The Supremacy of Reason I - The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius - Published Selections Explained, Med. XI.01

Meditation Med. XI.01 – The Supremacy of Reason I - Translated by George Long and rewritten by Russell McNeil

Note: Meditation XI.01 is published in The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius: Selections Annotated and Explained; McNeil. Russell, PhD, Skylight Paths, Ch. 5 ("Stoicism and the Mind – The Supremacy of Reason"), p. 121, 2007

Russell McNeil, PhD, is the author of The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius: Selections Annotated and Explained by Skylight Paths Publishing. The unpublished selections presented in this Blog are provided as supplemental material to the published selections which are annotated and explained in the book. The published selections are referenced in this Blog by page number and section.

The Supremacy of Reason II - The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius - Published Selections Explained, Med. XI.02

Meditation Med. XI.02 – The Supremacy of Reason II - Translated by George Long and rewritten by Russell McNeil

Note: Meditation XI.02 is published in The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius: Selections Annotated and Explained; McNeil. Russell, PhD, Skylight Paths, Ch. 5 ("Stoicism and the Mind – The Supremacy of Reason"), p. 121, 2007

Russell McNeil, PhD, is the author of The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius: Selections Annotated and Explained by Skylight Paths Publishing. The unpublished selections presented in this Blog are provided as supplemental material to the published selections which are annotated and explained in the book. The published selections are referenced in this Blog by page number and section.

The Tragic Christians - The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius - Unpublished Selections Explained, Med. XI.03

Meditation XI.03 - The Tragic Christians - Translated by George Long and rewritten by Russell McNeil

What a soul that is which is ready, if at any moment it must be separated from the body, and ready either to be extinguished or dispersed or continue to exist;¹ but so that this readiness comes from your own judgment, not from mere obstinacy, as with the Christians,² but considerately and with dignity and in a way to persuade another, without tragic show.³

Explanation

(1) This statement should not imply Stoic confusion about an afterlife. There is no afterlife in the Stoic scheme. As Marcus implies throughout the meditations, the goal of living is happiness, and that happiness is a state that is not bound to a temporal metric. If it were, this would imply that happiness is somehow imperfect. The Christian scheme promises a life everlasting. The Stoics find this entirely unnecessary, and, frankly, illogical. If happiness must endure forever to be perfect, then happiness that does not endure must be imperfect. The reward for virtue in Stoicism is a serenity that can not be tarnished - or improved - by duration. Happiness simply is. And then we die. Still, the jury was out (and to be honest might always be out in any religious sense) on the issue of what happens to the human soul after death.

Stoicism is a materialistic philosophy - not a religion. The soul is a material entity, and - in theory at least - measurable, using the tools of physics. Those tools were not available in the second century. As discussed further in Meditation XI.16, the ancient Stoics would likely have seized on modern electroencephalography (EEG) and magnetoencephalography (MEG) and related tools as useful ways to measure brain rhythms, which, they certainly would have hypothesized as direct or indirect analogs of the activity of the soul. At the very least they would have studied these rhythms in their attempts to uncover the underlying laws of nature governing human activity. In effect Stoic physics would take on the same program as modern physics - but with a different goal. The question of whether the soul retained its integrity after death would probably have been resolved in the negative - had they had access to those tools. The forces and fields responsible for those activities are in fact not destroyed at death (energy is conserved - and the Stoics were intuitively aware of this), but, consistent with the second law of thermodynamics (the law of entropy increase - and the Stoics were also intuitively aware of this law as well), the cohesion of those forces and fields is certainly dispersed when the body dies and decomposes.

(2) Marcus Aurelius was irritated with the newly emergent Christian cult and its pernicious undermining of Roman traditions. While it is true that Christian and Stoic values seem to converge in many ways, this was due more to the appropriation of Stoic philosophy by the early Christian fathers in the early centuries of the Christian Church. From the perspective of Marcus, the Christians were a bizarre cult infested with a cohort of followers who seemed to seek death at every turn. Marcus's comment that our readiness for death ought to come "from your own judgment, not from mere obstinacy, as with the Christians," alludes to the unreasoned willingness that Christians appeared to display in seeking death in the name of their crucified leader. This was - to Marcus - patently illogical and irrational (and in his mind would have probably seemed as illogical and irrational as the willingness shown by the followers of a modern cult figure, such as Jim Jones). A Stoic is always ready to die, and will never fear death. But no good Stoic should seek death in the name of an absent leader in return for a new life in another kingdom - a kingdom which the Stoics clearly rejected.

(3) The Christians died as martyrs and did so in the name of their leader, Jesus Christ, and did so (in Marcus's view) not to persuade others, but to seek their eternal (and irrational) reward. Death - to Marcus - would be welcome to any Stoic and embraced, if death brought virtue and honor to the actor, or served to show others how one ought to live. The sacrificial deaths of Christians were to Marcus nothing more than a useless and "tragic show."

Russell McNeil, PhD, is the author of The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius: Selections Annotated and Explained by Skylight Paths Publishing. The unpublished selections presented in this Blog are provided as supplemental material to the published selections which are annotated and explained in the book. The published selections are referenced in this Blog by page number and section.

Society and Social Collapse I - The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius - Published Selections Explained, Med. XI.04

Meditation Med. XI.04 – Society and Social Collapse I - Translated by George Long and rewritten by Russell McNeil

Note: Meditation XI.04 is published in The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius: Selections Annotated and Explained; McNeil. Russell, PhD, Skylight Paths, Ch. 9 ("Society and Government in Stoicism – Society and Social Collapse I"), p. 217, 2007

Russell McNeil, PhD, is the author of The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius: Selections Annotated and Explained by Skylight Paths Publishing. The unpublished selections presented in this Blog are provided as supplemental material to the published selections which are annotated and explained in the book. The published selections are referenced in this Blog by page number and section.

The Art of Being Human - The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius - Unpublished Selections Explained, Med. XI.05

Meditation XI.05 - The Art of Being Human - Translated by George Long and rewritten by Russell McNeil

What is your art? To be good. And how is this accomplished well except by general principles, some about the nature of the universe, and others about the proper constitution of humanity?¹

Explanation

(1) The Greek word for art is techne. Art requires a rational process in the production of an object or the accomplishment of an objective. The principle objective of human life in the Stoic scheme is to be happy. We can achieve this objective only through virtue. Being virtuous requires the study and full understanding of nature and her laws or "general principles." In so doing we will see that nature is beautiful - in the true sense of this word - and good. We will also understand that we as human beings are integrated fully into the fabric of this natural design, and that we too are beautiful and good. Our art then is to be what we by nature truly are: good. As creatures with free will, we do have the option not to develop this art. The art of being human requires perseverance and cultivation.

Russell McNeil, PhD, is the author of The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius: Selections Annotated and Explained by Skylight Paths Publishing. The unpublished selections presented in this Blog are provided as supplemental material to the published selections which are annotated and explained in the book. The published selections are referenced in this Blog by page number and section.

Comedy, Tragedy, and Stoicism - The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius - Unpublished Selections Explained, Med. XI.06

Meditation XI.06 - Comedy, Tragedy, and Stoicism - Translated by George Long and rewritten by Russell McNeil

At first tragedies were brought on the stage as means of reminding us of the things which happen, and that it is according to nature for things to happen so, and that, if you are delighted with what is shown on the stage, you should not be troubled with that which takes place on the larger stage. For you see that these things must be accomplished thus, and that even they bear them who cry out "O Cithaeron."¹ And, indeed, some things are said well by the dramatic writers, of which kind is the following especially: - “Me and my children if the gods neglect, This has its reason too.” And again - “We must not chale and fret at that which happens.” And, “Life's harvest reap like the wheat's fruitful ear.” And other things of the same kind.² After tragedy the old comedy was introduced, which had a magisterial freedom of speech, and by its very plainness of speaking was useful in reminding us to beware of insolence;³ and for this purpose too Diogenes used to take from these writers.⁴ But as to the middle comedy which came next,⁵ observe what it was, and again, for what object the new comedy was introduced, which gradually sunk down into a mere mimic artifice.⁶ That some good things are said even by these writers, everybody knows: but the whole plan of such poetry and dramaturgy, to what end does it look!⁷

Explanation

(1) Marcus offers us a cool reminder of the role and importance of the arts. Drama offers not only entertainment, but demonstrates how our personal experiences tie in with those on the "larger stage." Drama serves too as a mechanism for reflecting on the most difficult situations. The cry "O Cithaeron" is a reference to Oedipus's powerful monologue in Sophocles's tragedy Oedipus the King:

"O Cithaeron! Why didst thou e'er receive me, or received, Why not destroy, that men might never know Who gave me birth? O Polybus! O Corinth! And thou, long time believed my father's palace, Oh! what a foul disgrace to human nature Didst thou receive beneath a prince's form! Impious myself, and from an impious race. Where is my splendor now? ... "

(2) These selections are consistent with Stoic philosophy. We ought never "fret" about the accidents of life - what happens to us causes no real harm and is - in the end - what was meant to be. And, in his second reference, we do indeed "harvest" what we sow, so that here too we not not be surprised by life's twists and turns.

(3) The Old Comedy survives today in the works of Aristophanes (ca. 448-380 BCE).

(4) The reference is to Diogenes the Stoic (ca. 230 - ca. 150 BCE), a Greek philosopher active during the middle period of Stoicism (for more on this, please see the Introduction, "A Brief History of Stoicism" p xxiii, in the book). None of Diogenes's works survive but he is quoted frequently by other writers, particularly by Cicero (103-43 BCE).

(5) Middle comedy flourished in the 4th century BCE in the works of Eubulus, Epicrates of Ambracia, Anaxandrides, and Alexis.

(6) The New Comedy is perhaps best represented by Menander (ca. 342–291 BCE). Marcus's veiled criticism, "mere mimic artifice," might refer to New Comedy's predilection toward moral one liners, as well as its frequent but simplified imitations of the older styles of comedy.

(7) Marcus clearly prefers the older comedy forms over the new, which he seems here to dam with faint praise, "some good things are said even by these writers." His criticism was valid. The works of Aristophanes and the importance of the old comedy have survived over twenty-five hundred years of positive critical review.

Russell McNeil, PhD, is the author of The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius: Selections Annotated and Explained by Skylight Paths Publishing. The unpublished selections presented in this Blog are provided as supplemental material to the published selections which are annotated and explained in the book. The published selections are referenced in this Blog by page number and section.

A Stoic Must Engage in Philosophy - The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius - Unpublished Selections Explained, Med. XI.07

Meditation XI.07 - A Stoic Must Engage in Philosophy - Translated by George Long and rewritten by Russell McNeil

How plain does it appear that there is not another condition of life so well suited for philosophising as this in which you now happen to be.¹

Explanation

(1) Marcus would view modern society as having abrogated its central responsibility by allowing a hijacking of "philosophy" by intellectuals. In fact, many people in our world have marginalized the very word "philosophy." We conjure up images of worried academics philosophizing over conflicting arguments around the meaning of life. But the central task of the Stoic is philosophy, a word that means nothing more than seeking the truth. Philosophy, for the Stoic, is not the domain of the elite. It is what we all must do in order to be happy. The philosophy of 2nd century Rome did not require a university degree. Any time we reflect about how we ought to act in the world requires that we first check the rules. We ask ourselves if what we are about to do is self-serving, or other-serving. That is all that philosophy requires. The trick however is in the question. Many of us are unable to see the difference, or able to recognize that there even is a difference. To engage this question we need first to understand who and what we are in relationship to others. That requires that we "know ourselves." Knowing ourselves requires meditation. Meditation requires an inner journey. This inner journey is, paradoxically, a social act. It is a social act because the act of self-discovery will reveal that we are inextricably connected to the community: we come from nature; we live in nature; we return to nature at death. This is the method of Stoicism. The "Method of Stoicism" is examined in more detail in the book (Chapter 6, p. 129-151).

Russell McNeil, PhD, is the author of The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius: Selections Annotated and Explained by Skylight Paths Publishing. The unpublished selections presented in this Blog are provided as supplemental material to the published selections which are annotated and explained in the book. The published selections are referenced in this Blog by page number and section.

The Stoic Forgives, But Never Forgets - The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius - Unpublished Selections Explained, Med. XI.08

Meditation XI.08 - The Stoic Forgives, But Never Forgets - Translated by George Long and rewritten by Russell McNeil

A branch cut off from the adjacent branch must of necessity be cut off from the whole tree also. So too anyone when separated from another has fallen off from the whole social community. Now as to a branch, another cuts it off, but if you by your own act separate yourself from your neighbor when you hate him and turn away from him, and you do not know that you have at the same time cut yourself off from the whole social system. Yet you have this privilege certainly from the universal intelligence who framed society, for it is in your power to grow again to that which is near to you, and to become a part which helps to make up the whole. However, if it often happens, this kind of separation, it makes it difficult for that which detaches itself to be brought to unity and to be restored to its former condition. Finally, the branch, which from the first grew together with the tree, and has continued to have one life with it, is not like that which after being cut off is then ingrafted, for this is something like what the gardeners mean when they say that it grows with the rest of the tree, but that it has not the same mind with it.¹

Explanation

(1) As this simile illustrates, becoming alienated from the entire human community is something we as human beings choose for ourselves - and the consequences can be lasting. We ourselves choose to become self-regarding over other-regarding, and when we do so, we are always acting contrary to the will of nature. This fall from social union is never seen as something that is instigated by others. We always do this to ourselves. Modern commentators might view this as "blaming the victim." It might seem on face value insensitive to those who have been cast out of their social roles unfairly for discriminatory reasons. However, from a Stoic perspective, such discriminations will never be done by those who are acting rightly. Anyone who discriminates against anyone else is already like a branch removed from the tree. Their actions are always self-serving, and the community they are ejected from is not really a community at all in the Stoic sense. It is rather a dysfunctional community made up of those whose relationships with others are relationships of convenience or utility. The meditation is directed toward those who reject the true community of other-serving citizens, who in truth are prepared to welcome anyone into its fold. In this case the choice to break with society has been made willingly, and with full knowledge of the consequences. But even so, the Stoic will always presume that the choice was made out of ignorance, and the Stoic is expected to show compassion, and to take whatever measures available to reintegrate this self-exiled member back into the community. Marcus does appear to be fairly cautious about this however. Those who choose to become self-regarding - especially those who do so repeatedly - have great difficulty in reestablishing their full community status. They are - as he states here - like a graft. They can and do grow with the tree again, and can indeed flourish, but they do not have the "same mind" as before. A Stoic will always be ready to forgive. But a Stoic will never forget.

Russell McNeil, PhD, is the author of The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius: Selections Annotated and Explained by Skylight Paths Publishing. The unpublished selections presented in this Blog are provided as supplemental material to the published selections which are annotated and explained in the book. The published selections are referenced in this Blog by page number and section.

The Confident Stoic - The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius - Unpublished Selections Explained, Med. XI.09

Meditation XI.09 - The Confident Stoic - Translated by George Long and rewritten by Russell McNeil

As those who try to stand in your way when you are proceeding according to right reason, will not be able to turn you aside from your proper action, so neither let them drive you from your benevolent feelings towards them, but be on your guard equally in both matters, not only in the matter of steady judgment and action, but also in the matter of gentleness towards those who try to hinder or otherwise trouble you.¹ For this also is a weakness, to be vexed at them, as well as to be diverted from your course of action and to give way through fear; for both are equally deserters from their post, the person who does it through fear, and the person who is alienated from one who is by nature both kin and a friend.²

Explanation

(1) This meditation offers an interesting mix of persistence, toleration and wisdom - three virtues acting in unison. It's also extraordinarily encouraging. It basically claims that any actions that we as human beings decide to take, will succeed - if those actions are directed toward the common good, and have been carefully reasoned. Confident business leaders, athletes or military leaders who adopt a posture like this often do succeed, except that their posture toward their adversaries is generally not one of gentle benevolence - as Marcus commands. The reason that adversaries will oppose those who are on a "right reason" path is - according to Stoic reasoning - rooted, not in willful animosity, but in true ignorance of the will of nature. When we operate with right reason, we understand that even those who try to oppose us are, in actuality, among those who will become the beneficiaries of our actions. We do what we must do in life because we know that our actions are best for every member of the community. Still, Marcus cautions us not to proceed blindly. We need to be on our guard. Stoics need to be foxy (please see Meditation XI.31).

(2) Being vexed is something Stoics ought never do, because it is contrary to nature. It is, in fact, contrary to one of the five central principles of Stoicism (sins or transgressions against reason). Please see Meditation II.16 on p.16 in the book for a fuller discussion of this topic and the Stoic concept of "sin." Being fearful is an emotional excess, and is also contrary to nature because the Stoic has nothing to fear - Stoics are truly invincible. This latter idea is also discussed in the book in Chapter 4, p. 95 (Meditations X.03 and VIII.28).

Russell McNeil, PhD, is the author of The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius: Selections Annotated and Explained by Skylight Paths Publishing. The unpublished selections presented in this Blog are provided as supplemental material to the published selections which are annotated and explained in the book. The published selections are referenced in this Blog by page number and section.

We Imitate Nature as Nature Imitates Justice - The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius - Unpublished Selections Explained, Med. XI.10

Meditation XI.11 - We Imitate Nature as Nature Imitates Justice - Translated by George Long and rewritten by Russell McNeil

There is no nature which is inferior to art, for the arts imitate the nature of things.¹ But if this is so, then nature which is the most perfect and the most comprehensive of all natures, cannot fall short of the skill of art.² Now all arts do the inferior things for the sake of the superior; therefore the universal nature does so too.³ And, indeed, hence is the origin of justice, and in justice the other virtues have their foundation:⁴ for justice will not be observed, if we either care for middle things (things indifferent), or are easily deceived and careless and changeable.⁵

Explanation

(1) This theory that all art is a form of imitation (mimesis) or re-presentation of nature originates in Plato's Republic where art is defined as twice removed, because every element in nature is itself an imitation of the form of an idea which gives rise to each of the elements in nature.

(2) A copy or imitation of anything can never be as perfect or authentic as the original. Modern science would support this on the basis of the second law of thermodynamics, or the law of entropy.

(3) Art is inferior to nature. The universal nature re-presents (imitates) justice (once removed) from the form of the idea of justice - which must be superior, just as the human mind re-presents nature (in the various arts - twice removed) from the superior original form of justice.

(4) Human justice is a virtue achieved through human actions. Human justice is imitative of a universal law of nature but that law itself is inferred from reason when we observe the various relationships in nature.

(5) The necessity of justice will never be understood if we observe only the "middle" things because, in caring only for middle things we are blind to the truths of nature which are observed only from a close and careful examination of nature.

Russell McNeil, PhD, is the author of The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius: Selections Annotated and Explained by Skylight Paths Publishing. The unpublished selections presented in this Blog are provided as supplemental material to the published selections which are annotated and explained in the book. The published selections are referenced in this Blog by page number and section.

Controlling Addiction and Compulsive Behavior - The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius - Unpublished Selections Explained, Med. XI.11

Meditation XI.11 - Controlling Addiction and Compulsive Behavior - Translated by George Long and rewritten by Russell McNeil

If the things do not come to you, the pursuits and avoidances of which disturb you, still in a manner you go to them.¹ Let then your judgment about them be at rest, and they will remain quiet, and you will not be seen either pursuing or avoiding.²

Explanation

(1) Every meditation crafted by Marcus Aurelius reflects or imitates a universal truth about the laws of nature in the manner that an artist in her paintings, music, poetry, or sculpture attempts to imitate a truth about existence. As a consequence every meditation is also a meme, a modern term coined by the British ethologist Richard Dawkins (1941 -). The memetic quality of each of these meditations is bound to the sequence of ideas, symbols and processes laid out by its author. The word meme was taken from the Greek mimema (something imitated). According to Dawkins, memes are analogous to genes, and like the genes in a DNA sequence can self-replicate and even mutate in response to cultural pressures.

In an attempt to simplify these passages (or to represent Marcus as a new-age thinker), several recent but occasionally glib translations of the meditations lose their memetic qualities. I could, for example, offer you a plainer syntax structure for this meditation by restructuring the first sentence to read: "Even though there are many pleasures (or struggles) that you would rather not pursue (or not avoid), still you are inclined to pursue (or avoid) them." The literal meaning might seem clearer in this form, but the meditation loses its power as a meme and, frankly, much of its relevance to Stoicism. The sequence of intellectual steps Marcus lays out for us is essential, just as the sequence of genes in a DNA molecule is essential. Interchange the strands, and the DNA will either no longer replicate or replicate into a monstrosity. This is the reason I have resisted the temptation to "dumb down" Marcus's language.

We are intellectually forced, in following Marcus's sequence, to enter into the meditation on his terms, and in the order he specifies. We are required first to think abstractly about "things" not coming. We are secondly required to identify, from our own experiences, just what sorts of things we pursue - perhaps addictively - and what sorts of things we avoid - perhaps compulsively. And thirdly we are faced with the classic addict's (or laggard's) dilemma. There may indeed be many such things that we know are not good for us - but still pursue, if even only in our imagination - or ought to be struggling to achieve - but avoid in our psychological attitude toward struggle or work, even though we know these struggles or work duties are good and necessary for us. A modern expression for this psychological situation, applied to a controlled alcohol addict, is the so-called "dry drunk." In our working lives this psychology is reflected in those who cannot wait for the work day to end - even though they might be excellent workers (although psychologically still laggards).

(2) The judgment we are required to set "at rest" - if only for the moment that the compulsion occurs - is the "opinion" that we really need the pleasure we pursue, or that we really abhor the struggle we avoid. If we examine such situations from our real personal experience, we will probably realize that objectively we do not need those pleasures, and ought really not abhor those struggles. Such a shift in opinion is a shift to reality. Addictions and compulsions are aberrations. We know that. Stoicism offers a mode of thinking that shows us the truth - that our addictions and compulsions really are false opinions. When we learn to take these mental holidays from addictive or compulsive attitudes, we can learn how to release ourselves from addictive or compulsive patterns.

Russell McNeil, PhD, is the author of The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius: Selections Annotated and Explained by Skylight Paths Publishing. The unpublished selections presented in this Blog are provided as supplemental material to the published selections which are annotated and explained in the book. The published selections are referenced in this Blog by page number and section.

The Perfect Sphere - The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius - Unpublished Selections Explained, Med. XI.12

Meditation XI.12 - The Perfect Sphere - Translated by George Long and rewritten by Russell McNeil

The spherical form of the soul maintains its figure,¹ when it is neither extended toward any object,² nor contracted inward,³ nor dispersed nor sinks down,⁴ but is illuminated by light, by which it sees the truth, the truth of all things and the truth that is in itself.⁵

Explanation

(1) The notion that the soul is configured in the shape of a perfect sphere reflects the influence of the Greek Pythagorean philosophical school on early Stoicism. Pythagoras conjectured that the cosmos was in the shape of a perfect sphere, and that the Earth - at the center of the cosmos - was also shaped as a perfect sphere. The Stoics maintained that the animating intelligence of the universe, Logos, filled the entire cosmos but not the void beyond. Thus it would follow that this animating principle - referred to also at times as the world-soul - would also form the shape of the physical figure of the universe, that is, a perfect sphere. Because like begets like, the human soul, which is distilled from the whole, and of the same nature in all respects as the world-soul, must also be so shaped.

(2) Marcus uses these various distortions of the sphere as similes reflecting distortions in our lives when we stray from the right path. The sphere that would "extend toward any object" is a simile for any excessive human attraction toward a physical pleasure, power, or fame.

(3) "Contracting inward" is meant to signify any excessive actions that prevent us from doing the right thing (that is, being virtuous) because of our fear of physical or psychological pain. This is how the Stoic would define cowardice.

(4) Dispersed or sinking actions would include those that are ill-considered, poorly understood, or misdirected.

(5) The "truth" is the inherent beauty and goodness of perfection - a perfection mirrored in the shape of the sphere. That perfection, rightly understood as the perfection of the law of nature in its many manifestations, can be seen by anyone who turns toward its light. This same truth is also in the soul, or "in itself," because our core nature comes from this same source, and is in fact part of, and tethered to this same source, Logos.

Russell McNeil, PhD, is the author of The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius: Selections Annotated and Explained by Skylight Paths Publishing. The unpublished selections presented in this Blog are provided as supplemental material to the published selections which are annotated and explained in the book. The published selections are referenced in this Blog by page number and section.

Ignoring What Others Think II - The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius - Published Selections Explained, Med. XI.13

Meditation Med. XI.13 – Ignoring What Others Think II - Translated by George Long and rewritten by Russell McNeil

Note: Meditation XI.13 is published in The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius: Selections Annotated and Explained; McNeil. Russell, PhD, Skylight Paths, Ch. 3 ("Stoicism and Vice – Ignoring What Others Think II"), p. 79, 2007

Russell McNeil, PhD, is the author of The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius: Selections Annotated and Explained by Skylight Paths Publishing. The unpublished selections presented in this Blog are provided as supplemental material to the published selections which are annotated and explained in the book. The published selections are referenced in this Blog by page number and section.

The Nature of Evil and Insignificance of Misfortune II - The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius - Published Selections Explained, Med. XI.14

Meditation Med. XI.14 – The Nature of Evil and Insignificance of Misfortune II - Translated by George Long and rewritten by Russell McNeil

Note: Meditation XI.14 is published in The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius: Selections Annotated and Explained; McNeil. Russell, PhD, Skylight Paths, Ch. 3 ("Stoicism and Vice – The Nature of Evil and Insignificance of Misfortune II"), p. 57, 2007

Russell McNeil, PhD, is the author of The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius: Selections Annotated and Explained by Skylight Paths Publishing. The unpublished selections presented in this Blog are provided as supplemental material to the published selections which are annotated and explained in the book. The published selections are referenced in this Blog by page number and section.

On Knowing Yourself and 'Wolfish' Friendships II - The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius - Published Selections Explained, Med. XI.15

Meditation Med. XI.15 – On Knowing Yourself and 'Wolfish' Friendships II - Translated by George Long and rewritten by Russell McNeil

Note: Meditation XI.15 is published in The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius: Selections Annotated and Explained; McNeil. Russell, PhD, Skylight Paths, Ch. 8 ("The Practice of Stoicism – Knowing Yourself and 'Wolfish' Friendships"), p. 201, 2007

Russell McNeil, PhD, is the author of The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius: Selections Annotated and Explained by Skylight Paths Publishing. The unpublished selections presented in this Blog are provided as supplemental material to the published selections which are annotated and explained in the book. The published selections are referenced in this Blog by page number and section.

The Power of Soul - The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius - Unpublished Selections Explained, Med. XI.16

Meditation XI.16 - The Power of Soul - Translated by George Long and rewritten by Russell McNeil

As to living in the best way, this power is in the soul, if it be indifferent to things which are indifferent.¹ And it will be indifferent, if it looks on each of these things separately and all together,² and if it remembers that not one of them produces in us an opinion about itself, nor comes to us;³ but these things remain immovable, and it is we ourselves who produce the judgments about them,⁴ and, as we may say, write them in ourselves, it being in our power not to write them,⁵ and it being in our power, if by necessity these judgments have imperceptibly got admission to our minds, to wipe them out;⁶ and if we remember also that such attention will only be for a short time, and then life will be at an end.⁷ Besides, what trouble is there at all in doing this?⁸ For if these things are according to nature, rejoice in them, and they will be easy to you:⁹ but if contrary to nature, seek what is conformable to your own nature, and strive towards this,¹⁰ even if it bring no reputation;¹¹ for each of us is allowed to seek our own good.¹²

Explanation

(1) The Stoic soul or psyche is not the obscure intangible and indefinable object of religious traditions. Even in the ancient world the Stoics understood the soul as a materially defined and localized entity. If we take Stoic principles literally, the soul or its properties should therefore be accessible and measurable using the techniques of physics. The ancient Stoics would marvel at modern electroencephalography (EEG) and magnetoencephalography (MEG) with their detection of alpha, beta, delta, and theta waves, and other measurables of brain activity. These electromagnetically generated signals, they would conclude, are actually analogs of active mind-based human rhythms - in effect, they are direct measurements of the soul at work. These responses of the soul can be triggered by many things. The notion of "indifference" in this meditation applies to those areas of living that ought to trigger indifferent cognitive responses. This - the Stoic will claim - is a matter of choice and attitude. The pleasure-pain and fight-flight responses, in particular, are important, but only for bodily survival, and ought (in Stoicism) to trigger the appropriate cognitive responses (panic and addiction are examples of what the Stoics would say would be inappropriate cognitive responses). But these areas have nothing to do with "living in the best way," or living harmoniously with nature, or being virtuous.

(2) The Stoic would take a detached clinical perspective around areas of indifference. See indifferent things as they are, and understand why they exist, and for what purposes.

(3) The acquisition of an expensive material possession might drive us to extremes. We might work for years to save up for a fast sports car. But this object, the car, once we have it, has no "opinion" about itself. A similar argument can be made about all of our physical pleasures, or the pains that we spend an inordinate amount of time, money and energy trying to avoid.

(4) The view that maximizing pleasure and minimizing pain is the reason we exist is a judgment call. None of the pleasures or pains of life are in any sense important in terms of their influences over what really matters in life. They have no opinions about themselves.

(5) We have the power to see the difference between what is truly vital, and what is indifferent. We can "write" those differences onto our souls.

(6) We also have the power to "wipe out" those judgments that have in the past obscured our real reasons for living.

(7) This approach - to remember that it is easy to shift a long-held attitude, if we look at the brevity of life - has been subsumed into a variety of twelve-step approaches to addiction recovery. In the words of those programs, we can resolve these sometimes difficult addictions and our attitudes toward addictions by rewriting our personal scripts on a daily basis, and doing this "one day at a time."

(8) The "one day at a time" approach does work. It is a manageable and "trouble" free way to deal with seemingly intractable problems.

(9) Following nature will be painless and be a cause for rejoicing because the objects in this approach do give opinions about themselves, and those objects are both beautiful and good for those who choose to examine them.

(10) If things are contrary to nature, we ought to be indifferent toward them. We will be indifferent if we truly see them as they are, and notice that these things are indeed not conformable to our true nature.

(11) One of the difficulties we have in dealing with addictions, for example, is the isolation that our abandonment of those addictions brings. We lose the community of peers that are so often held together by the addiction. This feels like a loss of "reputation." But reputation in the Stoic scheme is nothing other than a form of fame - something we seek to bring comfort to our ego. It is really self-serving, and in opposition to nature. Our true goal in life must be other-serving. This is what will bring us real and lasting happiness.

(12) We have the power to act in ways that are unique to our own gifts and abilities. The virtues we have, and the ways we may express these define our individual paths.

Russell McNeil, PhD, is the author of The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius: Selections Annotated and Explained by Skylight Paths Publishing. The unpublished selections presented in this Blog are provided as supplemental material to the published selections which are annotated and explained in the book. The published selections are referenced in this Blog by page number and section.

Nature is Harmless - The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius - Unpublished Selections Explained, Med. XI.17

Meditation XI.17 - Nature is Harmless - Translated by George Long and rewritten by Russell McNeil

Consider where each thing comes from, and of what it consists, and into what it changes, and what kind of a thing it will be when it has changed,¹ and that it will sustain no harm.²

Explanation

(1) Stoic method requires both reduction and synthesis in its approach to the study of nature. The goal is to understand the underlying nature of the cosmos, the rules governing nature, and ultimately the moral template that governs our role in nature. This statement can be viewed as setting the scientific agenda for humankind - unprecedented when it was first articulated over two thousand years ago.

(2) The only harm that anything can experience devolves from resisting the law of nature. Inanimate matter and non-sentient life cannot resist those laws. Human beings can choose to oppose nature's plan, but such resistance is always futile and the only harm such resistance can exact is to deprive those actors from the peace, serenity and enlightenment that will come to those who live in accord with nature's design. But even in those cases, unhappy people will eventually die, and their substance will be reabsorbed back into the nature from which they came.

Russell McNeil, PhD, is the author of The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius: Selections Annotated and Explained by Skylight Paths Publishing. The unpublished selections presented in this Blog are provided as supplemental material to the published selections which are annotated and explained in the book. The published selections are referenced in this Blog by page number and section.

Anger Management: Step 1, Know Yourself - The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius - Published Selections Explained, Med. XI.18a

Meditation Med. XI.18a – Stoic Anger Management: Step 1, Know yourself and understand your relationship to others - Translated by George Long and rewritten by Russell McNeil

Note: Meditation XI.18a is published in The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius: Selections Annotated and Explained; McNeil. Russell, PhD, Skylight Paths, Ch. 8 ("The Practice of Stoicism – A Ten-Step Program in Anger Management"), p. 181, 2007

Russell McNeil, PhD, is the author of The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius: Selections Annotated and Explained by Skylight Paths Publishing. The unpublished selections presented in this Blog are provided as supplemental material to the published selections which are annotated and explained in the book. The published selections are referenced in this Blog by page number and section.

Anger Management: Step 2, Know Others and Study their Foibles - The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius - Published Selections Explained, Med. XI.18b

Meditation Med. XI.18b – Stoic Anger Management: Step 2, Know Others and Study their Foibles - Translated by George Long and rewritten by Russell McNeil

Note: Meditation XI.18b is published in The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius: Selections Annotated and Explained; McNeil. Russell, PhD, Skylight Paths, Ch. 8 ("The Practice of Stoicism – A Ten-Step Program in Anger Management"), p. 181, 2007

Russell McNeil, PhD, is the author of The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius: Selections Annotated and Explained by Skylight Paths Publishing. The unpublished selections presented in this Blog are provided as supplemental material to the published selections which are annotated and explained in the book. The published selections are referenced in this Blog by page number and section.

Anger Management: Step 3, Ignorance in Others is Involuntary - The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius - Published Selections Explained, Med. XI.18c

Meditation Med. XI.18c – Stoic Anger Management: Step 3, Recognize that Ignorance in Others is Involuntary - Translated by George Long and rewritten by Russell McNeil

Note: Meditation XI.18c is published in The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius: Selections Annotated and Explained; McNeil. Russell, PhD, Skylight Paths, Ch. 8 ("The Practice of Stoicism – A Ten-Step Program in Anger Management"), p. 183, 2007

Russell McNeil, PhD, is the author of The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius: Selections Annotated and Explained by Skylight Paths Publishing. The unpublished selections presented in this Blog are provided as supplemental material to the published selections which are annotated and explained in the book. The published selections are referenced in this Blog by page number and section.