulder their burdens. Most daily insults do not happen during teachable moments but they do always arrive with the opportunity to enact virtue. In doing so, we not only stay true to ourselves, we bring good into the world.

Stoics are meant to see the common humanity of everyone we meet. With that kinship in mind, we bear up under the weight of unjust actions and, if possible, point out a better way. If we truly embrace the Stoic perspective, this isn't difficult. Our point of view contains no fuel that could feed indignation. We're left free to act with compassion, and through compassion we show the strength of our philosophy.

Stoics Expect the Spanish Inquisition

Stoics do not ever control the circumstances in which we find ourselves. We don't control them if we are the person in charge, the emperor of the known world, or in any other place of power. We don't control them if we are alone and we don't control them if we are doing something at which we are experts. This is not a choice. Stoics do not abstain from control. We are simply recognizing a truth. The circumstances humans find ourselves in are never actually within our control.

I bring this up because I've seen comments about Stoicism that seem to divide circumstances into those we control and those we don't. That is not the case. They are, by stoic definition, outside of our control and I don't just mean circumstances external to ourselves. I includes many situations that take part within our own bodies. If you read the first chapter of the Enchiridion you'll find that Epictetus very clearly lists our own bodies in the "outside our control" list.

So what's my point? Are Stoics hopelessly adrift amid the waves of fortune? Not in the least. Stoics are masters of our fate. We achieve this by concentrating our energy on what is in our power. We find freedom by controlling the only thing that is truly free, our own will. 

How ridiculous and how strange to be surprised by anything that happens in life.

-Marcus Aurelius

The problem with the misunderstanding I first referenced, that Stoics seek control of circumstances, is that accepting that position makes us weak. It requires us to seek out moments in time that will help us flourish and likewise retreat from situations that would supposedly hinder us. 

If you believe that circumstances must play out in a "good" way in order for you to flourish, you will waste time trying to micro-manage your environment. What guarantee has life given us that would lend hope to the idea that our struggles are meant to be light? If your philosophy, worldview, or religion, isn't realistic (in that it won't accept the world-that-is) you will attempt to build a sanctuary where your tranquility won't be challenged. It will not work. Controlling your environment is a defensive game and Fortune has a great offensive line. You will either be shaken often, or you will create a hiding place so good life will never find you.

Stoicism is robust. Fate can not diminish its strength. Stoicism demands that we control our intentions and actions. It says to stand on virtue despite circumstances. In doing so, we flourish in the moment, in every moment. The easy days can certainly be appreciated but the draining days, the toil and the struggle, they do not surprise us nor shake us. As Aurelius said, bad fortune born nobly is good fortune.

Musonius Rufus concluded that, "because we humans acquire all good things through struggle, the person who is unwilling to endure that struggle all but condemns himself to being worthy of nothing good." Is courage tested as I read in my chair? Does justice flow through people who shy away from the society they're in? No and no. Our philosophy was born in the public square and that's its proper environment. So let us be bold. Stoics do not seek monasteries. One final quote, this one from Seneca.

Cling tooth and nail to the following rule: Not to give in to adversity, never to trust prosperity, and always to take full note of fortune's habit of behaving just as she pleases, treating her as if she were actually going to do everything it is in her power to do. Whatever you have been expecting for some time comes as less of a shock.

Stoic Parenting: Keeping Perspective

In a decade of child development work, I've never seen a wise action taken by an obviously stressed out adult. Well, unless that action was to walk away or otherwise calm down before reacting to a child. Walking away for a few minutes seems to be a common calming down tactic, and I assume most cultures have a version of the count-to-ten method. All the calming techniques I've seen seek to do two things, first, arrest the stress or anger that's building up and, second, lend time for reflection so that our perspective better aligns with the situation. Actually, I'm probably being generous concerning the second point. The act of stepping back from negative emotions is not necessarily followed by an improved perspective. Which is a shame.

It is impossible that happiness, and yearning for what is not present, should ever be united.

- Epictetus

This is one of my go to lines as a Stoic, an educator, and a parent. Our desires matter. If we are hoping for a quiet child while we're standing in front of a three year old throwing a temper tantrum, the dissonance will cause us grief. And it is the dissonance that hurts us. It isn't the tantrum. Have you ever observed a tantrum by someone else's child and, after feeling sorry for the parent, went on about your day like nothing happened?  That's possible because the event is not where the stress lies. It's the context, it's your perspective, that causes you pain. My goal when working with children has always been to enjoy working with children while I'm doing it. The same goes for parenting. I have no interest in simply enduring the pains of fatherhood so that I can look back at how "rewarding" it all was in the future. I'm planning on loving it all today.

Stress-light* parenting requires a realistic parenting perspective. What does that look like? First, there's a focus on what a parent can actually control. Second, any thoughts about the future will cover all possible situations, not just the easy ones. Expanding on number two, those thoughts about the future are used to prepare you for the coming day, not to daydream about how you hope things will go. How does that work? I'll run a scenario in reverse.

Mission: Spend eight hours at Disneyland with a five year old.

2. Spend no time thinking about the magical experience my child will have and the hours we will spend together in my old age reminiscing about this, the best of days. Instead, spend a moment in the morning expecting the LA traffic, the long lines, possible tired child breakdowns, etc...

1. Remind myself to focus on what I control, which is my mental world. What am I going to do when traffic grinds to a halt? Be a great parent. How? By helping my child enjoy the trip, if possible, and by not yelling about turning-the-car-around-right-now if she understandably finds the ride intolerable. Long lines? Be the best parent I can be. Break downs? Be the best parent I can be. I'm working to be proud of my actions as a parent at all times and to find peace in the fact that I am honestly doing my best for myself and my child.

Another Epictetus thought, "Seek not for events to happen as you wish but wish for events to happen as they do and your life will go smoothly and serenely." Life is not simple. Events go sideways. If we invest our energy in wishing for the day to go smoothly, we're going to stress when it doesn't. If we place our energy behind our response to life as it happens, we'll be the best person we can be. Does this sound too simplistic? It probably is. Still, I've found that, with consistent effort, it works. I hope it's helpful for you as well.

*A 24/7 perfect Stoic would be stress-free, but I'm just shooting for minimal stress in this life.