This (wrong) interpretation of Epictetus that almost everyone makes

Distinguishing what depends on oneself and what does not is at the foundation of the practice of Stoicism. But this precept of Epictetus is understood differently from one person to another. And it can lead to two radically opposed attitudes, especially when it comes to political engagement: passivity vs. agency. I would like to present these two interpretations and open the discussion so that everyone can enrich their own approach to Stoicism.

“Among the things that exist, some depend on us, others do not depend on us. Depending on us: value judgment, impulse to act, desire, aversion — in a word, everything that concerns us. Not depending on us: the body, our possessions, the opinions others have of us, public offices — in a word, everything that is not our business.”
Epictetus, Handbook, I.

1. “Passive” Stoicism

We sometimes hear Stoicism enthusiasts use the distinction between what depends on oneself and what does not in order to justify their disengagement from certain situations:
“I prefer to change my desires rather than the order of the world”; “other people’s emotions don’t concern me”; “I focus only on what I feel.”

In a sense, this seems logical: what depends on me, for Epictetus, are my desires, my…