Without the ups and downs, it would just be a flatline and stoicism does seem to be arguing for the flatline.

I would argue the problem is this idealist monism, where we think it should all boil down to one thing, from God, to money, to materialism, while reality seems more a cycling between dichotomies. That fluctuation between the polarities of up and down, pain and pleasure, individuals and society, nodes and networks, details and the big picture, order and chaos, simplicity and complexity, etc.

It’s a big part of why we don’t seem to get along with nature. We don’t sense the blowback until it knocks us down. Often repeatedly, as the lesson of the previous wears off.

The fact is that we are our desires. The logical mind only referees between the emotions. It is that raw will to live that drives us and this process of thought, no matter how complicated, is just the steering to that motor.

Yet those desires are often in conflict. Not every acorn gets to be an oak tree. We can’t have our cake and eat it too. The short term and the long term are often at odds.

So the mind not only has to navigate a complex outer world, but a complex inner world. We are only individuals at the point of contact.

The anarchy of desire, versus the tyranny of judgement.

So stoicism has its benefits, but then so does death.