The Kibitzer

This Dilbert comic provides me with a good opportunity to write about what William Irvine, in A Guide to the Good Life: The Ancient Art of Stoic Joy, calls the dichotomy of control. Asok’s new goal is manageable, being highly unlikely, but it’s also out of his control. The Stoics would suggest that if he wants to avoid disappointment he would do better to desire something within his control. (Hey, there’s a whole shelf of books at B&N with titles like [Insert pop culture phenomenon] and Philosophy, so I can surely introduce a bit on Stoic philosophy with a Dilbert strip.)

Here’s Irvine:

Epictetus’ Handbook opens, somewhat famously, with the following assertion: “Some things are up to us and some are not up to us.” He offers our opinions, impulses, desires, and aversions as examples of things that are up to us, and our possessions and reputation as examples of things that aren’t. From this assertion it follows that we are faced with a choice in the desires we form: We can want things that are up to us, or we can want things that are not up to us.

Clearly if we want a peaceful life we should desire those things that are up to us and not worry about those things which are not up to us. Irvine disputes whether some of the things Epictetus says are within our control are actually up to us. Impulses and desires, for example, usually catch us unawares, though whether we act on them is usually up to us. He also says that it isn’t clear what Epictetus means by something not being up to us. It could mean that we have either no control or incomplete control. Better, says Irvine, to speak of a trichotomy of control:

1. Things over which we have complete control.
   • Example: The goals we set for ourselves. The values we form.
2. Things over which we have no control at all.
   • Example: Whether the sun will rise tomorrow.
3. Things over which we have some but not complete control.
   • Example: Whether we win while playing tennis.

We should definitely concern ourselves with things in category one. It is the most important category, but it is also fairly well understood. A good deal of stress, however, comes from misunderstanding categories two and three. For example, the past is something over which we have no control at all, yet “crying over spilled milk” is one of the most common ways we raise our stress level. We can and must learn from the past. One of the failures of the perpetually preoccupied, says Seneca, is that they never take the time to reflect on their past because they never disentangle themselves from this present moment. But we must no more worry over the past than we should worry over whether the sun will rise tomorrow.

The key to dealing with things in category three is the way in which we order our desires. Irvine uses the example of winning a tennis match. (Weddle, if you’re reading this, no smart alleck comments from you.) Though we have some influence, the outcome of a tennis match is not entirely within our control. The key then to managing our emotional reaction to the outcome is to internalize our desires. If our desire is merely to win then if we lose we will be disappointed. If, on the other hand, our desire is to play our best game then we may be satisfied whether or not we win. In short, if we want to manage our reactions to those things that are not entirely within our control then we must manage those things that are within our control, namely, our desires. Desire what you can control and not what you cannot control.