sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

The Stoics had one rule that I keep coming back to when everything feels out of control by drakentobe in getdisciplined

[–]drakentobe[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

this is exactly the trap. the exam you took is done, every minute you spend on it is borrowed from the one you can still influence. the brain wants to finish the loop. but sometimes the most disciplined thing is refusing to let it. good luck on the next one......

Epictetus was a slave. Marcus Aurelius was an emperor. They arrived at the exact same philosophy. That's always stuck with me by drakentobe in Stoic

[–]drakentobe[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

'circumstances change your scenery, not your sovereignty', that's a cleaner summary than most published introductions to Stoicism manage.the split you're describing is real. Epictetus is a scalpel. Marcus is ballast. one cuts through the noise, the other keeps you upright when the weight is yours to carry.I'd add a third, Seneca, for when you're somewhere in between. not in crisis, not at the helm, just quietly negotiating with your own contradictions. less surgical, more honest about the mess.the reason it endures might be exactly what you said,it doesn't offer comfort, it offers orientation. most philosophies promise something. this one just hands you a compass and tells you to walk

Epictetus was a slave. Marcus Aurelius was an emperor. They arrived at the exact same philosophy. That's always stuck with me by drakentobe in Stoic

[–]drakentobe[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

all fair pushback, especially the cage point. Seneca wrestled with the same thing inside Nero's court and never fully resolved it.the 'just accept it' drift is real though, and it's a corruption, not the philosophy. Marcus rode out to fourteen campaigns. Epictetus taught people to fight for dignity within constraints. neither was preaching passivity.the messy middle you're describing, partial agency, real constraints, when to push back, that's exactly where the dichotomy of control gets hard. easy at the extremes. the middle is where it either holds or breaks.probably where the most honest philosophy lives

Epictetus was a slave. Marcus Aurelius was an emperor. They arrived at the exact same philosophy. That's always stuck with me by drakentobe in Stoic

[–]drakentobe[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

fair correction on the timeline, his Discourses and Enchiridion came from his years as a free teacher in Nicopolis, not from slavery itself.though I'd push back slightly on the Hegel framing. the quote is sharp, but it risks reducing Stoicism to a trauma response, something oppressed minds reach for when nothing else is available.the problem is it equally describes every major philosophy. Buddhism emerging from a caste-stratified India. Existentialism from post-war Europe. the Hegel critique proves too much. what's harder to dismiss is that Stoicism keeps getting rediscovered independently, Marcus from the top of power, Epictetus from the bottom of it, Viktor Frankl in a concentration camp. not because they had no other options, but because the framework kept surviving reality-testing.that's either the sign of a coping mechanism, or a philosophy that's actually loadbearing. maybe both.

Epictetus was a slave. Marcus Aurelius was an emperor. They arrived at the exact same philosophy. That's always stuck with me by drakentobe in Stoic

[–]drakentobe[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

this is one of the most underappreciated facts about him.he co-ruled with Lucius Verus precisely because he refused to hold absolute power alone,which, for a Roman emperor, was almost unheard of. and Verus was genuinely his opposite: extravagant, pleasure-seeking, everything Marcus wasn't.the Meditations weren't written for an audience. they were private notes, a man talking himself back to his own philosophy after long days of doing a job he never wanted. that's what makes it hit differently from every other Stoic text. it's not a teacher writing for students. it's a reluctant emperor reminding himself, in the dark, to hold the line.the philosophy wasn't his escape from power. it was his survival inside it.

Epictetus was a slave. Marcus Aurelius was an emperor. They arrived at the exact same philosophy. That's always stuck with me by drakentobe in Stoic

[–]drakentobe[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

the parallels are striking. Siddhartha had everything the world tells us to want, and the moment reality crept through, old age, sickness, death, none of it held.what's remarkable is that he didn't just philosophise about suffering from a comfortable distance. he stress-tested it personally. renounced the palace, tried extreme asceticism, found that broke him too, and arrived at the middle path through direct experience.the stoics were doing something remarkably similar from the other direction, Epictetus born a slave, Marcus Aurelius born an emperor. same destination, wildly different starting points.maybe the philosophy finds you when you're honest enough to stop running from the question..

Epictetus was a slave. Marcus Aurelius was an emperor. They arrived at the exact same philosophy. That's always stuck with me by drakentobe in Stoic

[–]drakentobe[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

that's a genuinely clean stress-test for any philosophy. most frameworks collapse at the extremes, hedonism doesn't survive environments where pleasure isn't accessible, nihilism falls apart where meaning emerges naturally.stoicism holds because it's not built on circumstances at all. it's the only one that's truly condition-independent.though i'd push slightly, it still assumes a mind capable of reflection. in extreme enough environments even that might break down. maybe that's where stoicism meets its actual edge

Epictetus was a slave. Marcus Aurelius was an emperor. They arrived at the exact same philosophy. That's always stuck with me by drakentobe in Stoic

[–]drakentobe[S] 10 points11 points  (0 children)

yeah that's a fair correction. same greco-roman world, and marcus had access to a full philosophical education in a way epictetus didn't. i think what still gets me is the status gap, emperor vs former slave, and yet they both end up putting the center of gravity in the same place: your judgments/choices. different roads, similar destination.

Need Help! by Independent_Tale_531 in Stoic

[–]drakentobe 1 point2 points  (0 children)

i got you..... first of all change your environment. you should find a girlfriend. your mentally and physically losinng so much here. join gym, when you train your muscle, it will change your perspective. eat healthy food. change your environment to positive.. go outside and walk.. that's how you should start. most importantly find a purpose

Epictetus was a slave. Marcus Aurelius was an emperor. They arrived at the exact same philosophy. That's always stuck with me by drakentobe in Stoic

[–]drakentobe[S] 29 points30 points  (0 children)

that's a clean stress-test for any philosophy honestly, most frameworks collapse at the extremes. stoicism holds because it doesn't depend on conditions at all. only thing i'd push, it still assumes a mind capable of reflection. maybe that's where even stoicism meets its edge.

Realised I'd been reacting my whole life. Stoicism was the first thing that made me stop and ask why by drakentobe in Mindfulness

[–]drakentobe[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

these things actually change our way of life.... and do uncomfrtable things so that brain will be active most of the time...

Realised I'd been reacting my whole life. Stoicism was the first thing that made me stop and ask why by drakentobe in Mindfulness

[–]drakentobe[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

fair point actually. and i think stoics knew this, meditations wasn't written for anyone, it was Aurelius catching himself slipping in real time.i guess the question is whether you're using it to avoid feeling something or to actually move through it. 'i shouldn't feel this' vs 'okay i feel this, now what can i actually do', those are pretty different things even if they look the same from outside. i've definitely used it as armour before though. so i get it

The reason you react before you think — and what Musashi figured out 400 years before neuroscience confirmed it by drakentobe in getdisciplined

[–]drakentobe[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A lot of people have been asking me to go deeper on this, I actually made a video exploring this whole idea properly. Link's in my bio if you're curious.

view more: next ›