Could you be a Stoic?

We often use the word stoic to describe a person who is unfeeling, unaffected by joy or grief. But the origins of stoicism have a much deeper meaning. Many secular people find stoicism to be a useful framework, especially those that are separating from or deconstructing from a monotheistic religion.

Stoicism is a philosophy that was created by Zeno of Citium around 300 BCE. The name comes from the place where he taught, Stoa Poikile (Painted Porch). 

Stoicism was a popular school of philosophy for around 500 years during its prime in ancient Greece and the Roman Empire. Stoic philosophy played a pivotal role in European society until the death of Marcus Aurelius in 179 AD, and the beginning of the end of Pax Romana (translated as Roman peace, this 200 year period was prosperous and stable for the Roman empire). 

One of the foundations of stoicism is  εὐδαιμονία (ancient Greek spelling of eudamonia which translates to the highest human good. )

 The Stoics believed the path to achieving eudamonia was a life spent practicing the four cardinal virtues in everyday life — prudence, fortitude, temperance, and justice — as well as living in accordance with nature. When I began exploring their writing, I kept seeing parallels to evidence-based practices I’d written about for secular people experiencing grief. The Stoics didn’t have double-blind studies, but they were onto something — much of what they practiced became the foundation for modern cognitive behavioral therapy. 

One foundational practice of stoicism is about deliberately separating events and our thoughts about them. For example, I may get splashed by water as an event, but my reaction is my choice. I can choose to be angry or I can choose to stay calm, or even to laugh it off. In cognitive behavior science we might call this cognitive reappraisal – choosing how we interpret an event rather than reacting automatically. 

Another foundational practice is to separate what you can control from what you cannot. You control your actions and your judgments. A striking example of this was the death of Seneca. The Emperor Nero unjustly forced Seneca to commit suicide. Seneca considered what was in his control and what was not. He considered whether he had lived virtuously and knew his death was unjust. I shared this quote from Seneca with a friend just a few weeks ago when he was faced with an impossible situation. “[You] can kill me but you cannot harm me.” 

In contrast to a secular world view, the stoics believed in a concept of providence. They believed in a universe that is ordered providentially with a web of cause and effect. Essentially, there was a hand at the wheel. There is a lot of discussion about the stoics believing in a higher power and therefore, a secular practice of stoicism is somehow wrong. But I think that is drawing the line a little too sharply. The foundational question for an individual who is no longer religious is: can the writing of the stoics be useful?

For me, the answer is yes. 

There are many paths to this mindset and many ways to practice it. 

For me, the simple reminders about identifying what I cannot control, and spending my energy on what I can control, have been transformative.

Have you explored Stoicism? Does it resonate, or does the ancient framework feel like a stretch? I’d love to hear from you!