WHY STOICS DON'T SURPRESS THEIR FEELINGS

Aaaah, stoicism. What a wonderfully misunderstood philosophy. You'll frequently hear stoicism used synonymously with "unfeeling" and "detached."

When I first ran into stoic quotes online, what stood out were phrases like:

“Endure and renounce.”
“Suppress emotion.”

And I thought: isn’t that… cold? Isn’t that suppressing what makes us human?

But over time, reading Marcus Aurelius, Seneca, Epictetus, and contrasting with Aristotle (very pro emotional involvement in action), I’ve started to see something deeper than the surface-level, seemingly cold nature of stoicism. Something more human. Stoicism has helped me immensely in maintaining a positive and productive outlook on all events in my life. I hope to shed light on it so it could do the same for you.

What Stoicism Really Means for Emotions

1. Emotion ≠ irrational explosion
Stoics don’t tell you to stop feeling. They tell you how to relate to your feelings.

Marcus Aurelius wrote:

“You have power over your mind — not outside events. Realize this, and you will find strength.” (Meditations 12.36)

The point isn’t to erase emotion but to not let it sweep you away.

2. Choice in response
Aristotle framed virtue as a mean between extremes:

“Anyone can become angry — that is easy. But to be angry with the right person, to the right degree, at the right time, for the right purpose, and in the right way — that is not easy.” (Nicomachean Ethics II.9)

This resonates with the Stoic view. Epictetus said:

“It’s not what happens to you, but how you react to it that matters.” (Enchiridion 5)

To be stoic is not to have no fear, but to act rightly in spite of it.

3. Understanding causes of emotion
Seneca reminds us:

“We suffer more often in imagination than in reality.” (Letters on Ethics 13.4)

Aristotle, for his part, emphasizes practical wisdom (phronesis) — the ability to discern the right reason for emotions and actions. Emotions aren’t enemies; they’re raw material for virtue, once guided by reason.

Why Stoicism Gets Misread as “Emotionless”

- Because the Stoic ideal is ataraxia (tranquility). From the outside, it can look like indifference.

- Because popular culture reduces stoicism to “grit” or “tough it out.”

- Because it’s easier to caricature the Stoic sage as stone-faced than to see the nuanced practice of cultivating calm presence.

Marcus again reminds us:

“When jarred, unavoidably, by circumstance, revert at once to yourself, and don’t lose the rhythm more than you must. You will have a better grasp of harmony if you return to it continuously.” (Meditations 6.11)

That’s not emotional suppression. That’s recovery. To put it another way, picture falling and scraping your knee (or maybe like tearing your bicep). The pain is real. You don’t deny it. You don’t pretend you didn’t fall (or tear your bicep).

But you also don’t make it worse by picking at the wound, replaying the moment in your head a thousand times, or refusing to get back up. You acknowledge it (with a good f*ck that hurt), clean it, bandage it, and give it the space it needs to heal.

That’s what Stoicism points to with emotions: don’t ignore them, don’t catastrophize them. Treat them with care, give them their moment, and then move forward with wisdom.

What Aristotle Adds (and Where They Meet)

Aristotle’s ethics are about flourishing — eudaimonia — living fully and well. Virtues like courage, temperance, and generosity require emotion, but in balance.

Stoics focus on what you can control and cultivating equanimity. Aristotle focuses on engaging with the world in ways that bring about human flourishing.

In both, reason is key: emotions are not to be erased, but understood, shaped, and lived with wisely.

So What Does “Emotionally Balanced” Look Like?

Some shifts I’ve tried to practice:

- When I feel anger, I pause, ask: What belief is driving this?

- I try to name the emotion: frustration, disappointment, fear. Naming diffuses its grip.

- I remind myself: emotions are signals, not commands.

- I aim for actions consistent with values, not just moods.

To take it all home

Stoicism isn’t about being unfeeling. It’s about choosing how to feel, and how to act, in light of what you control and what you don’t.

Aristotle and the Stoics don’t cancel each other out. They complement each other: Aristotle reminds us that emotions belong in a flourishing life, while the Stoics remind us not to be ruled by them.

Both paths point to the same horizon: a life lived with intention, steadiness, and meaning.

With all the emotion,

~ Bonde