In the letters, the most compelling part for me is the core of the philosophical morality, which is regarded as “acceptance”. It is pointed that we should live in agreement with our lives (Annas, 2007). What we need to do is accepting our lives and we should not make changes due to the external influences. We do not have to change, either for our personal lives or the entire human community.

Specifically, our acceptance of private life shown in the article can be divided into two aspects. Firstly, we are not supposed to pursue a luxurious life. At the same time, we do not need to pursue penance deliberately (Letter V.). Personally, I often get the education and opinion that we should not go for luxurious living. What appeals to me most is the letter said that we do not need to pursue penance. Before, I regarded suffering as a virtue. Hardship can sharpen our wills. Therefore, in real life, I often deliberately pursue the tough environment to make myself stronger. Even if the process is painful, I feel it is worthy. However, Stoic philosophy oversets some of my views. Maybe, suffering itself might be meaningless and would only cause pains. The reflection was not based on those pains, but a product of thinking.

The view of Stoicism is valid and widely used in real life. Although it was seen as emotionlessness, it could bring a satisfying lifestyle. It minimized the possibility of negative emotions triggers by changes. Then, the view is true. The Letter V. illustrated that the desire of predicting and making changes can lead to anxiety. Reducing desires can decrease fears, so accepting the status quo can bring people pleasure and peace (Monk, 2017)

However, Stoicism is an idealism view, and a lot of other philosophical thinking is opposite to it. For example, Newton’s materialism, which is an extension of mechanical philosophy, rejects the idea of maintaining the current situations. With the development of technology, people’s lives are bound to change dramatically. Meanwhile, in the 17th century, the natural science developed quickly, people had an ambition to conquer nature and make progress. Humans are no longer willing to accept passively, we would rather crave active changes. Essentially, these two views are the opposite of materialism and idealism. In fact, I personally support the idea of trying to change the life. Stoic philosophy has its historical limitations, and it maintains national stability in order to serve Macedonian government (Annas, 2007). Making changes can make life better as a whole in many cases. Even, in the pursuit of luxury, we force ourselves to make efforts. In the deliberate pursuit of asceticism, we learn to endure, which is beneficial.