Stoicism
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /lit/ - Literature
You are currently reading a thread in /lit/ - Literature
Hello people
Which one should i start with concerning stoicism? "Letters from a stoic" by Seneca or "Meditations" by Marcus Aurelius?
please respond
>>7414015
I've only read Meditations, so I cam only recommend that one. You might also try some Zhuangzi. His Taoism had some similarities with Stoicism.
>>7414052
anything in particular? thanks family
Bumping off of this thread, I haven't read any Stoicism yet, but it seems similar to Buddhism from the outside.
Would you guys agree/disagree/call me a pleb?
>>7414078
I agree with you, pleb.
>>7414078
Same in the sense that it promotes detachment from external stimuli, though Buddhism emphasizes the lack of meaning in the external world of the senses, while Stoicism only encourages you to value and maintain control over your internal experience regardless of exterior factors.
>>7414058
The first seven chapters of The Inner Chapters. Originally there were 52 chapters, we've found 33, but the first 7 are the most homogenous in style, and generally recognized as the work of Zhuangzhi himself.
>>7414087
So instead of external factors leading ultimately to suffering are they seen as neutral or irrelevant?
>>7414095
Umm ok stop talking to me now thnx
>>7414101
NO
ANSWER ME
Epictetus, Seneca, Marcus Based Aurelius
Meditations is an easier start if you're not learning the languages to read them.
Cicero is comfy in Latin but in translation it just means larger blocks of text than Aurelius' aphoristic style.
For more stoicism, try Pessoa's The Education of The Stoic.
If you want similar, but not as state duty obsessed, philosophies, Zhuangzi is a good rec or Lucretius if you don't mind poetry and scientific pondering for the first few chapters.
>>7414078
It's like the Confucian Buddhism that took over in China, and develops a similar sense of acting according to one's place. Earlier stoicism has some things in common, but the ideas of decorum and filial piety in Roman Stoicism and Confucian Buddhism are where the best comparisons can be made.
>>7414095
From my understanding of Stoicism and Buddhism, yes you are correct
>>7414142
>Cicero
My brain has turned off. Cicero is comfy, but I meant Seneca.
Seneca's less fun outside of plays, and as this >>7414132 more awake anon points out, you should really start with Epictetus.
Cicero is good at explaining decorum, but if you're not learning Latin, a lot of the ideas on when to use certain swear words and what ones to never use as a gentleman might get lost in translation.
Start with Seneca, very accessible. Then Epictetus or Aurelius. Read Musonius Rufus, too, he was Epictetus' teacher
Why does lit hate Stoicism?
>>7414210
>Musonius Rufus
You do know that all we have by him are fragments, right?
>>7414242
There's a book of the collected fragments for sale on amazon
>>7414210
really? i thought aurelius would be a better start than seneca
>>7414247
And you can find books "by" Heraclitus. For any realistic purpose we have nothing by Rufus. There is a reason why no one ever talks about him when referring to Stoic texts.
>>7414258
Aurelius wrote notes for himself. They are often opaque and can be misleading if one doesn't know anything about Stoicism because he isn't writing for any purpose other than his own self improvement. I think he is best read after one has some groundwork.
>>7414261
Hey now, I'm not saying the other guy is right, but a slim volume of Heraclitus' fragments is actually worthwhile, especially in Greek. Rufus though isn't worth that much, and Aurelius would be better even if not in Greek. I think the other guy is just being a wikipedia scholar, but there's no need to dis Heraclitus for that.
>>7414266
ok, so i'm few pages into meditations, should i leave it and start with letters from a stoic instead?
>>7414261
I literally read it dude. Either I'm right or there's a guy out there who can write based stoic advice that's close to the real thing.
>>7414258
Doesn't matter really. Seneca was my first introduction to fatherly advice from dudes who have been dead thousands of years. No matter what, read Epictetus though. There's a story of a soldier who was able to endure years in a Vietnam POW camp because he'd read Epictetus beforehand.
I slipped a disc in my back and have been in , at times, excruciating pain. Epictetus is the only thing that helps. Funny how logic chopping goes out the window when the chips are down
Don't forget to read some Epicureanism, which, on a side note, you could also argue has minor similarities to Buddhism (ultimate pleasure is the complete lack of suffering).
If you want to read some Epicureanism, I suggest:
De Rerum Natura - Lucretius
The Essential Epicurus
>>7414277
so it seems the consensus is to begin with seneca, thanks
>>7414015
de brevitate vitae by seneca
>>7414277
anything by epictetus specifically?
>>7414344
Get the Oxford world classics edition of his handbook and discourses. That's all that really left of him
>>7414361
got it, will read it after i finish letters from a stoic, thanks
>>7414344
Also check out the Enchiridion, it's a nice summation and intro of his work.
>>7414266
Both are pretty accessible
>Reflect that nothing merits admiration except the spirit, the impressiveness of which prevents it from being impressed by anything.’
What did he mean by this?
