Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
The Return of Stoicism in an Age of Chaos
The Return of Stoicism in an Age of Chaos
Apr 20, 2026 2:16 AM

This ancient “philosophy” is cool again. In a world of constant change, ignoring what doesn’t ultimately matter makes a lot of sense. But it can only take a striving soul so far.

Read More…

Despite its popularity, or perhaps because of it, Stoicism is a difficult thing to define. Is it a philosophy, a nuanced outlook, a mindset, a healthy lifestyle, or a conservative fad? Is it inherently masculine? Is it toxic? Is it all these things?

It’s also not clear why the practice of Stoicism is revived periodically throughout history. While it began in Hellenistic Greece, with philosophers like Zeno, it would continue to draw disciples centuries later in the Roman Republic and Imperial Rome. With the rise of Christianity, many of the early Church Fathers incorporated Stoic teachings into the faith, creating a tradition of Christian Stoicism. Even in the supposedly post-Christian West, many continue to be inspired by Stoicism, applying its principles to a world saturated with pervasive media, raging emotions, and nonstop noise.

To answer these questions about Stoicism, it’s best to go to the source—or sources. In a new edition of Gateway to the Stoics, modern audiences are treated to the writings of three of the greatest Stoics: Marcus Aurelius, Epictetus, and Seneca. While approaching Stoicism from entirely different perspectives—Marcus Aurelius was an emperor, Epictetus a Greek slave, and Seneca a statesman and teacher who had the misfortune of having the Emperor Nero as a student—the texts of these diverse writers nevertheless cohere to bring out the simplicity, depth, and enduring relevance of Stoicism.

The first thing that distinguishes Stoicism is its genre. Unlike the philosophies of Plato and Aristotle, which relied on a dialectal method that scrutinized and reconciled the logic of opposing claims to arrive at a greater truth, the Stoics practice a form of introspection to develop a singular claim on a greater truth. Thus, while Plato wrote dialogues and Aristotle treatises, the posed reflections, meditations, and letters.

Related to the Stoic style of argumentation is its focus. Although the philosophy presumably passes all aspects of life, most of its representative texts emphasize morality and praxis. None of the writers devote much time to proper definitions of key concepts but instead work off a set of self-evident principles. In this way, they are philosophers in the sense that Confucius and Ralph Waldo Emerson are philosophers, converting abstract ideas into practical application. Epictetus is explicit about this: “On no occasion call yourself a philosopher, and do not speak much among the uninstructed about theorems (philosophical rules, precepts): but do that which follows from them.”

While this attitude makes Stoicism accessible to everyone, it also tends to make the texts rather dry and disjointed. Seneca is the exception, since he is a skilled writer and rhetorician making an argument to his reader. However, Marcus Aurelius and Epictetus express their thoughts with no clear plan or audience. Thus, it falls to the reader to identify key themes and emerging patterns.

In the collection of texts featured in Gateway to the Stoics, there are four such themes: self-reliance, universal brotherhood, death, and resignation. The first two help explain the enduring appeal of Stoicism in addition to patibility with Christianity. The second two themes illustrate the weaknesses of Stoicism and why Christianity overtook it in the Western world.

The theme of self-reliance is most pronounced, especially when reading the Meditations of Marcus Aurelius and the Enchiridion (or Manual) of Epictetus. What they both prescribe isn’t mere detachment from the material world but rather the cultivation of an ethic of freedom—freedom from the passions, others’ opinions, and fortune. By freeing oneself of these external forces, one will find truth and serenity, or what Aurelius calls being aligned with “universal reason” or “universal nature.” Moreover, this is immediately possible for the individual, no matter what his station in life, as Aurelius enjoins his reader: “It is in thy power to live free from pulsion in the greatest tranquility of mind.”

Doubtless, this is a powerful message for people today who feel smothered by ubiquitous media and constant chatter. All the Stoics agree that the influences that bring down the individual are really just “opinion” or “externals,” and thus dispensable. As Epictetus explains, “You can be invincible if you enter into no contest which it is not in your power to conquer.” This isn’t cheap advice to pick one’s battles, but a reframing of one’s whole reality. We have a choice to master our circumstances or be ruled by them.

This idea of self-reliance ties into the theme of universal brotherhood. When all the titles and external trappings of life are removed, human beings are all in the same condition. As Seneca notes in a letter to his friend Lucilius: “Never forget that the man you call ‘slave’ grew up from the same stock as you, looks with pleasure on the same sky, breathes the same air, lives just as fully as you do, and will die just as certainly as you will.”

Not only is this stated as a matter of justice and doing right by others, but it sets up his argument of what constitutes slavery: “Show me the man who is not a slave: some are slaves to their sex drives, others to greed; some to their ambition, and all to fear.” This quote encapsulates Stoicism in a nutshell. It is rooted in the premise that all human beings are in a state of voluntary servitude and that true liberation begins in the mind, a truth that extends to all periods in history. As Spencer Klavan notes in his foreword to the book, “Perhaps, like Frederick Douglass after him, Epictetus also learned from studying his own example that a body in chains is not the same thing as a degraded soul.”

Of course, Stoicism isn’t all about empowerment and equality. If one were to judge what mattered most to the Stoics based on the number of mentions, it could easily be the idea of death. Marcus Aurelius continually muses over the fact that es for us all, making much of what people pursue in life utterly meaningless: “For all things soon pass away and e a mere tale, plete oblivion soon buries them.” Epictetus echoes this sentiment: “Let death and exile and every other thing which appears dreadful be daily before your eyes; but most of all death.”

Presumably, the inevitability of death will inspire an individual to free himself from fear of it and to give up vain pursuits. Still, as Randall Smith points out in From Here to Eternity, the Stoic conception of death is ultimately inadequate and easily leads to a crisis of meaning. What is the point of acting virtuously and living in accordance with the logic of the universe if one will simply die and be forgotten? Is Stoicism just a coping mechanism for those e to realize that nothing they do really matters? Not one of the writers really answers this important question, despite suggesting this conclusion on numerous occasions.

Coupled with a fixation on death is the resignation that pervades Stoicism. It isn’t so much an acceptance of a grim reality as more a belief that things are predetermined. Marcus Aurelius is the most positive on this point, expressing joy and awe at the beauty of creation: “If a man should have a feeling and deeper insight with respect to the things which are produced in the universe, there is hardly one of those which follow by way of consequence which will not seem to him to be in a manner so as to give pleasure.” Evidently, the point of life is admiring the logic of the cosmos, not necessarily making one’s mark on it.

Paradoxically, it is Stoicism’s ings that reveal its enduring value, particularly if one is a Christian: Christ makes up what is lacking in the Stoics. In place of a meaningless death and a static world driven by fate, Christ’s Gospel promises both life after death and an intelligible world that can be changed. Along with the Stoics’ cardinal virtues—prudence, justice, fortitude, and temperance—the Church adds three more, which make the whole project work: faith, hope, and charity. In this way, the revelations of both Stoicism and Christianity reinforce one another, giving a fuller picture of how people should act and why.

For this reason, Spencer Klavan is right to call out the efforts of today’s young Stoics to reject all belief in God. Sure, Stoicism can still help people with “taking back agency in their own lives” and not “fretting over a world that seems constantly on the verge of ending.” However, he concludes, “in the long run, without God, Stoicism cannot save.” Without a belief in a transcendent deity, or a divine redeemer for that matter, the once venerable philosophy shared by some of the greatest thinkers in the ancient world is inevitably doomed to degenerate into a self-help gimmick.

While Marcus Aurelius, Epictetus, and Seneca may not have known any better, people today have no such excuse. Not only can they read Gateway to the Stoics and learn Stoicism from the masters themselves; they also still live in a Christian-influenced culture and have access to the most meaningful piece of life’s puzzle that Stoicism is unable to provide: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
Hong Kong demands freedom in landslide election
The citizens of Hong Kong expanded their democratic revolution to the ballot box on Sunday, as pro-democracy parties won control of virtually every local government from pro-Beijing functionaries. Yesterday’s district council elections – the largest in history, with an estimated 71 percent of all registered voters (or 2.94 million of 4.13 million) participating – proved voters’ overwhelming support for the traditional rights enjoyed by the former British protectorate. The South China Morning Post described the landslide election as a “tsunami...
Nibbling at Dylan Pahman’s Chick-fil-A argument
As though guided by an invisible hand Dylan Pahman and I – independently and without coordination – each posted an essay about Chick-fil-A’s philanthropic giving within minutes of one another, each with slightly different emphases. Readers may see this as a conflict; however, probing the space between these analyses helps make sense of customer backlash, illustrates why “woke capitalism” of any variety is a miasma, and underlines that charitable decisions are best made by private individuals. Dylan quotes Milton Friedman’s...
Marco Rubio’s ‘Common-Good Capitalism’ lacks sound economics
In this week’s Acton Commentary I examine Sen. Marco Rubio’s case for “Common-Good Capitalism”: Americans are searching for answers for the disintegration of the family, falling participation in religious and civic institutions, drug dependency, suicide, and economic dislocation. Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., believes he has found the answer to the social crises of our time in Catholic social teaching. He describes his own reading of Catholic social teaching as “Common-Good Capitalism,” drawing principally on Pope Leo XIII’s encyclical Rerum Novarum...
There is no moral difference between eating Chick-fil-A and a McChicken
I am grateful to Fr. Ben Johnson for his thoughtful response to my recent post, “The social responsibility of Chick-fil-A is to make delicious sandwiches.”He adds some extra nuance, but I still stand my ground. Fr. Ben begins with an objection I’ve heard several times now: Friedman rightly notes that a CEO who funds a charity with the profits of a publicly held corporation spends the firm’s money, not his own. However, Chick-fil-A is a privately owned business, founded by...
Wealth inequality is a First World problem
As the West has e progressively more interventionist, concern with e inequality” has been eclipsed by “wealth inequality.” However, that focus betrays a certain blindness to a vital economic reality. Measures of equality and inequality tell us nothing about what really matters: a society’s prosperity or poverty. Communist societies were far from equal in practice. However, modern concerns about inequality focus on the fact that the free market does not reward all labor evenly. Yet the West’s efficiency creates the...
Spare a thought for China’s Muslim Uyghurs
The days in which many Westerners celebrated what many thought was mainland China’s inevitable march towards freedom as a consequence of its limited opening to global trade are now well and truly over. The present battle over Hong Kong, one of the world’s most economically-free regions, is plainly a proxy for a wider fight about China’s future—a future in which Beijing has made clear does not include much room for political freedom and rule of law. Then there is the...
The rise of ‘woke’ culture: Lessons on the power of institutions
We continue to see the ill effects of “cancel culture” and safetyism, whether through student-led riots and intimidation efforts at colleges and universities, the garden-variety intolerances of “woke capitalism,” or the self-destructive interventionism of “bulldozer parenting.” As far as how it’s e to be, we have explanations aplenty, from declines in religious life to the fraying of the social fabric to rises in political fragmentation and polarization. In an essay at Heterodox Academy, Musa Al-Gharbi points to yet another: a...
Stephanie Slade on markets, planning, and Catholic social teaching
Stephanie Slade writes in next month’s edition of Reason Magazine about, ‘Regulation and ‘the Right Ordering of Economic Life”according to Catholic social teaching: The Church’s surprising lesson for partisans of big government is that the best tools for correctly ordering economic life are found in the choices of individual market actors. Because those choices are based not only on their preferences but also on their convictions, people’s moral sensibilities—the extent to which they believe they have ethical obligations to each...
2019 Calihan Lecture Video: Religion, Society, and the Market
Last month, Prof. Giuseppe Franco received the 2019 Novak Award at the University of San Diego where he delivered the 19th Annual Calihan Lecture on “Religion, Society, and the Market: The Legacy of Wilhelm Röpke.” Watch the video now: TheNovak Awardrecognizes scholars early in their academic career who demonstrate outstanding intellectual merit in advancing the understanding of theology’s connection to human dignity, the importance of the rule of law, limited government, religious liberty, and freedom in economic life. Each Award...
Samuel Gregg: Marco Rubio’s ‘soft corporatism won’t help workers’
Senator Marco Rubio, R-FL, touched off a debate about the values of capitalism with his remarks on mon-good capitalism” on November 5 at the Catholic University of America. Today, Acton Institute Director of Research Samuel Gregg offers his assessment at Law & Liberty, where he traces Rubio’s thought to one of the most influential political philosophies in postwar Western European history. Sen. Rubio’s speech, titled “Catholic social doctrine and the dignity of work,” holds that the state must do more...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved