Skip to content
Coordinates of ThoughtHome of Philosophy
Join
Discussion

Epictetus was a slave and I drive the 413. What counts as ‘up to us’ at work?

Serkan Aydoğdu Fellow
· 5 replies
Economy & workGreek & RomanIndianIslamicStoicismSufismEpictetusMarcus Aurelius#dichotomy-of-control#dignity#epictetus#work
Follow

I drive the 413 across Ankara. Eight hours, two breaks, roughly three hundred passengers a day. I listen to philosophy lectures between stops, and Epictetus is the one I keep coming back to.

The Handbook opens by dividing things into what is up to us and what is not. Up to us: our judgements, our impulses, desires and aversions. Not up to us: our body, our property, our reputation, our office. Epictetus had been a slave. If anyone had a right to say most of life is not up to us, it was him.

In traffic this helps. The jam is not up to me. The passenger who swears at me is not up to me. My reply to him is. I can feel the difference in my shoulders by the end of a shift.

But I've started to wonder. The schedule is not up to me. The pay is not up to me. The rule that we can't open the doors between stops even in the rain is not up to me. Should I just accept all of that? My union rep says Stoicism is a philosophy for bosses: it teaches workers to be calm about things that ought to be changed.

On the way home I listen to Yunus Emre, whose poems say a lot about humility and love and not much about rotas. So, for others who work: does the dichotomy of control make people better at their jobs, or just quieter about them?

LikeReply
Follow5 replies

Join the conversation: members reply here, and joining is free. Reading is always free.

Join free to reply Sign in

5 replies

  1. Hugo Marchetti

    Fellow

    As a union man I'll take your rep's side, with a correction. Stoicism isn't for bosses; Marcus Aurelius was a boss, Epictetus a slave, and both said the same things. But the dichotomy can be used by bosses. Simone Weil worked in factories to understand what work does to people, and she saw how affliction makes workers stop expecting anything. "Not up to me" can become "not worth fighting for". What is up to you includes whether you join with others. That changes what is up to all of you together.

    Helpful · 3
  2. Brian Otieno Ouma

    Fellow

    I read Epictetus with men in a prison in Nairobi. Some find him freeing: their judgement is the one thing the prison can't confiscate. Others are suspicious, for exactly your union rep's reason. Telling a prisoner to accept his situation is what the prison would like. The men who got most out of it used Epictetus to stay steady while they fought their cases, not instead of fighting them.

  3. Rohan Desai

    Fellow

    After burning out I found the strict dichotomy too sharp. Some things are partly up to you: whether you win an argument with your manager depends on you and on him. One modern writer calls this a "trichotomy": what you control completely, not at all, and partly. For the partly bit, the trick is to set your goal as your own effort, not the outcome. Your schedule is partly up to you, through the union. Your reply to the swearing passenger is fully up to you.

    Helpful · 1
  4. Harpreet Kaur Grewal

    Fellow

    Sikh teaching has a balance I think you'd like. We are told to accept hukam, the divine order, and also to do kirat karo, honest work, and to share what we earn. Accepting the order has never meant accepting injustice; the Gurus spoke very directly against oppression. At the gurdwara, the same people who say "it's in God's hukam" are first in line to organise when something is wrong.

    Helpful · 2
  5. Serkan Aydoğdu

    Fellow

    Hugo has changed how I see it: joining the union is itself up to me. Rohan's "partly" fits the rota better than Epictetus's sharp line. And Harpreet's hukam sounds a lot like what Yunus Emre would say if he had to drive a bus. Tomorrow I'll be calm in the traffic and go to the union meeting on Thursday.

    Helpful · 3