A couple of theories:
I realise that this approach is not practising Stoicism, but only 'talking about Stoicism' as Epictetus would say.
I have read parts of Marcus prior to this research and I was very impressed. However, I felt like I needed more background before proceeding. In retrospect, a less linear, more cyclical approach would be more beneficial: e.g. read the original, do some research, read the original again, more research, read another original source, research, etc. If I continue to pursue Stoicism as a way of life, I will no doubt read the originals 100s of times, so not properly interpreting them the first time is no big deal.
The personal stories of Marcus and Epictetus have engaged me the most so far, much like the story of Jesus amazed me and drew me toward faith in Christ previously. I am still impressed by the Gospel, though I'm not a Christian.
A living example of a religion or philosophy like Jesus, Epictetus, Marcus or Seneca will always draw and instruct more than reading secondary sources. Perhaps the loss of Stoic examples really lead to the decline of Stoicism in the ancient world. The life of Jesus was too powerful in comparison.
- Challenge from the ascendency of Christianity, which appealed to the masses of slaves in Ancient Rome and later the noble classes
- Loss of persuasive teachers after Epictetus (Marcus Aurelius came after Epictetus but he was no teacher himself)
Challenge from Christianity
It's a pity more Christians weren't persecuted so that that Stoicism had more opportunity to flourish. Though Christianity was always going to win out - it offered an afterlife, an imminent Kingdom of God, greater fellowship and was attuned to the resentment of masses of slaves in ancient Rome. On the contrary Stoicism offered tranquility, but only through personal effort, self-responsibilty and discipline. Stoics had no one to blame for their problems but themselves. Not attractive to the resentful liberal, now more than ever.Loss of persuasive teachers
I realise that this approach is not practising Stoicism, but only 'talking about Stoicism' as Epictetus would say.
I have read parts of Marcus prior to this research and I was very impressed. However, I felt like I needed more background before proceeding. In retrospect, a less linear, more cyclical approach would be more beneficial: e.g. read the original, do some research, read the original again, more research, read another original source, research, etc. If I continue to pursue Stoicism as a way of life, I will no doubt read the originals 100s of times, so not properly interpreting them the first time is no big deal.
The personal stories of Marcus and Epictetus have engaged me the most so far, much like the story of Jesus amazed me and drew me toward faith in Christ previously. I am still impressed by the Gospel, though I'm not a Christian.
A living example of a religion or philosophy like Jesus, Epictetus, Marcus or Seneca will always draw and instruct more than reading secondary sources. Perhaps the loss of Stoic examples really lead to the decline of Stoicism in the ancient world. The life of Jesus was too powerful in comparison.
Comments
Post a Comment