Epictetus Discourses 4.4 - To those who have set their hearts on living at peace

To those who have set their hearts upon living in peace

You are travelling during the summer, on vacation.  After a long day of travel, you arrive at the hotel, check-in and then take your luggage to the room.  Immediately you love the room.  It's clean and cool; the beds are made and the window shows a great view to the beach.  Your thoughts and desires drift towards, "wow, wouldn't it be nice to wake up in this room, to this view every day!"  But then another thought wrings you back into reality; "Well, we will only be here a week, so I'll enjoy it while I can, and we check-out at the end of the week, I'll do so with gratitude and good memories in my heart."

It is this attitude of not wanting to hold on - this reserve clause of acceptance - that we need to embrace with regard to everything that is outside the sphere of our control.  And not only can this be applied to things that we desire, but it can and ought to be applied to things we may want to avoid.  And in this way, we can keep a constant, steady attitude in life.

"Remember that it is not only desire for office and wealth that debases men and makes them subservient to others, but also desire for quiet, and leisure, and travel, and learning ... what difference does it make, then, whether you set your desire on becoming a senator, or on not becoming one?" (v. 1-2, p. 239)  "Someone else is afraid that he won't gain office, while you're afraid that you will.  In no way should you be afraid, man!" (v. 19, p. 241)

"Nothing characterizes happiness better than the fact that it isn't subject to interruption or obstruction." (v. 6, p. 239)

No matter what happens, you should be steady; and even content with events.  "If this is what God pleases, so be it!" (v. 21, p. 241).  Your task is to "be happy, and be free from hindrance and obstruction." (v. 22, p. 241)

And, "if you attach value to anything at all that lies outside the sphere of choice, you've destroyed your choice.  Not only is [the appointment to] office outside that sphere, but also freedom from office; and not only want of leisure, but also leisure itself." (v. 23, p. 242)

If you are thrust into the commotion of every day life, it is in your power to change your attitude about the situation.  You can "think of it as a festival" if you wish, but "don't be irritable, don't be oversensitive about what comes to pass." (v. 24-25, p. 242).

Or, "if things turn out in such a way that you find yourself living alone, or with few companions, call that peace and quiet, and make use of those circumstances as you ought; converse with yourself, work on your impressions, perfect your preconceptions.  But if you get caught in a crowd, call it the games, call it a public gathering, call it a festival and join in the festival with everyone else." (v. 26, p. 242)

What is in your power?  The "ability to deal with impressions." (v. 28, p. 242)

"Haven't you heard it repeatedly stated that you must completely eradicate desire, and direct your aversion solely towards things that lie within the sphere of choice, and that you must give up everything, your body, possessions, reputation, and books or commotion, and office or freedom from office?  For if you turn aside from this course, you've become a slave, you're subject to others, you're liable to hindrance and constraint, you're entirely in the power of others.  No, you should keep the saying of Cleanthes at hand, 'Guide me, O Zeus, and thou, O Destiny'.  Is it your wish that I should go to Rome?  To Rome I go.  To Gyara?  Then to Gyara.  To Athens?  Then to Athens.  Into prison?  Then into prison." (v. 33, p. 243)

But who is Zeus, God and Destiny?  What if there is some person who claims they know the will of Zeus or God and they are telling me what to do?  Should I do so without thought?  I've made a note in my book on page 243.  "I'm ok with this if the 'divinity within me' is the part of the God who is directing the Universe and Destiny.  I don't want another man speaking for God, to me."  And to be clear, I believe there is a part of God that resides in me - the divinity within.  Marcus Aurelius references this several times in Meditations Book 2.13, 2.17, 3.4, 3.7, 3.15-16, 5.10, 12.1.  Practically speaking, this is hard work - trying to understand what God wants you specifically to do in this world.  Some might call it a personal calling.  Some might say that we were fated to do something.  Being true to this is what I think of as 'the divinity within.'  It is 'the god particle' if you have read God's Debris.

"There is one path alone that leads to happiness - and keep this thought at hand morning, noon and night - it is to renounce any claim to anything that lies outside the sphere of choice, to regard nothing as being your own, to surrender everything to deity, to fortune, to consign the administration of everything to those whom Zeus himself has appointed to carry out that task, and to devote yourself to one thing alone, that which is your own, that which is free from all hindrance." (v. 39, p. 244)

Live your life - go about what you think you should be doing.  But don't set your heart on things that are outside your control.  Go to school, get a job, marry, raise a family, go to work and contribute to society, but don't ever lose sight of the fact that all that you gain (health, wealth, fame, etc) can be lost and that if you lose it, you should view it as leaving a hotel room with a nice view.  Furthermore, events will conspire to "call you" to do something.  You may be called to lead an effort, or project at work or for the government or for your family.  You can choose to refuse, but you must look inside your heart - to the divinity within - to see what God has to say about it.  At some point, we have to act and not act.  We can't simply just drift in life aimlessly - or have others tell us what to do or not do.  So act!  Understand what the divinity within you says, find your unique calling and don't hold onto desires so harshly and don't avoid pain and discomfort at all costs.

The happy and industrious person "refers all his efforts to his own ruling centre, as he strives to bring it into accord with nature and to keep it so." (v. 43, p. 244)

Epictetus Discourses 2.8 - What is the essence of the good?

What is the true nature of the good?

There is divinity in each of us.  We have a mind that thinks; we possess intelligence and reason.  This is our god-given blessing that is unique to us.  It is here that we ought to spend our time and effort in improvement.

As Epictetus says, we "are of primary value [to God]" and that you and I are "a fragment of God" (v. 11, p. 85-86).  That "fragment of God" bit reminds me of the mind-blowing book by Scott Adams entitled God's Debris.  In this thought experiment, he proposes a paradigm, not un-like the Stoics, that helps us think of a framework where people can liberate their minds to more freely cooperate and help and love each other.  If you've not read or listened to it, I highly recommend it.

In today's modern world, people are fascinated by the invention of artificial intelligence.  Humans can create life, but this is a biological aspect of humans and it is not enough to satisfy the itch to create something truly special.  We, as a species, are trying to create a consciousness by our own design - inherent in us is this urge to create something that can exist on it's own.  This urge has haunted us for hundreds of years and we are driven to create something self-aware, outside the normal biological means of reproduction.

Isn't this nothing more than humanity trying to play like God?  God gave us our freedom and in turn, we are attempting to do the same.  "And what work of any human artist contains within itself the very faculties that are displayed in its markings?  Is such a work anything other than marble, or bronze, or gold, or ivory?  And the Athena of Phidia, once she has stretched out her hand to receive the Victory upon it, remains fixed in that attitude for ever, whereas the works of the gods move and breathe, and are capable of making use of impressions and passing judgements about them" (v. 20, p. 86-87).

Why make this point?  To show that we have a gift from God different from any of other life form in this world.  "Not only has [God] created you, but he has also entrusted you to your own sole charge ... he has delivered you yourself into your own keeping, and says, 'I had no one in whom I could put more confidence than you.  Keep this person as he was born by nature to be; keep him modest, trustworthy, high-minded, unshakable, free from passion, imperturbable'" (v. 21-23, p. 87)

And what are we to do with this unique gift?  We are to live our life according to virtue: integrity, honor, dignity, patience, calmness, poise, trustworthy, nobility.  We ought to show others our strength: "Desire that never fails in its aim, aversion that never falls into what it wants to avoid, motivation that accords with one's duty, purpose that is carefully weighed, and assent that is not over-hasty" (v. 29, p. 87).

Epictetus Discourses 1.6 - on providence

Of providence

The title of this chapter is On providence.

The point of this discourse is to show us that we are not mere brute animals.  What makes us humans unique is our providence-given abilities to "act in a methodical and orderly fashion, and in accordance with our own specific nature and constitution" (verse 15, p. 15).

Humans have the ability to think; to ponder; to reason and to appreciate.  What beasts create museums or art or music or ballets?  What animals write philosophical treatises or carry out experiments?  This is what sets us apart from all other creations.  Epictetus says "God brought the human race into the world to be a spectator of himself and of his works, and not merely to observe them, but also to interpret them.  It is thus shameful for a human being to begin and end where the irrational animals do.  Rather, he should start off where they do and end where nature ended with regard to ourselves.  Now it ended with contemplation, and understanding, and a way of life that is in harmony with nature.  Take care, then, that you don't die without having contemplated these realities" (verses 20-22, p. 16).

And where do we go to appreciate God's works?  I think they are not only found all over the world in the most pristine places, but they are also found in the day to day interactions.  To be able to see reason in philosophy and to see God's creations create!

Then the deep, reflective question Epictetus poses to us: "Will you never come to a realization of who you are, what you have been born for and the purpose for which the gift of vision was made in our case?"

And what about when difficult and disagreeable things happen to us?  How are we supposed to appreciate God's works then?  He offers a really good analogy.  People will take a pilgrimage to various places.  Perhaps they travel to Olympia or Mecca or to Washington D.C.  Despite the heat, humidity, the crowds, the traffic, the weather, the noise, the shouting - they endure it all to pay homage to whatever they find valuable.  Is this not true too with life and finding God or Zeus in the world?  Do we not fight the difficulties every day, if only to capture a glimpse of greatness?

And furthermore, God has given us the ability to endure said difficulties.  "by balancing all these things off against the remarkable nature of the spectacle, I imagine that you're able to accept and endure them.  Come now, haven't you been endowed with faculties that enable you to bear whatever may come about?  Haven't you been endowed with greatness of soul? And with courage?  And with endurance?  If only I have greatness of soul, what reason is left for me to be worried about anything that may come to pass?" (verses 28-29, p. 16)  And there is the rub - the key - the point of it all: to seek, to journey, to venture to find and then appreciate God's handiwork, while using the gifts God provides to enable us to get to that point.  To be able to seek, to use the inherent tools within us, to overcome and to achieve or at least to attempt to achieve.  That's all.

Without a lion to fight, there is no Hercules.  Without a lion, hydra, stag or boar, there is no Hercules.  Without the challenges, Hercules has no definition, no existence.  "What would have been the use of his arms and of all his strength, endurance, and nobility of mind if such circumstances and opportunities hadn't been there to rouse him and exercise him?" (verse 34, p. 17).

Now, take note!  In the seeking of trying to appreciate God's creations, you not only discover and appreciate those creations, but in the doing you discovered something within you: fortitude, grit, determination, reason, justice, discipline.  And you ought to appreciate this too!  In the seeking, you come to appreciate God's work without and within.  You may even exclaim, "Bring on me now, Zeus, whatever trouble you may wish, since I have the equipment that you granted me and such resources as will enable me to distinguish myself through whatever may happen" (verse 37, p. 17).

Or ... or, you do not embark on the journey to seek and appreciate God's works and you fail to not appreciate God's works and you fail to discover God's works within you.  In other words, "you cast blame on the gods" (verse 38).  You become impious.  In Christian vernacular, you break the first great commandment.

And one final point before the big question of the day.  God has given each of us the resources to deal with whatever difficulties come our way in our search to appreciate God's works.  God has given us the choice; God has given us freedom to choose.  There is no "constraint, compulsion" or "impediment" in this choice of ours - the choice of seeking to appreciate God's work or not.

And finally, to the big question of the day (maybe the question of a lifetime): what will you choose to do?

Will you use your God-given resources and God-given character of strength and resilience to seek out ways to appreciate God's works (both externally and within you)?  Or will you be wail, grieve, complain and groan?

Epictetus Discourses 1.3 - the benefit of knowing we are children of God

From the thesis that God is the father of mankind how may one proceed to the consequences?

Marcus Aurelius often wrote about "providence or atoms." This was in reference to the management of the universe and world. Is the world governed by God or Gods? Or is it a random interaction of atoms bouncing off each other endlessly leading to constant chaos?

There are several parts of Meditations that mentions this choice. As you read them, you will notice how he leans towards organization, order, a system or machine.

Book 4.2
Revisit the alternatives providence or atoms - and the many indications that the universe is a kind of community. But will matters of the flesh still have their hold on you? Consider that the mind, once it has abstracted itself and come to know its own defining power, has no contact with the movement of the bodily spirit.

Book 6.10
Either a stew, an intricate web, and dispersal into atoms: or unity, order, and providence. Now if the former, why do I even wish to spend my time in a world compounded at random and in like confusion? Why have any concern other than somehow, some time, to become 'earth unto earth'? And why actually am I troubled? Dispersal will come on me, whatever I do. But if the latter is true, I revere it, I stand firm, I take courage in that which directs all.

Book 6.24

Alexander of Macedon and his muleteer were levelled in death: either they were taken up into the same generative principles of the universe, or they were equally dispersed into atoms.  Reflect on how many separate events, both bodily and mental, are taking place in each one of us in the same tiny fragment of time: and then you will not be surprised if many more events, indeed all that comes to pass, subsist together in the one and the whole, which we call the Universe.

Book 7.32

On death. Either dispersal, if we are atoms: or, if we are a unity, extinction or a change of home.

Book 7.50

Again:  'What is born of earth goes back to earth: but the growth from heavenly seed returns whence it came, to heaven.'  Or else this: a dissolution of the nexus of atoms, and senseless molecules likewise dispersed.

Book 8.28

The recurrent cycles of the universe are the same, up and down, from eternity to eternity. And either the mind of the Whole has a specific impulse for each individual case - if so, you should welcome the result - or it had a single original impulse, from which all else follows in consequence: and why should you be anxious about that? The Whole is either a god - then all is well: or if purposeless - some sort of random arrangement of atoms or molecules - you should not be without purpose yourself. 

Book 9.39

Either all things flow from one intelligent source and supervene as in one coordinated body, so the part should not complain at what happens in the interest of the whole - or all is atoms, and nothing more than present stew and future dispersal. Why then are you troubled? Say to your directing mind: 'Are you dead, are you decayed, have you turned into an animal, are you pretending, are you herding with the rest and sharing their feed?'

Book 10.6

Whether atoms or a natural order, the first premise must be that I am part of the Whole which is governed by nature: the second, that I have some close relationship with the other kindred parts. With these premises in mind, in so far as I am a part I shall not resent anything assigned by the Whole. Nothing which benefits the Whole can be harmful to the part, and the Whole contains nothing which is not to its benefit. All organic natures have this in common, but the nature of the universe has this additional attribute, that no external cause can force it to create anything harmful to itself.

So remembering that I am part of a Whole so constituted will leave me happy with all that happens to me. And in so far as I have some close relationship with the other kindred parts, I shall do nothing unsocial, but rather look to the good of my kin and have every impulse directed to the common benefit and diverted from its opposite. All this in operation guarantees that life will flow well, just as you would judge a citizen's life in proper flow when he moves on through acts which benefit his fellow citizens, and welcomes all that his city assigns him.

We too are faced with this decision about how to view this Universe and life. Whether you talk to an atheist or a theist, both will share what they think is evidence that supports their cause. In a debate, it might be a tie. As an impartial observer, in a sense, we get to choose what we want to believe: Providence or Atoms. And when we arrive at this crossroads, we should do well to remember what Epictetus says: "If only one could be properly convinced of this truth, that we're all first and foremost children of God, and that God is the father of both human beings and gods, I think one would never harbour any mean or ignoble thought about oneself."

When I read this, it seems that Epictetus is saying that if you view yourself in high regard (a child of God), then your attitude about yourself and even the world, pivots to the positive.

image source: https://www.instagram.com/jpeg_v1/

Later he says, "these two elements have been mixed together in us from our conception, the body, which we have in common with animals, and reason and intelligence, which we share with the gods, some of us incline towards the kinship that is wretched and mortal, and only a few of us towards that which is divine and blessed. Now since everyone, whoever he may be, is bound to deal with each matter in accordance with the belief that he holds about it, those few who think they were born for fidelity, for self-respect, and for the sound use of impressions will never harbour any mean or ignoable thought about themselves, whereas the majority if people will do exactly the opposite."

On which side do you tilt? Are humans just high-functioning animals? Or are they more noble?

For me personally, believing in a God or Gods or Providence and thinking the Universe is ordered, I am more willing to accept my fate in all this; and that keeps me on the positive side of the scale. It also helps me give others the benefit of the doubt. If I tend to think that it is all chaos and random atoms, I might be willing to throw my hands up in the air in ambivalence and may act coldly towards other people and their challenges. But if I believe there is some order, I might be more willing order my life and help instill order and harmony in others.

Further Reading:

Stoicism: Providence or Atoms? Can you be a modern Stoic and an atheist (or agnostic)?

'Providence or Atoms? Providence!'

Commentary on Meditations: B12:14-15

Either the compulsion of destiny and an order allowing no deviation, or a providence open to prayer, or a random welter without direction. Now if undeviating compulsion, why resist it? If a providence admitting the placation of prayer, make yourself worthy of divine assistance. If an ungoverned welter, be glad that in such a maelstrom you have within yourself a directing mind of your own: if the flood carries you away, let it take your flesh, your breath, all else - but it will not carry away your mind.

The light of a lamp shines on and does not lose its radiance until it is extinguished. Will then the truth, justice, and self control which fuel you fail before your own end?

The "gods or atoms" argument is displayed again in chapter 14 of Book 12.  The gist of this idea is that the action is the same, whether you believe in a god or gods or if you do not.  The end result, "govern yourself."  If you can govern yourself, in the maelstrom, then do it.  If things are so random and chaotic, fine - accept it.  But then proceed to organize your mind.

Like light, the virtues of truth and justice and temperance always exist.  But do they exist in you?  You need to light them within you and they will always burn and light your life as long as you don't extinguish them.  And the choice is entirely yours as to whether you extinguish them or let them burn on.

(see also Citadel p. 45, 113, 148, 156-157, 237)

Commentary on Meditations: B10:7

The parts of the Whole, all that form the natural complement of the universe, must necessarily perish - and 'perish' should be taken in the sense of 'change'. Now if nature made this 'perishing' of the parts detrimental to them as well as necessary, the Whole would be poorly maintained when its parts are always on the way to change and specifically constituted to perish. Did nature deliberately undertake to harm the parts of herself, to render them both exposed to harm and necessarily condemned to fall into harm, or did she not notice these consequences? Hard to believe either.

But if someone abandons the concept of nature and explains these things as 'just the way they are', how absurd it is to combine the assertion that the parts of the Whole are naturally subject to change with surprise or resentment as if this change was something contrary to nature - especially as the dissolution of each thing is into the elements of which it is composed. Dissolution is either a scattering of the component elements or the change of solid to earth and spirit to air, so that these too are subsumed into the Reason of the Whole, whether the Whole is periodically turned to fire or renews itself through eternal mutations.

And do not imagine that this solid and this spirit are the same as at original birth. All this was gathered only yesterday or the day before from the influx of food consumed and air breathed in. So what changes is the gathered influx, and not what your mother bore. Suppose now that this influx has close implication in your individual self: that, I think, has no bearing on the present argument.

I had to really read this passage a few times to try to understand what Marcus is saying here.  In the first part of chapter 7 of Book 10, all he's really saying is he doesn't believe the Universe was designed to be in a constant "detrimental" change state or to be condemned to simply "perish".  Rather, he is alluding that the Universe has a greater end goal in mind - or at least it has determined that change and perishing are good for the health of the Universe (self-sustainment).  And to further get to the heart of the matter: he is alluding there is a directing mind behind the Universe.

In the second part, he clearly thinks it is "absurd" that some people are so surprised at (and resent) events while simultaneously believing the Universe is random mix of events.

The last part - what I get out of it is: we as individuals, are a series of different people.  We only ever live in the now.  So the at-birth version of you is way different than the 40-year old version of yourself, which is different than the 50-year old version of yourself.  All that matters is now.

(see also Citadel p. 149)

Commentary on Meditations: B10:6

Whether atoms or a natural order, the first premise must be that I am part of the Whole which is governed by nature: the second, that I have some close relationship with the other kindred parts. With these premises in mind, in so far as I am a part I shall not resent anything assigned by the Whole. Nothing which benefits the Whole can be harmful to the part, and the Whole contains nothing which is not to its benefit. All organic natures have this in common, but the nature of the universe has this additional attribute, that no external cause can force it to create anything harmful to itself.

So remembering that I am part of a Whole so constituted will leave me happy with all that happens to me. And in so far as I have some close relationship with the other kindred parts, I shall do nothing unsocial, but rather look to the good of my kin and have every impulse directed to the common benefit and diverted from its opposite. All this in operation guarantees that life will flow well, just as you would judge a citizen's life in proper flow when he moves on through acts which benefit his fellow citizens, and welcomes all that his city assigns him.

Two absolutes exist.

First, that we are part of the whole Universe (regardless of whether you believe there is a God or Gods or if all of it is just a random conflagration of atoms bouncing around in a constant flux).  There is no denying that there are some things ultimately out of your control and no matter how much you love it or how much you complain about it, whatever "it" is, will not change.  You simply must accept it.  Stated differently, amor fati.  In Stoic terms, this falls under the discipline of desire.

Second, we must recognize that humans are different than the vast majority of other living organisms.  What makes humans unique is our ability to reason coupled with our ability to be social. To a large degree, we have a duty to be social - to help others where we can.  This duty to help others falls under the Stoic discipline of action.

In my opinion, these two core ideas and disciplines are akin to the two great commandments in Christianity: 1) love God and 2) love neighbor.  And as long as we can keep these two ideas in the forefront of our minds and attempt to live accordingly, our "life will flow well" as Marcus states above.

(see also Citadel p. 43-44, 241) 

Commentary on Meditations: B9:40

Either the gods have power or they do not. Now, if they have no power, why pray? If they do have power, why not pray for their gift of freedom from all worldly fear, desire, or regret, rather than for the presence or absence of this or that? Certainly, if the gods can cooperate with men, they can cooperate to these ends.

But you might say: 'The gods have put these things in my own power.' Is it not then better to use your own power in freedom rather than show a servile and supine concern for what you cannot control? And who told you that the gods do not help us even to the ends which lie within our own power? At any rate, pray about these things, and you will see. One man prays: 'How can I sleep with that woman?' Your prayer is: 'How can I lose the desire to sleep with her?' Another prays: 'How can I be rid of that man?' You pray: 'How can I stop wanting to be rid of him?' Another: 'How can I save my little child?' You: 'How can I learn not to fear his loss?' And so on. Give all your prayers this turn, and observe what happens.

In a similar vein as the "Gods or Atoms" discussion, there is the discussion on the topic Gods having power or not.  Marcus goes down the branches and observes the dogma a Stoicism in the context of Gods having power or not.  If they indeed have no power (over humans), then praying is worthless.  But, supposing the Gods do have power and indeed cooperate with humans, then Marcus suggests how you should pray to them.  Ask them to give you real freedom.  Freedom from passions, fear, regrets, and desires.  These are the real slave-masters of humans, which if Gods do have power, perhaps they can help us humans gain freedom from them.

Some people may reply that we humans already have the power to release ourselves from the slavery of fear, anxiety, passions and desires.  Excellent!  Then use that power.  Show the Gods how good of a steward you are with your freedom.

If all that is not clear, Marcus provides a couple of examples.  One man may ask the Gods to help him in his quest to sleep with a woman.  A prokopton (one who makes progress on the path of Stoicism) would not pray to sleep with a woman, but would pray for the freedom from the desire to sleep with her.

Another person prays to the Gods that an undesirable person who is in their life, leaves (i.e. praying that their school teacher or boss moves away or perhaps gets in a car accident and dies).  A prokopton would pray for the freedom from the desire to be rid of that person.  And furthermore, I would add that they would also pray for wisdom - how they could learn from this undesirable person.

Yet another person would pray for their little child who may be on the verge of death - that the Gods would save her.  A prokopton would pray for freedom from the fear of loss.

In each instance, a prokopton prays for virtue or greater power or ability to exercise virtue.

Lastly, the Serenity Prayer seen above, is a possible Stoic prayer regarding the discipline of desire and action along with the virtues of courage and wisdom.

(see also Citadel p. 271)

Commentary on Meditations: B9:37-39

Enough of this miserable way of life, enough of grumbling and aping! Why are you troubled? What is new in this? What is it that drives you mad? The cause? Then face it. Or rather the material? Then face that. Apart from cause and material there is nothing. But you should even now, late though it is, see to your relation to the gods also: make yourself simpler, and better. Three years is as good as a hundred in this quest.

If he did wrong, the harm is to himself. But perhaps he did not do wrong.

Either all things flow from one intelligent source and supervene as in one coordinated body, so the part should not complain at what happens in the interest of the whole - or all is atoms, and nothing more than present stew and future dispersal. Why then are you troubled? Say to your directing mind: 'Are you dead, are you decayed, have you turned into an animal, are you pretending, are you herding with the rest and sharing their feed?'

I love it when advice from Marcus and my personal life events collide!  How timely is chapter 37 from Book 9 for me now.  I have, just this week, started a new assignment.  I am responsible for the service management of about 10 critical company applications, along with about 350 non-critical applications.  My job responsibilities are very vague and I need to juggle a dozen different things at once.  Thankfully my talent stack is such that I can potentially step into the role and immediately add value.  But, I admit, I worry and I see how I will have long days - often unplanned and unannounced - causing me to grumble inwardly.  What else is there to do?  The job is interesting!  So face it!  There is nothing surprising that will or can happen.  You have the talent stack to do this!  You have seen all this before in one former assignment or another.  So make a plan, put in the work and don't be sad about this lot in life - ever!  Remember, where a man can live, a man can live well!

If he did wrong, then tolerate or teach - there is no harm to you.  But perhaps he did not do wrong and it is you who needs to learn!

Gods or Atoms!  It doesn't matter where you conclusion lies.  Are you alive?  If so, you are thinking and a rational being.  If so, then act rationally.

(see also Citadel p. 41, 43, 148, 150)

Commentary on Meditations: B9:28

The recurrent cycles of the universe are the same, up and down, from eternity to eternity. And either the mind of the Whole has a specific impulse for each individual case - if so, you should welcome the result - or it had a single original impulse, from which all else follows in consequence: and why should you be anxious about that? The Whole is either a god - then all is well: or if purposeless - some sort of random arrangement of atoms or molecules - you should not be without purpose yourself.

In a moment the earth will cover us all. Then the earth too will change, and then further successive changes to infinity. One reflecting on these waves of change and transformation, and the speed of their flow, will hold all mortal things in contempt.

As often as the universe changes, much remains the same.  The changes is repetitive and constant.  Perhaps the length of those cycles has a long burn period and the relatively short life span of humans makes us think some of these changes are permanent, but in fact, there is a far lengthier repetition than we will live to see.  As a sidenote, consider the perspective of the Long Now Organization, which is running a project for the 10,000-year clock. If you have not heard of this project, go to longnow.org or go to YouTube and search for “10,000-year clock.” Life seen in this perspective strikes at the heart of what Marcus means about the "recurrent cycles of the universe" and how they repeat for eternity.

Returning to Marcus Aurelius, he contemplates whether there is an impulse directing traffic, so-to-speak, or if there was just an original impulse behind the universe.  For the Stoics, they believe that regardless if one believes in God (a directing soul in the universe) or if there are simply random atoms (such as the Epicurean swerve), what ultimately matters is your reaction to it all.  The Stoics believed that our actions should be the same irrespective if we believe in God or if we are atheist or agnostic.  If we believe in intelligent design, then embrace it, welcome it and be grateful there is a rational mind directing traffic so-to-speak.  If we believe events are random (a sort of chaos), then we've learned that we still can eke out a life of reason and order, in which case we ought to live a life of purpose.

In the second half of Book 9 chapter 28, Marcus reminds us that we should have nothing but contempt for mortal things; and in fact they are not worth our anxiety, worry and concern.  All things - you, me, others, our possessions, cities, countries, governments, cultures - pass in time.  Where we ought to place our concern, worries and anxiety is moral virtue.  As the Stoics succinctly say, "virtue is the sole good."

(see also Citadel p. 43, 148, 150-151, 161, 172)

Commentary on Meditations: B8:16-17

Remember that to change course or accept correction leaves you just as free as you were. The action is your own, driven by your own impulse and judgement, indeed your own intelligence.

If the choice is yours, why do the thing? But if it is another's choice, what do you blame - atoms or gods? Either is madness. There is no blame. If you can, put him right: if you can't, at the least put the matter itself right. If that too is impossible, what further purpose does blame serve? Nothing should be done without purpose.

When it comes to action and feedback, you can either assent to the feedback (the correction) and change course or, you can remain unchanged.  You are given the gift of reason to decide what is best and there is no need to complain: just act or carry on.

When others' actions are involved and you think correction is needed, then do your best to persuade and convince the other person.  The other person will either agree with you or not.  If not, then don't cast blame on them; let it go.  All actions should have a purpose.

(see also Citadel p. 203-204, 286, 301)

Commentary on Meditations: B7:73-75

When you have done good and another has benefited, why do you still look, as fools do, for a third thing besides - credit for good works, or a return?

No one tires of receiving benefit: and action in accordance with nature is your own benefit. Do not then tire of benefit gained by benefit given.

The nature of the Whole sets itself to create a universe. So now either everything that comes into being springs from that as logical consequence, or else even the primary aims to which the directing mind of the universe sets its own impulse are irrational. Reminding yourself of this will help you to face much with greater tranquility.

Bragging or even wanting recognition for service rendered is not aligned with nature.  Elsewhere in his Meditations, Marcus mentions horses that run, dogs that track, vines that produce grapes, and bees that make honey.  When they have done what they were supposed to be doing, they are not conscious of it.  So too, a human ought not to be conscious of simply doing their duty by serving others (social action; see also Book 5:6).

Just as you probably don't tire of receiving benefits when others serve you, do not tire of giving benefit to others by constantly serving.  In short, don't ever get tired or think you are tired of service.  The Christian adage of this same thought is, "do not grow weary of doing good" (see Galatians 6:9).

Reminding yourself that anything that can happen in the Universe, in turn, benefits the Universe can help you be at greater peace with events that are beyond your control.

(see also Citadel p. 43, 160, 200-201)

Commentary on Meditations: B7:32-34

On death. Either dispersal, if we are atoms: or, if we are a unity, extinction or a change of home.

On pain. Unbearable pain carries us off: chronic pain can be borne. The mind preserves its own serenity by withdrawal, and the directing reason is not impaired by pain. It is for the parts injured by the pain to protest if they can.

On fame. Look at their minds, the nature of their thought and what they seek or avoid. And see how, just as drifting sands constantly overlay the previous sand, so in our lives what we once did is very quickly covered over by subsequent layers.

No one knows (or if they do, they have not successfully communicated the result back to the living) what happens after death.  All are theories with a smattering of anecdotal information and data.  Marcus admits as much and notes two extremes.  When we die, we are simply returned to dust and atoms or if there is a God or ultimate directing mind or minds guiding the Universe and all in it, then possibly we may have a "change of home".  This alludes, possibly, to reincarnation or resurrection.  In other places, Marcus makes mention we have all lived this life before and we will live it again.  In the universe - the vastness of time and space - anything is possible.  All of these things are out of our control.  The only choice we have in the matter, is accepting that we will die.

With regard to pain.  Some pain is unbearable; do what you must to endure it.  I am constantly amazed by stories of people who have endured unimaginable pain.  Some people must have an incredible high pain tolerance.  I think of the pains endured by soldiers, refugees, sailors and athletes.  One particular example comes to mind: Aron Ralston.  Then there are those who deal with chronic pain.  I've run across a lot of stories on social media of those who seek Stoicism to help them deal with chronic pain.  It is possible to maintain serenity in spite of chronic pain.  In all these examples, Marcus reminds himself that pain is external to the directing mind.  A human can still reason and think despite pain.  It certainly is not easy, but it can be done.  Which further proves the point that pain is indifferent (our contentment and happiness does not depend on not ever experiencing pain).  In fact, some philosophers went out of their way to self-inflict pain (hugging cold statues with their bare skin) to toughen them up and prevent themselves from seeking pain avoidance.

Fame: so many seek it.  In the age of social media, people actively pursue "going viral."  They want their Tweet or picture or video to be seen, liked, argued over or talked about.  Some seek fame in the pursuit of becoming more wealthy.  Others seek fame solely for popularity.  Yet others seek fame to garner social wealth and then be in a position to more easily persuade others.  The endless flow of time will quickly cause anyone and everyone to be forgotten.  If you've ever observed the waves and sand on a beach or sand dunes and wind, you will quickly learn how frequently and rapidly they change.  Also observe vast cities: London & New York - all the layers of civilization that people continue to build upon today.  Archaeologists find new cities that have been buried by land and time and water.  I think of Mexico City and the thousands of years people have continued to build upon previous cities.  Those cities used to have people in them - people of fame and repute and power.  And now, no one knows who they were.  Only names and grand acts may be found inscribed on walls.  Yet many of these grand acts are relegated to a few words or sentences in a history book.  And that history book too will soon be forgotten.

Commentary on Meditations: B6:44

Now if the gods took thought for me and for what must happen to me, they will have taken thought for my good. It is not easy to conceive of a thoughtless god, and what possible reason could they have had to be bent on my harm? What advantage would there have been from that either for themselves or for the common good, which is the main concern of their providence? If they did not take individual thought for me, then certainly they took thought for the common good, and since what happens to me is a consequential part of that, I should accept and welcome it. But if after all they take thought for nothing (an impious thing to believe - otherwise let us abandon sacrifice, prayer to the gods, swearing by the gods, all the other things which we variously do on the assumption that the gods are with us and share our lives) - if, then, they take no thought for any of our concerns, it is open to me to take thought for myself: and my concern is for what is best. Best for each is what suits his own condition and nature: and my nature is both rational and social.

As Antoninus, my city and country is Rome: as a human being, it is the world. So what benefits these two cities is my only good.

In this passage, Marcus contemplates his relationship with the gods.  He does not believe the gods could have mal intent towards him.  It is difficult for him to think that the gods are set on harming him or others intentionally.  Rather, he takes the approach that they, indeed, have thought out the good for humans.  But even if the gods did not exist, he still can create his own opinion about what is best.  And his definition of best is to act according to his rational and social nature - which is nothing other than serving others in the spirit of the common good.

What is good for the city and Rome and for the world, is also good for him.

These thoughts, especially when considered in the context of a person experiencing events that may be painful or repulsive, help him and us to accept what the gods or fate dishes out to us.

In my opinion, acceptance of things as they are is the ultimate test. To accept and love whatever life sends your way can be a barrier for many people or it could be a motivating force to changing a course of action or seeking to remediate a situation.  I've observed that some people really excel at handling all the pressures and obstacles of life.  For others, it takes longer to figure things out.  But again, I've concluded that one of the ultimate tests of life is being able to accept and love some really, really bitter pills we must swallow.  This is why I overlay Nietzsche's words on a picture of a family struggling to survive the Great Depression.  To be able to accept that fate and love it?  Wow - a breathtaking challenge to say the least.

(see also Citadel p. 29, 43, 154, 159, 211, 268)

Commentary on Meditations: B6:23-25

Since you have reason and they do not, treat dumb animals and generally all things and objects with generosity and decency; treat men, because they do have reason, with social concern; and in all things call on the gods. And do not let it matter to you for how long you will be alive in this work: even three hours spent thus are sufficient.

Alexander of Macedon and his muleteer were leveled in death: either they were taken up into the same generative principles of the universe, or they were equally dispersed into atoms.

Reflect on how many separate events, both bodily and mental, are taking place in each one of us in the same tiny fragment of time: and then you will not be surprised if many more events, indeed all that comes to pass, subsist together in the one and the whole, which we call the Universe.

Marcus outlines our duties to animals and rational people.  And he, again, reminds us that we should never be concerned with how long we live, as long as we are performing our duties.

No matter if you are Alexander the Great or his servant, you will return to dust.  And it doesn't matter if you believe in a god or gods or a random universe; your end will come and you either return to your god(s) or you return to atoms.

Just as there are dozens or hundreds of processes going on in your body (breathing, blinking, moving, talking, listening, seeing, hearing, touching, digesting, etc), so too there are many cogs working in the universe.  And just as all those bodily processes are contained in one body, so too are all the universal events contained in one great whole: the Universe.

(see also Citadel p. 48, 148)

Commentary on Meditations: B6:10

Either a stew, an intricate web, and dispersal into atoms: or unity, order, and providence. Now if the former, why do I even wish to spend my time in a world compounded at random and in like confusion? Why have any concern other than somehow, some time, to become 'earth unto earth'? And why actually am I troubled? Dispersal will come on me, whatever I do. But if the latter is true, I revere it, I stand firm, I take courage in that which directs all.

This ‘either or’ idea is often repeated and discussed, Marcus revisits the notion of whether there is a god (or gods) or not.  Ultimately, the conclusion is the same whether you believe in god(s) or not.  In the end, you will die.

Additionally, if you believe in atoms or a randomly governed universe, and since you are a rational and reasonable person, then you ought not to manage your life in a random manner.  Rather, you should use your intellect and reason to govern and organize your life.

But if you do believe in unity, order and providence, then love it and embrace it.  Live life knowing full well that the ultimate directing reason over the universe knows all, sees all and you, as a part of that order, has a part: which is to act well your part; use your reason; live according to nature. And living according to Nature means to use your reasoning and God-given intellect to live your life.  Don't be like beasts who don't reason or think.

(see also Citadel p. 43)

Commentary on Meditations: B6:1-5

The substance of the Whole is passive and malleable, and the reason directing this substance has no cause in itself to do wrong, as there is no wrong in it: nothing it creates is wrongly made, nothing harmed by it. All things have their beginning and their end in accordance with it.

If you are doing your proper duty let it not matter to you whether you are cold or warm, whether you are sleepy or well-slept, whether men speak badly or well of you, even whether you are on the point of death or doing something else: because even this, the act in which we die, is one of the acts of life, and so here too it suffices to 'make the best move you can'.

Look within: do not allow the special quality or worth of any thing to pass you by.

All that exists will soon change. Either it will be turned into vapour, if all matter is a unity, or it will be scattered in atoms.

The governing reason knows its own disposition, what it creates, and what is the material for its creation.

The first five chapters of Book 6 seem to be interconnected.  Marcus begins by noting that the "reason directing" the universe does nothing wrong.  The reason guiding the universe simply exists.  Things within the universe begin and then they end. This is all we know of the universe today. We should be careful not to project our own emotions and desires on the universe. Too often, people think they should be God and they unnaturally think things ought to be a certain way. Simply put, this is not up to us.

He then shifts focus to himself as an entity within that universe.  He counsels himself to always carry out his duty, come cold or heat, whether tired or rested, when he's been maligned or praised or even at the point of death.  We always have a choice to do our duty, even in the act of dying.  In a summary, he counsels himself with regards to his actions.

In chapter 3, he continues to counsel himself, this time on his attitude and judgments.  He should embrace all that is of special worth and quality (temperance, courage, justice, wisdom - in a word: virtue).

In the fourth, he returns the idea of change and the reason directing it.  Whether a unity (god) or random atoms, we have to embrace things either way.

And lastly he returns to where he started Book 6 - the governing reason.  It just is - it exists and we have to accept whatever that governing reason creates along with the material it uses.

(see also Citadel p. 166)

Commentary on Meditations: B4:27

Either an ordered universe, or a stew of mixed ingredients, yet still coherent order. Otherwise how could a sort of private order subsist within you, if there is disorder in the Whole? Especially given that all things, distinct as they are, nevertheless permeate and respond to each other.

This passage is one of many that Marcus wrote on the question of: is there a God, or are there just random atoms that govern the universe?

The Stoics would see beyond the question and arrive at the conclusion that whether a person believed in a God or Gods that govern the universe or if a person believed it was all chaos and random atoms, the response from a person ought to be the same.  And that response is: live according to reason - be who you were meant to be; accept your fate regardless if you view it as coming from God(s) or from random events.

(see also Citadel p. 148)

Commentary on Meditations B4:3 The Inner Citadel

Men seek retreats for themselves - in the country, by the sea, in the hills - and you yourself are particularly prone to this yearning. But all this is quite unphilosophic, when it is open to you, at any time you want, to retreat into yourself. No retreat offers someone more quiet and relaxation than that into his own mind, especially if he can dip into thoughts there which put him at immediate and complete ease: and by ease I simply mean a well-ordered life. So constantly give yourself this retreat, and renew yourself. The doctrines you will visit there should be few and fundamental, sufficient at one meeting to wash away all your pain and send you back free of resentment at what you must rejoin.

And what is it you will resent? Human wickedness? Recall the conclusion that rational creatures are born for each other's sake, that tolerance is a part of justice, that wrongdoing is not deliberate. Consider the number of people who spent their lives in enmity, suspicion, hatred, outright war, and were then laid out for burial or reduced to ashes. Stop, then. Or will you fret at your allocation from the Whole? Revisit the alternatives providence or atoms - and the many indications that the universe is a kind of community. But will matters of the flesh still have their hold on you? Consider that the mind, once it has abstracted itself and come to know its own defining power, has no contact with the movement of the bodily spirit, be that smooth or troubled: and finally remember all that you have heard and agreed about pain and pleasure.

Well then, will a little fame distract you? Look at the speed of universal oblivion, the gulf of immeasurable time both before and after, the vacuity of applause, the indiscriminate fickleness of your apparent supporters, the tiny room in which all this is confined. The whole earth is a mere point in space: what a minute cranny within this is your own habitation, and how many and what sort will sing your praises here!

Finally, then, remember this retreat into your own little territory within yourself. Above all, no agonies, no tensions. Be your own master, and look at things as a man, as a human being, as a citizen, as a mortal creature. And here are two of the most immediately useful thoughts you will dip into. First that things cannot touch the mind: they are external and inert; anxieties can only come from your internal judgement. Second, that all these things you see will change almost as you look at them, and then will be no more. Constantly bring to mind all that you yourself have already seen changed. The universe is change: life is judgement.

The great passage from Meditations is Book 4.3.  In this, Marcus lays out all that is needed for your Inner Citadel.

People experience anxiety and stress from work and the busyness of life.  They think they need an escape or vacation.  People will drown their cares in alcohol or eating or drugs or time away from work - a week in Europe or in the mountains or on a white-sand blue-water beach, or at Disney World.  They seek to "get away from it all".  Marcus tells them and us, that if you want this reprieve, it is already there in your mind.  A quick trip to your mind, a re-cap of your doctrines and voila, you are ready to rejoin society.  And you can do this anytime; no need to schedule your escape.

Next he tells us how to quickly revisit those doctrines.  Do you hate, resent, are frustrated with, are bothered by or are disgusted with someone?  Remind yourself that rational beings are meant for each other (discipline of action).  Work with the other person; have compassion and understanding towards others.  Most likely, they are not acting out of mal-intent.  And what if they were acting with malice?  That is not up to us.  Either the other person is acting in accordance with the universe or they are acting randomly.  If they are acting in accordance with the universe, accept it.  If not, then don't you act badly or randomly - an ordered life is a content life.

Does fame (or lack of it) bother you?  Soon you and all those who you would want to cheer you on will be gone.  This world a speck in the vast universe.  This lifetime a blip on the infinite.  Fame is pointless.

Lastly, the two "most immediately useful thoughts" you should have while in your Inner Citadel are:

1) Peoples' opinions, actions, world events, elections, wars, natural disasters - they cannot touch the mind.  All the good or bad you place on these externals come from your mind.  It is your attitude that determines if things or good or bad or indifferent (discipline of assent).

2) Change is constant - the universe is change and life is all about how you view it (attitude / judgement).  At the very least, if you don't like something, eventually it or you will change.  Accept this constant; accept what the universe doles out to you and everyone else; accept your lot in life (discipline of desire).

(see Citadel p. 38-42, 53, 55, 105, 147, 149, 176, 265, 291)

God's Debris: God's Motivation

This particular chapter, from Scott Adams' God's Debris is worth reading and thinking about.  In my readings of various Stoic philosophers, this thought experiment is useful to have in the back of your mind.  And, if you have the time, I would highly recommend reading the book or listening to it on audio book.

*****

“If you were God,” he said, “what would you want?”

“I don’t know. I barely know what I want, much less what God wants.”

“Imagine that you are omnipotent. You can do anything, create anything, be anything. As soon as you decide you want something, it becomes reality.”

I waited, knowing there was more.

He continued. “Does it make sense to think of God as wanting anything? A God would have no emotions, no fears, no desires, no curiosity, no hunger. Those are human shortcomings, not something that would be found in an omnipotent God. What then would motivate God?”

“Maybe it’s the challenge, the intellectual stimulation of creating things,” I offered.

“Omnipotence means that nothing is a challenge. And what could stimulate the mind of someone who knows everything?”

“You make it sound almost boring to be God. But I guess you’ll say boredom is a human feeling.”

“Everything that motivates living creatures is based on some weakness or flaw. Hunger motivates animals. Lust motivates animals. Fear and pain motivate animals. A God would have none of those impulses. Humans are driven by all of our animal passions plus loftier-sounding things like self-actualization and creativity and freedom and love. But God would care nothing for those things, or if he cared would already have them in unlimited quantities. None of them would be motivating.”

“So what motivates God?” I asked. “Do you have the answer to that question, or are you just yanking my chain?”

“I can conceive of only one challenge for an omnipotent being—the challenge of destroying himself.”

“You think God would want to commit suicide?” I asked.

“I’m not saying he wants anything. I’m saying it’s the only challenge.”

“I think God would prefer to exist than to not exist.”

“That’s thinking like a human, not like a God. You have a fear of death so you assume God would share your preference. But God would have no fears. Existing would be a choice. And there would be no pain of death, nor feelings of guilt or remorse or loss. Those are human feelings, not God feelings. God could simply choose to discontinue existence.”

“There’s a logical problem here, according to your way of thinking,” I said. “If God knows the future, he already knows if he will choose to end his existence, and he knows if he will succeed at it, so  here’s no challenge there, either.”

“Your thinking is getting clearer,” he said. “Yes, he will know the future of his own existence under normal conditions. But would his omnipotence include knowing what happens after he loses his omnipotence, or would his knowledge of the future end at that point?”

“That sounds like a thoroughly unanswerable question.  I think you’ve hit a dead end,” I said.

“Maybe. But consider this. A God who knew the answer to that question would indeed know  everything and have everything. For that reason he would be unmotivated to do anything or create anything. There would be no purpose to act in any way whatsoever. But a God who had one nagging question—what happens if I cease to exist?—might be motivated to find the answer in order to  complete his knowledge. And having no fear and no reason to continue existing, he might try it.”

“How would we know either way?”

“We have the answer. It is our existence. The fact that we exist is proof that God is motivated to act in some way. And since only the challenge of self-destruction could interest an omnipotent God, it stands to reason that we . . .”

I interrupted the old man in midsentence and stood straight up from the rocker. It felt as if a pulse of energy ran up my spine, compressing my lungs, electrifying my skin, bringing the hairs on the back of my neck to full alert. I moved closer to the fireplace, unable to absorb its heat.  “Are you saying what I think you’re saying?” My brain was taking on too much knowledge. There was overflow
and I needed to shake off the excess.

The old man looked at nothing and said, “We are God’s debris.”