Embracing Vulnerability Isn't a Sign of Weakness
Article: The Emotional Stoicism of Marcus Aurelius and Michael Collins
In the annals of history, two figures stand out for their stoic resilience and emotional balance: the Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius and Ireland's great hero, Michael Collins. Contrary to popular belief, these stoic philosophers were not cold, emotionless beings, but rather, they demonstrated a remarkable capacity for human emotion.
Marcus Aurelius, often portrayed as a stoic statue, was in fact a man who felt the full gamut of human emotions. His occasional emotional displays serve as a reminder that he was human, not a machine or a statue. Yet, despite these moments of vulnerability, Marcus Aurelius never lost control of what was important. He was not weak because he felt overwhelmed; letting such feelings prevent future action is different.
The Stoics, including Marcus Aurelius, were human and experienced emotions. However, they did not advocate suppressing or denying emotions such as crying. Instead, they valued emotional control as mastery and reasoned response, not repression. Emotions like anger, fear, and sadness are seen as natural "guests," not rulers. Feeling sadness or even crying is not rejected, but collapsing under emotion or losing rational control is avoided.
Stoicism teaches creating a mental space, a pause, between experiencing an emotion and reacting to it, which allows for reasoned and controlled responses rather than impulsive reactions. The Stoic ideal is not emotional numbness but emotional clarity and strength — feeling emotions fully yet maintaining steady reason and composure, like a tree bending but not breaking in the storm.
Practically, they recommended techniques such as pausing before responding to emotional triggers to exercise mastery over feelings rather than immediate, uncontrolled reactions. The Stoics taught the distinction between feeling emotions and being controlled by them.
Michael Collins, like Marcus Aurelius, laughed and wept without self-consciousness, like a child. His biographer, Frank O'Connor, noted that Collins was not immune to tears. Yet, Collins' display of emotions does not suggest hysteria. It is not wrong for Marcus Aurelius to cry occasionally, as long as he does not dwell in self-pity.
If Stoics were devoid of emotions, there would be no courage or discipline to admire. The Stoics were not made of stone; their humanity is what makes their courage and discipline admirable. The display of emotions by both Marcus Aurelius and Michael Collins does not imply a lack of control over important matters. On the contrary, it demonstrates their ability to feel deeply while maintaining a clear head and making rational decisions.
In summary, Stoicism values emotional control as mastery and reasoned response, not repression. Expressing emotions like crying is acceptable as long as it does not lead to loss of rational self-governance or impulsive action. This balanced view is reflected in Marcus Aurelius’s writings and the broader Stoic tradition.
References: [1] Irvine, A. (2008). A Guide to the Good Life: The Ancient Art of Stoic Joy. Oxford University Press. [2] Long, A. A., & Sedley, D. N. (2002). The Hellenistic Philosophers. Cambridge University Press. [3] Inwood, B. (2008). Epicetus: A Stoic and Socratic Guide to Life. Oxford University Press. [4] Epictetus. (2004). The Enchiridion. Hackett Publishing Company, Inc.
- Stoic philosophy, exemplified by individuals like Marcus Aurelius and Michael Collins, promotes emotional control as a way to foster personal growth and mental health, encouraging a balanced response to emotions rather than repression.
- In the realm of education-and-self-development, the teachings of Stoicism offer insights into health-and-wellness, emphasizing the importance of emotional clarity and strength, as well as the significance of reasoned decisions and self-discipline in multiple aspects of life.
