3 Common Misconceptions About Stoicism
In this post, I'll address a few of the many common misconceptions about the philosophy and counter them with some things the ancient Stoics actually said.
#1 - That stoicism teaches us to be withdrawn from reality
People who practice stoicism only focus on/worry about what they can control, but it doesn't mean we're detached from the real world. Two of the most famous ancient stoic philosophers were Marcus Aurelius and Seneca the Younger, and neither of them were known to shy away from public affairs, quite the opposite. They both led very public civic lives and had deep connections and concern for their world.
#2 - That stoicism is an overly serious and gloomy approach to life
Also very untrue. Many stoics actually enjoy life to the fullest because we know that it's tragic and filled with despair. In fact, many famous stoics had been known for their ability to find humor and light in even the most dark and grim things about life. A good sense of humor offers a great alternative to anger. Seeking pleasurable distractions in moderation is good for everyone.
#3 - Stoics are unfeeling toward others
False. Those who practice stoicism care deeply about and have good relationships with people, they just arrive at that point through their ability to reason rather than by faith or emotion. We seek people to engage with rationally whom have things or ideas in common (sometimes even the opposite) and with whom to have conversations to strive to learn about them.
My response to this last point deserves longer explanation because I think it's the biggest one... I've often heard people misunderstand stoicism with a viewpoint that it means being very shut-off, emotionally. I can't help but feel a bit defensive on this because it's simply incorrect. Although to be fair, the unfortunate fact is that the word "stoic" itself has been incorrectly defined for decades by the masses to mean "cold," "apathetic," "steeled against feelings."
People may falsely attribute lack of concern for others to stoics. The reason people think this is because while stoics do care for the well-being of others for the others' own sake, we simply believe no external can truly cause us harm and therefore not to internalize the external. At the very least, we do lament over/have understanding for the feelings of the person who is emotional, but we know it's foolish to try to adopt feelings that aren't our own, and are then careful to pay attention to our own conduct and internal experiences/responses, rather than dwell on the actions or feelings of others, over which we have no control (because we can only control ourselves).
However, because the philosophies of stoicism make it largely an expansion of the self, it leads to the incorrect assumption that it's all stoics care about. On the contrary, it means we can feel an even greater sense of kinship with the rest of the living world. This expansion of self is known as the state of Oikeiôsis, similar to the Buddhist concept Mettā (although Buddhism shares similar traits to stoicism, they are not the same philosophies), it means inhabiting the kind of self-ownership and awareness that helps us to encompass others, in a fundamental truth that should guide all of our actions/unity/belonging.
This last point is, of course, a mere tip of the iceberg that could lead to great discussions on empathy, sympathy, compassion, and altruism in stoic philosophy.