You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: The slave, the philosopher and the emperor - Understanding Stoicism: Historical context pt.3

in #philosophy7 years ago

If man can be said to have his "best" self, then it must necessarily relate to his purpose, or function in his life station. Then it must follow that all men have stations, to which he is gifted by God (or gods) that they must fulfill to the abilities imbued in their creation. The Hellenic maxim - know thyself - has, in this context, social implications, in that men must know their place, station, and caste to which he is bound, surely as oxen are bound to their yoke. For a Hindu, such philosophy might be easy to practice, as their lot in life is socially predetermined for them already; the stoic philosophy would be most difficult to exercise in the modern West that proffers meaningless freedoms that undermine the very being of an individual.

The delusion that veils true happiness for many on this platform would be the oft bandied phrase "liberty" or "freedom" that men apparently derive from external to themselves, whether through state apparatus or some social convention. The concepts of "liberty, equality, brotherhood" blind men to their true being by denying that all men have stations to which they are bound. Most Westerners waste human energy clawing for that which is either beyond their station, or beneath their dignity. The very socio-political matrix of modern West conspire to suppress stoic thought.