In the last time I am interested in the subject of Feeling and Emotions and the differences between the practical philosophies and the Epicurean approach.
What do you think of this article explaining and comparing the Cynics, Stoics and Epicurean attitude to that ?
It sounds that Epicureans don´t look Pain in the face, like a form of positiv thinking.
My points: First you should do something to change painfull situations (and question the underlying belief and the hedonic calculus). If that is not possible than cognitive methods could help, like memorizing pleasure or to change the attention.
The Stoics method sounds good in the first place to change the belief or value of external things / detachment.
But is devalueing really good ?
The information about value is necessary in life I think and in the end it is like with the Cynics, I feel no affection for example for friends, family, society or to my body (ills) or helpful things (necessary and natural externals) and so feel no pain when loosing it.
But that´s manipulating the signals from nature (and coginitive intuition). So the Stoic Justice is a contradiction or ? To love humanity, friends and so on but don´t value it and get detached.
And that not for pleasure, ataraxia or eudaimonia or a better society (because than virtue would be instrumental for them) but only to value virtue in itself
So they only value their habit and virtue and values ; in which they value only their virtue ?
So they value nothing ?
It´s like the buddhist saying: "What distinguishes a dead from an enlightened one ? The enlightened one is warm...."
(I was on a buddhist path, but it´s not my goal in life to become a warm corpse )