There is a phenomena, that stoicism is chosen as the primary philosophy by the most people, mainly young men. It has to do with the crisis of masculine values, but I will not elaborate on that.

Now, the issue with that phenomena is, that private thoughts of great people, such as emperor Marcus Aurelius, are taken out of context and misinterpreted - which, inadvertely, turns stoicism into a philosophy of excuses, weakness and an ill version of self-affirmation. Which is dangerous, hence the necessity for this post.

// Note: this post will be updated with more content in due time. Below is something I found in my notes.

"[...] Achieving personality (secondary integration) is associated with [...] the dynamics of responsibility, empathy, and the ideal of personality." "[...] Responsibility at this level [...] is responsibility grounded in various forms of high-level sensitivity, in all disintegrative, conflictual (hierarchized) experiences. Thus, it is responsibility with a very broad scope and a multi-level structure. Here, the individual is responsible not only for what they have contracted for, for what is commanded of them, but for everything they encounter, for everything they perceive as harm, for everything that arouses concern, for the 'pain of the whole world'."

Interestingly, there seem to be a very popular view, originating in "Meditations" by Marcus Aurelius: the detachment from external things and events that are beyond one’s control, and the focus on what is within one’s power. I see there a conflict, which I think is due to the fact, that Marcus Aurelius was already the most powerful man on the planet at that time, and his private notes weren't meant to be read by regular people as an exercise in (stoic) philosophy. Further, it is very often a point brought by female psychotherapists, which I believe to be a misuse; a very destructive advice that results in a halt in personality development, for the sake of a temporary cope.