Practical Stoicism

134 Labs
  • ٠٫٠ (٠)
  • فلسفة
  • يتم التحديث أسبوعيًا

Stoicism is the pursuit of Virtue (Aretê), which was defined by the Ancient Greeks as "the knowledge of how to live excellently," Stoicism is a holistic life philosophy meant to guide us towards the attainment of this knowledge through the development of our character. While many other Stoicism podcasts focus on explaining Ancient Stoicism in an academic or historical context, Practical Stoicism strives to port the ancient wisdom of this 2300-plus-year-old Greek Philosophy into contemporary times to provide practical advice for living today, not two millennia ago. Join American philosopher of Stoicism Tanner Campbell, every Monday and Friday, for new episodes.

  1. قبل ١٣ ساعة

    Will AI Destroy Our Purpose?

    My Stoic Journaling Program is now 25% OFF with code "BREKKIE". Sign up at https://stoicjournaling.com. -- In this episode, I explore a growing concern: will AI eliminate human work, and if it does, what happens to our sense of purpose? I start by acknowledging the reality in front of us. AI is rapidly improving across creative and technical domains. Tasks that once required human skill are now being automated or reduced to minimal input. This is not speculation. It is already happening. Many forms of labour and many learnable skills are being replaced or compressed by technology. From there, I push the question further. If this trend continues, we may face a future where traditional employment becomes rare or unnecessary. That raises a deeper issue. If our culture has been built around work as the primary source of meaning, what happens when that work disappears? To answer this, I turn to Seneca and his writing on leisure. For the Stoics, leisure is not idleness. It is not the absence of work. It is the presence of directed attention toward what matters: self-examination, philosophical development, and contributing to others through wisdom and character. The problem is not that we may lose jobs. The problem is that we are not prepared to live well without them. I argue that we have confused employment with purpose. Stoicism makes a clear distinction. A person can lose their job and still live a purposeful life. What matters is whether they are being useful to others, improving themselves, and acting in accordance with reason. That work does not require a paycheck. I also acknowledge the uncertainty ahead. Economic systems may change. New structures like universal basic income may emerge. Or something else entirely. But rather than speculate too far into the future, the Stoic focus remains on preparation. We can begin now by asking what our purpose would be without our current job, and whether we can start moving toward that purpose today. The core idea is simple. Job work may disappear, but meaningful effort will not. Stoicism gives us a framework for living well regardless of economic conditions. The question is whether we are ready to use it. Listening on Spotify? Leave a comment! Share your thoughts. I am a public philosopher, it is my only job. I am enabled to do this job, in large part, thanks to support from my listeners and readers. You can support my work, keep it independent and online, at ⁠https://stoicismpod.com/members⁠ Looking for more Stoic content? Consider my 3x/week newsletter "Stoic Brekkie": ⁠https://stoicbrekkie.com⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

    ١٣ د

  2. قبل ٥ أيام

    Why should Stoics journal?

    Take advantage here: ⁠https://stoicjournaling.com⁠ Use the code "BREKKIE" at checkout for 25% off. That's it. Have a great rest of your week. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

    ٨ د

  3. ١٧ مارس

    Stoicism vs. The Manosphere

    Join Prokoptôn, a private community of dedicated practicing Stoics working together to improve. Learn more at https://skool.com/prokopton In this episode, I respond to a surge of listener questions about masculinity following a recent documentary on the so-called “manosphere.” The central question is simple: what does Stoicism actually say about what it means to be a man? I begin by clarifying a core Stoic idea. Just as the Stoic aims toward the ideal of the Sage, a man should aim toward becoming a good man. These are not fixed endpoints but guiding horizons. The goal is not perfection, but progress toward moral excellence over the course of a lifetime. From there, I address the common claims made by masculinity influencers. Wealth, physical strength, refusal to be censored, and dominance over women are often presented as defining traits of a “good man.” From a Stoic perspective, all of these fail. Wealth and strength are external. They do not determine character. Unfiltered speech is not virtue, but often a failure of judgment. And dominance over others is fundamentally unjust, especially when it involves suppressing another person’s rational agency. So what, then, defines a good man? The Stoic answer is straightforward: a good man fulfills his roles well. He takes seriously what is appropriate of him as a human being, as a member of a family, a community, and the broader world. He reasons through his responsibilities and works consistently to meet them. He is patient, just, self-controlled, and committed to improving both himself and the lives of those around him. This leads to an important conclusion. The qualities that make a good man are the same qualities that make a good woman. Reason, virtue, and the capacity for moral development are not gendered traits. As Musonius Rufus argued, both men and women share the same capacity for virtue and should be trained accordingly. I close by emphasizing that masculinity, properly understood, is not about status, power, or control. It is about living in accordance with reason and fulfilling one’s roles well. That is what it means to be a good man. And ultimately, that is what it means to be a good human being. Listening on Spotify? Leave a comment! Share your thoughts. I am a public philosopher, it is my only job. I am enabled to do this job, in large part, thanks to support from my listeners and readers. You can support my work, keep it independent and online, at ⁠https://stoicismpod.com/members⁠ Looking for more Stoic content? Consider my 3x/week newsletter "Stoic Brekkie": ⁠https://stoicbrekkie.com⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

    ١٨ د

  4. ٩ مارس

    Can We Make Anger Useful?

    Join Prokoptôn, a private community of dedicated practicing Stoics working together to improve. Learn more at https://skool.com/prokopton -- In this episode, I explore Marcus Aurelius’ Meditations 6.27 and what it teaches us about anger. Marcus reminds us that when people do wrong, they do so because they believe their actions are beneficial or appropriate. Our task, therefore, is not to react with anger but to teach, explain, and correct with patience. That idea opens the door to a deeper question: what is anger actually for? Some modern thinkers claim anger is necessary for progress, even suggesting that it fuels social change. I disagree. Anger is not a driver of wise action. It is a signal. Anger alerts us that something has happened which does not accord with our expectations, values, or understanding. That is its only real utility. Once the signal appears, the work begins. We must translate that signal into usable information by asking questions: What happened? Why did it happen? What assumptions am I making? Could I be mistaken? This process turns anger into data. The signal draws our attention to an impression. Rational questioning extracts information from it. And our willingness to revise our own assumptions ensures that we do not simply act on emotional certainty. Seneca makes the Stoic position clear in On Anger: anger itself contributes nothing useful to action. Virtue never requires the assistance of vice. Anger is not a helpful fuel for moral progress. It is a destabilizing force that clouds judgment and pushes us toward impulsive decisions. The goal, then, is not to eliminate anger entirely, since it is part of our human psychology. The goal is to refuse to act while under its influence. Socrates captures this beautifully when he tells a servant, “I would strike you, were I not angry.” His point is simple. If the desire to punish someone appears at the same moment as anger, we cannot trust that the desire is rational. The wise response is to pause until calm judgment returns. This is the Stoic discipline in practice. Anger may signal that something is wrong. But only reason can determine what should be done about it. Listening on Spotify? Leave a comment! Share your thoughts. -- I am a public philosopher, it is my only job. I am enabled to do this job, in large part, thanks to support from my listeners and readers. You can support my work, keep it independent and online, at ⁠https://stoicismpod.com/members⁠ Looking for more Stoic content? Consider my 3x/week newsletter "Stoic Brekkie": ⁠https://stoicbrekkie.com⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

    ١٢ د

  5. ٣ مارس

    Can Wars Be Just?

    Join Prokoptôn, a private community of dedicated practicing Stoics working together to improve. Learn more at https://skool.com/prokopton -- Support my work for as little as $1 a month: https://stoicismpod.com/members -- Subscribe to my Stoic Brekkie newsletter: https://stoicbrekkie.com -- I pull heavily from Leonidas Konstantakos' "Stoicism and Just War Theory" doctoral dissertation in this episode. I encourage you to download it and read it yourself: ⁠https://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/record/13724⁠ -- In this episode, I take up a difficult question: can war ever be just in Stoicism? Not justified. Not strategically useful. Not legal. But truly just — meaning virtuous and right. I begin by setting aside the two dominant modern frameworks for thinking about war: utilitarianism and deontology. Utilitarianism evaluates war based on consequences. If enough good results from it, the war can be defended. Deontology evaluates war based on rules. Some actions are always wrong, regardless of outcomes. Stoicism does neither. Using the firebombing of Dresden and the ticking time bomb scenario, I explain how the Stoic approach shifts the focus away from body counts and legal rules and onto character. For the Stoic, external outcomes — even death and destruction — are morally indifferent. What matters is the internal condition of the agents making decisions. Are they acting from justice, courage, and wisdom? Or from fear, ambition, pride, or the desire to dominate? Drawing on Cicero’s On Duties and later Stoic interpretation, I outline the core criteria: right intention, proper authority, discrimination, and war as a last resort aimed at peace. A war undertaken from a corrupted value structure — where victory is treated as a good in itself — reflects vice. A war undertaken from rational concern for preserving the cosmopolis, after all other paths have been exhausted, may be just. I also address torture and why the Stoic rejects it, not because of rule-following or cost-benefit calculations, but because it corrupts the agent. It reflects disordered judgment and a failure of oikeiôsis — a failure to recognize another rational being as part of the same moral community. Stoicism is not rule-based. It is character-based. I then turn to the present. We cannot fully know the internal motives of national leaders. We can only infer. War may be just or unjust depending on the reasoning behind it. That reasoning is ultimately visible only to the agent and their daimon — their inner rational faculty. Finally, I bring the question home. Most of us are not heads of state. But the Stoic framework for just war is simply Stoic ethics scaled up. The same question applies in everyday conflict: am I acting from virtue, or from ego and fear? The work of the prokoptôn is constant self-examination, especially when stakes are high. War can be just in Stoicism. But only if it is conducted by people whose souls are ordered toward peace, whose intentions are clean, and whose reason has honestly left them no alternative. Listening on Spotify? Leave a comment! Share your thoughts. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

    ١٤ د

  6. ٢٥ يناير

    Stoicism Is Not Compliance Nor Blind Obedience

    I am a public philosopher, it is my only job. I am enabled to do this job, in large part, thanks to support from my listeners and readers. You can support my work, keep it independent and online, at https://stoicismpod.com/members Looking for more Stoic content? Consider my 3x/week newsletter "Stoic Brekkie": https://stoicbrekkie.com The Iris Council: https://iriscouncil.com In this episode, I focus on the Stoic virtue of Justice and why it matters so urgently right now. Justice, in Stoicism, is not about legality or compliance with the law. It is about fairness. When we confuse what is legal with what is just, we risk excusing serious wrongdoing simply because it has been ratified by those in power. I explain why laws themselves can be unjust, especially when they are created or enforced by leaders who are not acting as protectors and benefactors of their people. If a law is out of alignment with what is fair, then the injustice lies with the law, not with those who recognize its unfairness. This is where Stoicism demands courage rather than passive acceptance. To ground this discussion, I turn to Musonius Rufus and his lecture On That Kings Too Should Practice Philosophy. Musonius argues that rulers must study philosophy because only philosophy teaches justice, self-control, courage, and rational judgment. A good king must be a good person, and a good person, by necessity, is a philosopher. Leadership without moral wisdom is not merely flawed; it is dangerous. I then broaden the lens to our responsibility as Stoics. Stoicism is not withdrawal or indifference. It is rational engagement with the world. The Cardinal Virtues work together: courage enables just action, temperance guides when to act, justice clarifies what is fair, and wisdom grounds us in our role as social beings. Leaders who divide humanity into “our kind” and “not our kind” fail this test of justice, regardless of what the law permits. Finally, I argue that our response to unjust leadership must itself be just. That requires self-examination. Before judging leaders, we must be capable of judging ourselves. A society that does not understand goodness cannot expect just leaders, and leaders drawn from such a society will reflect that confusion. What we need is not blind obedience or reckless outrage, but a serious moral recalibration rooted in Stoic philosophy. Listening on Spotify? Leave a comment! Share your thoughts. Podcast artwork by Original Randy: https://www.originalrandy.com Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

    ٢٣ د

  7. ١٩ يناير

    Toxic Soil

    I am a public philosopher, it is my only job. I am enabled to do this job, in large part, thanks to support from my listeners and readers. You can support my work, keep it independent and online, at https://stoicismpod.com/members Looking for more Stoic content? Consider my 3x/week newsletter "Stoic Brekkie": https://stoicbrekkie.com In this episode, I respond to a listener question prompted by the loss of a long-lived orchid. The plant did not die from neglect, but from care that was given in ignorance. What was meant to nurture it slowly caused harm. From that story comes a serious Stoic question: when does patience become self-abandonment? When does non-reactivity turn into tolerating conditions that prevent growth? I address a common misunderstanding of Stoicism that treats emotional detachment as a virtue in itself. Stoicism does not teach that we should endure all conditions indefinitely, nor that thriving means being comfortable, happy, or externally successful. To thrive, in the Stoic sense, is to pursue moral excellence. Health, wealth, and calm are not the measure. Character is. I make a distinction between the Stoic sage and the rest of us. A sage could flourish in any environment, but most of us are not sages. Environments shape the range of choices available to us. While our surroundings cannot force us to act viciously, they can limit what just and reasonable options are open to us. Poor environments narrow choice. Better environments expand it. From that, I argue that changing your environment can be a Stoic obligation, not a failure of resilience. If a situation consistently restricts your ability to live out your roles well, whether as a parent, partner, or moral agent, then leaving or changing that environment may be the just choice, provided it is done without abandoning responsibilities or harming others. Stoic endurance is not passive tolerance of harm. It is rational engagement with reality, including the reality that sometimes the right move is to change the soil, not blame the plant. Listening on Spotify? Leave a comment! Share your thoughts. Podcast artwork by Original Randy: https://www.originalrandy.com Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

    ١١ د

  8. ٧ يناير ·  إضافة

    ✅ 2026 Audience Survey

    This one is incredibly valuable to me, folks. Your answers will help me succeed this year. Please fill this out! Survey is here: https://stoicismpod.com/audience Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

    **ASE.Web.Podcasts.Duration.Minute.two**

  9. ٥ يناير

    Difficult People and Moral Progress

    This podcast is supported entirely by you, the listener. Without your patronage, none of this is possible. Become a patron of my work for as little as $0.50/week here: https://stoicismpod.com/members -- In this episode I reset Practical Stoicism back to its foundations and begin a new chapter for the show by returning to the classical texts themselves. I explain why this version of the podcast will move deliberately across the Stoic corpus rather than reading a single work straight through, drawing from Marcus Aurelius, Seneca, Epictetus, Musonius Rufus, and, where possible, the early Greek Stoics like Zeno of Citium, Chrysippus, and Cleanthes. From there, I focus on Meditations 2.1, one of the most concise and powerful passages in Meditations, using George Long’s translation. I explain why Marcus is so often misunderstood, why he should be read as a deeply committed practitioner rather than a philosophical instructor, and why Meditations was never meant to teach Stoicism to anyone but Marcus himself. We then unpack what Marcus is really doing in this meditation: preparing himself to meet difficult people, refusing to moralize or dehumanize them, and grounding his response in the Stoic claim that ignorance of good and evil (virtue and vice) is the root of wrongdoing. I explain why, in Stoicism, there is only one good and one evil, how this reframes resentment and anger, and why Marcus sees hostility toward others as fundamentally anti-social and contrary to Nature. The episode closes by showing how Stoicism combines sympathy, personal responsibility, and moral resolve, and why caring for others is not optional if one is genuinely pursuing virtue. This is not a philosophy of withdrawal or toughness for its own sake, but a demanding ethical system aimed at producing better human beings. Key takeaways from this episode include: Why Meditations is a private practice document, not a Stoic instruction manual, and how misunderstanding this leads to shallow readings How Meditations 2.1 reveals the Stoic view that vice is ignorance, not malice, and why this matters for how we treat others Why Stoicism is fundamentally pro-social, and why turning away from others undermines the pursuit of virtue itself If you'd like to provide feedback on this episode, or have question, you may do so as a member. Email sent by non-members will not be answered (though they may be read). This isn't punitive, I just cannot keep up. Limiting access to members reduces my workload. You're always invited to leave a comment on Spotify, member or not. Thanks for listening and have a great day! Podcast artwork by Original Randy: https://www.originalrandy.com Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

    ٢١ د

  10. ٣ يناير ·  إضافة

    Where have all the episodes gone? [Welcome to Practical Stoicism 2026]

    Pledge your support to my continued work: https://liberapay.com/tannerocampbell New episodes of Practical Stoicism being January 6th, 2026. Practicing Stoicism is available on Spotify and Apple Podcasts as of January 6th, 2026 and can be found simply by searching for the name. The Practical Stoicism Archives are available for free on Spotify [https://open.spotify.com/show/0eDPIzBgCvMb1AptEbqtpb?si=b1648b3cd2c54dab] and Apple Podcasts [https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/practical-stoicism-archives/id1866198483]. The Archives feed submitted to Spotify and Apple just today (January 3rd, 2026). If you cannot yet see them, please wait a day for them to appear in search results. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

    ١١ د
مشاهدة الكل (١٦)

حول

Stoicism is the pursuit of Virtue (Aretê), which was defined by the Ancient Greeks as "the knowledge of how to live excellently," Stoicism is a holistic life philosophy meant to guide us towards the attainment of this knowledge through the development of our character. While many other Stoicism podcasts focus on explaining Ancient Stoicism in an academic or historical context, Practical Stoicism strives to port the ancient wisdom of this 2300-plus-year-old Greek Philosophy into contemporary times to provide practical advice for living today, not two millennia ago. Join American philosopher of Stoicism Tanner Campbell, every Monday and Friday, for new episodes.

المعلومات

  • قناة
    134 Labs
  • صناع العمل
    Tanner Campbell
  • سنوات النشاط
    ٢٠٢٢ - ٢٠٢٦
  • الحلقات
    ١٦
  • التقييم
    ملائم
  • حقوق النشر
    © Tanner Campbell and 134 Labs Limited 2026
  • موقع البرنامج على الويب
    Practical Stoicism

المزيد من 134 Labs

قد يعجبك أيضًا