The Only Safe Harbor

"For the only safe harbour in this life's tossing , troubled sea is to refuse to be bothered about what the future will bring and to stand ready and confident , squaring the breast to take without skulking or flinching whatever fortune hurls at us."

- Seneca, Letter 104, Letters from a Stoic, posted to the Stoic Sub Reddit by silverdeath00


"Fortune" is in this case Fortuna, the goddess of chance. Seneca has a literal being in mind when he says "Fortune," whether or not he believed in her literal existence (see 5.3 at this link).

She hurls challenges at us like Jupiter hurls thunderbolts, if you're into that sort of thing. Once we've done all we can do then we can whine or we can ride it out with some style. What else is there?

Good post, silverdeath00.

* * *

Image is public domain

Only Apologize Once

I read this excellent entry at Manly Distribution on apologies and it got me thinking about my own apology practice.

I've noticed that my best apologies occur one time. I admit fully and completely my mistake and I say that I've learned from the experience. After that if the person brings it up again I say something like "yeah, I remember that" or "I thought I already apologized for that." The other person may accept or reject my apology. The relationship may continue or it may stall, or it may cease all together, but I won't grovel.

The key here is to own the behavior completely. Some people use an apology as a sort of get out of jail free card. They insult you, then they off handedly say "just kidding." Then they insult you again. The apology isn't sincere. I've done this myself and it makes me feel cheap. So the goal is a sincere, complete apology delivered one time only.

This practice isn't universal; if I do something major I understand that my apology will be a process rather than a one-off event. This hasn't happened in recent memory, but in the past I have occasionally said something horrible and it took some time to convince the other party that I was speaking without thinking and that I was truly contrite. Then there was that time I backed my uncle's van into a solid post. That was a tough one. Then there was that time I got a guy's expensive radio controlled airplane stuck in a tree...

What I'm talking about here is different; I am describing the everyday apology. We're all human and we all make mistakes. Sometimes the people we have wronged need to hear that we understand that we have wronged them, that we care about them and that we will try not to wrong them in the future. This keeps relationships alive and, in my experience, can even strengthen them.

As Stoics, of course, we think about being "wronged" differently, but the idea still holds relevance for us. Suppose I lend something to my friend and he breaks it. He doesn't apologize and he doesn't replace it. I've learned not to lend him anything. That's good information to have. Suppose, instead, that he breaks it, apologizes and maybe even offers to replace it. I will likely lend him something again. I've seen some reflection on his part, so that particular aspect of our relationship may continue. This is also good information to have.

Apologies are, therefore, necessary and useful. What is NOT useful is grovelling. If we wrong others and they can't let go of the wrong, or if they bring it up over and over again they are trying to punish us. Fair enough, if that's what they want to do, but if the act in question was a minor one and if we apologize fully for it the matter is now their problem, not ours. We've done all we can do.

Of course this also means that I must accept the sincere apologies of other people with as much grace as I expect from them, and I do. I actually feel pretty good about it. Letting go of past hurts is, after all, a very Stoic thing to do.

* * *

Public domain image courtesy of the New York Public Library

Stoic Yoga

"It shows a lack of natural talent to spend time on what concerns the body, as in exercising a great deal, eating a great deal, drinking a great deal, moving one's bowels a great deal or copulating a great deal. Instead you must do these things in passing, but turn your whole attention toward your faculty of judgment." -Epictetus, Enchiridion 41


There are two things to take from this passage. The first is that Epictetus assumes that we will take physical exercise, eat, drink (wine, presumably), use the toilette and enjoy physical love. The second is that he sees these things as mere incidentals, not goals in and of themselves. For him the needs of the body should be met, but not dwelt upon.

I'm pretty good about not dwelling on these things, but I'm not very good at meeting them.

I want to set up some simple systems to care for my body without requiring obsessive amounts of time and effort. I want to be a good steward of it, but I don't want to build it into my life's work. I don't want my body to be a monument to my will.

So what have I done to further this goal?


1. Green smoothies to up my fruit and veg consumption

2. Walk three miles three times per week

3. Body weight and fitness band exercises twice per week

4. Calorie limitation using myfitnesspal.com

I'm getting to the point that these things are becoming habit. I don't have to think about them too much. I believe that this is in keeping with Epictetus's teaching.

There's one thing left to deal with: pain.

There is a very realistic older man where I work, a man who tells the truth all the time. He doesn't volunteer it freely; he's pretty self contained. If you ask him a question, though, you'll get a straight answer.

Once I asked him what it's like to be an older man.

"I'm in constant pain," he said. I thought he was talking about psychological pain. He may have had regrets or failures of character. I said as much.

"No, I mean physical pain. The older I get the more everything hurts."

There is some truth to it. What we cannot change we must accept, right, fellow Stoics? But what if we CAN change it?

I try to do a simple yoga routine at least once per week. Notice that I say "try." What I really ought to do is to commit to doing it twice per week. I've noticed that when I do yoga my joint pain decreases and my back pain sometimes dissappears.

So I have a goal: I will do yoga twice per week. This seems moderate, and I know that it will produce real results, a claim which seems to be  backed up by science.

Here is a sequence I've been using, and it seems to work pretty well:

* * *

Public domain image courtesy of the New York Public Library

Admiral Stockdale's Take On His Debate Performance

I found an interview that James Stockdale did with Jim Lehrer in 1999. The transcript is here.

I'll let the Admiral speak for himself, but a few things did jump out at me.

1. He considered character to be far more important than specifics. A man of character can deal with specifics. He says that he doesn't get up in the morning thinking about Social Security.

2. He was a placeholder because Ross Perot needed a warm body in states that required a declared VP. He never expected to be in a public debate, and he wasn't terribly thrilled about it.

3. He and Perot never ever talked about politics.

4. He considered physical courage to be very important. If he ran a presidential debate he would ask the candidates about a time when they had to demonstrate physical courage.

5. He was very realistic about his performance. He was surprised to be there, but that's where those other guys lived. It is what it is.

6. He describes his time in the big central prison as the founding of a new civilization. They lost everything and had to start over. He is proud of what they accomplished.

7. His experience during the VP debates caused him to feel emotion. There were highs and lows. His way seems to have been that you experience the emotion and then you deal with it. The emotion seems to happen whether you like it or not, and then you use philosophy to manage it.

So for anyone who wants to know "How does a Stoic handle X or Y?" This is how a Stoic handles it.

* * *

The images used are official US government property, so I think that they are in the public domain.

Our Public Shaming of Admiral Stockdale, Stoic Sage

James Bond Stockdale was inspired by Stoicism as a young man. He was inspired to the point that he memorized The Enchiridion by Epictetus, which was a good move because it would allow him to survive seven and a half years of brutal torture and emerge with his sanity.

Admiral Stockdale flew A-4 Skyhawks over North Vietnam. He was shot down, captured and tortured. At one point he slashed his own scalp with an improvised razor so that the North Vietnamese wouldn't be able to exploit him on television. Seven and a half years later he came home to teach philosophy at Stanford. If I had known then what I know now I might have applied to that august institution.

Here is his take on the experience of surviving as a POW. He could laugh about it. That's incredible. What an incredible human being. I think that he might be the closest thing to a Stoic sage we've seen in the modern age. In fact I think that he was a sage. I think that he earned the title.

Before I learned of Admiral Stockdale's Stoicism, and before I knew his history, I thought of him as a doddering old fool (to my great shame). I thought that because as a young man I watched him perform poorly in a vice presidential debate, and then I laughed as he was lampooned on Saturday Night Live by Phil Hartman. Now I've read a lot about Mr. Hartman. His friends loved him and said that he was a gentle, kind human being. I don't think that Mr. Hartman wanted to personally injure Admiral Stockdale (not that he could, if seven years of torture couldn't). Still, Phil Hartman wasn't fit to shine Admiral Stockdale's boots. Neither am I. This is a person who we should treat as the national hero that he was.

In this excellent article by Eric Black another comedian and SNL alumnus is quoted:

"Comedian Dennis Miller captured this small tragedy well, when he said:

"Now I know [Stockdale's name has] become a buzzword in this culture for doddering old man, but let's look at the record, folks. The guy was the first guy in and the last guy out of Vietnam, a war that many Americans, including our present president, did not want to dirty their hands with. The reason he had to turn his hearing aid on at that debate is because those f***ing animals knocked his eardrums out when he wouldn't spill his guts. He teaches philosophy at Stanford University, he's a brilliant, sensitive, courageous man. And yet he committed the one unpardonable sin in our culture: he was bad on television."

Admiral Stockdale wrote about Epictetus in "Courage Under Fire: Testing Epictetus's Doctrines in a Laboratory of Human Behavior." I can't seem to link to it but if you google the title it'll come up at the top of the list. It's well known in Stoic circles, so I'm not pioneering any new territory by posting the link here, but if you haven't read it do yourself a favor. It's improving.

Thank you for your service, Admiral Stockdale, and thank you for continuing to serve beyond your own lifespan.

* * *

The image of a bust of Admiral Stockdale, by Master Chief Larry Nowell, is not public domain... I've put in a request to Mike Lambert at "I Like The Cut of His Jib" to use it... I can't imagine that he or Chief Nowell would have a problem with it, though.

There Were No F**ks Given That Day

Sir-weasel posted this link over at the Stoic subreddit (note that Mr. Weasel warns us that the article contains "somewhat ripe language"):

Link to the article

Here is my response:

Upvote! I'll tell you why... this characterizes something I've noticed about the developing masculine subculture known as "red pill." My guess is that quite a few young men end up here because stoicism, or outcome independence, is discussed as part of the red pill outlook on life.

I listen to Joe Rogan's podcast (to me he is a modern day philosopher, the real thing, who gathers forward thinkers around him and discusses new ways of being). Anyway, he often uses the phrase "there were zero fks given that day!" I don't know that Mr. Rogan would call himself a red pill thinker; he certainly doesn't like parts of it, but he does seem to represent to me a large number of young men who are dissatisfied with modern culture. Sounds a lot like the founders of our own philosophy... My point here is that this "No Fks given" idea isn't some random meme; it's the tip of a cultural iceberg. It's a movement.

There is a shade of the "no F**ks given" idea that to me seems to be in conflict with Stoicism. A cartoon accompanies the article. It shows a character floating away with a bunch of helium balloons in one hand and a raised middle finger in the other. The character is flipping off a large number of people and going his own way.

Aurelius tells us that we will often meet people who behave in negative ways, and that we are to remember that they do this because they are ignorant of the good. Those are our brothers and sisters.
When we reject modern culture, or aspects of it, we do so because we feel that parts of it are aggressively colonizing our minds. So we here have revived a twenty-five hundred year old philosophy in response. That's a pretty bold move... it's a pretty clear rejection. Rather than see modern culture as the enemy, though, I think that we are directed to see the people who we don't want to emulate as ignorant of the good.

So perhaps the cartoon character could be smiling, open armed, and saying "I don't give a f**k, and you don't have to either."

Thanks for posting this and for stimulating my own thoughts. I look forward to hearing more from you.

* * *

I choose not to use profanity publicly. For me it seems to cheapen my thoughts. That's why I asterisk out the "f" word. Do what you like; I don't mind, it's just not for me.

Preferred Indifferents: Musonius Rufus Brand Pizza

Rufus advises us to eat cheap, wholesome food and to avoid meat. I think that he would approve of this pizza recipe*.

Check it out here.

The cost of ingredients breaks down like this:

Flour, yeast, and sugar: less than $1
Cheese: I shredded 1/8 of a block of cheddar**, so probably $1.00
Sauce: I used 1/4 of a can of $1 spaghetti sauce, so about .25 cents

All in cost: $3.25... call it $3.50 if you throw in the olive oil and cornmeal to keep it from sticking...

It's pretty tasty, and it cost less than a single value meal at McDonalds. Plus I know what's in it (except for the spaghetti sauce).

* * *

I hereby release the above image into the public domain

*Some Stoics will worry that I'm trying to turn Stoicism into some sort of Oprah/Doctor Phil style trend, and that's a valid concern. On the other hand Rufus gives us specific lifestyle advice, which I find interesting because it's a way to live out our practice. I'd be very intersted to hear about other Stoic views on living a Stoic lifestyle in the modern age.

**Yes, using cheddar instead of mozzarella is tantamount to sacrilege, but it's what I had on hand, so in true Stoic fashion...

Studying Philosophy While Married: If A Homeless Guy Can Do It...

Should a Stoic get married? Rufus says yes.

I've been hitting Musonius Rufus pretty hard lately, using Cynthia King's excellent translations. I would buy this work as one of the essential texts of Stoicism. For me a good place to start is the Enchiridion, Meditations, and Rufus.

Why? Because Rufus explicitly discusses practice. He tells us what to wear, how to eat, what to do (he thinks that we should all be farmers)... I'm not saying that we 21st century Stoics should blindly follow him*, but it does make for some interesting introspection.

Anyway, in his 14th lecture Rufus tells us that marriage is no hindrance to philosophy, and points to Crates as one of his examples.

Crates was a famous and respected Cynic who taught Zeno, our philosophy's founder. Stoicism has sometimes been described as a more reasonable and moderate form of Cynicism*, so it's worth our time to consider this very strange man, whose sole possessions seem to have been a thin cloak, a chiton-style tunic, and a satchel.

Rufus tells us that even though Crates had no home, property or money, he married a woman anyway and lived with her beneath the public stoas of Athens.

Crates' wife was herself a Cynic philosopher. Her name was Hipparchia of Maroneia. She fell in love with Crates against her parents' wishes and gave away all her money to live with him a life of poverty. She donned the clothes of a man and together they had two children... apparently conceiving them right out in the open in typical cynic fashion. Here's a woman who took her philosophy seriously.

Rufus then goes on to say that if this fellow can practice philosophy while homeless, why should marriage be a hindrance to those of us who have homes and maybe even servants? What's our excuse?

Not only was Crates able to study philosophy, he was also able to teach it and thus to contribute to his city. We are not meant to live like wolves according to Rufus. We aren't meant to exist in community just to better our odds of surviving; we are meant to live like bees. We are meant to contribute to the well being of our brother and sister humans.

"A virtuous person," he says, "displays love for his fellow human beings, as well as goodness, justice, kindness, and concern for his neighbor--given all this, shouldn't each person, out of concern for his city, create a family with the well being of the city in mind?"

So, according to Rufus, a virtuous Stoic marries and has children for the good of the city,* even if that Stoic is homeless.

By the way, if you find a suitable partner and you choose to propose in the style of Crates simply strip naked and declare to your love that this is all you own in the world. I didn't do that, but then I'm not a Cynic...

All this makes me wonder if I've ever met a latter day homeless Crates in the streets of my city. I probably avoided him or gave him a quick, pitying smile and moved on.

* * *

Images are public domain

*It's interesting how some modern Stoics respond to the smallest perceived simplifications and inaccuracies with outrage... is that a very Stoic thing to do?

Depressed and Dateless

I saw this post on Reddit and felt compelled to reply:

"I'm 20, and i'm just not good looking. So I haven't had an intimate or sexual experience with women yet. This feels awfully distressing since the vast majority of the people my age have had these experiences, from a kiss, to a date, to sex; and therefore seems like most guys my age are 'preferred' and are hence of greater value than myself. I have trouble accepting this, but I know i'll have much more peace of mind once I do and just forget about women. Which is why i'm here. I want to be a student of Stoicism so I don't have to put up with such emotions causing me distress. I hope someone can help."

Here is my advice:

"Problem: you want a date. You don't think a date wants you because you are ugly.

"Solution 1: Accept that you are undatable. There are 3.5 billion women on planet Earth and not one wants to date you. You can't control this, so you must accept it. Now I happen to know that the likelihood that this is true is absolutely zero, but you don't, so this seems to be the way you're headed. Don't do it.

"Solution 2: Sort yourself out. It's not terribly complicated.

"You need to be clean. Shower, haircut, brush the teeth, use deodorant, clip your nails. Do this every day. There's dignity in it.

"You need to work out. If it doesn't improve your physique it will at least improve your mood. Walk two miles and listen to pod casts. Next day do Mark Sisson's basic primal workout. Rinse and repeat.

"Read nonfiction. Just trust me.

"Eat more fruits and veg. Avoid sugar and processed food.

"Wear clean clothes. I like a black button up shirt, jeans, and black shoes with socks that aren't white. Iron your jeans flat but don't crease them. Iron your shirt.

"Work. Work hard.

"Go where women are. Act calm and confident. Say hi, with no expectation that they will say hi back. Do this 100 times.

"Put a dating profile online. Expect rejection. Expect Battle of Britain levels of getting shot down. All part of the game. You are a beginner. There are hard knocks to be taken. Part of Stoic practice is to put yourself into difficult positions. This is not a retreat from the world. This is the conquest of your own fears.

"Google ALL of this to learn how to do it better. We're baby stepping here.

"Do this and it will happen. But what if it doesn't? Then it doesn't. Go down swinging. But you've already tried! No you haven't, not like this you haven't.

"Good luck, brother Stoic. We're on your side here. Check back in with us."

I followed on with this:

And by the way, lest I swerve into holier-than-thou insincerity, here's how I stack up:

Hygiene: On point! I'm clean.

Work Out: It's finally a habit... I do exactly what I've written and it takes me 3 hours per week.

Nonfiction: This has been my habit for awhile.

Fruits and Veg: This is what I'm working on now... hence the green smoothie post.

Wear Clean Clothes: On point!

Work Hard: Roger that!

Go where women are: I live with one, whom I am married to, so check!

Dating Profile: I'm insulted!

Google all of this and learn more: That's what led me here!

Under my current understanding of Stoicism it isn't meant to separate us from the world. It's meant to make us more virtuous while living our everyday lives. It should allow us to function better in the world. It is natural to seek out a mate, whatever that may mean to you, and fear shouldn't prevent you from doing it.

* * *

Public domain image courtesy of Public Domain Archive, a great place to find public domain images

Green Smoothies: Magical Elixer

Musonius Rufus offered some very interesting lifestyle advice to we Stoics:

"On diet he used to speak often and very earnestly, as of a matter important in itself and in its effects. For he thought that continuence in meats and drinks is the beginning and groundwork of temperance. Once, forsaking his usual line of argument, he spoke as follows:"

He goes on to advise us to eat fruit in season, grains, plants (greens?), vegetables, herbs, milk, cheese and honeycombs. He specifically advises us to eat these foods raw. He calls these foods "cheap," because they don't derive from slaughtered animals. Meat was enormously expensive in the ancient world.

What results may we expect from following his advice?

"It is those who use the cheapest food who are the strongest. For example, you may, for the most part, see slaves more sturdy than masters, country-folk than town-folk,poor than rich - more able to labour, sinking less at their work, seldomer ailing more easily enduring frost, heat, sleeplessness, and the like. Even if cheap food and dear strengthens the body alike, still we ought to choose the cheap; for this is more sober and more suited to a virtuous man; inasmuch as what is easy to procure is, for good men, more proper for food than what is hard - what is free from trouble than what gives trouble - what is ready than what is not ready. To sum up in a word the whole use of diet, I say that we ought to make its aim health and strength, for these are the only ends for which we should eat, and they require no large outlay."

My response to Rufus's advice (and I mean it; it's really why I started this whole thing) is to embrace the green smoothie. So far I'm very pleased with the results.

Of course there's nothing magical about them. Green smoothies are nothing more than a combination of water, fruit and veg. You could eat the ingredients separately, drink a glass of water and achieve the same effect. You'd probably be more Stoic. Still, I didn't ever do this consistently. I find that smoothies are a way to sneak fruit and veg past my taste buds, and I'm grateful for them.

So far here is what I've found:

1. I eat less... I track what I eat on myfitnesspal.com and there has been a significant drop in my caloric intake, a drop that has taken me down to weight loss levels.

2. I have more energy... way more. This may be the placebo effect. Good for the placebo effect! I'm understating the effect... my body seems to tingle with energy. It's weird.

3. It's better to drink one in the morning. I have a cup of coffee and a green smoothie, and that's it. For the rest of the day it's like my body is plugged into an energy generator. I'm more aware, I do more, I look FORWARD to working out. If I skip the morning smoothie I'll have one in the afternoon, but my day is better when I drink one in the morning.

There is a very good chance that this is all the zeal of a convert. What happens when the novelty wears off? Who can drink green smoothies every day for the rest of their lives?

Well, I drink coffee every day, and the recipe never changes: plain coffee, cream and sugar. I haven't gotten sick of that yet. Why should I get sick of smoothies, especially when they can be made with such variety?

It's early days, but so far so good. And even if I don't lose weight I feel better and I'm following solid Stoic practice.

One of the really great benefits is that you can plug in to an online community without paying for a program, buying frozen food, or ordering strange supplements. The knowledge is free, and you likely already own everything you need. So give it a try.

How to:

For the purist: blend until smooth 1 cup of spinach, 1 frozen banana and 1 cup of other fruit (apples and pears work well).

For the beginner: use a coconut water base, or even do coconut water and orange juice, or plain water and OJ. If these things don't taste good you won't keep drinking them.

For everybody: freeze the fruit, especially the banana. Frozen bananas have a consistency like ice cream when blended. 

* * *

Green Smoothie Links:

Incredible Smoothies

Simple Green Smoothies (this includes a very useful recipe chart)

Seeing Through The System

One of the things that Stoicism allows is a little objectivity. When we examine our own motivations and insecurities we begin to see them in other people. They don't necessarily see these things in themselves, though, and anyway we might be wrong. Perception is always suspect. With that caveat in mind, I offer the following:

I know a few people, high achievers, who are often worried about not measuring up. Maybe that insecurity is necessary to high achievement, or maybe it is necessary to some people in the sense that otherwise those particular people wouldn't have achieved.

For example, suppose there exist two equally successful athletes. One may have achieved "x" level of success through natural ability and moderate effort. The other, born with less potential, achieved "x" through single minded determination. He scorched the earth. He psyched himself up. He neglected relationships and personal development. He trained constantly. He sacrificed more.

I know some people in the latter category. This would often cause conflict, because when I achieved they would pick out flaws or cut me down in some way. I would respond defensively. We would then enter into conflict.

What ended the cycle is my realizing their need for validation. I began to compliment them on their achievements. At first nothing changed on their end, but instead of reacting defensively I'd shrug it off and move on. I repeated and repeated.

After about a year they began to compliment me back. Now we like each other. Actually they are pretty close friends. I like them. I can rely on them. They have my back. They're different people.

A key insight was my realization that what these people had in common was a rough childhood. They were picked on by their peers. The way they dealt with the harassment was to adopt an "I'll show them!" mentality. They applied themselves to their professions with a singleminded zeal. In addition to this it was their habit to stake out some mental safe space in their heads, which they defended with everything they had. The best defense is a good offense, in other words.

I made myself safe to them. They let me past the perimeter because I stopped attacking and started aiding in their own defense. I became a trusted ally.

I had seen through the system. I had found their motivation and manipulated it for our mutual benefit. I was the puppet master.

And do you know what I noticed, after I got a little distance from the whole thing? I was just like them. I cut down people who performed better than I did. I carved out a safe space and defended it like a zealot. And I did it for the same reasons that they did. Here I was judging their flaws and figuring out how to deal with them, and then congratulating myself for successfully doing it, when all the while I was just like them.

When things between us changed I'm not even sure that I prompted it. Maybe we all got sick of our old habits at the same time.

The system I had seen through was one of my own making.  

It was like waking up to the world: I was never secretly superior. I was never the bigger man.

My old self would have considered this to be a disastrous revelation. My new self is very pleased by it. Why?

I'm not alone, and people can improve. That's a very good thing for the world.

* * *

Image is public domain