Really enjoyed this. One thing I think adds to your point: it’s not how novel the practice is that makes it Stoic, it’s the intent behind it.
Plenty of people fast, journal, or read inspiring quotes. But for the Stoic, fasting is about training desire, journaling is about testing your thoughts against reason, and keeping maxims close is about using them as reminders to steer your choices. Same actions, different purpose.
That’s what makes them Stoic exercises — not how unique the practice is, but that they’re chosen and done with the aim of shaping character in line with our rational nature.
My book “Breakfast with Seneca” contains a list of 17 Stoic exercises or practices in an appendix, which are all summarized from the writings of the Roman Stoics.
However, for what it is worth, most of these practices came from earlier philosophers. For example, “the daily review” from the Pythagoreans; “the view from above” from Plato; “the premeditation of future adversity” from the Cynics; etc.
In many ways, Stoicism was a synthetic philosophy, with its own distinctive elements. They borrowed many elements of their thought from earlier philosophers — sometimes making radical changes at the same time, like advancing the idea that the Logos is “material” (which other ancient thinkers didn't believe).
But since the Stoics “made these ideas their own,” I think we need to accept them as Stoic — because if we took these ideas away from Stoicism, it would not hold together as a coherent philosophy. It would have too many missing pieces.
Likewise, we can’t say that the cardinal virtues aren’t “Stoic,” just because they took them Plato; and we can't say that “virtue” wasn't Stoic because it was shared by Plato, Aristotle, etc.
Really enjoyed this. One thing I think adds to your point: it’s not how novel the practice is that makes it Stoic, it’s the intent behind it.
Plenty of people fast, journal, or read inspiring quotes. But for the Stoic, fasting is about training desire, journaling is about testing your thoughts against reason, and keeping maxims close is about using them as reminders to steer your choices. Same actions, different purpose.
That’s what makes them Stoic exercises — not how unique the practice is, but that they’re chosen and done with the aim of shaping character in line with our rational nature.
My book “Breakfast with Seneca” contains a list of 17 Stoic exercises or practices in an appendix, which are all summarized from the writings of the Roman Stoics.
However, for what it is worth, most of these practices came from earlier philosophers. For example, “the daily review” from the Pythagoreans; “the view from above” from Plato; “the premeditation of future adversity” from the Cynics; etc.
In many ways, Stoicism was a synthetic philosophy, with its own distinctive elements. They borrowed many elements of their thought from earlier philosophers — sometimes making radical changes at the same time, like advancing the idea that the Logos is “material” (which other ancient thinkers didn't believe).
But since the Stoics “made these ideas their own,” I think we need to accept them as Stoic — because if we took these ideas away from Stoicism, it would not hold together as a coherent philosophy. It would have too many missing pieces.
Likewise, we can’t say that the cardinal virtues aren’t “Stoic,” just because they took them Plato; and we can't say that “virtue” wasn't Stoic because it was shared by Plato, Aristotle, etc.