Here in Europe, if I would be able to describe “most” of the atheist, I would say they follow, consciously or not, the stoicism.
Does stoicism movement is common also in US or other Anglo Saxons cultures (Canada, Australia etc).
Stoicism is a very nice (for me at least that I follow it) compass to navigate life and if would be more thaught in school I sense we would have way more stoicists around
1 Like
I, personally, enjoy reading about the philosophy and have watched many You Tube videos. It seems to be a no-frills, pragmatic approach to life.
Focus on what you can control: Let the bullshit hit the fan. Stop worrying about what other people say and do if it does not affect your life.
Love your life: Regardless of where you are or what you are doing. You are here now. Stop and smell the roses. Love yourself and love this life.
Practice self-control - this equates to moment-to-moment awareness or mindfulness to me.
Prepare for the worst - Being ready for a battle will prevent a battle. Being ready for the future makes the future easier to deal with.
You are not entitled to anything: There are no shoulds, ought toos, musts, need toos. There is “I want.” And you can not always have what you want.
Seek virtue. Well… we all have our vices. I could be a lot better at this one. I like my life.
These are also the basics of Rational Emotive Therapies though different language is used to describe what is going on. I think, that when there is truth in a philosophy, it finds expression in many “new” ideas that manifest as humanity evolves. Our jog is to simply take what is useful and leave the rest to the past.
So the things that work in Stoicism have been adopted by Humanism, Modern Christian thinking, New Age Woo Woo, and more. Everyone tries to make what is profound, their own.
1 Like
I suppose the pervasive stuff like vanity, the strong focus on pop culture to derive values, greed, and the tendency to imagine our own private fantasies as reality might offer some resistance to the practice of stoicism in the U.S… so maybe it’s less common here.
Perhaps a survey might be started on the subject among the atheists here at some point as a gauge. From what I can tell, a high percentage of the regulars are living in the Global North. I could be wrong about that.
The closest I’ve come to studying philosophy is reading Pirsig’s stuff in the 70s. I just live my life, think my thoughts, learn, listen, and behave in the way I think right. Overall, it’s worked fairly well for me so far.
Stoicism seems to be the default position for atheism (small “a”). That means that without thinking about it, the usual response from an atheist is a stoic response.
HOWEVER, there is nothing about Atheism (Captial “A”) that demands, requires, presupposes, etc. that Stoicism is the ACTUAL default position. That choice remains with the individual.
What I find interesting that that Scientific Realism (I had to look that one up!) also seems to be a common philosophical position for atheists. It seems like Stoicism and Scientific Realism aren’t incompatible.
Hmmm… There are a lot of batshit crazy atheists. The community of regular posters on this site is not a good measure of what’s out there. I’ve visited sites where it’s all just irrational Christian bashing and the atheists engage in as much fallacious BS as the theists. The people that last around here, tend to be rational and objective. As I previously indicated, stoic ideas are in many different philosophies or belief systems, even in the Bible. People use and repeat what works.
Stoicism in the bible:
Some scholars find many traces of Stoicism in the New Testament , particularly in the teachings of the Apostle Paul. One even concludes: “Paul was a crypto-Stoic” (Engberg-Perderson, in Strange & Zupko, 2009).
Stoicism in Buddhism:
Stoicism and Buddhism are similar philosophies that both encourage people to find happiness internally and to not be controlled by life’s ups and downs. Both philosophies also offer ways to master desire.
Here are some ways that Stoicism and Buddhism are similar:
Could you point those out? I know that as the atheist population grows, it becomes more like the general populace, but I don’t recall much in the way of irrationality - and would like to get my head screwed on straight if there’s some out there.
No wonder about St. Paul: he is actually the one that invented christendom, after hitting his head over a rock (and having permanent brain damage).
If christians today enjoy porkmeat and do not cut the foreskin is due to rules he setted.
And he grew in a cultural milieau where he studied and was aware af the cynicist VS stoicist debate
For me, atheism only means a lack of belief in God (or gods).
I don’t know this would be attached to other philosophies (like Stoicism . . . whatever that is).
2 Likes
From memory: Happy Atheist Chat, Chatzy comes to mind as a completely worthless site.
I have not bounced around much lately. There are others out there. Debate an Atheist Reddit seems to be fairly good. Debate/Christian Reddit is also fairly good. Once a few good sites have been located, the crap can be avoided. Check around and see what the other folks on this forum recommend.
This is a good point, stoics tended to be pantheists. They did believe their moral teachings were universal truths produced by a god that was present in all things, a force of nature.
1 Like
I can understand why they felt this way.
There are universal truths. The speed of light in a vacuum is one example. The point that things are born, live, and die is almost universal.
Yet I keep revisiting the same point: If God created these truths, then what created God? If God has always existed, then why not skip a step and decide that these truths have always existed?
What god? Have you seen any God on this planet who was moral? Please give an example. I know of none.
Our perception of morality evolved with our intelligence and ability to survive and actually worry about such things.
4 Likes
Agree 100%. Twenty characters.
“Our perception of morality evolved with our intelligence and ability to survive and actually worry about such things.”
Exactly, when I speak to christians I always try to explain it: different boundary conditions lead to different moral values.
When the jews emerged as seminomadic (some text removed by mod), they adopted the “you should not kill”, but why? Prior to them, in a hunter gatherer society killing was the norm, also killing war prisoners. Because feeding them was limited to what you can hunt/gather. When people turned to agriculture, with the caloric surplus they could feed slaves, and that is why “life” became more important, because was useful to have slaves and because you could feed them
1 Like