Trust @javerend to add some solid knowledge to any discussion of philosophy! I love it.
Stoicism/philosophy reply
The journal I have is basically a journalized version of The Daily Stoic by Ryan Holiday and Stephen Hanselman (the journal is also from them, so not adapted by someone else), I would lean pop culture, but I think the quotes from Marcus Aurelius, Seneca, et al. are well translated. Well… I don’t know know, but my impression is that it was important to them to have faithful translations (I believe Stephen Hanselman is the translator or the one managing that aspect the most) than to be pop culture-esque.
Yes yes yes. Now, to be fair, I don’t know neuroscience to any degree, so it might not be 100% true for everyone, or at least not to the same degree. But an average person is able to control what they do when they are angry, or sad, or upset, or happy, or enthusiastic.
(I’m gonna add a disclaimer here, mostly for myself, but crying is not an action that can be controlled. Can it sometimes be suppressed or pushed off? Yes. Can it always? No. And asking someone to stop crying or requiring them to not cry when upset/sad/happy/at-any-point-that-they-cry is controlling AF and you need to get over yourself. Crying is also not irrational nor does it mean that the crying person’s mind is suddenly lost. Severe emotions (of any kind) can temporarily overwhelm someone, but just because someone is crying, doesn’t mean they are. Public service announcement over.)
And anyone who says they can’t (acknowledging possible medical exceptions), are in denial or ignorant (after all if your parents/other people as you grow up don’t teach you emotional intelligence, school doesn’t either, so you might not actually know it is possible) or willfully ignoring the possibility. So instead, it is left to the people being pushed by someone else to choose how they react to that, or spin like a cone on top of a hill too.
I was with you for everything you wrote until this bit—and then I realized I seem to have a slightly different idea of what passion is.
Because I see passion as equal parts impressions and assent (to use the words introduced by someone clearly knowing far more on the subject than me! ). So to me, it doesn’t make sense to say that passion is the push, and you can assent or not. Without the assent, there is no passion.
We don’t always act on the enthusiasm/inspiration/sudden thought of a passion, but it doesn’t make it any less of a passion for us. Sometimes we might even be in phases of life where we have to set a passion aside for a while. Still doesn’t make it any less of a passion.
And if I felt driven by a passion to such a degree that I felt I couldn’t say no, I wouldn’t call it a passion anymore. It would be an obsession and/or addiction, and those are another thing entirely.
Maybe, I just have my own idea of what passion is. Or at least my own slant that doesn’t entirely fit in. It certainly doesn’t fit into the pure stoic philosophy, but then I didn’t pick up this journal thinking I’d become a stoic. I do like a lot about what I know about stoicism (even if my knowledge so far is shallow). Recognizing that my reactions to things are in my control (except you know the bodily ones (chemical/hormonal/similar) ). That I can change them if I want to. That is valuable stuff.
Also, I really love stillness and serenity, and even if my version is generally a pretty cheerful version of it, there is still a quality of quiet or solidity or stillness to it that I feel like the stoics capture pretty well. So I do find it useful to read and learn more about stoicism, but I’ll probably never call myself a stoic.