The article deals with the modern recycling of the classical philosophical current, "Stoicism", adapted to the new era of express success, philosophy for the slaves of the new era.

A "slave doctrine" to understand today`s bosses and employees: stoicism has returned
Miquel Echarri
www.elpais.com - Barcelona - 09 Dec 2023

A philosophical doctrine from 24 centuries ago that invited us to accept reality as it is and offered comfort to the poorest and a free hand to the richest is enjoying success in the form of books, podcasts and hashtags on social networks.

Elon Musk, a billionaire who, by all accounts, sometimes sleeps on the floor.

From the Meditations of Marcus Aurelius to the most popular practical thinking podcasts on the planet, Stoicism remains surprisingly relevant. Right now, it is one of the most widely disseminated ancient doctrines on the web and the bedside philosophy of the disruptive business elite, from Kevin Rose to Elon Musk via Bill Gates, Jack Dorsey, Jeff Bezos or Warren Buffett. Pioneers such as Tim Ferriss helped introduce it to Silicon Valley around 10 years ago, integrated into a suggestive postmodern cocktail of Taoism, Confucianism and Zen meditation.

Some analysts attribute its popularity in the first quarter of this troubled 21st century to the fact that it is a practical philosophy, a "school of life", in Ferriss` own words. But back in 2016, Olivia Goldhill wondered in an insightful article in Quartz what Gates and company might be learning from an age-old doctrine "conceived by Greek slaves" that preaches that success is an illusion and that austerity and renunciation must be cultivated as the preferred path to virtue.

How to do absolutely nothing at work: between employee roguery and corporate incompetence

Sandy Grant, a philosopher at the University of Cambrige, describes Stoicism as an intellectual current that set out to "bring comfort to the oppressed" in a world "of slaves and rigid hierarchies" in which women were considered the "property" of their fathers, brothers or husbands. Even the philosophical populariser Ryan Holiday, author of bestselling books such as Everyday Stoicism: 366 Reflections on Wisdom, Perseverance and the Art of Living, finds it paradoxical that modern Stoics seem to proliferate mainly at the top of the social pyramid, not at the bottom.
Our everyday stoicism


What`s so stoic about Elon Musk? Judging by one of the official bulletins of contemporary neo-stoicism, Holiday`s blog, The Daily Stoic, very little. The site recognises his unquestionable entrepreneurial merits, but reproaches him for a verbal incontinence that would have exasperated the Stoic par excellence, the emperor Marcus Aurelius.

A man relaxes in his office, enjoying the view.

Musk, in the opinion of his co-religionists turned detractors, would have "too many opinions". He would be too prone to "engage in petty squabbles, disrespect his employees with disabilities, spread disinformation and propaganda, attack journalists" and generally "get sucked into the contemporary culture wars". None of these attitudes seem very compatible with the serenity, virtue, balance and inner silence promoted by Stoic doctrine.

Moreover, with the acquisition of Twitter, today X, Musk would have become a direct promoter of a culture of immediacy and noise that is totally incompatible with this school of thought. It would be of little use, therefore, if he had avidly read the works of the Stoic triumvirate (Seneca, the slave Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius) or if he imposed on himself superficial exercises to harden his spirit, such as sleeping on the floor of his factories in periods of crisis. Stoicism, for Daily Stoic, is something else.


Oscar Lagrosen, editor of Medium, does accept with little hesitation the thesis that Elon Musk is "the modern Seneca". His arguments? Both the Cordovan philosopher and the Pretoria-born entrepreneur were the richest men of their time: Musk`s more than $2.6 billion would be roughly equivalent to the formidable 300 million denarii accumulated by Seneca. Moreover, both amassed their fortunes by exercising virtue, "without a hint of corruption", had the discipline to make the most of their respective talents, and did "good" without expectation of retribution or recognition. Lagrosen credits Musk with an altruistic feat that was highly publicised at the time but about which analysts are not quite in agreement: he donated a substantial part of his fortune to alleviate world hunger, although it was not entirely clear when, to whom and under what specific conditions.

Equestrian statue of Marcus Aurelius in Rome.
Ghigo Roli

Of course, behind such disparate assessments lie divergent understandings of stoicism. For scholars such as Sandy Grant, John Sellars and Víctor Gómez Pin, this ancient wisdom must be contextualised, interpreted and, if necessary, applied, taking into account its complexity and nuances. For popularisers with or without philosophical pedigree, such as Lagrosen or Massimo Pigliucci, it might be enough to rummage through the attic of the old doctrine, identify some ideas with a hint of validity and add a discreet esoteric or self-help veneer to them. Hence the proliferation of podcasts that provide "Stoic recipes" for enjoying (or coping with) everyday life, but often sidestep or omit the fundamental question: what did Stoicism really consist of?
Los chicos del pórtico

Stoicism is a philosophical school founded by the Cypriot sage Zeno of Citius in Athens in the early third century BC, at the height of the Hellenistic period. The Stoics met under an Athenian portico, the stóa, and there they developed a personal ethic based on the pursuit of happiness and virtue through rational behaviour, self-control and tolerance. Their ideas took firm root in imperial Rome in later centuries and eventually became the hegemonic intellectual and spiritual current, spreading to all levels of society. Gates, Bezos and company are well aware of the facts, but that does not seem to be the side of Stoic thought that interests them. They simply buy, with somewhat uncritical enthusiasm, the stoicism of Tim Ferriss, defined as "a simple and immensely rich recipe book for optimal results with minimal effort".

Stoicism, as Ferriss understands it, would be a sophisticated variant of mindfulness combined with the exaltation of business leadership and the culture of effort. Other recent popularisers have nevertheless made an effort to strip it of this elitist patina and promote a popularly oriented Stoic doctrine, suitable for all audiences. This is the case of The Little Book of Stoicism: Wisdom, Resilience, Confidence and Calm from the Classical Philosophers, by Jonas Salzbeger.

Other examples of this Hellenistic wisdom within reach of all pockets are The Stoic`s Way, by Ollie Snider, and Stoicism for your everyday life. A philosophical guide to becoming more tenacious, calm and resilient. In almost all of these essays, more or less close to self-help, the concept of "resilience" is key, that quality that is so fashionable today and that the RAE defines as the "capacity of adaptation of a living being in the face of a disturbing agent or an adverse state or situation". Consume stoicism in judicious homeopathic doses and you will be increasingly resilient. How simple and practical is the "recipe" of the disciples of Zeno of Citium?

In conversation with ICON, Víctor Gómez Pin recommended "dispelling the confusion" by turning to the sources. In other words, accessing the original Stoicism (and the rigorous interpretations that experts have been making of it ever since) instead of settling for "interested, vulgar and trivial" substitutes. This is what Arpa Editores has set out to do with the recent republication of one of the canonical texts of the Stoic corpus, the Meditations of Marcus Aurelius.

A bust of Seneca.

David Hernández de la Fuente, writer and professor of classical philology at the Complutense University of Madrid, has been responsible for the translation, introduction and notes. He describes the work as "the intellectual memoirs of a model ruler", as well as a book "that was not conceived for us to read, but as the vehicle that this cultured man of contemplative attitudes found to question himself, as if he had two voices coexisting within him: one that doubts and suffers and another that acts as a teacher offering comfort and certainty".

In the light of this "fascinating" text, Hernández tells us, one would have to conclude that Musk, Gates and the others have "very little" stoicism: "Perhaps just a thin veneer. It is possible that their interest in the intellectual fad of popularised, throwaway stoicism has given them a certain peace of mind. In general, these new-fangled Stoic entrepreneurs often say that it has taught them temperance and self-control, and I am not one to doubt it. But judging by their actions, they are driven by business interests far removed from stoicism. I think what interests them most about Marcus Aurelius is that he was the most powerful man of his time and managed an empire".

Build it and they will come

Hernández, in spite of everything, considers "legitimate" the attempts to disseminate Stoicism and bring it back to our times, even if it is by "vulgarising" it: "After all, philosophy has always been vulgarised to adapt it to all kinds of audiences. In the end, it doesn`t matter too much whether you come into contact with Stoicism through a popular book, a podcast, a website, a television programme or a tweet. If it captures your interest, you`ll go into it in more depth, and you`ll end up learning at your own pace about a very ancient doctrine that continues to offer crucial lessons for the present".

He is a little more concerned that this wealth of wisdom is being accessed "through sloppy, rushed translations" or, worse, "self-serving reinterpretations". But he believes that, even so, the curious and attentive reader will end up finding their way to "treasures such as the reflections of Epictetus, the fragments of Zeno, the complex and very fertile thought of Seneca" or the Meditations, "a masterpiece of introspection and a hymn to the intimate dignity of the human being".

Is it possible to be a Stoic in 2023, and is it worth the effort? Hernández recalls that "the globalised universe in which Stoicism emerged, that of Hellenistic Greece and the Roman Empire, was similar to ours in its high degree of interconnections, its political turbulence or the climatic, health and environmental challenges it faced". But it was also a very different world, "in which not even the highest spirits, such as Marcus Aurelius, questioned slavery, the subjugation of women or the prevalence of violent imperialism".

The cultural distance that separates that era from our own is immense, and "an attempt to naively and uncritically apply stoicism would be absurd and counterproductive". On the other hand, Hernández does consider "what is universal in Stoic wisdom" to be valid. It seems to him to be a philosophy "useful in times of crisis, because it is an ethic of duty, serenity and responsibility, which invites us to take care of ourselves and others, which has a social aspect because it invites us to collaborate, to act in an empathetic, understanding and tolerant way".

The virtuous life

The philosopher, essayist and teacher Eduardo Infante, author of essays on Hellenistic philosophy such as No me tapes el sol. Como ser un cínico de los buenos (Ariel), considers that the Stoics "should not be confused with the clichéd image that early Christianity spread of them". They were by no means "masochists who pursued redemption through pain". On the contrary, "they strove to avoid it by rationalising it, relativising it and distancing themselves from it". They practised self-analysis as a tool to become "excellent people". That is to say, "balanced, sensible, just", capable of distancing themselves "from anguish, restlessness and the compulsive search for immediate satisfaction of desire, which is the true source of unhappiness and suffering".

Stoicism, recalls Hernández de la Fuente, was once "an intellectual revolution" that taught the inhabitants of a troubled world "how to live better, more virtuously and rationally". It coexisted with Greco-Roman polytheism, mythical cults and Christianity. It was part of the dominant ideology and had a profound impact on everyday life. But it was never an exclusive cult or a dogmatic religion. No one was required to `convert` to Stoicism, but it was often useful to know and practise it.

Hernández declares himself a fervent believer in "philosophy as salvation", and an occasional supporter of the everyday "vulgar Stoicism", which does not "preach radical indifference to pain, one`s own and that of others", but teaches how to deal with it within the framework of an ethic "of good living, of a life that is both active and contemplative, in accordance with the logic of nature". Two pieces of practical advice from Stoicism seem to him to be particularly valid: "Face reality as it is, shutting out bad judgements and false perceptions. And cultivate your mind with the same discipline with which an athlete cultivates his body". His main shortcoming? That it advocates a certain conformism, since it "starts from the need to accept reality as it is" and to find in that acceptance an intimate guide to conduct. "Stoicism", Hernández concludes, "is not a useful philosophy for those who want to change the world". Perhaps that is one of the less obvious (and more uncomfortable) reasons for its persistent popularity among elites, however disruptive they may be.