Stoicism is a state in which you only regulate what is out of balance, and only identify with balances you can regulate. It seems optimal for single individuals, but I would expect that it should be disadvantaged by evolution for species that form cooperative groups.
-
-
I see. I was confused with the individual/population bit. Are you saying individual imbalances might be healthy for a population-balance? Like, Stoicism akin to a mean-field approach. Might not reach the global optimum, if everyone is “balanced”.
-
Happiness requires more energy than necessary for the individual. Being in equilibrium is better than hustling for making yourself feel things above that. – For group species, it may be good if the individual hustles as much as possible.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.