[derbOac]

I'm sympathetic to the stoic view, but wrestle with why it doesn't resonate with me. I think it's because at some level it seems to me to be a lie, or more accurately, it betrays the lie of society. There's some dissonance there. Sure, being stoic about it is actually healthy in a lot of ways but isn't it harmful too? What about the lot of the less fortunate? Stoicism would be fine if we as a society all shared some kind of empathetic orientation toward our fellow beings. It's not the fact someone else came out better, it's that we as a society proceed as if this always occurs because of some kind of just world, which is nonsense to use a polite word. Socialized risk, capitalized gain, stoic when things are bad, and just world when things are good.

It's this age old tension that arises with a lot of Buddhist philosophy and is embodied in the serenity prayer. At least it's a large source of tension for me: when do you let it go? Because some things shouldn't be let go.

[swman]

Here's my opinion as a casual person who watched a few youtube videos on this.

The only one we have full agency/control over is ourselves. Everyone individually will do what they want, so you can't really change society the way YOU want. The best thing is to understand yourself and how you fit into the world. If you do what is best for yourself, and by extension if you are a good person then YOU try to do what's best for society in your view.

I'll give you an example. Yesterday I got myself some fast food and I offered a homeless person my fries when he asked if I got anything. When I pulled the fries out of my bag, he asked me "Really bro? I'm not taking it after you touched them" Considering the guy had no mask on (we have a mask mandate in my city) and I tried to be nice, what am I supposed to do, feel bad for myself? I was willing to give up my fries, but hey if he doesn't want them that's not my problem. I'm not going to force him to take them, nor am I gonna get worked up over it.

In my mind, I'd like to give someone food. But they have an expectation as well, and there are times when I can't meet them. It happens, and I'm still able to rationalize my good intent.

Unless I'm misunderstanding I'm pretty sure I didn't hear anything to be a jerk or to stop being empathic towards people. However, given the track record of the ancient Romans in regard to their cruelty, maybe that plays a factor in why it appears so cold?

[deepfield67]

You know, I have this exact feeling about the idea of "the meek shall inherit the earth" philosophy expounded in the Sermon on the Mount, but I haven't until now thought of it in terms of stoicism or buddhism. It's definitely important to have some idea of the difference between "fair" inequality that's just the luck of the draw that's unavoidable to some extent, and the "unfair" inequality that's a result of oppression and exploitation. It's almost certainly a bad idea to seek to simply stop comparing anything and be oblivious to all the differences between people. But like a lot of our natural thought processes there's a healthy version and a pathological version, but it's never really clear where exactly one becomes the other. There is a bit of a built in failsafe in Buddhism that is the idea of the "middle way", that indicates any "extreme" position is liable to be unhelpful. I find myself using that a lot, as I tend towards extreme views and am prone to oversimplified, black-and-white thought.