The more and more we learn about these different philosophers and their beliefs, I am trying to figure out which one I agree with the most, but I have definitely figured out which one troubles me the most: stoicism and Epiteitus' ideals. I cannot imagine a world in which I was not able to be overcome with immense passion. Stoics define passion as the vice or an error. I honestly feel like having passions is part of humanity; I want to know if the stoics successfully achieved their beliefs or if it was all in theory. Think of a world in which we had no one with passions. We would have no Miley vs. Nicki, Kanye vs. Taylor. I mean those examples might not be the best ones...Without passion we would have no Mother Teresa or Martin Luther King Jr.
I personally value passion over most things. Passion drives some of the best things in people: charity, love, and friendship. The things that passion brings make the world good and entertaining. Although it can be deemed "irrational" that does not mean it should be off-written as an error or vice. What would we do without Kanye's in the world?
I love how your go to example for passion fueled action is Kanye West. (Yeezus for president 2020) But at the same time, I think Yeezy is a great example for how stoicism in moderation can be beneficial. Detaching yourself from your passions can save you a lot of grief and public ridicule just ask Bill Clinton, Mike Tyson, or as you mentioned above Kanye. The issue is how far you take the stoic principles. A little bit of stoicism can have a positive influence on your personal relationships. Listening to reason rather than passion can make you more understanding of people and the crazy things they do. However, like Mckenzie said, completely following stoic principles is a bad look. A stoic would live a life free of relationships simply because no one would want to be around them. One of my favorite passages from the reading is when Epictetus urges his audience not to grieve when they attend funerals. He said if you attend a child's funeral don't be sad because everything lives and dies so rationally there is no need to grieve. Then he quickly adds that if the parents walk by make sure not to look too nonchalant; keep your indifferent feelings on the inside. I think this is an hilarious example of how the stoic's principles can be completely impractical.
ReplyDeleteTo add to Sam's comment, I think what makes passion a bad thing is when the passion is a terrible thing itself. People can love to sing, dance, and create technology, however other people or even the same people could have a passion for not eating, harming one's self and even possibly harming animals. The latter passions are why Epictetus said we should not be ruled by passions. However like Sam said, the stoics might not be die-hard for their beliefs. In short, passions can produce good or bad outcomes just like good or bad actions can produce good or bad consequences. To have a perspective of a stoic might, indeed, have saved Trump a few votes.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with Elizabeth! Balance is the key! I do not think Stoics are heartless people acting like zombies around the city. They have emotions and passions but they do not let it control them. For example if I have a child who I love, and s/he passes away I do not lose it and can't live life anymore. I grieve and move on bc I know s/he wasn't immortal. However I do not abuse or neglect that hold either thinking oh s/he is going to die anyways one day. Just like a glass will break but I am not going to walk through my house and break every single piece of glass I own.
ReplyDelete