Stoicism vs Compassion, the right mindset to have?

[Travel memoir21]

When's the proper time to be Stoic and when's the proper time to be compassionate in your opinion? I think the two have its advantages depending on the situation or scenario. I can picture myself being compassionate while listening to children in need, during charity, but lean on being a hardcore stoic during warfare or a tense situation. What's your philosophy on this?

 

[Plinco]

When's the proper time to be Stoic and when's the proper time to be compassionate in your opinion? I think the two have its advantages depending on the situation or scenario. I can picture myself being compassionate while listening to children in need, during charity, but lean on being a hardcore stoic during warfare or a tense situation. What's your philosophy on this?

This is a question about what ethical principle one should live by. The answer to that is to act in your rational (long term) self interest.

To live a better life, means striving to integrate every aspect of yourself coherently. None of your goals or desires should conflict, if something does conflict, then that should signal to you that there's something that needs to be thought out better.

 

[taiyuu_otoko]

When's the proper time to be Stoic and when's the proper time to be compassionate in your opinion?

Compassion is almost always weakness in disguise.

Don't be a pvssy.

 

[Gamisch]

Compassion is almost always weakness in disguise.

Don't be a pvssy.

For real?

I won't go along with this mindset, im sorry..if anything, compassion is a sign of strength. It's takes a strong person to be able to relate to other people or even animals or nature.


The most dangerous man is the righteous one.

 

[plumber]

Compassion is almost always weakness in disguise.

Don't be a pvssy.

tell more. i get it, but tell why you think that.

 

[plumber]

When's the proper time to be Stoic and when's the proper time to be compassionate in your opinion? I think the two have its advantages depending on the situation or scenario. I can picture myself being compassionate while listening to children in need, during charity, but lean on being a hardcore stoic during warfare or a tense situation. What's your philosophy on this?

be kind. do not be reactive, always choose.

 

[FlexpertHamilton]

I don't think Stoicism is incompatible with compassion in any sense, they're in fact completely seperate and indifferent to each other...

 

[taiyuu_otoko]

tell more. i get it, but tell why you think that.

I'm too lazy to write it out so I copied this from AI:


Nietzsche famously viewed compassion (or pity) as a life-denying, corrosive force. Rather than a virtue, he argued it was a subtle form of dishonesty that multiplies suffering, degrades the recipient, and functions as a psychological weapon used by the weak to diminish the strong. [1, 2]

Why Nietzsche Considered Compassion "False"

• The Will to Power Masked as Virtue: Nietzsche argued that the "giver" often uses compassion to establish superiority. By pitying someone, you elevate yourself and implicitly position the recipient as an inferior or a failure. [1, 2, 3]
• Contagion and Weakness: He believed that taking on another person's suffering drains your own emotional and physical energy. By feeling pity, the strong are weakened, and suffering is merely multiplied rather than solved. [1, 2, 3]
• Perpetuating Victimhood: Nietzsche argued that pity keeps the sufferer in a state of suffering. It encourages individuals to identify as victims and discourages the vital necessity of struggle, self-overcoming, and moving forward. [1, 2]
• Critique of Christianity: He viewed Christian compassion as a societal sickness that glorifies weakness, poverty, and suffering, ultimately working against the flourishing of human potential. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

 

[Gamisch]

I'm too lazy to write it out so I copied this from AI:


Nietzsche famously viewed compassion (or pity) as a life-denying, corrosive force. Rather than a virtue, he argued it was a subtle form of dishonesty that multiplies suffering, degrades the recipient, and functions as a psychological weapon used by the weak to diminish the strong. [1, 2]

Why Nietzsche Considered Compassion "False"

• The Will to Power Masked as Virtue: Nietzsche argued that the "giver" often uses compassion to establish superiority. By pitying someone, you elevate yourself and implicitly position the recipient as an inferior or a failure. [1, 2, 3]
• Contagion and Weakness: He believed that taking on another person's suffering drains your own emotional and physical energy. By feeling pity, the strong are weakened, and suffering is merely multiplied rather than solved. [1, 2, 3]
• Perpetuating Victimhood: Nietzsche argued that pity keeps the sufferer in a state of suffering. It encourages individuals to identify as victims and discourages the vital necessity of struggle, self-overcoming, and moving forward. [1, 2]
• Critique of Christianity: He viewed Christian compassion as a societal sickness that glorifies weakness, poverty, and suffering, ultimately working against the flourishing of human potential. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

Good thing Nietzche isn't the end all be all.

You can qoute Jesus Christ from Nazareth himself, I'll still tell you to filter information and think for yourself. And that goes for anything; religion Muslim or Christian, politics, culture and upbringing, street codes or whatever. Be a big boy and make your OWN decisions.


If you wanna live by this, cool. Do you. I have compassion for my people, and that means I will protect and defend them if needed.

Arguably the lack of compassion means you're broken beyond repair, entering the psychopath category.

 

[plumber]

I'm too lazy to write it out so I copied this from AI:


Nietzsche famously viewed compassion (or pity) as a life-denying, corrosive force. Rather than a virtue, he argued it was a subtle form of dishonesty that multiplies suffering, degrades the recipient, and functions as a psychological weapon used by the weak to diminish the strong. [1, 2]

Why Nietzsche Considered Compassion "False"

• The Will to Power Masked as Virtue: Nietzsche argued that the "giver" often uses compassion to establish superiority. By pitying someone, you elevate yourself and implicitly position the recipient as an inferior or a failure. [1, 2, 3]
• Contagion and Weakness: He believed that taking on another person's suffering drains your own emotional and physical energy. By feeling pity, the strong are weakened, and suffering is merely multiplied rather than solved. [1, 2, 3]
• Perpetuating Victimhood: Nietzsche argued that pity keeps the sufferer in a state of suffering. It encourages individuals to identify as victims and discourages the vital necessity of struggle, self-overcoming, and moving forward. [1, 2]
• Critique of Christianity: He viewed Christian compassion as a societal sickness that glorifies weakness, poverty, and suffering, ultimately working against the flourishing of human potential. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

assume your endorsing that position. this fits will with many topics discussed in this space. its a winner take all or all that they can idea. likely it depends on ones position within the realm to fuel an opinion. so are compassion and pity the same ? for me, i have always had a different feel of the two words. pity seems derogatory while compassion an act of power.

its a real debate about what path leads to better paths. and exactly what does better mean.