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.
No comments:
Post a Comment