Why is stoicism wrong?

What should one do instead of that, I'm really interested on that topic and most of the critics of it seems to be misunderstanding it. And I'm not really a stoic myself but am rather looking for the right thing

It's not necessarily wrong. It advocates you study philosophy, do your job, not worry about the past and the present (Aurelius), or anything out of your control (Epictetus). It tells you to be manly, but not too strong, and it highlights the power of the mind.

It revolves around reason vs emotion, and that already was fought between Plato and Aristotle.
Plato won btw.

>Plato won btw.
Did he? I remember Aristotle giving him quite the beating

Stoicism is often adopted by disaffected men in their 20s who see is as an abstracted father figure from which they'll learn how to be manly.

Then from here they argue among themselves about what stoicism *really* is until their definitions get so hedged in that they lose all motive value and its practitioners become about as interesting as drywall.

I mean look at the ideas posted in here, some retard literally defined it as "do yer job." What a philosophy! Literally anything would be better.

literal cucks are the ultimate stoics

What should one do instead

"Know thyself and do thy job" - Montaigne paraphrasing Plato.

I didn't define it as "do your job," but that's an integral aspect, yes. You wouldn't say that a major part of a man's life is to realize what his purpose is and doing it? Cf. every western canon book.

meant for:

When I think of a guiding principle I envision something that should inspire.
"Wageslave until you die" isn't what we're looking for.

wouldn't you say some people are meant to be a "wageslave?" The inferior exist for the (or alongside) the superior. I'm not saying that's YOUR purpose.

What's wrong with being a wageslave (for someone who can't do anything above that)?

If you don't make poor decisions, feel your emotions or rely on others you start to feel dysphoria in a world where everyone else does.

i'm tired of seeing the word cuck on Veeky Forums, in literature, and in life. Everywhere I am, cuckoo, cuckoo, cuckoo. I feel like Leopold Bloom only I shouldn't because i'm in a confident relationship. Too bad I can't go a day without seeing or thinking about cuck, cuck, cuck. Anything I read has a cuckold. Anna Karenina, Ulysses, Homer, fucking MARTIAL, Ovid, Delillo, Hemingway, Steinbeck, the comments about Aurelius, Proust... I wouldn't be surprised if by re-reading the Divine Cuckedy i would find something (Beatrice fucked Virgil didn't she?). She fucked Virgil and cucked Dante. Fuck and cuck. Cuck, cuck, cuckoo. And don't even get me fucking STARTED on Shakespeare. Literally every play has at least a line mentioning the cuckold's horns one way or another (oh I marked them). Please somebody cleanse me of this mind virus. Thank God i'm at least half as manly enough as Petruchio or any Shakespeare hero or how Martial or Socrates or Aristotle or Epictetus or Sam Hyde would aspire to be, or else I would probably end up blowing my brains out.

it's just the law of fives in action

Nothing is wrong with wageslaving as utility.
But wageslaving as philosophy? Pretty thin gruel m8.

i'm not saying the wageslaving is the philosophy. Working is different than philosophizing. They're separate and they go hand-in-hand, but they're not the same thing. And again, not everyone is cut out for stoicism--the wageslave is a rare example. I'd just like to backtrack and say that when I mean't "do your job" i didn't mean literally do a wageslave job. Do what you were meant to do on this earth. It takes years to figure that out if you're lucky.

meant*

(i've been reading too much Shakespeare)

Putting your head down and "doing what you're meant to do" is a great way to allow yourself to be used by others who didn't get memed.
Playing by the rules just gets you fucked.
It's just a very sad, passive philosophy. Go with the flow, don't react, blah. It's like you're already dead.

Stoicism isn't wrong. It's just an incomplete characterization of life that can bring you a lot of solace and strength when practiced well but certainly isn't enough to live the good life.

you just discovered that the western canon is just the hidden history of cuckoldry. Don Quixote for example was written solely to include that self-cucking story in the middle, the rest is filler

i haven't explained myself well enough. "Know thy job." = "Do thy job." = "Do what you were meant to do."

Do what you're meant to do can mean an endless trial to try and achieve your highest fulfillment. "Everyone should make a proper estimate of his own natural ability and show himself a critical judge of his own merits and defects." (Cicero, De Officis). This goes in line with stoicism.

It's not saying, "Don't react." Epictetus and Seneca in fact say the opposite. If you're going off only Aurelius things get hazy because then you don't have the foundation of what it means to be a stoic, you only have the endgame realization.

Just take from Encheiridion I:

>"If then you desire (aim at) such great things, remember that you must not (attempt to) lay hold of them with small effort; but you must leave alone some things entirely, and postpone others for the present. But if you wish for these things also (such great things), and power (office) and wealth, perhaps you will not gain even those very things (power and wealth) because you aim also at those former things (such great things): certainly you will fail in those tings through which alone happiness and freedom are secured."

>It's that part of the discussion where all consensus on stoicism evaporates into nothing and everyone is left holding their dick in their hand

>Stoicism is often adopted by disaffected men in their 20s who see is as an abstracted father figure from which they'll learn how to be manly.

That's so accurate it's not even funny

it isn't necessarily "wrong" but it has subjective or unfalsifiable axioms so it's as "correct" as most religions.

Stoicism can be considered wrong in so far the detachment from passion entails a lack of authenticity under the auspices of rationality.

The deterministic view or amor fatis as termed Nietzsche therefore creates the world as representation of pure cause to effect as stoicisim as a whole is a system. Truth and certitude are systemized, knowledge stems from representation or image, the impression of a real object in the soul just like the seal in the wax from Zeno and this is leads to a first evaluation on whether things can be acknowledged through soul and if in truth, therefore things have an understanding or perception of the object which is immediate which is certainty of things as they are.

The sensation is therefore distinctively separated from the image as an act of the spirit, the faithful image as criteria for truth is called comprehensive representation. This image is passive but capable to produce its acknowledgement and perception.