Is the Joker Stoic? Is Batman? 

One result of Stoicism’s contemporary popularity is people perpetually asking the question: “Is ____ Stoic?” You can fill in the blank with practically any sort of content you like. It can be an actual person (“is this MMA fighter, or this politician, or CEO Stoic?”), it can some imaginary character (what about the Batman. . . or the Joker?”), or even some hybrid of both (“how about Mar-cus Aurelius, but in The Gladiator?). It can be some other sort of “-ism”, a lifestyle choice, an ideological commit-ment. It can be a practice, or an action. It can be a kind of food. It can be someone’s favorite sound-bite. It can be an article of clothing, a tattoo, a coin. Someone in some Stoic forum will ask it sooner or later. 

Unproductive discussions 

Raising the question often produces a lot of conversation. Unfortunately, much of that, from what I’ve seen, winds up to be rather unproductive. And like the legendary hydra’s heads, once one of these threads gets finished off, another immediately springs up in its place. An interesting meta-version of this question was even asked recent-ly in one Stoicism Facebook group: “Is it Stoic to ask if one's behavior is Stoic or not?” That spurred me to think it might be useful to address these sorts of queries. Stoicism is more than a set of hacks 

In order to be “Stoic” in any substan-tive sense, there really ought to be some reference to what classic Stoic thinkers actually thought. Stoicism, as Seneca points out, is a complex system of philosophical principles and practic-es. It’s more than just a set of life-hacks, or sound-bites, or examples - however useful those may be when placed within a proper context. While practice is absolutely central to Stoi-cism, so is ongoing and progressive study of the philosophy by would-be practitioners. Many “Is ____ Stoic?” questions can be readily answered by examining what Stoics actually do say about matters in their now-widely avail-able works. 

Occasionally useful 

Of course, there remain many matters not discussed by classic Stoic texts and thinkers. Those of us living in the pre-sent do have to engage in interpreta-tion, adaptation, and extrapolation, ex-tending Stoicism into all sorts of new spaces. So perhaps, one might say, that’s why people should ask “Is ____ Stoic?” And occasionally, asking that question, and working out an answer, does pay off. 

Ask yourself three questions 

Still, in most cases, I would suggest, we would be better off asking ourselves three other kinds of questions. One of these has to do with our motives and assumptions - and making a practice of examining those is eminently Stoic. Why does one want to pigeonhole this thing as definitively Stoic, and this thing as not? What desires or aversions, what thoughts and feelings, what judgments and what assents drive this process? Is there a risk that uncritically insisting upon this sorting process will set me up for later misunderstandings, setbacks, and frustrations? 

Another set of questions run along these lines. Is devoting the time, energy, and headspace on musing about “Is ____ Stoic?” itself a pru-dent choice? Developing and exercising prudence (or practical wisdom) is some-thing Stoics were crystal clear about being central to Stoicism. If I really want to understand Stoicism better and live by that philosophy, what else could I choose and commit myself to? 

A third set would refine the process of questioning, along more Stoic lines. If it’s really that important to have a verdict upon the Stoic-ness of something, maybe instead of conceiving it as a Yes/No, one should ask the question in other ways. How compatible, complementary, or contradictory is this matter with Stoicism? Is this thing sort-of-Stoic, but only by bearing some su-perficial resemblance or tangential con-nection? Is it something that could be (like Epictetus says about bathing) done in a Stoic mindset or manner, but could also be done otherwise? This shifts focus away from asking whether the thing itself is or isn’t Stoic to how a Stoic would more flexibly - and rationally - approach the matter. And even more importantly, why a Stoic would do so. 

---

Greg Sadler, PhD 

Greg Sadler is editor of Stoicism Today, a member of the Modern Stoicism team, and co-founder of the Milwaukee Stoic Fellowship. 

 

---