Neo-Stoicism in the Modern World

Here is a response to variablast on the question of why stoicism is not more prevalent in the modern world.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1557535612/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=c...
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_6_6?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field...

Category:

Education

Tags:

• stoicism
• stoic
• stoics
• Ernest Becker
• Causa-Sui
• Epictetus
• Seneca

[PerennialLucidity]

interesting video. i wonder though if Christianity and stoicism are as much at odds as you say. Christians are encouraged to bear temporary burdens gracefully in many places in the Bible, and delayed gratification is central to the Gospel. also, all Christian denominations (regardless of stance on free agency) teach that God - not man - is in control, and man should not be concerned about that which he has no control over.

perhaps i have too narrow a view of Stoicism though... thoughts on this?

[Professoranton]

I would give you an earful of how much of the good stuff Christians took from the stoics. The difference is belief in an afterlife.

[ostrogotu]

"A guide to the good life: The Ancient Art of Stoic Joy" by William B Irvine - a must-read for any stoic-to-be

[mikeyfeist]

my interpitation of stoicism is that you need to be controlled by logic and ethics. what we call emotions i sometimes call sicknesses. christianity is not at all different from stoicism. any philosophy based on learning to master your faults, while earning nothing more than self awareness is essentially stoicism. i believe yeshua ben yusef was a stoic, and he was bringing logic and self awareness to communities. he was killed for causing a rift and the rest is an engineered a myth.

[rmasso38]

@Professoranton To confuse chronology with christian theology taking from the stoics is lazy thinking. because event B happened after A doesn't logically mean that A caused, or influenced B. And to make your statement worse, the book of Job precedes stoic philosophy, which is one of the fullest accounts of a stoic life in suffering. Also it is quite uncertain whether stoics believed in an afterlife or even whether this would change their belief as to conduct. PerennialLucidity has a valid point

[MrWatchdawg77]

You should do a video about Neo-Epicureanism, Campaigner Socialists and the Multi-Cult!

[Winrockful]

@WorshipInTruth Of course we use faith, and hopefully in order to believe that which is most reasonable rather than most appealing. And since we know that we don't know, we should avoid dogmaticism.

I think what I said is in fact related to mysticism, since mysticism is about knowledge through direct experience, which is the alternative to reasoned-out knowledge. Having any experience is always 100% certain while you have it. Memory and reason are not. We still need them, of course.

[WorshipInTruth]

@Winrockful "Mysticism makes a lot of sense to me. Ask yourself what you can be ABSOLUTELY certain about. It is this: Experiencing is happening. Strictly speaking, not even that.".... that statement you made isnt really about "mysticism" seems to me that you are talking about agnosticism, I myself am a bit of a skeptical agnosicism, humans perception is extremely limited, we cannot really be sure about anything, but we take stuff and base our understanding of the world upon FAITH, everybody does

[WorshipInTruth]

@Winrockful If you read Calvins ideology you realize that just because God is sovereign over his creation and in control it doesn't disclude humanity from guilt, sin does not proceed from God, it is God who defeats the power of sin over his elect, you can say it is unjust that he does't just save EVERYBODY but under what basis is that unjust? After all, it is the Creator which ultimately decides what is just and what isnt.

[Winrockful]

@WorshipInTruth Metaphysics and the meaning(lessness) of life or the mind-body problem are topics too few people are interested in... Would discuss more with you if I had the time. I still think Calvin's God is unjust: Sinners have no control over their sinning. They can't help it, so they can't be blamed. It's quite simple.

Mysticism makes a lot of sense to me. Ask yourself what you can be ABSOLUTELY certain about. It is this: Experiencing is happening. Strictly speaking, not even that.

[WorshipInTruth]

@Winrockful I do not mind Eckhart too much, I was able to read much of his work until I found some obvious heresies, but the heresies were there and they were blatant, he was not even close to having the theological mind of Calvin. I tell you to beware the pietists, it is crass mysticism not fully in line with orthodox Biblical Christianity. If you listen to me long enough you will know that I make a good claim that "pietism" was an attempt by the illuministic forces to corrupt Protestantism.

[WorshipInTruth]

@Winrockful You should know that it was Martin Luther who first published Eckharts treatises and even named the manuscripts, if it wasn't for Luther nobody would even have ever heard of Eckhart past the small group of 14th century franciscan monks who tried to have Echkart charged with heresy by the inquisition. Luther was quite favorable towards Eckhart. Calvin, on the other hand, wasn't as Eckhart was not the strict determinist which you have tried to paint him to be.

[WorshipInTruth]

@Winrockful The God of the Bible is "unjust"? I will disagree with that wholeheartedly, what is unjust is a God who is not strong to save his elect and would allow them to fall into the pits of hell. God does not punish the innocent, first of all, none are innocent all fall short and are born unto sin, it is God who makes certain individuals innocent at all in the first place through the shed blood of his Son.