What is Virtue? It is the knowledge of how to live excellently. How does one obtain this knowledge? They don’t. You won’t, I won’t, and I firmly believe no one ever has (Seneca’s General be dammed) — but that’s not the point. The point is the on-going effort of working towards obtaining this knowledge by staying perpetually focused (practicing prosochē) on our thoughts and impressions while being careful to assent only to the ones which are appropriate or correct to assent to.
If Stoicism has an essence, this is one-third of its nebulous form.
The second is understanding, and acting in accordance with understanding, that we control nothing but our choices. Within our brain we have free will, the free will to choose. Outside of our brains, though, we have no free will. We may choose to throw a ball, but the moment that choice turns into kinetic action, our free will evaporates like water in a hot frying pan. We can’t choose whether the wind blows, whether our arm seizes up, whether we have a stroke and fail to throw the ball at all, or whether any number of other things happen to impact the carrying out of the choice we’ve made to throw that ball.
We 100% control our choices, bet we do not 100% control anything else. This being true, we control nothing but our choices. That’s the nature of control! You either have it or you don’t. There is no “trichotomy of control”; no such thing as partial control. Partial control isn’t control, it’s influence. Influence isn’t control.
The second-third of the essence of Stoicism, then, is understanding that we control nothing but our own choices.
The third-third, which is fun to say, is action in accordance with the Stoic concept of Oikeosis — or, as I like to phrase it: choosing to do stuff for the Cosmopolis, not just thinking and debating over what and how exactly we’re supposed to do that stuff.
If you’re a Stoic who isn’t working in service to your circles of concern, in accordance with your roles, then you’re not a Stoic. Stoics are motivated by their pursuit of Virtue, through their understanding of control and choice, to reason towards, and then make, Just choices. Stoics cannot make Just choices if they aren’t considering other people in their choices since Justice, in Stoicism, relates to how we treat other people.
There it is. The essence of Stoicism: the lifelong pursuit of a specific kind of knowledge, held up against the understanding of limited control and a duty to serve your community in accordance with your roles (human, social, professional, and situational).
But what does that look like in action?
Stoic Pudding
It looks like a little studying, a little debate, and a lot of implementation of what you’ve reasoned to be appropriate choices of opinion, attitude, and action — it’s 5% bookwork, 5% spirited discussion, and 90% acting on what you’ve figured out so far. Now, rinse and repeat. That’s it. You’re prokoptôn! You’re trying, you’re failing, you’re learning, you’re trying again, then failing again, then learning again, then… well, as I said: rinse and repeat.
What does it not look like, though? What do I see a lot of contemporary Stoics prioritizing over implementation? Frankly: impressing others with their vast knowledge of the philosophy of Stoicism (versus their successful translation of that knowledge into aligned practice)
We’ve got to stop putting so much stock in how much we’ve read, or how many books are on our shelves, or how much we think we already know. The proof that our tasty pudding is actually tasty, isn’t in the stock of ingredients we’ve collected to make it — it’s in the pudding. You’ve got the ingredients, and you know everything there is to know about them, but can you make a tasty pudding?
That’s the point, that’s the essence of Stoicism executed: can you make a tasty pudding, or can you just tell other people how you think they should make theirs?
