A tweet-storm (my first ever?) to attempt to add context and defend the position of this earlier tweet:

I picked these 3 not because they are particularly related but because they all recently came up in my feed or in convo with friends. https://twitter.com/rivatez/status/1081849625231929344

Stoicism pacifies. Pacifcation ≠ Strength. Aurelius had already conquered the West before he regurgitated Epictetus. He wrote Meditations whilst he was trying to conquer and pacify the East. Most readers aren't Aurelius. They already lack ambition and self-efficacy.

I would sell Stoicism to every one of my enemies to prevent them from being an obstacle. My alternative history version of Aurelius is that he wanted to placate the people, based on the 'great men can't be ruled' concept. The writers of the Pentateuch had similar goals.

The idea of controlling yourself as the ultimate greatness is dangerous because it makes you subordinate to your fate. A lot of spirituality sells you that narrative. A true Stoic probably wouldn't fight for tech progress or grand science-fiction visions. We all lose.

There's a sense (IMO) in which the indirect knock-on effects of Stoicism are somewhat anti-progressive. There's a reason why Ryan Holiday lives in a ranch in Texas. Already successful people flaunt Stoicism. I worry about the opportunity cost of congratulating those ideas.

Stoicism is the opposite to something like The Odyssey or Rand. Those campaign for individual greatness and striving for more than what you have. Both their philosophies are threatening to harmony. However, we're living in a time where we really lack great men (+ women).

Moving on to Solipsism. Come the fuck on. It's reductio ad absurdum in it's truest sense. Name me one great solipsist philosopher. It takes a useful tool- Cartesian skepticism- and pushes it to a surrealist and illogical extreme. Solipsism provides no pragmatic value.

Lastly, Utilitarianism. Utilitarianism works if the best tool you have to solve complex problems is toddler socialist math. Otherwise, almost anything is better. It's faulty reductionism usually based on ill-defined good intentions.

/end rant.