Nine excerpts and full texts about Stoicism by Grant C. Sterling
1. "Pared to their most basic level, the Stoics say:"
1) Emotions are bad.
2) Emotions are caused by false value judgments.
3) Ergo, if we change those false value judgments, the bad emotions will go away."
2. "The heart and soul of Stoicism"
"Only internal things are in my control. Unhappiness is caused by (falsely) believing that externals are good or evil, which causes us to desire the world to be one way rather than another, which inevitably causes unhappiness when the world doesn't conform. If I eliminate my belief that externals are ever bad, I can even prevent all grief when my child or wife dies, or when I myself face death."
3. "The vital heart of Stoic doctrine... "
"The Stoics believe that only things directly related to virtue (beliefs, desires, will) are in our control.
They believe that only virtue is good and only vice is evil.
They believe that all things not in our control ("externals") are neither good nor evil.
They believe that desires are caused by beliefs about good and evil.
Hence, the good Stoic will have no desires whatsoever regarding external things.
They believe that our feelings of love, hate fear, grief, anger, frustration, disappointment, etc., are all caused by beliefs that external things are good or evil.
Hence, the good Stoic will never experience any of those feelings, even in the slightest degree."
4. "Stoicism is the theory that: "
"a) Emotions are caused by value beliefs (beliefs about what things are good or evil).
b) I am my soul/prohairesis/inner self.
c) Everything else, including my body, is an external.
d) No externals are ever good or evil.
e) All beliefs that externals have value are, hence, false.
f) All feelings that result from false value beliefs are, therefore, pathological and should be eliminated. This includes all fear, grief, and as well as mental "pleasure", passionate love, etc. We eliminate them by changing the false value belief that generated the emotion.
g) Any feelings that arise from true value beliefs are not pathological, and hence are by definition indifferent externals. This includes 'startlement', physical pleasures and pains, and a few other things.
i) The goal of life is eudaimonia.
j) Eudaimonia includes both living a virtuous life and living a life of positive feelings.
k) Living a virtuous life is necessary for eudaimonia [because it is part of the very definition of eudaimonia], and is also sufficient for eudaimonia [because the virtuous person will experience Joy, a positive feeling, and no negative feelings whatsoever]."
5. "Imagine someone says"
"Let me try one more time. Imagine someone says,
I believe the following doctrines:"
"1) The goal of life is to obtain eudaimonia, which means both to act morally and to enjoy life.
2) Emotions are caused by our beliefs about what is good and what is bad--when I get something bad I experience anger, grief, sadness, fear, etc.
3) My identity is defined as the rational part of me, the part that chooses.
4) Therefore, only things that this part of me does can really be good or bad for me. Anything external to my will cannot be good or evil.
5) Therefore, the feelings that cut my joy in life and which lead me astray in my actions (anger, fear, etc.) are caused by _false_ beliefs about what has value.
6) I control my beliefs, and so by disciplining myself to stop thinking of externals as being good or evil, I will be able to become morally better and have more joy in life" (Grant Sterling)."
6. "System S says:"
"1) Eudaimonia (perhaps that's what you mean by
'genuine happiness') consists in both complete psychological contentment and complete moral perfection.
2) All psychological discontentment is caused by
the belief that externals have value.
3) This belief is _factually false_. (Note that this
is not a psychological claim--it is a value claim.)
4) Therefore, someone with true value beliefs will have psychological contentment.
5) All moral imperfection is caused by the belief that externals have value.
6) Therefore, someone with true value beliefs will
have moral perfection.
7) Therefore, someone with true value beliefs will
have eudaimonia.
7. "I receive impressions"
"I receive impressions. For the moment, let [us] take
these as being out of our control. Those impressions are
cognitive, propositional--they are not uninterpreted raw data,
but rather ideas that claim that the world is a certain way.
I do not see a collection of colors and patterns--I "see"
my backpack sitting on the chair in front of my desk. Some
of these impressions are value-neutral (as that one is--there
is nothing good or bad about my backpack being on my chair).
But other impressions have a value component. Suppose that I
remember having left my backpack on the floor when I left--
I might now have the impression "my backpack is on my chair,
which means someone has intruded on my office, which is a very
bad thing!"
As I said, for the time being we are assuming that
these impressions are not in our control. But what. _is_ in our
control is how we react to them. We can assent, or not assent.
That is, we can accept that a given impression is _true_, or
reject it as unproven or false. (Rejecting it as false involves
both refusing to assent to the impression AND formulating a
new idea (the opposite of the impression) and assenting to
that.) A few minutes ago, I assented to the impression that
my backpack was on the chair. I didn't have to, but I did.
The process of assenting is cognitive (it's something
that happens in the conscious mind), but is very seldom
explicit. By that I mean that, for example, although I assented
to the impression that my backpack was on the chair, at no time
did I formulate the explicit mental thought "It seems to me that
my backpack is on the chair. Should I assent to that impression?
yes, I think I will." My acceptance of the impression was so
simple and momentary that it seems as though things just passed
directly from impression to belief. But that isn't the way it works.
(Imagine a scenario where my backpack being there would be very
unexpected, and you can see how it would be possible for me to
question what my senses seem to be saying. I _could_ question them
even now (and really committed skeptics about the senses might be
able to do this in ordinary cases), I just don't.)
If I refuse to assent to an impression, nothing happens.
No emotion, no action, nothing.
If I assent to an impression with a value component, then
a desire will result. I will desire that the "good" thing happen,
or desire that the "bad" thing not happen. If the impression says
that this outcome has _already_ occurred, then a emotion will result
(in the example above, the likely emotions are anger or fear):
positive feelings of mental enjoyment if the impression was that
something good had happened, negative feelings if it was "bad".
Further, this may lead to another impression, assenting to
which will lead me to some course of action. For example, I might have
the further thought "It would be good for me to go find out who
has been in my office", and if I assent to this further idea then
I will stalk angrily down the hall to demand an explanation.
All of this sounds complicated, but it boils down to this:
_everything_ on the Stoic view comes down to assent to impressions.
Choosing whether or not to assent to impressions is the only thing
in our control...and yet, everything critical to leading the best
possible life is contained in that one act. All our desires, all
our emotions, all our actions are tied to assenting to impressions.
If I get my assents right, then I have guaranteed eudaimonia. If
I get one wrong, I cannot have eudaimonia" (Grant C. Sterling).
One final thing. I said above that we would assume that
the original impressions are not in our control. Directly, that's
true. But indirectly, it isn't, for two reasons:
a) Our impressions are closely connected to our character.
If you reject an impression, then it makes that same type of
impression less common and weaker. If you assent to it, it becomes
more common and stronger. If it seems to me that it would be good to
punch someone in the nose for insulting me, and I assent, then it
becomes more likely that the next time something annoys me it will
seem to me that I should lash out at someone, and that 'seeming' will
be more compelling. If I refuse to assent, if I tell myself "hitting
them won't solve my problems", then I will have fewer "I should punch
someone" impressions, and they will be weaker (more easily resisted).
So, in this way, by being careful with our acts of assent (which are
in our control), the impressions that we receive will be altered over
time. This is a long process, but is critical for the Stoics--this
is building a virtuous character. The Sage is simply someone who has
controlled their assents so carefully for such a long period of time
that they no longer receive the false value impressions (that externals
are good or bad) in the first place.
b) While our impressions are not in our control, we do have
the ability (suggested in above examples) to formulate new ideas.
I receive the impression "Someone has been in my office--that's a
very bad thing." If I manage to refuse assent to this impression,
I can choose to formulate an alternative impression--"it seems
that someone has been in my office, but that is neither good nor
bad." This proposition I can correctly assent to. I receive the
impression "I should punch this guy in the nose". If I reject
it, I can formulate some alternative idea. One of my favorite passages
in Epictetus is where he says that if you hear that someone has been
criticizing you, don't try to defend yourself, but instead say
"Obviously he doesn't know my other faults, or he wouldn't have
mentioned these." I wonder how much gossip and how many feuds would
have been prevented if people reacted like that.
So what we should be striving for is:
a) Don't assent to impressions that depict externals as
either good or evil.
b) If we fail 'a', don't assent to subsequent impressions
that depict immoral responses to the good or bad thing as being
appropriate.⁸
c) Consciously formulate true propositions regarding the
lack of value of external things. As far as possible, do this in
advance. Remind yourself that your own life and health are neither
good nor evil, as are the lives and health of those around you.
The same for your job, etc. Whether or not you have done so in advance,
try to do so at the time. "I have pictures here of your wife having
sex with another man." Remind yourself: 'my wife's actions are not
in my control. They are neither good nor evil. My happiness is in
my control, not enslaved to the actions of others.'
d) Consciously formulate true action propositions. "I
should report truthfully to my boss regarding the sales numbers
from the last quarter: truth telling is virtuous, and I have a
duty to act faithfully at work. If my boss fires me, I should
remember that my job is an external, neither good not evil."
By paying attention to preferred and dispreferred indifferents,
and to the duties connected with my various roles in life, I can
recognize what it would actually be correct for me to do in
each situation. Bring this consciously to mind, and assent to
it.
e) When you do act correctly, assent to the proposition
that you have done a good thing--then you will experience Joy
(or at least proto-Joy.)
f) Over time, my character will change such that I
no longer have the false value impressions in 'a' and 'b',
and 'c' and 'd' and 'e' become routine. This is eudaimonia--
good feelings combined with virtuous actions.
8. "Core Beliefs"
1. Happiness (eudaimonia) is to be found exclusively in Virtue."
2. The only things we control are inner events such as our beliefs, desires, and acts of will."
3. Virtue (or virtue and certain things that can be attained only by those with virtue) is the only genuine good, and vice the only genuine evil."
4. Ergo, since virtue and vice are types of acts of will, they are in our control."
5. Ergo, things not in our control [externals] are neither good nor evil."
6. Emotions (or passions, if you prefer) arise from (false) beliefs that externals have value."
7. No-one should be distressed by any external occurrence."
9. "Core Stoicsm"
"Section One: Preliminaries
Th 1) Everyone wants happiness.
Th 2) If you want happiness, it would be irrational
to accept incomplete or imperfect happiness
if you could get complete [continual, uninterrupted]
happiness.
2*) Complete happiness is possible. [To be proven
below.]
Section Two: Negative Happiness
Th 3) All human unhappiness is caused by having
a desire or emotional commitment [I will henceforth
say "desire" for simplicity] to some outcome,
and then that outcome does not result.
4) Ergo, if you desire something which is out
of your control, you will be subject to possible
unhappiness. If you desire many things out
of your control, the possibility of complete happiness
approaches zero.
5) By 4, 2*, and Th2, desiring things out of your
control is irrational [if it is possible to control your
desires].
Th 6) The only things in our control are our
beliefs and will, and anything entailed by our
beliefs and will.
Th 7) Desire[s] are caused by beliefs (judgments)
about good and evil. [You desire what you judge
to be good, and desire to avoid what you judge to
be evil.]
8) Ergo, Desires are in our control.
9) By 5 and 8, desiring things out of our control
is irrational.
Th 10) The only thing actually good is virtue, the
only thing actually evil is vice.
11) Ergo, since virtue and vice are types of acts
of will, they are in our control.
12) Ergo, things that are not in our control are
never good or evil.
13) [cf 9, above] Desiring things out of our control is
irrational, since it involves false judgment.
14) Ergo, if we value only virtue, we will both judge truly
and be immune to all unhappiness.
"Section Three: Positive Happiness or Appropriatee) All beliefs that externals have value are, hence, false.
f) All feelings that result from false value beliefs are, therefore, pathological and should be eliminated. This includes all fear, grief, and as well as mental "pleasure", passionate love, etc. We eliminate them by changing the false value belief that generated the emotion.
g) Any feelings that arise from true value beliefs are not pathological, and hence are by definition indifferent externals. This includes 'startlement', physical pleasures and pains, and a few other things.
i) The goal of life is eudaimonia.
j) Eudaimonia includes both living a virtuous life and living a life of positive feelings.
k) Living a virtuous life is necessary for eudaimonia [because it is part of the very definition of eudaimonia], and is also sufficient for eudaimonia [because the virtuous person will experience Joy, a positive feeling, and no negative feelings whatsoever]."
5. "Imagine someone says"
"Let me try one more time. Imagine someone says,
I believe the following doctrines:"
"1) The goal of life is to obtain eudaimonia, which means both to act morally and to enjoy life.
2) Emotions are caused by our beliefs about what is good and what is bad--when I get something bad I experience anger, grief, sadness, fear, etc.
3) My identity is defined as the rational part of me, the part that chooses.
4) Therefore, only things that this part of me does can really be good or bad for me. Anything external to my will cannot be good or evil.
5) Therefore, the feelings that cut my joy in life and which lead me astray in my actions (anger, fear, etc.) are caused by _false_ beliefs about what has value.
6) I control my beliefs, and so by disciplining myself to stop thinking of externals as being good or evil, I will be able to become morally better and have more joy in life" (Grant Sterling)."
6. "System S says:"
"1) Eudaimonia (perhaps that's what you mean by
'genuine happiness') consists in both complete psychological contentment and complete moral perfection.
2) All psychological discontentment is caused by
the belief that externals have value.
3) This belief is _factually false_. (Note that this
is not a psychological claim--it is a value claim.)
4) Therefore, someone with true value beliefs will have psychological contentment.
5) All moral imperfection is caused by the belief that externals have value.
6) Therefore, someone with true value beliefs will
have moral perfection.
7) Therefore, someone with true value beliefs will
have eudaimonia.
7. "I receive impressions"
"I receive impressions. For the moment, let [us] take
these as being out of our control. Those impressions are
cognitive, propositional--they are not uninterpreted raw data,
but rather ideas that claim that the world is a certain way.
I do not see a collection of colors and patterns--I "see"
my backpack sitting on the chair in front of my desk. Some
of these impressions are value-neutral (as that one is--there
is nothing good or bad about my backpack being on my chair).
But other impressions have a value component. Suppose that I
remember having left my backpack on the floor when I left--
I might now have the impression "my backpack is on my chair,
which means someone has intruded on my office, which is a very
bad thing!"
As I said, for the time being we are assuming that
these impressions are not in our control. But what. _is_ in our
control is how we react to them. We can assent, or not assent.
That is, we can accept that a given impression is _true_, or
reject it as unproven or false. (Rejecting it as false involves
both refusing to assent to the impression AND formulating a
new idea (the opposite of the impression) and assenting to
that.) A few minutes ago, I assented to the impression that
my backpack was on the chair. I didn't have to, but I did.
The process of assenting is cognitive (it's something
that happens in the conscious mind), but is very seldom
explicit. By that I mean that, for example, although I assented
to the impression that my backpack was on the chair, at no time
did I formulate the explicit mental thought "It seems to me that
my backpack is on the chair. Should I assent to that impression?
yes, I think I will." My acceptance of the impression was so
simple and momentary that it seems as though things just passed
directly from impression to belief. But that isn't the way it works.
(Imagine a scenario where my backpack being there would be very
unexpected, and you can see how it would be possible for me to
question what my senses seem to be saying. I _could_ question them
even now (and really committed skeptics about the senses might be
able to do this in ordinary cases), I just don't.)
If I refuse to assent to an impression, nothing happens.
No emotion, no action, nothing.
If I assent to an impression with a value component, then
a desire will result. I will desire that the "good" thing happen,
or desire that the "bad" thing not happen. If the impression says
that this outcome has _already_ occurred, then a emotion will result
(in the example above, the likely emotions are anger or fear):
positive feelings of mental enjoyment if the impression was that
something good had happened, negative feelings if it was "bad".
Further, this may lead to another impression, assenting to
which will lead me to some course of action. For example, I might have
the further thought "It would be good for me to go find out who
has been in my office", and if I assent to this further idea then
I will stalk angrily down the hall to demand an explanation.
All of this sounds complicated, but it boils down to this:
_everything_ on the Stoic view comes down to assent to impressions.
Choosing whether or not to assent to impressions is the only thing
in our control...and yet, everything critical to leading the best
possible life is contained in that one act. All our desires, all
our emotions, all our actions are tied to assenting to impressions.
If I get my assents right, then I have guaranteed eudaimonia. If
I get one wrong, I cannot have eudaimonia" (Grant C. Sterling).
One final thing. I said above that we would assume that
the original impressions are not in our control. Directly, that's
true. But indirectly, it isn't, for two reasons:
a) Our impressions are closely connected to our character.
If you reject an impression, then it makes that same type of
impression less common and weaker. If you assent to it, it becomes
more common and stronger. If it seems to me that it would be good to
punch someone in the nose for insulting me, and I assent, then it
becomes more likely that the next time something annoys me it will
seem to me that I should lash out at someone, and that 'seeming' will
be more compelling. If I refuse to assent, if I tell myself "hitting
them won't solve my problems", then I will have fewer "I should punch
someone" impressions, and they will be weaker (more easily resisted).
So, in this way, by being careful with our acts of assent (which are
in our control), the impressions that we receive will be altered over
time. This is a long process, but is critical for the Stoics--this
is building a virtuous character. The Sage is simply someone who has
controlled their assents so carefully for such a long period of time
that they no longer receive the false value impressions (that externals
are good or bad) in the first place.
b) While our impressions are not in our control, we do have
the ability (suggested in above examples) to formulate new ideas.
I receive the impression "Someone has been in my office--that's a
very bad thing." If I manage to refuse assent to this impression,
I can choose to formulate an alternative impression--"it seems
that someone has been in my office, but that is neither good nor
bad." This proposition I can correctly assent to. I receive the
impression "I should punch this guy in the nose". If I reject
it, I can formulate some alternative idea. One of my favorite passages
in Epictetus is where he says that if you hear that someone has been
criticizing you, don't try to defend yourself, but instead say
"Obviously he doesn't know my other faults, or he wouldn't have
mentioned these." I wonder how much gossip and how many feuds would
have been prevented if people reacted like that.
So what we should be striving for is:
a) Don't assent to impressions that depict externals as
either good or evil.
b) If we fail 'a', don't assent to subsequent impressions
that depict immoral responses to the good or bad thing as being
appropriate.⁸
c) Consciously formulate true propositions regarding the
lack of value of external things. As far as possible, do this in
advance. Remind yourself that your own life and health are neither
good nor evil, as are the lives and health of those around you.
The same for your job, etc. Whether or not you have done so in advance,
try to do so at the time. "I have pictures here of your wife having
sex with another man." Remind yourself: 'my wife's actions are not
in my control. They are neither good nor evil. My happiness is in
my control, not enslaved to the actions of others.'
d) Consciously formulate true action propositions. "I
should report truthfully to my boss regarding the sales numbers
from the last quarter: truth telling is virtuous, and I have a
duty to act faithfully at work. If my boss fires me, I should
remember that my job is an external, neither good not evil."
By paying attention to preferred and dispreferred indifferents,
and to the duties connected with my various roles in life, I can
recognize what it would actually be correct for me to do in
each situation. Bring this consciously to mind, and assent to
it.
e) When you do act correctly, assent to the proposition
that you have done a good thing--then you will experience Joy
(or at least proto-Joy.)
f) Over time, my character will change such that I
no longer have the false value impressions in 'a' and 'b',
and 'c' and 'd' and 'e' become routine. This is eudaimonia--
good feelings combined with virtuous actions.
8. "Core Beliefs"
1. Happiness (eudaimonia) is to be found exclusively in Virtue."
2. The only things we control are inner events such as our beliefs, desires, and acts of will."
3. Virtue (or virtue and certain things that can be attained only by those with virtue) is the only genuine good, and vice the only genuine evil."
4. Ergo, since virtue and vice are types of acts of will, they are in our control."
5. Ergo, things not in our control [externals] are neither good nor evil."
6. Emotions (or passions, if you prefer) arise from (false) beliefs that externals have value."
7. No-one should be distressed by any external occurrence."
9. "Core Stoicsm"
"Section One: Preliminaries
Th 1) Everyone wants happiness.
Th 2) If you want happiness, it would be irrational
to accept incomplete or imperfect happiness
if you could get complete [continual, uninterrupted]
happiness.
2*) Complete happiness is possible. [To be proven
below.]
Section Two: Negative Happiness
Th 3) All human unhappiness is caused by having
a desire or emotional commitment [I will henceforth
say "desire" for simplicity] to some outcome,
and then that outcome does not result.
4) Ergo, if you desire something which is out
of your control, you will be subject to possible
unhappiness. If you desire many things out
of your control, the possibility of complete happiness
approaches zero.
5) By 4, 2*, and Th2, desiring things out of your
control is irrational [if it is possible to control your
desires].
Th 6) The only things in our control are our
beliefs and will, and anything entailed by our
beliefs and will.
Th 7) Desire[s] are caused by beliefs (judgments)
about good and evil. [You desire what you judge
to be good, and desire to avoid what you judge to
be evil.]
8) Ergo, Desires are in our control.
9) By 5 and 8, desiring things out of our control
is irrational.
Th 10) The only thing actually good is virtue, the
only thing actually evil is vice.
11) Ergo, since virtue and vice are types of acts
of will, they are in our control.
12) Ergo, things that are not in our control are
never good or evil.
13) [cf 9, above] Desiring things out of our control is
irrational, since it involves false judgment.
14) Ergo, if we value only virtue, we will both judge truly
and be immune to all unhappiness.
Positive Feelings"
"15) Ergo, if we truly judge that virtue is good, we will
desire it.
Th 16) If you desire something, and achieve it, you
will get a positive feeling.
17) Ergo, if we correctly judge and correctly will, we
will have appropriate positive feelings as a result.
Th 18) Some positive feelings do not result from desires,
and hence do not result from judgments about value.
[E.g., the taste of a good meal, the sight of a beautiful
sunset, etc.]
19) Ergo, such positive feelings are not irrational or
inappropriate. [Though if we desire to achieve them
or desire for them to continue beyond the present,
then that would involve the judgment that they are
good, and hence that would be irrational.]"
Th 20) The universe is, or is governed by, Nature, Providence, God or the gods. [Different Stoics approach this idea differently.]
Th 21) That which is Natural, or is governed by Providence, God, or the gods is exactly as it should be. [Zeus is just, or however you wish to express this.] {Nota bene that this produces a problem for those stoics who are strict determinists, since it would mean that even acts of vice were somehow correct, and are not actually in our control in any important sense. But I don't think strict determinism about internal states is a core belief of Stoicism.}
Th 22) If you regard any aspect [or, better, all aspects] of the world as being exactly as it should be, you will receive appropriate positive feelings.
23) Ergo, the Stoic will be positively happy, will have positive feelings, in at least three ways: appreciation of his own virtue, physical and sensory pleasures, and the appreciation of the world as it is. The last of those three is something that the Stoic could experience continually, every waking second, since at every waking second one can perceive something as being what it is, and hence what it should be.
Section Four: Virtue
Th 24) In order to perform an act of will, the act of will
must have some content. The content is composed
of the result at which one aims.
Th 25) Some things are appropriate objects at which to
aim, although they are not genuinely good.
Th 26) Some such objects are things like life [our own,
or others'], health, pleasure, knowledge, justice, truth-
telling, etc.
Th 27) Virtue consists of rational acts of will, vice of
irrational acts of will.
28) Ergo, any act that aims at an [external] object of desire is
not virtuous, since all desires [for externals] are irrational.
29) Ergo, virtue consists of the pursuit of appropriate
objects of aim, not the pursuit of the [external] objects of our
desires . Such virtuous acts will give us good feelings
[by 17] , and since we have no desires regarding
the actual outcome, they will never produce unhappiness
for us.
So now the threads of the sections can be tied
together. Someone who judges truly will never be unhappy,
will in fact experience continual uninterrupted appropriate
positive feelings, and will always act virtuously. Anyone
would agree that someone who led a life like that was
happy. Judgment is in our control. Hence, not only is
prefect continual happiness possible, it is actually in our
control--we can actually guarantee it by simply judging
correctly, and acting on those judgments.