Skip to content
Published on

Stoicism — How a 2000-Year-Old Philosophy Answers Modern Life

🇰🇷KO🇺🇸EN🇯🇵JA
Split View필사 모드
Authors

Opening: If a Slave and an Emperor Read the Same Book

Picture this. One man walked with a limp and began his life as a slave. The other ruled half the known world as a Roman emperor. They never met. One had already died before the other was born. And yet, if you set their writings side by side, they sound like brothers taught by the same master.

"Do not torment yourself over what you cannot change. Pour your heart only into what you can."

These two men are Epictetus, the philosopher who started life as a slave, and Marcus Aurelius, the Roman emperor. The name of the thought they shared is Stoicism.

What follows is not a dry tour of an old philosophy. We are going to trace how an idea that began roughly 2300 years ago, under a painted colonnade in Athens (in Greek, a stoa), has climbed back onto bestseller lists in the age of the smartphone, and why athletes, entrepreneurs, and therapists keep returning to it.

Let us begin with a curious question. We tend to use the word "stoic" to mean unfeeling, cold, or grimly enduring. The dictionary agrees. Yet when you actually read what the Stoics wrote, they never told us to erase our emotions. They were, instead, people who wrestled stubbornly with how to live well, love well, and endure well. So where did this enormous misunderstanding come from? Read to the end, and the answer should come into view.

What Stoicism Is: Starting With One Sentence

The shortest summary of Stoicism might be this.

"Happiness depends not on our external circumstances, but on the judgments and attitudes with which we meet them."

Is that all of it? Of course not. But the seed of the whole philosophy sits inside that one sentence. The Stoics trained themselves to think of life in three parts, traditionally called ethics, physics, and logic. Physics concerns how the universe works, and logic concerns how to reason correctly. Yet everything ultimately bends toward ethics, toward the question of how one ought to live in order to live well.

The Stoics saw the good life as a life lived in harmony with nature, and a life lived according to reason and virtue. Here, virtue (arete) does not merely mean being nice. It means something closer to performing one's function as a human being with excellence. For them, the core virtues were wisdom, courage, temperance, and justice.

One intriguing point is that the Stoics did not regard wealth, health, honor, or a good reputation as bad. They gave such things a rather awkward name, "preferred indifferents." That is, they are nice to have, but they do not decide our happiness. This subtle distinction becomes the source of several misunderstandings we will tackle later.

Core Idea One: The Dichotomy of Control

If there is one concept to hand a newcomer to Stoicism first, it is the dichotomy of control. Epictetus opens his short handbook, the Enchiridion, with exactly this line.

"Some things are within our power, and some things are not."

This plain distinction is the starting point of Stoic practice. According to Epictetus, our judgments, opinions, desires, and the will that decides what to pursue and what to avoid are within our power. By contrast, our body, our property, our reputation, what others think of us, and most external events are not fully in our hands.

Why does this matter so much? Because most of our suffering arises when we try to control what cannot be controlled. Think of standing at the gate, fuming, while a flight is delayed. The departure time is not up to us. But whether we burn an hour in irritation or open a book and use that time well is entirely up to us.

A note of caution is in order. Many modern commentators point out that taking this dichotomy too bluntly can be risky, because so many things in life lie neither fully inside nor fully outside our control, but somewhere in between. An exam score, for instance, depends partly on my effort, yet also on factors beyond me, like the slant of the questions or my health on the day. For this reason, some modern philosophers prefer a "trichotomy of control," dividing things into what is fully up to us, what we can only partly influence, and what we cannot control at all. Which framing is more correct is something I will leave for you to judge.

The Dichotomy of Control at a Glance

  [ Up to Us ]                     [ Not Up to Us ]
   - My judgments and reading       - Weather, traffic, economy
   - My values and goals            - Others actions and opinions
   - My effort and attitude         - Things that already happened
   - My choice in this moment       - The final outcome itself

   Pour energy here ->              Cling here ->
   strength grows                   suffering grows

Core Idea Two: Negative Visualization

The second concept is negative visualization. In Latin it is premeditatio malorum, which we might render as "the foreseeing of bad things."

The name alone sounds like a gloomy exercise. Deliberately imagining bad outcomes, is that not just pessimism? But the Stoics intended the very opposite. The heart of the practice is closer to "renewed gratitude for what could have been lost."

In a letter to a friend, Seneca wrote that the person who has rehearsed adversity in advance is far less shaken when it actually arrives. A misfortune we never saw coming can crush us, but a misfortune we have already lived through in the mind strengthens us.

There is a warmer version too. When you hug your family on the way out each morning, you pause to consider, just for a moment, that this might be the last time you see them. It can sound morbid, yet this brief imagining makes precious again the very thing that, by always being near, had come to feel ordinary. Psychology has a notion that we grow used to good things astonishingly fast. Negative visualization is the device that lets the steam out of that familiarity.

Let us run a thought experiment. Picture one object you use every day, say a tap that pours out hot water at a turn. What if, starting tomorrow, only cold water came out for a month? When the hot water returned a month later, you would feel a small wonder at that ordinary tap. Negative visualization is an attempt to summon that wonder now, without waiting the month.

Three Portraits: A Slave, a Statesman, an Emperor

If you want to remember Stoicism through human faces, the best way is to recall three figures from Roman times. Strikingly, the three stood at opposite ends of the social ladder. A slave, a wealthy statesman, and an emperor. That they shared the same philosophy shows the universality of Stoicism well.

Epictetus: Free Even in Chains

Epictetus began life as a slave. His very name is said to carry, in Greek, the sense of "the acquired one," that is, a possession. He had a bad leg, and a tradition holds it was due to mistreatment during his enslavement, though this is not certain.

Once freed, he taught philosophy. He himself wrote nothing down. The teachings we read come from lecture notes and a handbook recorded by his pupil Arrian. His message is firm and clear. No external force can take your will itself. The body can be chained, but no one can chain your judgment. That a man who began as a slave spoke most deeply about the nature of freedom is, in itself, a message.

Seneca: A Philosopher at the Center of Power and Wealth

Lucius Annaeus Seneca is quite different from the other two. He was a statesman and playwright from a wealthy family, and for a time he was tutor and adviser to the young emperor Nero. He enjoyed immense wealth and stood at the center of power.

For this very reason, Seneca has been a subject of debate then and now. The charge that he preached frugality while being rich himself dogged him during his own lifetime. To this Seneca replied that the problem is not having wealth, but being captured by it. The wise person possesses wealth without being enslaved by it. Whether you read this answer as an excuse or a serious position is yours to decide. Still, the letters he left, especially his essay on the shortness of life and his letters to his friend Lucilius, resonate deeply even today.

In his final years, he was ordered by Nero to take his own life. The composure before death that he had prepared in writing all his life was, in his last moment, actually put to the test.

Marcus Aurelius: The Emperor Who Kept a Journal

Marcus Aurelius was emperor of the Roman Empire, often counted as the last of the so-called Five Good Emperors. The work he left, usually called Meditations, was in fact never meant for publication. It was a set of notes and a journal he addressed to himself, in a tent on the battlefield or on nights weighed down by the burden of rule.

Reading the Meditations is therefore an odd experience. We are peering at the most powerful man in the world straining to keep himself in line. The passage that begins "Today you will meet people who are meddling, ungrateful, and arrogant," and then resolves not to be angry with them anyway, reads less like the writing of an emperor and more like a morning resolution any of us might make.

A Pause: A Mini Quiz

If you have read this far, the core ideas should be taking shape. Let us check with a light quiz. The answers are just below, so think for yourself first.

  1. According to the dichotomy of control, which of the following is "up to us"? (a) tomorrow's weather (b) the judgment of those listening to your talk (c) your attitude and effort in preparing the talk
  2. Which is closest to the true aim of negative visualization? (a) living pessimistically (b) being grateful for what you have and preparing for adversity (c) giving up all pleasure
  3. What is the commonly misunderstood meaning of the word "stoic"? (a) feeling emotions keenly (b) unmoved and emotionless (c) very sociable

Let us check. Number one is (c). The weather and others' opinions are out of our hands, but our attitude and effort are up to us. Number two is (b). Negative visualization is not pessimism but a practice for gratitude and preparation. Number three is (b), and that very misunderstanding is what we will correct in earnest in the next section.

The Biggest Misconception: Stoicism Never Told Us to Erase Emotion

Now let us return to the question from the opening. Why did the word "stoic" harden into meaning "cold and unfeeling"?

Translation and time played a trick here. The Stoics held up a state called apatheia as an ideal. Rendered into English it becomes "apathy," which sounds like indifference or coldness. But the original apatheia is not "a state with no emotions at all," but closer to "a state not tossed about by destructive passions."

What the Stoics guarded against was pathos, the violent impulse that swallows us and clouds our judgment. Uncontrolled rage, a mind blinded by envy, panic trembling with fear, and the like. They saw such passions as born of mistaken judgment. At the same time, they recognized the existence of good emotions. Joy, prudent caution, and rational wishing were regarded as feelings that actually suit the wise person.

In other words, the aim of Stoicism is not the removal of emotion but the refining of it. To borrow a car analogy, it is not about ripping out the brakes, but about fitting brakes that work well. It is not that you should feel no sorrow, but that you should master sorrow so it does not drag you off a cliff.

That Seneca himself left a letter grieving the death of a friend illustrates this well. The real Stoic is not a person turned to stone, but rather someone who feels deeply yet is not swept away and broken by the feeling.

Meeting the Modern World: The Bridge of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy

A large part of why Stoicism drew attention again in the twenty-first century is its surprising link to modern psychology. That bridge is cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT).

The core idea of CBT is startlingly Stoic. What torments us is not the event itself, but our thoughts and interpretations of that event. Of the same rain, one person thinks of a ruined picnic and grows gloomy, while another rejoices that a parched garden will revive. The rain was the same; the mind was not.

This idea was, in fact, voiced by Epictetus in almost the same words. "It is not events that disturb people, but their judgments about events." Albert Ellis, counted among the pioneers of cognitive therapy, is said to have openly credited Stoic philosophy as an inspiration for his approach. One could say that a branch of modern psychotherapy was built upon the insight of a slave philosopher from 2000 years ago.

A note of balance is needed here, though. Many find that reframing their thoughts helps, and research suggests that CBT is effective in a range of situations. But philosophical practice and clinical treatment are not the same thing. If you are living through deep depression or anxiety, the help of a qualified professional should come before any good book. Stoicism can be an excellent tool for training the mind, but it should not be inflated into a prescription for healing every ailment of the mind on one's own.

Sorting It Out by Comparison: Common Myths and the Reality

Let us gather what we have covered into a single table. The left column is the impression we commonly hold; the right is the grain that emerges when you read the original texts.

Common MisconceptionCloser to the Stoic Sources
Suppress every emotionMaster only destructive passions; honor healthy emotions
Be indifferent to the worldDo not cling to outcomes, but attend faithfully to duty
Just endure everythingActively change what can be changed
Treat wealth and pleasure as sinRegard them as preferred indifferents, but do not be enslaved
A hermit doctrine of solitary practiceIt stresses duty to community and to others
Cold and pessimisticCloser to a firm optimism through gratitude and calm

As the table shows, Stoicism is a far warmer and more active philosophy than its common impression.

A Short Timeline of the Stoic Journey

To see at a glance how Stoicism flowed through time, here is a rough sketch. The focus is on feeling the main current rather than pinning down exact years.

The Main Current of Stoicism (rough chronological order)

  around 3rd century BC   Zeno of Citium begins teaching in an Athenian colonnade
                           -> the name 'Stoa' (colonnade) comes from here
  the following centuries  Chrysippus and others systematize the thought (early Stoa)
  around 1st century AD    Seneca, active in the heart of Roman politics
  1st to 2nd century AD    Epictetus, from slave to teacher of philosophy
  2nd century AD           Marcus Aurelius, emperor and philosopher
  medieval to modern       influence on Christian thought and Renaissance humanism
  the present              inspiration for CBT, a popular revival

What stands out in this flow is that Stoicism never stayed in one age, but was endlessly reread and reshaped. It is not a relic in a dead museum, but a body of thought that survived by changing its clothes in every era.

Small Experiments for Everyday Life

You can test Stoicism without any grand resolution. Here are a few light experiments. They are only suggestions, so feel free to pick only what fits you.

First, the morning sentence. As Marcus did, begin the day by writing a single line about a difficulty you might meet today. "There may be a frustrating moment in the meeting today. Even so, I will choose calm." A difficulty sketched in advance feels lighter when it actually arrives.

Second, the control check. When something weighs on your mind, pause and ask yourself, "Is this up to me, or not?" If it is not, move the energy you were spending there toward what is up to you.

Third, the evening review. Seneca is said to have looked back on his day before sleep, asking himself what he did well and what he should mend. It is not self-reproach but a checkup. Retrace the day with the eyes of a kind coach, not a judge.

Fourth, shifting the gaze of gratitude. Choose one thing so constant it has become invisible, and briefly imagine a day without it. Then, when you look again, that ordinary thing will appear a little differently.

Criticisms and Limits: Looking at It Fairly

No philosophy is a cure-all. Stoicism, too, faces criticisms worth taking seriously. Before raising one hand in approval, hearing both sides is the fair thing to do.

First, there is a worry that the dichotomy of control can slide into passivity. The phrase "I cannot change this" can become an excuse for resignation in the face of an injustice that ought to be changed. To pursue only calm before social wrong may be evasion, not wisdom. Then again, the Stoics themselves named justice as a core virtue, so this criticism may aim at a lazy application of Stoicism rather than its true intent.

Second, there is the charge that its stance on emotion is too idealized. Viewing passion solely as a matter of judgment may not fully account for regions of the mind, like trauma, that are hard to master by will. We moderns know that the mind is often not controlled by thought alone.

Third, as Seneca's case shows, there is the problem of the gap between word and life. But this gap is not unique to Stoicism; it is a universal burden carried by every human who chases an ideal.

Knowing these criticisms does not erase the value of Stoicism. On the contrary, used with an awareness of its limits, a philosophy becomes not an object of blind faith but a useful tool.

Closing: To Be Shaken Without Breaking

Let us return to the two men from the start, the slave and the emperor. One had almost nothing, the other lacked almost nothing. And yet the two reached the same conclusion. Place the center of gravity of your life inside, not outside. Hold calm before what cannot be changed, and courage before what can.

Stoicism does not tell us to feel neither sorrow nor joy. It only urges us to learn how to ride the waves of emotion instead of being swept away by them. To be shaken without breaking, perhaps that is the firmest gift this philosophy, having endured 2000 years, holds out to us.

Things to Ponder

  • Bring to mind one worry that weighs on you most right now. How much of it is truly up to you?
  • Between the dichotomy and the trichotomy of control, which feels like a better fit for your life, and why?
  • Negative visualization gives some people gratitude, yet may breed anxiety in others. Where do you think that difference comes from?
  • A figure like Seneca, who wavered between ideal and reality, should we see as a hypocrite, or as a striving human being?
  • If Marcus Aurelius faced today's smartphones and social media, what do you think he would write in his journal?

References

Discuss on Twitter • View on GitHub