The beginning and the ends are my domain.

I am the first and the last.

My beauty is not obvious,

My necessity not well known.

I make my lands to shine a purest white

Though scarce be the day's cold light.

Harvest and gather, store and stow,

For I bring you rest from life's toil.

I am the year's morning, it is time to rise;

Toward the Sun and upon its strength lean.

I fill your rivers and enlighten your shoots.

The tenderest of beginnings are mine to give.

Burst forth from hard-shelled chambers,

lay open your embrace

I have so much life to give

And not a moment to waste.

Mine is the middle, the Sun my banner,

Waving it East to West in slow, controlled manner.

I bear it over the good, the bad, the just, and unjust,

but the unjust elude and extend my power.

It is not my place to make things right

only to give warmth and light.

I ripen and wrinkle all exposed.

What is it to me whether you protect your own?

I am the twilight of the year,

The last call and warning as the baring draws near.

Harvest the flowers and the fruits of the vine.

Whatever you leave behind is mine.

Celebrate and enjoy the fleeting light,

But also work to make your affairs aright.

For when I am done and the Sun has set

leave nothing undone that you might regret.

Stoicism ultimately aims at the harmony of order--order within one's self, order of one's actions and possessions, and order of self within the context of the whole cosmos. Achieving harmony in these ways is Stoic eudaimonia, that is, the perfection or fulfillment of the human unto beatitude or absolute happiness. In other words, the Stoic believes that if human beings are able to achieve this three-fold order, they will not want or desire anything else--they are perfected or complete.

According to the Stoic, one's self, one's actions, and all the parts of one's self all fall under the human being's "power" to order. This is largely true. Because of my nature as a human being, here I am sitting at my computer, because I have to be somewhere. I am typing these words because I know how and I have some proclivity or tendency to do it. Further, I am content in the knowledge of what I am doing is in conformity with the logic of the cosmos such that I am not experiencing any extremity of emotion. Thus, I demonstrate the order of myself in conformity to the world around me, order in my actions, and inner order.

Again, according to the Stoic, if there is any disorder to be found among these things, there is a single remedy: knowledge. If I am sad that I am sitting here typing this rather than doing something else that I might think to be more worth my time, it is because I am ignorant of some part of the overarching logic of the universe. Either it has been ordained that I be sitting here typing and I am just ignorant as to the reason why, or I am actually supposed to be doing something else, and so that hypothetical sadness would have driven me to be doing something else. If I am sick or injured, I can be healed through a knowledge of medicine or the knowledge of a doctor, to bring myself back to a certain equanimity of life. For whatever disorder, knowledge can bring order.

It very much seems that Stoicism is the answer to the many ills of our time. The teenage mental health crisis as a result of social media addiction seems able to be solved by the knowledge that putting down the phone and hanging out with people is good for teenagers. If tech CEOs and boards knew not to be so tight-fisted over the trillions (yes, with a capital "TR") of dollars in their control, perhaps the economy would be in better shape. Perhaps, someone should tell them.

On paper (or in this case, on screen), this all sounds like it should work and lead to happiness, but it ultimately does not. There are a few problems with Stoicism that are insurmountable. For one, it certainly seems our will is free contra Stoic determinism. I think many people, teens included, know that scrolling for hours on end is bad for them and yet they fall into it because it is something of a natural tendency. The Stoic is all about following our tendencies and inclinations. As a result people are sad and depressed in alarming numbers. Why? I think Aristotle had the right answer in saying there are conflicting appetites in human nature, and that we have to choose to follow our intellectual appetites. There is a free choice to make, and a certain amount of effort needed to make that choice. Knowledge is not enough.

Another related problem is the reality of our emotions. Stoicism denies the moral usefulness and value of our passions. One thing the Stoics definitely get right is that our decisions should be made in an "even-keeled" emotional state as much as possible. In doing so, we are able to let reason take the reins and make the best, most reasonable decision. However, I question both the sanity and moral compass of anyone who does not want to mourn the death of a loved one, or rejoice in the birth of their child.

I can understand if someone wants to cry and yet cannot, since mourning is a complex experience. But death is a natural evil which should move anyone to sadness even if it is not exteriorly expressed. A Stoic apatheia is not really welcome in such a case, which we modernly would call an emotional numbness. Again, that numbness is a tendency that we can just "fall into" suffering, but most people will say that it is not something they really want. People want to feel. It takes effort to actively process, become vulnerable, and let the gravity of loss "sink in." There is such a thing as "a good cry," and it comes with the knowledge of the reality that death is not a good thing, even if it is a natural thing. The experience of feeling is a two-sided coin. It is only by allowing oneself to be vulnerable to mourning and feeling sadness that one is thus also enabled to rejoice and feel joy. To reject emotions is to reject both sadness and joy.

So what does all this mean in application? No, I do not think that just because Stoicism is wrong that it should be entirely dismissed and never talked about. There are certainly parts of life that it gets right. Making decisions based purely on passion and instinct is certanly not the right way to live life. Living life only in and by emotions does not capture the truth of human nature and experience. And, obviously, harmony and order are good and noble things for which we should definitely seek. So, parts of Stoicism are helpful pedagogically in the quest for the real truth of the human being, who is a rational animal. Living stoically up to a point, then, is helpful for developing the virtue of temperance which is one of the Stoic virtues. Temperance is the control of the emotions. If someone is overly emotional, Stoicism can help in the practice of developing the habit of "tamping" them down before thinking and making a decision, which helps also in the exercise of another virtue, prudence. This leads to an inner harmony and order, letting reason reign as the most important part of human nature. However, as mentioned above, the feeling of emotions is a part of human nature, a reality that Stoicism denies as a human good. Further, being physicalist-materialist in essence, Stoicism denies that the human will is free. The merely Stoic man may be free of sadness, but he is not truly free.

To manipulate is to "handle skillfully by hand." Manipulation is reserved for tools--objects made by man for his use. Manipulation implies a relationship, a one-sided bond of utility. It is the basis of the master-craft relation. The user manipulates the used in a way that is advantageous to the user.  Manipulation is at once skillful and destructive, wearing down the used object to its nub and ultimately destroying it for the ends of building, constructing or creating. An artist manipulates his paints and brush, a writer her pen and ink, and hatred his humanity.