Talk:Stoicism

Stoicism has been listed as one of the Philosophy and religion good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
January 31, 2011	Good article nominee	Listed

Greece Mid‑importance

	Greece portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greece on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GreeceWikipedia:WikiProject GreeceTemplate:WikiProject GreeceGreek articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Classical Greece and Rome High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Philosophy: Logic / Ethics / Ancient High‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

High

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Logic
	Ethics
	Ancient philosophy

Politics Mid‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Religion Top‑importance

	Religion portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Guild of Copy Editors

This article was copy edited by Twofingered Typist, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on March 20, 2018.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles

Archives

1, 2

This page has archives. Sections older than 365 days may be automatically archived by when more than 5 sections are present.

The following Wikipedia contributor may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.

HypnoSynthesis (talk · contribs)

Stoicism is NOT shoa[edit]

Shoa isn't the same as Stoicism, especially, do not write this in the German Wiki article as well, it's just NOT the same! I do not hate holocaust victim jews! --2001:16B8:57D0:200:B00D:AFAB:A5C1:6C0B (talk) 05:03, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@2001:16B8:57D0:200:B00D:AFAB:A5C1:6C0B of course, it is not. Do people really pronounce stoa as shoa? Worldpermeating (talk) 05:17, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Removing uncited claims and original research[edit]

There's a whole lot in this article that isn't supported by any secondary sources. It seems as if some editors may have read the extant works on Stoicism and arrived at their own original conclusions. I'm going through the article and removing anything that is not supported by a secondary, scholarly source. There are no shortage of academic sources covering Stoicism, we should have an article that represents the academic consensus rather than risk introducing some new age interpretations or self-help literature.

This article has a long way to go to meet the good article criteria despite being marked as such - the Stoics made highly structured divisions of their philosophy into Logic, Physics, and Ethics with highly structured subdivisions of each, this is nowhere to be found on this article. There's also almost no history of the movement and how it developed, or discussion of any of the influences it exerted over medieval or modern philosophy. - car chasm (talk) 20:52, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate the transformation of this article by your hand. 182.239.146.18 (talk) 14:00, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unreliable Source[edit]

Hope nobody objects to me raising a question about this here, if so please direct me to the correct approach. Someone just contacted me pointing out that one of my own books is marked as an unreliable source in this Wikipedia entry. (Stoicism and the Art of Happiness, published by Hodder.) I just wondered what the rationale was for that decision. As far as I can see the book doesn't actually meet any of the criteria for a questionable source cited here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability#Questionable_sources It is not self-published but was published as part of a reputable series from a well-known publishing house. Thanks. - Donald Robertson HypnoSynthesis (talk) 18:34, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, you have come to the right place in the first instance. The book was tagged in January, for reasons not given. I have (a) removed the tag, and (b) linked the citation to the publisher's entry on Wikipedia - John Murray (publishing house). Please note that the article does not cite the Hodder printing, but the John Murray one. Hopefully this matter is now addressed and will not be repeated. (Personally, thanks for your time spent compiling the book.) 182.239.146.18 (talk) 13:46, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Christian Misrepresentation[edit]

The section referencing influence on Christianity claims both systems assert fundamental human depravity. That isn't true of Stoicism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:8C0:980:E520:949E:36AD:30D4:9503 (talk) 20:18, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Acceptance of Anaxagoras' claim[edit]

As a subtopic in the categories section, there is a claim that "stoics accept the anaxagoras notion that when an object becomes red, it is because an universal redness has entered the body". I would doubt that claim considering that stoics themselves deny the existence of most universals as bodies (as a warning, i am not a stoic expert, so maybe i'm wrong in this claim, but it seems contradictory). Also, the claim is unlinked, so I would appreciate if someone links it to the direct source (which I couldn't find too, since the main sources never say this, though I couldn't read all the sources so maybe the source is there somewhere. Any way, it would be nice to link it). 181.97.174.141 (talk) 16:12, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]