This Is Water (2005)
I am not really fond of this speech or way of thinking and wrote a counterpoint here: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;simonsarris.substack.com&#x2F;p&#x2F;stoicism-is-not-enough" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;simonsarris.substack.com&#x2F;p&#x2F;stoicism-is-not-enough</a><p>Chiefly:<p>&gt; I suspect this kind of stoicism — for Marcus and Wallace and some modern popularizers — is a response to perceiving the breakdown of a functioning world. Their prescription for dealing with such troubles is to develop profound internal strength, and in doing so the stoic attitude can dodge some societal-level failures by compartmentalizing toward a robust individualism. While this is good in situations where you truly can’t change anything, where it fails is more subtle. By couching success as something that happens entirely within the ego, it encourages one to downplay anything external. If a stoic attitude is applied too liberally, the insistence that success lies solely within becomes an unconscious dodge of difficult forces and responsibilities beyond one’s complete control.