/lit/ - Literature

>stoics

>muh oblique pursuit of pleasure through the cultivation of Virtues (spooks)

>>4859041
>virtues
>spooks
In the context of stoicism it means something closer to wisdom rather than ethics, you should know that

>>4859051

>he thinks there are only ethical spooks

>doesn't realize wisdom is a spook

>>4859041
>implying spooks aren't a spook

Epictetus?

>>4859053
stop bastardizing Stirner you fucking goober, spooks are illusory self-imposed boogeymen hindering man from becoming an egoist.

Its not a code word for "everything I don't understand."

>>4859056
>>implying spooks aren't a spook

>>4859061
>stop bastardizing Stirner you fucking goober, spooks are illusory self-imposed boogeymen hindering man from becoming an egoist.

sounds like a perfect description of stoicism and its virtue ethics and wisdom seeking injunctions.

>>4859065
except that Stoicism has nothing to do with ethics, it is an egoist act of self betterment. If anything, stoicism is the exorcism of spooks, the sage has freed himself from all errors in judgement aka destructive emotions which often manifest themselves in falling for the spooks.

>stirnerfags in charge of meaningful contributions to discussions
Reading Stirner is not a license to be incontrovertibly contrary.

>>4859058
This.
From the cursory introductions I've ben listening to, he sounds like best of the Stoics.

>>4859041
You spook fags are unbearable

How do I become a better stoic?

How does Seneca differ from the other stoics, btw? I've only read his letters to Lucilius, and no other stoic philosopher as of yet, but I think Seneca practically covers all grounds there are to be covered, no?

The main thing I got from it was that you can have everything you want and do whatever you want aslong as you can also do without, and not become absorbed in your possessions to a degree where they outweigh your own being.
Also that you should strive to educate others and gather a group of close friends to exchange ideas with.

Is there any more to it?

>>4859085
Practice.

But read their lessons first.. of course

>>4859073
>freed himself from all errors in judgement
>errors
>errors
>implying there is a right vs wrong judgements
>falling for even more spooks

>>4859090

>tfw Jennifer will never be young again

>>4859094
At least post a pic of her in that Labyrinth film

>>4859099
I googled "Jennifer Connelly Labyrinth" and found a picture of her with Bukowski.

>>4859090
usually I don't think of Jennifer Connelly as hot, but damn son.

>>4859122
>usually I don't think of Jennifer Connelly as hot

You might have low testosterone bro.

>>4859122
i know what this anon means, in her "young" movie she looks amazing - but her mental picture in every head is one "enhanced" by plastic surgery atleast

>>4859091
if it is a destructive emotion to the ego, it is an error, not that hard to understand

>>4859175

>being this redundant
>preserving some vague "ego" is now a moral imperative

that's still a spook

>mfw when filthy Stoics touch muh precious Stirnerological termini with their filthy virtuous hands.

>>4859181
>implying there is a moral imperative
>implying you know what the fuck stoicism is
kiddo puhlease

>>4859089

Epictetus goes through stoic theory, logic and metaphysics way more thoroughly, and also differs from Senece quite much in some points (like public life)

He's also in my opinion the most well spoken of the stoics.

>>4859207


>implying stoicism is devoid of ethical standards and prescribed wisdom goals

>implying you even read one stoic

>>4859207

the only way you can make stoicism and stirner compatible is if you totally undermine stoicisms' virtues, ideals and search for Truth.

>>4859061
An essentialist notion of nature which which man can either align or not align himself with and is thereby virtuous to the degree that he does so is pretty fucking spooky, friend.

>>4859073
Seems like you do not even have a basic wikipedia grasp of stoicism. Stoics were horrible moralfags.

>>4859175
>implying Stirner would entertain such a silly notion as 'one ought not destroy the self'.

Just fyi: The 'is Stirner compatible with Greek techniques of the Self' debate is happening elsewhere. Cf. Saul Newman's essay in the collection of essays called 'Max Stirner' which he also edited, a rebuttal will be published in German in the upcoming yearbook of the Max Stirner Gesellschaft (it's currently being shipped, I hear).

>>4859336
You the German Stirnerbro, anon? Weren't you writing a thesis on him or something?

>>4859369
Yes and yes. I still haven't started writing the actual fucking thesis, I just take more and more notes that I cannot fit into any sane structure... I just keep coming up with more angles, more connections, more things I could have introductory segments on (how post-anarchists write their own history with respect to political events and theory, for example). Since I quit uni after a year of being a department helper monkey and working on Stirner, I did an internship for half a year and now I work and can live off my wages, yay! (it's relatively soul-crushing, though).

>>4859427
Are you teaching girls?

Aurelius' Meditations is basically the only Stoic shit worth reading. Stoics were retards.

>>4859503
I fucking wish. No, I work in a communications agency. At least the internship was in Berlin, so it was a little Stirner-relevant.

>>4859521

>only Stoic shit worth reading
>aphorisms of uneven quality and generally more poorly written compared to other Stoic writings

step up with your shitposting, anon

>>4859623

>Book is basically the musings and thoughts of one of history's most important men

Nigga it doesn't have to be comprehensive like Thomas "I Suck Dicks" Hobbes to be great.

>>4859634

though this is the stoicism thread, feel free to start a "thoughts and semi-biographies of Roman emperors" thread

also I don't hate the book and parts of it are even important to me personally, but placing it above Epictetus is absurd considering how much Aurelius is influenced by him and some of the meditations don't even make much sense unless you've read Epictetus

>>4859654
>Epictetus

That's like saying Houston Chamberlain is important because he influenced Hitler.

>>4859662

Have you actually read Epictetus? I would be interested in hearing why you think his texts are worse than Aurelius'.

>>4859675

Some of him, yeah. Had to read the enchiridion for a class. Thought it was silly and stupid. Not to mention half of what he says is redundant or doesn't need to be stated as it's pretty obvious.

Has anyone read the Neostoics like Lipsius and du Vair? Are they readable?

>>4859526
You can always go on welfare, the improved version of borrowing money and running.

>>4859683
>Not to mention half of what he says is redundant or doesn't need to be stated as it's pretty obvious.

Welcome to philosophy. Enjoy your stay.