The Stoicism Thread

[sengsational]

The way I read it, your emotions are your emotions. They are a "thing", and not to be denied. As long as they are examined, you're good. You can find good, bad and "meh" emotions. Replace a bad one once in a while, and you're better off. If all you do is react, and don't use your unique ability to be humanly wise, well, you're missing out on a chance to live a better life.

 

[48Fire]

Good points, I like the Idea of observing the emotions. I did a little practicing on that today, and it worked pretty well

 

[Gumby]

I would never recommend that someone else "snap out of it". One thing I have learned in life is that people have feelings and need to process them. Empathy and kindness are never wrong.

However, I would apply none of this to myself. I had what might most charitably be described as an unsettled childhood. I immigrated to this country as a young boy and met a man who said he was my father, and whom I did not like one bit. We were quite poor and moved around a lot, living in a variety of trailer parks and cheap apartments. Sometimes I did not live with my parents at all, for reasons that were never explained to me. I quickly learned a few things - 1) nobody, but nobody, cares a rat's fat behind what I feel or or think about anything; 2) if they do know what I feel or think, they will find some way to use it against me; and 3) I have absolutely no control over anything but me.

So I learned the principles of stoicism without any formal education in them. I learned to focus on what I could do within myself - to do well in school and in sports, to learn as much as I could about the world, and to prepare myself to leave home. I learned to moderate my emotions, to give way to neither too much happiness nor too much sadness, because I knew that sooner or later things would change and I would have a new reality to face. I also learned to neither court external approval nor fear disapproval, especially from my parents. I told them neither the good nor the bad that happened to me. Most importantly, I learned that I am the person I choose to be, that my emotions are mine, and that no one else has either the power or the responsibility to control or change them.

It was in some respects a rough way to grow up, but in the end, I think it has served me well. I generally maintain an even keel, and I am happy almost every day because I choose to be happy. I try not to concern myself with things over which I have no control. And I control that which I can.

 

[tmm99]

I am very grateful for this thread, and those contributing. I am very new to Stocism, but it’s a natural progression on my journey.

About a year ago, I suffered some severe emotional trauma. It felt like I would fall abruptly into a dark, deep hole, and it seemed quite likely that I would not get out. Fortunately, my loving wife reached down, and she pulled me out of the hole. I was considering counseling, but we agreed that she would be best to help me.

One of the first things my wife suggested I do was to recite the Serenity Prayer five times a day. “God, grant me the Serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the Courage to change the things I can, and the Wisdom to know the difference.” It was enlightening to discover that this is one of the key foundations of Stoicism, so I was anxious to explore more. This prayer and philosophy allowed my wife to continue to be a happy person, despite her many challenges in her early life before we met. I often wondered, how did she survive?

Chapter 4, “Take Another’s Perspective”, of the Stoicicm Handbook, hit home. My wife has incredible empathy, and this comes naturally for her. For me, it takes more thinking, more practice. And my lack of empathy can lead to relationship issues.

I am also enjoying the audio book, “How to think like a Roman Emperor, the Stoic Philosophy of Marcus Aurelius. It’s very insightful, especially to my individual challenges.

So it’s been a year since I hit the rock bottom of the deepest, darkest hole I wasn’t expecting to ever be in, especially at age 59. But with help, a lot of looks in the mirror, and a loving wife, I am continuing to improve.

Thanks so much for everyone contributing to this thread. At this point in my life, it’s WAY more important than 4% SWR and other financial tasks

I am sorry that you had to go through such a tough time, but glad that you came out of it with renewed strength and insight. May I ask which book you are referring to regarding Chapter 4? Can you post the name of the book annd the author or an amazon link? Thank you.

 

[48Fire]

A Handbook for new Stoics, Chapter 4, "Take Another's Perspective". Authors are Massimo Pigliucci and Gregory Lopez.

Thanks for your thoughts

I am sorry that you had to go through such a tough time, but glad that you came out of it with renewed strength and insight. May I ask which book you are referring to regarding Chapter 4? Can you post the name of the book annd the author or an amazon link? Thank you.

 

[ER Eddie]

I've started Marcus Aurelius' Meditations. For those of you who don't know, Meditations is a disorganized collection of private notes Marcus wrote to himself, to remind himself about various perspectives or values he wanted to embody. It has a self-instructional tone: "Do this." "Remember this." Marcus never intended any of it for publication; it was just for his own use. He repeatedly circles back to certain themes -- death, providence, character development, reputation, etc. -- so you can see what preoccupied him.

So far, it's not clicking for me. He talks a lot about death, and I already heard plenty of that from Seneca. Many of his notes have a harsh, negative tone. In the Introduction, the translator describes Marcus as a pessimistic fellow, and I'm finding that to be true. He can be pretty contemptuous of people and bodies, among other things. I can't really relate to it.

He talks about character development, and that's fine. However, I feel like I'm listening in on someone's superego, instructing him on how he "should" be. I've got enough of that in my head already, so I'm not keen on adding Marcus' inner critic to my own. Plus, a lot of them take the form of exhortations to be thus-and-so (fair, just, tolerant, kind, etc.). That just doesn't have much impact on me.

But I'm only about halfway through. I'll keep going. I know a lot of people have found value in it. Maybe something will strike a chord with me. So far, though, I'm just not connecting.

 

[Rianne]

So I learned the principles of stoicism without any formal education in them. I learned to focus on what I could do within myself - to do well in school and in sports, to learn as much as I could about the world, and to prepare myself to leave home. I learned to moderate my emotions, to give way to neither too much happiness nor too much sadness, because I knew that sooner or later things would change and I would have a new reality to face. I also learned to neither court external approval nor fear disapproval, especially from my parents. I told them neither the good nor the bad that happened to me. Most importantly, I learned that I am the person I choose to be, that my emotions are mine, and that no one else has either the power or the responsibility to control or change them.

I appreciate your entire quote but want to focus on this part. I'm not sure sympathy is the way to respond to your childhood. You survived with wisdom. This cannot be taught, I'm not sure if therapy could bring anyone to your level of personal confidence. I aspire to that level but have to say a good emotional outburst helps diffuse the tension every so often. Maybe even a good cry. I do that over the simplest things. One time, I watched an African documentary where a mother lion brought 2 of her cubs to mourn the death of her other cub. I think I cried for a couple of hours. How can we as humans think we're the only ones with emotions? How can we as humans think we're superior to other living things? I cry over stuff like that.

 

[O2Bfree]

I've started Marcus Aurelius' Meditations. For those of you who don't know, Meditations is a disorganized collection of private notes Marcus wrote to himself, to remind himself about various perspectives or values he wanted to embody. It has a self-instructional tone: "Do this." "Remember this." Marcus never intended any of it for publication; it was just for his own use. He repeatedly circles back to certain themes -- death, providence, character development, reputation, etc. -- so you can see what preoccupied him.

So far, it's not clicking for me. He talks a lot about death, and I already heard plenty of that from Seneca. Many of his notes have a harsh, negative tone. In the Introduction, the translator describes Marcus as a pessimistic fellow, and I'm finding that to be true. He can be pretty contemptuous of people and bodies, among other things. I can't really relate to it.

He talks about character development, and that's fine. However, I feel like I'm listening in on someone's superego, instructing him on how he "should" be. I've got enough of that in my head already, so I'm not keen on adding Marcus' inner critic to my own. Plus, a lot of them take the form of exhortations to be thus-and-so (fair, just, tolerant, kind, etc.). That just doesn't have much impact on me.

But I'm only about halfway through. I'll keep going. I know a lot of people have found value in it. Maybe something will strike a chord with me. So far, though, I'm just not connecting.

I’ve been into Buddhist practice for some time and the stoic philosophy really resonates. Buddhism too has many such “harsh” teachings, but in the practice I’ve learned that the apparent harshness is due to the limitations of intellectual understanding vs. “whole body-mind” understanding. Like when you’re trying to learn a new move, for example in a sport. You start with an intellectual understanding of the necessary motions, and have to force yourself through them for awhile. This training period can feel harsh, especially if you have a coach barking at you. But when you finally “get it” and the motions start to feel natural, there’s a new harmony between body and mind that transcends the intellectual understanding of the motions. The bits and pieces of intellectual understanding have sharp edges, but those edges go away when the pieces blend into a larger picture.

 

[ER Eddie]

I’ve been into Buddhist practice for some time and the stoic philosophy really resonates. Buddhism too has many such “harsh” teachings, but in the practice I’ve learned that the apparent harshness is due to the limitations of intellectual understanding vs. “whole body-mind” understanding. Like when you’re trying to learn a new move, for example in a sport. You start with an intellectual understanding of the necessary motions, and have to force yourself through them for awhile. This training period can feel harsh, especially if you have a coach barking at you. But when you finally “get it” and the motions start to feel natural, there’s a new harmony between body and mind that transcends the intellectual understanding of the motions. The bits and pieces of intellectual understanding have sharp edges, but those edges go away when the pieces blend into a larger picture.

I didn't mean harsh in the sense of harsh discipline; I meant harsh in the sense of negative, critical, and judgmental. I don't think you'd characterize Buddhism that way. Marcus can be awfully cynical and pessimistic about people sometimes.

So that's what I'm referring to -- not harsh stoic discipline, as in "Toughen up, buttercup, life is rough." I get that. I'm talking more about a cynical, pessimistic, and dark attitude he expresses about people and about life in general, sometimes. I just don't find it helpful.

I think Marcus may be more relevant to people in positions of power. I've never been interested in power or gravitated to positions of power -- in fact, I've tried to avoid them whenever I could. So, he may be speaking to a different audience than me.

 

[sengsational]

Thanks for the personal perspective on "Meditations". I don't think I'm quite smart enough / patient enough to go to the historical translated source on many things. I've tried it before, and have not been able to get much out of those attempts (usually because I gave up). I'm fine with someone's interpretation of the original work, as most authors doing that kind of work know they're under the microscope. Sure, the academics have arguments, but mostly over things that to the casual learner would be considered nuances.

It's too bad that so much of the written works of the Greek and Roman Stoics didn't survive, so we're left with some dude's notes to himself, hehehe! I'm reading "How to think like a Roman Emperor", which is about the life of Marcus. So far, not anything dragging me down, so Robertson is probably doing me a favor and filtering that stuff out.

 

[braumeister]

I'm fine with someone's interpretation of the original work, as most authors doing that kind of work know they're under the microscope. Sure, the academics have arguments, but mostly over things that to the casual learner would be considered nuances.

A good comment, and it made me think of a wonderful example.

One of the most influential books ever published was Montaigne's Essays.

Not an easy read for most of us, since it was written in 16th century French. But a recently published summary (kind of a Cliff's Notes version) was so beautifully done that I thought it was one of the best reads I've had in years. Highly recommended.

How to Live: Or A Life of Montaigne in One Question and Twenty Attempts at an Answer

How to get along with people, how to deal with violence, how to adjust to losing someone you love—such questions arise in most people’s lives. They are all versions of a bigger question: How do you live? This question obsessed Renaissance writers, none more than Michel Eyquem de Montaigne, considered by many to be the first truly modern individual. He wrote free-roaming explorations of his thoughts and experience, unlike anything written before. More than four hundred years later, Montaigne’s honesty and charm still draw people to him.

 

[Rianne]

It's too bad that so much of the written works of the Greek and Roman Stoics didn't survive, so we're left with some dude's notes to himself, hehehe! I'm reading "How to think like a Roman Emperor", which is about the life of Marcus. So far, not anything dragging me down, so Robertson is probably doing me a favor and filtering that stuff out.

I thought this interesting that happened during Marcus' reign as Emperor, 161-180. Are his writings and principles in conflict with his life and actions?

"The persecution of Christians in the Roman Empire is believed[by whom?] to have increased[how?] during his reign.[why?] The Antonine Plague broke out in 165 or 166 and devastated the population of the Roman Empire, causing the deaths of five million people. Lucius Verus may have died from the plague in 169"

"Aurelius advocates finding one's place in the universe and sees that everything came from nature, and so everything shall return to it in due time. Another strong theme is of maintaining focus and to be without distraction all the while maintaining strong ethical principles such as "Being a good man."[4]"

It seems he was a bit a war hawk. These are just observations. His reputation as a Stoic exhibits some aggression?

"The reign of Marcus Aurelius was marked by military conflict. In the East, the Roman Empire fought successfully with a revitalized Parthian Empire and the rebel Kingdom of Armenia. Marcus defeated the Marcomanni, Quadi, and Sarmatian Iazyges in the Marcomannic Wars; however, these and other Germanic peoples began to represent a troubling reality for the Empire."

 

[O2Bfree]

I didn't mean harsh in the sense of harsh discipline; I meant harsh in the sense of negative, critical, and judgmental. I don't think you'd characterize Buddhism that way.

I suppose it depends on what sort of practice you’re looking at. Practicing Buddhism with a teacher can actually involve a great deal of harsh judgment and criticism, all meant to erode the ego and loosen attachments to concepts. Classical Buddhist teachings such as the sutras include very negative judgments against the same sorts of things as in Meditations, such as the body, personalities and behavior, and the transient qualities of life. Pop culture Buddhism isn’t quite so nitty-gritty.

 

[ER Eddie]

I suppose it depends on what sort of practice you’re looking at. Practicing Buddhism with a teacher can actually involve a great deal of harsh judgment and criticism, all meant to erode the ego and loosen attachments to concepts. Classical Buddhist teachings such as the sutras include very negative judgments against the same sorts of things as in Meditations, such as the body, personalities and behavior, and the transient qualities of life. Pop culture Buddhism isn’t quite so nitty-gritty.

That's interesting. When I think of Buddhism, it's all about compassion, making space for your thoughts and feelings, and adopting a neutral, non-judgmental stance toward your inner experience -- kind of the opposite of the harsh criticism and judgment you're describing. I guess if I ever decide to be a Buddhist, I'll have to remember to avoid the harsh, "break down the ego" type teachers. That wouldn't work well with me.

 

[ER Eddie]

I thought this interesting that happened during Marcus' reign as Emperor, 161-180. Are his writings and principles in conflict with his life and actions?
[....]
It seems he was a bit a war hawk. These are just observations. His reputation as a Stoic exhibits some aggression?

In the introduction to Meditations, the translator talks about these wars. I don't remember all the specifics, but I got the impression that Marcus was sort of obliged to fight on these fronts. He didn't go out looking for a fight, in other words, but instead these were "necessary" or in some cases defensive actions. For example, the invading tribes from the north would, years later, result in the fall of the Roman empire.

I'm not saying "It wasn't his fault -- they started it!" but rather, I'm just suggesting Marcus wasn't deliberately pursuing conquest or trying to expand his empire. He seemed to be reluctantly engaging in wars that were just part and parcel of keeping the empire together. At least that's my best recollection of what the translator was implying.

Hey, it's tough being a Roman emperor. This is part of why I would turn down the job if they offered it. I imagine that the stresses and strains of war were part of why he seems so cynical and negative sometimes. All those severed feet and heads make a guy grumpy.

 

[48Fire]

I finished the Audio Book version of “How to Think Like a Roman Emperor, the Stoic Philosophy of Marcus Aurelius”, by Donald Robertson. I liked it a lot. I think I will try to get the actual book, so I can easier refer to some key areas I liked.

I am very interested in creating better habits and practices. I need to overcome those sudden jolts that take me out of a good mood. Robertson said pay attention to yourself, using yourself as a mentor. Or ask yourself what would Marcus, a mentor, or your teacher say about your behavior. At the end of the day, ask yourself about the value judgments you make, and how they created anger, fear, sadness, unhealthy desires, and bad habits.

Ask yourself 2 or 3 times how the events of the day actually went. What would your imaginary mentors say? What would they say you should have done different? He says this is the opportunity to learn from experience, and apply this to the morning.

One thing I learned was about handling pain. My wife handles pain very well, and has the ability to not complain, and avoid making the pain worse. When I know she is pain, sometimes I ask, “How are you?”, and she says, “I’m fine.” I could do better with dealing with pain

My wife has some natural Stoic natures she has developed. While listening to the audio book, I often thought, “That’s her!” Maybe someone you know has some of these virtues you can use as well.

I liked the references to a couple of Aesop’s Fables, and was listening to this part of the book. Ironically, we were packing yesterday, and I came across one of the few books my wife has kept throughout down-sizing was Aesop’s Fables. I am not usually one to believe in signs or connections like this, but it was pretty cool to me.

 

[48Fire]

But a recently published summary (kind of a Cliff's Notes version) was so beautifully done that I thought it was one of the best reads I've had in years. Highly recommended.

How to Live: Or A Life of Montaigne in One Question and Twenty Attempts at an Answer

Thanks for the suggestion, I just checked out the e-book

 

[48Fire]

In the introduction to Meditations, the translator talks about these wars. I don't remember all the specifics, but I got the impression that Marcus was sort of obliged to fight on these fronts. He didn't go out looking for a fight, in other words, but instead these were "necessary" or in some cases defensive actions. For example, the invading tribes from the north would, years later, result in the fall of the Roman empire.

I'm not saying "It wasn't his fault -- they started it!" but rather, I'm just suggesting Marcus wasn't deliberately pursuing conquest or trying to expand his empire. He seemed to be reluctantly engaging in wars that were just part and parcel of keeping the empire together. At least that's my best recollection of what the translator was implying.

Hey, it's tough being a Roman emperor. This is part of why I would turn down the job if they offered it. I imagine that the stresses and strains of war were part of why he seems so cynical and negative sometimes. All those severed feet and heads make a guy grumpy.

That's my take, too. Marcus seemed resigned to the fact that he was going to have to kill a bunch of people to survive. A tough job, no doubt. He tried to keep emotions in check during this. But he seemed very focused, and not distracted by life's pleasures that a Roman Emperor could have indulged in. I liked the comparison to Lucious, who seemed to self-destruct.

 

[Zona]

Thanks for the suggestion, I just checked out the e-book

I read the Bakewell book and recommend it very highly, as well! Thanks for mentioning it Braumeister! Her book inspired me to actually read Montaigne’s Essays and travel diaries. That tome took me several months to get through (I joke that it was my “summer of Montaigne”) but it was so worth it. I marvel at the fact that he writes in a way that makes you feel like it’s not centuries between you - he writes with such a modern (or rather universal) human “voice”. I don’t know if I’d ever undertake to reread all the essays again, but there were quite a few that I dog-eared to revisit. His travel diaries read a little like a modern day travel blog but with maybe a few too many references to kidney stones for the medically squeamish.

As a side note, I did finally finish Farnsworth’s “The Practicing Stoic” and it’s a great reference if reading the source material does not appeal. I especially liked the very last few pages, where he discusses common critiques of Stoicism (its “heartlessness”, that it’s impossible/difficult to practice perfectly, that some stoics were hypocrites, etc).

 

[ER Eddie]

Well, I've finished Marcus Aurelius' Meditations, so I'll offer my brief impressions. I admit that I did not read the book thoroughly but instead skimmed a fair portion of it. Once I got the sense that it wasn't really for me, I didn't feel like reading every entry. So take that into account. My impression isn't based on a careful, in-depth reading. No doubt I missed some things.

1. The first thing I'll mention is that it's quite easy to read.

I don't think I'm quite smart enough / patient enough to go to the historical translated source on many things. I've tried it before, and have not been able to get much out of those attempts (usually because I gave up).

You're plenty smart, and you wouldn't have any trouble with this. If you want to stick to the curated, interpreted versions, that's cool. I just mention it in case you think it's difficult reading. It's not. Epictetus was, but Marcus is quite straightforward. Let's see if I can find an example...

Don't be irritated at people's smell or bad breath. What's the point? With that mouth, with those armpits, they're going to produce that odor.

But they have a brain! Can't they figure it out? Can't they recognize the problem?

lol, pretty straightforward. That's the Gregory Hays translation, in the Modern Library edition.

2. It definitely has a self-instructional tone. Marcus is always telling himself, "Do this," or "Don't do that." It feels very much as if you're listening in to his inner dialog, where he is instructing himself how to be, how to think about things, how to act. Marcus is a very conscientious person. If you know Big 5 personality scales, he'd be topping out the Conscientiousness factor. So it's a lot of "shoulds." It's an interesting model for a journal.

3. Marcus was a good man. That is very clear. He is trying to do his best to be a good man under very trying circumstances. He's admirable. Not enviable, but admirable. (This is part of why I like reading the originals -- because they give you a flavor of the man and the times, rather than just nuggets of wisdom.)

4. Marcus put tremendous emphasis on being an unselfish leader. He continually talks about performing his duties as unselfishly as he can, setting aside his own "petty" needs and feelings in order to do what was required by his position. I think he would've been a great leader. I wouldn't want to have been him, nor would I want to model my life after someone like him, but if you're going to have someone with such absolute power and authority, you couldn't do better than someone like him. He seems entirely devoted to being a good man and a selfless leader. It's all about duty and obligation and doing the work Nature destined for you.

5. He sure talks a lot about death. All the stoics seem to. At times, he sounds tired and down, and he talks about looking forward to death.

6. He's not a philosopher himself, although others have thought of him like that. He's more a student of the philosophers, trying to learn, trying to apply their lessons to himself. He has an appealing humility about him.

7. He has a lot to say about handling other people's faults and mistakes. I imagine he dealt with a lot of that, as emperor.

It's silly to try to escape other people's faults. They are inescapable. Just try to escape your own.

8. He can get dark sometimes.

Like the baths -- oil, sweat, dirt, grayish water, all of it disgusting. The whole of life, all of the visible world.

The darkness isn't quite as pervasive as I made it sound in my earlier entry, though. There is plenty of goodness and wisdom in there, too -- much more than the dark, pessimistic stuff.

9. This book would be particularly useful for people in positions of leadership. Since I am not in a position of leadership, I did not find most of it applicable to my life. But I know that a lot of leaders have found it helpful.

Overall. It's a fine book. There are definitely plenty of nice little nuggets of wisdom in there. It would appeal more to people who are not me.

I found the tone a little too self-instructional for my tastes. That may be a personality thing. I dislike lots of talk about duty and obligation. I'm not selfless, by a long stretch. I also have very little interest in leadership and power. I found it interesting to get a glimpse inside Marcus' mind, but I wouldn't want to live there.

 

[sengsational]

Thanks for posting those points on Meditations. I'm also less interested in the leadership/power topics I come across in many of my readings. Not that Marcus was addressing someone with a job to get through, as these writings were likely never intended for mass consumption, but for some of my other readings, they seem to be addressing someone who's got a j*b to work through. That's of zero interest to me except for when I can somehow apply it to "duty" as a husband, father, family member or friend. But those relationships are most often light on the leadership/power dynamic in my case (thankfully). The "should" aspect of Marcus' self-direction is probably a pretty good reflection of what he distilled from his Stoic learning, so, given your encouragement that it's not a hard read, at least the version you reference, maybe I'll give it a try some day.

 

[O2Bfree]

I read Marcus Aurelius’ Meditations, the less modern translation by Francis Hutcheson and James Moor, and really enjoyed it. One thing that strikes me about the various belief traditions is the importance of a quiet mind and mindfulness, of not being pushed and pulled around by things external nor by your own internal noise.

Acquire a method of contemplating how all things change into one another. Apply constantly to this part [of philosophy,] and exercise yourself thoroughly in it. For there is nothing so proper as this for raising you to an elevation and greatness of mind. He who does this, has already put off the body, and being sensible how instantly he must depart from among men, and leave all these things behind him, resigns himself entirely to justice, in whatever he does himself; and to the nature of the whole, in every thing else which happens. What any one may say or think of him, or do against him, on this he spends not a thought. He satisfies himself with these two things: With acting justly in what he is at present doing; and with loving what is at present appointed for him. He has thrown off all hurry and bustle; and has no other will but this, to go on in the straight way according to the law; and to follow God in the straight way.

Practicing a method leads to an immutable and calm strength:

The soul is as a polish’d sphere, when it neither extends itself to any thing external, nor yields inwardly to it, nor is compressed in any part; but shines with that light which discovers both the truth in other things, and that within itself.

If, I say, you separate from the governing principle within you those things which are, as it were, appended to it by its vehement passions, and the times past and future, you make yourself like the firm World of Empedocles,

A sphere rejoicing ’midst the circling eddy.

I’ve looked into a few traditions over the years, including Christianity, Christian Science (which is not Scientology), Islam, native American traditions, Judaism, Catholicism, and Buddhism, and all refer to the importance of quieting the mind. I know I can waste a lot of energy on needless thinking, which adds not only to mental fatigue but can aggravate or even create other physical problems. Letting go has a healing effect. I’ve experienced this many times, in that after a meditation retreat that involves limited sleep and sometimes rather strenuous work parties, I invariably come home feeling better and with more energy than when I left.

 

[Rianne]

I thought to add to a list of stoic references to the thread. I found this quote from Seneca to be important. It's easier to say "no" in the era of CV-19. But I've found saying no has enriched my life. I've found that exploring my own ideas and desires without the noise of the outside world of friends, family and commitments creates a sense of growth and introspection.

"Seneca wrote eloquently on how we have “laid waste to your life when you weren’t aware of what you were losing, how much was wasted in pointless grief, foolish joy, greedy desire, and social amusements—how little of your own was left to you.” It’s not that we were given too little time to live, it’s that we wasted too much of it."

https://dailystoic.com/dont-let-them-steal-what-cant-be-replaced/

 

[aja8888]

I thought to add to a list of stoic references to the thread. I found this quote from Seneca to be important. It's easier to say "no" in the era of CV-19. But I've found saying no has enriched my life. I've found that exploring my own ideas and desires without the noise of the outside world of friends, family and commitments creates a sense of growth and introspection.

"Seneca wrote eloquently on how we have “laid waste to your life when you weren’t aware of what you were losing, how much was wasted in pointless grief, foolish joy, greedy desire, and social amusements—how little of your own was left to you.” It’s not that we were given too little time to live, it’s that we wasted too much of it."

https://dailystoic.com/dont-let-them-steal-what-cant-be-replaced/

After reading the linked article, I don't believe Kobe thought that he was "wasting time" by doing things with his daughters rather than committing to an interview which, I'm sure, would have been less fulfilling than being with his daughters. (He gets to choose what's important, not someone else)

Some of this stoic stuff doesn't make sense to me.

 

[Rianne]

After reading the linked article, I don't believe Kobe thought that he was "wasting time" by doing things with his daughters rather than committing to an interview which, I'm sure, would have been less fulfilling than being with his daughters. (He gets to choose what's important, not someone else)

Some of this stoic stuff doesn't make sense to me.

The Kobe part was a side note to the article. I was referring to the Seneca quote.