Stoicism seems to be here to stay. There are many content creators, from unimaginable areas, who champion this classic philosophy to defend messages that invite us to toughen up, accept adversity and develop in it. But… Are they as good as we imagine?

José Carlos Ruiz claims that there is something dangerous in the modern approach to Stoicism, but he is not the only one who does so. In an interview that the philosopher José Antonio Marina gave us, he already warned us about this, ensuring that the Stoics did not try to do philosophical science, but that we must understand them as small life advisors.

So… Is it okay for us to take their advice literally? Do his words hide some kind of danger if we do not place them in their context? The philosopher José Carlos Ruiz gives his perspective.

The origin of stoicism

The main warning that José Carlos Ruiz gives us has to do with the very origin of Stoicism. Do you know its founder and its history? Do you know the lives of its main authors? Saving Seneca, whom, the expert assures, we cannot consider 100% Stoic, They all have tragic lives.

Zeno of Citium, the first of the Stoics, founded this philosophy when he lost everything in a shipwreck. Epictetus was a slave. Marcus Aurelius spent 20 years fighting without being able to return to Rome, without being able to be with his family. They all had very complicated lives.

This is key, because It is what reflects the Stoic philosophy. One that asks us to accept adversity without questioning it. “All the Stoics used to have painful life situations, in which the only intellectually worthy solution was to say, ‘I have nothing, I have very little. So, I have to adapt to what I have’«, explains José Carlos Ruiz in the interview he gives for the podcast It makes sense.

This is the origin of Stoicism. “It comes out of necessity, not because it was the best way of life for a person.«, clarifies the philosopher. «I would ask everyone who uses stoicism if they know the biographies, so that they can then tell me if that life is very much in line with what they think. It is very sad to think that life can be limited to these things.”

A philosophical model of loneliness

At Bodymente we have followed the rise of Stoicism closely, asking its main authors about the reasons why it has resurfaced in the 21st century. Perhaps the most lucid and forceful answer was given to us by Massimo Pigliucci, author of Practical guide to Stoicism. According to him, one of the main reasons for this resurgence has to do with the fact that “We live in times of upheaval and social changes of great magnitude, very stressful times.”

Stoicism emerged “between the death of Alexander the Great and the beginning of the Roman Empire,” where this climate of “social, political, economic, etc., unrest” was also experienced.

Without a doubt, we live in uncertain times, in which we face situations that are difficult to digest. Wars, crimes against human rights, political unrest. But Is the right way to accept it without question? Embrace adversity alone and forget about everything? José Carlos Ruiz says no.

The biggest problem with this philosophy, from their perspective, is that “they don’t talk about community.” The philosopher assures that “Stoicism lacks ethical work in the community directly. That is to say, all contemporary stoicisms speak of an isolated subject who has to work on himself,» he says. And that, without a doubt, is dangerous.

The alternative to stocism

For José Carlos Ruiz, contemporary stoicism easily connects with a concept that he himself has coined, which is that of “post-happiness.” “There is a very evident correlation between post-happiness and contemporary stoicism”, he assures in the interview.

“As post-happiness is that struggle that the subject has to achieve the checklist and where he activates all the processes of conquest of that emotional drug dependence that this conquest of things generates, it is also closely associated with the meritocracy that he is a product of his identity, and, therefore, he has to do everything in the individual sense.

This, without a doubt, is dangerous. Because it distances us, differentiates us and confronts us. Because it impedes us, and limits our ability to act and even be happy.

Post-happiness

«Post-happiness is individual,» says Professor Ruiz, «it is not group. Post-happiness has broken all ties. And what does stoicism say? You have to become a fighter who resigns yourself to the realities that are being imposed. You have to accept things as they are. Stoicism seems to me to be a dangerous philosophy focused like this”.

The danger that José Carlos Ruiz warns about is that of individualism. Because this Stoic idea asks the subject to take responsibility for himself, to fight towards his path, «and when he fails, Stoicism tells him, ‘now you have to learn to hold on’.»

For the philosopher there is a much more rational, more emotional and healthy alternative. “Start a revolution within your reality, change, look for links, generate community and try to project life from another place«, explains the expert. That should be the way, and not, as modern Stoic gurus do, inviting you to endure, isolate yourself and «play hard to get.»

«Where is the other in this process where I have to harden myself? What role do my loved ones play in this process where I have to work on myself?» asks José Carlos Ruiz. And their questions remain echoing in our minds.