Hey Tanner, I was just wondering what your personal thoughts were on the theory that we are living in a “simulation”? Also, how do you think Marcus or any other prominent figure in stoicism would react if they thought that our reality is not “reality”? Have a great day.
I have been interested in Stoicism both as a philosophy and as a 'religion', for lack of a better term, and while I don't yet consider myself a Prokopton, I have been listening to both your podcast and the 'Stoicism On Fire' podcast and have been trying to live more in line with Stoic principles. I have been a daily user of cannabis for some time, and it has occurred to me that this habit might not be in line with Stoic philosophy, given that I don't use cannabis for medical reasons. I also use nicotine products on a daily basis, which I suppose would sort-of fall in the same category. I'm curious what your thoughts might be on these kinds of things. Should a Prokopton aim to avoid vices such as these?
What do you believe is the strongest way to overcome needless anxiety and overthinking during the day? Thoughts such as "I wonder what "x" will be like in 500 years" or "Will this task I am doing even matter in the far future?". Staying in the present is difficult for some. What do you think is a good way to process these thoughts? Thanks.
Hey Tanner, huge fan of the podcast. Delighted to be able to get in touch with you! At the moment I'm delving deep into the endless pit of stoicism amongst other things, one of those being non-binary thinking. I'm not sure whether Marcus or Epictetus had anything to say on the matter in their time but it's been on my mind and I thought I'd get your opinion on the subject. From my understanding, a practising stoic should know what they're striving for and, to the best of their ability, allign their behaviors and thoughts with the most direct path towards achieving this goal. Often times however, the (supposedly) most direct path to a goal might not be in line with ones current beliefs and therefore finding the most direct path to achieving said goal may be dependent on changing the relevant beliefs. To use you as an example: Your goal (from what I can see) is to create an incredible podcast to help people. Originally you believed that offering an option for people to remove the ads and preambles was the best thing to do for your podcast. Now that your volume of production has increased (to everyones joy), you've concluded that what is best for the podcast is to keep the preambles in, in order to help your workflow so you can produce more (a worthy trade-off in my opinion). My understanding is that a stoic should not stray from their core beliefs or values, but at the same time they should value a direct path to a goal (which may mean changing their beliefs or values to attain). This is a paradox I've been contemplating. In relation to non-binary thinking, my question is: How far should a prokopton be willing to bend their core beliefs and values in order to continue on the most direct path to their goal? Thanks again for producing a fantastic show! As someone who fits into your exact target audience (21 year old male) I can confirm that you're providing incredible value and I really appreciate your work. Keep it up! Louis