I suggest taking some Nugenix and start lifting weights. You’ll feel a lot better, and you won’t be so easily bothered by such things.

I don't know about that. I feel as though the best thing to do is to just limit the passions and desire as per Buddhism. I have an eclectic philosophy of meshing Stoicism with Buddhism. It just seems to me that if you're logical and rational then limiting your desires is the only rational thing to do as a stoic.

OK, so how's that rational desire limiting working for you?

Most of us have more desires than we can shake a stick at, so it is a good idea to stop wanting everything we can possibly think of. Wanting less gives one more energy to actually obtain some of the stuff one wants. A paradox. Or is that irony? Or divine wisdom? Or just plain nonsense?

Stoicism is more general than Cynicism I feel. The former is about acceptance of reality and its caprice while the former is specifically about the reality of people, their selfishness.

Voluntary suffering wouldn't be a stoic's or a cynic's way for one can't change reality in any way. One can only learn to accept what comes your way and that goes for everyone.

Voluntary discomfort is one of 3 Stoic exercises described in this article:
https://dailystoic.com/practical-stoic-exercises/

1. A view from above - Marcus Aurelius
2. Negative visualisation - Seneca
3. Voluntary discomfort - Epictetus

1. I like this one. It's about putting things into perspective. To zoom out of your self while still keeping yourself centred. Marcus would have been amazed at how far we humans would eventually be able to see. The views of Earth from the Universe. The Hubble photographs:
http://www.astronomy.com/news/2017/04/best-of-hubble-images
Of course, this could have the opposite effect and make some feel puny and insignificant. But perhaps only those whose capacity for wonder and awe has left them.

2. Negative visualisation is not meant to be negative or especially troublesome.

In the life of a stoic, one has to be constantly aware of things that can cause discomfort, pain, sickness, and the likes. — Wallows

It is a tiring effort to wake up every day and repeat to yourself that you are going to encounter ill-will, deceit, frustration, and even anger. There is a cognitive dissonance that arises in the mind of the stoic — Wallows

You are not meant to fixate on these thoughts. It should be a simple morning exercise which again can help put things into perspective.

You need to stop this misrepresentation, as discussed in previous thread:
My reply to Wallows:
" You say you are unable to get past the burden of an ancient morning meditation which you perceive as a negative visualisation.
I see Marcus as preparing himself mentally for the day ahead. His workload as Roman Emperor was a heavy one. Amongst other things he had to spend time addressing matters of law such as petitions and hearing disputes.
Rather than being negative about people in general, he was quite the realist. He knew the different types he would have to deal with. His writings were addressed to himself as a reminder to be patient with those who had poor quality of character and behaviour. Basically, it was because they did not know any better". From :
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/5018/musings-of-a-failed-stoic

3. Voluntary discomfort. This is the one which I have most problems with.
It seems to me that is hardship pursued to make a man stronger in battle. Cold showers. Walking in the cold without a jumper or cosy socks. This could lead to harm, pneumonia and death through stupidity.

However, if seen as a way of challenging your comfort zone then that makes more sense to me. I am not training myself to be a Navy Seal. However, the mental challenge in reading a philosophical text carefully with a view to understanding, well...who knows where that might lead ? Boredom, fascination, enlightenment, laugh-out-loud hysteria ?

What are your thoughts about willingly sacrificing your peace of mind in the name of the good, and how important is it? — Wallows

What do you mean by 'peace of mind' and how is it being sacrificed ?
What do you mean by 'in the name of the good' ?

These are not rhetorical questions. I would be grateful for a clear and thoughtful response.
Thanks.

Wanting less gives one more energy to actually obtain some of the stuff one wants. — Bitter Crank

Yes, true. It's a paradox.

Voluntary suffering wouldn't be a stoic's or a cynic's way for one can't change reality in any way. One can only learn to accept what comes your way and that goes for everyone. — TheMadFool

Yes; but, voluntary discomfort is a way to harden oneself with respect to the world. It indicates a philosophy that understands that the world is a tough place to maintain one's sanity, and thus should be treated with caution.

It seems to me that is hardship pursued to make a man stronger in battle. Cold showers. Walking in the cold without a jumper or cosy socks. This could lead to harm, pneumonia and death through stupidity. — Amity

Well, it doesn't have to necessarily be physical discomfort, which you highlight. I tend to think it can be interpreted from a Buddhist slant in that denying oneself pleasure, delaying gratification, enduring stress and not fantasizing escapist tendencies, forcing oneself to do things they may not like, and such matters.

However, the mental challenge in reading a philosophical text carefully with a view to understanding, well...who knows where that might lead ? Boredom, fascination, enlightenment, laugh-out-loud hysteria ? — Amity

Yes, there is a limit to how much a person can endure. It's not something that is discussed in much detail in any of the works of the well-known stoics.

What do you mean by 'peace of mind' and how is it being sacrificed ? — Amity

I feel as though the point I am trying to make is that people tend to prefer the path of least resistance. It's dangerously easy to indulge in pleasure. People don't like being told what they are doing is wrong or not right. Only in hardship does our true nature come out, and life is becoming increasingly more hedonic, as far as I can tell. It's said that Stoic philosophy is mostly a type of Westpoint/Marine Core philosophy; but, I am somewhat unsure about that. I think it is a useful philosophy for any type of person in any age of time or place.

What do you mean by 'in the name of the good' ? — Amity

Well, stoic philosophy places an enormous amount of emphasis on the welfare of other people. Humanity and mankind are of supreme importance. To live in accordance with nature is important. And what is assumed as natural in stoic philosophy is to be a social animal and engage in politics and the polis.

Why not think of stoicism and cynicism as tools and opportunities to be used in different situations? Knowing what you want and knowing reality, you will be able to suffer when you will be gaining something more important than your comfort in return.

I think the actual opposite of stoicism as you define it isn't cynicism but dark nihilism. Alternatively, perhaps hedonism, cognitive dissonance?

Cynicism to me when contrasted against stoicism only seems appropriate when talking solely about things like delayed gratification or taking on important responsibilities where the cynic has misjudged what is best for himself and his family/friends mostly due to his ignorance. If the cynic has correctly judged that there isn't a whole lot of merit to the suffering then the stoic just appears to be a naive fool.

Why not think of stoicism and cynicism as tools and opportunities to be used in different situations? — Judaka

It's difficult to asses when being a stoic or cynic is appropriate. It's kind of a package deal with them. My personal stack is Buddhist teachings and Stoicism.

Knowing what you want and knowing reality, you will be able to suffer when you will be gaining something more important than your comfort in return. — Judaka

I don't understand this. What do you mean by that?

I think the actual opposite of stoicism as you define it isn't cynicism but dark nihilism. Alternatively, perhaps hedonism, cognitive dissonance? — Judaka

I never meant to imply that the opposite of stoicism is cynicism. They are both related to one another.

I didn't realise you're talking about the philosophy of Stoicism rather just the adjective, never mind.

Yes; but, voluntary discomfort is a way to harden oneself with respect to the world. It indicates a philosophy that understands that the world is a tough place to maintain one's sanity, and thus should be treated with caution. — Wallows

For a stoic it appears that this "toughening" has already taken place. For an aspiring stoic, the world, as it is, is enough to "toughen" him/her. Don't you think voluntary discomfort is redundant? It's like giving medicine to the healthy - it's unnecessary.

Do you even know what you’re talking about?

Do you even know what you’re talking about? — Noah Te Stroete

No, I wondered why you asked that and re-read OP and realised I was talking about something completely different.

I commend you for your honesty. I think you’re cool.

What are your thoughts about willingly sacrificing your peace of mind in the name of the good, and how important is it?
— Wallows

What do you mean by 'peace of mind' and how is it being sacrificed ?
What do you mean by 'in the name of the good' ? — Amity

I feel as though the point I am trying to make is that people tend to prefer the path of least resistance. It's dangerously easy to indulge in pleasure. People don't like being told what they are doing is wrong or not right — Wallows

This doesn't reallly answer my question. What is 'peace of mind' and how is it being sacrificed ? Your original 'willingly' seems to refer back to the 'voluntary discomfort' of your title. It is important to clarify what is meant by 'peace of mind'.

Since it seems to be the goal of Stoicism to cultivate and achieve this, why do you see it as something to be sacrificed ? And willingly. This isn't the purpose of the 'voluntary discomfort' exercise. Perhaps it would be good to revisit the OP and give references; the source of this 'concept you introduced and how you used it.

From: https://theconversation.com/want-to-be-happy-then-live-like-a-stoic-for-a-week-103117
" Stoicism holds that the key to a good, happy life is the cultivation of an excellent mental state, which the Stoics identified with virtue and being rational. The ideal life is one that is in harmony with Nature, of which we are all part, and an attitude of calm indifference towards external events."

As to doing it 'in the name of the good' - from above, the emphasis seems to differ with your account:

Well, stoic philosophy places an enormous amount of emphasis on the welfare of other people. Humanity and mankind are of supreme importance. To live in accordance with nature is important. And what is assumed as natural in stoic philosophy is to be a social animal and engage in politics and the polis. — Wallows

I think first and foremost, Stoicism is about training your mind. And that is where the mental exercises come in. The 'good' being what we strive for. The 'peace of mind' being identified with goodness or virtue. And being rational.

From above article:
----------
' The Stoics developed a whole series of practical exercises designed to help train people to incorporate Stoic ideas into their daily lives. Seneca recommended taking stock at the end of each day, noting when you become irritated by something trivial, or act angrily in response to someone who perhaps didn’t deserve it, and so on. By noting his mistakes, he hoped to do better the next day.'
----------

We have already discussed Marcus Aurelius but here it is again, perhaps more convincingly:

----------

'Marcus Aurelius had another strategy, reminding himself each morning that he was probably going to encounter a lot of angry, stressed, impatient, ungrateful people during the coming day. By reflecting on this in advance, the hope was that he would be less likely to respond in kind. But he also reflected on the fact that none of these people would be like this intentionally. They were the victims of their own mistaken judgements.

Here we get another paradox: no one chooses to be unhappy, stressed, angry, miserable, and yet these are in fact all the product of our judgements, the one thing within our control.'

----------

So, to answer the question you posed:
Your 'peace of mind' is not something to be sacrificed but something to aim for.
It is for your own good initially. The good of humanity has to start somewhere.
If you can do this by using any of the Stoic exercises, fine. If not, there are other ways.
It is not necessary to identify yourself as 'a Stoic'.

I hope this has made things clearer. It seems that more and more people are looking to this kind of philosophy as self-help. Even the modern writers of Stoicism don't agree on everything.

Best wishes for any early and late evening meditations or thoughts.
I like to think of Marcus muttering to himself. 'Don't let the bastards get you down!'
And then I think. But look in the mirror - perhaps you are the bastard ?

Thanks for introducing a useful and thought- provoking discussion. And continuing engagement.

:love:

Useful Resources:

https://www.iep.utm.edu/stoicism/

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/stoicism/

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/epictetus/

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/seneca/

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/marcus-aurelius/

Depends on how mentally strong you are.
If you attempt to be "stoic", and you wind up resenting the sacrifices you make, you are really not doing any good for others because, resentment always leads to an even worse outcome.

This doesn't reallly answer my question. What is 'peace of mind' and how is it being sacrificed ? Your original 'willingly' seems to refer back to the 'voluntary discomfort' of your title. It is important to clarify what is meant by 'peace of mind'.

Since it seems to be the goal of Stoicism to cultivate and achieve this, why do you see it as something to be sacrificed ? And willingly. This isn't the purpose of the 'voluntary discomfort' exercise. Perhaps it would be good to revisit the OP and give references; the source of this 'concept you introduced and how you used it. — Amity

Well, it's like building muscle, I think. There is a component of strife, struggle, effort, and willpower required to lift the weights; but, after a hard day at work or in the gym, you feel like you've accomplished something worthwhile for your own sake. But, the stoic goes even further and exposes him or herself to trials and tribulations that other people can engender, which I elaborated on in the OP.

" Stoicism holds that the key to a good, happy life is the cultivation of an excellent mental state, which the Stoics identified with virtue and being rational. The ideal life is one that is in harmony with Nature, of which we are all part, and an attitude of calm indifference towards external events."

As to doing it 'in the name of the good' - from above, the emphasis seems to differ with your account — Amity

How so?

I think first and foremost, Stoicism is about training your mind. And that is where the mental exercises come in. The 'good' being what we strive for. The 'peace of mind' being identified with goodness or virtue. And being rational. — Amity

Yes, no disagreement on that from my end.

So, to answer the question you posed:
Your 'peace of mind' is not something to be sacrificed but something to aim for.
It is for your own good initially. The good of humanity has to start somewhere.
If you can do this by using any of the Stoic exercises, fine. If not, there are other ways.
It is not necessary to identify yourself as 'a Stoic'. — Amity

Well, like I said, it requires effort and willpower to willingly go out of your "comfort zone" and do these premeditated exercizes with respect to what misfortunes you will encounter throughout the day. It's just that the stoic goes one step further and doesn't necessarily do it for their own rational self interest; but, for other people too. So, you saying:

'Don't let the bastards get you down!' — Amity

...isn't quite true.

Dashing away from the conservative undertones in this thread; I believe, most stoics would be left-leaning rather than conservative. Thoughts?

I could be mistaken here, but I don’t think the Stoic is supposed to go out of her way to find stressful situations. Aren’t the mental exercises supposed to prepare you for the everyday stresses that naturally occur?

Dashing away... — Wallows

Can't deal with a few daily reminders as mental preparation. Too much disturbance. Diddums. :brow:

Can't deal with a few daily reminders as mental preparation. Too much disturbance. Diddums. :brow: — Amity

I don't wanna! Overcome that!

Can't deal with a few daily reminders as mental preparation. Too much disturbance. Diddums. :brow:
— Amity

I don't wanna! Overcome that! — Wallows

Understood.

From: https://donaldrobertson.name/2012/12/20/the-serenity-prayer-and-stoicism/

" The most fundamental principle of Stoic psychotherapy can be found in the very first sentence of the famous Enchiridion or Stoic “handbook” of Epictetus: “Some things are up to us and others are not.” The importance of this maxim and the wider implications of absorbing its meaning and implications are explored in detail throughout the ancient Stoic literature...

...Epictetus attempts to sum up these notions in a laconic maxim of the kind which the Stoics meant to be easy to memorise and constantly “ready to hand”.

What, then, is to be done?  To make the best of what is in our power, and take the rest as it naturally happens. (Discourses, 1.1.17)

The basis of the Serenity Prayer:

"God grant me serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
Courage to change the things I can,
And wisdom to know the difference."

" The most fundamental principle of Stoic psychotherapy can be found in the very first sentence of the famous Enchiridion or Stoic “handbook” of Epictetus: “Some things are up to us and others are not.” The importance of this maxim and the wider implications of absorbing its meaning and implications are explored in detail throughout the ancient Stoic literature... — Amity

Ah, the Enchiridion, my favorite Stoic manual. It is more direct and to the point than the Meditations by Marcus Aurelius.

...Epictetus attempts to sum up these notions in a laconic maxim of the kind which the Stoics meant to be easy to memorise and constantly “ready to hand”. — Amity

What do you think about Seneca as a stoic?

"God grant me serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
Courage to change the things I can,
And wisdom to know the difference." — Amity

:up: