Stoicism in a modern world

About the why

Let’s start upfront: talking about an ancient philosophy kinda feels out of place in a modern world. I mean, who cares about virtues, about the idea of living according to nature and the “good” in people? Why should anybody live by thousand-year-old knowledge, written by people in a completely different world? Doesn’t it feel like a romanticized thing to do? At the end of the day it won’t change how the world is right now, does it?

To make things straight from the beginning: yes, of course there isn’t one single way of living — that’s unrealistic and utopic. Life is just too complex, there’s too much going on to find a one-size-fits-all answer for everything. Also no, you shouldn’t live strictly by the standards of ancient philosophers, even if they got some things right (and other things kinda wrong, mostly because they were victims of their time). And even though I admire most ideas and concepts of Stoicism, I wouldn’t call myself a Stoic. A better description would be that I live by some Stoic values. It’s also questionable whether someone like Marcus Aurelius or Seneca could even exist in today’s world. But that’s a different topic and irrelevant for now.

What matters is that the core ideas of the Stoic worldview can still help us live better lives — almost like an underlying operating system. Today’s world is dominated by unreflected opinions and uncontrolled emotions, a flow most of us embrace rather than regulate. Don’t get me wrong: it’s not about not feeling emotions or not having opinions, but we should ask inwardly instead of giving in completely. And that’s where Stoicism offers great advice and ideas that resonate with me more and more, day after day.

That’s why I think Stoicism, or at least what it represents, still has a place in today’s world. Maybe not as the old philosophy most people only heard of in history class or through AI-generated fake quotes — but as something renewed, adjusted, reformed for a modern context.

What doesnt work

Talking about gods and the idea that they somehow watch our steps and judge us isn’t really at the center of Stoic philosophy, but it still comes up from time to time. And as I said before, you can’t really blame them — they were victims of their time. But let’s be clear: believing in gods nowadays is becoming rarer and rarer. Believing in beings like Zeus or Saturn (Cronos in Greece) is nearly nonexistent in today’s religions. Historically, religion has always been some kind of explanation tool for answering the unknowns of the world. Today, most of those unanswered questions are gone. One could say that old philosophy and religion have been replaced by psychology and science — at least in the classical sense.

Also, the physical explanations for why things are the way they are are completely outdated compared to today’s knowledge — for example, believing in the pneuma, some godly fire or spark that pierces everything and gives it order was quite normal. Pretty ancient huh?

On top of that, the ancient Stoics often referred to living in harmony with nature — which, in today’s language, sounds like hippie talk. But to them, living in nature meant something like living in harmony with the structure of reality itself. Just to be clear: it’s not about plants and peace. It’s about reality, and the state of things as they truly are. A rose plant has thorns, a river flows down the hill, and the sun is in the middle of our solar system — it’s just how the universe is. Opinions are added by us.

What does work

In its core, Stoicism is a rational philosophy through and through. Its concepts about living with reality, understanding what’s in one’s control and what isn’t, and the importance of self-reflection are just a few examples of why it’s still filled with relevance today. The idea that things are just that — things — and that their value or meaning is later formed by yourself is something that is now used in psychology (Cognitive Appraisal Theory), but was first clearly and systematically articulated by the Stoics.

Also, based on stoic ideas, nothing really belongs to you because you lack control over it. Your smartphone, your bed, your car, and even your body aren’t fully in your control. You can lose them, they can be stolen, and some unforeseen event can destroy your health. It’s all outside your control, and believing otherwise makes you vulnerable. It puts you in chains, bound to yourself in a strange way.

The only sphere you truly command is your judgments, your intentions, and the direction of your will. That may sound simple, but there’s something quietly extraordinary about it: while everything external can slip from your hands at any moment, this inner space remains yours to shape. That’s what the ancient Stoics trained every single day. And it’s something you, me, and anyone else can draw on constantly. The way you interpret events, the meaning you give them, the choice of how to respond — all of that starts with you. And because it’s the one realm you genuinely control, why not use it to your advantage?

There are countless moments in our lives where we get angry at someone, or somebody does this or that, and we lose ourselves for a second. It’s important to understand that the world isn’t made up only of people who are “good”.. whatever that even means. There have to be bad people too, and that’s okay, just like bitter berries or apples with worms in them. It’s simply part of nature, or, put differently, part of reality itself.

So don’t be stupid about it: you don’t get angry at a little rock stuck in your shoe either.

Also, the practice of Diairesis — the disassembling of a idea or thing into its parts — is a great way to understand one’s own opinions about something. It’s a key skill in Stoicism for uncovering the underlying concepts of a thing by breaking it down. It helps with reflection and with choosing actions more wisely. Same goes for Askesis, which literally means training or exercise; learning from books is one thing, but actually living it makes the real difference.

Whats next

We shouldn’t try to modernize Stoicism itself. It stands as it is, shaped by its time and carrying the flaws that naturally come with its age. What we can do is take what still holds true and integrate it into our own way of living. Not as a revised form of Stoicism, but as a path that moves in a similar direction, using some of the same tools and ideas the Stoics relied on.

Maybe that already makes it another phase of Stoicism, or maybe the name simply isn’t important. Names fade. Ideas remain.

By taking inspiration from Stoic thought and applying it to my own life, I’m trying to understand what actually works and what doesn’t. The Stoics repeated this often: knowledge from books is not enough. You have to step into the world, face real situations, and test the principles in practice. Only then do you learn whether you truly understand them and whether you can live by them.

Where this journey will take me, I don’t know yet. But I’m willing to walk it, and if you’re curious, you’re welcome to join me on this path toward a steadier and better life.

Guidelines for a modern take on stoicism

1. First and foremost it needs to be understandable, not only for those who seek wisdom and are willing to dive deep into ancient texts. It needs to be a people’s philosophy, something short and easy to grasp. Today’s attention span is crippled by social media streams, and a modern take on Stoicism could be the answer or the life-changing perspective some folks need to break free from their habits.
2. Its core wisdom should also be available for free, a philosophy from the people for the people. There’s no need to gatekeep wisdom behind paywalls, ads, or any other focus-stealing distractions.
3. Its language shouldn’t become sterile. Yes, the concepts are rational and can appear cold from time to time, but that’s only because you, the reader, interpret them that way. The ancient Stoics used a lot of imagery, even poetic elements here and there, which in turn made their rational ideas feel more alive. It gave those concepts a coat of paint and made them easier to take in. Thats something that needs to persist, cold rational papers are for academics and doctors.
4. Stoicism often repeats its ideas again and again, sometimes even by the same author. It references its sources whenever possible, and of course you should read the original Stoic texts, but it shouldn’t be a requirement. That’s why I think name-dropping ancient authors on every second page might be the wrong thing to do. On the one hand, it suggests we’re still relying on thousand-year-old wisdom and simply recycling it into the modern world; on the other hand, it creates an elitist, almost scholarly tone that puts those figures on a pedestal and leaves our own words in their shadow. It builds a persona, but ironically, Stoicism is supposed to be more about the ideas than the people behind them. Do you really think Epictetus would enjoy getting the spotlight over and over again while his concepts fade into the background? A new form of Stoicism should respect its sources, yes, but it shouldn’t live in their shadow. At the same time, completely ignoring those roots would weaken the entire foundation. A modern Stoicism should stand on its own feet, but still keep one hand on the old stones it was built from — not to worship them, but to stay grounded while evolving beyond them.
5. Ironicly, and contradicting the fourth point, a new form of Stoicism should in some areas actually return to older ideas. Modern interpretations often embrace the individual, the self – but the original Stoics weren’t self-improvement gurus. They didn’t see their teaching only through the lens of the ego. As Marcus wrote again and again in his Meditations, you carry a responsibility toward the community. Humans are, at their core, social creatures, and today’s modern Stoicism tends to focus heavily on personal growth while neglecting the social dimension. A new take should include how to deal with social and cultural crises, how to live responsibly. Of course, self-improvement will always be a cornerstone of the Stoic framework, but it shouldn’t be its center point. A modern take should revive the communal character of Stoicism.
6. A modern take needs to keep its practical form, but it should also offer an optional theoretical layer. Practicing Stoicism in daily life is the core of the philosophy, but its deeper roots still matter. Ancient Stoicism had a whole framework of natural philosophy behind it → something we don’t need to copy anymore. The modern version isn’t grounded in that old “physics,” but in a clearer understanding of why the practical parts work the way they do.
7. A modern take needs to be error-friendly. Stoicism isn’t a perfection game, and it never was. You will fail, you will slip, you will forget every principle you ever read. The point is not to become emotionless or unshakeable like some statue; the point is to return to the principles again and again until they slowly reshape how you see the world. A modern Stoicism shouldn’t pretend that self-discipline is easy. It should admit openly that we are fighting sleep deprivation, digital addictions, stress, childhood baggage, and all the random nonsense life throws at us. Falling off doesn’t break the practice — it is the practice.
8. A lot of people mistake Stoicism for “don’t feel anything.” That’s not Stoic, that’s malfunction. The Stoics never wanted dead, silent hearts but instead they wanted clear ones. A modern version should make this painfully obvious. Emotional intelligence and Stoic clarity aren’t opposites. They complete each other. The point isn’t to shut emotions down but to avoid being dragged by them like a dog on a leash. Feel fully, but don’t get swallowed.
9. A modern Stoicism needs to address digital overstimulation as one of the main obstacles to clarity. The old Stoics didn’t have to deal with social networks, never-ending content streams, or the absolute luxury of sitting around watching YouTube all day — feeling productive while producing nothing at the same time.
10. The ancient Stoics didn’t talk about the state the way we do today. Their idea of living “in the polis” wasn’t about institutions, borders, or flags — it was about people sharing a world together. They saw humans as parts of a larger order, connected through reason, bound to each other whether we like it or not. That’s why Marcus keeps coming back to the bee and the hive: you can’t thrive if the place you live in is falling apart. A modern Stoicism should take that seriously again. Not as politics, not as ideology, but as a simple fact of reality: we’re sharing one world, one atmosphere, one future. If Stoicism says anything here, it’s that responsibility doesn’t stop at your doorstep. Your actions ripple outward. What harms the world around you eventually circles back to you. And what strengthens it makes your own life steadier, too.

Closing words

Let’s end with something simple. Stoicism, and whatever a modern version of it might become, won’t fix the world. It won’t work for everyone. And yes, any attempt to update it risks losing something essential along the way. But that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try. We live in a strange moment in history: religion no longer shapes our lives the way it once did, and science, for all its strength, doesn’t offer the kind of meaning people used to find in faith. We are somewhere in between now — too informed for old gods, too restless to rely only on data.

A renewed Stoicism could fill part of that gap. Not as dogma, not as a spiritual replacement, but as a clear way of seeing the world. Something grounded in ancient insight, refined by modern science, and shaped into a framework that actually helps us stay steady. A way to meet reality as it is, without illusions and without despair. If that is all it achieves, it is already more than enough.