at all, a dignified protest in the small is nearly always possible and often worthwhile.
HITTING THE SWEET SPOT
All this is to say
that
there is space between acquiescence and all-out resistance, not
how
one is to reliably hit that sweet spot. There is no general recipe or procedure for actually doing this, even once we know that moral recognition is what we are after. Still, for what it is worth, here are two suggestions.
The first is: don’t try to change the asshole, and cooperate only on your own terms. The second is: take a stand at the right time. We take each suggestion in turn.
OWN YOUR ATTITUDES
According to a Stoic principle, one must always accept what is given. One can hope for good things and work toward them, but one should not strive for what is not within one’s power. As the wise Epictetus explains, “If [a way things appear] concerns anything outside of your control, train yourself not to worry about it.” 6
Among things not within one’s control Epictetus explicitly includes the recognition or lack of recognition by others. He writes:
It is only after you have … learned to distinguish between what you can and can’t control that inner tranquility and outer effectiveness become possible.… Such things as …
how we are regarded by others
… are externals and therefore not our concern. 7
Since one can’t change an asshole, then, one shouldn’t try. One shouldn’t seek recognition in his eyes.
Now, the Stoics arguably take this too far. They famously counsel that one can retain happy equanimity even while being stretched on the rack or in the face of the death of your own child. One need only adjust one’s interpretations of how things appear. It should then be relatively easy to accept being taken advantage of by an asshole. As Epictetus explains:
People don’t have the power to hurt you. Even if someone shouts abuse at you or strikes you, if you are insulted, it is always your choice to view what is happening as insulting or not. If someone irritates you, it is only your own response that is irritating you. Therefore, when anyone seems to be provoking you, remember that it is only your judgment of the incident that provokes you. 8
Indeed, as Epictetus elaborates, it is the provocateur who is mainly injured:
If someone treats you disrespectfully or speaks unkindly about you, remember that he or she does so from [his orher] impression that it is right to do so. It is unrealistic to expect that this person sees you as you see yourself. If another person reaches conclusions based on false impressions, he or she is the one hurt rather than you, because it is that person who is misguided. 9
So we are to own our perceptions
as our own
. If nothing else, this is a good way of mellowing oneself out. Still, having mellowed, one might well finally conclude, on due reflection, that this guy is a serious asshole and that some response—perhaps a quick riposte—is indeed called for. It is only if there really is
nothing
one can do by way of reply that full disengagement becomes the wise course (as in “Here he goes again; let us observe whether his technique is changing, perhaps even improving!”). When constructive replies are in the cards, we will rightly take our chances on action. Epictetus might well agree, as long as action flows from full acceptance that the world may not cooperate. We should act decisively but stand ready to let go. Trying is fine, as long as it is not fruitless striving for what is not in our power.
What, then, should one try for? For the Stoics, the flip side of our lack of full control over the world is that we have correspondingly heightened personal responsibility for our
attitudes and interpretations
, which
are
within our power. A responsible reply to the asshole will seek after what is achievable and worthy. The practical challenge is to seek that and nothing more. The Stoics tell us how: we appropriately judge the appearances, through clear thinking.
HITTING THE SWEET SPOT
All this is to say
that
there is space between acquiescence and all-out resistance, not
how
one is to reliably hit that sweet spot. There is no general recipe or procedure for actually doing this, even once we know that moral recognition is what we are after. Still, for what it is worth, here are two suggestions.
The first is: don’t try to change the asshole, and cooperate only on your own terms. The second is: take a stand at the right time. We take each suggestion in turn.
OWN YOUR ATTITUDES
According to a Stoic principle, one must always accept what is given. One can hope for good things and work toward them, but one should not strive for what is not within one’s power. As the wise Epictetus explains, “If [a way things appear] concerns anything outside of your control, train yourself not to worry about it.” 6
Among things not within one’s control Epictetus explicitly includes the recognition or lack of recognition by others. He writes:
It is only after you have … learned to distinguish between what you can and can’t control that inner tranquility and outer effectiveness become possible.… Such things as …
how we are regarded by others
… are externals and therefore not our concern. 7
Since one can’t change an asshole, then, one shouldn’t try. One shouldn’t seek recognition in his eyes.
Now, the Stoics arguably take this too far. They famously counsel that one can retain happy equanimity even while being stretched on the rack or in the face of the death of your own child. One need only adjust one’s interpretations of how things appear. It should then be relatively easy to accept being taken advantage of by an asshole. As Epictetus explains:
People don’t have the power to hurt you. Even if someone shouts abuse at you or strikes you, if you are insulted, it is always your choice to view what is happening as insulting or not. If someone irritates you, it is only your own response that is irritating you. Therefore, when anyone seems to be provoking you, remember that it is only your judgment of the incident that provokes you. 8
Indeed, as Epictetus elaborates, it is the provocateur who is mainly injured:
If someone treats you disrespectfully or speaks unkindly about you, remember that he or she does so from [his orher] impression that it is right to do so. It is unrealistic to expect that this person sees you as you see yourself. If another person reaches conclusions based on false impressions, he or she is the one hurt rather than you, because it is that person who is misguided. 9
So we are to own our perceptions
as our own
. If nothing else, this is a good way of mellowing oneself out. Still, having mellowed, one might well finally conclude, on due reflection, that this guy is a serious asshole and that some response—perhaps a quick riposte—is indeed called for. It is only if there really is
nothing
one can do by way of reply that full disengagement becomes the wise course (as in “Here he goes again; let us observe whether his technique is changing, perhaps even improving!”). When constructive replies are in the cards, we will rightly take our chances on action. Epictetus might well agree, as long as action flows from full acceptance that the world may not cooperate. We should act decisively but stand ready to let go. Trying is fine, as long as it is not fruitless striving for what is not in our power.
What, then, should one try for? For the Stoics, the flip side of our lack of full control over the world is that we have correspondingly heightened personal responsibility for our
attitudes and interpretations
, which
are
within our power. A responsible reply to the asshole will seek after what is achievable and worthy. The practical challenge is to seek that and nothing more. The Stoics tell us how: we appropriately judge the appearances, through clear thinking.
Similar Books
