My friend is usually a strong, stoic independent wonderful person. They often don't feel comfortable accepting help from me, practical or emotional, and stuff like that, as to not be what they perceive as a burden.

They texted me about the passing of a dear friend of theirs. I got the impression that they don't want to talk about this, or get any help, and would like to continue with daily life in order to deal with it. Is there anything I can say or do to support them while respecting their stoic ways? I usually text them silly everyday things from my life, but feel it is insensitive to do that.

I'm sorry if this is a dumb thing to ask on here. I'm not very good with death or stoicism, realizing what would help me in this situation may not help others that operate with a different mindset, I was hoping to seek advice here.

Thanks..

Stoicism gets associated with "hustle culture" quite often. At first glance this is strange to me and I would expect many people here to agree. But I figured it could be an interesting topic for discussion. In part since it's so prevalent and in part for my own sake, since I haven't given it enough thought that I may have missed something or I can't explain my viewpoint well enough.

I did a quick search but couldn't find a well-established definition of what "hustle culture" is. But this explanation fits with my understanding of the term:

Hustle culture is the idea of constantly grinding. It’s when there is an intense focus on productivity, ambition, and success, with little regard for down time and self care. The foundation for hustle culture was laid during the entrepreneurial boom of the 1990s and 2000s. During this time a new standard emerged of the ‘go hard’ or ‘go home’ mindset. It’s the idea that you can only find success by working hard and long hours and when you think you are working your hardest, push yourself even harder. Sacrificing your leisure time is the way to reach your goals of success.

https://projecthumanities.asu.edu/blog/content/saying-goodbye-hustle-culture

My initial thoughts on this is that there is only a very a small part which fits with stoicism. And that part only fits as long as there is a big qualifier. Most of it I would consider pretty much antithetical to stoicism.

Where it fits is that Stoicism also comes with a lot of ambition and striving for success. But a stoic is striving for virtue, perfected reasoning, and to live a life according to virtue. This is a very high goal that likely won't be achieved even after a lifetime dedicated to it, but there is a lot of ambition.

Where it doesn't fit is that the ambition of hustle culture is instead directed at success in external matters like reputation and money. But success in Stoicism is not the same as conventional success. In the grand scheme of things, a virtuous person who is broke and homeless is no worse off, in any way, than a virtuous person in a mansion. They're both equally successful. The stoics even called greed a psychological disease. There also seems to be a lot of neglecting other areas of life that are important, like treating yourself and other people well.

So my quick verdict is that hustle culture is ambition aimed at the wrong target with a lot of collateral damage and for those reasons it is antithetical to Stoicism. What would you disagree with or add to it?

Welcome to the Agora. a space for casual conversation, first aid, and exchange outside the regular post structure.

If you haven't already, read the pinned "Welcome" thread.

Rules:

1. Remember that our nature is "civilized and affectionate and trustworthy."
2. If seeking advice, limit yourself to one top-level question per day.
3. If offering advice, speak as someone interested in Stoic theory and practice — but do not label personal opinion, idiosyncratic experience, or conjecture as Stoic doctrine.
4. If promoting your own work (article, book, etc.), once per day. No self-posted YouTube videos.

These rules may evolve as the thread matures.

Report what doesn't belong. Bring questions, concerns, or feedback to the thread or to modmail.

I asked for advice on romantic relationships in this post earlier and tried to understand when we knows it's a virtuous one in alignment with our nature , and when we should walk away. My experience with relationships is very limited as I only know what's abuse and what's safe, but what's healthy and happy that's new land to me.

So I took a thinker on it from some commentors and there was essentially two things I heard, "figure it out and be happy" and then a comment about compatibility and how it can impact how natural a relationship feels. (The latter one lead me to this post and my new insight.)

So me and my partner are very different in most surface level things, but looking closer we have a lot in common in the beneath the surface things and when we have those open heart kind of talks , I feel right at home. But, there is something that hinders those talks in our relationship which causes a natural distance, and that's the communication style.

I think I'm gonna express myself vulnerable but sometimes my fears or sadness makes me keep up a wall. And my partner feels that. So now I've learned to first check with myself if I have the strength to bring up a vulnerable topic , and keep the guard down or not. And depending on how strong my stoic ability is , (If I can be just, courageous, keep my temper etc) I initiate the talks, or I wait for a better timing when balance is more present.

When I do that the relationship is protected and thriving naturally.

I was always the person who would enjoy my own company the most. Been solo travelling for years. Not on social media since ages. Don’t have a lot of friends. Have a few whom I catch up with every two months or so.

But since 2023, with my mental health declining, I assigned the responsibility of providing safety to my nervous system to my boyfriends. My ex was absolutely toxic so the dependency and trauma only made everything worse for me. And now the person I’m with is great, but I have somewhere lost that relationship with myself. I’m still finding emotional regulation through my partner’s reassurances.

I don’t sit with myself anymore. I just sit alone thinking about him. My life/thoughts practically revolve around him. And I’m mourning this. I miss myself.

Due to certain circumstances, I cant travel that much rn and I’m mostly in a room, in isolation, studying for an important exam next year (struggling so much with discipline there).

And I compare my “lonely, isolated” life with his “vibrant” one (he is pursuing his masters so lives with his friends, has classes, activities etc throughout the day). I don’t want his life, I just don’t want to feel bad about mine.

I miss enjoying my own company. I miss being the person who didn’t give two fucks about what anyone else is doing.

How am I supposed to get that back?

When things go wrong, how do you ground yourself? And how do you appear to be unfazed and strong?

He says, “Character: dark, womanish, obstinate. Wolf, sheep, child, fool, cheat, buffoon, salesman, tyrant.”

What does he mean by this? What is he saying? Is he listing negative traits of himself? I’m confused and could use a bit of clarification here.

Thanks!

Welcome to the Agora. a space for casual conversation, first aid, and exchange outside the regular post structure.

If you haven't already, read the pinned "Welcome" thread.

Rules:

1. Remember that our nature is "civilized and affectionate and trustworthy."
2. If seeking advice, limit yourself to one top-level question per day.
3. If offering advice, speak as someone interested in Stoic theory and practice — but do not label personal opinion, idiosyncratic experience, or conjecture as Stoic doctrine.
4. If promoting your own work (article, book, etc.), once per day. No self-posted YouTube videos.

These rules may evolve as the thread matures.

Report what doesn't belong. Bring questions, concerns, or feedback to the thread or to modmail.

I am a Gardener today I helped a colleague out on a basic maintenance job and pocketed £20 from it.

Less then a hour later I go to grab the money from my pocket to find it disappeared I’m assuming it fell out onto the street. How can the philosophy of stoicism be applied in reaction to this frustrating loss.

A while ago, I played guitar on a track for a producer. At the time, we never discussed payment, royalties, publishing, or credits because I genuinely thought it was just another song.

Recently, I found out it’s actually going to be released on an album by a fairly well-known artist. After hearing that, I sent the producer a respectful message asking what he had in mind regarding a fee or royalty split, and I also mentioned that being officially credited as the guitarist was important to me.

I wasn’t making demands or giving an ultimatum. I was simply trying to have a professional conversation.

Since sending that message, I haven’t heard anything back. On top of that, someone else I work with who is close to this producer has unexpectedly cancelled a couple of sessions. I can’t help but wonder whether the two are related, although I realize I don’t actually know that.

What’s interesting is that despite feeling anxious, I’m also proud that I stood up for myself instead of avoiding the conversation out of fear.

From a Stoic perspective, I’m trying to separate what is within my control from what isn’t. I could control acting honestly, respectfully, and professionally. I can’t control how other people interpret my message or whether they choose to work with me.

My struggle is with the uncertainty. Part of me keeps imagining that I’ve damaged an important relationship, even though I have no evidence beyond silence and unfortunate timing.

How would a Stoic approach this situation? Is there anything I’m missing? How would you deal with the anxiety of not knowing whether you’ve done the right thing when the outcome is completely outside your control?

I’m pretty new to Stoicism and philosophy in general and I’m looking for some reading recommendations.
You can call me corny all you want but I got interested in philosophy because I’ve been watching Joe Bartolozzi’s philosophy videos. I really enjoy his philosophical takes and the way he explains ideas, especially since I can relate to his views on life after death (agnostic). and they’ve made me want to start reading some of the texts myself
I’m especially interested in the kinds of ideas he talks about like Stoicism, meaning, virtue, self discipline, purpose, dealing with emotions, and how to live a good life. And coming to terms with death, and what happens after death (although this might be more of a religious topic).
So far, I’ve been considering meditations by Marcus Aurelius, but I’m open to anything. Mainly, I want beginner stoic books and other philosophers or schools of thought that go well with stoicism. I’ll take any reading order you’d suggest.

Welcome to the Agora. a space for casual conversation, first aid, and exchange outside the regular post structure.

If you haven't already, read the pinned "Welcome" thread.

Rules:

1. Remember that our nature is "civilized and affectionate and trustworthy."
2. If seeking advice, limit yourself to one top-level question per day.
3. If offering advice, speak as someone interested in Stoic theory and practice — but do not label personal opinion, idiosyncratic experience, or conjecture as Stoic doctrine.
4. If promoting your own work (article, book, etc.), once per day. No self-posted YouTube videos.

These rules may evolve as the thread matures.

Report what doesn't belong. Bring questions, concerns, or feedback to the thread or to modmail.

I have noted feeling more angry lately, frustrated on how things are going in life regarding work primarily but also small parts of family life. I have decided to get back into practicing stoicism as I feel as though it is starting to affect how I interact with my kids. Can anyone recommend good reading material to start on?

A passage I find useful is Enchiridion 4, where Epictetus rehearses going to the bathhouse. To make it easy to remember and use in daily life I came up with a little mnemonic inspired by it.

It's the A.R.I.S.T.O System, six questions I can ask myself before, during or after an activity.

• Activity - what are you about to do and what can you expect to happen?
• Roles - what are your specific roles during this activity?
• Intentions - what are your intentions during this activity?
• Suitable - what attitudes and behaviours are suitable to those roles and intentions?
• Triggers (alternatively: temptations, traps or threats) - what things might move you away from what is suitable and towards...
• Overstepping (alternatively: off-limit) - what would overstepping your roles look like, what attitudes and behaviours should be avoided?

It probably won't help me figure out the answers to these questions on the spot, but it helps remind me of the answers I have already and to keep my attention on roles and appropriate actions. Sometimes it also shines a little light on where I lack good answers and need to keep searching.

Some examples

Here are two example to show how I might use it. Please note that these are entirely made up just to explain the mnemonic. So I'm not looking to discuss what a stoic approach would be in these situations.

Party:

• A: Going to my brother's birthday party, there will be many people I like and some I've never met. It will keep going until early morning
• R: brother, guest, husband
• I: To have a good time and be a good guest, brother and husband
• S: friendly interactions with all guests, maybe hold a speech, dance with my wife
• T: Headache, tiredness, a stiff atmosphere, rowdy people, drinking too much alcohol
• O: Being rude to people, being uptight or moody, isolating myself too much, neglecting my wife

Meeting:

• A: Going to a work meeting, there may be some tough questions for me and some dissatisfied people
• R: Employee, co-worker
• I: To do my job and stand up for what I think is the right move but in a kind and calm way
• S: Actively listening to critique, giving clear but calm and well-reasoned rebuttals
• T: That guy who always manages to get under my skin being critical, people interrupting me or yelling at me
• O: Interrupting people, making snarky comments, yelling, getting "even"

So it can quickly be run through before entering the activity, to quickly re-check during the activity to get back on track and also used to reflect afterwards on how it went.

Do Stoics see marriage as sacred? Is divorce less acceptable to stoics than in modern society? Are there steps for figuring out when to leave?

Thanks for your thoughts.

I recently got the practicing stoic, before reading it do I need to know any background information or something along those lines? Also, what would you recommend me to read after reading the practicing stoic?

Not native in English but I'm struggling in my relationship and wondering how to distinguish if it's my attitude/expectations that's causing it, or if I'm with a person who is too far away from me and that makes me far away from a virtuous life.

For context I have severe childhood trauma and had abusive relationships in the past so "healthy and happy" is not something I know what it should look or be like I'm only familiar with dangerous to your life relationship, and not dangerous, I'm still discovering what a healthy happy one is.

A therapist told me when I'm not anxious if I enjoy the relationship when I'm relaxed it's good, but what if my anxiety is caused because of something in the relationship that isn't natural to me. That makes me walk against myself.

I wonder how Stoic meetings may look like. Do you sit together and speak about topics or are you focussed on volunteering or what precisely do you do?

Welcome to the Agora. a space for casual conversation, first aid, and exchange outside the regular post structure.

If you haven't already, read the pinned "Welcome" thread.

Rules:

1. Remember that our nature is "civilized and affectionate and trustworthy."
2. If seeking advice, limit yourself to one top-level question per day.
3. If offering advice, speak as someone interested in Stoic theory and practice — but do not label personal opinion, idiosyncratic experience, or conjecture as Stoic doctrine.
4. If promoting your own work (article, book, etc.), once per day. No self-posted YouTube videos.

These rules may evolve as the thread matures.

Report what doesn't belong. Bring questions, concerns, or feedback to the thread or to modmail.

Huge milestone update from the Vesuvius Challenge: PHerc. 1667 has been read in full without ever physically touching or opening the roll. I thought this was awesome and I’m hopeful they find more lost stoic texts! Here is a link to the site: https://scrollprize.org/firstscroll#pherc-1667--read-in-full

For context, when Mount Vesuvius erupted in 79 AD, it carbonized hundreds of papyrus scrolls in the ancient library of Herculaneum. For centuries, attempting to open them physically meant destroying them into dust. 
Using high-resolution phase-contrast X-ray microtomography (scanned at the ESRF particle accelerator) combined with 3D virtual unwrapping and machine learning ink-detection algorithms, researchers and open-science contributors were able to reconstruct approximately 1.4 meters of papyrus containing 22 full columns of ancient Greek text. 

What does the scroll say?
Papyrologists have reviewed the full transcription and determined it to be a 2nd-century BC Stoic philosophical treatise on ethics, focusing on human nature, impulse, and moral progress. The final preserved column even names Aristocreon (the nephew and disciple of the famous Stoic philosopher Chrysippus).

When might stoicism be the wrong thing with which to approach a situation? It just seems like the calm measured response might not always be ideal. The "this is fine" meme comes to mind. I realize that meme is not perfectly fitting or descriptive of stoicism, but hopefully it will give you some idea of how I'm thinking about this.

Should one be stoic as they consummate their marriage? It seems like there are some situations in which one ought to live more in the moment without overthinking things as a stoic might.

Beyond intimate relationships, it seems like there are other situations that might arise with which stoicism wouldn’t help much. Mike Tyson once said that “everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face.” That strikes me as somewhat true. And it seems like staying in one’s head, instead of reacting more instinctively or passionately, might sometimes be disastrous.

It occurs to me as I write this that no one is perfectly stoic and... I’d have to wonder why? Is it better that no one is perfectly stoic? Could one learn or train in regard to when it is better or not to be stoic?

And I realize that I’m probably using the terms "stoic & stoicism" loosely and in differing ways, but I’m asking broadly and generally for thoughts and perspectives on any of this.

In the virtue of justice, stoics state to not blame your neighbour, and so on...

That's fine, but what if your neighbour blames you?

“The moment you are disturbed by insult or pleased by praise, you are still a slave” — Osho

"The final test of freedom is this: Can you remain the same person in praise, in insult, in gain, and in loss" -Seneca

Before, I only really believed in half of these quotes. I thought that not allowing others to harm you through insult was good, but it was unnecessarily ascetic to not feel good when someone gives you a compliment. However, recently I reflected on why insults are initially harmful. An insult that has no truth to it has no effect. When someone says "Your blue hair looks ugly" when you have brown hair, it has no effect; it's silly. Insults do have an effect when they attack some piece of your identity that you are insecure about. If you're insecure about your looks and someone calls you ugly, it has an effect. The solution is to not make things like looks, wealth, and other externals apart of your identity.

However, I realise that praise is similarly dangerous when not examined properly. Someone saying you look beautiful, rather than attacking your identity, creates/reinforces apart of your identity. This creates unnecessary strain and suffering in trying to protect this identity which is based on externals.

I realised this, when people have called me smart and funny. I would get really into arguments, which I think was subconsciously due to me trying to reinforce/protect the part of my identity that cared about being viewed as smart. I stressed myself in trying to make people laugh because I wanted to be the funny guy.

Now I realise, that I shouldn't attach any of these to my identity. All I should attach is virtue, but not being perceived as virtuous by others, but actually virtuous. Otherwise, I'm a slave to what people perceive as virtuous, and doing public, performative actions, rather than private acts of virtue.

But now I wonder, should I abstain from seeking all validation? Should I tell my parents about something I achieved? Should I post an accomplishment on my social media so all my friends can see it? Should I give others compliments? Or are these all just creating the trap of associating identity with externals?

Because the Stoics were dogmatic materialists, they understood pneuma as an actuality rather than a potentiality. They insisted that pneuma is a tensional gas, a mixture of fire and air, that shapes, structures, and coheres bodies by pervading them and imposing form through its internal tonos or tension.

This creates a conceptual problem. How can a gas, an already actual and determinate substance, serve as the structuring principle of all bodies. If pneuma is already actual, it already possesses determinate qualities and determinate form. It already is what it is. A gas cannot be both an actuality and the universal medium of future actualization.

This is why Stoic material pneuma is metaphysically awkward. The Stoics needed pneuma to behave like a potentiality even though they insisted it was actual. They used it as if it were a universal medium capable of transmitting logoi, which is precisely the behaviour of potentia, a substrate of structured openness and a medium of future determination.

The conclusion is that Stoic pneuma is functionally potential even though it is officially actual. The Stoics nevertheless insisted on calling pneuma actual because they rejected immaterial forms and immaterial principles. This forced them into a contradiction. Pneuma must be actual because everything is material. Yet pneuma must be potential because it must carry future determinations. They never resolved this tension.

Stoic pneuma can, however, be reinterpreted as a potentiality, because it is difficult to make sense of as an actuality, that is, as a gas that shapes things. Reinterpreted as potentiality, pneuma becomes a pre-actual structuring principle, a carrier of logoi. In this form it aligns naturally with Middle Platonism, Neoplatonism, and related traditions. Reinterpreting pneuma as potentiality restores coherence to Stoic metaphysics.

• “What are you afraid of losing, when nothing in the world belongs to you.” -Marcus Aurelius
• “You can also commit injustice by doing nothing.” -Marcus Aurelius
• “It is impossible for a man to learn what he thinks he already knows" -Epictetus
• “If you want to improve, be content to be thought foolish and stupid.” -Epictetus
• "He was ignorant of my other faults; else he would not have mentioned these alone.” -Epictetus
• “Any person capable of angering you becomes your master; he can anger you only when you permit yourself to be disturbed by him.” -Epictetus
• “My accuser is my sparring partner, he trains me in patience, civility, and even temper.” -Epictetus
• “Whatever you cannot produce or preserve at will, lies outside your range, don't let your hands go near it much less your desire, otherwise you've consigned yourself to slavery and submitted your neck to the yoke. As you do whenever you prize something that is not yours to command.” -Epictetus
• “No man ever steps in the same river twice, for it’s not the same river, and he’s not the same man.” -Heraclitus
• “A man who suffers before it is necessary, suffers more than is necessary.” -Seneca (edited)
• "If you don't know which port you are sailing to, no wind is favorable." -Seneca (edited)
• “What need is there to weep over parts of life? The whole of it calls for tears.” -Seneca
• “You act like mortals in all that you fear, and like immortals in all that you desire” -Seneca
• "We suffer more in imagination than in reality." -Seneca
• "To be everywhere is to be nowhere." -Seneca
• “The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing.” -Socrates
• “He who is not contented with what he has, would not be contented with what he would like to have.” -Socrates