There’s a pressure that runs through modern life that doesn’t always announce itself clearly but is difficult to miss once you notice it. The pressure to be remarkable, to have a story worth telling, to be doing something that stands out from the ordinary run of things. It shows up in the language around careers and ambitions, in the way people describe what they do and what they want, in the quiet discomfort that arrives when someone asks what you’re working towards and the honest answer is something fairly modest.
The Stoics would have found this pressure puzzling, not because they were against excellence or against ambition in any simple sense, but because they understood that the vast majority of what makes a life genuinely good has very little to do with being remarkable, and that the pursuit of remarkability at the expense of what’s actually in front of you tends to produce a particular kind of unhappiness that more achievement rarely resolves.
What the Stoics Actually Valued
Marcus Aurelius governed an empire and wrote one of the most enduring works of philosophy in the Western tradition, which makes him a somewhat ironic advocate for ordinary life, and yet the values he returned to most consistently in his private writing were precisely the quiet ones. Doing the work in front of him properly. Treating the people around him with genuine attention. Maintaining his own character under pressure. None of these required being remarkable. They required being present, honest, and consistent, which is available to anyone regardless of the scale of their life.
Epictetus, who began his life as a slave and ended it as one of the most respected philosophers of his age, was particularly clear about the independence of a good life from external circumstance or visible achievement. He argued that the man who has ordered his inner life well, who has genuine values and lives according to them, who treats the people around him with care and does his work with honesty, has achieved something real and complete regardless of whether anyone outside his immediate circle ever notices it.
This is not consolation philosophy, the kind that tells people their unremarkable lives are secretly remarkable if you look at them the right way. It’s something more honest than that, a genuine argument that the qualities which make a life worth living are available at every scale of existence and are not in any meaningful way dependent on the scale.
The Extraordinariness Trap
The problem with organising a life around the pursuit of being extraordinary is not that extraordinary things aren’t worth doing, some of them clearly are, but that the pursuit itself tends to produce a particular relationship with ordinary life that makes it very difficult to find genuine satisfaction in it.
A man who has decided that ordinary is not enough tends to experience ordinary days, which is to say most days, as a kind of failure or at least a falling short, a gap between where he is and where he believes he ought to be. This gap doesn’t close with achievement, or at least it doesn’t close for long, because each achievement simply resets the standard against which the next ordinary day is measured, and the cycle continues.
Seneca wrote about men who were perpetually restless, who moved from city to city and project to project in search of the feeling that they were living at the right scale, and who found that the feeling never quite arrived, because it was being sought in circumstances rather than in the quality of attention brought to whatever circumstances they actually had.
What Ordinary Life Actually Contains
An ordinary life, attended to properly, contains most of what matters. The relationships that are built and maintained over time. The work done honestly and with genuine care. The small daily decisions that, accumulated over years, form a character and a way of being in the world that has real value regardless of whether it produces anything that anyone outside your immediate life would ever know about.
Marcus Aurelius understood this not as a philosophical position but as a lived experience. He wrote about the importance of finding genuine engagement in whatever was in front of him, however mundane, not because the mundane was secretly extraordinary but because the quality of attention brought to the mundane was the same quality of attention that determined the texture of his entire inner life, and his inner life was the thing he was most responsible for and most interested in maintaining well.
There’s something worth sitting with in this. The man who can be genuinely present for an ordinary day, who finds the work of that day worth doing properly and the people in it worth attending to carefully, has something available to him that the man perpetually reaching for the next remarkable thing tends to miss, which is the actual experience of his own life as it’s happening rather than as a staging post for something better that hasn’t arrived yet.
The Dignity in It
Dignity is perhaps the right word for what the Stoics were pointing at, even if it’s one that’s become slightly awkward in contemporary usage. There is a genuine dignity in a life lived well at whatever scale it happens to occupy, in the man who does his work honestly, keeps his commitments, treats people with genuine care, and maintains his own values without needing the world to confirm that they’re worth maintaining.
This dignity doesn’t require an audience and doesn’t increase with recognition, which is part of what makes it genuinely available to anyone rather than only to the people whose lives happen to be visible. The man working quietly and well in circumstances that nobody outside his immediate world will ever notice is, in the Stoic view, doing something real and complete, not a lesser version of something that would be better if it were larger.
The Courage Part
The title of this post uses the word courage, and it’s because courage is not a word usually associated with ordinary life.
The courage required to be ordinary, genuinely and without resentment, in a culture that treats ordinariness as a failure of ambition, is not nothing. It requires the willingness to measure your life by standards you’ve actually chosen rather than standards absorbed from a culture that has a strong interest in making people feel that whatever they have is not quite enough.
It requires the ability to find genuine satisfaction in what’s actually there rather than in the projected version of what might be there under different circumstances. And it requires a settled enough sense of your own values that the absence of external validation doesn’t feel like an absence of worth, which is a more demanding thing to maintain than it sounds given how thoroughly the opposite message tends to get reinforced.
The Stoics would have called this self sufficiency, and they would have considered it one of the more significant things a man could develop, not because ordinary life is the only life worth having, but because the capacity to find it genuinely enough is the capacity to be genuinely at peace with whatever life you actually have, which turns out to be rather more valuable than most of what gets offered in its place.
Leave a Reply