The Sage as a Thinking Tool

In the Discourses of Epictetus we get a returning move whenever a student is concerned around how to behave. What we see is the student not being told to consult their own judgement - in which he has no problem telling them he has no confidence in. But instead he asks; what would Socrates do? Or indeed that of a person of genuine character, when faced with the same circumstance. Several entries in the Enchiridion come to the same conclusion by holding up a ‘model mirror’ and acting as they would, as opposed to answering from first principles under pressure.

Marcus Aurelius does something akin to this in the opening of his Meditations. At first it’s easy to miss because it kind of reads like a list of acknowledgements you’d see at the tail end of many modern books. The first pages are spent cataloging the virtues of others, including Antoninus Pius, his adoptive father and the man who Marcus attempted to mirror his conduct and decision making as emperor of Rome. As we know the Meditations were never meant for anyone else’s eyes, and instead acted as a working reference ‘to himself’. When faced with a decision he didn’t trust himself to make, Antoninus would have been the model to use as a guide mark.

Seneca the younger also gives us an example of mirror modelling in a letter that doesn’t get enough attention, like some of the other spiritual exercises do. In Letter XI, when corresponding with Lucilius — who’s struggling with moving under scrutiny. We find him reaching for a piece of wisdom credited to Epicurus - who he says has “quite properly given us a guardian and an attendant.”

Cherish some man of high character, and keep him ever before your eyes, living as if he were watching you, and ordering all your actions as if he beheld them… We can get rid of most sins, if we have a witness who stands near us when we are likely to go wrong.

What the big three are describing is not just aspirational - like watching a sportsperson, or business role model. It goes beyond the motivational sense of becoming more like X, because of Y. Using a Sage is seen as a decision making tool in the heat of a moment, when your own thoughts and judgements are the things you can’t solely rely on.

The Stoics and other schools were clear-eyed about this. Their views are that most people, including themselves didn’t have access to true wisdom on demand. Therefore instead of asking to summon wisdom out of thin air when faced with difficulty or a moral quandary, it goes deeper in borrowing it from somewhere that already exists, even if only by using an imagined version of another person.

An established finding from Ethan Kross at the University of Michigan explains the Stoics cross reference quite well. The study of self distancing, the practice of stepping back from your own immediate perspective to view situations like a third party observer would. A striking finding from his research is that people tend to give themselves better advice when they refer to themselves in the third person, or by name, as opposed to using “I” or “me”. This rather simple pronoun shift allows enough psychological distance to unlock more measured judgement. It’s similar to the way we’d happily offer advice to a friend or family member, rather than when the stakes are ultimately your own.

A similar mechanism is from a study professor Rachel White ran with younger children, called the ‘Batman effect’. Here a group of children where given a boring, but effortful task — those who excelled when asked to complete it, pretended to be a competent, heroic, persistent character. Batman being the popular choice here, hence the name. These children weren’t magically acquiring willpower out of the blue, but instead borrowed a mirror model of behaviour that already implied the correct characteristics to step into it.

A Sage then in a way works on the same principle, but aimed at adult life, and with significantly harder material than just chores at stake. Using their teachings we go about these choices not asking ‘what would I do?’ with all the self-doubt and trepidation that this carries, instead you’re using a mirror model of a named, trusted individual - and taking appropriate action on the answer. Having separation between “I”/“me” and “he” or “she” turns out to do a surprising amount of the work.

The Sage, in the strict philosophical sense is a limiting case. Even Socrates, the closest candidate most ancient greek philosophers were willing to point to, was argued to the point of tears for centuries over this question. Nobody is asking that you cast a flawless person in the role, instead think of it as borrowing fragments of sound judgement, from an experienced but indeed weathered person.

The Stoics didn’t always reach for grandiose historical figures, or warriors either. Although figures like Cato the Younger were invoked regularly in the later Roman Stoa as a Sage-type figure in many writings of that time. A man so committed to principle, he took his own life to avoid the tyranny of Julius Caesar. He may not be the ideal choice in the day to day operations of anyone who has a mortgage to pay, and short temper at incoming traffic. So it’s best to choose someone closer to scale, like a grandparent who handled real hardship without being performative about it, or a friend/colleague whose composure under pressure you’ve actually seen up close more than once.

The criteria for usage is narrow in this method. You should have at least witnessed this person handle something difficult, not just read or heard they’re wise. And it’s best to be specific enough, that you describe to yourself — what they’d actually do instead of mere expression of it. Vague admiration will produce a blurry Sage, and because of that the advice may too be vague - defeating the purpose entirely.

Once you’ve chosen the desired person, the practice itself is quite simple. When going about making a decision - before you have to pull the pin, ask the question: what would they do here. Not what they would instruct you to do, that might trigger an open ended debate — but instead what would they actually do faced with your exact situation. Then, like the famed archer metaphor from Cicero. You point, aim and shoot for that desired choice.

Mentioned above, Seneca’s variant where you imagine the same person overseeing your decision is actually worth running alongside it. It comes in use for situations where the temptation might line in some private shortcut nobody would ever catch you taking.

Remember the guardian doesn’t actually need to be watching, but the imagined possibility that they might be is enough to alter the decision positively.

This is the obvious objection to this system. Isn’t it a delusional type of cosplay? You’re essentially pretending to be someone you’re not instead of putting in the hard work of actually becoming a better judge of your own situations. I think this gets the running order of operations slightly backwards. You cannot become a more composed human by doing so in the dark, or in abstract. Being well rounded comes from the repeated action of practicing in specific, day to day realities - until behaviourally borrowing from a Sage starts to become the modus operandi in your daily life.

The Sage to me is a scaffolding framework, and not a costume or second face. Scaffolding is supposed to come down, eventually (not the case in some cities it seems) when the work is complete and with enough repetition in this practice — it does.

Another objection would be that using this technique is a way to seek an excuse, in essence acting against your own values but telling yourself, “at least I’m channelling someone better”. That is a real risk, and the only defence to offer is choosing your Sage carefully in the first place. Someone whose true values you’ve examined and want to emulate, ensuring it’s not just someone whose confidence, material wealth or success you envy. As Heraclitus reminds us, Your character is ultimately your fate.

Borrow the judgement of a truly discerning person - and the technique will sharpen your ethical toolkit. If you borrow from someone merely impressive on merit alone, it just helps launder whatever you wanted to do anyway.

In my own practice I use a version I stumbled into a decade before I had a name for it. And although the casting has changed since then, especially with a few months of fatherhood behind me, I notice I’m beginning to ask the same questions about a different way of living and pressures — the one thing that remains is the objective of doing the right thing, with good character at the forefront of my decisions.

Whoever it may be for you, the value of the technique above is the same. You don’t need to have become a wiser person, you just need to know one, closely enough to borrow their judgement when your own is cloudy or inhibited.

Until July,

Memento mori,

Enda (The Irish Stoic)

There are some changes coming to my Substack and how I approach writing. Including a brand new paid tier, and different approaches to content. Stay with me, while I continue grafting in the workshop to bring these ideas to life.

In the meantime, read these pieces that landed earlier in the year:

Stoic Practices for the Modern Mind

·

Apr 17

The Stoics were not interested in philosophy as spectacle. They wanted tools: techniques that could be picked up, used daily, and tested against the friction of daily life.