So far this book is just "tfw centrist master race" you fuckers memed me

So far this book is just "tfw centrist master race" you fuckers memed me

Reminder that the George Long translation is pretentious for its own sake to the point of severely detracting from the book.

Yeah you have to account for the fact that this book was written hundreds of years ago.

I specifically remember him mentioning something a long the lines, that if you have lived one day, you could die in the evening and still have missed nothing about the state of being human.

I always thought that was bullshit. Also, stoicism just seems like one big COPE to me. Everything is coping when you think about it actually, but Stoics are just really good at suppressing their emotions but dont take Marcus' words for what a man is and is not.

You should read it again, you don't seem to understand what stoicism is. Read something from Seneca aswell

>Also, stoicism just seems like one big COPE to me.
Same. It's the cope philosophy for periods of decline. Centrists like it because they know what they have to do but aren't willing to do anything because they're centrist pussies.

>How much truth can a spirit bear, how much truth does a spirit dare? That for me became the real measure of value. Copelets BTFO

I also bought the book and tried making my way through it but it just seems like it's tidbits of information here and there that you can choose to take in, like a diary I guess that's how it was written(?)

Do you have to read it from cover to cover or some sections more worth it than others, it's a fucking bore desu and I actually did philosophy at A level and liked it compared to this. I think I need a better understanding of history to truly appreciate it.

Yeah, it was his private journal. It wasn't really meant for others to see, so we don't get a full picture of Stoicism, only what he struggled with. Most of it is trying to quell his own self-doubts and steel himself. Read Seneca and Epictetus for a more in-depth look at the Stoics.

As for read order, read the first book then pretty much go wherever you want from there. As I said, it's a journal, so there isn't a logical order of progression beyond the first book. Sometimes it's beneficial to only read a few lines a day, like it was written.

To be honest, I wouldn't start with Meditations if you're just beginning to learn about it. It has a slightly more "human" feel than the works of Seneca and Epictetus, but it also lacks a logical progression. Perhaps it's disorder is the precise reason it feels so genuine.

Nonetheless, I'll just parrot the usual advice is philosophy: move from ancient to modern. Philosophy is a discipline with a lot of history and a lot of lengthy, complex texts that build off one another.

am I on Veeky Forums or Veeky Forums right now?

Did we read the same fucking book?
That's not what I got out of it at all.

So basically what you did/ are doing is trying to find confirmation about a world view that you already have (some people are pussies, the individual has all the responsibility) and then get mad cause it doesn't not confirm your bias in the way you expected it to do.

Also this guy either has a horrible reading comprehension or didn't read the book at all.

Marcus states at least 5times explicitly that stoicism isn't about surpessing anything.


I agree with this guy. The meditations aren't meant to give you knwoledge about the argumentations or ontology of stoicism, even though you might be able to derive it from between the lines.
It is more about a deep insight of the struggles a stoic ruler has with himself and the world. I love reading 2-3 lines every day to ponder about it, but it certainly isn't just a literaly piece that you can read in a row, that would kill the whole purpose of it.

That centrist was emperor of the Roman Empire, spent a good amount of his life traveling for war to protect the Empire, altough suffering for his bad health. You are reading his inner struggles to rationalize life and death and the list of all the moral qualities and teachings that allowed him to hold the empire together during his reign.

Veeky Forums how would you describe the difference between the philosophies of the Stoics, Nietzsche, and Evola?

>Stoic is cope
>Neitchze is everything is broke
>Evola is only through Traditionalism is there hope

havent read evola, but what do you mean what are the differences, are you retarded. they are fucking different in of themselves, they focus on different aspects of philosophy. like some anons said stoicism is about coping and being steadfast, all the while living a moral life for the benefit of "city", or society, while nietzsche talks about transcending traditional morality which ultimately prefers you to be weak, and be strong, ubermensch, have the mental fortitude to say fuck you to everyone and believe and bee urself, ultimately you should still be moral and cultured, but this has to come from a point of strength, confidence and pride, not humility and cowardice. oh and there's a lot of commentary about other philosophies, ascetism, the jews, women, generally shit like that

Read Seneca’s letters, they make Stoicism a lot more down to earth and applicable to real life. Perhaps Epicurianism is more up your alley, it’s a lot more focussed on personal happiness. Or you could read up on the Cynics, who believed stripping down life to the bare necessities was the path to virtue. One of their founders Diogenes lived in a barrel and trolled people in Athens and later taught Zeno who went on and created Stoicism. It’s all really interesting once bits and pieces fall together so keep reading.

>Not maxing out STR, DEX, CON, INT, and WIS with CHA as a dump stat
>Making it

>reading brothers karamazov
>hardly any paragraph breaks
>can barely pronounce / remember people's names
>halfway through
i hope its worth it in the end

>dex

If the author is pic related he looks like an ancient soyboy honestly. Look at those feminine skull features

Stoic is the father who goes through his life miserable to provide for his children

Neitzche is the guy who starts fights at sports events

Evola is the tweaker on the street corner

>"centrist"
how the fuck do brainlets misunderstand stoicism so hard? This shit isn't complex

What is the most Veeky Forums philosophy?

Evola is the father that provides, you got it mixed up

National Socialism

This. They had a fitness cult a la ancient greece.

Anything that won't get me fired?

It's about not being a pussy.

Its more personal philosophy rather than anything specifically political

this

It's not a fucking philosophical treatise it's just his personal diary. It's to remind himself what his teachers taught him, not share wisdom.

>bitcheslaughing.jpg

I like these

>what do you mean what are the differences
Because they're all decline philosophies so I want to know the shorthand version of them to see how they differ. ty for reply btw

Yeah its not a political book so maybe you just can't read. But its also pretty stupid that its recommended as much because really you need to read the manga to enjoy the anime and in this case Seneca is your guy.

Here is the briefest expressions of stoicism: "Not happy he who thinks himself not so" because "It is not the man who has little, but the man who craves more, that is poor"

But its not about settling for things, its more about focusing on the actions you can take and the outcomes you can control rather than just wishing for shit to be good and being sad when it isn't - so its actually the opposite of settling.

Here is some of my boy epictetus as well to showcase it further:

‘But my nose is running!’ What do you have hands for, idiot, if not to wipe it? ‘But how is it right that there be running noses in the first place?’ Instead of thinking up protests, wouldn't it be easier just to wipe your nose?

What can I do? Pick the captain, the boat, the date, and the best time to sail. But then a storm hits. Well. it’s no longer my business; I have done everything I could.

When faced with anything painful or pleasurable, anything bringing glory or disrepute, realize that the crisis is now, that the Olympics have started, and waiting is no longer an option; that the chance for progress, to keep or lose, turns on the events of a single day. That's how Socrates got to be the person he was, by depending on reason to meet his every challenge. You’re not yet Socrates, but you can still live as if you want to be him.

You can read the enchiridion if you google it and it gives some good ideas of stoicism etc.

>I know this is true because it's a longer than average post in Veeky Forums.

>stoicism is all about coping lmao
ask me how i know the people saying this have tendencies towards mediocrity. you can interpret the "coping" strategies to be meant for accepting weakness or for accepting the pain of struggle towards betterment etc. the application depends on yourself. it also has nothing to do with political ideologies

Dex>sex

>you need to subscribe to one philosophy
Definitely start reading some books mate.

You have to remember that this is just a guy writing down random thoughts to himself--like a diary, but with even less coherence since he literally wrote it like notes for himself. Also:
>he isn't a bourgeois centrist
never gonna make it

Could somebody summarize Neitchze for me

it was autism

>i hope its worth it in the end
It is. Next, read "Demons".

...

If you're reading Meditations before you read Seneca's letters, you fucked up

Really doesn't matter. So long as you end up at Seneca's letters (and moral essays/dialogues) you're gold. The Meditations is the best base for the Stoic faith, metaphysics, and cosmology, but for the ethics you have to read Seneca.

Brothers Karamazov is amazing, keep going.

Having control + willpower over yourself =/= suppression. Emotions are for liberals btw, so gtfo

...

Stoicism is to Amor Fati what Untermensch is to Ubermensch.

What is some recommended /fitlit/?

>beingthisilliterate

>"in this moment I am euphoric"

You really just berated someone for misunderstanding a core tenet of Stoicism, then said "Emotions are for liberals".

>no more mr nice guy
>The 48 laws of power.

Thoughts on Cicero and scepticism? Is it compatible with stoicism?

Fucking this.

Stoicism = I give up.
Nietzsche = I hate Jesus!
Evola = More brown people drugs pls.

^

>Stoics = Hold fast, you cant do anything about most of reality
>Nietzsche = The world an majority of people are shit, nihilism is too, here is how you overcome it
>Evola = we are in the kali yuga, you can only fight

Sparta, but this extends to today as national socialism/fascism

>56%

Have you guys ever read evola?

i like that aspect of the nazis, but the inherent unnecessary violence of their philosophy comes off as so inherently wrong. And that is not even mentioning the balance of power in a national socialist society, or the type of dictator authority positions there are at the top. Making the whole system very liable to collapse.

>the inherent unnecessary violence of their philosophy comes off as so inherently wrong.

No you sperg Stoicism is about focusing on what you can change and not stressing about what you can't.

>inherent unnecessary violence
War is completely natural and has produced most of the social and scientific advancements throughout history, directly or indirectly. We need it every once in a while, to obtain new heroes and legends to rally around, to forge increasingly divided people back into a Nation, to rid society of dead weight and to redesign systems and processes that would be untouchable during peacetime. Fascism/NatSoc doesn’t want war for war’s sake but recognises it’s necessity. I would recommend you to read Evola’s ‘Metaphysics of War’, it’s not just childish fighting.

fascism, not necessarily hitlers natsoc.

Is it possible to be a stoic while still pursuing hedonistic endeavors like drugs and porn?

Laughably wrong

Yes. Just don't make it into a dependency.

only if you do it because you want to, stoics aren't cynics