Become a Creator today!Start creating today - Share your story with the world!
Start for free
00:00:00
00:00:01
Stoicism For Me But Not For Thee With Marcus Hedahl (Episode 50)
722 Plays1 year ago
Want to become more Stoic? Join us and other Stoics this October: Stoicism Applied by Caleb Ontiveros and Michael Tremblay on Maven
This is our 50th episode! Thank you for listening and supporting Stoa Conversations. If you’d like to support the show, please subscribe, leave a review, and share an episode with a friend. Also, send a note to [email protected]. We read and respond to every single one.
This episode is with Dr. Marcus Hedahl. Marcus turns the tables and asks Caleb Ontiveros about his article, Stoicism For Me But Not For Thee. They each discuss how to talk to irrational and non-Stoic people.
Stoicism For Me But Not For Thee
Marcus Hedahl on Stoic Happiness
(03:01) Stoicism for Me
(16:28) Blaming Others
(19:18) Pluralism?
(20:55) Inviting Others to Stoicism
(31:57) Why Do We Want Others to be Stoic
(33:52) Groaning With Others
(40:43) Pity and Empathy
Recommended
Transcript
Introduction to Stoic Conversations
00:00:00
Speaker
As Marcus says, a bee produces honey, a horse runs, an excellent humanly helps others, right? And what more could we be called on to help others than in their suffering, right? In their lack of virtue that's causing their suffering.
00:00:14
Speaker
Welcome to Stoic Conversations. In this podcast, Michael Trombley and I discuss the theory and practice of stoicism.
Celebrating Milestones and Gratitude
00:00:22
Speaker
Each week we'll share two conversations, one between the two of us, and another we'll be an in-depth conversation with and experts.
00:00:31
Speaker
And before we get started with the primary episode, a discussion between myself and Marcus Hidal, I just wanted to say thanks for listening to Stoicism Applied. This is our 50th episode, so Michael and I wanted to leave a note thanking you all for listening and supporting. Yeah, the response from everyone has just been great. I really appreciate all the emails we've been getting.
00:00:58
Speaker
the reviews, the liking and the sharing people have been doing and the discussion going on around these episodes. That means a lot to us because at the end of the day, we want this show to be something that gets out there to people, helps people gain understanding of stoicism and improve their practice. So really appreciate all the support from the community that has been behind us in growing the show.
Supporting the Stoic Mission
00:01:19
Speaker
Absolutely. Yeah, with Stowe, we're trying to help people build resilience and live more virtuously with stoicism and any support you can give us on that mission, either with this podcast, with our app, or the newsletter is always really appreciated. And I especially love it when someone with an unfamiliar name shows up in our inbox with a note that either they like the podcast or they have some suggestions for a guest or future episode. That's always fantastic.
00:01:49
Speaker
Yeah, we're really responsive to those comments. So any reviews, recommendations, you know, things you want us to cover or guests you'd want us to speak to, let us know as we continue to grow the show. Absolutely. And as always the best way to continue to support what we're up to with still conversations is to leave a review, subscribe on your favorite podcast platform and share it with a friend.
00:02:16
Speaker
With that, we can get to the show.
Stoicism for Me, Not for Thee?
00:02:18
Speaker
In this episode, I speak with Dr. Marcus Hidal. It's a bit different. The tables are termed. Marcus asked me a number of questions about my article, Stoicism, for me, but not for thee. This is a conversation between two practitioners about how to best explain and embody stoic principles, especially when it comes to dealing with other people. Here it is.
00:02:45
Speaker
Welcome to Stoa Conversations. Today I'm going to have another conversation with Dr. Marcus Hidal. And it's going to be a little bit different than usual, so I'll hand it off and I hope you guys like it.
00:03:01
Speaker
Yeah, thanks Caleb. Thanks for having me. I always love, love being here. And as Caleb says, we're going to do things a little bit differently today. I'm going to interview Caleb about his article entitled Stoicism for me, but not for the how to talk to irrational people.
Personal Practice of Stoicism
00:03:15
Speaker
So without further ado, why don't we just get into it? So, so Caleb, what do you take that phrase that I think is a useful kind of way of thinking about things, stoicism for me, but not for the, what do you take that to imply?
00:03:29
Speaker
Yeah, well, I suppose I want to say first that it's a slogan, a useful way for me to remember what is in fact a practical rule, which is that often I've noticed in myself and I think others have the same experience.
00:03:46
Speaker
I will be disappointed in the way that others react to adverse events, or perhaps even frustrated because they're acting in a non-Stoic manner. And at that point, I want to remind myself, wait, Stoicism's for me, it's not
00:04:02
Speaker
for others and this very experience is just another adverse event that I need to respond to in a stoic manner rather than reacting in a way that pushes my focus on the other person.
00:04:17
Speaker
So I think that's the main idea is that the focus of stoicism initially, at least when I am at my stage, is always when it comes to these sorts of circumstances on my own judgments and decisions rather than on others' reactions.
00:04:38
Speaker
So I was wondering if maybe in the article you talk about a common enough events that we ought to be strictly prepared for, but frequently aren't.
Applying Stoicism in Real Life Scenarios
00:04:45
Speaker
And that's airlines delays, right? So you give this really, I think, vivid example. And I was wondering how you could talk about how that kind of situation kind of illustrate this kind of notion that you're talking about, about focusing initially on your own reactions rather than other.
00:05:02
Speaker
Yeah, absolutely. So the initial setup is a situation that all of us have encountered. Plane is delayed. And if you're traveling alone, you might think, at least I would think, you know, I can handle plane delays. Planes get delayed. That's just a fact of modern travel.
00:05:18
Speaker
But if you're traveling with someone else, they might be exceptionally frustrated and that can have a almost miasmic effect where you feel like, oh, I'm becoming frustrated as well because this person who I'm traveling with is also frustrated. So then the question is, what can you do instead? And I think there's sort of the question of how do you handle the plain delay as a matter of practical logistics?
00:05:47
Speaker
In some cases, the right thing to do is to get on another flight, see if you need to maybe even find somewhere to stay overnight. And if you address those sorts of concerns, you might address what the other person is frustrated at. They're frustrated at feeling like they don't know what's going on, that there needs to be some practical solution to the delay. So I think that's always the first thing
00:06:16
Speaker
to note is does this adverse event you know that is the object of the other person's frustration addressable and if so then that's one of the first things.
00:06:31
Speaker
to look at. And then if it's not, you're sort of in a different situation and the question should be less around trying to prevent the other person's emotional reaction but remaining
00:06:47
Speaker
calm yourself and meeting them where they're at. And that's just going to range on a number of different factors with your personal relationship with the person, past conversations you had with them and how you know they respond to different events like this. With some friends, I think I could sternly admonish them and they might, they would snap back to reality as it were. And with others, a different response is going to be more appropriate.
00:07:18
Speaker
Well, yeah, so that's a really fascinating kind of point there about the differences in between different people and the different ways that they might react and the ways that we might react to them and their own suffering.
Introducing Stoic Ideas in Times of Crisis
00:07:32
Speaker
So I often have conversations, and I don't have a good answer to this, but I would love to hear your thoughts here about when is a good time to talk with other people about stoicism. So your story about the
00:07:46
Speaker
The plain delay brings to mind, and what you were just saying about talking to some of your friends, there's the famous Buddhist parable of the second arrow, which the Buddha says, anytime we suffer a misfortune, two arrows fly our way. Being struck by an arrow is painful. Being struck by a second arrow is more painful. And the second arrow is often our reaction to the first. And that's something that's within our control.
00:08:08
Speaker
Yet there's often this kind of way that that parable often gets interpreted that it might not be the best time to talk to someone about Buddhism or Stoicism or any kind of aesthetic philosophy, let's say, right after being shot by a literal arrow. Yet at the same point, people are often willing to try new ideas or practices during times of crisis when they feel lost. They may be open to more understanding of new ways to manage suffering when suffering.
00:08:35
Speaker
So how do we find a balance between these two? Maybe talking about someone when things are just completely well in their lives, they might not see the need for stoicism or some way to change their reactions to the world. But if they're so deep in their suffering, then it might be not the time to react to this. Those might be the times, as you say, that you just need to find some way to alleviate that, get on a different flight, take out the arrow, patch the wound.
00:09:03
Speaker
Right. Have you have any thoughts about how we can balance those kinds of like seems like two competing considerations that Sometimes people are more open to things like stoicism when they're suffering yet at the same point too much suffering might be It might be taken inappropriately or or we just would be inappropriate time to start thinking about how to reframe the way we see the world Right, it's always hard to say I suppose one way
00:09:31
Speaker
to think about this is on one level, it's better to refrain from sharing these kinds of views unless the person's explicitly receptive to them. Maybe they're not searching for stoicism, but they're searching for an answer or something in particular. And in that case, how you think about these adverse events, how you think about stoic principles or other facts about your life,
00:09:59
Speaker
philosophy, they're being asked for. And in that case, how you respond is appropriate. You know, you can share with a stoic philosophy in that case. And then I think there's also, at some point in a relationship, your stoicism is just the core fact of who you are, how you respond to practical events that is shaped by your stoicism. And as virtue of being in a relationship with another person, it's going to be appropriate to share that
00:10:28
Speaker
maybe not when they're suffering as such, but just as a matter of the normal flow of a relationship and getting to know you, just as you all get to know the other person and how they think about dealing with the ups and downs of life.
Rhetoric and Persuasion in Stoicism
00:10:43
Speaker
There's another idea that I'm curious to get your thoughts on, and that's this idea of taking rhetoric or persuasion more seriously, which is not something that stoics talk about as much, but one account of
00:10:58
Speaker
Cicero's view of rhetoric is it's not like these rules of different grammatical form. You're not just trying to think of the right words to convince another person, but the art of rhetoric is really the art of risk management. It's about putting yourself out there having the courage to
00:11:14
Speaker
put your ideas out there as a statesman in Cicero's case and pay whatever costs may come for promoting your ideas. And being able to be in excellent rhetorician is sort of balancing risk management essentially in a political sphere.
00:11:31
Speaker
And something I wonder is if people who are better at this art of rhetoric or persuasion have a wider range of circumstances where they can present stoic ideas in a way that is going to be more persuasive to others, which would place a demand on stoics to be better at rhetoric or communication.
00:11:56
Speaker
And it's not going to be a costless demand. Sometimes you will share your ideas and you might fail. And that's part of what it would be to be a good stoic. I don't know if you have any thoughts on that. I don't know if I have a lot of discreet and well thought out thoughts on that. I do think that, so it wouldn't surprise me that let's say Cicero, who is very inclined towards stoicism,
00:12:22
Speaker
but does in many ways take a slightly different stance would take that position, right? Because he takes himself to be required to help others both individually and collectively do better, right? So he viewed a part of his job to influence others and a part of his job to make Rome
00:12:47
Speaker
Better right and not just in kind of the material ways but actually kind of better in in in its virtue and its justice and its excellence, right and so if we take those things more seriously or more seriously as Contents of our of our duties and we're going to think that rhetoric is going to be more important than if we think of
00:13:12
Speaker
ourselves as primarily required to think about our own virtue and our own responses. And I do think that all the Stoics think that we have some duty at least to teach others.
00:13:28
Speaker
to aid others, not just aid others, but also just to make them more virtuous. And all of the Stoics recognize fundamentally that ultimately that's beyond our control, right? That we can make it much, much more likely or much, much less likely for someone else to be virtuous, but ultimately it's up to them for them to be.
00:13:49
Speaker
do the thing and how much we kind of balance those two is going to influence how much we think we have a duty to be better at rhetoric, to maybe teach people in a better way, or at least make it more appealing.
00:14:07
Speaker
I do remember one of the first times I taught Stoicism, I had, you know, several early converts in the class and as early converts are, they often get a little, you know, overexcited. And I do remember one of my students thinking that I couldn't possibly have this 2D to help other people because it's fundamentally about my own reactions.
00:14:25
Speaker
And, uh, and my favorite thing was, is, is they, they put this challenge before me to they're like, well, you have to show it to me in this. And they're like, held up their copy of Epictetus, right. And not in this, and he held up his Seneca as if this watered down, like person that always is, you know, quoting Epicurus, right. Not serious. Um, I think I was able to convince him that, that, that even Epictetus, even the more, even the more individualist stoics think that we have this duty to help others.
00:14:55
Speaker
Uh, but yeah, I think I think that's a balance right that kind of thing and I do think we have some sort of duty to be better at it but It's an interesting question about if persuasion is the way to do that rather than
00:15:12
Speaker
I don't know. So there's a question of rhetoric, how important is that for stoics? That's a deep question I'm not entirely sure how to think about yet. And then there's the Cicero's conception of rhetoric as the orator being willing to put themselves at risk for their ideas, which I think has some practical import here, which is that often when
00:15:39
Speaker
We are seeking to change another person's reaction. I think other people might respond with thinking that is lame in some ways. We're not seeing the situation as seriously as we should.
00:15:54
Speaker
would take it more seriously if we were taking more risk when he put out and sharing the message at times where we can sort of show that we care, as it were. You know, Cicero admires Cato the Stoic because Cato the Stoic will
00:16:13
Speaker
share his stoicism, whether he is at a late night's drinking party or whether he's staring down an armed group of Caesar's men. And that I think is an important aspect to, I suppose, one important option. Yeah.
Stoicism as an Invitation
00:16:29
Speaker
Yeah. So that idea that I will live it and make it clear independently. Yeah. And I think as well sometimes, so
00:16:40
Speaker
I was curious about how much you think about this resistance at times in certain contexts has to do with the stoic prescriptions against blaming, right? So, you know, you know, there's a Marcus Aurelius in book eight talks about, you know, if you can set people straight and if not, then repair the damage done. And if you realize you can't do either, remind yourself, even in those cases, blaming serves no purpose, right? And nothing should be done without a purpose. And I wonder if sometimes
00:17:12
Speaker
Sometimes when we view other people, like in the airport case, that there is this tendency sometimes to blame them.
00:17:21
Speaker
in some way, and that the prohibition that's kind of contained by the stoicism for me, not for thee, is a reminder not to blame them, not to view them, let's say, as less than somehow, if they are going through this and are not able to react as stoically as, let's say, the sage would, after all, none of us can do that.
00:17:49
Speaker
The desire to have them react less emotionally has hidden within it this kind of implicit blame that is actually contrary to what the Stoics teach us to do. Yeah, I think that's right. I think part of the the first part of the slogan is look the focus is on your virtue and then perhaps the second aspect that you rightly pull out is that
00:18:12
Speaker
people are making mistakes of ignorance, not ill, intent, and they very well might not be responsible in any significant way for their ignorance. So the classic stoic view is that people do not do wrong out of ill-intense, but rather it's because they do not know what they do. And in that way it's, I think, deeply
00:18:39
Speaker
forgiving, deeply egalitarian, and also has a lot in common with Christian ideas around, at least some Christian ideas around how to manage other people's mistakes. And that's important. And of course, there's always the reminder that you too will make mistakes out of ignorance and that often you are ignorant, if not in the exact same way, but ways that are
00:19:01
Speaker
Equally equally fall short and especially for the traditional Stoics where everyone is going to be falling short in the most important respect Which is that they are not the sage and that there's nothing else to say in terms of measuring oneself against other progressives Yeah, so I was thinking about that the phrase in particular and and a lot of the things that you said so far so
00:19:28
Speaker
So as part of the reason that you take Stoicism to be like, to steal a phrase from Parfit one way up the mountain of virtue, that perhaps there are other ways, and that you look at it more pluralistically and ecumenically.
00:19:43
Speaker
Or is it that we ought to remind ourselves that we can't control what other people do? Right or as you just said right this kind of notion of as you mentioned explicitly That it draws our comparison to the wrong class,
Slogan 'Stoicism for Me, Not for Thee'
00:19:56
Speaker
right? We're supposed to compare ourselves to the asymptotic ideal rather than other people We're not supposed to create ourselves on a curve. Do you think it's all three of those things some some combination of those two? What do you? What what do you?
00:20:10
Speaker
What do you take to be kind of the background to the kind of the really nice slogan? I would say it's principally the last two that what matters is your own virtue and then adding to that the idea that others do wrong out of ignorance and the associated idea that you two are
00:20:34
Speaker
a progressor who's ignorant and the relevant class is the sage making progress as it were. I don't think the pluralism plays as much as a role in my judgment so much as it's not a message for tolerance as much as a message for being a better stoic, at least is how I think about it. Interesting. Okay. So I've been thinking lately and I would love to, and your piece is kind of invited this kind of thinking about the way we talk about
00:21:04
Speaker
The way we conceptualize the way that we talk about stoicism with others, right? Perhaps not as proselytizing or even teaching, but instead maybe something like an invitation. So I've been thinking a lot about the phrase that seems very stoic to me. That's very common. It is what it is. And what I like about this phrase is oftentimes when I tell people this and I say, why do we say this?
00:21:31
Speaker
And a lot of people, their very first reaction is that it's another way of saying you should have a stoic reaction to this. You can't change it, so you should make the best of it. You should find a way to accept it.
00:21:47
Speaker
But I'm less sure about that the more I think about it. Because it doesn't say that. It doesn't say, for example, the way that I think people would rightly get upset if at the airport you said to someone who was near and dear to you that you should just be able to let this roll off your back a little bit more. In fact, I'm sure if someone said that to me, most of the time I think my initial reaction would be negative even though it should be positive.
00:22:15
Speaker
But it does seem to, because it seems like if I say it is what it is, the other person could say something along the lines of, well, yeah, and it's really bad, and we ought to feel bad about it. We ought to be angry, or we ought to be mournful. I might disagree with them, but that's a possible reaction to that line. Whereas it's more of an invitation, a way to pick it up.
00:22:41
Speaker
this way, to pick up the phrase the way I intended it to be picked up. And an invitation is really powerful because the receiver is free to decline. We wouldn't be upset by that. We're not typically upset when people decline our invitations. So I guess my question is first, do you think that that's a useful metaphor?
00:23:00
Speaker
In addition that would go with the stoicism for me not for the for framing our thoughts about introducing stoics to others And then I guess you know, how how might that color the way we talk about stoicism? Interesting that's really that's I suppose the way I think about it has been less of an explicit invitation and more of
00:23:22
Speaker
along with Epictetus's line, occasionally you will need to groan with others, just do not groan inwardly, which is a sort of way of adapting yourself to others, and then sort of being an existence proof, if you will, or an example of another way of life, which isn't so much an invitation, but really pushing yourself to be the kind of person who
00:23:48
Speaker
shows what stoicism looks like in a life. And if the other person is interested, as we talked about earlier, or if they're receptive, then we can share whatever aspects of the philosophy you think are important at that
Living Stoically by Example
00:24:04
Speaker
time. So the invitation idea sounds to me to be more active, more as a matter of promoting stoicism than how I was previously thinking about it,
00:24:17
Speaker
I think because you might send invitations to people knowing that they are not necessarily receptive just because it is appropriate or has a significant enough chance of working.
00:24:32
Speaker
So I think I would need to so like what would that what would that look like in practice? That you know if you're thinking about that at the airport situation What would an invitation look like that might make it this yeah, that's a good question, right? So so so it might be so so perhaps
00:24:50
Speaker
So you talk about all the things that underline the frustration, right? It might be the information we've been not knowing. It might be the anxiousness about missing some event, right? So perhaps the invitation in that case would be, so you could offer invitations that aren't invitations to SOAS, but invitations perhaps to
00:25:12
Speaker
Remedy or or try to locate the cause of the suffering right or the anxiety or whatever term we want to use the frustration right and then and then perhaps what we could do about it and then you know, so so those are kinds of invitations to I suppose right because
00:25:33
Speaker
One could, and I'm sure I have, at times, been even obstinate about alleviating my own suffering, even in ways stoic, in ways that you kind of mentioned, like just trying to find an earlier flight, or getting in line to talk to the agent to get more information, or on your phone, or using the time to
00:25:56
Speaker
go somewhere and do some activity that you wouldn't otherwise be able to do. There are times certainly when I'm just like, no, I just want to be pissed right now. And I don't think that's helpful. And certainly, I think my significant other has at times offered invitations to try to make it better. And I often accept those. But I think that it could also be
00:26:19
Speaker
Yeah, it's an interesting question about what makes it and what, what crosses the line between invitation and telling someone how to react, right? So for example, it might just be a question to be like, can we, should we feel bad about the fact that we can't do anything about this delay has at least the grammatical structure of maybe an invitation or a question.
00:26:41
Speaker
But my guess is it's probably going to be delivered and very likely to be received as a direction to feel a certain way. And I don't know if that's either helpful or appropriate in many cases. Right. And so it might be worth thinking about.
00:27:00
Speaker
Well, what do those invitations look like in that case? And I think that those kind of practical questions in that particular case, or in any case of like somewhere you're frustrated or angry.
00:27:12
Speaker
Is is a tough question right because oftentimes like i'm What do you want me to do can often make things worse? I think offering specific activities Can be helpful and then the person can take those as invitations, right? Uh, you know, would it be helpful if I went and talked to the agent for example something specific that they can say yes or no to and then by recognizing perhaps
00:27:42
Speaker
the limits of their control in particular cases, it might actually become less anxious, less frustrated, less angry. I know that works for me in many cases, right? Because part of my frustration and anger
00:27:56
Speaker
often stems from a misguided belief in the moment that I should be able to control more than I can control. So the BBC had a great thing on Seneca's on anger, where they say at one point, the rich often think that their money ought to buy them.
00:28:15
Speaker
like freedom from these kinds of frustrations. And many of us living today are by any accounts that would be put forward by the stoics, obscenely rich. And we often think that we should be able to control these things. I booked on a decent airline for God's sakes. This isn't Frontier anyway.
00:28:40
Speaker
Yeah, so it's something like that, I think. Invitations to recognize the cause of the suffering. Invitations to find ways to alleviate it. Invitations to recognize our own limits of control in this situation. I don't know. Does that help a little or? I think so. I think one
Identifying Frustration Sources
00:29:00
Speaker
thing that sticks out to me there is
00:29:03
Speaker
Clarifying the source of the frustration is, I think, both useful in my own case and with others. It's always useful to clarify what exactly it is about the delay that might be frustrating. And then once that is made specific rather than into some sort of lump of emotion, sometimes psychologists talk about the lump theory of emotions.
00:29:26
Speaker
then there's the decision, okay, should you try to challenge or dispute the judgments that are behind that specific cause of the frustration? Perhaps you just accept them.
00:29:41
Speaker
Or another way is to invite the other person to some other activity, almost noting that that frustration is there and then saying, okay, well, let's do something else together. And I think that I think is one way to
00:29:58
Speaker
understand the invitation idea, and it could probably be useful. And it's somewhat different from commiserating, right? It's not merely sitting with the other person. I really like the idea of locating, being more specific about the source of the frustration. I find that helpful for me when I get upset on the road.
00:30:15
Speaker
Because I immediately start wondering, well, why am I upset that this person cut me off? And then I start unpacking it a little bit. And I realize that I think that somehow they're disrespecting me in some way, or not acknowledging me, or not recognizing my humanity, or something like that. And of course, once you start saying it out loud, even in the height of being on the road, you pretty quickly realize that's not why they cut
00:30:44
Speaker
That's a pretty self-centered way to look at our packed highway system. And that often helps for me. And I think it can help for others. I think it's helped for others for me as well. I like that focusing on the source of frustration more specifically. But yeah, it's always tricky with both yourself sometimes and others when you're dealing with these situations that you yourself recognize aren't
00:31:12
Speaker
aren't fully rational, right? Because I think one of the things that I think the Stokes are really powerful about is recognizing that our goal is to be fully rational, yet also recognizing that trying to reason our way out of irrationality
00:31:31
Speaker
in the moment isn't always necessarily the perfect way of doing it. And so this way of recognizing our own irrationality through focusing on that is interesting. Yeah, that's right. I think that's one reason why sharing stoicism or really any other helpful ideas just might not always work because one might be in a state of heightened passion.
00:31:54
Speaker
Right both one and the other person. Yeah Yeah, and I think you're right part of the issue is if the reason i'm doing it So so this is something I hadn't thought of in reading your article that really i'm thinking about more now Is that my desire? My desire to kind of get you to act stoically is precisely because it's getting me to act unstoically And so i'm trying to alleviate that
00:32:23
Speaker
in the least stoic way possible by trying to change the gods rather than myself, right? By trying to change the world outside rather than my own reaction.
00:32:32
Speaker
And so I think that it's stoic because I'm telling you to be more stoic, right? It's driven from a place that's very unstoic because it's the way that I feel I can be more stoic is if I change the world around me, i.e. you more so that you're not having this reaction because it's causing me to have a similar reaction. Yeah, I think that's really fascinating and worth thinking about.
00:33:00
Speaker
Yeah, I think not an idea that stoics talk about so much, but one conception of sin is Luther's idea of incurvitus se, which basically means a curve inward towards one's cell.
Focus on Personal Change in Stoicism
00:33:13
Speaker
And the thought is that any image of the good
00:33:17
Speaker
any image of what you think the good life is, you are going to pervert to serve your own selfish ends in a way. And what you explain there is you have a picture of what it is to be stoic, to live well for yourself. And you see it not being applied to others. And in a way, you're defeating that
00:33:41
Speaker
very image even though it'd be gone with a picture of what the good is and using it to Find your own emotional tranquility find a better Yeah, I like that a lot. Yeah, that's really fascinating One other thing I wanted to touch on that that I don't know if it's directly related to this or not I think it is broadly in terms of how we relate to others so so
00:34:07
Speaker
Sure, a while ago, you cited, Epictetus is famous. I dictate that one ought to groan or wail with someone and talking with mourning from the handbook, but take pains not to groan or wail inwardly. Not to assent to the impression that this person has been harmed by the world around us.
00:34:24
Speaker
And I've been chosen by my students and I'm not, I'm not a hundred percent sure about what to say about this, but, so I'd just be curious, do you have any concerns that this would, we would, we, we ask Stoics in some ways to be disingenuous, right? To pretend we're more upset about something than we actually are when we tell people to do this. I'm just curious about your thoughts there.
00:34:47
Speaker
Yeah, that's interesting. I suppose perhaps I've ingrained too much of the epithetus' role ethics, but I think some amount of...
00:34:56
Speaker
What it is, roles are defined in culturally specific ways, and it's incumbent on us to act in the ways that they're culturally defined, even if sometimes they might not be as oriented towards the truth. But in a real sense, they almost are acting, and the other person is also acting and performing out.
00:35:22
Speaker
particular beliefs that might not even represent what they believe in a deeper sense or would believe in a different context. I think this is something that I haven't written about before or I'm not too sure how
00:35:35
Speaker
I'm curious if there are other places you know stoics take this line, but I was reading a fellow named Ludwig Edelstein, and he has a set of lectures called the Meaning of Stoicism that I think are from the 1950s. And one phrase that he has when talking about this bit from Epictetus is that I have it right here. It's a pity another to assist him.
00:35:59
Speaker
is as if one were trying to save a drowning man standing on the shore one cannot save him one must enter the water and one does so because one sympathizes with him which stuck out to me because you're taking on almost acting as if
00:36:16
Speaker
you have these beliefs that are not correct. And so, a way of explaining what it is to play a role, I suppose. Sometimes people with different religious inclinations or maybe even athletic inclinations, you know, I'll take on the frame, I am the winner, I am going to win, do that to serve their own practical ends. And I think that just is a part of
00:36:41
Speaker
being a social creature is to take on these roles, these beliefs, either on faith or act as if there are different ways to explain it.
00:36:53
Speaker
And it's not necessarily disingenuous. Most of social life just is acting in some level like this. So I think of it a similar way. I don't think I've made it as concrete as I should right now, but that's generally how I would. Okay. No, I like that a lot. And I don't have, the only one that comes immediately to mind is, is, which is maybe a little too on the nose, but you know, the Epictetus is famous also from the handbook, right?
Epictetus and Life Roles
00:37:18
Speaker
To play your part well. Right. That's, that's your, that's your, your job, right. To choose that part belong.
00:37:23
Speaker
to another. And I think there is something to that. I really like the metaphor of getting into the water. Yeah, I don't have a good answer either. I think I often think about it in terms of it doesn't necessarily seem disingenuous to me if I can see the reasons that someone would feel a certain way and act on those reasons. So
00:37:46
Speaker
In acting together, often we talk in leadership a lot about ownership. And so oftentimes in any collective organization, you're going to have to act contrary to a decision that then you would have made in that role. But one would hope, at least the vast majority of the time, you can at least see the reasons for that decision. I might have gone left rather than right, but I can see the three good reasons to go left.
00:38:12
Speaker
and and and one can act i don't think there's anything irrational or or disingenuous about necessarily about acting on reasons that you
00:38:24
Speaker
you see as valid. One of the contexts that brings to mind is that when my father passed away, I remember there was this moment when there was someone who was not super close, but I certainly knew and was close with my father and it was kind of our time together.
00:38:46
Speaker
You're not grieving constantly, even in an event like that. But I could tell it was important for her. She was certainly very shook up in this moment. And to put on and to remind myself of the way I had recently been more shook up didn't seem to me to be disingenuous in any way.
00:39:06
Speaker
But I could see why some would be concerned. I think some of my students said, at the end of the day, it might not even matter if it works, right? It's the goal, as you say, is to get into the water and to save the people that are drowning. Does it matter whether you are really wet or just feigning wetness? Might matter less. Yeah, I'm not sure on that. And I think as well, certainly one of the things we can often do
00:39:37
Speaker
when we're helping others out is the fact that we're not suffering in the same way can actually be useful.
Empathy and Understanding in Stoicism
00:39:43
Speaker
Like we need to understand. So if we come back to the significant other at the airport, we need to understand why they're frustrated, why they're angry, why they're upset. And that may require at the very least having experienced those feelings at some point.
00:39:59
Speaker
And we understand fully what it is and to appreciate that in order to get them out of the water. It's less clear that we always need to feel it fully. And sometimes we might think that that actually is counterproductive to being able to see the way to shore. We might need to be in water that's at the very least less deep than they are.
00:40:20
Speaker
Yeah, but it is something I think about, but yeah, all very, very interesting. Well, do you have any other thoughts, Caleb, that you want to make sure that we share about this topic, about thinking about the way our stoicism gets complicated in the way we deal with others, particularly when their reactions aren't as stoic as we might objectively want them to be?
00:40:43
Speaker
Yeah, well, one thing I'd like to talk about that brings out the tension or the potential problem this is for Stoics is this idea that we've been talking about a little bit around pity, sympathy, empathy, and so on, which is that, you know, are the Stoics
00:41:02
Speaker
against pity altogether. So the classicist, Martha Nesbom has an article connecting Nietzsche's attitudes with the Stoics, and she argues that both of them are anti-pity traditions. And Nietzsche is basically just following in the footsteps of Stoics, he read while he was younger. And the
00:41:24
Speaker
argument for this is that she takes Aristotle's account of pity. What is it to feel? Pity is to recognize that the other person's suffering is significant, that it's not their fault, and that you could be in that situation if fortune had turned out differently.
00:41:43
Speaker
But for the Stoics, often what people are upset about is not significant. They're indifference. There's a sense in which they're upset out of ignorance, but there is also a sense in which it is their fault. It's up to them whether they are upset or not. And the last one is, of course, if you are a sage, you could not be in the situation that they are in because you would not be making the judgment that they would be.
00:42:11
Speaker
That's her short argument for why stoics are anti-pity. And I think it brings out some of this tension around when you think about submerging yourself, as it were, commiserating with the other person, or what have you. Are you acknowledging that particular indifference
00:42:35
Speaker
are bad, is it behavior that is encouraging vice in the other? Are you not taking the other person seriously by noting how they are responsible in their own suffering? So there's a sense almost in which Epictetus is counseling that other people be treated as children.
00:42:58
Speaker
right that you and even in this metaphor that Edelstein gives you submerge yourself to put move yourself lower to be at the other person's level and see the world as they do in order to pull them up which
00:43:13
Speaker
I think in some sense is correct and is useful, but there are also dangers in taking that approach to others since you are not the sage, right? The last condition of pity is likely is not met for most of us. We could be in that situation. So there certainly is that uncertainty there.
00:43:34
Speaker
And if we take a more Roman stoic position where at least some of them might be more skeptical that the sage is possible, then that becomes even stronger. Especially if we take a more modern position, I think, that while the stoics are right about many things, they were probably wrong about the link between mind and body.
Stoicism's View on Pity and Duty
00:43:58
Speaker
And if that's true, then sagehood isn't going to be something that at least is durable. I will always be vulnerable in terms of the ability to corrupt my mind in the future by corrupting my brain.
00:44:20
Speaker
And so that's a really fascinating argument. I think there's probably something to it. And I think there's something true to that. I certainly think it's more true of Nietzsche than for the Stoics because I think that what you might say is something along the lines of I could still pity them. I just might think I might pity them for different reasons. Right. So I don't.
00:44:46
Speaker
I don't pity them because they were injured physically, but because they weren't in a place where they could handle that as well as they could otherwise, or that the injury was more significant than what they were ready for at that time.
00:45:04
Speaker
or that they weren't given other avenues to be able to deal with that injury in a more productive way. I think a lot of it will come down to what we mean when we talk about compassion and pity and empathy. And if it means feeling with, then certainly I think that we're going to say that the Stoics don't think that we ought to
00:45:29
Speaker
have their pain resonate with us. But if we ought to take that as a call to action to do something for them, then I think absolutely the stoics would say we can feel pity. Now, what might be that we do for them might be different. And it might not be helpful and empowering to do the thing that a lot of frameworks
00:45:58
Speaker
of what a good life is, especially a lot of modern frameworks would say we ought to do for them. But we ought to do something for them if they're in pain or suffering. And what that be will be often difficult. Yeah, I think that's a really good question about pity. I generally frame it in terms of care, compassion, and empathy.
00:46:22
Speaker
Frame that the stoics would say we can feel all kinds of ways we think about those words But not many of the ways that we think about this words in part because they undercut the beliefs that the one is required for the other Right that my feeling that my feeling your pain is required for me to take action to alleviate your pain right and that seems right to me that I'm not required to feel it to take action in fact I
00:46:49
Speaker
You know, as they point out many times, oftentimes that'll get me to either do too much or too little. My anger, for example, my feeling of your pain, if I can just do a little bit, oftentimes I'll stop feeling it. And that'll be enough when your suffering still exists, right? Other times I'll try and help some people rather than others. Once again, not useful, even though it changes my experience of pain.
00:47:16
Speaker
But yeah, I think penny is a really interesting one that I need to think more about that. I think we should all think about But we should break it out in in terms of as we should do in all these cases Like should I feel the pain they're going through or does their pain call out to some action on my part? And certainly the second part. I think the stoics would say Yes, absolutely
00:47:38
Speaker
You know, we should do it and not make note of it, as Marcus says, right? A bee produces honey, a horse runs, an excellent humanly helps others, right? And what more could we be called on to help others than in their suffering, right? In their lack of virtue that's causing their suffering. So yeah, I think it might, they could feel pity, but it would be different, right? The content would be different, right? I wouldn't feel bad that they were injured, but I would feel bad that they didn't have the
00:48:08
Speaker
ability to deal with their injury or they don't currently maybe would be an even better way of framing it, right? They don't currently have a way of dealing with their injury. And so what I need to do is to figure out how somehow to help them do that better and sometimes that will be to heal their injury and sometimes that'll be to give them other tools and sometimes it'll be to give them an invitation to stoicism perhaps. Right. I certainly agree that the stoics cannot say that.
00:48:36
Speaker
that pity is a matter of feeling what the other person is feeling or empathizing in that sense. Indeed, Naspam connects Nietzsche and the Stoics attitudes towards pity with their attitude against revenge, which is an interesting and underrated connection that feeling with the other person often leads to the desire that someone else
00:49:05
Speaker
ought to be deal pain punished yeah that they ought to feel yeah because if it's not their fault then it then then then perhaps it's someone else's and then that person ought to suffer right rather than this person or at least that person ought to suffer as much as this person yeah i think what what's really fascinating and pity and i've had lots of discussions with my students about hope too and i think both of them turn on a lot about
00:49:32
Speaker
the content, right? What is it that we're pitying and what is it we're hopeful for, right? So I often say, I hope that I'm able to rise to the challenge is not a kind of hope that the Stoics would disdain, right? It would be a hope that tomorrow's weather is better than today's or that I have more money tomorrow or that people think well of me after the speech. So, you know, once we kind of get
00:50:03
Speaker
get clear about what the content of hope or pity are, I think that will change things. And I think a lot of people will still disagree with the Stoics and rightly so, because once again, all we can, the best we can do is invite them. But, but it is, I think it does change the, what we think about things, right? Once we get a little clearer on the content of.
00:50:28
Speaker
Yeah, it does. It does change your focus. Your focus is less on what is the indifference that occurred to myself or to others and is more on the who did these things occur to and then what's next? Yeah, that's a really interesting question. Yeah, I'll have to think more about that. But yeah. Excellent. Awesome. Thanks, Caleb. Anything else you want to talk about?
00:50:56
Speaker
I don't think so. He covered a good amount. Is there anything else you wanted to say or ask? No. No, I mean, this is fun as always and always really thought provoking and I always learn a lot. Okay, perfect. Yeah, I enjoyed it as well. I'm glad you suggested it. Yeah. Thanks, Hugh.
00:51:12
Speaker
Alright, cheers.
00:51:29
Speaker
And I'd like to thank Michael Levy for graciously letting us use his music. Do check out his work at ancientliar.com and please get in touch with us at stoameditation.com if you ever have any feedback or questions. Until next time.