Shame-based Ethical Enforcement

In this brave new world we seem to be working out a new system of morality, and that system seems to be shame-based. Stoicism might be a good response to that. A personal example:

I recently stuck to an opinion in the face of adversity.

I respect the other side very much; they're some of my best friends, but we had a genuine disagreement. It was a very minor thing that blew up into a very big thing.  I'm responsible for a good part of that... I wasn't very Stoic. My words were measured but my tone wasn't. I didn't resort to ad hominem and I didn't say anything offensive, but when they got loud so did I. Or maybe I got loud first? I can't remember.

They asserted that no reasonable person could possibly disagree with them. They ascribed personal motives to my position. They questioned my character.

I did not apologize and I didn't act shamed and it seems to have immediately died down into nothing.

"SHAME ON YOU!"

"No thanks."

"Oh, OK then... could you pass the coffee?"

It was bizarre.

This happened once before. There was shame, I didn't act shamed, then there was reasoned discussion and I changed my mind. They seemed surprised, because I didn't hold a grudge. I treated them exactly as I had before.

Well, a Stoic looks at criticism and assents or not. That time I assented. This time I did not.

Be the purple thread.

The Good Men Project

Some of the bloggers I've read view The Good Men Project as a genuine exploration of what it means to be masculine in the 21st century (that's certainly how TGMP sees itself). Others consider it to be a propaganda arm of the feminist movement, a sort of Pravda to be consumed by the non-ovarian set.

I've never actually read it... until now!

What follows are my impressions, recorded as I read. It's this sort of investigative journalism that has earned me more than 2 cents in ad revenue, folks.

1. First off, in the "About" section the publishers tell us that:

"Guys today are neither the mindless, sex-obsessed buffoons nor the stoic automatons our culture so often makes them out to be. Our community is smart, compassionate, curious, and open-minded; they strive to be good fathers and husbands, citizens and friends, to lead by example at home and in the workplace, and to understand their role in a changing world. The Good Men Project is a place where that happens. We’re glad to have you along for the ride."

Here "stoic" is used with the lower case "s," which seems to mean "without emotion." We Stoics would say that acceptable emotions include joy, wishing and caution, emotions which contribute to the admirable state of mind which follows "Our community" in the above paragraph. In fact the ideal discussed in this paragraph would seem to describe, at least in part, the ideal Stoic sage.

2. Moving on to the front page, the following headlines catch my eye:

"How To Harness And Heal The Pain Of A Breakup"
"Task 50 of 52: Good Men Mind Their P's And Q's"
"The Limitless Joy Of Never Fully Knowing Your Significant Other"
"Why Passion Is Overrated"
"They Don't Have To Be Your Out-laws"
"Men Need Healthy Role Models-Make Your Voice Heard"
"See Yourself As She Sees You-Real Is Sexy"
"Co-Parenting: It Doesn't Have To Be Difficult"
"Why Women Are Smarter Than Men"
"In Appreciation: An Open Letter To All The Good Men In The World"

These really are the headlines that jumped out at me, though you don't know that for certain. As far as you know I cherry picked them. So with that in mind, TGMP is marketed to this guy (let's call him Ted):

Ted has known some pain in his life. He's divorced and has had a hard time getting over his ex. He has a new relationship, though, and he's eager to maintain some mystery with her/him. He needs to! He's a little confused about how to be "sexy" for her/him, if we're being honest. 

Ted has anxiety. He doesn't get along with his in-laws but he wants to. The ex has proven difficult to co-parent his 2.3 children with, but he's willing to work with her/him. 

Ted is not content. He's searching for something, for a way forward in the 21st century. He wants men to look up to, men who can show him the way. He wants to be a good man, and good men are a rare commodity these days. What defines "good," though? He's here to learn the answer to that question.

I KNOW Ted. I know lots of Teds. I don't think that I am Ted, but maybe I used to be.

For your reading pleasure I'll delve more deeply into the headlines and deliver to you my "take-away." Any reactions I have will be listed in blue. Keep in mind that these are only one man's impressions. I've been wrong before.

3. "How To Harness And Heal The Pain Of A Breakup"

Use stress hormones to motivate you to exercise, take up new hobbies and launch new creative endeavors. Then be honest with yourself as to why you broke up. Love yourself, feel your emotions fully, forgive the other party and be grateful that the relationship happened at all.

As a Stoic I'd probably tell myself that relationships often end. I'd do a review of my own actions, change what needs to be changed, deny assent to the idea that anything tragic has happened and move on.


4. "Task 50 of 52: Good Men Mind Their P's And Q's"

Standard traditional American manners... your great grandfather would agree with this.

Follow these rules or don't. There's some good stuff here. One thing stands out, though: "don't ogle the women." If by "ogle" the author means barking like a dog in a Looney Toons cartoon, fair enough. If he means "don't notice that women are physically attractive" then I wonder how guys would get girlfriends at all. I hope he doesn't mean that we should be ashamed of our sexuality...



5. "The Limitless Joy Of Never Fully Knowing Your Significant Other"

The author finds familiarity stultifying. When a relationship becomes routine it ends. To prevent this we must enter an ego-less state which in my view strongly resembles Zen Buddhism. As a dispassionate observer we will realize the limitless otherness in our partner and never be bored again.

Stoics find joy in virtue, not in an endless feeling of mystery centered around one person. According to the author he's felt endless mystery for his partner for three and a half years, though, so what do I know? Good luck, pal.


6. "Why Passion Is Overrated"

The author begins with a poker analogy and defines "passion" as shoving all your chips in and hoping for the best. He's a fair poker player, and it was curiosity rather than passion which led him to that pursuit and which helps him to beat "passionate" players. In his regular life he bet his future on naval aviation and a wife and neither worked out, leaving him miserable. He then worked for a phone company an enjoyed it but got laid off. He started a business but it failed. Finally curiosity about a distant couple dancing in a gazebo drew him to the tango. He started a non-profit to promote tango and achieved happiness. Passion flames out but curiosity lasts.

This sounds pretty Stoic in that he avoids passions, but not very Stoic in that his happiness depends on his external circumstances. I admire how this guy keeps bouncing back. And he's found a way to make a living off of the tango. That's impressive. The tango!


7. "They Don't Have To Be Your Out-laws"

Play your cards close to your chest. Don't play family politics and don't say things that people will disagree with. You can pull it together for a couple of days per year, can't you?

Solid advice. In my experience there is no hill I'm willing to die on at a family reunion. I like to find one or two very interesting, open people, people who don't mind a polite disagreement should one arise but who aren't looking for one, and spend most of my time with them.


8. "Men Need Healthy Role Models-Make Your Voice Heard"

Please submit pieces to us about how you overcame health problems.

If I ever overcome one I'll do that! I'm serious; this thing isn't half bad.


9. "See Yourself As She Sees You-Real Is Sexy"

This one vanished as I read other articles... or it didn't and I just have attention problems. I can't find it, though. So let's do "Don't Let Gender Expectations Ruin Your Marriage."

John Gray, of "Men Are From Mars, Women Are From Venus" fame, exaggerates gender differences and it has made him very popular, but he's wrong. Society pushes men into traditonal, harmful masculinity. Women participating in casual male-bashing doesn't help. Society should let men be vulnerable. It is frustrating that many women seem to want the old, masculine man and not the vulnerable new man. Women are still judged by the old feminine standard even though they have been encouraged to abandon it. All of this produces power struggles. The key to resolve these is a mix of patience, negotiation, and assuming the best of the other party.

There's a lot more to this article... a lot to digest. My immediate reaction is that, according to the author, women find bad boys sexy but they shouldn't. Attraction can be negotiated. I'm skeptical.



10. "Co-Parenting: It Doesn't Have To Be Difficult!"

Communicate, negotiate, and keep the kid's best interests in mind. If that fails get a mediator.

My aunt does this. She's brilliant at it; best step-mom in the world. Solid advice.


11. "Why Women Are Smarter Than Men"

Women score higher in emotional intelligence (EQ) than men, and EQ is critical in suceeding in the work place. To raise your EQ don't drink caffiene and do get more sleep. Don't be too hard on yourself and be grateful for what you have.

On the other hand caffeine is a cognitive booster, so if you want to be slightly more abrasive but have slightly better ideas visit Starbucks. Are women better at relationships? I'll have to look around and see if I can find evidence of that in my daily life. Maybe they are!


12. "In Appreciation: An Open Letter To All The Good Men In The World"

The author is grateful to the men who taught her lessons and brought her to her current high level of relationship happiness. A good man, in her view, is one who:

Will take care of his partner. Will smile, hug, give a back rub, share in the house work. Will call in the middle of the day just to say Hi. Will empower his partner to be all that he/she can be. Will be there for his children, and nurture them to help them be all that they can be. Will be proud if his partner makes more money than he does. He knows the job does not define the man. Will occasionally surprise his partner, in a good way. Will make plans for the future, both long and short term. Will listen, hear and understands with his heart. Will protect his partner, and family. Will serenade his partner. Will sit and let his partner cry it out, or stamp his/her feet until it is all out. Will have done some of his work, and will be there for his partner while they work through their own stuff. Will build things, fix things, invent things. Will have his own life, his own hobbies, his own sense of worth. Will not depend on his partner for his financial life or his emotional life, now [sic] will he want his partner to be his reason for living.

Source

Here's where I fall short, according to the author: making plans for the future, listening, serenading, and sitting and letting her cry it out. She lists twenty-six standards, and I meet twenty-two of them. Not bad! I wonder of my partner would give me 22/26? Perhaps I've just deluded myself.

I'd like to see a list of characteristics of the ideal woman from this author. She must be pretty spectacular to land this sort of guy. 


So there you have it! I agreed with some things and disagreed with others. As Seneca says, all good ideas are public property, so I'll take the good and leave the bad.

All in all I was pleasantly surprised. This is an interesting site. I'll be back.

Stoic Or Glutton, But Not Both

What if they invented a pill that mitigated every negative effect of overeating? What if, after taking the pill, you could eat Twinkies all day long and still look like Brad Pitt circa Fight Club?

It would still be worth it to eat fruits and vegetables, and just barely enough of them.

You can't be both a Stoic and a glutton, friend. So take your own advice. Are you stronger than a Twinkie? No, but you could be...

Opinion and Shame

I've stated here that I'm a cultural libertarian. I've been viewing sites that support this belief. I worry that I might be getting carried away, though. I worry that I might be entering an echo chamber.

I've been trapped in an echo chamber before. I've lacked all perspective, but to people on the outside it was obvious.

Both sides, the authoritarians pushing PC culture and the cultural libertarians, snipe at each other. I'm not above the fray myself, at least not in my mind. I try to be very careful of what I publish here (for the consideration of my ten regular readers) but in private I seem to take great pleasure in the other side's missteps. 

That's not Stoic. Probably a better view would be to treat the other side with kindness and do what I can to bring them around, because ultimately I think that liberty brings more happiness than dogma. 

Well then, isn't my duty to bring this insight to the general public? A Stoic serves his* city, right?

If I were to become more vocal, and if (against all odds) I gained a wide audience, I would risk saying the wrong thing and incurring public shame. These days that's not an inconsiderable thing. 

I'm lucky, I suppose, that my opinion means very little. I'm one in a chorus of millions. Marcus Aurelius, Seneca, and especially Cato led very public lives and their decisions are still discussed. Aurelius paid for the security of his empire with his health. Seneca and Cato killed themselves. Cato (who was unwilling to live in a world ruled by a tyrant) met an especially difficult end (source):

"Cato did not immediately die of the wound; but struggling, fell off the bed, and throwing down a little mathematical table that stood by, made such a noise that the servants, hearing it, cried out. And immediately his son and all his friends came into the chamber, where, seeing him lie weltering in his own blood, great part of his bowels out of his body, but himself still alive and able to look at them, they all stood in horror. The physician went to him, and would have put in his bowels, which were not pierced, and sewed up the wound; but Cato, recovering himself, and understanding the intention, thrust away the physician, plucked out his own bowels, and tearing open the wound, immediately expired."

That's a heavy price to pay for a political opinion, self-imposed though it was. I certainly wouldn't have to do that. 

I do censor myself online for fear of retribution, though, and I bet you do too.

If I ever do incur the wrath of an online which hunt I plan to use Jon Ronson's advice. He's written a book called "So You've Been Publicly Shamed."  He recently did an interview with GQ in which he discusses the public shaming phenomenon, and I think it's worth a read. My favorite quote neatly sums up the dangers of our new shame culture:

"It’s very destructive to society and I think it’s created a conformist, conservative, fearful surveillance society, like the Stasi, and nobody wants to live in a Stasi state, and that’s the world we’re quite literally living in. I really don’t think I’m overreaching when I say that."

I agree.


*I wince as I type this. Do I go with the classical "his?" Do I use the clumsy and grammatically aberrant "their?" How about the limp, insipid "his or her?" Or I could go postmodern with "his/her?" Perhaps the Swedish gender neutral "hen?" Maybe "xe?"

Cultural Libertarianism

I've been enjoying Dave Rubin's "Rubin Report."  Check out his guiding rules; if the media in general adopted these we would all have a much clearer picture of the world around us. Anyway, he has a theory that the next great political movement will be cultural libertarianism.

I hope so. For me the old "conservative" and "liberal" labels don't apply. I'm a mix of those. The idea that there are authoritarian forces brewing and that those forces should be opposed, though... that I can get on board with.

So I'm a cultural libertarian.

Here is Christina Hoff Sommers on the subject:

My favorite quotes:

"What unites us as Americans, maybe Westerners too, is a love of freedom."

"Right now sort of the bullies have the upper hand, so it's going to be a battle to take the power away from them and give it to where it belongs, to people who are nice, respectful of other people, and who realize that people have different opinions and that's OK, and not to be policing. I don't want these authoritarians here who say they can make the rules... your arguments for censorship and doing away with due process are not going to work. They have been tried before, with unhappy results, so read some history."

Mythic Warriors

My kids love this show. We pause it and talk about it.

This one is about Prometheus and Pandora. The show leaves out the bit about Prometheus bound, having to suffer being eaten by eagles every day. That's the most interesting part, so of course I filled the boys in. They were very sorry for Prometheus.

They were pleased that Zeus let him go.

The dramatic arc of the story is simple but powerful: Prometheus stands up to power in the name of kindness and is proven justified, and in the end he is reconciled to his king. Something to that, folks...

President Obama Defends Free Speech

"...being a good citizen... involves hearing the other side and making sure that you are engaging in a dialogue."

On the "certain strain of militant political correctness" sweeping college campuses the President says "And I disagree with that."

"That's a recipe for dogmatism, and I think you're not going to be as effective."

"The purpose of that kind of free speech is to make sure that we are forced to use argument and reason and words in making our democracy work. You don't have to be fearful of somebody spouting bad ideas; just out argue them. Beat 'em. Make the case as to why they're wrong. Win over adherents. That's how things work in a democracy. And I do worry if young people start getting trained to think that 'if somebody says something I don't like... if somebody says something that hurts my feelings that my only recourse is to shut them up, avoid them, push them away, call on a higher power to protect me from that..."

"You're not going to make the kinds of deep changes in society that those students want without taking them on in a full, clear and courageous way."

Well said, Mr. President!

FIRE

I'm not for hate speech, but I am for free speech. As far as I can tell this organization, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, is bipartisan and really lives out its principles.

You ought to be able to say unorthodox things on a college campus. Face the social consequences, sure, but things have gone to far. That's obvious.

Trigger warnings... I hope my sons never feel pressured to offer trigger warnings.

Eat Like A Roman And Live Forever

That title is deceptive. It's probably more accurate to say "Eat Like A Greek Peasant in 1820," but this is a Stoic blog, so...

My doctor recommended a book to me called "Good Food, Great Medicine." It's author, Miles Hassell M.D., uses evidence to make the case for the Mediterranean diet.

Doctor Hassell is deeply suspcicious of fad diets. Instead he bases his advice on high quality studies from peer reviewed journals. These studies teach us that the Mediteranian diet produces:

1. Lower total mortality
2. Less heart disease, artery disease and stroke
3. Les diabetes
4. More sustainable weight loss
5. Less depression
6. More active elderly people
7. Less cancer and better cancer outcomes

In broad strokes Doctor Hassell recommends that we avoid processed foods, sugar, refined grains, and hydrogenated fats.

Instead we should eat whole foods which would be recognizable 150 years ago. We should eat plenty of vegetables, fruits, nuts, and animal protien. Whole grains are fine and dark chocolate is mandatory. He advises that we drink 2-6 cups of coffee per day and one alcoholic drink (probably red wine, probably with dinner). Cheese and eggs are great.

We shall see, folks...

Hassell emphasizes simplicity in cooking. Most of his recipes seem unfussy and very doable. That's pretty Stoic.

If you're interested Wikipedia has an excellent article on Roman cuisine. Made me want to try making puls. This article claims that modern Romans eat a puls made of boiled farro grain in coffee and cream. I would not have thought of that combination.

This nice hipster lady wants to lay some science on you:

Turns out that interest in the Mediterranean diet started in Crete after World War II:

Image is by Sailko and is used under some sort of public domain license

The Private Life of the Romans

I've been enjoying this 1932 work by Harold Whetstone Johnston. I particularly enjoy the chapter about Roman houses. Worth a look.

The Fight-Through

I don't remember where I read this, but I've found it to be true.

When changing a habit the first bit is easy. It's different and that's interesting. This is the "honeymoon period."

Next comes the hard part, the "fight-through" phase. Fight-through requires will power. People often cycle through the honeymoon period and the fight-through and fail and then rinse and repeat. That's part of the process.

If you survive the fight through you have yourself a habit.

For me, Stoicism is like a habit. It's a lens through which you view the world, yes, but keeping the lens on full time is quite the feat. It's not easy.

I cut off chunks of it and then fight through until they become habits. I'm very, very far from the goal, but I am making progress.

Good luck!

Averi Designs Aurelius Ring

It's a great ring, custom made and sized and crafted to a high standard. I paid him sixty five dollars but he treated me as if I'd paid him a thousand. Brant is eager to please and he works quick. My highest recommendation.

Averi Designs

Brian Martin and Irvine's Insult Pacifism

Brian Martin has written an excellent review of William Irvine's method of "insult pacifism." This is the "starve a bully" theory. I know that Irvine takes a lot of heat from some Stoics for his somewhat unorthodox take on the philosophy, but I've found him to be a very good source of wisdom. I actually emailed him about a personal issue and he responded, and his advice was very useful.

When dealing with low-level bullies I have found his insult pacifism to be fairly effective. What this involves is to either ignore an insult, say "thanks," or agree and amplify.


"You're fat."

--------

"You're fat."

"Thanks."

"You're fat."

"I'm enormous!"

I would add to this the "laugh along with them" technique.

"You're fat."

"Ha ha ha! Anyway, about this report..."


I'm not a pacifist. I think that there are times when a threat needs to be met head-on. Still, for low-level bullying I've found insult pacifism to be very effective. This is especially true with adult bullies.

What a bully wants is your humiliation. They want to feel superior to you. If you are nonreactive then you starve them without openly challenging them, and they'll often hunt somewhere else. In addition, anybody who sees your non-reactivity is likely to view you as more mature, more in control. That's also useful, because bullies don't just want to humiliate you, they want to do it in front of an audience.

In my particular social setting it is highly unlikely that a bully will actually assault me, and it is very likely that bullying behavior will be cloaked as friendly teasing. Typically this teasing happens in a group (in my experience); adult bullies generally want to raise their stock in front of an audience; they're very unlikely to bully people one-on-one.

Insult pacifism provides a mild reproof. The bully feels a little awkward, but not so awkward that he or she will be rejected from the group. The group will just think that the bully is having an off day, or perhaps feels a little cranky.

That's an important thing to remember in any conflict, actually. Always keep the audience in mind. You probably won't change the other person's mind, but you certainly can bring the undecided over to your side.

That said, I've gone nuclear on adult bullies three in my life. In all three cases I talked to them privately and said in no uncertain terms that I didn't like how they treated me. In all three cases they became immediately conciliatory. One guy admitted that he was doing it and said that he needed to grow up. We hugged. The second guy became incoherent and barely spoke to me after that, and when he did he was always polite. The last guy denied bullying me at all and thought I was a little crazy, and then took great pains to point out his own flaws. That's when I realized how sad and lonely his life seemed to him.

I had to actually think about that one. Was I wrong? I don't think so, but I talked to a friend of mine who was a part of the bully's audience and he thought it was just heavy teasing.

Maybe. Maybe not. Either way the guy backed off.

Now if I were a sage I would do as Marcus Aurelius advises.

“Begin each day by telling yourself: Today I shall be meeting with interference, ingratitude, insolence, disloyalty, ill-will, and selfishness – all of them due to the offenders’ ignorance of what is good or evil. But for my part I have long perceived the nature of good and its nobility, the nature of evil and its meanness, and also the nature of the culprit himself, who is my brother (not in the physical sense, but as a fellow creature similarly endowed with reason and a share of the divine); therefore none of those things can injure me, for nobody can implicate me in what is degrading. Neither can I be angry with my brother or fall foul of him; for he and I were born to work together, like a man’s two hands, feet or eyelids, or the upper and lower rows of his teeth. To obstruct each other is against Nature’s law – and what is irritation or aversion but a form of obstruction.”

So ultimately a Stoic will practice insult pacifism because the Stoic recognizes that the bully simply doesn't know any better. The bully is our brother. We are meant to live in harmony. That's a beautiful thought. 

That's the target; that's what we are to work toward. 

But then again I'm not a sage. And sometimes, if I'm honest, I'm the bully.

Physician heal thyself.

Should a Stoic Share Feelings?

This might be useful, gentle reader. In response to a post by Frebel on the Stoic Reddit I offer the following:

Was it Epictetus who said that going to see a Stoic philosopher is like going to see a physician? Perhaps a person's feelings are their symptoms. I expect that the philosopher might use Socratic methods to help the person understand that they are worried about things that aren't up to them. Hard to do that if the person doesn't share.

This of course assumes that these feelings aren't preferred.

And from my work in the SES course I learned that Stoics did endorse three feelings (or emotions... I'm using them interchangeably here): joy, caution and wishing.

Wishing produces feelings of benevolence and friendliness. Joy produces mirth and cheerfulness. Caution produces modesty and reverence.

We Stoics may actually be well advised to share these feelings with the world. Personally I like seeing things clarified this way, because when I experience the three "authorized" feelings (I know, I know) I feel very much at peace with the world. Stoicism allows us to increase the intensity and duration of these feelings, right?

If nothing else my participation in the SES course would have been worth it simply for this observation (though it has brought me so much more than this!). We Stoics can expect an increase in benevolence, friendliness, mirth, cheerfulness, modesty and reverence for our trouble.

Not a bad bargain, that.

I'm Going To Wear A Man's Head On My Finger

When I was in basic training I was issued a set of dog tags. We were allowed to hang one religious item from them, so I did. I just thought it looked cool.

Something happened, though, that I didn't expect. When I felt the tags bump against me I remembered the symbol. When I saw myself in the mirror I saw the symbol. When I showered there was the symbol.

It was a constant reminder, and it tended to focus my mind on higher things. I made better choices and I was happier. There was value to it.

To that end I have ordered a silver ring from "averidesigns" on etsy. Here's a picture (I've sent away for permission but I don't anticipate any problems):

Shop owner Brant Spencer is, according to his profile, a very experienced jeweler who has a fascination for ancient coins. He sets them in modern settings and people wear them as jewelry. His work is beautiful; he seems like a real craftsman.

When I get my ring I'll post a review, but so far I'm impressed. He's professional, friendly, and easy to work with. I have an odd ring size (it involves a fraction) but Brant custom makes everything, so it's no problem.

I also ordered a gift for my wife which he is making it to my personal specifications.

His prices are very, very reasonable, which I appreciate because I don't want to spend hundreds of dollars on any sort of accessory. I prefer to buy something that is simple, sensibly priced and created with some professional pride.  

Now of course Stoicism isn't a ring, and trinkets don't make a man, but I do like the idea of a reminder.

So far, so good.

The Stoicism of Shaun King

Brietbart, a conservative news publication, ran a story in August outing Black Lives Matter activist Shaun King as a White man. I remember the story and at the time I didn't really question it. I thought that he was a bit shady and a bit of a con artist and then I thought about it no more. How wrong I was!

Turns out that Mr. King is biracial (a simple Google Image search will tell you that). The name on his birth certificate is not the name of his genetic father.

His response to the accusation is positively nobel. If I am ever falsely accused of anything I hope that I can muster half the dignity that this young gentleman displays. It's an excellent essay and it's a good example of the use of reason and evidence in the face of a witch hunt.

He's not a Stoic with a capital "S," but his response, I think, fits very well with the tenets of our philosophy.

Well done, Mr. King. I admire you.

11/7/2015 Update: Now it looks like a number of his followers have concerns about his high school story, his reorganization of his coalition, and his use of donated funds. I very much hope that these accusations are baseless. Is this a hatchet job or the truth coming out?

It's on twitter... #shaunkingletmedown

Oh well. This will teach me to dabble in politics!

Omelet Muffins

This strikes me as a pretty good way to eat a healthy breakfast. It's my blog and I'll post what I like!

If Rufus can tell you to be a farmer and eat veggies I can suggest an omelet muffin.

Stoicism And The Red Pill

Do men and women think differently?

I don't know. Maybe. Does it matter? We all have a frontal lobe. We can all resist biology.

We design ways of viewing the world, and these ways are imperfect. Does sexism exist? I think so. Can Feminism be carried to undesirable extremes? Absolutely.

We are given the faculty of reason, and if more of us use it perhaps the "isms" of the world will recede into the background and we can just be decent to each other. I think that's the way it will go, actually. Well, except for Stoicism. I'll keep that one.

Am I A Modern Man? A Stoic Takes A Quiz

The New York Times recently ran a list of qualifications for the would-be "modern man." The internet has collectively (and gleefully) heaved it into the dustbin of op ed history, but I think it would be fun to attempt a dispassionate self-test... It seems standard to reprint the list and then eviscerate the author point by point, so I'll follow suit without the snark [Edit: there's still snark]. Off we go:

1. When the modern man buys shoes for his spouse, he doesn’t have to ask her sister for the size. And he knows which brands run big or small.

I cannot imagine wasting my time doing this, and neither can she. She's a grown-up; she can buy her own shoes. I'll buy flowers and jewelry instead.

2. The modern man never lets other people know when his confidence has sunk. He acts as if everything is going swimmingly until it is.

Actually I can get behind this. In essence "the modern man" isn't a whiner. I find that if I refuse to wallow in self-pity my life seems to go better. This thought is within spitting distance of Stoicism.

3. The modern man is considerate. At the movie theater, he won’t munch down a mouthful of popcorn during a quiet moment. He waits for some ruckus.

I've done this, except I've done it with nachos.

4. The modern man doesn’t cut the fatty or charred bits off his fillet. Every bite of steak is a privilege, and it all goes down the hatch.

I won't leave meat on the table, but I prefer not to eat the fat. That said, perhaps eating the fat is more respectful to the animal that died to nourish me. Doing something unpleasant out of a sense of gratitude could be Stoic. I'll think about this one.

5. The modern man won’t blow 10 minutes of his life looking for the best parking spot. He finds a reasonable one and puts his car between the lines.

Agreed! Besides, I could use the exercise. Well said!

6. Before the modern man heads off to bed, he makes sure his spouse’s phone and his kids’ electronic devices are charging for the night.

If they had to go a day without electronics it wouldn't be the worst thing that ever happened to them. Besides, that's their job. Natural consequences, Lombardi...

7. The modern man buys only regular colas, like Coke or Dr Pepper. If you walk into his house looking for a Mountain Dew, he’ll show you the door.

Soda is poison. I think the modern man is better off drinking iced tea or water.

8. The modern man uses the proper names for things. For example, he’ll say “helicopter,” not “chopper” like some gauche simpleton.

I like proper language, but I also like to say "fridge" instead of "refrigerator." Looks like I'm not modern.

9. Having a daughter makes the modern man more of a complete person. He learns new stuff every day.

Alas, having only sons, I must remain incomplete.

10. The modern man makes sure the dishes on the rack have dried completely before putting them away.

Or he could use a dish towel... I think it probably takes more discipline to use a dish towel.

11. The modern man has never “pinned” a tweet, and he never will.

I don't know what that means. The modern man has never stabbed a bird? Then I qualify!

12. The modern man checks the status of his Irish Spring bar before jumping in for a wash. Too small, it gets swapped out.

Personally I mash all the soap shreds into a little ball and carry on until it dissolves to nothing. Then I use shampoo instead. Once every three months I'll remember to throw a new bar in. I think I fail on this one.

13. The modern man listens to Wu-Tang at least once a week.

I was prepared to scoff, but this ain't half bad. It's jazzy. I'm not going to schedule Wu Tang time, but I like it. Half credit for me!

14. The modern man still jots down his grocery list on a piece of scratch paper. The market is no place for his face to be buried in the phone.

The market is the perfect place to bury one's head in a phone. I like to listen to podcasts while I shop. It's a mindless task and everybody in the store wants to get done as quickly as possible. Nobody wants to be there, Lombardi. Well, maybe they do at Whole Foods, but I shop at Winco.

15. The modern man has hardwood flooring. His children can detect his mood from the stamp of his Kenneth Cole oxfords.

I have neither hardwood flooring or Kenneth Cole Oxfords. If I did I would not be inclined to develop some sort of stamping code to convey my mood. That seems overly complicated. I prefer to say "Daddy's irritated, so forgive him if he snaps."

16. The modern man lies on the side of the bed closer to the door. If an intruder gets in, he will try to fight him off, so that his wife has a chance to get away.

She's closer to the door. If an intruder gets in she'll provide token resistance while I find the pepper spray. Every war has its casualties, Lombardi.

17. Does the modern man have a melon baller? What do you think? How else would the cantaloupe, watermelon and honeydew he serves be so uniformly shaped?

What is a melon baller? I chop it with a knife... it's never uniformly shaped.

18. The modern man has thought seriously about buying a shoehorn.

Picture him bent over his Kenneth Cole oxfords, lost in thought. "Nah," he finally murmurs. "Not today." I'll pass, Lombardi. I'll pass.

19. The modern man buys fresh flowers more to surprise his wife than to say he is sorry.

Absolutely! And make sure her coworkers see them. That's the point of flowers.

20. On occasion, the modern man is the little spoon. Some nights, when he is feeling down or vulnerable, he needs an emotional and physical shield.

Death first! That's a bridge too far, Lombardi! I'll curl into the fetal position and hide in the woods like a wounded deer, but I won't be the little spoon. Clearly I'm not as Stoic as I thought I was...

21. The modern man doesn’t scold his daughter when she sneezes while eating an apple doughnut, even if the pieces fly everywhere.

This one is like the shoehorn. There he is, at the breakfast table, covered in snot and apple donut. "Nah," he murmers to himself. "I'm gonna let this one slide." It's not like she could help it, Lombardi. Is the modern man a sociopath?

22. The modern man still ambles half-naked down his driveway each morning to scoop up a crisp newspaper.

That's just lazy. You're just rationalizing sloth. I've done it, but I'm not proud of it. Still, full credit!

23. The modern man has all of Michael Mann’s films on Blu-ray (or whatever the highest quality thing is at the time).

I don't know who that is and I don't own any Blu-rays.

24. The modern man doesn’t get hung up on his phone’s battery percentage. If it needs to run flat, so be it.

The essence of Stoicism distilled to a single sentence.

25. The modern man has no use for a gun. He doesn’t own one, and he never will.

I own several and I don't even shoot. They reproduce in the garage. Last year two of my shotguns had a bouncy baby pistol. I have no use for them, though, so I'll give myself half credit.

26. The modern man cries. He cries often.

I have not cried since I saw Last of the Mohicans in 1992. I hope that wasn't a Michael Mann film. I'm gonna feel pretty stupid if it was.

27. People aren’t sure if the modern man is a good dancer or not. That is, until the D.J. plays his jam and he goes out there and puts on a clinic.

People are certain that I'm not a good dancer.

So I score 7.5 out of 27. I'm not an Australopithecus, but I'm certainly not modern.

Sellars on the Definition of Virtue

I'm working my way through John Sellars' book "Stoicism" as part of my studies for the College of Stoic Philosophers SES course. His book is excellent so I decided to search Youtube to see if he has any lectures posted.

He does. 

In his talk he gives some definitions which stand out to me and which I'd like to record (I use this blog as a sort of commonplace book):

"Bad" Passions: unpleasant emotional experiences based on mistaken value judgements

"Good" Passions: positive emotional responses that are based on correct value judgements

Good: something that always and necessarily benefits us

Virtue: the only good... an excellent, healthy state of mind

Joy: the good passion produced by virtue

New Stoa

I'm on hiatus while I work through the Stoic Essential Studies course from the College of Stoic Philosophers.

On Losing One's Mojo

My advice to a reddit user who had lost his mojo:

So there was an incident. You got sucked in. You made mistakes.

That's in the past now. You can't change it, so you might as well get something out of it, right? And besides, did you think that you're a sage? You're not. I'm not. Nobody on this forum is. So these things are going to happen. You will never be perfect; you'll just approach perfection, if you study and practice regularly.

I would make a T-chart. I'd actually write it in pen and paper. It helps focus the mind (like Marcus's journaling). On the left write "What did I learn?" On the right write "What can I fix?"

Perhaps you learned that you would rather not express political opinions when you don't have to, because nobody gets much out of it. Perhaps you can somewhat fix things by apologizing to Ted. By the way, if you apologize I recommend doing it once, completely, and then never again. They accept it or they don't, but groveling won't help anyone.

You seem like a person who might hold himself to a high standard. That is certainly useful, but then again there is a freedom in realizing that you're not perfect and you never will be. Accepting this lets you view yourself with some sympathy. Like Seneca says, it allows you to become a better friend to yourself. As Stoics we are to be kind to our fellow people, but we are also called to be kind to ourselves. Correcting our faults need not come with a big dose of guilt. Look at the Meditations; here's a man who is honest with himself without beating himself up. He writes to himself as he would write to a close friend.

As for your work schedule, your diet, your working out etc. I would view this as an opportunity. It's good training. If you can force yourself to muster some discipline and follow a schedule in the bad times it will be MUCH easier to do in the good times. It will build character and expand the soul.

And consider this: 1.5 months ago when you were happily rolling along were you REALLY being tested? Were you REALLY developing as a person? Perhaps you were, but not as much as you are about to. Easy living is NOT what builds a life, right? This is. This is where a strong soul is forged. How else would it happen? How can you grow if you're never tested?

Since I am a Stoic theist* I'd also say that God has given us the tools we need to achieve virtue. Epictetus said this too. You have all you need. It's reassuring when you think about it like that.

Finally I would be really interested to hear back from you. Did any of our advice work? Did you learn something that we can use? Please keep in touch. Better yet maybe start a blog and let us follow your progress. Watching somebody break through (and you WILL break through) is heartening.

*No offense to my atheist brothers and sisters! Big tent! Big tent!

A Baltimore Cop Lays It All Out

Joe Rogan recently interviewed Michael A. Wood, an ex police officer from Baltimore, Maryland. Wood is totally honest. Whether you agree with him or not he is speaking the truth as he sees it. It's very brave. Very self-reflective.

He says this of walking through Black neighborhoods off duty: "When you go through the city, it's not at all what you think it is... it's not like things were chaos in the neighborhood; ladies are sweeping their steps. But the neighborhood changes once you have that uniform and those lights and you are now the authority."

He seems to want to change the world by first questioning his own impressions. Pretty Stoic.

That said, I am a mere consumer of information. I don't know the whole story down there and I can't pretend to.

Check it out here.

A Little Boy With Nothing Giving A Millionaire His Phone Back

It starts at minute 4:00...

Russell Brand is distributing chocolate in a slum (which he admits might be tasteless and ego gratifying) when a kid steals his Iphone. Another kid brings it back and refuses any reward. That is virtue.

Verba Rebus Proba

Verba rebus proba. "Prove your words with things."

Duffstoic posted this maxim by Seneca on the Reddit sub, and it's a good one.

Jules Evans on Stoicism and CBT

In this video Jules Evans explains how "millions of people have got access to the theraputic wisdom of the ancient Greeks" through Cognitive Behavioral Therapy. He was a student of CBT first and then became a Stoic as a result.

It happened like this: after benefiting from CBT Evans decided to look up its founder, Albert Ellis. Ellis, at the age of 92, gave Evans an interview (his last). Ellis described how, as a Fruedian psychoanalyst, he had become frustrated by his patients' lack of progress. He looked back to his earlier studies and revisited Epictetus. He synthesized some of Epictetus's teachings into a new therapy which has been proven by science to be highly effective.

In light of this one might ask why Stoicism is necessary at all, since we have a modern evidence-based version. Evans gives us two reasons. First, because the ancients expressed Stoic ideas in some of the most beautiful language available in the Western canon, and that makes Stoicism highly persuasive. Second, CBT left some things out. Specifically it left out a concept of virtue, or what it means to live a good life. Also it left out higher questions such as "what is the meaning of life?" and "what does it mean to flourish?"

Worth your time.

Stoic Women Named Elizabeth

In his excellent The Stoic Handbook Erik Wiegardt tells us that "Queen Elizabeth I was an admirer of Stoicism and personally translated the Discourses of Epictetus into Elizabethan English (Page 17)." He goes on to say that "The ethics of the Stoa predominated and inspired Renaissance philosophers and essayists in their creation of the new humanism of that era."

Intrigued, I did a quick online search for Queen Elizabeth's translation and found nothing. Wikipedia, however, reveals that another Elizabeth, Elizabeth Carter, is credited with publishing the first translation into English of The Discourses of Epictetus.

Ms. Carter was part of the Bluestocking Group, a loose collective of female intellectuals in mid 1700's Britain. She was an accomplished classicist and author and was highly regarded by Dr. Johnson.

Now it's a bit of a stretch to call either Elizabeth Stoic. Both were committed Christians (at least outwardly), and they seem to have "admired" Stoicism rather than practiced it. On the other hand how can a person translate the entire Discourses and not be something of a Stoic?

Ms. Carter's translation is available here.http://classics.mit.edu/Epictetus/epicench.html

If anybody knows anything about Elizabeth I's translation, even as a fragment, please do pass it along.

And since we're on the subject of female Stoics Donald Robertson has written a very interesting post on Portia Catonis, available here.

The Afterlife Dysfunction

Robert Lanza has suggested that the universe springs from life. Life doesn't spring from the universe. He calls his theory "biocentrism."

He places biology above physics and chemistry to create a theory of everything.

Here's a popular look at it by a youtuber called "Athene."

Here is Lanza himself giving a lecture about his theory.

Russell Brand on God

If you are interested in the idea of a conscious universe I think that this is worth your consideration. Russell Brand responds to Stephen Fry's atheism... I know he takes a lot of heat for comparing himself to Jesus and Che, but he's very intelligent and I don't find much to disagree with here.

No offense to you atheists and anti-theists! Big tent, big tent...

The Three Phases of Anger

Some unknown redditor gave me the best Stoic advice of my life. The poster said something like "The first blush of anger is an impression; you can't do anything about that. The second step involves a decision. Will you act on it? The third step is the action and, if you submit anger, the result is beyond your control."

If you are the original poster please make a note of it and accept my heartfelt thanks.

Anyway, I was reminded of this advice when reading cleomedes' reply to a recent post and saw that he linked to this page, which contains the following quote from Seneca's "On Anger:"

"IV. Furthermore, that you may know in what manner passions begin and swell and gain spirit, learn that the first emotion is involuntary, and is, as it were, a preparation for a passion, and a threatening of one. The next is combined with a wish, though not an obstinate one, as, for example, “It is my duty to avenge myself, because I have been injured,” or “It is right that this man should be punished, because he has committed a crime.” The third emotion is already beyond our control, because it overrides reason, and wishes to avenge itself, not if it be its duty, but whether or no. We are not able by means of reason to escape from that first impression on the mind, any more than we can escape from those things which we have mentioned as occurring to the body: we cannot prevent other people’s yawns temping us to yawn; we cannot help winking when fingers are suddenly darted at our eyes. Reason is unable to overcome these habits, which perhaps might be weakened by practice and constant watchfulness: they differ from an emotion which is brought into existence and brought to an end by a deliberate mental act."

The original source material!

Cleomedes reminds us that "The Stoics divide emotions into two classes, impressions (sometimes 'feelings') and passions. See here. Impressions are emotions that happen to you, so trying to control them is a mistake, but passions are the result of your judgements, your beliefs about good and bad. These judgments are explicitly listed as things 'under your control'."

So if I have this right then this is how the process of becoming angry works:

First: You recieve an involuntary impression. "Bill calls me an idiot and I am angry." This is not in your control. You can no more avoid this first feeling of anger than you can avoid yawning. It's automatic.

Second: You assent to the impression or  you reject it. "Bill has wronged me. I will avenge myself." Or you could think "Bill made sounds with his mouth that aren't true. That's nothing to me." Or you could think "Bill has a point; perhaps I shouldn't play with matches at a gas station. I'll stop that." 

If you decide to avenge yourself then you have created a passion. If not life goes on as normal.

Third: You have created or avoided a passion. If you have created one it is no longer in your control. You tell Bill to go play in traffic and then you question his parentage. Now both of you are angry and things may escalate.

You only control Step 2. You may choose reason or passion.

I can't tell you how many times an understanding of this model has saved me real trouble. I have a problem with my temper, but now when I receive an angry impression I think about the three steps. I ride out the first impression, I reason my way through the problem and then I generally avoid creating a passion. Except when I don't.

An example: I don't like overstuffed drawers and cabinets. Yesterday I had a drawer that wouldn't close and felt that first rush of anger. I thought about the three steps and ARRRGGGGHHHHH!!!!!! slammed the door shut, breaking a hinge. Then I felt stupid. So, not a perfect record...

Another example: On the other hand, a few days ago a person on the street swore at me. I hadn't done anything to deserve it (I hadn't done anything at all). I felt the first flush of anger, remembered the three steps, and determined that unwarrented aggression probably meant that the person was having a tough day. I said as much.

"Yeah," he said. "I just broke up with my girlfriend."

"That's rough," I said. "Good luck to you."

He nodded and seemed to feel better.

Now that could have turned ugly in a hurry. This person was looking for somebody to take his misery out on, but when I refused the bait and instead offered understanding it diffused him.

That's Stoicism in action. It's powerful.

You'll have to excuse me. I need to go buy a new hinge.

Preferred Indifferents: Bernini's Angels, by Kerry Muzzey

This is wonderful. I heard it on Pandora and was dumbstruck. This one isn't bad either. Or how about this?

* * *

Image by Bede735 is public domain

Preferred Indiferents: Strength Training

Epictetus (and I think several other Stoics) often refer to athletes in their metaphors, and they assume that we Stoics will get a moderate amount of exercise. It seems that in their time a trip to the gymnasium and the baths was a daily occurrence. If you have more specific information about daily life in the Roman Empire please do chime in.

So to that end I've been doing circuit training at a gym three times per week. I do five exercises (bench press, lat row, curl, triceps press, power runner) suggested by a trainer. I walked in and told him "I want to be in and out in a half hour." He set me up with this plan and we adjusted the weight so I could do 10 repetitions of each exercise. I've been at it four months and skipped only one day. It's become a habit.

I've asked several gym goers what a good benchmark to shoot for is to achieve a moderate level of fitness. Most have told me that a 200 pound bench press is pretty decent for the casual guy.

This article from Muscle and Fitness confirms it. The author says that if you can bench 200 you are stronger than 90% of men walking the earth.

Now I don't want to "win," but I do want a target to shoot for. According to this calculator with 10 repetitions of 135 pounds my max would be 180 pounds. I'll need to get a spotter to see if that's actually true, but it's kind of cool to know that, in theory, I have 20 pounds to go.

I am the farthest thing from an expert you'll find in the gym, but I can say with authority that the Stoic practice of getting a bit of exercise has been good for me.

Massimo Pigliucci's Meditation Regimen

This comes from Ryan Holiday's blog, "Meditations on Strategy and Life." Mr. Holiday conducted a very interesting and useful interview with Massimo Pigliucci, who seems to be one of the foremost Stoics of our time.

Holiday asks Pigliucci about his daily meditation practice. Here is the answer, condensed:


First: he contemplates the challenges he's likely to face that day. He contemplates which of the four cardinal virtues he's likely to call on (courage, self control, equanimity, wisdom).

Second: he visualizes Hierocles' Circle, picturing his concern for himself, then his family, then his friends, and then the world.

Third: he does premeditatio malorum... he visualizes a bad thing that might happen that day.

Fourth: he meditates on a Stoic Maxim.

Fifth: he ends the day with a Marcus Aurelius-syle journal, which is not intended for publication. He reviews the day's events and his own performance.


Pigliucci credits Stoic week with designing his practice, and says he's only modified it slightly to suit his own tastes.

Holiday's interview contains a number of other gems, but I'll let you read it for yourself.

Preferred Indifferent: Modern Classical Music

This article points the casual fan of classical music to nine modern composers who we may not be aware of. Since the readers of this blog may share an interest in high culture I thought I'd pass it along.

I had no idea that somebody had written an opera about Anna Nicole Smith...

The Parable of the Un-castrated Athlete

Discourses Book 1, Chapter 2, Verses 25-29 (Robin Hard's translation):

"It is in this way that a certain athlete behaved too, when he was in danger of dying if his genitals weren't cut off. His brother (who was a philosopher) came to him and said, 'Well brother, what are you planning to do? Are we to cut off this part of you and go to the gymnasium as usual?' But the athlete wouldn't submit to that, but set his mind against it and died. When someone asked, 'How did he do that? Was it as an athlete or as a philosopher?', Epictetus replied: As a man, and as a man who had been proclaimed as victor at Olympia, and had fought his corner there, and had passed his life in such places, rather than merely having oil smeared over him at Baton's training ground. But another man would be willing even to have his head cut off, if it were possible for him to live without a head. This is what is meant by acting according to one's character, and such is the weight that this consideration acquires among those who make a habit of introducing it into their deliberations. 'Come now, Epictetus, shave off your beard.' If I'm a philosopher, I'll reply: I won't shave it off. 'Then I'll have you beheaded.' If it pleases you to do so, have me beheaded."

What I take from this odd parable is that, in Epictetus's time, it was part of a boxer's character to have a set of wedding tackle. It was part of a philosopher's character to have a beard. Perhaps the boxer wouldn't mind cutting off a beard and perhaps the philosopher wouldn't mind cutting off the wedding tackle, but each held to the excellence of his own way of life despite all hazard.

Later on in the same chapter Epictetus tells us that he's no Socrates, but that if he tries to be Socrates and ends up "not too bad" it's good enough for him.

Maybe we're the people at Baton's training ground getting oiled up and trying to be the un-castrated athlete, though we have no real chance of actually attaining our aim, and maybe we'll learn to be content with being "not too bad."

I'm very open to further interpretation!

Self-esteem or Self-respect Part II

There is a lot of anger in Mr. Elam's article, isn't there?  For me it is a very un-Stoic article containing a very Stoic truth.

One of the things that I've found interesting about the "manosphere" is its embrace of Stoicism. A wide variety of movements within the manosphere umbrella seem to see our philosophy as a counterpoint to their perception of modern Feminism's embrace of emotion over reason. That said, there IS a lot of anger there, and anger isn't our way.* 

The value I take from the article itself is that self-esteem does seem to get more play in modern discourse than self-respect, but that self-respect is probably the worthier of the two concepts. That is very perceptive. As far as I know it's an original thought, and I don't run into too many of those. 

After I read the article I did a search of the Discourses and the Enchiridion on the subject of self-respect and found that Epictetus had a lot to say about it. Epictetus in fact seems to have considered self-respect to be one of the main attainments of a Stoic philosopher. I reference Chapter 24 of the Enchiridion to support this.

A very moving example of Stoic self-respect appears in Discourses 1.2. Florus approaches Agrippinus asking whether or not he (Florus) should attend one of Nero's grotesques. I take it that Florus considers the activity to be beneath his moral standards, but on the other hand nobody wants to provoke a violent madman.

"Go," says Agrippinus.

"But why aren't you going yourself?"

"Because I've never even considered it."

Agrippinus's boundaries are well-defined. His self-respect will not even admit the possibility of debasing himself. That is a thing of beauty. That is virtue. That is excellence, and Mr. Elam's article led me to it.

*It IS Mr. Elam's way... I can't remember where but I watched some of his videos and he considers anger to be an important component of the men's rights movement.

Self-esteem Or Self-respect?

Paul Elam has penned this article on the difference between self-esteem and self-respect, and I think it's worth a look.

For those who don't know Mr. Elam runs a Canadian organization called "A Voice For Men." AVFM is a men's rights organization. If you would like to have a conversation with or debate a men's rights activist you will find good hunting ground at their site. I'd prefer not to here. I will just say that I read widely, and that I have found some useful ideas in Mr. Elam's article.

Elam has some harsh things to say about the mental health industry's relationship with self-esteem, things which a reasonable person might disagree with, but what really stands out, for me, is this:

"Self-respect, on the other hand, is about how you treat yourself and what kind of treatment you will tolerate from others. It is clearly and unmistakably measurable. And more importantly, it is completely attainable regardless of outside influences."

That strikes me as a very stoic paragraph. Our philosophy teaches us that we are all a part of a great whole, that we are designed by nature* to exist in community, but that we ourselves are responsible for ourselves. We ourselves are sufficient. We have the power to bring ourselves in line with nature.

Self-respect must be a part of that. Mr. Elam has it exactly. If we value self-esteem as the more important of the two concepts then we place our fate in the hands of emotion, and emotion is subject to our impressions, not to our reason. If we value self-respect as the greater of the two then we place our faith in a set of principles. Principles are less subject to outside influence, and if they change the change is more apt to result from reasonable consideration of the evidence.

Mr. Elam follows this up with:

"That truth leads to an unassailable fact. You can instinctively handle most anything life throws at you if you respect yourself enough to keep your own best interests at the forefront."

I'm not sure that I should keep my own best interests at the forefront, but let's continue:

"In fact, I think it more than fair to say that you could take the average man, put him through a gender studies program, send him through a nightmare marriage with a personality disordered basilisk, take his children and his assets in the divorce and drive his own family and friends to blame him for the entire mess, and his self-respect would still be within relatively easy reach."

The meat of what he is saying is that self-respect is always attainable, no matter one's circumstances. That is deeply Stoic and I think it's true. It's a deeply reassuring thought.

How do we attain it? How do we reach this thing that is always within reach? According to Epictetus we achieve self-respect through the exercise of our own will. We just decide to do it and then we do it.

In Book 4, Chapter 9, Versus 15-18 of the Discourses Epictetus compares the student of Stoicism to an athlete being trained by a wrestling master:

"The boy has taken a fall: 'Get up,' he says, 'and resume the fight until you grow strong.' You too should think in some such way as that: you should know that there is nothing more tractable than the human mind. You only have to exert your will, and the thing comes about, and all is put right; whereas on the other hand, you only have to doze off, and all is lost. For ruin and deliverance alike come from within.

"'And after all that, what good will I gain?'"

"And what greater good could you seek than this? Where once you were shameless, you'll have self-respect; where once you were faithless, you'll become faithful; where once you were dissolute, you'll have self-control. If you're looking for anything other than things such as that, continue to act as you're now acting; for not even a god could still be able to help you."

Elam's hostility toward what he considers to be the excessive influence of modern feminism is what it is, and his views are not my own. His insights into self-esteem and self-respect, however, are a revelation to me. He has taken something which was hovering just beyond my ability to articulate and articulated it, and for that I am very thankful. 

*Whether it be conscious or unconscious

The Fire Burns Anyway

Discipline is good, and reason is good, but Zeno tells us that we are fire. We contain the divine spark that gave birth to the universe, and look at the universe! It's a swirling mass of energy! Things collide and explode... whole galaxies born in fire.

We have that in us. Maybe it burns brighter sometimes and darker at other times.

Today I met somebody in whom the fire burns very bright, but he is afraid of it. He wants to put it out because he fears failing. He won't risk anything... yet the fire burns. It would be easier for him if it didn't, but it does.

What a paltry thing to fear, failure, compared to the Divine fire.

I wish that he could see himself as I see him.

It's Good Training

"If you want to improve, be content to be thought foolish and stupid."

Epictetus


Maxims are important. It is advisable to have a supply of them at hand when times get tough. When we enter the stress response, when our adrenaline starts pumping and our heart starts beating our higher cognitive functions are shoved aside by our lower instincts. At these times maxims are a workaround back to rationality. They're a cheat code.

I find that the maxim which rises through my mental muck the most often is "This is good training."

I don't know exactly where I picked it up. I know that Epictetus advises us to repeat "It is for this that I trained" when we encounter tragedy, so it's probably related to that. Also, when I was in the military and somebody did something stupid all the NCO's would mumble "it's good training." More sweat on the training field means less blood on the battlefield, as they say. Make your mistakes when the stakes are low and you won't make the same mistakes when the stakes are high.

Hmm... so I guess I DO know where that comes from. Strange how writing a thing down can clarify it.

Anyway, I save "It is for this that I trained" for the big tragedies and "This is good training" for everyday annoyances.

Suppose, for example, that somebody asks something unreasonable of me. Suppose that I'm neck deep in a project and they want me to drop it all for a low priority task. I could swallow my rage and do it or I could blow up at them and call them selfish or I can repeat "it's good training," center my mind and work on a new skill.

"I understand, but this is my priority. I can talk to you about your thing later. I have to get back to this."

It's measured. Who can argue with it? It's not even mean. I'm just letting a fellow creature know what I'm thinking.

So what about when I lose my cool and do something stupid? Well, that's life.

If I want to improve, I must be content to be thought foolish and stupid. It's part of the game. I will make mistakes and people will see me make them. Some of those people will think that I am foolish and stupid. It WILL happen, so I will prepare for it. It's good training.

Nobody shows up to a golf course on Day 1 and smacks 300 yard drives time after time. They bounce balls off of trees, hit them straight up, plough divots everywhere... failure is part of the deal. If we can internalize this idea then failure will have less power over us. We will use it rather than subjugate ourselves to it. We will learn and move on.

It's good training.

Lazy Stoicism And The Viper's Tongue

I've got a mouth. I don't mean that I literally have an orifice which allows me to breathe and ingest nutrients, though I certainly have that. I mean it in the Southern sense: "That fella's got a mouth on him."

I'm sarcastic. In our age this trait is often characterized as a plus. I have a buddy, for example, who dates online and he says he's amazed by how many people list "sarcasm" as a positive personality trait. This perplexes him. Why would he want to date an openly sarcastic person? Why sign up for mockery?

"So I just scraped my car's rim against a curb, right? So not only do I have a scratched rim but my date is laughing at me and cracking jokes. Not attractive."

That one didn't work out. Now as a good Stoic I would try to develop myself to the point that neither the scratch nor the date's laughter mattered, of course, but his point is well taken. If the world is filled with potential dates why choose a sarcastic one? Why add to your burden?

My grandmother once told me that I have the tongue of a viper. She was herself a sharp-tongued German lady from North Dakota, brought up hard in an unforgiving environment  amid naturally Stoic people. Her world view was an unusual combination of deeply humanitarian impulses and high cynicism. She would feed every kid in the neighborhood but they would all fear the sting of her words if they stepped out of line. She passed this on to my father.

"A pessimist is never disappointed," he would tell me. He would also tell me to "watch my mouth" on a regular basis. I got his mouth, he said, and he got his mother's mouth... who knows how far back the mouth goes? No doubt some Teutonic tribeswomen once stood along the banks of the Danube taunting her nephew for skinning a hog the wrong way, and she begat me.

I can't relate that without admiration, though... I think that what people appreciate in a sarcastic comment is the fact that the originator had the nerve to make it in the first place. Perhaps sarcastic people come off as confident, or superior... I don't know.

As a supposedly practicing Stoic I make a conscious effort not to use my mouth. Sarcasm is insincere, after all. It's not kind and in my case it betrays irritation and insecurity.

I'd been doing pretty well in the last few months, but there came a day when I hadn't gotten enough sleep and I'd had one too many annoying personal interactions and my Stoicism failed me, or rather I failed it.

Whatever. In any case, I said something really sarcastic. My target pointed this out without replying in kind. It was embarrassing... for a moment.

"Well," my Stoic self said, "we don't want to do that again. Apologize, learn, and move on."

Which is what I did. Then we both felt better.

It was automatic. I didn't go home and lose sleep, I didn't mull it over with a friend, I didn't do an internet search on how to be less sarcastic... I just recognized the mistake, made a complete apology and vowed to do better.

It was easy. It felt lazy.

I think this stuff is working. I think that by deliberately thinking a certain way I am actually forming a mental habit. My default state is becoming more Stoic.

It's weird that this surprises me, but it does. I had a similar experience recently when I lifted up my youngest son. It didn't hurt like it used to. I started lifting weights two months ago and now I'm stronger. I must have secretly believed that it wouldn't really work, and then was surprised when it did. Same thing with my Stoicism...

Hipster Irony

I'd like to develop my thoughts on hipsterism a bit further. In my last essay I described an encounter with hipsters in which I found that some self-reflection allowed me to abandon my own insecurity and appreciate them for what they were. I even admitted to displaying a certain amount of hipster aesthetic. I'm not a hipster myself, though. One stark difference between us remains: they value irony more than sincerity. I don't.

We live in an ironic age, we are told. One aspect of modern irony is self-deprecation. We make fun of ourselves. Why? According to Christy Wampole (How to Live Without Irony) we do so to preempt criticism. We do it out of fear.

"Take, for example, an ad that calls itself an ad, makes fun of its own format, and attempts to lure its target market to laugh at and with it. It pre-emptively acknowledges its own failure to accomplish anything meaningful. No attack can be set against it, as it has already conquered itself. The ironic frame functions as a shield against criticism. The same goes for ironic living. Irony is the most self-defensive mode, as it allows a person to dodge responsibility for his or her choices, aesthetic and otherwise. To live ironicly is to hide in public."

I think that there's something to this. We insult ourselves before other people can. If we produce something sincere on a social media platform and people mock us it stings because they are mocking who we are. If we present ourselves as clownish figures, though, we preempt their mockery with our own. We are in on the joke. It's safer. We risk less. Isn't this a species of cowardice? 

Wampole's essay is excellent, and I think that she is right to be suspicious of irony, but she misses a very important aspect of hipster culture: authenticity.

One of the great hallmarks of hipster culture is the rejection of consumerism. Hipsters shun the cheap and instant. Why do hipsters spend $200 on jeans made from antique looms in Japan? Because those are the REAL thing. That's what jeans are supposed to be. People put effort into them. People cared about them. That smacks of... sincerity.

In her essay Wampole pokes fun at trombone playing hipsters. Fair enough; it seems a little odd, but let me tell you, anybody who gets decent at the trombone is sincere. They may laugh about it with their friends, they may play it off as a quirky hobby, but they are absolutely sincere. Learning an instrument takes discipline and commitment. There's no irony to be mined there. 

Why learn the trombone at all? So that you can pull it out, play something jaunty for twenty seconds and then have a laugh with your friends? No. Hipsters learn to play trombone because the trombone is real in a way that Rhianna is not. I've seen hipster brass bands playing on street corners; they mean it. Complement their playing and their eyes shine with pride. 

What I see in the hipster movement is a looking back to some of the things we've lost as a culture. We used to make things with our hands. We used to pay real money for real craftsmanship. Life was slower. Hipsters were raised in a fast-paced consumerist wonderland where everything is available on demand, instantly. They crave something more meaningful.

Consider some evidence Jonathan Fitzgerald's counter argument to Wampole:

"All across the pop culture spectrum, the emphasis on sincerity and authenticity that has arisen has made it un-ironically cool to care about spirituality, family, neighbors, the environment, and the country. And pollsters find this same trend in the up-and-coming generation from which Wampole culls her hipsters, Millennials. A recent Knights of Columbus-Marist Poll survey found that among Millennials, six out of 10 prioritized being close to God and having a good family life above anything else. For those in Generation X, family was still important, but the second priority was not spirituality—it was making a lot of money. Clearly, a change has been underway."

Now, do hipsters present themselves with a bit of irony? Absolutely. If you're going to twist your mustache into waxed handlebars then you're going to stand out from the dominant culture, and irony is a serviceable defense mechanism. But behind the irony stands a deeper ethic: sincerity.

And let us remember that sincerity doesn't automatically mean "good." Take the classic example from the 80's megahit Wall Street, in which Gordon Gekko tells us that greed is good. It's supposed to be a cautionary tale, but people adopted it as a mantra:

There's no irony to be found there! He's completely sincere. That slicked-back hair is the predatory embodiment of a shark's fins. Those power shoulders are meant to intimidate. 

I'll take hipster irony over yuppie sincerity any day, friends. 

* * *

Thanks to Greg Milner for linking to Wampole's essay. I found inspiration in a counter argument to that essay by Jonathan Fitzgerald. Read Mr. Fitzgerald's work here.