View Full Version : The Stoic Worldview.
http://www.bizcharts.com/stoa_del_sol/logos/logos_3.html
The Logos Continuum: Stoic Worldview
I thought I might share what little I know abut the ancient Stoic worldview, which in some ways will sound familiar. That's because some of their ideas were borrowed from and incorporated by later philosophies and religious traditions.
For the Stoics nothing passes unexplained. There's a reason for everything in Nature. They believed there is an active "force" which is everywhere coextensive with matter. The Stoics believed that there was something acting within them--as they put it--"a spirit deeply infused, germinating and developing as from a seed in the heart of each separate thing that exists."
For the Stoics God was Fire (active energy) and Logos (reason) diffused throughout the Cosmos. They believed, too, that the Law of Nature was God's material presence in the Universe. As cosmic reason, God was Providence. This Providence ordained all things. God was Fate, too. The Stoics believed Fate imposed upon humanity a certain determinism that allowed for freedom only within the context of a person's inner acceptance of cosmic necessity.
As for Fire, the Stoics likened this concept of God as seed that having in itself the "reasons of all things and the causes of what was, is, and shall be." This energy was the vital principle from which all the flora and fauna springs. The Stoics considered that through any stage of development, it was God (as a living force) who molded and dominated passive matter in terms of "progress."
The Stoics believed in soul--even for the animals, though not a rational soul. In rational creatures, however, they considered the Pneuma (firey breath) to be manifested at a higher degree of intensity as an "emanation from the world-soul." This Pneuma was a spark of the celestial Fire.
Essentially the Stoics believed that what God is for the world, the soul is for man. They declared that the Cosmos must be viewed as a single Whole--with its "variety being referred to varying stages of condensation in Pneuma." Therefore, for the Stoics, the actual nature of a human person is the universal on a small scale--a *microcosm.*
There is a parallel between the macrocosm and the microcosm. God, the Soul of the World, fills and penetrates it. Similarly, the human soul pervades and breathes through all the body--informing and guiding it. In both the macrocosm and the microcosm, there is a ruling part.
The Stoics considered each human soul a "fragment of the universal divine force, yet not completely sundered from the parent-stock." They were talking about *family.* They declared that "We are thy offspring!"
Out of their cosmology the Stoics developed their ethics-- which focused on Virtue. They believed Virtue to be the law that governed the Universe. For them, that which Reason (God/Logos) ordained must be accepted as binding upon the "particle of reason which is in each one of us." In turn, human law comes into existence when persons recognize this obligation--hence justice, responsibility, and freedom revolved around this obligation to God.
The Stoics expressed these ethics further into the ideas of community. The individual must recognize the "society of rational beings of which he is a member, and subordinate his own ends to the ends and needs of this society"--the city of Zeus (God).
This city of Zeus was the ideal cosmopolis. In this city, the Stoics believed all is ordained by reason--working intelligently. The citizens exist for the sake of one another, working towards contributing towards one another's good. Such intercourse would find expression in justice, in friendship, in family and political life.
More specifically--in their own times--the Stoics boldly and bravely declared there was no difference "between Greek and barbarian, between male and female, and bond and free." All persons were members of "one body as partaking in reason."
In terms of religion, the Stoics felt that its essential features were *not* ceremony or sacrifice, but prayer, self-examination, and praise. As they put it: "God is best worshiped in the shrine of the heart by the desire to know and obey him."
A beautiful, monistic, and utilitarian philosophy that was all but lost in the collapse of the archaic Mediterranean culture. I was converted to Stoicism after a perusal of Marcus Aurelius' To Myself and, while I haven't been the best example of a Stoic, it's less about immediate perfection and more about gradual progress. To belong to the great city of Gods and Men, that of intellect and virtue, is a higher honor than to belong to any other polity.
Liffrea
05-15-2010, 06:36 PM
I like a lot of the Stoic philosophy but it does edge closer to indifference rather than acceptance of life as it is, difficult to equate with a life affirming attitude i.e. an embracing of the bad as well as good as necessary aspects of being alive rather than as something to be suffered.
The indifference is regarding externals, like who won the last NBA game, or being stood up for a date by the girl you really like. These are the things that can't be controlled, but the things within, holding this opinion or that belief, can be controlled. The idea is to create a serene state of mind, apatheia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apatheia). Being indifferent to the things that one can't control, physical illness, even death, is simply a means to an end: true happiness, eudaimonia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eudaimonia), kind of like being in tough with the higher self in the dharmic religions- the [eu]daimon[ia] can be called the higher self or guardian spirit. Socrates has one that he referred to very frequently.
One can be disturbed by things, but Epictetus, or maybe Seneca, tells us not to be disturbed in our heart and mind and upset out composure. The example given is when someone, a friend, is showing grief due to the death of a loved one- as a friend to that person, we should show sympathy and grieve as well, but not deeply in our hearts.
Piparskeggr
05-15-2010, 10:37 PM
Part of my personal ethos comes from reading Aurelius. A lot of the "externals" have little to do with how I think, believe, feel or react.
The Stoicism of Zeno of Citium, who founded the school, was much more rigid; by the time of Marcus, Stoicism was much more flexible. The earlier Stoics were, for example, much more interested in the theories behind virtue; the middle and latter Stoics, like Marcus, were much more interested in the activity of virtue. Likewise, in the age of Zeno (4th and 3rd centuries bce), only a select few could practice philosophy; by the age of Musonius Rufus (late 1st century ce), the teacher of Epictetus, who inspired Marcus, philosophy was a discipline that even the well-adjusted everyman (or everywoman, since the Stoics seemed to have had little issue with women being philosophers) could practice. Musonius taught that hard work via manual labor was more conducive to virtue, by teaching consistency and patience, rather than airy rhetoric and intellectual sophistry. Stoicism perfectly blends these blue class ideals with a respect for God, king, and country (so to speak) and a poeticism that, at times, rivals, even exceeds, the finest examples from the psalter (Hymn to Zeus from Cleanthes) like the much-loved Psalm 23.
http://www.mircea-eliade.com/from-primitives-to-zen/139.html
Cleanthes' Hymn to Zeus, my favorite bit of [surviving] Stoic poetry, in praise of Father Zeus.
Most glorious of immortals, Zeus
The many named, almighty evermore,
Nature's great Sovereign, ruling all by law
Hail to thee! On thee 'tis meet and right
That mortals everywhere should call.
From thee was our begetting; ours alone
Of all that live and move upon the earth
The lot to bear God's likeness.
Thee will I ever chant, thy power praise!
For thee this whole vast cosmos, wheeling round
The earth, obeys, and where thou leadest
It follows, ruled willingly by thee.
In thy unconquerable hands thou holdest fast,
Ready prepared, that two-timed flaming blast,
The ever-living thunderbolt:
Nature's own stroke brings all things to their end.
By it thou guidest aright the sense instinct
Which spreads through all things, mingled even
With stars in heaven, the great and small-
Thou who art King supreme for evermore!
Naught upon earth is wrought in thy despite, 0 God.
Nor in the ethereal sphere aloft which ever winds
About its pole, nor in the sea-save only what
The wicked work, in their strange madness,
Yet even so, thou knowest to make the crooked straight.
Prune all excess, give order to the orderless,
For unto thee the unloved still is lovely-
And thus in one all things are harmonized,
The evil with the good, that so one Word
Should be in all things everlastingly.
One Word-which evermore the wicked flee!
Ill-fated, hungering to possess the good
They have no vision of God's universal law,
Nor will they hear, though if obedient in mind
They might obtain a noble life, true wealth.
Instead they rush unthinking after ill:
Some with a shameless zeal for fame,
Others pursuing gain, disorderly;
Still others folly, or pleasures of the flesh.
[But evils are their lot] and other times
Bring other harvests, all unsought-
For all their great desire, its opposite!
But, Zeus, thou giver of every gift,
Who dwellest within the dark clouds, wielding still
The flashing stroke of lightning, save, we pray,
Thy children from this boundless misery.
Scatter, 0 Father, the darkness from their souls,
Grant them to find true understanding
On which relying thou justly rulest all-
While we, thus honoured, in turn will honour thee,
Hymning thy works forever, as is meet
For mortals while no greater right
Belongs even to the gods than evermore
Justly to praise the universal law!
Piparskeggr
05-16-2010, 03:08 AM
Hard work, personal virtue, consistency and patience...if my dad had anything within his personal ethos, he had these. :D
I guess some folks are natural Stoics, rather than just plain stoic. I learned a lot from him, too.
Hard work, personal virtue, consistency and patience...if my dad had anything within his personal ethos, he had these. :D
I guess some folks are natural Stoics, rather than just plain stoic. I learned a lot from him, too.
Virtue is inborn to every human being, it just takes a good midwife to make sure it's born healthy. A good teacher doesn't cajole or browbeat a pupil, but leads by example, explanation, and a bit of good humor. Often, people, like your father, are the best teachers because they teach even though they don't know it.
http://www.religionfacts.com/a-z-religion-index/stoicism.htm
Stoicism was one of the two principal schools of the Hellenistic era (the other being Epicureanism). Originally founded by Zeno in 4th-century-BC Athens, Stoicism later developed and changed into forms designated "Middle Stoa" and "Later Stoa," also known as Roman Stoicism. This article deals with primarily with original, Greek Stoicism.
Fast Facts
•Date founded: c.313 BC
•Place founded: Athens, Greece
•Founder: Zeno (335-263 BC)
•Adherents: unknown
History
Stoicism was founded by Zeno of Citium (Cyprus), who was born in 335 BC and came to Athens around 313 BC. According to tradition, Zeno had studied under the Cynics, but some later Stoics (e.g. Panaetius) were embarrassed by this connection and denied it. At Athens, Zeno began teaching philosophy in the Stoa Poikile (the Painted Porch, hence "Stoicism"). He taught the scientific study of Greek grammar and vocabulary and developed a complete philosophical system of three branches: logic; physics and theology; and ethics. He taught that the goal of life is virtue; everything else is indifferent.
Zeno's successor was Cleanthes of Assos (331-232 BC), who became head of the school in 263 BC. He developed Zeno's materialistic worldview in a more religious direction. He compared the universe to a human being, and the realm of fixed stars to the soul. Both were the greater concentration of spirit in their respective realms, and the stars could therefore be worshipped. He also emphasized the universal law of providence. Cleanthes is best known for his Hymn to Zeus, which movingly describes Stoic reverence for the cosmic order and the power of universal reason and law.
Chrysippus of Soli (Cilicia) (c.280-207 BC) took over the Stoa in 232. He attempted to show that Homer and Hesiod were really Stoics, which gave impetus to the practice of allegorizing. Through him Stoicism assumed a more academic and technical character, and this was the form in which it was largely transmitted in the ancient world. The teachings of Zeno and Cleanthes were absorbed into Chrysippus to the extent that it is difficult to separate them.
The teachings of the above exponents of the Early Stoa were later modified by others. The two important figures of the Middle Stoa are Panaetius (c.185-109 BC) and Posidonius (c.135-c.50 BC). Important teachers of the Later Stoa include Seneca (c.1-65 AD), whose Stoicism was tempered by eclecticism and more religious sentiments, and Epictetus (c.55-c.135 AD), whose ideas are preserved in the Discourses and the Enchiridion.
Marcus Aurelius (121-80 AD), the Roman emperor, was the last of the great Stoics. Stoicism died out, as the popular saying goes, "because everyone became a Stoic." Everything Stoicism had to say became common property in Late Antiquity, and what was of value was absorbed into the Neoplatonic synthesis.
Texts
None of the writings of the three earliest leaders of Stoicism has survived intact; we have only fragments and quotations. See Books, below, for bibliography.
The Stoics taught materialism, in which everything - including God and words - is material. Even emotions are material because they have physical manifestations (e.g. blushing, smiling).
Their worldview was also pantheistic, in which a divine reality pervades the universe. They taught there are two kinds of matter: the grosser matter that is seen and touched and the finer matter called breath or spirit that holds everything together. It was given various names: logos (reason), pneuma (breath), pronoia (providence), Zeus, or fire (the element considered most akin to reason). The Stoic god has thus been described as a "perfectly good and wise gas." 1
The Stoics sought to find their theories in the ancient mythology, using the allegorical method of interpretation to do so. The gods did not actually do the things attributed to them; these were descriptions of natural events. One technique was to rearrange letters to find true meaning; for example: Hera (ERA) becomes air (AER); DEMETER becomes GE METER (Earth Mother). This method was later adopted by the Jewish philosopher Philo of Alexandria, and through him, by the Christian philosophers Clement and Origen of Alexandria.
Human nature incorporates both of these kinds of matter in the body and the soul, respectively. The soul was believed to stretch throughout the body and have eight parts: the five senses, voice, generative power, and the "leading power" of the mind, which was located in the heart. (Later Stoics, because of advances in medicine, placed it in the head.)
The universe is like a giant living body with its own leading part (the stars or the sun). All parts are interconnected, thus what happens in one place affects what happens elsewhere. In addition, everything in the universe was predetermined. This world is the best of all possible worlds, developed by the logos down to the smallest detail. These concepts justified the continued use of divination and oracles.
At the same time, Stoicism upheld human free will. This apparent paradox was explained with the illustration of a river with eddies in its current. We are all being carried down the river to perfection; the eddies are free will when it resists. But since one is going to be swept along regardless, and it is the best way anyway, it is better to voluntarily "go with the flow."
The Stoics held a cyclical view of history, in which the world was once fire and would become fire again. The cycle of conflagration will then be repeated. Since this is the best of all possible worlds, each world cycle is exactly the same - Socrates will teach again, you will read this web page again.
The goal of life for the Stoics was happiness, which is found only through the pursuit of virtue. Virtue alone can give happiness because it cannot be taken away by any external circumstances. "Virtue" means living in accordance with nature, and the rational principle (logos) pervades nature. Thus to live virtuously means to live reasonably. "Sin" thus derives from ignorance, not evil or ill will. The Stoics taught that once one has the power to live in accordance with reason, this power of is never lost. Thus everyone is either wise or foolish, not in between. For obvious reasons, the Stoic "wise man" soon became seen as an ideal to which none actually attain.
Since only virtue/reason matters, everything is predetermined and perfect, and reason is distorted by passion and emotion, the wise Stoic is indifferent to everything but virtue, not distressed by external circumstances, and avoids passion and emotion. This has given rise to the modern meaning of "stoic" to describe an emotionless or apathetic person. But the Stoics did not reject emotions altogether, but sought to avoid emotional troubles by developing clear judgment and inner calm through logic, reflection, and concentration. In ancient times, "passion" conveyed the idea of suffering (i.e. Christ's Passion) rather than emotion.
Stoicism developed a strong tradition of human equality and brotherhood, for all people are manifestations of the one universal spirit. Thus they should live in brotherly love and help one another and external differences such as rank and wealth are of no importance in social relationships.
Many of the above concepts can be seen in the following passage from Marcus Aurelius (a later Stoic), in his famous Meditations:
Say to yourself in the early morning: I shall meet today ungrateful, violent, treacherous, envious, uncharitable men. All of these things have come upon them through ignorance of real good and ill... I can neither be harmed by any of them, for no man will involve me in wrong, nor can I be angry with my kinsman or hate him; for we have come into the world to work together...
The Stoics did not have a clear conception of an afterlife. Some held that the soul survives until the next conflagration; others taught that the soul is part of the World Soul and would reappear in the new world. But a personal immortality was not part of the Stoic worldview.
Just a couple of observations on comments from the above article:
"The Stoics taught materialism, in which everything - including God and words - is material."
Not quite true, as matter is of the profane and purer kind, the former being mundane matter and the purer being pneuma. The profane matter proceeds from the purer matter, which is the true essence of Zeus, and it's the profane matter which is destroyed during the conflagration, reabsorbed into Zeus to be remade. Thus, Zeus is not the world per se, but the world is the visible portion of him, his immanent aspect; Zeus still has transcendent qualities. The human body is the best example that I can give- the outer shell is the apparent, visible aspect of the person, yet his or her true self is much more deeply-seated, being in the heart, mind, and soul. These qualities are sparks of Zeus' pneuma, just as wisps of flame licking off of a bonfire.
"The Stoics held a cyclical view of history, in which the world was once fire and would become fire again. The cycle of conflagration will then be repeated. Since this is the best of all possible worlds, each world cycle is exactly the same - Socrates will teach again, you will read this web page again."
This is the conflagration or ekpyrosis. The only eternal form of existence is fire, or active energy, which is Zeus and Mind. This cosmic, spiritual fire (or light) permeates all of existence, hence Stoicism can be called pantheistic, and gives rise to the other elements of air, earth, and water. At some point in time, Zeus will withdraw all of his fiery energy once more into a single point, reabsorbing his essence and causing the ekpyrosis- and, again, he'll cause it to explode outward again in an endless cycle of creation, destruction, and reabsorption.
I should say that the lack of a centralized dogma and the open-ended nature of the question-and-answer method of ancient philosophy made sure that not every Stoic had exactly the same ideas. Cicero was a bit of an eclectic, and Marcus seems to have been influenced by the atomist ideas of the main rivals of the Stoics, the Epicureans. The important part of Stoicism wasn't its metaphysical doctrines but its practical doctrines of teaching people how to cope with life and to live well.
Belenus
04-08-2011, 02:31 PM
I'm a practicing Stoic myself. I haven't delved as deeply into it or conditioned my thinking to the level I would like to, but I do use Stoicism on an almost daily basis, in many respects without conscious thought. And it is surely wise to not worry about that which is outside of one's control.
What I want to know about Stoicism, though, is how its careless attitude toward death could be reconciled with a theology that posits some sort of life after death, which pretty much all Western spirituality agrees on.
What I want to know about Stoicism, though, is how its careless attitude toward death could be reconciled with a theology that posits some sort of life after death, which pretty much all Western spirituality agrees on.
The position of classical Stoicism amounts to something like this: the human soul is a portion of the cosmic fire (that is Zeus, or the Logos, or God). This is why the Stoics spoke of the God within (i.e. Marcus Aurelius alludes to it in To Myself) and also of a wholly transcendent God. Basically, the Stoics taught that human beings are God in microcosm.
Stoic cosmology amounts to an endless cycle of creation and destruction; the only true existence is Zeus ("the father of gods and men"), who suffuses all of of existence. Zeus creates, expands outward, filling the cosmos with his fiery nature, but, at some point, with draw it all back in in the ekpyrosis:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ekpyrosis
Basically, think of Big Bang and Big Crunch.
Zeus expands out, creates gods and men, but'll eventualy draw himself back in, destroying all (even the gods, who are merely aspects of Zeus). All returns to a single point of origin, or your cosmic singularity. However, all still exists, all potential, matter, energy. It exists in Zeus, who will throw it all back out again. There's some thoughts in my mind if the constant creation/destruction serves some overall purpose, such as Zeus wanting to experience the fullness of his infinite potential until some cosmic omega point is reached (i.e. Zeus truly becomes Zeus).
Stoics don't posit the existence of an omnipotent and omniscient God. Terms like "almighty" and "everlasting" are used for Zeus, but this is relative to our own human understanding. Perhaps this ekpyrotic cycle is so that a truly omnipotent and omniscient God can be born.
It's actually a very sublime theory.
It's actually a very sublime theory.
And let me add that gives one a sense of peace and fulfillment, if understood properly. Basically it amounts to "From Zeus we come, to Zeus we return, for Zeus is our most essential nature."
A portion of the Hymn to Zeus by Empimenides:
They fashioned a tomb for thee, o Zeus.
The Cretans, always liars, evil beasts, idle bellies!
But thou art not dead; thou livest and abidest forever;
For in thee we live and move and have our being.
He's referring to, and rejecting, the mythological beliefs of Zeus (i.e. that there were to be seen on Crete supposed tombs and the supposed birthplace of Zeus), and instead stating the fundamental point of existence:
For in thee we live and move and have our being.
Piparskeggr
04-09-2011, 01:19 PM
Though I give my Worship to the Gods and Goddesses of the North, I too have a belief that there is some Unknown and Unknowable (by the mind of man) Source of All...
In some ways, I am a bit of a natural Stoic, accepting things as they happen with as good a heart and manner as possible.
Though I give my Worship to the Gods and Goddesses of the North, I too have a belief that there is some Unknown and Unknowable (by the mind of man) Source of All...
In some ways, I am a bit of a natural Stoic, accepting things as they happen with as good a heart and manner as possible.
Well, seen from a Stoic viewpoint the Aesir and the Vanir, as well as the other divine entities of the north, are merely aspects or parts of Zeus.
Here's a hymn supposedly by Plato to the Creator, but many of its points can easily belong to the Stoic as well as the Platonic schools, given that both are more or less derived from Socrates.
http://www.openbuddha.com/2005/10/09/a-platonic-hymn-to-the-creator/
Just a couple of passages to illustrate what I mean:
Thou art One and likewise Many, Thou art First and Last, Thou art at once the Center and the Survivor of the universe.
Thou art the whole race of gods, Thou the cause and strength of all things, Thou art all nature, one god innumerable, in Thee are both male and female, to Thee was once born this god, this universe, the home of both men and gods, gleaming and sparkling with the sublime flower of youth.
This Creator, spoken variously as Zeus or Jove or Theos, etc. by the Stoics (and other schools), the One who is also Many (and vice-versa). Yes, this gets into Platonism/Neoplatonism, but this was a common belief in the classical world, inherited I'd say from the Egyptians.
It's really hard to say what Stoicism is. It's definitely adaptable. I can name at least four, probably five, distinct periods of the Stoa.
The early, middle, and late Stoa. Early from the time that Zeno began to teach his version of Cynicism, through the middle period of the school and such teachers as Posidonius, to late, best exemplified by Marcus Aurelius.
Then there's neostoicism, which came about during the Renaissance as an attempt to reconcile Stoicism from the classical period with Christianity.
And now, what I guess you can call the "new" Stoicism, when people become attached to the philosophy, in part (as is usually the case) or in full (as I seem to have done, since I'm probably best described as a follower of the sort of Stoicism of the late classical, i.e. Roman-era, school when the philosophy reached its zenith of development). But, if understood properly, that there is a single ground of being (Zeus, God, etc.), one can easily believe in a multiplicity of gods and goddesses as well as Zeus alone. So, one can easily be, say, a practicing Asatruar in terms of religious devotion and a practicing Stoic in terms of private, philosophical beliefs. It might sound odd for a heathen to be heard uttering prayers of thanks to "Zeus and the Aesir," but one can easily substitute a more generic term like "The Unknown God and the Aesir" or somesuch.
The Stoics et al. merely called the Unknown God Zeus, Jove, etc. as a courtesy. Many ancient prayers from from Greco-Roman times begin with a formula that goes something like "Hail Zeus, or by whatever name you desire to be called (so I will call you by this name)..."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sbgpjcf-i8I
Stoicism is all about controlling your desires/indulgences and shaping expectations so you don't become overwhelmed by your emotions. It's also about assessing what you let affect you and having a realistic outlook on things like the eventuality of death.
Stoics posited that there is no real point to anything aside from duty and virtue, which were their own rewards. It prioritises reason over passion, which makes for a safe, albeit blander life. In principle, stoicism appreciates this balance. In practice, it lacks the ability to promote this balance, always favouring logic.
It is not a tool to circumvent dealing with reality, and is only relevant to those who with the means can separate themselves from commoners. It's a good base to build a deeper understanding of things and human character but beyond that it's the retarded caveman of philosophies.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.