Modern Stoicism

Off topic: When you say "modern stoicism", do you mean applying classical stoic principles to modern life or are there certain books, authors, or websites that offer a modern interpretation of classical stoicism you're referring to? A quick search yielded this site: http://modernstoicism.com. Any other references would be appreciated.

Acceptance and its role in happiness is such a great topic and I am so grateful we can access the works of long-past lucid thinkers. This is a very productive use of limited reading time IMO. Putting aside Aristotelian virtue-of-external-goods, there is so much agreement with the Stoics (action-from-virtue and virtue-from-within). And THEN, when you fold in schools like Daoism and Buddhism (the philosophy, not religion) and their takes on acceptance and happiness ... I am also impressed (comforted?) that there is so much in common with the west. (Confirmation of fundamentals? I recognize this optimism is decidedly un-Stoic. Lol.) BTW, here's another good article IMO that contrasts the two Greek camps: http://modernstoicism.com/poor-but-happy-aristotle-and-the-stoics-on-e…

I can't speak for Vipassana, never having tried it, but I think that's an unfair characterization of stoicism (but perhaps not of some who claim to practice it?). http://modernstoicism.com/

The thinking expressed echoes many of the themes from my reading of Stoicism, chiefly * learning to appreciate what you have rather than chase something you don't have in the vain hope that it will give you satisfaction. * coming to terms with the fact that there are things you have no control over and not worry about them. (If you are unfamiliar with Stoicism and would like to learn more, the blog archive at http://modernstoicism.com/ has a lot of content. I also liked William Irvine's "A guide to the good life" (https://www.amazon.com/Guide-Good-Life-Ancient-Stoic/dp/0195374614).

Some differences between the two as well: > The main point of contention between Aristotelian and Stoics is the issue of whether virtue is sufficient for happiness (Aristotle, NE 1.8-10, Cicero, On Ends Books 3-5). Both Aristotle and Stoics claim that virtue is an essential component of happiness. But while Aristotle sees happiness as dependent on a combination of virtue and bodily goods (for instance, health) and external goods (for instance, money, power and friends), for the Stoics happiness depends solely on virtue. Thus, for Aristotle virtue is necessary for happiness, but not sufficient, whereas for the Stoics it is both necessary and sufficient. * https://modernstoicism.com/aristotelian-and-stoic-happiness-by-gabriel… > * If all external things are deemed by the Stoa unnecessary for our happiness, this will include other people. Yet the affect of love, with its valuation of the other and her good as part of our own, seems to be set irremovably deep in our nature and infancy, and to be the portal to the most meaningful experiences of life: a thought underlying Aristotle’s arguments concerning philia. The Stoic opposition to the pathē more widely, likewise, seems psychologically unrealistic – since passions like love and fear are so basic to our psyches – and to threaten to rob our subjective lives of too much of what gives them their colour. Finally, at a more technical level, the Stoic emphases on virtue as a technē or epistēmē seems to rob…

In a sense that book is more about selfhelp, and misses some parts of Stoicism. An interesting book which is more complete but still readable is Stoic Notes written by Rymke Wiersma, translated in English here: https://modernstoicism.com/a-free-book-stoic-notes-by-rymke-wiersma/

I just learned about amathia (https://modernstoicism.com/there-is-nothing-banal-about-philosophy-by-… which seems to apply here.

I recently spent time on Stoicism Week 2025: https://modernstoicism.com/stoic-week-2025-live-like-a-stoic-and-disco… This years theme was on well-being, I found it useful.

What if the snowflake nucleated around microbes in the air, as is common? [1] Would that be life-like enough, especially as the crystalline structure of the snowflake itself would reflect the microbe. Or, what if the observer of the snowflake held the philosophical belief that we live in a single living universe, as did the ancient Stoics? [2] It appears that we have at least two clear instances where preserved snowflakes can indeed be considered fossils. [1] https://asm.org/articles/2019/january/snow-is-coming-whats-that-have-t… [2] https://modernstoicism.com/modern-stoicism-expert-panel-posts-the-univ…

FYI: There is actually a MOOC going on right now called "Stoic Mindfulness & Resilience Training (SMRT)"[0] [0] https://modernstoicism.com/stoic-mindfulness-and-resilience-training-s…

It likely came that way via the Vulgate ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulgate ) which was a translation of Greek into Latin in the fourth century. It was the official Catholic version in 1545 - 1563 (the KJV was translated in 1611). in principio erat Verbum et Verbum erat apud Deum et Deus erat Verbum Though going back to logos - even that word changed meaning over the the centuries from Heraclitus (5th century BC) ( https://chs.harvard.edu/chapter/17-the-heraclitean-logos/ https://theimaginativeconservative.org/2015/12/logos-of-heraclitus.htm… https://modernstoicism.com/heraclitus-and-the-birth-of-the-logos/ ) to the neoplatonist school (3rd century AD) The early Christian church traditions were a battlefield of dueling scriptures and philosophies. Some books that I'd recommend on that area. Note that my approach to the Bible isn't one of a believer but rather as another work of ancient philosophy (which was my favorite philosophy class of my almost not getting a CS degree) and stoicism is the branch within there that I've read the most of. https://www.amazon.com/Stoicism-Early-Christianity-Tuomas-Rasimus/dp/0… https://www.amazon.com/Lost-Christianities-Battles-Scripture-Faiths/dp… https://www.amazon.com/Lost-Scriptures-Books-that-Testament/dp/B094NY2…