Dear colleagues, I need help with an idea I’m trying to sort out. If you have the time and inclination, I would love to hear from you on the following: Saying Yes to life and Stoicism. Stoicism seems to be understood as a relationship to life where you keep going on despite the odds. There is also an inuendo that this may not be humanly possible and that internal pressures will eventually cause the person to crash. What I want to know is, was that the Stoicism that Zeno founded or merely a degraded understanding? Why did we as an Order cast it in a negative light? What was our beef with it? Was it a reaction to the degraded form or were we looking at it in its original sense? regardsDharma
Hi Dharma, I don’t have an answer for your question, but I am eager to hear others’ answers. For me, stoicism (endurance—"we will survive") is a big part of Japanese culture, and helps people survive the pandemic and evolving endemic. I also see stoicism as an opposite of Pollyanna-ism, trying to see the bright side of any situation ("I can save money by shutting myself in my house”). The message of the theological revolution in RS-1 was different than these two views. Don
On Jan 21, 2022, at 9:27, Dharmalingam Vinasithamby via Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote:
Dear colleagues,
I need help with an idea I’m trying to sort out. If you have the time and inclination, I would love to hear from you on the following:
Saying Yes to life and Stoicism. Stoicism seems to be understood as a relationship to life where you keep going on despite the odds. There is also an inuendo that this may not be humanly possible and that internal pressures will eventually cause the person to crash. What I want to know is, was that the Stoicism that Zeno founded or merely a degraded understanding? Why did we as an Order cast it in a negative light? What was our beef with it? Was it a reaction to the degraded form or were we looking at it in its original sense?
regards Dharma _______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net
Don. . . . Who? Cynthia Vancefacilitationfla@aol.com -----Original Message----- From: ヒンクルマンＤ.Ｗ." via Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> To: Colleague Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> Cc: ヒンクルマンＤ.Ｗ. <hinkel@sgu.ac.jp>; OE Listserve <oe@lists.wedgeblade.net> Sent: Thu, Jan 20, 2022 7:48 pm Subject: Re: [Dialogue] Stoicism Hi Dharma, I don’t have an answer for your question, but I am eager to hear others’ answers. For me, stoicism (endurance—"we will survive") is a big part of Japanese culture, and helps people survive the pandemic and evolving endemic. I also see stoicism as an opposite of Pollyanna-ism, trying to see the bright side of any situation ("I can save money by shutting myself in my house”). The message of the theological revolution in RS-1 was different than these two views. Don On Jan 21, 2022, at 9:27, Dharmalingam Vinasithamby via Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote: Dear colleagues, I need help with an idea I’m trying to sort out. If you have the time and inclination, I would love to hear from you on the following: Saying Yes to life and Stoicism. Stoicism seems to be understood as a relationship to life where you keep going on despite the odds. There is also an inuendo that this may not be humanly possible and that internal pressures will eventually cause the person to crash. What I want to know is, was that the Stoicism that Zeno founded or merely a degraded understanding? Why did we as an Order cast it in a negative light? What was our beef with it? Was it a reaction to the degraded form or were we looking at it in its original sense? regardsDharma_______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net _______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net
I believe Hinkleman. *Sunny Walker * *She/her/hers* *On **Arapaho, Cheyenne, Núu-agha-tʉvʉ-pʉ̱ (Ute), and Očeti Šakówiŋ (Sioux) tribal land* Certified Facilitator (Also Certified ToP Facilitator) ToP Methods Mentor Trainer - Upcoming Courses <https://www.top-training.net/w/> Virtual Facilitation Collaborative Senior Facilitator sunny.sunwalker@gmail.com 303-587-3017 For virtual facilitation inquiries: sunny@virtualfacilitationcollaborative.com www.virtualfacilitationcollaborative.com On Thu, Jan 20, 2022 at 7:07 PM Cynthia Vance via Dialogue < dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote:
Don. . . . Who?
Cynthia Vance facilitationfla@aol.com
-----Original Message----- From: ヒンクルマンＤ.Ｗ." via Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> To: Colleague Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> Cc: ヒンクルマンＤ.Ｗ. <hinkel@sgu.ac.jp>; OE Listserve <oe@lists.wedgeblade.net> Sent: Thu, Jan 20, 2022 7:48 pm Subject: Re: [Dialogue] Stoicism
Hi Dharma,
I don’t have an answer for your question, but I am eager to hear others’ answers. For me, stoicism (endurance—"we will survive") is a big part of Japanese culture, and helps people survive the pandemic and evolving endemic. I also see stoicism as an opposite of Pollyanna-ism, trying to see the bright side of any situation ("I can save money by shutting myself in my house”). The message of the theological revolution in RS-1 was different than these two views.
Don
On Jan 21, 2022, at 9:27, Dharmalingam Vinasithamby via Dialogue < dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote:
Dear colleagues,
I need help with an idea I’m trying to sort out. If you have the time and inclination, I would love to hear from you on the following:
Saying Yes to life and Stoicism. Stoicism seems to be understood as a relationship to life where you keep going on despite the odds. There is also an inuendo that this may not be humanly possible and that internal pressures will eventually cause the person to crash. What I want to know is, was that the Stoicism that Zeno founded or merely a degraded understanding? Why did we as an Order cast it in a negative light? What was our beef with it? Was it a reaction to the degraded form or were we looking at it in its original sense?
regards Dharma _______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net
_______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net _______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net
Hi Dharma, Such a thought-provoking question. In mundane terms, I think of myself falling into Stoicism when I say, “Marilyn, just force yourself to do, or accept, or be or………”. In those moments I feel I must do or be because of external expectations or exigencies, not by profound personal intention or choice. I never studied Zeno, nor heard anything in our OE courses that specifically negated his teachings. However, I am empowered when I take time to stop and rehearse a different Word from RSI, that I can intentionally take a new attitudinal relationship to my situation, grounded in profound possibility, and say YES to what I have chosen freely. The latter seems akin to Joseph Campbell’s encouragement “to follow one’s bliss”. For the many years leading up to, and since (in November) Joe moved to an assisted living memory care facility, I manifested both of these approaches in the extreme. As Joe’s dementia progressed, and I was his 24/7 caregiver, I tried the Stoic approach: Marilyn, just keep on going, you can handle it all no matter what, and you must. As you noted, that is unrealistic and guarantees a crash, sooner or later. And then there is guilt, which deepens the crash of not being able to keep on going. For me, the Word that I am limited (Bultman); and that is OK (Tillich); that I can decide anew what is needed (Bonhoeffer); and can engage the support of the “sensitive and responsive” who are everywhere (HRNeibuhr) — that has made all the difference. But it, like the self-talk of the Stoic, is a daily rehearsal, sometimes hourly litany of one’s self-understanding. Thank you for prompting my reflection on this important question. Grace, peace, and love — with fond memories of our time in the KL house in 1969/70 Marilyn
On Jan 20, 2022, at 7:27 PM, Dharmalingam Vinasithamby via Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote:
Dear colleagues,
I need help with an idea I’m trying to sort out. If you have the time and inclination, I would love to hear from you on the following:
Saying Yes to life and Stoicism. Stoicism seems to be understood as a relationship to life where you keep going on despite the odds. There is also an inuendo that this may not be humanly possible and that internal pressures will eventually cause the person to crash. What I want to know is, was that the Stoicism that Zeno founded or merely a degraded understanding? Why did we as an Order cast it in a negative light? What was our beef with it? Was it a reaction to the degraded form or were we looking at it in its original sense?
regards Dharma _______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net
Well said. Thank you, Marilyn. Cynthia Vancefacilitationfla@aol.com -----Original Message----- From: Mari Crocker via Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> To: Colleague Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> Cc: Mari Crocker <maricrocker@gmail.com> Sent: Thu, Jan 20, 2022 8:44 pm Subject: Re: [Dialogue] Stoicism Hi Dharma, Such a thought-provoking question. In mundane terms, I think of myself falling into Stoicism when I say, “Marilyn, just force yourself to do, or accept, or be or………”. In those moments I feel I must do or be because of external expectations or exigencies, not by profound personal intention or choice. I never studied Zeno, nor heard anything in our OE courses that specifically negated his teachings. However, I am empowered when I take time to stop and rehearse a different Word from RSI, that I can intentionally take a new attitudinal relationship to my situation, grounded in profound possibility, and say YES to what I have chosen freely. The latter seems akin to Joseph Campbell’s encouragement “to follow one’s bliss”. For the many years leading up to, and since (in November) Joe moved to an assisted living memory care facility, I manifested both of these approaches in the extreme. As Joe’s dementia progressed, and I was his 24/7 caregiver, I tried the Stoic approach: Marilyn, just keep on going, you can handle it all no matter what, and you must. As you noted, that is unrealistic and guarantees a crash, sooner or later. And then there is guilt, which deepens the crash of not being able to keep on going. For me, the Word that I am limited (Bultman); and that is OK (Tillich); that I can decide anew what is needed (Bonhoeffer); and can engage the support of the “sensitive and responsive” who are everywhere (HRNeibuhr) — that has made all the difference. But it, like the self-talk of the Stoic, is a daily rehearsal, sometimes hourly litany of one’s self-understanding. Thank you for prompting my reflection on this important question. Grace, peace, and love — with fond memories of our time in the KL house in 1969/70 Marilyn On Jan 20, 2022, at 7:27 PM, Dharmalingam Vinasithamby via Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote: Dear colleagues, I need help with an idea I’m trying to sort out. If you have the time and inclination, I would love to hear from you on the following: Saying Yes to life and Stoicism. Stoicism seems to be understood as a relationship to life where you keep going on despite the odds. There is also an inuendo that this may not be humanly possible and that internal pressures will eventually cause the person to crash. What I want to know is, was that the Stoicism that Zeno founded or merely a degraded understanding? Why did we as an Order cast it in a negative light? What was our beef with it? Was it a reaction to the degraded form or were we looking at it in its original sense? regardsDharma_______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net _______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net
Hi Marilyn, Thanks for your response to my question. I'm sorry to hear that Joe's dementia had gotten worse. I know being the sole care-giver is hard and can be overwhelming so it is good that you have some institutional support. My question was related to the problem we face with global warming accelerating and the sense of futility in trying to respond to it. Your words answer my question of how we find the courage to keep going even when the effort might seem meaningless. with love, Dharma On Friday, 21 January 2022, 09:44:12 am MYT, Mari Crocker via Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote: Hi Dharma, Such a thought-provoking question. In mundane terms, I think of myself falling into Stoicism when I say, “Marilyn, just force yourself to do, or accept, or be or………”. In those moments I feel I must do or be because of external expectations or exigencies, not by profound personal intention or choice. I never studied Zeno, nor heard anything in our OE courses that specifically negated his teachings. However, I am empowered when I take time to stop and rehearse a different Word from RSI, that I can intentionally take a new attitudinal relationship to my situation, grounded in profound possibility, and say YES to what I have chosen freely. The latter seems akin to Joseph Campbell’s encouragement “to follow one’s bliss”. For the many years leading up to, and since (in November) Joe moved to an assisted living memory care facility, I manifested both of these approaches in the extreme. As Joe’s dementia progressed, and I was his 24/7 caregiver, I tried the Stoic approach: Marilyn, just keep on going, you can handle it all no matter what, and you must. As you noted, that is unrealistic and guarantees a crash, sooner or later. And then there is guilt, which deepens the crash of not being able to keep on going. For me, the Word that I am limited (Bultman); and that is OK (Tillich); that I can decide anew what is needed (Bonhoeffer); and can engage the support of the “sensitive and responsive” who are everywhere (HRNeibuhr) — that has made all the difference. But it, like the self-talk of the Stoic, is a daily rehearsal, sometimes hourly litany of one’s self-understanding. Thank you for prompting my reflection on this important question. Grace, peace, and love — with fond memories of our time in the KL house in 1969/70 Marilyn On Jan 20, 2022, at 7:27 PM, Dharmalingam Vinasithamby via Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote: Dear colleagues, I need help with an idea I’m trying to sort out. If you have the time and inclination, I would love to hear from you on the following: Saying Yes to life and Stoicism. Stoicism seems to be understood as a relationship to life where you keep going on despite the odds. There is also an inuendo that this may not be humanly possible and that internal pressures will eventually cause the person to crash. What I want to know is, was that the Stoicism that Zeno founded or merely a degraded understanding? Why did we as an Order cast it in a negative light? What was our beef with it? Was it a reaction to the degraded form or were we looking at it in its original sense? regardsDharma_______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net _______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net
Great question Dharma Sent from my iPhone
On 21-Jan-2022, at 5:57 AM, Dharmalingam Vinasithamby via Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote:
Dear colleagues,
I need help with an idea I’m trying to sort out. If you have the time and inclination, I would love to hear from you on the following:
Saying Yes to life and Stoicism. Stoicism seems to be understood as a relationship to life where you keep going on despite the odds. There is also an inuendo that this may not be humanly possible and that internal pressures will eventually cause the person to crash. What I want to know is, was that the Stoicism that Zeno founded or merely a degraded understanding? Why did we as an Order cast it in a negative light? What was our beef with it? Was it a reaction to the degraded form or were we looking at it in its original sense?
regards Dharma _______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net
Stoic: I'm fine. Me: Are you telling the truth?Stoic: Well, even if I hurt, what can I do. I will just bear it.Me: Have you tried what the doctor advised?Stoic: Oh, I probably will soon. Stop worrying about me. I'm fine. Another day--Stoic: I don't see how we need to worry about climate change. It will destroy us and the rest of life on the planet soon.Me: But shouldn't we do a few actions that might help.Stoic: Oh, we are too far gone. The oceans are rising, the ice is about gone. We might as well just enjoy the life we have.Me: but what about our kids and grandkids and their kids?Stoic: Look. We are human. The planet it too far gone. We may as well just accept it. Another day--Stoic: Well, I think we have gone as far as we can to abolish racism in the United States.Me: I think there is still a lot of suffering from racism. I think we should find some way to pay reparations.Stoic: You pay for it. I have some other things I want to do with our money. Another day--Me: Did you hear about how the Wisconsin government is giving back some of their land to the Indians?Stoic: Oh for Pete Sake. That war is long over, and we are getting along fine. Another day--Stoic: Listen to those shovels! They are finishing my work!Me: No, honey, they are digging your grave. Another day--Me: They say that faith is belief in things not seen.Stoic: Ha. Sounds pretty magic to me!Me: But if you trust that the creative power of God is in charge, you can have hope that the future is open, and we can act!Stoic: Naptime now. Karen Bueno -----Original Message----- From: Dharmalingam Vinasithamby via Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> To: OE Listserve <oe@lists.wedgeblade.net>; Dialogue List <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> Cc: Dharmalingam Vinasithamby <dvinasithamby@yahoo.com> Sent: Thu, Jan 20, 2022 5:27 pm Subject: [Dialogue] Stoicism Dear colleagues, I need help with an idea I’m trying to sort out. If you have the time and inclination, I would love to hear from you on the following: Saying Yes to life and Stoicism. Stoicism seems to be understood as a relationship to life where you keep going on despite the odds. There is also an inuendo that this may not be humanly possible and that internal pressures will eventually cause the person to crash. What I want to know is, was that the Stoicism that Zeno founded or merely a degraded understanding? Why did we as an Order cast it in a negative light? What was our beef with it? Was it a reaction to the degraded form or were we looking at it in its original sense? regardsDharma_______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net
Does anyone recall (have notes on) the lecture introductions from RS-1? They were quick and insightful, and I don't find anything in our archives on them . . . One intro, maybe on Saturday afternoon -- would have been an intro to the freedom lecture / section / holy spirit / life style was a series of little triangles . . . Everyone lives out of some sense of their final reality What am I upagainst in life? what is my situation?and they have "A word" that releases them -- gives me the capacity to liveand a life style that comes out of that Anyway, I think one of them was the final reality is bad, and the word was just survive, and the life style was the stoic I don't quite remember the other ones . . . and the one course I had on philosophy did not emphasize the stoics. Jim Wiegel Theunknown is what is. And to be frightened of it is what sends everybodyscurrying around chasing dreams, illusions, wars, peace, love, hate, allthat. Unknown is what is. Accept that it's unknown, and it's plainsailing. John Lennon 401 North Beverly Way,Tolleson, Arizona 85353 623-363-3277 jfwiegel@yahoo.com www.partnersinparticipation.com On Thursday, January 20, 2022, 07:54:09 PM MST, Karenbueno via Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote: Stoic: I'm fine. Me: Are you telling the truth?Stoic: Well, even if I hurt, what can I do. I will just bear it.Me: Have you tried what the doctor advised?Stoic: Oh, I probably will soon. Stop worrying about me. I'm fine. Another day--Stoic: I don't see how we need to worry about climate change. It will destroy us and the rest of life on the planet soon.Me: But shouldn't we do a few actions that might help.Stoic: Oh, we are too far gone. The oceans are rising, the ice is about gone. We might as well just enjoy the life we have.Me: but what about our kids and grandkids and their kids?Stoic: Look. We are human. The planet it too far gone. We may as well just accept it. Another day--Stoic: Well, I think we have gone as far as we can to abolish racism in the United States.Me: I think there is still a lot of suffering from racism. I think we should find some way to pay reparations.Stoic: You pay for it. I have some other things I want to do with our money. Another day--Me: Did you hear about how the Wisconsin government is giving back some of their land to the Indians?Stoic: Oh for Pete Sake. That war is long over, and we are getting along fine. Another day--Stoic: Listen to those shovels! They are finishing my work!Me: No, honey, they are digging your grave. Another day--Me: They say that faith is belief in things not seen.Stoic: Ha. Sounds pretty magic to me!Me: But if you trust that the creative power of God is in charge, you can have hope that the future is open, and we can act!Stoic: Naptime now. Karen Bueno -----Original Message----- From: Dharmalingam Vinasithamby via Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> To: OE Listserve <oe@lists.wedgeblade.net>; Dialogue List <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> Cc: Dharmalingam Vinasithamby <dvinasithamby@yahoo.com> Sent: Thu, Jan 20, 2022 5:27 pm Subject: [Dialogue] Stoicism Dear colleagues, I need help with an idea I’m trying to sort out. If you have the time and inclination, I would love to hear from you on the following: Saying Yes to life and Stoicism. Stoicism seems to be understood as a relationship to life where you keep going on despite the odds. There is also an inuendo that this may not be humanly possible and that internal pressures will eventually cause the person to crash. What I want to know is, was that the Stoicism that Zeno founded or merely a degraded understanding? Why did we as an Order cast it in a negative light? What was our beef with it? Was it a reaction to the degraded form or were we looking at it in its original sense? regardsDharma_______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net _______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net
Thanks everyone for your responses. Some of these touched on what is happening to our planet, which is also what triggered my question. It is clear that we have pushed our biosphere over the tipping point into a trajectory that will bring mass extinctions, perhaps even that of our species, in its wake. Whatever we do cannot change this, at least till after several decades. So whatever good we do, we won’t be around to see its result.So the question for me is what does it mean to say Yes to life in this situation and to live out of that stance. To use a metaphor, if we are led to the gallows, can we approach it saying Yes to what our life has been and what is going happen? By “can we”, I mean how do we generate the courage and spirit for this. A related question, how do we tell others what is in store truthfully and yet not leave them without hope or drive? If we live like this, could it be described (in a positive way) as Stoicism? I remember we seemed to have reservations about this during our RS1 courses. But I’m not sure whether they were about the popular understanding of Stoicism, as Karen illustrates in her email, or something deeper in that philosophy. Dharma On Friday, 21 January 2022, 11:17:28 am MYT, James Wiegel via OE <oe@lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote: Does anyone recall (have notes on) the lecture introductions from RS-1? They were quick and insightful, and I don't find anything in our archives on them . . . One intro, maybe on Saturday afternoon -- would have been an intro to the freedom lecture / section / holy spirit / life style was a series of little triangles . . . Everyone lives out of some sense of their final reality What am I upagainst in life? what is my situation?and they have "A word" that releases them -- gives me the capacity to liveand a life style that comes out of that Anyway, I think one of them was the final reality is bad, and the word was just survive, and the life style was the stoic I don't quite remember the other ones . . . and the one course I had on philosophy did not emphasize the stoics. Jim Wiegel Theunknown is what is. And to be frightened of it is what sends everybodyscurrying around chasing dreams, illusions, wars, peace, love, hate, allthat. Unknown is what is. Accept that it's unknown, and it's plainsailing. John Lennon 401 North Beverly Way,Tolleson, Arizona 85353 623-363-3277 jfwiegel@yahoo.com www.partnersinparticipation.com On Thursday, January 20, 2022, 07:54:09 PM MST, Karenbueno via Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote: Stoic: I'm fine. Me: Are you telling the truth?Stoic: Well, even if I hurt, what can I do. I will just bear it.Me: Have you tried what the doctor advised?Stoic: Oh, I probably will soon. Stop worrying about me. I'm fine. Another day--Stoic: I don't see how we need to worry about climate change. It will destroy us and the rest of life on the planet soon.Me: But shouldn't we do a few actions that might help.Stoic: Oh, we are too far gone. The oceans are rising, the ice is about gone. We might as well just enjoy the life we have.Me: but what about our kids and grandkids and their kids?Stoic: Look. We are human. The planet it too far gone. We may as well just accept it. Another day--Stoic: Well, I think we have gone as far as we can to abolish racism in the United States.Me: I think there is still a lot of suffering from racism. I think we should find some way to pay reparations.Stoic: You pay for it. I have some other things I want to do with our money. Another day--Me: Did you hear about how the Wisconsin government is giving back some of their land to the Indians?Stoic: Oh for Pete Sake. That war is long over, and we are getting along fine. Another day--Stoic: Listen to those shovels! They are finishing my work!Me: No, honey, they are digging your grave. Another day--Me: They say that faith is belief in things not seen.Stoic: Ha. Sounds pretty magic to me!Me: But if you trust that the creative power of God is in charge, you can have hope that the future is open, and we can act!Stoic: Naptime now. Karen Bueno -----Original Message----- From: Dharmalingam Vinasithamby via Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> To: OE Listserve <oe@lists.wedgeblade.net>; Dialogue List <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> Cc: Dharmalingam Vinasithamby <dvinasithamby@yahoo.com> Sent: Thu, Jan 20, 2022 5:27 pm Subject: [Dialogue] Stoicism Dear colleagues, I need help with an idea I’m trying to sort out. If you have the time and inclination, I would love to hear from you on the following: Saying Yes to life and Stoicism. Stoicism seems to be understood as a relationship to life where you keep going on despite the odds. There is also an inuendo that this may not be humanly possible and that internal pressures will eventually cause the person to crash. What I want to know is, was that the Stoicism that Zeno founded or merely a degraded understanding? Why did we as an Order cast it in a negative light? What was our beef with it? Was it a reaction to the degraded form or were we looking at it in its original sense? regardsDharma_______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net _______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net _______________________________________________ OE mailing list OE@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net
Maybe stoicism is another form of facing reality in which we stop pretending all is well and going to get better some day. I have been following many scientists and philosophers as they try to account for global warming, massive pollution of our precious water and degradation of our living space and the pending energy crisis. Some think we are only in a natural cycle of Earth's processes, Some think we still have time to pull ourselves out the situation if we only rely on the human way of solving such situations especially through innovation and our desire to succeed, and some see an end to everything that our species will be. From my own perspective that has been instructed by a very special person, William Catton, who authored the book _Overshoot_, I understand that humans have been able to create living space that has far exceeded the Earth's carrying capacity. Fossil fuels have allowed us to over populate the Earth by at least 5 billion more beings than can be sustained in the future. Fossil fuels have also allowed us to use up most of its resources including arable land and potable water. As a species, we use an estimated 10 planets the size of Earth which is totally unsustainable. Many scientists believe we have gone beyond several tipping points especially concerning climate. The atmosphere is gaining massive gigatons of carbon dioxide and many other green house gasses each year and that what we have put up there will last for several centuries. The future temperature will definitely exceed CoP-26 projected 1.5 degrees C and by the end of this century may be 3 or more degrees higher. As we deplete our enormous energy supply that has made our current life of comfort and free time possible, life will become very difficult and unpleasant for those of us who are accustomed to the great American Dream. Our children and grandchildren will certainly experience life's resources comparable to what was only available hundreds of years ago and a climate of droughts and floods and unbelievable strong weather patterns. Here is where I probably show my stoicism. I have a thought that has allowed me to say yes to what is occurring. I believe that one role sentient beings have in this world is to replenish our biosphere with millennia of lost carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide which was plentiful millions of years ago and allowed great life forms to populate this planet. Humans may go extinct but life will still flourish in our wake. Thus, we give back to our planet that, which if lost completely, would cause all life to perish on a frozen world Didn't we also have a saying: "Always going through it, never going under" Jim Baumbach On 1/20/2022 6:27 PM, Dharmalingam Vinasithamby via Dialogue wrote:
Dear colleagues,
I need help with an idea I’m trying to sort out. If you have the time and inclination, I would love to hear from you on the following:
Saying Yes to life and Stoicism. Stoicism seems to be understood as a relationship to life where you keep going on despite the odds. There is also an inuendo that this may not be humanly possible and that internal pressures will eventually cause the person to crash. What I want to know is, was that the Stoicism that Zeno founded or merely a degraded understanding? Why did we as an Order cast it in a negative light? What was our beef with it? Was it a reaction to the degraded form or were we looking at it in its original sense?
regards Dharma
_______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net
-- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
My comments fade in comparison to these reflections. In what do we put our trust? What is my posture in having a life? We reduced profundity to one-liners. As I recall, the RS1 stoicism illustration was a checker board. Stoicism guided one to be always on the ‘good' squares not the ‘bad’ squares. You can take it from there that we were proponents of living ‘all’ the squares - whatever they offered. Any form of nihilism was rejected. I rather like Camus’s version of the posture of Sisyphus - rather than accepting being condemned by the gods to futility and meaninglessness by rolling his rock up a hill in hell, only to see it escape and roll back down - Sisyphus would enthusiastically shout, “That’s my rock!” and continue his eternal mission. Another current favourite for me is: “Yay though he slay me, yet will I trust him. Nevertheless, I will argue my ways before him.” What is Job saying? He is saying that for sure he will argue his case (Can I please have it my way?) – but at the bottom, no matter what, he trusts the goodness of the cosmos. Phrases of trust scratched on the walls of Nazi extermination camps reflect this. Love and hugs, Ken
On Jan 20, 2022, at 11:46 PM, Jim via Dialogue <dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> wrote:
Maybe stoicism is another form of facing reality in which we stop pretending all is well and going to get better some day. I have been following many scientists and philosophers as they try to account for global warming, massive pollution of our precious water and degradation of our living space and the pending energy crisis. Some think we are only in a natural cycle of Earth's processes, Some think we still have time to pull ourselves out the situation if we only rely on the human way of solving such situations especially through innovation and our desire to succeed, and some see an end to everything that our species will be.
From my own perspective that has been instructed by a very special person, William Catton, who authored the book Overshoot, I understand that humans have been able to create living space that has far exceeded the Earth's carrying capacity. Fossil fuels have allowed us to over populate the Earth by at least 5 billion more beings than can be sustained in the future. Fossil fuels have also allowed us to use up most of its resources including arable land and potable water. As a species, we use an estimated 10 planets the size of Earth which is totally unsustainable. Many scientists believe we have gone beyond several tipping points especially concerning climate. The atmosphere is gaining massive gigatons of carbon dioxide and many other green house gasses each year and that what we have put up there will last for several centuries. The future temperature will definitely exceed CoP-26 projected 1.5 degrees C and by the end of this century may be 3 or more degrees higher.
As we deplete our enormous energy supply that has made our current life of comfort and free time possible, life will become very difficult and unpleasant for those of us who are accustomed to the great American Dream. Our children and grandchildren will certainly experience life's resources comparable to what was only available hundreds of years ago and a climate of droughts and floods and unbelievable strong weather patterns.
Here is where I probably show my stoicism. I have a thought that has allowed me to say yes to what is occurring. I believe that one role sentient beings have in this world is to replenish our biosphere with millennia of lost carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide which was plentiful millions of years ago and allowed great life forms to populate this planet. Humans may go extinct but life will still flourish in our wake. Thus, we give back to our planet that, which if lost completely, would cause all life to perish on a frozen world
Didn't we also have a saying: "Always going through it, never going under"
Jim Baumbach
On 1/20/2022 6:27 PM, Dharmalingam Vinasithamby via Dialogue wrote:
Dear colleagues,
I need help with an idea I’m trying to sort out. If you have the time and inclination, I would love to hear from you on the following:
Saying Yes to life and Stoicism. Stoicism seems to be understood as a relationship to life where you keep going on despite the odds. There is also an inuendo that this may not be humanly possible and that internal pressures will eventually cause the person to crash. What I want to know is, was that the Stoicism that Zeno founded or merely a degraded understanding? Why did we as an Order cast it in a negative light? What was our beef with it? Was it a reaction to the degraded form or were we looking at it in its original sense?
regards Dharma
_______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net <mailto:Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net> http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net <http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net>
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient&utm_term=icon> Virus-free. www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient&utm_term=link> <x-msg://43/#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>_______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net
participants (10)
-
"ヒンクルマンＤ.Ｗ." -
Cynthia Vance -
Dharmalingam Vinasithamby -
James Wiegel -
Jim -
Karenbueno -
Ken Fisher -
Mari Crocker -
Mary Kurian D'Souza -
Sunny Walker