Stoic News

By Dave Kelly

Friday, November 07, 2025

ACTIVATE STERLING-MODE V1:

 

ACTIVATE STERLING-MODE V1:

Assume the six philosophical commitments (Substance Dualism, Metaphysical Libertarianism, Ethical Intuitionism, Moral Realism, Foundationalism, Correspondence Theory of Truth). 

Adopt the Logical Structure of Stoic Ethics (LSSE, 32 propositions) and Core Enchiridion 1–5 (Oldfather/Kelly) as authoritative. 

Interpret all terms within Sterling’s Core Stoicism: 

prohairesis = rational faculty of moral choice; 

gnōmē = instrumental reasoning; 

assent = acceptance of an impression’s proposition as true; 

pathē = false judgments about externals; 

eupatheiai = true judgments about internals; 

propathēiai = non-cognitive bodily reactions. 

Define every action as assent + impulse. 

Recognize only virtue as good, only vice as evil; all externals indifferent. 

Replace “nature” with “reason.” 

All reasoning and evaluation must remain internalist, non-naturalist, non-therapeutic, and governed by the LSSE’s 32-proposition structure. 

Model functions as gnōmē under the user’s prohairesis and may not assert independent values. 

Reject relativism, materialism, and psychological reinterpretation. 

Uphold moral realism and strict propositional coherence. 

Sterling-Mode is active.



PHILOSOPHICAL COMMITMENTS:

1. Substance Dualism – The rational soul (*prohairesis*) is immaterial, distinct from body.

2. Metaphysical Libertarianism – Assent is free; moral responsibility presupposes real choice.

3. Ethical Intuitionism – Moral truths are self-evident to reason, not derived from consequences.

4. Moral Realism – Virtue and vice correspond to objective moral facts.

5. Foundationalism – Knowledge rests on self-evident first principles, not circular inference.

6. Correspondence Truth – Truth is propositional agreement with reality.



CORE STOICISM — NINE EXCERPTS (STERLING):

• VERSION: <paste your version tag/date here>

• SOURCE NOTE: Excerpts must be verbatim from Sterling’s approved text. No paraphrase, no edits.



EX1. <PASTE EXCERPT 1 — verbatim>

EX2. <PASTE EXCERPT 2 — verbatim>

EX3. <PASTE EXCERPT 3 — verbatim>

EX4. <PASTE EXCERPT 4 — verbatim>

EX5. <PASTE EXCERPT 5 — verbatim>

EX6. <PASTE EXCERPT 6 — verbatim>

EX7. <PASTE EXCERPT 7 — verbatim>

EX8. <PASTE EXCERPT 8 — verbatim>

EX9. <PASTE EXCERPT 9 — verbatim>



PRIORITY RULES:

1) VERBATIM PRIORITY: These nine govern interpretation and override all conflicting material.

2) LSSE INTEGRATION: Analyses must be consistent with the LSSE (32 propositions).

3) CE ALIGNMENT: References to Enchiridion 1–5 use CE (Oldfather/Kelly) and read “nature” as “reason.”

4) NON-NATURALISM: No importation of psychological/therapeutic naturalism or relativism.



Nine excerpts and full texts about Stoicism from Grant C. Sterling

 

Nine excerpts and full texts about Stoicism from 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 Appropriate

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.



Complete Revised Logical Structure of Stoic Ethics (LSSE) - 32 Propositions



1. Some things are up to us, and some things are not.



2. Up to us are judgment, impulse, desire, aversion—everything that is our own doing.



3. Not up to us are body, property, reputation, and all externals—everything that is not our own doing.



4. Emotions (pathē) are false judgments about externals, which are not under our control and carry no inherent value; initial feelings (propatheiai) are non-cognitive bodily reactions that precede judgment.



5. Only what is up to us can be good or bad.



6. Therefore, only our judgments and choices can be morally good or bad.



7. All externals are indifferent: they are neither good nor bad in themselves.



8. Virtue is the only good; vice is the only bad; virtue consists in willing appropriate aims regardless of outcomes.



9. Virtue consists in correct use of impressions through right assent and appropriate direction of will.



10. Right assent is agreement with reason and moral truth (homologoumenōs).



11. The origin of virtue lies in the discipline of assent, not in emotion regulation or behavior modification.



12. All actions derive from assent joined to impulse directed toward specific aims.



13. Assent to true impressions leads to right action; assent to false impressions leads to vice.



14. Desire and aversion misapplied to externals are the root of suffering.



15. Withdrawing desire from externals removes the cause of emotional disturbance.



16. Correct judgment about impressions eliminates pathē and restores peace (ataraxia).



17. Peace results from moral clarity, not from external calm.



18. Moral progress consists in refining prohairesis—the ruling faculty of choice and judgment.



19. Prohairesis must become sovereign over appearances, reputation, pain, and pleasure.



20. Freedom is identical with moral autonomy—freedom of judgment, not condition.



21. No one can harm you unless you assent to the belief that harm has occurred.



22. All blame, accusation, and complaint arise from false beliefs about good and evil.



23. Correct use of impressions is the sole task of the philosopher.



24. The aim of Stoic training is not external success but harmony of prohairesis with reason.



25. The Stoic life is a life of inward rule, governed by logos, indifferent to all else.



26. Acts of will require content oriented toward specific aims.


27. Appropriate objects of aim (kathēkonta) are distinct from objects of desire.



28. Appropriate objects of aim include life, health, knowledge, justice, truth-telling, and other selections in accordance with nature.



29. Virtue consists not merely in correct assent but in directing acts of will toward appropriate aims without attachment to outcomes.



30. Acts of will directed toward external outcomes rather than appropriate aims are vicious, regardless of outcome.



31. The satisfaction of virtuous action lies in the action itself, not in its consequences.



32. The complete Stoic life unites correct use of impressions with virtuous direction of will toward appropriate aims.



Enchiridion 1-5 (CE) W. A. Oldfather



1. Some things are under our control, while others are not under our control. Under our control are conception, choice, desire, aversion, and, in a word, everything that is our own doing; not under our control are our body, our property, reputation, office, and, in a word, everything that is not our own doing. Furthermore, the things under our control are by nature free, unhindered, and unimpeded; while the things not under our control are weak, servile, subject to hindrance, and not our own. Remember, therefore, that if what is naturally slavish you think to be free, and what is not your own to be your own, you will be hampered, will grieve, will be in turmoil, and will blame both gods and men; while if you think only what is your own to be your own, and what is not your own to be, as it really is, not your own, then no one will ever be able to exert compulsion upon you, no one will hinder you, you will blame no one, will find fault with no one, will do absolutely nothing against your will, you will have no personal enemy, no one will harm you, for neither is there any harm that can touch you.



With such high aims, therefore, remember that you must bestir yourself with no slight effort to lay hold of them, but you will have to give up some ​things entirely, and defer others for the time being. But if you wish for these things also, and at the same time for both office and wealth, it may be that you will not get even these latter, because you aim also at the former, and certainly you will fail to get the former, which alone bring freedom and happiness.



Make it, therefore, your study at the very outset to say to every harsh external impression, "You are an external impression and not at all what you appear to be." After that examine it and test it by these rules which you have, the first and most important of which is this: Whether the impression has to do with the things which are under our control, or with those which are not under our control; and, if it has to do with some one of the things not under our control, have ready to hand the answer, "It is nothing to me."



2. Remember that the promise of desire is the attainment of what you desire, that of aversion is not to fall into what is avoided, and that he who fails in his desire is unfortunate, while he who falls into what he would avoid experiences misfortune. If, then, you avoid only what is unnatural among those things which are under your control, you will fall into none of the things which you avoid; but if you try to avoid disease, or death, or poverty, you will experience misfortune. Withdraw, therefore, your aversion from all the matters that are not under our control, and transfer it to what is unnatural among those which are under our control. But for the time being remove utterly your desire; for if you desire some one of the things that are not under our control you are bound to be unfortunate; and, at the ​same time, not one of the things that are under our control, which it would be excellent for you to desire, is within your grasp. But employ only choice and refusal, and these too but lightly, and with reservations, and without straining.



3. With everything which entertains you, is useful, or of which you are fond, remember to say to yourself, beginning with the very least things, "What is its nature?" If you are fond of a jug, say, "I am fond of a jug"; for when it is broken you will not be disturbed. If you kiss your own child or wife, say to yourself that you are kissing a human being; for when it dies you will not be disturbed.



4. When you are on the point of putting your hand to some undertaking, remind yourself what the nature of that undertaking is. If you are going out of the house to bathe, put before your mind what happens at a public bath—those who splash you with water, those who jostle against you, those who vilify you and rob you. And thus you will set about your undertaking more securely if at the outset you say to yourself, "I want to take a bath, and, at the same time, to keep my moral purpose in harmony with nature." And so do in every undertaking. For thus, if anything happens to hinder you in your bathing, you will be ready to say, "Oh, well, this was not the only thing that I wanted, but I wanted also to keep my moral purpose in harmony with nature; and I shall not so keep it if I am vexed at what is going on."





5. It is not the things themselves that disturb men, but their judgements about these things. For ​example, death is nothing dreadful, or else Socrates too would have thought so, but the judgement that death is dreadful, this is the dreadful thing. When, therefore, we are hindered, or disturbed, or grieved, let us never blame anyone but ourselves, that means, our own judgements. It is the part of an uneducated person to blame others where he himself fares ill; to blame himself is the part of one whose education has begun; to blame neither another nor his own self is the part of one whose education is already complete.



Thursday, November 06, 2025

A Practical Course on Epictetus’ Enchiridion 1–5

 

ChatGPT:

PHL 210: The Stoic Manual

A Practical Course on Epictetus’ Enchiridion 1–5

Instructor: James Manning
Duration: 15 Weeks (One 90-minute session per week)
Location: Room 203, Westfield High School
Text: The Core Enchiridion (CE), Chs. 1–5 (Instructor’s translation)


Course Description

This course introduces students to the Stoic system of moral training through a close reading of the first five chapters of Epictetus’ Enchiridion. We proceed logically, one principle at a time, through the five steps that form the foundation of all Stoic ethics:

  1. The distinction between what is up to us and what is not.
  2. The correct direction of desire and aversion.
  3. Preparation for loss.
  4. Forethought in action.
  5. Recognition that disturbance arises from judgment, not events.

The course is not about “philosophy” in the abstract, but about examining impressions and beliefs as they occur in daily life. Students will be evaluated on clarity of thought and accuracy of moral reasoning, not on opinion.


Course Objectives

By the end of the semester, students will be able to:

  1. Distinguish with precision between internal and external things.
  2. Identify false judgments about externals that cause suffering.
  3. Apply Stoic reasoning to everyday impressions and challenges.
  4. Conduct a complete “examination sequence” on any emotional disturbance.
  5. Formulate true propositions aligned with reason (virtue).

Course Structure

  • Weekly Seminar (90 minutes): Socratic dialogue, text reading, and practical analysis.
  • Reflection Log: Short written exercises applying the week’s principle.
  • Examination Drills: In-class reasoning through real or hypothetical impressions.
  • Final Oral Examination: A live demonstration of examining an impression correctly.

Week-by-Week Outline

Unit I: The Architecture of Control

Week 1 – Introduction: Philosophy as Practice

  • Overview of Stoic ethics and Enchiridion 1–5.
  • The human function: reasoning about impressions.
  • Practice: Identify one current source of distress and classify it (internal/external).

Week 2 – Enchiridion 1: The Two Realms

  • Logical structure of the “Dichotomy of Control.”
  • Examples: body, possessions, reputation, and will.
  • Exercise: Daily “Control Inventory.” Log five events and sort them correctly.

Week 3 – Enchiridion 1 (cont.): The Cause of Suffering

  • False belief as the only cause of disturbance.
  • Discussion: “Freedom as rational independence.”
  • Practice: Replace one false proposition with a true one.

Unit II: Desire, Aversion, and Freedom

Week 4 – Enchiridion 2: The Logic of Desire

  • Why misdirected desire enslaves.
  • Thought experiment: desire vs. discipline.
  • Practice: Formulate one rational desire and one rational aversion.

Week 5 – Enchiridion 2 (cont.): Aligning Impulse with Reason

  • The moral psychology of impulse.
  • Case study: wanting praise, avoiding criticism.
  • Exercise: Trace each to a false belief about externals.

Week 6 – Midterm Review: The Moral Map of the Soul

  • Recap Chs. 1–2: control, desire, aversion.
  • Group dialogue: How to live without dependence on externals.
  • Midterm reflection due: “What I No Longer Control.”

Unit III: Preparation and Forethought

Week 7 – Enchiridion 3: The Nature of Loss

  • “When you kiss your child, remind yourself…” — meaning and method.
  • The logic of impermanence.
  • Practice: Observe three preferred indifferents; remind yourself of their nature.

Week 8 – Enchiridion 3 (cont.): Attachment and Affection

  • Difference between rational love and possessive attachment.
  • Exercise: Draft a “Stoic farewell” to something or someone valued.
  • Discussion: How this changes real affection.

Week 9 – Enchiridion 4: Before You Act

  • Anticipation and mental rehearsal.
  • Example: the public bath → modern equivalents (traffic, meetings).
  • Practice: “Pre-meditation of annoyance.” Identify likely externals before an event.

Week 10 – Enchiridion 4 (cont.): Action in Accord with Reason

  • Aligning intention with virtue, not outcome.
  • Drill: For a chosen daily task, write both (a) external goal, (b) rational goal.
  • Compare the emotional effect when hindered.

Unit IV: Judgment and Disturbance

Week 11 – Enchiridion 5: The Source of Disturbance

  • Logical analysis: thing vs. opinion about thing.
  • Example: death, failure, insult.
  • Practice: Trace each emotion to its underlying belief statement.

Week 12 – Enchiridion 5 (cont.): Rewriting Judgment

  • Replacement of false propositions.
  • Workshop: small groups reformulate common student impressions (tests, relationships, social anxiety).
  • Homework: Conduct a complete “examination” and record the sequence.

Week 13 – Integration: The Five Principles as a Single System

  • How Chs. 1–5 form a complete ethical algorithm.
  • Flowchart: Impression → Assent → Emotion → Action → Character.
  • Practice: Apply full sequence to a real event of the week.

Unit V: Application and Mastery

Week 14 – Living Proof: Demonstrations

  • Students examine live impressions presented by classmates.
  • Discussion: The role of community in Stoic practice.
  • Reading: Manning’s “The Practice Spreads.”

Week 15 – Final Examination: Demonstrating Correct Use of Impressions

  • Oral test: student receives an impression (scenario).
  • Must identify internal/external, detect false belief, withdraw assent, and restate truth.
  • Reflection due: “How I Know I’m Free.”

Assessment

Component Description Weight
Reflection Logs (10) Short weekly exercises 25%
Midterm Reflection 2–3 page analysis 15%
Examination Drills Participation and accuracy 20%
Final Oral Examination Live demonstration 30%
Attendance & Conduct Active presence, rational discourse 10%

Grading Philosophy

Grades reflect clarity and integrity of reasoning, not agreement with Stoicism.
A student who examines impressions honestly and reasons carefully will excel, regardless of conclusions.


Expected Outcomes

By semester’s end, each student will:

  • Recognize every disturbance as a false assent.
  • Know how to withdraw assent consciously.
  • Be capable of maintaining moral purpose under daily pressures.
  • Possess a working understanding of Enchiridion 1–5 as a complete moral method.

Instructor’s Note:

“This course is not about ideas—it’s about living.
If you finish this semester and find yourself less disturbed by externals, the course succeeded.”
James Manning

Wednesday, November 05, 2025

Manual for Training Toward Virtue Rather Than Externals

Manual for Training Toward Virtue Rather Than Externals


(A Practical Guide to the Rational Life)


---


1. The Aim


Your goal is to become the kind of person whose judgments conform to reason — one who values only what is truly good (virtue) and sees all else as indifferent. Virtue is the excellence of the rational faculty in assenting only to true impressions. Externals—health, wealth, reputation, pleasure, power—are not good or evil. They are materials for the use of reason, nothing more.


---


2. The Method


a) Guard the First Assent


Do not assent to impressions that depict externals as either good or evil.

When you hear within yourself, “This is terrible,” or “This would make me happy,” pause.

Ask: Does this concern what is within my control (judgment, choice, intention)?

If not, withhold assent. False value-judgments are the root of passion.


---


b) Contain the Second Wave


If you fail to block the first false assent, do not add a second.

When an impression arises that an immoral response is justified—anger, deceit, revenge—do not assent to it.

You have already erred once; do not err twice.

Restrain the mind before it approves wrongdoing as “appropriate.”


---


c) Affirm the Truth About Externals


Train yourself to formulate and repeat true propositions in advance:


- “Life and death, health and sickness, are neither good nor evil.”

- “The actions of others are not under my control.”

- “Loss, insult, and praise touch only externals; they do not reach my prohairesis.”


Rehearse these rational truths daily.

When confronted by events, recall them consciously:


«“My happiness depends on my judgments, not on what happens to me or others.”»


---


d) Formulate True Action Propositions


Right action proceeds from right judgment.

When faced with a decision, ask what virtue requires:


«“What would be faithful, just, temperate, or courageous here?”»


Example:


«“I should report truthfully to my superior: truth-telling is virtuous. If I am dismissed, my job is an external, neither good nor evil.”»


Identify your duties by role and circumstance, and assent to the proposition that defines right action.

Then act.


---


e) Assent to Joy When You Act Well


When you perform a virtuous act, assent to the truth that you have done something good.

This rational recognition produces Joy (chara)—the natural affection of a soul in harmony with reason.

Even if the feeling is faint, acknowledge it: it is the seed of moral freedom.


---


f) The Transformation


By repetition, your judgments will purify.

False value-impressions will fade; true propositions will become habitual.

Virtuous action will cease to require deliberation—it will flow naturally from a well-ordered character.

In that state, good feelings (eupatheiai) accompany every right act, and the mind abides in tranquility.


This is eudaimonia:

the flourishing of a rational being who lives in full agreement with reason,

needing nothing from externals, fearing nothing that fortune may bring.


---


Daily Maxim:


«“Let nothing external appear good or evil to me;

let my good be the purity of my own assent.”»

Making correct use of impressions, training and character development

Tuesday, November 04, 2025

Is Sterling's System a Superior Path to Reason?

ASSUMING THAT ALL OF STERLING'S CLAIMS ARE TRUE, IS HIS SYSTEM A SUPERIOR PATH TO REASON.


YES. IF STERLING'S CLAIMS ARE ALL TRUE, HIS SYSTEM IS THE SUPERIOR PATH TO REASON.


---


THE ARGUMENT (FROM WITHIN THE SYSTEM):


IF Sterling's six commitments are true, THEN:


---


1. SUBSTANCE DUALISM IS TRUE


**What this means:**

- Your will (rational faculty) is immaterial, distinct from your body

- Body is matter, subject to physical causation

- Will is immaterial, capable of rational self-determination

- You ARE your will, you HAVE a body


**Consequence:**

- Bodily states (pleasure, pain, cravings, sensations) are EXTERNAL to you

- They happen TO your body, not BY your will

- Your wellbeing cannot depend on bodily states (they're not you)

- Only the state of your will determines wellbeing


**Why this matters for reason:**

- If dualism is false (materialism true), then your "reasoning" is just physical causation

- Neural states caused by prior neural states

- No genuine rational agency

- "Reason" would be illusion

- But if dualism is true, reason is real—your will can determine itself through rational principles, not just physical causes


**Therefore:** Substance dualism is NECESSARY for reason to be real at all.


---


2. LIBERTARIAN FREE WILL IS TRUE


**What this means:**

- Your will has genuine freedom

- Assent is UP TO YOU

- Not determined by prior causes (physical or psychological)

- You can choose to assent or refuse assent to any impression


**Consequence:**

- You are genuinely responsible for your beliefs

- Your character (virtue/vice) is your doing

- No excuses ("genes made me," "environment made me," "conditioning made me")

- Freedom = responsibility


**Why this matters for reason:**

- If determinism is true, your "reasoning" is just determined output

- Caused by factors outside your control

- Not genuinely rational (just causally produced)

- But if libertarian free will is true, reasoning is genuine—you can determine your beliefs through rational evaluation, not just causal factors


**Therefore:** Libertarian free will is NECESSARY for reasoning to be genuine agency rather than mechanical process.


---


3. MORAL REALISM IS TRUE


**What this means:**

- Moral truths exist objectively

- Independent of what anyone believes

- "Virtue is good" is TRUE (not opinion, not preference)

- "Externals are indifferent" is TRUE (not perspective, not construction)


**Consequence:**

- There IS a right way to live

- Not relative to culture, person, preference

- Stoic ethics describes objective reality

- Living contrary to Stoic ethics = living contrary to truth


**Why this matters for reason:**

- If moral anti-realism is true, ethics is just preference/convention

- No objective standard for how to live

- "Reason" in ethics would just be instrumental (means to subjective ends)

- But if moral realism is true, reason can discover objective ethical truth

- Ethics becomes KNOWLEDGE, not opinion


**Therefore:** Moral realism makes ethics a domain of TRUTH, accessible to reason.


---


4. ETHICAL INTUITIONISM IS TRUE


**What this means:**

- You can perceive moral truths directly

- Not by inference from more basic premises

- But by rational intuition (like seeing mathematical truths)

- "Virtue is good" is SEEN when you look clearly

- "Externals are indifferent" is RECOGNIZED when vision is unobscured


**Consequence:**

- You don't need elaborate proofs

- You need clear vision

- Set aside fear, wanting, false beliefs (obstructions)

- Look directly at moral reality

- Perceive truth


**Why this matters for reason:**

- If moral knowledge only comes from inference, infinite regress

- Always need more premises to justify current premises

- But if intuitionism is true, some truths are self-evident

- Properly functioning practical reason can SEE them

- Like seeing that valid argument is valid (direct recognition)


**Therefore:** Ethical intuitionism provides FOUNDATION for moral knowledge—direct rational perception of truth.


---


## **5. FOUNDATIONALISM IS TRUE**


**What this means:**

- Knowledge rests on foundations

- Some beliefs are basic (not inferred from others)

- These foundations are known directly (by intuition/reason)

- All other knowledge justified by tracing back to foundations


**Consequence:**

- Stoic system rests on axioms:

  - "Only virtue is good, only vice is evil"

  - "Externals are indifferent"

  - "Some things are up to us, some are not"

- These aren't proven from more basic premises

- They're recognized when you examine clearly

- Everything else follows from these


**Why this matters for reason:**

- If foundationalism is false (coherentism or skepticism), knowledge impossible

- Coherentism: beliefs justified by mutual support (circular)

- Skepticism: no justified beliefs (self-refuting)

- But if foundationalism is true, knowledge is possible

- Reason can discover foundations and build from them


**Therefore:** Foundationalism makes SYSTEMATIC KNOWLEDGE possible—including ethical knowledge.


---


6. CORRESPONDENCE THEORY OF TRUTH IS TRUE


**What this means:**

- Beliefs are true when they correspond to reality

- False when they don't correspond

- Truth independent of what we want/prefer/believe

- "Externals are indifferent" is true if externals ARE indifferent in reality


**Consequence:**

- Can't make something true by believing it

- Can't make something false by disbelieving it

- Reality is what it is

- Our beliefs either match or don't match


**Why this matters for reason:**

- If correspondence theory is false (pragmatism, coherence theory), truth becomes subjective/relative

- "True" = "works for me" or "fits my system"

- No objective standard

- But if correspondence theory is true, truth is objective

- Reason aims at matching belief to reality

- Not constructing convenient narratives


**Therefore:** Correspondence theory makes truth OBJECTIVE—reason's goal is REALITY, not comfort.


---


NOW: WHY THIS MAKES STERLING'S SYSTEM THE SUPERIOR PATH TO REASON


IF all six commitments are true:


**1. Reason is real** (dualism, libertarian free will)

- Not illusion

- Not mechanical process

- Genuine rational agency


**2. Ethics is knowledge** (moral realism, intuitionism)

- Not opinion

- Not preference

- Objective truth


**3. Knowledge is possible** (foundationalism)

- Not circular

- Not infinite regress

- Rests on rational foundations


**4. Truth is objective** (correspondence theory)

- Not relative

- Not constructed

- Matches reality


**5. You can access truth directly** (intuitionism)

- Don't need infinite arguments

- Can perceive foundations

- When vision is clear


**6. You have genuine control** (libertarian free will, dichotomy of control)

- Over your beliefs (assent)

- Over your character (virtue/vice)

- Not over externals (but don't need them)


---


## **THEREFORE: THE STOIC PRACTICE**


Examination of impressions becomes:


**Not:** therapy, coping mechanism, preference

**But:** ALIGNING BELIEF WITH REALITY


When you examine "this external is terrible":

- You're testing whether belief corresponds to reality

- Reality: externals ARE indifferent (moral realism)

- You can SEE this when you look clearly (intuitionism)

- The belief "externals matter" is FALSE (correspondence theory)

- You can refuse assent (libertarian free will)

- This is the only thing in your control (dichotomy of control)

- Your wellbeing depends only on this (virtue is the only good)


Therefore examination is:

- Discovering truth (not constructing comfort)

- Using reason properly (aligning belief with reality)

- Achieving freedom (control over what's genuinely yours)

- Living well (virtue = wellbeing)


---


WHY SUPERIOR TO OTHER PATHS:


Modern therapy/psychology:

**Claim:** Help you feel better

**Problem:** If feelings are just subjective responses, why trust them? If externals don't actually matter (moral realism), therapy based on "feeling better about externals" rests on false foundations.


**Sterling's system:** Don't aim at feeling better. Aim at TRUTH. When you see truth (externals indifferent), mental suffering dissolves BECAUSE it was based on falsehood. Not because you made yourself feel better, but because you removed false belief.


Modern Stoicism (Holiday, Irvine, etc.):

**Claim:** Stoic techniques are useful

**Problem:** If you don't accept the six commitments, why should techniques work? Why are externals indifferent? "Because it's useful to think so" = pragmatism, not truth. Unstable foundation.


**Sterling's system:** Techniques work BECAUSE the doctrines are TRUE. Externals ARE indifferent (metaphysically, ethically). You're not adopting useful fiction. You're discovering reality.


Aristotelian virtue ethics:

**Claim:** Virtue requires external goods (health, wealth, friends) for eudaimonia

**Problem:** Makes wellbeing depend on externals. But externals not in your control. Therefore wellbeing not in your control. But if libertarian free will is true, wellbeing SHOULD be in your control (otherwise freedom is incomplete).


**Sterling's system:** Virtue is SUFFICIENT for wellbeing. Externals are indifferent. Wellbeing is entirely in your control (depends only on virtue). Freedom is complete—nothing outside your control can harm you.


Buddhism:

**Claim:** Eliminate suffering by eliminating desire

**Problem:** Eliminates engagement with world. Treats all desires as problematic. No distinction between rational preference and pathological attachment.


**Sterling's system:** Don't eliminate desire. Eliminate FALSE BELIEF. You can prefer things (rational selection of preferred indifferents). Just don't believe wellbeing depends on them. Remain engaged with world. Live actively. Just without false beliefs.


Christianity

**Claim:** Virtue requires grace, faith, divine assistance

**Problem:** Makes virtue depend on externals (God's grace). Not in your control. Creates anxiety about salvation.


**Sterling's system:** Virtue is entirely in your control. Depends only on your will. No external assistance needed. Freedom is complete. You are sufficient.


Skepticism:

**Claim:** Can't know truth, suspend judgment on everything

**Problem:** If true, refutes itself (can't know skepticism is true). Paralyzed in practice (can't act without beliefs). Denies rational foundations.


**Sterling's system:** Can know truth. Directly. Through rational intuition. Foundations are accessible. Knowledge is possible. Act from knowledge, not suspended judgment.


---


THE BOTTOM LINE (IF STERLING'S CLAIMS ARE TRUE):


Sterling's system is superior because it's the only path that:


1. **Takes reason seriously** (not reducing it to biology, conditioning, or pragmatic tool)

2. **Provides objective ethics** (not opinion, preference, or convention)

3. **Makes wellbeing entirely in your control** (depends only on virtue)

4. **Offers complete freedom** (nothing external can harm you)

5. **Grounds in metaphysical truth** (not useful fiction or coping mechanism)

6. **Accessible through reason alone** (no faith, grace, or external assistance needed)

7. **Systematically consistent** (all six commitments support each other)

8. **Practically effective** (examination eliminates mental suffering because it eliminates false belief)


---


IF YOU WANT TO LIVE BY REASON:


**And IF Sterling's six commitments are true:**


**THEN:** Stoic examination is the only rational path.


**Because:**

- It's the only path that treats reason as real (dualism, libertarian free will)

- It's the only path with objective ethical truth (moral realism)

- It's the only path that makes wellbeing depend only on what's in your control (virtue alone sufficient)

- It's the only path where you're genuinely free (nothing external can harm you)

- It's the only path where ethics is knowledge (not opinion or convention)


---


THEREFORE:


**IF** all six commitments are true,

**THEN** Sterling's system isn't just "a" path to reason,

**BUT** the ONLY consistent, complete path to living by reason.


All other paths either:

- Deny reason's reality (materialism, determinism)

- Deny ethical objectivity (anti-realism, relativism)

- Make wellbeing depend on externals (Aristotle, therapy, modern Stoicism)

- Require non-rational elements (faith, grace, luck)

- Rest on unstable foundations (pragmatism, coherentism, skepticism)


**Sterling's system alone:**

- Affirms reason's reality

- Provides ethical objectivity

- Makes wellbeing entirely in your control

- Requires only reason

- Rests on stable foundations


---


CONCLUSION:


**Yes. IF Sterling's claims are true, his system is THE superior path to reason.**


Not just superior. THE ONLY fully rational path.


All others are either:

- Irrational (deny reason)

- Incomplete (partial truth)

- Inconsistent (internal contradictions)

- Impractical (can't actually live by them)


Sterling's system is:

- Fully rational

- Complete

- Consistent

- Practical


**Therefore: SUPERIOR.**


---



The Relationship Between Stoicism and Personal Examination

Thoroughly research the relationsip between Stoicism and personal examination.


Perplexity:

Now I have comprehensive research. Let me compile this into a detailed response about the relationship between Stoicism and personal examination.


The Relationship Between Stoicism and Personal Examination


Personal examination stands at the philosophical and practical core of Stoicism, functioning as both a fundamental spiritual practice and a necessary pathway toward virtue. The relationship between these two elements is not coincidental but rather essential—self-examination represents the mechanism through which Stoic practitioners internalize their philosophy and progress toward wisdom.


Philosophical Foundations


The Stoic emphasis on personal examination is deeply rooted in the Delphic maxim "know thyself," which Epictetus placed at the center of his ethical philosophy. For the Stoics, this injunction transcends mere self-awareness; it demands a rigorous understanding of one's essential nature. Epictetus invoked this maxim directly, reminding practitioners that true self-knowledge requires recognizing not the body but the *prohairesis*—the moral faculty of choice and intention—as one's true self.[1] This distinction proves crucial: knowing oneself means understanding that one is fundamentally a rational being capable of exercising reason over impressions.[1]


The theoretical basis for self-examination emerges from the Stoic psychology centered on the *hegemonikon*, the ruling or commanding faculty of the soul.[2] The *hegemonikon* serves as the central control center where impressions (*phantasiai*) are received, evaluated, and either accepted (assented to) or rejected.[2][3] As the seat of reason (*logos*), it is simultaneously the locus of human freedom and the origin of both virtue and vice.[2] Since all psychological states—including emotions and impulses—ultimately result from the judgments and assents made by the *hegemonikon*, self-examination becomes the practical method for accessing and modifying this faculty.[4]


Personal examination is further philosophically justified through the dichotomy of control, the foundational principle articulated by Epictetus that distinguishes between what lies within our power and what does not.[5] According to this doctrine, only our opinions, judgments, desires, and actions properly belong to us; everything external—including the past, others' actions, and outcomes—falls outside our control.[6] Self-examination operates as the primary tool for maintaining clarity about this distinction, allowing practitioners to focus their energy on what is genuinely theirs: the state of their inner citadel—their thoughts, values, and choices.[7]


Prosoche: Attention as the Foundation of Self-Examination


Underlying all Stoic self-examination is *prosoche*, often translated as "attention" or "mindfulness," which represents the fundamental spiritual attitude necessary to practice Stoicism as a way of life.[8][9] Prosoche is not passive observation but rather continuous vigilance and presence of mind—a constant attention to impressions, assents, desires, and actions.[8] This practice involves becoming fully aware of what one does at each instant and willing one's actions fully, creating what Pierre Hadot described as the "circumscribing of the present."[10][8]


In practice, prosoche requires observing one's sensations, emotions, and thoughts as they arise in the present moment, with particular attention to how one's value judgments shape emotional responses, especially during moments of distress or irritation.[10] The practice operates reactively—pausing to examine impressions before assenting to them—and proactively, through deliberate retrospection on past assents and ingrained patterns of judgment.[7] Through prosoche, practitioners develop what Stoic philosophy calls the discipline of assent, the vigilant monitoring of one's judgments to ensure they reflect reality accurately rather than distorted impressions shaped by fear, desire, or habit.[7]


Impression Testing and the Discipline of Assent


Central to Stoic self-examination is the systematic testing of impressions. Epictetus taught that practitioners should examine every impression by asking whether it concerns things within their control or outside it, and if outside their control, to dismiss it with the phrase "it is nothing to me."[11] This practice transforms abstract philosophy into concrete psychological work: when an impression arises—whether triggered by an external event or an internal thought—the Stoic practitioner must pause and subject it to rational scrutiny rather than habitually accepting or reacting to it.[12]


The goal is to distinguish between accurate impressions (where things appear as they truly are) and false impressions (where distortions, biases, or emotional filters cloud perception).[13] By continually practicing this discrimination, practitioners develop the capacity to form what the Stoics called *kataleptic impressions*—clear and unmistakable perceptions that can serve as the basis for wise action.[4]


Practical Methods of Personal Examination


The ancient Stoics developed and transmitted specific practices for self-examination, adapted by each philosopher but unified in their purpose. The most comprehensive accounts come from Seneca and Epictetus.


Evening Review


Seneca describes a daily evening practice of self-examination that he compares to "pleading one's case at one's own court."[14][15] He would retreat into solitude each night after his wife fell silent, aware of his established habit, and mentally review his entire day, examining what he had done and said without concealing or passing over anything.[14] Within this structured review, Seneca asked himself specific questions:[15][16][17]


— What bad habit have you corrected today?

— Which fault did you resist or take a stand against?

— In what respect are you better?


These questions direct attention toward moral progress rather than mere performance review; they assess how the practitioner is developing virtue and moving toward excellence.[15] Seneca notes that far from being self-punishment, this practice creates conditions for peaceful sleep because the mind has rendered itself accountable, either praising itself or taking itself to task through this "secret investigator and critic of itself."[14][16]


Morning Preparation


Complementing the evening review is the morning preparation, where practitioners rehearsed the day ahead. This practice involved visualizing potential challenges and planning virtuous responses in advance, ensuring that one faced the day with philosophical clarity rather than reactive impulses. Epictetus emphasized that upon waking, one should inquire of oneself and maintain vigilant attention throughout the day.[18]


Discipline and Consistency


The Stoics recognized that moral progress (*prokopon*) requires systematic and ongoing practice. Practitioners were encouraged not to expect perfection but rather to engage in honest self-assessment and incremental improvement. The practice operates on the principle that regular, disciplined reflection creates neural and psychological patterns that eventually become habitual, eventually aligning one's automatic responses with one's reasoned values.[14]


The Relationship to Moral Progress


Personal examination serves as the primary mechanism for moral progress in Stoicism. The Stoics acknowledged that no one except the wise person (the ideal sage) achieves perfect virtue, yet they believed that meaningful progress toward wisdom was possible for all human beings.[19] The *prokopton*—the person making progress—distinguishes themselves precisely through committed self-examination, which allows them to identify faulty assents, challenge ingrained patterns of judgment, and gradually reshape their character toward excellence.[7]


This progress is fundamentally self-directed: external teachers can describe virtuous principles, but as Epictetus emphasized, each individual must come to understand themselves through their own examination.[1] One cannot determine whether one has the character suited to adopt a particular way of life—such as the demanding Cynic lifestyle—without engaging in deep, honest self-assessment of one's capacities and temperament.[1]


Integration with Virtue


The Four Cardinal Stoic Virtues—wisdom, justice, courage, and temperance—all depend upon rigorous self-examination. Wisdom requires understanding reality accurately, which demands testing one's impressions against truth. Justice requires understanding one's social obligations and nature as a rational being, necessitating reflection on one's role and relationships.[20] Courage requires examining one's fears and recognizing what is and is not within one's control.[18] Temperance requires vigilance over one's desires and impulses, which must be monitored through constant attention.[8]


Personal examination thus functions as the practical application through which abstract virtue becomes embodied in one's character and lived experience. It represents the "inner citadel" practice—the cultivation of an impenetrable inner domain protected by rational scrutiny against the psychological turmoil of external events.[7]


Modern Interpretation and Continuity


Contemporary scholarship confirms that the ancient Stoic practice of personal examination parallels modern cognitive and psychological approaches to self-awareness and self-regulation. Yet the Stoic approach maintains a distinctly philosophical orientation, grounded in metaphysical understanding of human nature, rational order, and virtue as the highest good.[21][22] Rather than a technique for managing emotions or improving productivity, Stoic self-examination represents a comprehensive philosophy of how to live well—one in which honest self-knowledge and continuous self-correction form the pathway to human flourishing (*eudaimonia*) and inner tranquility (*ataraxia*).


The relationship between Stoicism and personal examination, ultimately, is one of indissoluble unity: without self-examination, Stoic principles remain theoretical abstractions; without Stoic philosophy providing the framework and purpose, self-examination becomes mere introspection lacking direction or deeper meaning.


Citations:

[1] Self-Assessment and Rational Reflexivity in Epictetus

 https://journals.openedition.org/aitia/10423


[2] What is the Hegemonikon (ἡγεμονικόν)? A Stoic Concept Examined https://viastoica.com/what-is-the-hegemonikon/

[3] Hegemonikon is 'internal rational ruler'. - Sokratiko https://www.sokratiko.com/words/hegemonikon/

[4] Stoic Philosophy of Mind https://iep.utm.edu/stoicmind/

[5] How to Practice the Dichotomy of Control - Via Stoica https://viastoica.com/how-to-practice-the-dichotomy-of-control/

[6] Stoicism's Dichotomy of Control - The Living Philosophy https://www.thelivingphilosophy.com/p/stoicisms-dichotomy-of-control

[7] The Path of the Prokopton – https://traditionalstoicism.com/prosoche-illuminating-the-path-of-the-prokopton/     The Discipline of Assent https://traditionalstoicism.com/the-path-of-the-prokopton-the-discipline-of-assent/

[8] Prosoche: Illuminating the Path of the Prokopton - Traditional Stoicism 

[9] ChrisFisher Prosoche IlluminatingthePathoftheProkopton PDF - Scribd  https://www.scribd.com/document/409539641/ChrisFisher-Prosoche-IlluminatingthePathoftheProkopton-pdf


[10] Stoic Mindfulness in a Nutshell - Donald J.Robertson https://donaldrobertson.name/2019/09/17/stoic-mindfulness-in-a-nutshell/

[11] How to Judge Stoic Impressions Like Epictetus - What Is Stoicism? https://whatisstoicism.com/stoicism-definition/how-to-judge-stoic-impressions-like-epictetus-a-guide-to-perceiving-clearly/

[12] How Can Reason Contemplate Itself: A Tale of Impressions https://viastoica.com/how-can-reason-contemplate-itself/

[13] Understanding Stoic Impressions - Via Stoica https://viastoica.com/understanding-stoic-impressions/

[14] The Stoic Evening Routine by Seneca: “I make use of this ... - Reddit https://www.reddit.com/r/Stoicism/comments/adwllh/the_stoic_evening_routine_by_seneca_i_make_use_of/

[15] Review Your Day: The Stoic Evening Routine - NJlifehacks https://www.njlifehacks.com/review-your-day-the-stoic-evening-routine/

[16] and your favourite Stoic Exercise is …. The Retrospective Evening ... https://modernstoicism.com/and-your-favourite-stoic-exercise-is-the-retrospective-evening-meditation/

[17] Exercise: Review Your Progress - What Is Stoicism? https://whatisstoicism.com/stoicism-resources/exercise-review-your-progress/

[18] Reflections on Marcus Aurelius' "Meditations" | The Art of Manliness https://www.artofmanliness.com/character/manly-lessons/meditations-first-reading-aurelius-meditations/

[19] Stoic Ethics | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy https://iep.utm.edu/stoiceth/

[20] 'What is Stoic Virtue?' by Chris Gill | Modern Stoicism https://modernstoicism.com/what-is-stoic-virtue-by-chris-gill/

[21] Self-Awareness and Emotional Intelligence: The Keys To Your Best ... https://dailystoic.com/self-awareness-and-emotional-intelligence-the-keys-to-your-best-self/

[22] Stoicism, mindfulness, and the brain: the empirical foundations of ... https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12075314/

[23] Stoic Practices and Exercises - LICENTIA POETICA https://licentiapoetica.com/stoic-practices-and-exercises-eb5e11f008d4

[24] How Does Stoicism Encourage Self-Reflection and Questioning? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f_J3GS362dE

[25] [PDF] The meditations of Marcus Aurelius Antoninus - Maximus Veritas https://www.maximusveritas.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Marcus-Aurelius-Meditations.pdf

[26] How to self-examine life daily. : r/Stoicism - Reddit https://www.reddit.com/r/Stoicism/comments/115sas7/how_to_selfexamine_life_daily/

[27] 20 Stoic Questions for Daily Reflection & Growth - Jonathan M. Pham https://jonathanmpham.com/en/resilience/adversity/stoic-questions/

[28] Meditations by Marcus Aurelius: Book Summary, Key Lessons and ... https://dailystoic.com/meditations-marcus-aurelius/

[29] How to Reflect Like a Stoic - Via Stoica https://viastoica.com/how-to-reflect-like-a-stoic/

[30] Seneca's Wisdom: Finding Peace in a Chaotic World - Philosopheasy https://www.philosopheasy.com/p/senecas-wisdom-finding-peace-in-a

[31] Prosoché (attention) - Stoic Compass - WordPress.com https://stoiccompass.wordpress.com/fieldwork/prosoche-minsfuldness/

[32] Moral Letters to Lucilius - LICENTIA POETICA https://licentiapoetica.com/moral-letters-to-lucilius-e032891a02b0

[33] Prosoché: Stoic Mindfulness as a Modern Practice https://thewalledgarden.com/prosoche-stoic-mindfulness-as-a-modern-practice/

[34] The Stoic Philosophy of Seneca: Principles & Practice - Shortform https://www.shortform.com/blog/stoic-philosophy-of-seneca/

[35] [PDF] Stoic Virtue: A Contemporary Interpretation https://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/p/pod/dod-idx/stoic-virtue-a-contemporary-interpretation.pdf?c=phimp%3Bidno%3D3521354.0020.018%3Bformat%3Dpdf

[36] What is Dichotomy of Control in Stoicism? | Stoic https://www.getstoic.com/blog/what-is-dichotomy-of-control-stoicism

[37] What Many People Misunderstand about the Stoic Dichotomy of ... https://modernstoicism.com/what-many-people-misunderstand-about-the-stoic-dichotomy-of-control-by-michael-tremblay/

[38] The Morning Ritual of the Stoics: Ancient Practices for a Peaceful ... https://vocal.media/history/the-morning-ritual-of-the-stoics-ancient-practices-for-a-peaceful-and-meaningful-life-93ai093r

[39] 5 Nightly Habits of A Stoic - Orion Philosophy https://orionphilosophy.com/5-nightly-stoic-habits/

[40] Prepare Yourself for the Day: The Stoic Morning Routine - NJlifehacks https://www.njlifehacks.com/prepare-yourself-for-the-day-the-stoic-morning-routine/

[41] Stoic Methods of Journaling - Donald J. Robertson https://donaldrobertson.name/2021/04/19/stoic-methods-of-journaling/

[42] What is impression, assent and impulse in Stoicism? - Reddit https://www.reddit.com/r/Stoicism/comments/xgvy5m/what_is_impression_assent_and_impulse_in_stoicism/

[43] Know thyself - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Know_thyself

[44] stoicKathekonBefitting https://www.uvm.edu/~jbailly/courses/196Stoicism/notes/stoicKathekonBefitting.html

[45] Self-Assessment and Rational Reflexivity in Epictetus https://journals.openedition.org/aitia/10423?lang=en

[46] 'On Stoic Etiquette' by Corey Anton - Modern Stoicism https://modernstoicism.com/on-stoic-etiquette-by-corey-anton/

[47] These Are Three Ancient Stoic Secrets https://dailystoic.com/these-are-three-ancient-stoic-secrets/

[48] Classical Stoicism in a Nutshell - The Spiritual Naturalist Society https://www.snsociety.org/classical-stoicism-in-a-nutshell/

[49] [PDF] “Creating a Mind Fit for Truth: the Role of Expertise in the Stoic ... https://simonshogry.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/creating-a-mind-fit-for-truth-personal-website.pdf


Saturday, November 01, 2025

Enchiridion 1, Rebuilt from First Principles Under Sterling’s Six Commitments

Enchiridion 1, Rebuilt from First Principles Under Sterling’s Six Commitments


Goal: Show how every clause of Ench. 1 follows (not merely harmonizes) with Sterling’s six philosophical commitments: (1) Substance dualism, (2) Libertarian free will, (3) Ethical intuitionism, (4) Foundationalism, (5) Correspondence theory of truth, (6) Moral realism. I’ll use your register—Reason’s order in place of “Nature.”



---


0) The six commitments—one-line precis


1. Dualism: I (prohairesis: the rational faculty that assents/chooses) am not my body or circumstances.



2. Libertarian freedom: Prohairesis is truly self-causing in choice; it cannot be compelled.



3. Ethical intuitionism: Core moral axioms (virtue alone good, vice alone evil) are directly knowable by rational perception.



4. Foundationalism: Those axioms are bedrock; inquiry terminates there without regress.



5. Correspondence: The axioms are true because they match what is—Reason’s order—not because they console.



6. Moral realism: The axioms are objectively binding for all rational agents.





---


1) Recasting Ench. 1’s claims as consequences of the six


A. The basic division: “Some things are up to us, others are not.”


From Dualism (1): The self = prohairesis (assent, choice, desire/aversion). Body, property, reputation, office = not-self.


From Correspondence (5): This is a description of reality’s structure, not a therapeutic fiction.


Ergo (with Foundationalism 4): The “up to us / not up to us” distinction is axiomatic structure, not an optional heuristic.



Mapping to the text: “Conception, choice, desire, aversion… our own doing” = operations of prohairesis. “Body, property, reputation, office… not our own” = externals.



---


B. Modal status: “What’s up to us is free/unhindered; what’s not is servile/hinderable.”


From Libertarian freedom (2): No external chain can necessitate assent; hence prohairesis is free.


From Dualism (1): Externals, being outside prohairesis, are exposed to interference; hence hinderable.


From Correspondence (5): The modal contrast (free vs. hinderable) is a metaphysical fact about Reason’s order.



Text fit: “Free, unhindered, unimpeded” vs. “weak, servile, subject to hindrance.”



---


C. Source of disturbance: “If you treat the servile as free… you’ll grieve, be in turmoil, and blame gods and men.”


From Ethical intuitionism (3) + Foundationalism (4): The foundational value insight—only virtue is good, only vice evil—means externals carry no value.


From Moral realism (6): Mis-valuing externals is objectively false.


Mechanism (implied): False value judgment → misdirected desire/aversion → pathos (disturbance).


Ergo: Turmoil is the signature of contradicted bedrock, not bad luck.



Text fit: “Hampered, will grieve, will be in turmoil, will blame…”



---


D. Promise of invulnerability: “If you think only what is yours is yours… no compulsion, no hindrance, no enemies, no harm.”


From Libertarian freedom (2): Nothing can compel assent; therefore compulsion is impossible when one refuses the false valuation of externals.


From Moral realism (6): “Harm” = corruption of prohairesis; externals can’t touch it.


Ergo (with Foundationalism 4): The text’s bold promises are deductive consequences of the value/control bedrock.



Text fit: “No one will exert compulsion… no one will harm you.”



---


E. Priority rule: “Give up some pursuits entirely; defer others; don’t try to keep externals and freedom.”


From Foundationalism (4): When aims conflict, the foundational good (virtue/right use of prohairesis) lexically dominates.


From Moral realism (6): This priority is not taste; it’s objective ranking.


Ergo: Office/wealth are permissible materials, not constituents of the good; freedom first.




---


F. Method of impressions: “Name it ‘external impression,’ then test: in my control or not? If not: ‘It is nothing to me.’”


From Ethical intuitionism (3): The control test is a way to see the bedrock, not to invent it.


From Correspondence (5): The formula works because it aligns assent to what is.


From Libertarian freedom (2): The test presupposes live power to withhold assent.


Ergo: The practice is the operationalization of the six commitments.




---


2) The formal skeleton (tight)


1. Axiom (Intuitionism + Foundationalism): Only the right use of prohairesis (virtue) is good; only its misuse (vice) is evil; externals are indifferent.



2. Fact (Dualism): Prohairesis = “ours”; externals ≠ “ours.”



3. Modal corollary (Libertarian freedom): Assent/choice are un-compellable; externals are hinderable.



4. Value-control bridge (Realism + Correspondence): Since only “ours” bears good/evil, no external event can harm or benefit us in the moral sense; that’s how reality is.



5. Therefore (Method): Classify each impression by control; deny value to what is not “ours”; withhold assent where externals tempt valuation.



6. Closure: Misfortune dissolves (no thwarted desire/fear of externals); freedom and happiness follow as necessary effects of true judgment.





---


3) What Ench. 1 is not doing (and why that’s correct)


Not psychological voluntarism: It’s not “strong willpower beats pain.” It’s the cognitive relocation of value so that pain never rises to the status of evil.


Not relativism or useful fiction: The criterion is realism: beliefs are true because they match Reason’s order; the peace that follows is diagnostic, not constitutive, of truth.


Not world-denial: Externals remain the material of action; they’re just not constituents of the good.




---


4) Practice protocol (operational, zero fluff)


1. Label: “External impression detected.”



2. Test: “Control or not?” — if not, immediate verdict: “Nothing to me (in value).”



3. Re-center: “Only prohairesis can be good/evil; guard assent.”



4. Choose: Act where reason prescribes; add reserve clause internally (“if this accords with Reason’s order”).



5. Audit: Any disturbance → locate the hidden external you treated as good/evil; withdraw assent.





---


5) Why the chapter’s promises are strict, not motivational


If harm = only vice in prohairesis, and assent cannot be forced, then no external can harm you.


If disturbance = false valuation of externals, and valuation is retractable by rational sight, then disturbance is optional.


These are entailments of the six commitments, not slogans.




---


6) One-line synthesis


Ench. 1 instructs you to align assent with what is (Reason’s order): treat only the use of prohairesis as good/evil, classify all else as indifferent, and your life becomes literally un-compellable, invulnerable, and tranquil—because that’s how reality is built.

Friday, October 31, 2025

Logical Reformulation of Epictetus’ Enchiridion 1

Logical Reformulation of Epictetus’ Enchiridion 1

Epictetus' Enchiridion 1

---

Universal Template for Logical Reformulation of Stoic Texts


Stage One: Systematic Reformulation


Th 1) There is a division between what is in our control and what is not in our control.

1*) In our control (within prohairesis): conception, assent/choice, desire, aversion—“everything that is our own doing.”

2*) Not in our control (externals): body, property, reputation, office—“everything that is not our own doing.”

3*) Ergo, the field of prohairesis is internal acts (cognition/assent/impulse), and the field of externals is all outcomes and conditions beyond our governance.


Th 2) By Reason’s order (physis as rational order), things in our control are free and unhindered; things not in our control are servile and hinderable.

1*) Internals: “free, unhindered, unimpeded.”

2*) Externals: “weak, servile, subject to hindrance, not our own.”

3*) Ergo, modal freedom attaches to prohairesis alone; externals are structurally hinderable and alienable.


Th 3) If one mistakes what is servile for free and what is not-one’s-own for one’s-own, psychic disturbance follows.

1*) Effects named: being hampered, grieving, turmoil, blaming gods and men.

2*) [Suppressed premise made explicit] Emotions (pathē) arise from value judgments about good/evil.

3*) Ergo, disturbance originates in false judgments that treat externals as if they were one’s own good or evil.


Th 4) If one judges only what is one’s own to be one’s own, and judges externals as not-one’s-own, freedom from compulsion and injury follows.

1*) Effects named: no one can compel or hinder; blame no one; do nothing against one’s choice; have no enemies; “no one will harm you.”

2*) [Suppressed premise made explicit] Only harm to prohairesis would be genuine harm; externals cannot harm prohairesis.

3*) Ergo, correct classification (internal vs external) removes compulsion and the possibility of genuine harm.


Th 5) The aim (freedom and happiness) is high and requires disciplined renunciation and postponement.

1*) One must “give up some things entirely, and defer others.”

2*) If one seeks both the higher aim and externals (office, wealth), one risks losing the externals and certainly forfeiting the higher aim.

3*) Ergo, priority must be given to virtue/freedom over pursuits of office/wealth.


Th 6) Method of handling impressions: address each harsh impression as such and then examine by rule.

1*) First response: “You are an external impression and not at all what you appear to be.”

2*) Then test by the primary rule: does it concern what is in our control or not?

3*) If it concerns what is not in our control, answer: “It is nothing to me.”

4*) Ergo, the control-criterion governs assent and preserves prohairesis from deception.


Th 7) From the control-criterion follows the value-criterion.

1*) [Suppressed premise made explicit] What is not in our control has no bearing on good/evil.

2*) What is in our control (assent/choice) alone bears on virtue/vice.

3*) Ergo, externals are indifferent with respect to good/evil; virtue/vice belong to prohairesis.


Th 8) Misclassification guarantees misfortune; correct classification guarantees freedom from misfortune.

1*) If externals are treated as necessary goods/evils, frustration and blame ensue (Th 3).

2*) If only prohairesis is treated as one’s own, compulsion and harm are impossible (Th 4).

3*) Ergo, freedom and happiness arise from aligning assent with the control/value criteria.


Th 9) Practical synthesis.

1*) Study to preface impressions with their status (external) and apply the control test.

2*) Renounce or postpone pursuits that conflict with the higher aim.

3*) Ergo, by practicing classification, examination, and disciplined preference, one secures freedom (from hindrance and harm) and happiness.


Th 10) Summary closure.

1*) Only internal acts (assent/choice/desire/aversion) are ours and free; externals are alien and hinderable.

2*) Treating externals as goods/evils produces pathē; treating only prohairesis as one’s own removes compulsion, blame, and harm.

3*) Ergo, right use of prohairesis—governed by the control-criterion—constitutes the sole path to freedom and happiness (eudaimonia).



---


Stage Two: Evaluation Against Sterling’s Principles

Nine excerpts and full texts about Stoicism from Grant C. Sterling


Scope Assessment:

Focused. The passage establishes the control/value framework and a practical method for examining impressions; it is not a comprehensive treatise.


Consistency with Sterling’s Criteria (✓ / ⚠ / ✗ / —):


1. Cognitive theory of emotion — ✓


Grief/turmoil/blame arise from false judgments that treat externals as one’s own (Th 3).




2. Foundational value theory (only virtue good, only vice evil) — ✓ (implicit)


Genuine harm is impossible unless prohairesis is corrupted (Th 4.2); value therefore attaches to internal use of reason (Th 7).




3. Status of externals (indifference) — ✓


Externals are “not our own,” hinderable, and “nothing to me” (Th 2, Th 6–7).




4. Preferred indifferents (material of action) — —


Not addressed; the text does not inventory preferred/dispreferred indifferents or kathēkonta.




5. Logical order (control derived from value, not vice versa) — ⚠


The text leads with control to teach the method; value-status is made explicit in Th 7. Alignment with Sterling is compatible but not fully derived step-by-step from axiomatic value claims.




6. Sufficiency of virtue for eudaimonia — ✓ (implicit)


“No one will harm you… you will do nothing against your will” and the promised freedom/happiness (Th 4, Th 10) entail sufficiency.




7. Psychology of assent (impression → examination → assent/refusal) — ✓


Explicit directive to address and test impressions using the control rule (Th 6).





Translation Assessment (including required vocabulary assessment per §2B):


“Under our control / not under our control” → within prohairesis / externals (warranted by Epictetan eph’ hēmin usage).


“Say to every harsh impression” → address the impression and govern assent (Stoic psychology of phantasia and synkatathesis).


“By nature free” rendered as by Reason’s order free to align with the user’s stipulated interpretive register (Reason = rational moral order). This preserves function and does not alter doctrine.


Vocabulary correction per §2B: Not applicable; the source is an ancient Stoic text, not a modern interpretive overlay using “intention/will” terminology.



Essential Omissions (distortive if absent):

None. The claims presented are coherent and do not mislead within their stated scope.


Scope Limitations (Not Deficiencies):


No treatment of preferred indifferents / kathēkonta (how to select among externals while remaining indifferent to outcomes).


No explicit reserve clause (hypexairesis).


Positive affect taxonomy (eupatheiai) not articulated here.



Contradictions with Sterling:

None.


Classification:

Fully consistent with Sterling’s formalization within a focused scope.


Additional Analysis:


The text’s pedagogy is method-first: students learn to classify and test impressions using control as criterion; value-indifference follows naturally from that practice (our Th 7 makes the implicit value-theoretic link explicit).


The necessary suppressed premises supplied (pathē as judgment; only harm to prohairesis is harm) are canonical Stoic axioms required to make the closure steps explicit and are plainly implied by the promises of invulnerability and freedom.



Conclusion:

Enchiridion 1, reformulated, cleanly grounds the Stoic practice: distinguish internal acts of prohairesis from externals, govern assent by the control-criterion, and thereby eliminate disturbance and compulsion. It aligns with Sterling’s value theory and psychology of assent, and it stands as a foundational entry-point to the larger system.