The Blog

There’s a particular kind of freedom that doesn’t get talked about much, probably because it doesn’t look like freedom from the outside. It looks, if anything, like restraint. The man who has reduced what he needs from the people around him in order to feel all right tends to be mistaken for someone who doesn’t care, or someone who has closed himself off, when actually he has done something rather more deliberate and rather more useful than either of those things.

The Stoics called this self sufficiency, and they valued it not as a point of pride or as a way of keeping people at arm’s length, but as a genuine condition of inner freedom. A man who needs a great deal from others in order to function well has, in a quiet way, handed a portion of his stability over to people and circumstances he cannot control, and that handover has consequences that accumulate slowly and without much announcement.

What Self Sufficiency Actually Means

It’s worth being clear from the start about what the Stoics were not describing, because the idea is easy to misread.

They were not arguing for isolation, or for the kind of brittle independence that refuses help on principle and treats needing anyone for anything as a weakness. Marcus Aurelius was a man with deep friendships and genuine affection for the people around him, and he wrote about those relationships with real warmth. Seneca’s letters to Lucilius are among the most genuinely intimate pieces of writing from the ancient world. These were not cold men, and their philosophy was not a cold one.

What they were describing was something more precise than independence. It was the cultivation of an inner life stable enough that it didn’t require constant external input to remain upright. The difference between a man who enjoys the company of others because he genuinely likes them, and a man who needs company because he cannot bear to be without it, is not a difference in how social they appear. It’s a difference in where their stability is actually coming from.

Where the Dependence Tends to Develop

Most of us develop needs we don’t quite notice forming. The need for a particular kind of reassurance from a particular person, which means that when that person is unavailable or unwilling, something in us goes slightly off balance. The need for things to proceed in roughly the way we expected them to, so that unexpected change produces more distress than the situation itself probably warrants. The need for a certain level of recognition from the people around us, so that its absence feels like something has been withheld rather than simply not given.

None of these needs are shameful, and the Stoics weren’t suggesting they were. They’re entirely human, and they develop naturally in the course of an ordinary life. The question the Stoics were asking is simply whether we’ve noticed them, whether we understand how much weight we’ve placed on things outside our control, and whether there’s anything we’d like to do about that.

Epictetus, whose entire philosophy grew out of the experience of having everything external stripped away, was particularly direct on this point. He argued that the man who has learned to want only what is genuinely within his reach, which is to say his own thinking, his own judgements, his own responses to whatever arrives, has made himself very difficult to harm in any lasting way, because there is very little left that anyone can take from him.

The Quiet Work of Building It

Self sufficiency, in the Stoic sense, isn’t achieved by withdrawing from people or by deciding you don’t need anything. It’s built gradually, through a kind of honest audit of where your stability is actually coming from and whether those sources are as reliable as you’ve been assuming.

Some of them will be. The things you’ve built through your own effort, the values you’ve developed through your own experience, the capacity to think clearly under pressure that comes from having thought clearly under pressure before, these are genuinely yours and genuinely reliable. Others will turn out to be more precarious than they looked, resting on circumstances or on other people’s behaviour in ways that leave you more exposed than you’d like.

Marcus Aurelius did this kind of audit regularly in his private writing, not as a form of self criticism but as a way of keeping an honest account of where he actually stood. He seemed to understand that the man who doesn’t know what he depends on is in a weaker position than the man who does, even if what they depend on is exactly the same, because the first man will be surprised when it’s removed and the second won’t.

What It Gives You in Practice

A man who has genuinely reduced his unnecessary dependencies tends to show up differently in his relationships, and the difference is usually a good one, which is perhaps the most important thing to say about this.

When you don’t need someone to behave in a particular way in order to feel all right, you become considerably easier to be around. You’re not monitoring them for the reassurance you need, not quietly disappointed when they don’t provide what you were hoping for, not placing on the relationship a weight it was never designed to carry. You can simply be with them, which turns out to be a more generous and more relaxed way of being in a relationship than the alternative.

Seneca wrote about friendship in terms that make this clear. The best friendships, in his view, were between people who chose each other freely, not out of need but out of genuine regard, and who were therefore able to give to each other without the transaction of dependence running underneath everything. That kind of friendship is only available to people who have done enough of the inner work that they’re not secretly asking their friends to carry something that belongs to them.

The Freedom on the Other Side

There’s a particular quality of ease available to a man who has built enough inner stability that he’s not constantly scanning his circumstances for reassurance. It doesn’t make him indifferent to what happens around him, and it doesn’t make him immune to difficulty. What it does is give him a steadier place to stand while the difficulty is happening, so that his responses come from somewhere more considered than the panic of feeling that something he needed has been removed.

The Stoics weren’t promising that this would make life easy. They were saying it would make a man more genuinely free, in the only sense of freedom that can’t be taken away by other people or by events outside his control. That’s a quieter kind of freedom than most of what gets offered under that name, but it tends to be considerably more durable.