Stoicism is not Therapy, but Training (Part 3)

 This email message from Grant Sterling to the International Stoic Forum is the third of a three part discussion he had with Jules Evans.

At 05:47 PM 2/25/2008, Stoic Stoic wrote:

>this would be a pity, because the core stoic

>insight - that our suffering often comes from

>our own thoughts and beliefs rather than from

>externals - is much easier to accept for most

>people. its much more practically useful.

>stoicism has survived because of that insight,

>not because of the more radical idea that the

>only real source of happiness is inner virtue.

Slow down. The belief that our suffering comes from our own

thoughts and not from externals is equivalent to the belief

that externals are neither good not evil. If externals were

genuine goods or evils, then our perception of a genuine evil

would cause suffering, as would the loss or absence of a genuine

good. So you cannot coherently believe that our suffering

never comes from externals without holding that externals

are neither good not evil.

Now, as I said, you can phrase this doctrine in whatever

way will help the other person learn it. You don't have to use the

_words_ "good" or "evil". But that's the doctrine.

It would be a shame to teach someone that externals have

no value [in whatever way you wish to phrase it] and not teach them

that Virtue _does_ have value. It would be odd to teach them that

suffering comes from our thoughts and beliefs and not from externals,

and not teach them that _happiness_ comes from having the proper

thoughts and beliefs. I see no reason why this "more radical idea"

would be hard to swallow for anyone who swallowed the "core

insight". Why would that be?

>and the techniques of stoicism - training

>oneself to stay mindful, to stay in the moment,

>to keep thought journals, to challenge negative

>thoughts etc - are also much more generally

>accessible and applicable than the more radical

>idea that the only source of happiness is inner virtue.

Train oneself to stay mindful _of what_? To keep thought journals

_about what_? All these techniques, it seems to me, either reflect the

underlying Stoic doctrine [we are to challange negative thoughts _because_

negative thoughts are based on the false belief that externals have value],

or else they are in no way distinctively _Stoic_ techniques [many other

philosophical systems recommend that you stay mindful of something, etc.]

>stoicism can actually help people to achieve

>their external goals. they decide they would

>like to overcome their shyness with the opposite

>sex and try to meet a nice girl or boy, for example.

That's great. I do not deny that Stoic techniques can

make people happier.

>the 'pure' stoic therapy would be to tell them

>that a girlfriend or a boyfriend is an

>indifferent, it's not a source of real

>happiness, so they should rather spend their

>time trying to accept the will of the Logos. so

>they accept the will of the Logos and don't change their situation.

This is false. This is a misunderstanding of the nature of

goodness that results from not understanding the doctrine of

preferred indifferents. Pure Stoic therapy would tell them no such

thing. [Although it _would_ tell them to accept the will of Logos

if they try to meet someone _and fail_...but you'd better be teaching

them that, or else your method won't be relieving their suffering at all.]

>but a more practical form of stoic therapy would

>treat the attempt to get a girlfriend /

>boyfriend as a stoic exercise, as a way to

>challenge one's shyness and conquer one's fear,

>which achieves the stoic goal of conquering fear

>and getting closer to a state of inner balance,

>as well as, hopefully, the practical goal of

>getting one to be more calm and confident with

>the opposite sex, so that you do actually find a nice girlfriend or boyfriend.

I have no trouble with this.

>this more practical form of stoic therapy is

>what CBT, REBT and positive psychology has

>incorporated. because it has retained the core

>insight of stoicism (thoughts often cause

>suffering) without the more radical claims (only

>source of happiness is virtue) it has gained

>great acceptance with the medical community,

>with governments, and with ordinary people.

The success it has had is the result of incorporating

Stoic _doctrine_. I see no reason to suppose that it

would have less success or popularity if it incorporated _more_

Stoic doctrine. :)

[This is no different from the way in which Freudian

psychotherapy is based on Freudian _doctrines_ about

the nature of the unconscious, repression, etc. The only

difference is that Freudian psychotherapy doesn't work,

because they underlying doctrines are false.]

>The waiting lists of people trying to get CBT in

>the UK are still huge - you have to wait at

>least six weeks in many places. But the

>government has now put in £400m to train more

>therapists and get waiting lists shorter.

>

>There are six million people with depression in

>the UK, and about 4 million with anxiety

>disorders. you can't wait for them all to accept

>that the only source of happiness is inner

>virtue. if they don't, i still believe stoic

>ideas and techniques can help them.

Indeed, it can help them because they will then be "making

progress", by adopting the first and most basic Stoic principles

and working upwards. More power to them. I have no objection

whatsoever to the expansion of Stoic-based psychological programs.

>All the best,

>

>Julian

Regards,

Grant