At a first glance, Stoicism and Nihilism have the same attitude towards managing emotions, advocating for detachment as the only way to find inner peace, especially in the face of negative events. This leads many people to mistakenly conflate the two philosophies.

But are Stoics really Nihilists? And what does emotional detachment truly mean in the context of each philosophy? Do they advocate for the same meaning of life - in case they believe such a meaning is even possible?

This post will attempt to shed some light on the similarities and differences between the two philosophies, providing some thought-provoking reflections on the types of emotional distancing each philosophy encourages. 

We will examine how a Stoic and a Nihilist would deal with an instance of real-life adversity and reflect on which approach to emotion management is likely to be the sanest and most effective. Let’s go!

Stoicism Teaches Emotional Resilience, Not Detachment.

Stoicism does not advocate for complete emotional detachment as is commonly misconstrued. Rather, it teaches emotional resilience. The distinction is essential; resilience refers to the capacity of bouncing back from negative emotional experiences and adapting to adversity, while detachment suggests a disconnection or distancing oneself from emotions altogether.

In Stoic thought, emotions are recognized as part and parcel of the human experience and thus aren't seen as something to be avoided. This stems from the Stoic belief that it is irrational to not live in accordance with (human) nature - more on that here.

From a Stoic perspective, while we should not be ignoring our emotions, we are well advised to not let them dictate our actions or cloud our judgment. Instead, we should strive to cultivate an attitude of equanimity towards life's ups and downs because both are inevitable. 

A practical way to do this is to focus on responding rationally and constructively to whatever obstacle we are facing by remembering that we can only affect things that are within our control.

Nihilism, On the Other Hand, Advocates for Emotional Indifference

Nihilism traditionally asserts that life lacks any objective meaning, purpose, or intrinsic value. This viewpoint extends to encompass emotions as well, and Nihilists perceive emotions as inconsequential in the grand scheme of things, mirroring their outlook on life itself. 

Some nihilists might even consider emotions as deceptive, obscuring the underlying emptiness of life. As such, the philosophy advocates for emotional indifference. 

If the term ‘indifference’ has made you think of the Stoic preferred and dispreferred indifferents, proceed with caution. The term ‘preferred indifferents’ is used by Stoics to denote things that do not fundamentally contribute to virtue, but are generally preferred to have. Examples include health, wealth, reputation, and other possessions. They do not advocate for wanting these things in general, but against pursuing them at the expense of moral character (i.e.: trying to get them at any cost). 

This is radically different from the Nihilistic stance, which completely disregards such things because they are devoid of meaning.

Stoicism vs Nihilism: Similarities & Differences

Having understood the Stoic and Nihilistic stance on emotions, let’s dig deeper into their commonalities and differences.

Similarities between Stoicism and Nihilism

Both Stoicism and Nihilism have the following views in common:

• they advocate for accepting the world as it is instead of deluding ourselves with what it isn’t,
• they reject dogmatic beliefs or blind faith and advocate for rationality instead,
• they are skeptical towards initial impressions of events and ask us to examine them critically and rationally,
• they show disregard to societal pressures, but for different reasons: Stoics because they believe that virtue is the only good, while status wealth and other externals are irrelevant; Nihilists because they see them as devoid of meaning,
• they advocate for not letting ourselves be controlled by our emotions - but for vastly different reasons (as explained above).

Yet, despite these similarities, the two philosophies are vastly different in their outlook on life.

Differences between Stoicism and Nihilism

Here are five key differences between the two philosophies:

• Stoicism emphasizes the importance of virtue and human excellence, while Nihilism rejects moral values,
• Stoicism posits that the universe is inherently rational (and thus purposeful), while Nihilism rejects any concepts of objective meaning or purpose,
• Stoicism teaches that suffering can be endured and is thus its absence is not a prerequisite for inner peace, while Nihilism views suffering as further evidence of life's inherent meaninglessness,
• Stoics see emotions as a natural feature of human beings which needs to be understood and managed wisely, while Nihilists dismiss them as inconsequential and deceptive, since they abscond life’s lack of meaning,
• Stoics view death as a natural part of life that should not be feared, while Nihilism (especially in its existential form) argues that it is the ultimate proof of life’s meaninglessness. 

Are Stoics Nihilists?

The Stoic and Nihilistic perspectives on life, as well as their attitude towards it are fundamentally different. This stark divergence in their foundational beliefs is the reason why Stoics are NOT Nihilists.

Aside from their treatment of emotions - which Stoics view as a natural aspect of life that isn’t a hindrance and Nihilists strive to ignore completely - the two schools of thought differ fundamentally when it comes to their treatment of existential meaning. Here’s why. 

Stoics believe in the existence of universal reason which they call the 'Logos' that governs the world, and they see life as having a purpose (a meaning) which is closely aligned with it. Furthermore, they posit that the only way to serve this purpose is to achieve virtue (moral excellence) through the pursuit of wisdom, justice, courage, and temperance.

Nihilism takes the opposite stance and rejects the existence of inherent or objective meaning, values, or purpose in life. This leads some Nihilists to argue that since there is no objective structure or purpose to our existence, there can also be no absolute moral or ethical truths, and no ultimate consequences for our actions. (A very dangerous thought, if you ask me!)

To put it simply, while Stoicism affirms the potential for a meaningful life as long as it is guided by virtue and wisdom, Nihilism questions the very possibility of such meaning regardless of any human efforts expanded in its pursuit. 

To make this point a little clearer and better understand why Stoics are not Nihilists, let’s examine a real-life scenario and think through how a Stoic vs a Nihilist would approach the situation they are faced with.

What does it mean to be Stoic vs Nihilistic?

Imagine that a Stoic and a Nihilist have both lost a loved one. Let’s see how they are likely to react when faced with this tragic life event. 

For the Stoic, the loss would undoubtedly bring sorrow, but it would also provide an opportunity to respond with wisdom and resilience. They might say, "What we can control is not the fact of death itself, but our judgments and responses to it." They would likely acknowledge their grief, but aim not to be overwhelmed by it, finding solace in memories and gratitude for the time they got to spend with their loved one. 

They might also find comfort by reminding themselves that their loved one is no longer susceptible to the sufferings of the human condition. 

Such a stance would allow the Stoic to maintain equanimity despite the tragedy and to prevent grief from hindering their ability to live virtuously.

A Nihilist, on the other hand, might approach the loss quite differently. From a nihilistic perspective, the pain and grief associated with the loss might be seen as further proof of life's inherent emptiness. They might also reject societal or traditional expectations around mourning, seeing them as arbitrary constructs without meaning. This doesn't necessarily mean that a nihilist wouldn't experience or express sorrow or miss their loved one, just that they would perceive this as further reason for existential despair, which would make it even more difficult for them to attain inner peace.

Another evocative - if rather extreme - example of a situation where one could have easily fallen prey to Nihilism, but chose to remain Stoic instead, is the experience of Viktor Frankl, the Austrian psychiatrist who was a prisoner in a concentration camp during World War II. 

In his book, "Man's Search for Meaning," Frankl uses his own lived experience to explain that even in the most inhumane and horrific circumstances, individuals can find meaning in life. He postulates that this search for meaning is the primary motivation for living and that it is up to us to find it under any and all circumstances, even the most miserable ones. 

It follows that the meaning of life is not a one-size-fits-all answer, but something to be discovered by each individual through the arc of their existence. It can be found through work (by doing something significant), through love (through caring for another person), through practicing courage during difficult times, or through any other (moral) human pursuit. 

Choosing the Sanest Type of Emotional Distancing is NOT a Matter of Preference

It should be obvious by now - Stoicism is an empowering philosophy that promotes proactive engagement with life, while Nihilism is defeatist. The appeal of the latter is obvious: believing that life is ultimately devoid of meaning might offer a certain form of solace, but it risks crossing into apathy, despair and even moral fluidity. 

To put it in no uncertain terms - Nihilism is a cowardly stance towards life. It can lead to disillusionment, inaction, and a disregard for one's own well-being and that of others. If everything is pointless, why strive for anything? Why care for oneself or others? 

The sense of hopelessness that Nihilists experience can potentially contribute to self-destructive behaviors or a complete lack of empathy for fellow human beings. Imagine this at scale: a world full of Nihilists. Is that the world you want to live in?

Certainly not.

So in the question of Stoicism vs Nihilism I encourage you to side with the brave; to remind yourself that upholding your moral character is always entirely up to you and that it is meaningful to immerse yourself in life and live it to the fullest. Setbacks and challenges do nothing to diminish the potential for a good life because they can be conquered with the right attitude and the right philosophical tools! 😉 

If you enjoyed this post about Stoicism vs Nihilism, you may want to see how Stoicism compares to other philosophies. Give this post about Stoicism vs Confucianism a try.

Or perhaps you want to see how Stoicism compares to Existentialism, a close cousin of Nihilism?