#stoics

Or

Feelings about indiscernable feelings

---

This blog has 147 partly-finished drafts. Some of them just need another round of editing, but I haven't done any of that editing in the last couple weeks.

In itself, the not-writing isn't a problem. The problem is that I don't know why I'm not writing.

Why is not knowing a problem?

Something shifted and that's fine - things shift. The problem is I can't name it. I can't point to the day, the conversation, the thing I read, the thing I didn't say, and go "Ah! There, that's what did It! Now it makes sense!"

The desire to write just seems to have quietly slipped out without leaving a note.

And I hate that. I want things to make sense.

Some of you are familiar with this difficulty identifying and naming your own emotional states. It's called alexithymia, and it's not uncommon among autistic people.

It's not as difficult for me as it once was. I had a great therapist who helped me start working out many emotional states by paying more attention to how they felt in my body and pattern recognition, but I still struggle with it.

So maybe this whatever-it-is has a name or a cause and you just can't work it out. Why is this a problem?

I realize intellectually that most people don't know their own minds as well as they believe, but this is still genuinely distressing for me.

So I'm trying something different.

Instead of perseverating on it and fruitlessly trying to puzzle it out, I'm treating it like weather.

My internal states aren't required to have discernible causes right now. One doesn't interrogate and integrate a storm, one just...waits for the storm to pass.

That's weird.

Nah. If you like fiction, you've probably read this move a hundred times without noticing it for what it was.

"Loneliness crept in around the edges of the evening."

"A wave of nostalgia washed over him."

"Despair took hold and wouldn't let go."

"Something dark moved in beneath his ribs."

"A sadness settled over me."

"A wave of grief hit her."

These metaphors externalize emotional states despite the fact that emotional states are not external.

In these literary examples, the emotional state arrives from outside, does its business, and, like a storm, eventually passes. The self stays intact underneath the storm, and the self is the ground the weather moves across.

So...why is this helpful?

"I am anxious" makes anxiety a trait baked into you. "Anxiety is visiting" makes it a guest. Guests eventually leave. We want to make it easier for the guest to depart.

The stoic Epictetus draws the line between what's actually up to you and what isn't, then dumps most emotional states into the second bucket, externalizing them.

You don't choose whether the storm rolls in, says Epictetus, but you can choose whether you stand in it screaming at the sky...or go get the fucking umbrella.

To externalize a state doesn't excuse it or ignore it. Ideally, I'm acknowledging this thing is real, it's happening to me, but it is not me.

I'm not "a person who has stopped writing." I'm a person currently experiencing weather that precludes writing. This storm, however, will pass.

Doesn't that give up agency and promote passivity?

Yeah, there's a trap on the other side of this. "I can't help it, it's just how I am" is a coward's version of the metaphor.

Real weather changes, and that's the point of the analogy. If you use "it's just weather" to justify never checking the barometer again, you've stopped using the metaphor and started hiding behind it.

But if I can regard this as weather, I don't have to treat a drop in output as a verdict on my character, my discipline, or my ability to write.

147 drafts sitting there isn't an indictment. They're just waiting for the storm to pass.

I don't know why the desire to write left or when it will come back. The reason is probably knowable, but not to me, not right now.

So I'm going to take a break from the idea that this is a problem I can think my way out of.

I'll get back to writing when the storm has passed.

oh dear!!!!!!!! it's been a year, and, dear tuathaigh, please do not think i've forgotten about you. i've been painfully aware of this ask 80% of the time, just didn't have the mental capacity to produce anything meaningful 🧍‍♂️but let me make it up to you (better later than never :( )

so this morning for my morning practice i was reading seneca's letters, and the letter 52. (On choosing our teachers) ends with these lines:

[L]et them be roused to the matter, and not to the style; otherwise, eloquence does them harm, making them enamoured of itself, and not of the subject. [...] There can be no doubt that philosophy has suffered a loss, now that she has exposed her charms for sale. But she can still be viewed in her sanctuary, if her exhibitor is a priest and not a pedlar.

taken from: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Moral_letters_to_Lucilius

and it really struck me, how once again the majority of the modern stoic scene is summarized in the ancient texts. and once again, it raised me question, whether they even read the original stoics. it really makes me sad to see how all these self-help gurus, the finance bros, and god knows who else, use stoicism to gain financial benefits. how they sell this beautiful philosophy, and how, by doing this, they contradict the very teachings they think they preach. and how they spread and strengthen the myths that are in the culture around stoicism. all these sigma videos. no, stoicism does not require you to feel nothing. it is not human to feel nothing. instead, you should not let them control you. yes, you will still feel anger or annoyance at times, the thing is what you do with it. no, you will not become a stone cold killer thanks to this philosophy. no, you are not a stoic if you hate on people. yes, it includes all the minorities the sigmas like to laugh at. stoicism is one of the most egalitarian schools of thought i know. yes, they included women. they included slaves. because everybody can attain virtue, because we are all human. no, you are not a stoic if you only care about yourself. they highlight the importance of collectivity and cooperation, and the importance of the service for society since ancient times, wake up. you will make money if you become stoic? have we read the same texts? or did you just skip the 89% of it where they talk about money, because last time i checked, they did not praise appeasing to social status, being rich, and dedicating yourself to material things. quite the oppposite actually.

if you are somebody who is interested in stoicism as a way of life, i strongly encourage you to read the original texts. do not fall for the trap of the ready "guidebooks" that are supposed to facilitate it for you. it is already easy enough. if this is not, there are books by academics, written for further development of the stoic thought, not for money. if you need something less intimidating, john sellars could be your "introduction to stoicism" guy. if you look for something more audio or video-based, please check out accepting the universe. it is on youtube, spotify, and probably other platforms too. i've been following this channel for a very long time, and for me, atesh is one of the very few creators worth following. you can tell that he is a thinker, he really is interested in what he is saying, what he is thinking, reading. and he can talk about it very beautifully, at least in my opinion. he understands the core values underlaying stoic thought. and he also has discord channel where you can ask about any problem you encounter with the teachings, and people there are simply lovely. i know because i am there myself, and i experienced their thoughtfulness and kindness many times firsthand :]

How To Stay Calm When Life Gets Crazy