> I would also say that there's a pretty big difference between "stiff upper lip/no emotions" that people imagine when using the the adjective "stoic" and the Stoic writings of Marcus Aurelius and the like.
A quick way to find out what sort of self-proclaimed lover of Meditations you’re dealing with is to ask what they think of its physics and metaphysics.
Taking amusement in catching little social lies isn’t exactly gatekeeping. More like sport.
I don’t give a damn whether people call themselves Stoics or not and whether they’re sincere—whatever that means—or not, but I’m very sure, specifically, that there are a lot more fans of Meditations than people who’ve read it or even meaningfully read about it, which is funny in that “oh boy, aren’t we humans goofy” sort of way. It’s also an easy phenomenon to stumble on innocently while trying to discuss the book, though I think that goes for a lot of Very Important Books that more people claim to have read than actually have. IIRC someone wrote a whole tongue-partially-in-cheek guide to pretending at having read books, for the reason that it’s pretty common.
One of my hobbies is asking christians if they know about the time god told a bear to maul some kids for making fun of a bald guy. When they say they aren't I dab, tip my fedora, then moonwalk out of the room. Aren't humans goofy?
A quick way to find out what sort of self-proclaimed lover of Meditations you’re dealing with is to ask what they think of its physics and metaphysics.