Before praising the advantages of a #philosophy , we should devote equal efforts to assessing its disadvantages. Few people enjoy looking at the #risks of projects because the outcome can prove depressing, but rational decision making requires us to look before we jump. Seneca was partially aware of the flaws in his philosophy, but failed to address them in his writings. By the time #seneca had committed himself to addressing those issues, it was too late. He had been already marked for death by #nero (37-68 AD), and then pushed to commit suicide. At first sight, it seems difficult to believe that there are risks in Seneca’s ideas, that is, in mainstream #stoicism . If those ideas have been frequently endorsed in #history , is it not safe to assume that they are true and beneficial? Besides, what could be possibly wrong in a philosophy that is promoting #peaceful cooperation, honesty and modesty. If we all followed Seneca’s recommendations, is it not true that the world would be a better place? Those are solid questions, but do not prove the correctness of Seneca’s ideas. The questions will elicit the answer that, yes, indeed, there are many ideas worse than Seneca’s and possibly, large numbers of people could benefit from reading his works. I don’t need to be convinced of those benefits. I regard them as incontrovertible, but incomplete facts. The problem is that a partial truth, when assumed to be whole, can inflict devastating damage. Let me give an unrelated example to show what I mean. If I am asked by a tourist “Can you swim from the mainland to the nearby island?”, I should give the complete answer. If I answer that “the water temperature is great this week,” I would be giving a partial truth. Indeed, the water is warm, but I am omitting to say that there are sharks in the area, and that it’s #dangerous to swim to the nearby island. Here is the link to the original article: https://johnvespasian.com/the-dark-side-of-thinking-like-seneca/