Logos and Natural Order

[DISCLAIMER]

I served in the United States (U.S.) Marine Corps from 1996 to 2007, with my primary billet as military police (MP). During that time, men and women were held to different standards of physical fitness. Regarding this matter, one source claims:

While they are gaining seniority in the US military, women continue to face discrimination. As women were forging paths into the military, men sought ways to differentiate themselves and maintain their dominance in the organizational hierarchy. Men and the military as an institution took three primary measures:

·  Prioritize certain physical standards such as upper body strength regardless of job requirements that advantage men over women;

·  Place a premium on combat experience for promotions curtailing women’s pathways to senior leadership positions;

·  Give Special Operations, which continue to be almost exclusively men, a central role in US military strategy.

The prioritization of physical strength has coincided with two other dynamics that curtail women’s opportunities in the military: greater emphasis on combat experience for climbing the ranks and heavy reliance on Special Operations that remain men-dominated.

That source ostensibly supports the concept of patriarchy, “a social system in which positions of authority are primarily held by men” and “socialization processes [which] are primarily responsible for establishing gender roles” as “norms to maintain control over women.”

I argue that this feminist concept serves as a narrative of victimhood that rejects truth about reality. For instance, I invite you to consider the following photo of a female MP next to me. The image was taken during my time in Okinawa, Japan (1997-1999).

My female counterpart and I were subject to the same system of promotion which was based on unequal physical fitness standards. Regarding this matter, describing collective operations of the Marine Corps as “the huddle,” I stated in a blogpost entitled The Huddle:

[I]n a blogpost entitled When Idealism Doesn’t Stack Up to Realism, I meticulously outlined how male and female Marines weren’t subject to the same fitness standards when I served.

For instance, in order to achieve the highest physical fitness test score at the time, males were required to complete 20 pull-ups, 100 crunches, and an 18-minute 3-mile run. Alternatively, females completed a 70-second flexed-arm hang, 100 crunches, and a 21-minute 3-mile run.

Male Marines had to exhibit more upper body strength and run faster than our female counterparts. Nevertheless, females who weren’t held to the same fitness standards could be promoted to a higher rank than their male counterparts. Those were disparate standards.

Also, when I became a Marine Security Guard (MSG)—a diplomatic security provider trained in special weapons and tactics (SWAT) for protection of U.S. consulates and embassies—females were allowed within the huddle without enduring the same standards as males.

The female MP in the photo above wasn’t victimized by the so-called patriarchy. Rather, she benefited from an artificial system of norms (principles of right action binding upon the members of a group and serving to guide, control, or regulate proper and acceptable behavior).

Ergo, what was considered normal (conforming to a type, standard, or regular pattern: characterized by that which is considered usual, typical, or routine) in the Corps wasn’t natural (being in accordance with or determined by nature—the external world in its entirety).

Disparate standards which favored women were therefore contrary to the natural order (the orderly system comprising the physical universe and functioning according to natural, as distinguished from human or supernatural laws) of life. This is merely a factual statement.

Of course, I’m used to ad hominem attacks when I discuss objective reality. Nonetheless, lazy claims of male chauvinism (a belief that men are superior to women) aren’t disputes to the arguments I’ve made thus far. In any case, this topic reminds me of a book I’ve been reading.

As Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy (REBT) is informed by Stoic philosophy, this blog entry is part of an ongoing series regarding a book entitled The Daily Stoic: 366 Meditations on Wisdom, Perseverance, and the Art of Living by Ryan Holiday and Stephen Hanselman.

Admittedly, I’m not well-read when it comes to matters of philosophy. Thus, as part of my ongoing psychoeducational experience, I use The Daily Stoic to teach me about broad Stoic concepts. For example, the authors quote Marcus Aurelius who stated (page 165):

Joy for human beings lies in proper human work. And proper human work consists in: acts of kindness to other human beings, disdain for the stirrings of the senses, identifying trustworthy impressions, and contemplating the natural order and all that happens in keeping with it.

When initially reading that quote, I wondered what Aurelius meant by “natural order.” While I’ve already provided a definition used in common parlance, I was curious about how ancient Stoics used the term. When searching online, Econation offered the following perspective:

In a Stoic worldview, nature plays a central role. Stoics believed there is a natural order that all people should live in harmony with. They believe that nature is governed by a force called Logos.

To them, Logos is the sacred and rational power that organises the universe, providing order and balance. For Stoics, everything in nature is connected, and the understanding of these universal connections is essential to understanding the world.

I remain only vaguely familiar with the term Logos. For clarity, one source states of this concept:

Logos is a term used in Western philosophy, psychology and rhetoric, as well as religion (notably Christianity), that most broadly means reason, logic, order, or understanding. Among its connotations is that of a rational form of discourse that relies on inductive and deductive reasoning.

Aristotle first systematized the usage of the word, making it one of the three principles of rhetoric alongside ethos and pathos. This original use identifies the word closely to the structure and content of language or text. Both Plato and Aristotle used the term logos (along with rhema) to refer to sentences and propositions.

For perspective, one source states that “rhema literally means an ‘utterance’ or ‘thing said’ in Greek. It is a word that signifies the action of utterance.” With my approach to REBT, rhema can relate to utterances both in- and outside of oneself (i.e., verbally expressed words or thoughts).

Additionally, I imagine that Econation references what is known in REBT as a preferential should belief regarding people living in harmony with nature. This is different than an absolutistic should belief. Whereas the former is flexible, the latter is rigid.

When discussing beliefs of this kind, as they relate to “rational power” addressed by Econation, I differentiate between rational (i.e., flexible) and irrational (i.e., inflexible) beliefs. In order for a belief to be considered rational, it empirically must remain in accord with both logic and reason.

Here, “logic” is the interrelation or sequence of facts or events when seen as inevitable or predictable, and “reason” is a statement offered in explanation or justification. For instance, a modus ponens syllogism uses the following logical form: If p, then q; p; therefore, q.

For context, one source states that “the average man is much stronger than the average woman in terms of absolute strength.” Another source states that “current male-female offsets do represent the intrinsic performance differences between human males and females” regarding speed.

Given this background information, if, on average, men are stronger and faster than women (p), then human males and females aren’t comparatively equal to one another (q). On average, men are stronger and faster than women (p). Therefore, human males and females aren’t comparatively equal to one another (q).

This rhema follows logical form. As well, in consideration of cited evidence, it forms a reasonable argument. Therefore, there was a rational explanation for male and female Marines maintaining different fitness standards when I served in the military.

Contrarily, concerning promotions, I argue that it was irrational for the U.S. military to have practiced discrimination (the act, practice, or an instance of unfairly treating a person or group differently from other people or groups on a class or categorical basis, such as sex or gender).

My argument is based on a modus tollens syllogism (if p, then q; not q; therefore, not p). If female Marines deserve to be promoted above their male counterparts (p), then female Marines will perform at the same level of physical fitness (q). Female Marines don’t perform at the same level of physical fitness (q). Therefore, female Marines don’t deserve to be promoted above their male counterparts (p).

This isn’t a matter of male chauvinism or an alleged patriarchy whereby females (girls and women) are oppressed by males (boys and men). Rather, I’m appealing to the concepts of logos and natural order. From a Stoic perspective, one source adds in alignment with this appeal:

The idea of “living according to nature” is at the core of Stoic thought and practice. Living in accordance with nature, as advocated by the Stoics, is not just about accepting the natural order of things.

It is about actively striving to understand and align ourselves with it. They believed that by understanding the natural laws that govern the universe, we could lead a life that is in harmony with nature.

One of the key tenets of Stoic philosophy is that we should strive to align our own will with the will of the universe, or nature. If we follow the concept of “oikeiôsis,” which means “identification” or “appropriation”.

This refers to the process of identifying with the natural order of things and understanding our place in the world. By understanding our place in the world, we can align our actions and thoughts with the natural order of things.

I understand that, in the interest of logos, the natural order of the universe is that human males and females generally aren’t equal to one another. Any artificial system of norms which are structured otherwise is unnatural, abnormal, and irrational.

Noteworthy, the female MP featured with me in the photo above couldn’t compete with me physically—not during traffic stops, on pull-up/chin-up bars for a physical fitness tests, on fields of battle, or otherwise. This is merely a factual statement.

At this point in the blogpost, I imagine you’re asking yourself what any of this has to do with the field of mental, emotional, and behavioral health (collectively “mental health”). Here, I invite you to consider that the American Psychological Association (APA) thusly defines delusion as:

[A]n often highly personal idea or belief system, not endorsed by one’s culture or subculture, that is maintained with conviction in spite of irrationality or evidence to the contrary.

Delusions may be transient and fragmentary, as in delirium, or highly systematized and elaborate, as in delusional disorders, though most of them fall between these two extremes.

Common types include delusional jealousy, delusions of being controlled, delusions of grandeur, delusions of persecution, delusions of reference, nihilistic delusions (see nihilism), and somatic delusions.

Data suggest that delusions are not primarily logical errors but are derived from emotional material. They have come to represent one of the most important factors in systems for diagnostic classification.

Granting the APA rhema, as delusions aren’t “primarily logical errors but are derived from emotional material,” I argue that irrational appeals to emotion about my view on logos and natural order regarding women serving in the military and law enforcement represent delusion.

I’ve merely outlined factual statements herein. The foundation of my critique isn’t against females in particular. Rather, I regard systems serving illogical and unreasonable rhemas which result in active discrimination toward men as founded upon irrationality.

Granting that the APA rhema proposes that delusion doesn’t exist when “not endorsed by one’s culture or subculture” (i.e., as long as U.S. society supports discrimination toward men, it isn’t a delusional matter), I’ve not used emotional delusion within this blogpost.

Instead, I’ve addressed what was known relatively five minutes ago about human nature—men and women aren’t equal to one another. The individual who responds emotively to this rhema is the one exercising delusion, which isn’t uncommon for those embracing feminist dogma.

This matter regards mental health in that people who kowtow to irrational discrimination that follows illogical and unreasonable norms are in denial of truth about reality, as the APA defines psychosis as “an abnormal mental state involving significant problems with reality testing.”

Consequently, I’m not subject to psychotic loss of touch with reality. Likewise, I’m not delusional regarding this matter. Whether or not the same is true of you may concern whether or not you irrationally believe that, on average, males are equal to females and vice versa.

If you’re looking for a provider who tries to work to help understand how thinking impacts physical, mental, emotional, and behavioral elements of your life—helping you to sharpen your critical thinking skills, I invite you to reach out today by using the contact widget on my website.

As a psychotherapist, I’m pleased to try to help people with an assortment of issues ranging from anger (hostility, rage, and aggression) to relational issues, adjustment matters, trauma experience, justice involvement, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, anxiety and depression, and other mood or personality-related matters.

At Hollings Therapy, LLC, serving all of Texas, I aim to treat clients with dignity and respect while offering a multi-lensed approach to the practice of psychotherapy and life coaching. My mission includes: Prioritizing the cognitive and emotive needs of clients, an overall reduction in client suffering, and supporting sustainable growth for the clients I serve. Rather than simply trying to help you to feel better, I want to try to help you get better!

Deric Hollings, LPC, LCSW

References:

Allan. (2023, January 29). Guest post: The Stoic idea of living in accordance with nature. What is Stoicism? Retrieved from https://whatisstoicism.com/stoicism-resources/guest-post-the-stoic-idea-of-living-in-accordance-with-nature/

APA Dictionary of Psychology. (2018, April 19). Delusion. American Psychological Association. Retrieved from https://dictionary.apa.org/delusion

APA Dictionary of Psychology. (2018, April 19). Nihilism. American Psychological Association. Retrieved from https://dictionary.apa.org/nihilism

APA Dictionary of Psychology. (2018, April 19). Psychosis. American Psychological Association. Retrieved from https://dictionary.apa.org/psychosis

APA Dictionary of Psychology. (2023, November 15). Reality testing. American Psychological Association. Retrieved from https://dictionary.apa.org/reality-testing

Brzycki, M. (2002). Gender differences in strength: A comparison of male and female world-record performances in powerlifting. Princeton University. Retrieved from https://brzycki.scholar.princeton.edu/sites/g/files/toruqf4561/files/brzycki/files/mb-2002-01.pdf

Daily Stoic. (n.d.). Translating the Stoics: An interview with “The Daily Stoic” co-author Stephen Hanselman. Retrieved from https://dailystoic.com/stephen-hanselman-interview/

Econation. (2025, March 23). Stoicism and natural order. Retrieved from https://econation.one/blog/stoicism-and-natural-order/

Holiday, R. and Hanselman, S. (2016). The daily stoic: 366 meditations on wisdom, perseverance, and the art of living. Penguin Random House LLC. Retrieved from https://www.pdfdrive.com/the-daily-stoic-366-meditations-on-wisdom-perseverance-and-the-art-of-living-d61378067.html

Hollings, D. (2024, July 9). Absolutistic should beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/absolutistic-should-beliefs

Hollings, D. (2023, October 15). Ad hominem. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/ad-hominem

Hollings, D. (2023, October 14). Appeal to emotion. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/appeal-to-emotion

Hollings, D. (2024, November 24). Automatic thoughts and beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/automatic-thoughts-and-beliefs

Hollings, D. (2023, April 22). Control. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/control

Hollings, D. (2022, March 15). Disclaimer. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/disclaimer

Hollings, D. (2024, April 2). Discrimination. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/discrimination

Hollings, D. (2024, February 25). Doing the work. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/doing-the-work

Hollings, D. (2024, July 10). Empirical should beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/empirical-should-beliefs

Hollings, D. (2025, March 9). Factual and counterfactual beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/factual-and-counterfactual-beliefs

Hollings, D. (2024, May 17). Feeling better vs. getting better. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/feeling-better-vs-getting-better-1

Hollings, D. (2023, February 9). Feminism. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/feminism

Hollings, D. (2023, October 12). Get better. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/get-better

Hollings, D. (n.d.). Hollings Therapy, LLC [Official website]. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/

Hollings, D. (2024, January 2). Interests and goals. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/interests-and-goals

Hollings, D. (2025, March 4). Justification. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/justification

Hollings, D. (2025, October 13). Knowledge, wisdom, understanding. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/knowledge-wisdom-understanding

Hollings, D. (2023, September 19). Life coaching. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/life-coaching

Hollings, D. (2023, January 8). Logic and reason. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/logic-and-reason

Hollings, D. (2024, March 4). Mental, emotional, and behavioral health. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/mental-emotional-and-behavioral-health

Hollings, D. (2025, November 16). Mental health, mental illness, and mental disorder. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/mental-health-mental-illness-and-mental-disorder

Hollings, D. (2025, March 16). Modus ponens. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/modus-ponens

Hollings, D. (2025, March 16). Modus tollens. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/modus-tollens

Hollings, D. (2024, July 7). Non-dogmatic preferences. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/non-dogmatic-preferences

Hollings, D. (2025, November 3). Normativity standard. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/normativity-standard

Hollings, D. (2024, April 22). On disputing. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/on-disputing

Hollings, D. (2024, June 17). On free will. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/on-free-will

Hollings, D. (2023, April 24). On truth. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/on-truth

Hollings, D. (2025, April 9). Perception, action, and will. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/perception-action-and-will

Hollings, D. (2025, May 3). Predictability of logic. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/predictability-of-logic

Hollings, D. (2024, July 10). Preferential should beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/preferential-should-beliefs

Hollings, D. (2024, May 26). Principles. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/principles

Hollings, D. (2024, January 1). Psychoeducation. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/psychoeducation

Hollings, D. (2024, May 5). Psychotherapist. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/psychotherapist

Hollings, D. (2022, March 24). Rational emotive behavior therapy (REBT). Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/rational-emotive-behavior-therapy-rebt

Hollings, D. (2025, August 13). Rational versus irrational thoughts and beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/rational-versus-irrational-thoughts-and-beliefs

Hollings, D. (2024, January 1). Rational vs. irrational. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/rational-vs-irrational

Hollings, D. (2024, March 14). REBT and emotions. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/rebt-and-emotions

Hollings, D. (2024, July 18). REBT flexibility. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/rebt-flexibility

Hollings, D. (2024, January 4). Rigid vs. rigorous. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/rigid-vs-rigorous

Hollings, D. (2025, January 15). Satisfaction. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/satisfaction

Hollings, D. (2024, April 21). Stoicism. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/stoicism

Hollings, D. (2025, February 10). The huddle. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/the-huddle

Hollings, D. (2024, November 14). The logic doesn’t follow. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/the-logic-doesn-t-follow

Hollings, D. (2025, November 6). The senses and self-defense. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/the-senses-and-self-defense

Hollings, D. (2024, February 6). This ride inevitably ends. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/this-ride-inevitably-ends

Hollings, D. (2025, February 28). To try is my goal. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/to-try-is-my-goal

Hollings, D. (2025, July 3). Trust the process. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/trust-the-process

Hollings, D. (2022, November 25). Victimhood. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/victimhood

Hollings, D. (2023, July 7). When idealism doesn’t stack up to realism. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/when-idealism-doesn-t-stack-up-to-realism

McClelland, E. L. and Weyand, P. G. (2022). Sex differences in human running performance: smaller gaps at shorter distances? Journal of Applied Physiology. Retrieved from https://journals.physiology.org/doi/full/10.1152/japplphysiol.00359.2022

Nagel, R. U., Spears, K., and Maenza, J. (2021, October 5). Culture, gender, and women in the military. Georgetown Institute for Women, Peace, and Security. Retrieved from https://giwps.georgetown.edu/resource/culture-gender-and-women-in-the-military/

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Aristotle. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristotle

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Deductive reasoning. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deductive_reasoning

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Ethos. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethos

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Inductive reasoning. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inductive_reasoning

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Logos. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logos

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Marcus Aurelius. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Aurelius

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Marine Security Guard. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_Security_Guard

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Military police. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_police

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Pathos. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pathos

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Patriarchy. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriarchy

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Plato. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plato

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Rhema. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhema

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Ryan Holiday. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryan_Holiday