Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that The Stoic distinction between 'real goods' and 'externals' presupposes a conception of the self that severs agency from embodied, relational existence.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Stoics emphasize living according to nature and fulfilling our natural social roles—duties inherently tied to embodied, relational existence.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius discuss managing emotions, desire, and bodily impulses as part of virtue—showing agency remains embedded in embodiment.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Stoic indifferents (health, relationships, reputation) matter for living well, suggesting the self cannot be severed from these relational goods.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Stoics locate virtue (the only true good) in rational choice, which operates independently of bodily fortune or social circumstance.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
If agency were essentially embodied and relational, loss of health or relationships would diminish moral capacity—but Stoics deny this.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
The Stoic sage can maintain eudaimonia in torture or exile, implying the self transcends its concrete, situated conditions.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Next step
Based on where you are in your exploration
Strongest counterpoint
Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.