Meditations by Marcus Aurelius - Summary & Review

Introduction

I recently finished reading Meditations by Marcus Aurelius, the Roman Stoic philosopher turned emperor. I found it to be one of the most engaging and eye-opening reads I've had in a while. The school of Stoicism has a long history, but was mostly developed and evolved through Greco-Roman philosophers. I will not be detailing the historical context, but rather give a brief overview of the main points of Stoicism.

Stoicism, at least how it was portrayed by Marcus, seems like a largely secular belief system due to its universality as a practical philosophy, but it was far from that for him. Marcus was somewhat agnostic, but ultimately believed in the Gods. The Stoics believed in an all-pervading force called the logos. The logos is within all individuals as well as in the entire universe. One the cosmic scale, it is synonymous with "God" or "Nature." On the personal level, it provides the basis for rationality. The logos also is what's responsible for the determination of all events (an implicitly deterministic outlook, yet the Stoics got around the apparent non-existence of free will by saying that it is a "voluntary accommodation to what is in any case inevitable") - a dog attached to a wagon can be "dragged by the wagon" or choose to "run with it," but the wagon remains moving.

Marcus' style of Stoicism has 3 main tenets, as it were:

1. Discipline of Perception - maintain complete objectivity of thought; see things as they really are.

2. Discipline of Action - concerning your relationship with other people (what you can control).

3. Discipline of Will - concerning your attitude toward what is not within your control.

One of the appealing parts of Stoicism is that it wasn't only the rich man's right to participate. There is the example of the drastic difference in social status between Marcus Aurelius (an emperor) and Epictetus (a slave), who were both Stoics. In a broader sense, philosophy itself doesn't discriminate among its participants.

---

Summary

Marcus Aurelius wrote the Meditations to himself, and they were never meant for formal publication. They are spiritual exercises from him to himself, and he essentially repeats the same 6 or 7 ideas over and over and over again to internalize them. Many of them overlap in content.

The most important themes I found throughout his work are the following:

1. Life is short (all will be forgotten):

Marcus never shies away from contemplating mortality, the insignificance of most things that occupy our minds, and the finality of everything. What may be the prettiest lie that many people have is tacitly believing that they will somehow live forever, and it is incredibly dangerous to how you live your life. Marcus makes notes throughout his work emphasizing that everything will be forgotten, even those who buried you and forgot you will also be forgotten. Change is the stuff of life, and to not recognize and accept that is to live irrationally. You've accepted the fact that you cannot fly as the birds do, so why do you then expect to be immortal?

2. People were made for the benefit of other people (we are all social animals):

The Gods made humans social animals, and it is within our nature/duty to cooperate, or at least put up with other people. He emphasizes that if an act doesn't cause harm to the group, it does not harm an individual. In Meditations 7.70, it presents a no excuses outlook: "Are you weary of enduring the bad men of this world? The gods aren't and they made them. Are you really weary of enduring the bad men of this world? Especially given that you are one of them?"

3. Don't complain:

The most ruthless criticism for anyone that spends so much time complaining can be found in this recurring theme:

If you can't control something, there's no sense in complaining because there's absolutely nothing you can do to change it. It is just a waste of time to do so.

If you can control something, there is also no reason to complain. You know what you have to do to make it better, so go do it. The time you wasted complaining could've been spent fixing the situation.

Either way, don't complain.

4. Be direct:

Displaying honesty, purpose (performing no random actions), and genuineness in your actions are highly regarded as important for a well respected life. If you go through life aimlessly and allow your emotions to override your rationality, you'll inevitably be degrading yourself and your abilities. People won't have to guess your intentions if you fully focus and practice what you believe in.

5. Be rational:

The 3 disciplines (perception, action, and will) stated above fit nicely here. Also, see things as they are; see them as they really are. What composes it, what is its purpose, and what is it for? Stop attributing your preconceptions to something and calling it "bad" because it makes your emotions feel a certain way. It is neither really "bad" or "good," as those are simply ideas we put on an object or outcome. Learn to separate your mind from your body, in a sense, and you will see how few things can affect you negatively. Concurrent with the logos, Marcus believed that everything happens as it should and that the Gods do not subject us to anything that we cannot endure.

6. Follow your nature:

As in the 2nd point, humans are meant to help or put up with other humans. We are to live up to our nature and fulfill our duty that was given to us. Also, don't expect fanfare or a reward for you virtuous actions. The reward for virtue is virtue itself. You are doing what you are meant to do, so let that be its own reward.

7. Achieve a moral life. Don't degrade your soul:

For Marcus Aurelius, he did not fear death nor any pain that life could bring. The only thing he feared was degrading his own soul, and not living up to his nature and what the logos intended for him.

---

Criticism

I do have some criticisms of Stoicism, but they are minor.

The main one that I have accepted as a good argument against it is that Stoicism doesn't lend itself as a good way to learn from your failures. The Stoics maintained that the mind can manipulate anything that happens to the body as either necessary or unable to affect the mind's well-being. Let's say you happen to lose a large amount of money. A regular person would feel frustration and sadness at losing what is no longer theirs. The Stoic, on the other hand would manage to see the situation objectively, and conclude that the loss of money has no impact on your mind. It is neither bad nor good, and thus, while our emotions (the body) tell us one way, the mind has the power to see the importance of not attaching your happiness to material possessions.

The second argument is not so much a criticism, but rather a byproduct of how scientific revelations since the time of Marcus Aurelius have aged Stoicism. Stoicism ignores the fact that mind and body are not separate, but that in fact the mind is just another organ in the body. Nevertheless, it's an organ with consciousness as an exclusive emergence with respect to the rest of the body. That is about as close as modern scientists can get to accepting the division between mind and body. Nobody nowadays would argue that the mind is impervious to certain genetic makeups or chemical changes, as that is precisely what causes it to take up the state that it does in every person. However, Marcus (and other Stoics) seem to have taken a position in line with modern determinism and the non existence of free will. There is a good argument for the absence/illusion of free will, and it seems as though Marcus and modern philosophers who hold this belief agree, while arriving at this conclusion through different reasons (logos vs. psychology). As a matter of practicality, one can conclude that free will is an illusion and still live as though it were a reality (this is something which I personally do). For this reason, I don't dock Stoicism too many points, as though it can be scientifically inaccurate, it is no less useful or truthful in practice.

Despite the criticism, when you supplement Stoicism with other practical philosophies, it can make for an incredibly fulfilling and rational life.

---

Conclusion

What makes Meditations so powerful is that Marcus not only told people how to live, then went on to indulge himself (he could have easily done so as a Roman emperor). No, he actually made it his entire focus to live the life he believed in. He is easily one of the most disciplined individuals that I have ever read about.

I love the structure of this book. Marcus wrote almost in bullet point fashion to fully internalize what he needed to do. This makes it one of the best examples of practical philosophy. There aren't many flashy words, nor is it long-winded. It's short and to the point. There is a powerful sense of urgency and ruthlessness in how he speaks to himself (and now, the reader). He allows himself no excuses.