Why were the Stoics so stoical, i.e., what made them that way

Question

BTW: Yahoo suggested this Q be put under the heading

L*****n, g*y, Bisexual, and Transgendered. Does that mean homosexuals are more stoic than heterosexuals? LOL

Answer 1

Because they believed in fatalism.

Answer 2

im lol too, but i dont know the answer, like most good questions in here i doubt youll get  a satisfactory response, its the stupid questions get all the attention...try posting it in history?

Answer 3

Logic

For the Stoics, the scope of what they called ‘logic’ (logikê, i.e. knowledge of the functions of logos or reason) is very wide, including not only the analysis of argument forms, but also rhetoric, grammar, the theories of concepts, propositions, perception, and thought, and what we would call epistemology and philosophy of language. Formally, it was standardly divided into just two parts: rhetoric and dialectic (Diog. Laert., 31A). Much has been written about the Stoics' advances in logic (in our narrow sense of the word). In general, one may say that theirs is a logic of propositions rather than a logic of terms, like the Aristotelian syllogistic.

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/stoici...

The Stoics disagreed with Aristotle about essences. He called them objects that were "in the things themselves." The Stoics, in what we would call "the theories of concepts, propositions, perception, and thought, and what we would call epistemology and philosophy of language," were, for them *conceptual,* whereas for Aristotle it was as if science could someday extract the epistemological essence. The problem was, Aristotle didn't see essences as epistemologica, as the Stoics did, as Occam did, as Ayn Rand did; he saw them as metaphysical.

The Stoics, rejecting this line of thinking, were able to place into a rational perspective the thinking-yet-militaristic way of life they developed.

"Chrysippus was recognized by his contemporaries as the equal of Aristotle in logic. Stoic epistemology was decidedly empiricist and nominalist in spirit. They rejected both Plato's and Aristotle's notions of form.

"God has no existence distinct from the rational order of nature and should not be construed as a personal, transcendent deity of the sort essential to later Western theism.

"Not only is the world such that all events are determined by prior events, but the universe is a perfect, rational whole. For all their interests in logic and speculative philosophy, the primary focus of Stoicism is practical and ethical. Knowledge of nature is of instrumental value only. Its value is entirely determined by its role in fostering the life of virtue understood as living in accord with nature.

"Furthermore, for much of modern Western history, Stoic ideas of moral virtue have been second to none in influence. Stoic ideas regarding the natural order of things and of each rational soul as a divine element provided one basis upon which later ideas of natural law were erected."

condensed by me from http://www2.evansville.edu/ecoleweb/arti...

The Stoics were the Randian Objectivists of their day!

Answer 4

Okay!  What made you disregard the suggested category?  Do you not have faith in their thinking abilities?  Or,  were you afraid of the adverse reaction...being booed out with the shouts of "wrong category!!!"

A Stoic would not mind either the bouquets or brickbats;  for a Stoic knows the futility of any exercise beyond a certain point.  Everything has a short shelf-life...a momentary distraction.  This realisation is what makes them so...in my opinion.  Take it or Leave it!