The three rules of Stoic Club
The three rules of Stoic Club
A modest proposal
As is well known: “The first rule of Fight Club is: You do not talk about Fight Club. The second rule of Fight Club is: You do not talk about Fight Club.” This, of course, comes from the homonymous 1999 movie directed by David Fincher, starring Brad Pitt, Edward Norton, and Helena Bonham Carter, and based on the 1996 novel of the same name by Chuck Palahniuk.
Stoicism is not Fight Club. We can talk about it. And it doesn’t have rules, per se, since it falls into the class of virtue ethics, not deontology. Still, let me perhaps immodestly suggest three informal “rules” that may be wise to adopt.
Rule #1: Don’t tell people who don’t follow Stoicism that they are not being Stoic
When you see anyone weeping for grief, either that his son has gone abroad or that he has suffered in his affairs, take care not to be overcome by the apparent evil, but discriminate and be ready to say, ‘What hurts this man is not this occurrence itself—for another man might not be hurt by it—but the view he chooses to take of it.’ As far as conversation goes, however, do not disdain to accommodate yourself to him and, if need be, to groan with him. Take heed, however, not to groan inwardly, too. (Epictetus, Enchiridion, 16)
The first part of this quote from Epictetus reminds us of a fundamental Stoic doctrine: the distinction between objective facts (e.g., my daughter has moved overseas) and value judgments (e.g., it’s a terrible thing that my daughter has moved overseas).
Judgments are not in the world as such, they are human constructs. And a crucial technique in Stoicism is to reframe things so that we may reduced our own suffering and focus on what is really important: improving our own judgments (our faculty of prohairesis).
However, as the second part of the quote makes clear, we shouldn’t act toward others assuming that they follow the same principles. Indeed, it would be callous to do so, and entirely unhelpful, from a pragmatic standpoint (analogous to telling someone who is upset to “just calm down”). Rather, we should be sympathetic toward our fellow human beings, and act (externally) in a manner that actually comforts them, while retaining the (internal) attitude we have being honing as Stoics.
Rule #2: Don’t tell other Stoics that they are not being Stoic
There is no reason why you should desire to come to me for the sake of making progress. You are mistaken if you think that you will get any assistance from this quarter; it is not a physician that dwells here, but a sick man. (Seneca, Letters to Lucilius, LXVIII.9)
Even when it comes to fellow Stoic practitioners, it’s really a good idea not to say anything along the lines of “hey, that’s not very Stoic of you!,” as if we were the teachers and they the pupils. It is one thing to give advice if asked; entirely another thing to use one’s own (surely imperfectly practiced!) Stoicism as a stick to beat our brothers and sisters with every time we think they fail the test.
As Seneca embodies in his 68th letter to his friend Lucilius, our attitude should be one of fellow travelers, or fellow patients, not of self-appointed masters of others. After all, sages come about once every 500 years or so (Letters, XLII.1), so it’s unlikely that we have actually managed the transition from fools to sagehood.
Rule #3: Be a Stoic, don’t just talk like one
No longer talk at all about the kind of man that a good man ought to be, but be such. (Marcus Aurelius, Meditations, X.16)
Marcus was going a bit overboard here, when he told himself not to talk “at all” about the kind of person he wanted to be. Indeed, the whole Meditations is an exercise of talking himself into being a better person. But the general advice is sound: practice your philosophy of life, and be a role model to others through your actions, rather than your words.
The Society for Ethical Culture, a “secular religious” group founded by Felix Adler in 1877, has adopted the motto “deed before creed.” It’s just as good for Stoics as for the followers of Adler. It does not imply that “creed” is not important, nor that one cannot do good by talking (or writing, as in my case here) about it. It only implies that what matters in the end is what one actually does. As Epictetus put it:
If from the moment they [his students] get up in the morning they adhere to their ideals, eating and bathing like a person of integrity, putting their principles into practice in every situation they face—the way a runner does when he applies the principles of running, or a singer those of musicianship—that is where you will see true progress embodied, and find someone who has not wasted their time making the journey here [i.e., to Epictetus’ school in Nicopolis] from home. (Discourses I, 4.20)
Practically rules of The Stoic Club could go this conclusion that there is only one rule: Don’t argue and explain being a Stoic to anyone, just be one.
I would include the original "Fight Club Rule" that we should not speak about Stoicism. When I discovered the Stoics, I became very vocal about their teachings (just like a "born-again" christian...) . I even bought books (Yours too, Massimo) to my close relative ... in a naive hope that these concepts and ideas would extinguish a little bit of his anger issues and lifelong depression. I was really-really wrong... He is a very intellectual and well read person, but instead of really internalizing the Stoics' or Socrates's ideas, he totally turned them inside-out, cherry-picked some ideas and used them to justify his ongoing anger toward certain individuals. Nowadays he really likes to compare himself to Socrates, or Seneca in such a ways that I would consider "infuriating blasphemy".... I have to consciously keep my anger in check when he talks about them in any context... Now it is clear to me, that he never reads anything to learn something, but to conform, and strengthen his already formed worldview.
I have an other close friend who is also highly intelligent and susceptible to philosophy. I told him about Stoicism too, and sent him some articles. He considered this very limited amount of information enough to be "reconstruct" the whole Stoicism. He often criticize Stoicism on the shallow level of the wikipedia, and not on the level of the "John Sellars book". (I mean, I criticize Jordan Peterson after watching 20-30 hours of him talking about stuff...).
Since the ancient Stoics did not ask us to proselytize, and there is no "eternal pressure" to get more and more people into Stoicism, I would add the rule that "Don't speak about Stoicism, unless someone explicitly ask you."