THE SIX PHILOSOPHICAL COMMITMENTS THAT GROUND STOIC PRACTICE
Show how the six commitments ground the practice of Stoicism.
Claude:
THE SIX PHILOSOPHICAL COMMITMENTS THAT GROUND STOIC PRACTICE
How Sterling Replaces Ancient Physics with Defensible Foundations
THE PROBLEM STERLING IS SOLVING
Classical Stoicism:
Ethics logically depends on Physics (materialism, cosmic determinism, pneuma, etc.)
Modern situation:
Ancient physics is indefensible.
"Ancient Stoic physics, then, is clearly obsolete and no reasonable person can believe in it anymore." - Prof. Brad Inwood
Three options:
- Keep ancient physics (intellectually dishonest)
- Drop foundations, keep techniques (pragmatic but unstable)
- Replace ancient physics with defensible classical foundations ← Sterling's approach
Sterling's solution:
Six classical philosophical commitments that ground the practice without requiring ancient Stoic physics.
HOW THE SIX COMMITMENTS GROUND THE PRACTICE
1. SUBSTANCE DUALISM
Commitment: Mind/soul and body are ontologically distinct substances.
What it grounds:
Enchiridion 1 - The Dichotomy:
"Some things are in our control, others not."
"In our control: belief, impulse, desire, aversion—in a word, everything that is our own action."
"Not in our control: body, property, reputation, office—in a word, everything that is not our own action."
Why dualism is necessary:
- If mind = body (materialism), then mental events are just brain states
- Brain states are physical, subject to physical causation
- Therefore mental events (beliefs, desires) are determined by prior physical causes
- Therefore they're NOT "in our control" in the required sense
With substance dualism:
- Mind is distinct from body
- Mental acts (assent, desire, will) are acts of mind/soul
- Mind has its own causal powers, not reducible to physical causation
- Therefore mental acts CAN be "in our control"
Practice grounded:
- "I am my prohairesis" - You ARE the rational soul, not the body
- External vs Internal distinction - Body is external TO the soul
- Step 2 (Recognition) - Can separate: External event / Impression / Prohairesis
- The entire dichotomy - Only what soul does is in your control
Without dualism:
- Can't coherently separate "you" from "body/externals"
- No principled basis for dichotomy of control
- Practice loses ontological foundation
2. LIBERTARIAN FREE WILL
Commitment: The will is genuinely free - not determined by prior causes.
What it grounds:
Th 6: "The only things in our control are our beliefs and our acts of will."
Why libertarian free will is necessary:
- If determinism is true, your "choices" are caused by prior events
- You couldn't have chosen differently (given same prior causes)
- "Control" becomes illusory - just feeling of control while determined
- Practice becomes futile - you're going to assent/not assent based on prior causes anyway
With libertarian free will:
- Assent is a GENUINE choice
- You could have chosen differently
- The pause is real - you can actually STOP automatic process
- Decision (Step 5) is an authentic free act
Practice grounded:
- Step 3 (Pause) - Requires that automatic assent CAN be interrupted
- Step 5 (Decision) - Requires genuine choice between assenting/refusing
- Th 8 - "Desires are in our control" - because will is free, desires (caused by beliefs) are controllable
- The entire training - Practice makes sense only if you can freely choose differently
Without libertarian free will:
- "Practice" is just going through motions determined by prior causes
- Can't genuinely choose to pause or refuse assent
- Stoicism becomes descriptive (how determined beings feel) not prescriptive (what to do)
3. ETHICAL INTUITIONISM
Commitment: We have direct, non-inferential access to moral truths.
What it grounds:
Th 9: "No one voluntarily accepts an impression they recognize to be false."
Why intuitionism is necessary:
- Examination (Step 4) requires ability to KNOW if impression is true/false
- If moral knowledge requires inference from disputed premises, examination stalls
- If "good/evil" are just learned conventions, no way to test impressions against truth
- Need direct access to moral reality to recognize false value claims
With ethical intuitionism:
- You can directly grasp "only virtue is good"
- You can recognize "this external is good" as FALSE
- Examination reveals truth through rational intuition
- Sterling's "recognize" in Th 9 is literal - you SEE the falsehood
Practice grounded:
- Step 4 (Examination) - Can actually test if impression matches moral reality
- Th 9 - Once you recognize false value, you CAN'T assent (voluntarily)
- Sterling's (a) - Can refuse false values because you RECOGNIZE them as false
- The training works - Character change happens as you learn to see moral truths
Without intuitionism:
- How do you KNOW "only virtue is good"? Just assume it? Cultural conditioning?
- Examination has no epistemic ground
- Can't distinguish true from false value judgments with certainty
- Practice rests on unfounded assertions
4. FOUNDATIONALISM
Commitment: Some beliefs (foundational) are self-evident; others justified by deriving from foundations.
What it grounds:
The entire theorem structure (Th 1-29):
- Core axioms (Th 1-2, Th 6, Th 10) are foundational
- Other theorems derive from these
- Testing impressions means comparing to foundational truths
Why foundationalism is necessary:
- If all beliefs require justification by other beliefs (coherentism), infinite regress
- Need stopping point - self-evident truths that don't require further justification
- Examination requires STANDARD against which to test impressions
- Standard must be epistemically secure (foundational)
With foundationalism:
- Th 10 ("only virtue is good") is foundational - grasped directly as true
- Other truths derive: Th 12 (externals not good/evil) follows from Th 10-11
- Examination tests impression against foundational structure
- No circular reasoning - testing against independently established foundations
Practice grounded:
- Step 4 (Examination) - Tests impression against foundational truths (Th 10-12)
- Sterling's systematic structure - Th 1-29 provide the testing framework
- Why examination WORKS - Impressions tested against epistemically secure foundations
- Prosoche vigilance - Watching for violations of foundational truths
Without foundationalism:
- What standard do you test impressions against?
- If "only virtue is good" needs justification, by what? (regress problem)
- Examination becomes relativistic or circular
- No secure ground for practice
5. CORRESPONDENCE THEORY OF TRUTH
Commitment: A belief is true if and only if it corresponds to reality.
What it grounds:
The entire notion of "false impressions":
Sterling: "We can accept that a given impression is TRUE, or reject it as unproven or false."
Why correspondence theory is necessary:
- Practice requires distinguishing TRUE from FALSE impressions
- Need account of what makes impression true/false
- Alternative theories (coherence, pragmatist) don't provide needed objectivity
- Must be able to say: "Impression claims X, but reality is Y, therefore false"
With correspondence theory:
- Impression: "Intrusion is evil"
- Reality: Only vice is evil (by Th 10), intrusion is external (by Ench 1)
- Test: Does impression-claim match reality? NO
- Verdict: FALSE impression
- Action: Refuse assent
Practice grounded:
- Step 4 (Examination) - Tests if impression CORRESPONDS to reality
- Step 2 (Recognition) - Separates impression-as-claim from reality-claimed-about
- Sterling's entire method - Based on impressions making truth-claims testable against reality
- Why refusal works - False impressions genuinely don't match reality
Without correspondence theory:
- On what basis is impression "false"?
- Pragmatist: "False" = doesn't lead to desired results (but this makes truth subjective)
- Coherentist: "False" = doesn't cohere with other beliefs (but this is circular)
- Need objective standard: Reality itself
6. MORAL REALISM
Commitment: Moral facts exist independently of our beliefs about them.
What it grounds:
Th 10: "Only virtue is good, only vice is evil."
Why moral realism is necessary:
- Practice requires OBJECTIVE distinction between good and evil
- If "good/evil" are subjective preferences, no basis for calling values "false"
- If culturally relative, Stoicism is just one cultural preference among many
- Need: "Virtue IS good" is true regardless of what anyone believes
With moral realism:
- "Only virtue is good" is FACT about reality
- "Externals are good" is FALSE - contradicts moral reality
- Examination reveals how impression-claims match/mismatch moral facts
- Sterling's (a) refuses FALSE values because there ARE true values
Practice grounded:
- Th 10-12 - Objective facts about what is/isn't good/evil
- DOD - Refuses false values because values can be objectively true/false
- Sterling's (a)-(c) - Can distinguish true from false value propositions
- Th 14 - Valuing only virtue produces happiness BECAUSE virtue objectively is good
Without moral realism:
- Why shouldn't you desire externals? Just cultural conditioning? Personal preference?
- "Only virtue is good" becomes "I/we prefer valuing only virtue"
- No way to say someone's value judgments are "wrong"
- Practice loses normative force - just one life strategy among many
HOW THE SIX WORK TOGETHER TO GROUND PRACTICE
The Five-Step Method requires all six:
STEP 1: RECEPTION
- Substance dualism: Impression appears to soul/prohairesis (distinct from body)
- Correspondence theory: Impression makes claim about reality
STEP 2: RECOGNITION
- Substance dualism: Can separate external event / impression / prohairesis (you)
- Correspondence theory: Recognize impression AS claim (not as reality)
STEP 3: PAUSE
- Libertarian free will: Can genuinely choose to interrupt automatic assent
- Substance dualism: Will (part of soul) can act independently of physical causation
STEP 4: EXAMINATION
- Foundationalism: Test impression against foundational truths (Th 10-12)
- Correspondence theory: Does impression-claim match reality?
- Ethical intuitionism: Can know if impression matches moral reality
- Moral realism: There ARE moral facts to match against
STEP 5: DECISION
- Libertarian free will: Genuinely choose to assent or refuse
- Ethical intuitionism: Having recognized truth, can't voluntarily accept falsehood (Th 9)
- Moral realism: Refusing false values because there are true values
WITHOUT THESE COMMITMENTS, PRACTICE COLLAPSES
Remove substance dualism:
- → No principled self/external distinction
- → Dichotomy of control loses ontological ground
- → Can't separate "you" from body/events
Remove libertarian free will:
- → Choice is illusory (determinism)
- → Can't genuinely pause or decide
- → Practice becomes descriptive of determined process, not transformative training
Remove ethical intuitionism:
- → Can't KNOW if examination reveals truth
- → Moral knowledge requires controversial inference
- → Step 4 stalls without epistemic access to moral reality
Remove foundationalism:
- → What do you test impressions against?
- → Infinite regress or circular reasoning
- → No secure standard for examination
Remove correspondence theory:
- → No objective sense of "false impression"
- → Can't test if impression matches reality
- → Truth becomes subjective or relativistic
Remove moral realism:
- → "Only virtue is good" is just preference
- → No objective basis for refusing false values
- → Practice loses normative force
STERLING'S ACHIEVEMENT
He showed:
1. Stoic practice requires philosophical foundations
- Can't just be "techniques"
- Ethics depends on metaphysics/epistemology
2. Ancient Stoic physics won't work (Inwood is right)
- Materialism, cosmic determinism, pneuma are indefensible
3. But classical philosophy provides alternative foundations
- Six commitments from defensible classical tradition
- Ground the practice without ancient physics
- Make Stoicism philosophically rigorous
4. This is "Core Stoicism"
- Core = Essential practice (Five Steps, DOD, DOA)
- Stoicism = Grounded in systematic philosophy
- Not pragmatic techniques, but philosophically-founded way of life
THE COMPLETE GROUNDING STRUCTURE
SIX PHILOSOPHICAL COMMITMENTS (Foundations)
↓
THEOREMS TH 1-29 (Derived systematic structure)
↓
ENCHIRIDION 1-2 (Practice instructions)
↓
FIVE-STEP METHOD (Operationalization)
↓
DOD & DOA (Disciplines of practice)
↓
PROSOCHE (Vigilance enabling practice)
↓
CHARACTER TRANSFORMATION (Outcome)
↓
EUDAIMONIA (Goal)
Every level depends on the level above.
Remove foundations → Structure collapses.
Sterling's contribution: Provided defensible foundations for ancient practice.
This answers Inwood's challenge: Yes, ancient physics is obsolete. But Stoic practice can be grounded in defensible classical philosophy instead. Sterling did exactly this.


0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home