Stoicism vs Realism: what can these two philosophies teach us about how to approach life in a way that doesn’t deny reality, but rather embraces it head on? Do they differ in their approach to life, or are Stoics realists by default because they accept their destiny wholeheartedly?

Let’s answer these questions by looking at what each philosophy proposes on its own, then by examining what they have in common and what sets them apart. By the end of this post, you’ll have a better idea of which philosophy fits your own thinking most, so stay tuned for a shot of wisdom!

Stoicism: a Philosophy in Search of Tranquility

Stoicism is a practical philosophy that gained traction in ancient Greece and later reached its epitome in ancient Rome, that proposes a mindset that allows their students to navigate the uncertainties of life with resilience and equanimity.

You may have heard of the best-known tenet of Stoicism already, but you may not know what it’s “officially” called: the Dichotomy of Control. This is the Stoic belief that states we should separate what is within our control and what is not and channel our energy and attention into the former. (The reward is that we will achieve tranquility.)

This means that we can reduce our anxiety by striving to master our thoughts, emotions, and actions, while allowing external events and circumstances to unfold as they may without clinging to any particular outcome. 

A practicing Stoic embarks on a lifelong journey of self-discipline and reflection aimed at living in accordance with the 4 virtues and considers reason their most trusted companion for understanding Nature (the Universe). They might also practice exercises such as Memento Mori, the View from Above or Premeditatio Malorum in order to strengthen themselves against adversity and develop a sense of gratitude for what they have in the present moment. 

Realism: The Philosophy of Authenticity

First things first: the term ‘Realism’ in this blog post, refers to philosophical Realism and should not be confused with Realism as a literary movement, which is simply a narrative method that aims to depict life without idealization. As a philosophy, realism posits that reality is objective (i.e.: it exists independently of our thoughts and perceptions of it) and that we can come to know and understand it through reason and empirical observations.

A realist rejects subjective interpretations and firmly believes that their understanding of the world should be based on objective facts that have been vetted by logic and causality. 

They believe that objective truth can be discovered either by looking at the common denominator of the experience of all individuals, contemplating abstract entities (such as numbers and forms) or can be deduced entirely from their effects (e.g.: gravity and other physical phenomena).

Stoicism vs Realism: Ties that Bind

As you may already suspect, Stoicism and Realism both value reason, which they employ in perceiving the world as it truly is. They both recognize that absolute knowledge is unattainable for a human, humbly accepting that there are aspects of existence beyond our comprehension. Because of this, both philosophies encourage us to accept the natural order of things and to find harmony within the world as it unfolds. Let’s look at these aspects more closely.

Focus on objective reality

Realism asserts that reality exists independently of our perceptions of it. This means that the only way to find truth is to seek knowledge and understanding through empirical evidence and rational inquiry. 

This echoes the Stoic belief that we should rid ourselves of biases and illusions, so that we can more easily and quickly accept the world as it is. 

Trust in Rationality and Logic

Both schools of thought advocate for the effectiveness of rationality in helping us pursue our goal of understanding the Universe. They see exercising reason as the wisest and only reliable way to approach life’s challenges and embrace the reality of the present moment. Without it, we would be unable to make informed decisions based on the objective truth of the world around us, and thus be prone to excessive suffering.

Acceptance of the natural order of things

Because Stoics and Realists consciously shed all of their illusions, they gravitate towards accepting the natural order of things. They accept reality without judgment - you’ll never hear either of them say things like “the world is unfair” - because they know that the true state of affairs cannot be changed and it is pointless to fight against it.

Stoicism vs. Realism: Divergent Trails

Stoicism and Realism differ in significant ways. Specifically, they define the scope of human focus differently, have a different view of what constitutes reality and identify different goals as the most worthwhile human endeavor. Let’s see what that means exactly.

Scope of Human Focus

Remember the Dichotomy of Control I mentioned previously? It represents the fundamental guidance on what Stoicism advises us to focus on: our minds and actions. Trying to control everything else is a waste of time, which could be spent on moral pursuits instead. Because of this, Stoics have an inward focus.

This is different for Realists, who opt for an outward focus. They argue that our attention is best spent on uncovering the objective truth and facts of the world, so that we can act in accordance with them. 

This is not to say that Stoicism denies objective reality - that couldn’t be farther from the truth - but simply that they place most of their efforts in personal development, rather than endless knowledge acquisition.

Perception of reality

Closely related to the previous divergence is the different stances the two schools of thought take on the perception of reality. A Realist considers that reality is singular (objective reality) and that any perceived deviation from it points to an error in judgment or a lack of knowledge. Ideally, if we were all good Realists, we would end up with the exact same mental depiction of reality.

Stoicism argues that our understanding of reality is inherently subjective (i.e.: shaped by our own perceptions and judgments) and that these can lead us astray unless we observe and correct them. Stoics believe that a human’s behavior is informed by their judgment of external reality, rather than objective reality, which they find problematic.

Purpose of Life

While realism is a multifaceted philosophy - not all realists will identify with the same ideas - it is safe to say that they would see the purpose of their life being either empirical exploration and/or truth-seeking. In other words, a realist seeks first and foremost to understand the world as it is.

This is in contrast to Stoicism, which sees the cultivation of moral excellence (virtue) as the chief pursuit in life. The Stoic imperative is moral, rather than epistemological (= pertaining to knowledge).

Conclusion

I hope you’ve enjoyed today’s philosophical exploration and that it clarified your thoughts on whether you are more of a Stoic or a Realist (or perhaps a bit of both).

While Realism is interesting, especially for the mathematically and scientifically inclined, I would argue that Stoicism offers a richer philosophical experience because it recognizes that the human condition is as unique as the individual.

It offers solace for those universal struggles we will all inevitably be faced with, while empowering us with the thought that we have agency and are singularly responsible for how we respond to external events.

Whichever school of thought you choose to align yourself with, I hope it brings you closer to the resilience and inner peace you are looking for. 

If you’ve enjoyed this post, you may want to delve into the differences between Stoicism and Skepticism next. Or perhaps Stoicism caught your attention and you want to know what the best books on Stoicism for beginners are.