Letters from a Stoic 109 - On the Fellowship of Wise Men

On the Fellowship of Wise Men

The question at hand and the topic of the letter is: can a wise man help another wise man.  In Seneca's view, the answer is 'yes' for these reasons:

Each needs someone with whom he may make comparisons and investigations.

...

The wise man also needs to have his virtues kept in action; and as he prompts himself to do things, so is he prompted by another wise man.

...

He can quicken his impulses, and point out to him opportunities for honourable action. Besides, he can develop some of his own ideas; he can impart what he has discovered. For even in the case of the wise man something will always remain to discover, something towards which his mind may make new ventures.

...

will bring joy to the other, he will strengthen his faith, and from the contemplation of their mutual tranquillity the delight of both will be increased. Moreover, they will communicate to each other a knowledge of certain facts; for the wise man is not all-knowing.

...

the wise man cannot maintain his mental standard without intercourse with friends of his own kind – with whom he may share his goodness. 10. Moreover, there is a sort of mutual friendship among all the virtues.

...

in order to prompt perfect reason, there is need of perfect reason.

...

the wise man can also be useful by discussing honourable things in common, and by contributing his thoughts and ideas.  Moreover, it is in accordance with Nature to show affection for our friends, and to rejoice in their advancement.

...

Now virtue advises us to arrange the present well, to take thought regarding the future, to deliberate and apply our minds; and one who takes a friend into council with him, can more easily apply his mind and think out his problem.

Seneca closes the letter by musing that this sort of discussion (can the wise help the wise), is all simply "mental gymanstics."  Seneca wants to discuss how to go about acting more like a wise person.

What good does this do me? Make me more brave now, more just, more restrained! I have not yet the opportunity to make use of my training ...  teach me now what it is necessary for me to know!

Notes and What I learned from "The Present Alone is Our Happiness" - Philosophy as Life and as Quest for Wisdom by Pierre Hadot

This is part 7 of a 12 post series reviewing the book "The Present Alone is Our Happiness"

Regarding 'living philosophically' as a choice and in every day life ... a few quotes.

The Stoics of the Scaevola family were, moreover, the only ones to apply themselves the laws decreed against luxury.  Thus, in everyday life they had an austerity, a moral rigor that the others lacked (p. 98).

...

The Stoics were regarded as excessively austere people (p. 99).

...

Platonism was the movement toward separation of the soul and the body, detachment from the body, and even a tendency to transcend reasoning ... the Neoplatonists [had] the idea that life should be a life of thought, a life of the mind (p. 99).

...

in Antiquity the philosopher was always regarded somewhat like Socrates himself: he is not 'in his place'; he is atopos.  He cannot be put in a particular place, in a special class.  He is unclassifiable (p. 100).

...

Nothing is more opposed to the cult of profit, which is progressively destroying humanity, than this Stoic morality that requires of everyone absolute loyalty, transparency, and disinterestedness (p. 101).

...

It is the problem of the philosopher who should, theoretically speaking, separate himself from the world, but in fact must return to it and lead the everyday life of others. ... Socrates was a philosopher not because he taught from a pulpit, but because he chatted with his friends and joked with them; he also used to go to the agora, and after all this he had an exemplary death.  Thus Socrates' real philsophy is the practice of everyday life (p. 101).

There there is this question posed to Hadot: Can one mix the Stoic attitude with the Epicurean attitude, as did, for example, Goethe, Rousseau, or Thoreau?

"Kant declares that the exercise of virtue must be practiced with Stoic energy and Epicurean joie de vivre."  Of Rousseau, he says, "one finds both the pleasure of existing, and the awareness of being a part of nature."  In Goethe, Hadot notes "half Stoic and half Epicurean."  And of Nietzsche, he says, "one must not be frightened of adopting a Stoic attitude after having benefited from an Epicurean recipe" (p. 102).

Regarding choosing a philosophy, Hadot notes one must try it to be able to learn. He supplies an analogy - riding a bike in the dark, and the light on the bike (which illuminates the path), is connected to the turning of the pedals.  In order to see, you must pedal!

Philosophy is an exercise of awareness.  As stated many times before, it is an exercise of preparing for death.

one had to pass from the empirical and lower self destined to die, to the transcendental self ... one had to detach oneself from sensible life (p. 105).

...

It is a matter of becoming aware that the moment one is still living has infinite value.  Because death may interrupt it, it must be lived in an extremely intense manner as long as death has not arrived (p. 105).

...

This is Horace's well-known carpe-diem: harvest today without thinking of tomorrow (p. 105).

...

one must live every day as though one had completed one's life, and hence with the satisfaction of telling oneself in the evening, 'I have lived' ... one tells oneself that one already has had everything in a single instant of existence.  It is always a matter of becoming aware of the value of existence (p. 105-106).

He is asked if spiritual exercises are a form of egoism.

First, spiritual exercises are intended to let one disengage oneself from egoism. ... detach themselves from the partial and biased self, and to elevate themselves to the level of the superior self.

...

as soon as one attempts to subject himself to reason, one is almost necessarily obliged to renounce egoism (p. 107).

...

The second argument ... ancient philosophers have a very strong concern for others ... take care of others, to make them decide to have concern for themselves. ... the care of the self consists in becoming aware of what one really is, that is, finally, of our identity with reason, and even, among the Stoics, with reason considered as God.  Thus, philosophers have always had concern for others (p. 107).

... 

discipline of action contains a very important element, which is the concern for the common good (p. 108).

...

"Live for others if you want to live for yourself" (Seneca) ... self-transformation consists precisely in being attentive to others (p. 108).

To practice philosophy means to practice living.  He speaks of an ellipse with two poles - "a pole of discourse and a pole of action" (p. 110).

He is asked how does one explain the recession of the practice of spiritual exercises after Antiquity?

I think that the triumph of Christianity played a very large role in this recession.  Confronted by pagan philosophers, revealed Christian theology replaced philosophy as early as the end of Antiquity, and absorbed both ancient philosophy and ancient philosophical life.

Philosophy must be action oriented.

The passage from discourse to life is a tightrope to walk that it is hard to make up one's mind to try.  I will allow myself to cite Kant: 'When you are finally going to begin to live virtuously, said Plato to an old man who was telling him that he was attending lessons on virtue.  You cannot always keep speculating, but you must finally think of passing into action.  But today we consider one who lives in conformity with what he teaches to be a fanatic' (p. 116)

Hadot identified the qualities of the sage.

The first is his love for mankind. ... A second characteristic ... is the audacity of his cosmic wisdom ... a third trait, finally: he is free, without fear, with an inner peace analogous to that of the gods.

Note the three disciplines in the above ... action, desire and assent.

Hadot also quotes Georges Friedmann who said, "the modern sage (if he existed) today would not turn away from the cesspool of men" (p. 118).

the concern to act well without being misled by hatred, anger, or pity, that will oblige one to conquer peace of mind (p. 119).

Letters from a Stoic 93 - On the Quality, as Contrasted with the Length, of Life

On the Quality, as Contrasted with the Length, of Life

The gist of this letter is found in this quote:

We should strive, not to live long, but to live rightly; for to achieve long life you have need of Fate only, but for right living you need the soul.

This is the response to anyone who suggests that someone who has died before their time; and it serves as a reminder to live each day as if it were your last.

Seneca notes,

I have noticed many who deal fairly with their fellow-men, but none who deals fairly with the gods. We rail every day at Fate.

A great many things in life may seem unfair, but we should stop this line of thinking before we jump to that conclusion.  It is we who assume things are unfair, when in fact, this is how the Universe operates.  Is it fair that my home flooded or burned down?  Is it fair that the world is warming up or cooling down too much to my liking?  Is it fair that weeds exist and are in my yard?  Is it fair that my knee locked up, while playing basketball, and I hyper-extended it?  Is it fair that my parent dies at the age of 45 or my Marine son dies in his 20s?

Be mindful of jumping to the conclusion of 'what is fair and what is not.'  The Cosmos is too complex for one person to conclude what is just and what is not.  This topic comes up quite a bit in life.  For my part, I like to recall the story of "The Farmer's Son: Fortune or Misfortune?" as found on my hypomnemata on wisdom.

Seneca continues,

do you consider it fairer that you should obey Nature, or that Nature should obey you? And what difference does it make how soon you depart from a place which you must depart from sooner or later?

He then explains what a good life represents, as opposed to the length of life.

rendered to itself its proper Good ... assumed control over itself ... had fulfilled all the duties of a good citizen, a good friend, a good son.

Life must be measured by the performance of good, rather than the length.  A perfect circle is still perfect regardless of it's diameter.

a life of small compass can be a perfect life. Age ranks among the external things.  How long I am to exist is not mine to decide, but how long I shall go on existing in my present way is in my own control.

A full life is one that has attained wisdom.

It is living until you possess wisdom. He who has attained wisdom has reached, not the furthermost, but the most important, goal.

One who lives wisely has fulfilled the measure of his creation.

for he has paid [Nature] back a better life than he has received. He has set up the pattern of a good man, showing the quality and the greatness of a good man. Had another year been added, it would merely have been like the past.

If a person lives 80 years, and does nothing but eat, sleep, drink, defecate and does hardly anything rational to improve himself or others, he is no better than an animal.  But one who lives a mere two decades, and who exercises rationality and lives morally, ethically to the betterment of himself and in the service of others, we will applaud the latter and forget the former.

Ask yourself why that is.

Death visits each and all; the slayer soon follows the slain.

We all die regardless.  It is how we spend the time allotted to us is what matters.

Letters from a Stoic 31 - On Siren Songs

On Siren Songs

Fads, trends, populism, crowd favorites - I've tried to be leery of what the majority desires.  If only the majority were in favor of justice for all, temperance, courage and wisdom, then perhaps I would willingly go along with the crowd.  But usually what the crowd desires is not wise, but foolish.  They will choose the well-worn, popular path.  For this reason, I think, Seneca approves of the "impulse which prompted" Lucilius to "[tread under feet] that which is approved by the crowd.

The phrase "tread under feet" seems to mean to ignore, or oppress or put down.  Therefore, Seneca approves of the idea of going against the crowd, as long as that means one is living philosophically.

He compares the desires of the crowd to a siren song.  Odysseus had to plug the ears of his men so they would not hear the siren song, lest they succumbed to it and dash their ships into the rock.  Similarly, we must plug our ears to the calls of the crowd, which are everywhere!

the song, however, which you have to fear, echoes round you not from a single headland, but from every quarter of the world. Sail, therefore, not past one region which you mistrust because of its treacherous delights, but past every city. Be deaf to those who love you most of all; they pray for bad things with good intentions. And, if you would be happy, entreat the gods that none of their fond desires for you may be brought to pass. What they wish to have heaped upon you are not really good things; there is only one good, the cause and the support of a happy life, – trust in oneself.

Seneca warns that we must be deaf even "to those who love you most all."  What an odd thing to say.  I presume that what he means is that those who love us most, may not have embraced philosophy, and therefore, when they pray for you, they are praying that you become famous, rich, handsome, healthy or some sort of indifferent.  Or they may be praying that you don't die or become ill or fall on so-called misfortune.  Therefore, Seneca says that if you really want to be happy, plead with the gods that your loved ones' prayers are not answered.

I'm not so sure how sound this advice from Seneca is.  I'm not so sure a practicing Stoic would forbid his loved ones to pray for such things, nor would he go out of his way to pray to the gods to not answer the prayers of his loved ones.  At best, a practicing Stoic may be completely nonplussed by such prayers and would not worry if those things came (or not) into his life.  He would view them as indifferents regardless if they came (or not) due to prayers from a loved one or otherwise.

The next part of the letter delves into the subject of work; and I assume he means the subject of gainful employment.  Work, itself, is an indifferent.  Therefore, work can be infused with either virtue or vice.  A practicing Stoic, then would attempt to make his work noble.

Make yourself happy through your own efforts; you can do this, if once you comprehend that whatever is blended with virtue is good, and that whatever is joined to vice is bad. Just as nothing gleams if it has no light blended with it, and nothing is black unless it contains darkness or draws to itself something of dimness, and as nothing is hot without the aid of fire, and nothing cold without air; so it is the association of virtue and vice that makes things honourable or base.

Knowledge of how to make good use of things (indifferents) is the art of philosophy.  The good, therefore, is knowledge.  And evil is lack of knowledge.  Your human craft is to gain knowledge about how to be a good human.

Just as a carpenter learns to work with wood and there are varying degrees of craftsmanship in different carpenters due to knowledge and practice (as well as lack of knowledge and practice), so too we can apply this analogy to what it means to be a good human being.  A good human will seek justice for all (not only justice for some, and not at the expense of others' justice).  A good human being will be disciplined and temperate in eating, entertainment, learning and working.  A good human being will demonstrate courage and honesty.  A good human being learns and demonstrates wisdom.  The medium for the carpenter is wood.  The medium for a human being is work and life.

in order that virtue may be perfect, there should be an even temperament and a scheme of life that is consistent with itself throughout; and this result cannot be attained without knowledge of things, and without the art which enables us to understand things human and things divine. That is the greatest good. If you seize this good, you begin to be the associate of the gods, and not their suppliant.

The 'art' he refers to is philosophy.  If we learn and practice this art, we become equal with the gods.  It does not matter our lot in life, the choice we have is our response to our lot and circumstances in life.  Is our soul worthy to the challenge?  Will you take the path less travelled or will you follow the crowd?

The unique part of *you* has a choice, regardless of circumstances.

What we have to seek for, then, is that which does not each day pass more and more under the control of some power which cannot be withstood. And what is this? It is the soul, – but the soul that is upright, good, and great. What else could you call such a soul than a god dwelling as a guest in a human body? A soul like this may descend into a Roman knight just as well as into a freedman's son or a slave. For what is a Roman knight, or a freedman's son, or a slave? They are mere titles, born of ambition or of wrong. One may leap to heaven from the very slums. Only rise

"And mould thyself to kinship with thy God."

Notes and What I Learned From: Philosophy as a Way of Life - the essay "'Only the Present is our Happiness': The Value of the Present Instant in Goethe and in Ancient Philosophy"

As I do often at work and at home and in many aspects of my life, let me start by stating the problem that needs to be solved.  The problem is stated in the last paragraph of the essay.

• There is a "tragic lack of balance which has come about in the modern world between 'power' and 'wisdom.'"
• "Modern man ... [is] hypnotized ... by language, images, information, and the myth of the future [which] seemed to us to provide one of the best means of access to this wisdom."
• We, in post-modern society have not taken care for the self, in terms of wisdom and sound thinking.  And as such, we have allowed "all human institutions" the power of preventing us "from feeling [our] life, by means of the constant dispersion of [our] thoughts." (p. 235)

While the sentiment expressed above was written several decades ago, it rings true more than ever before, in the year 2019.  The thoughts of the majority - despite being ever so connected with the world - are constantly being dispersed (distributed and spread over a wide area).  Few focus on the weightier matters of wisdom and the love of it (philosophia).

The proposal of the essay, and one which, if carried out, might begin to tip the balance toward 'wisdom' and away from 'power,' is for the individual to "enjoy the present moment" and to "will it intensely" as a duty (p. 230).

While Hadot focuses a lot on Goethe and Epicureanism, I will limit my commentary to the Stoic aspects of the essay.

The practicing Stoic, in an attempt to keep his equanimity, will limit his focus to things in his control.  Out of his control are the past and the future.  Only the present remains in his control.  If he chooses to rehash the past, causing anxiety and consternation, he will not keep his equanimity.  If he fears the future or stews over it, he will not keep his equanimity.  But if he is mindful of the present, and keeps his judgements, actions and inner attitude in balance with nature, then he will retain his equanimity.

Marcus wrote to himself, and so too we should heed the advice:

These will suffice: the present certainty of judgement, the present social action, the present disposition well content with any effect of an external cause (Meditations 9.6)

In another passage, he repeated and expanded on the same idea of focusing on the present:

All that you pray to reach at some point in the circuit of your life can be yours now - if you are generous to yourself. That is, if you leave all the past behind, entrust the future to Providence, and direct the present solely to reverence and justice. To reverence, so that you come to love your given lot: it was Nature that brought it to you and you to it. To justice, so that you are open and direct in word and action, speaking the truth, observing law and proportion in all you do. You should let nothing stand in your way - not the iniquity of others, not what anyone else thinks or says, still less any sensation of this poor flesh that has accreted round you: the afflicted part must see to its own concern. 

If, then, when you finally come close to your exit, you have left all else behind and value only your directing mind and the divinity within you, if your fear is not that you will cease to live, but that you never started a life in accordance with nature, then you will be a man worthy of the universe that gave you birth. You will no longer be a stranger in your own country, no longer meet the day's events as if bemused by the unexpected, no longer hang on this or that. (Meditations 12.1)

What a beautiful passage which describes a life full of equanimity and how to achieve it.

Hadot said, "there are two reason why the present is sufficient for our happiness: in the first place, Stoic happiness is complete at every instant and does not increase over time.  The second reason is that we already possess the whole of reality within the present instant, and even infinite duration could not give us more than what we have right now" (p. 228).

Only the Present is our Happiness

If you strive, right now, to always have objective assents and judgements, and if your actions are moral actions, right now, and if you understand that the whole history of events and circumstances have brought you to this point and that they belong to you and you love your fate, now, then you will always retain your equanimity.  It could then be said, that you lack nothing - that you are content.  And like a circle, your equanimity is whole and complete, regardless of the size - it is a perfect circle.

Therefore if you can spend a few brief moments, now, in perfect harmony (i.e. a perfect circle), then the duration does not matter; only the quality of it matters.  "Happiness is nothing more nor less than that instant in which man is wholly in accord with nature" (p. 228)

Hadot quotes Chrysippus: "If a person has wisdom for one instant, he is no less happy than he who possesses it for an eternity" (p. 228).

And since all the ingredients that are needed to go into this instant of happiness are within our control, the only variable that needs to be determined is your desire for it (or not).  Happiness, therefore, is a choice that you can make in the present moment.

"What is needed is the immediate transformation of our way of thinking, acting, and accepting events.  We must think in accordance with truth, act in accordance with justice, and lovingly accept what comes to pass.  In the words of Marcus Aurelius: 'How easy it is to find oneself, right away, in a state of perfect peace of mind.'  In other words, it is enough to just want it" (p. 229).

To give a sense of urgency of the importance of our "transformation" we must always realize that death may come to us at any moment (memento mori).  "We must live each day with a consciousness so acute, and an attention so intense, that we can say to ourselves each evening: 'I have lived; I have actualized my life.' ... In the words of Seneca: 'He has peace of mind who has lived his entire life every day.'" (p. 229)

Existence is a Duty and should be Intensely Willed

I think many people lack context and awareness of their position in the universe.  Personally, I believe we are parts of a cosmos, which is one whole.  As Marcus has said before, there is divinity within each of us; and collectively, we represent the consciousness of the cosmos.  Accepting this, we must grant that other people have divinity within them and we must cooperate with them, not unlike a hand which would cooperate with a foot in playing a basketball game.

Furthermore, our interface with the cosmos is the present time and space.  All the events that have preceded me and have brought me to this point, represent the sum total of my fate.  It is uniquely mine and I ought to love it.  Hadot says, "The instant is our only point of contact with reality, yet it offers us the whole of reality; precisely because it is a passage and metamorphosis, it allows us to participate in the overall movement of the event of the world, and the reality of the world's coming-to-be" (p. 229).

Our duty, in this moment in time and space "is the harmonization of the reason within us with the reason which guides the cosmos, and produces the chain of causes and effect which makes up fate.  At each moment, we must harmonize our judgement, action, and desires with universal reason" (p. 229).

This is why Marcus said, "He who sees the present has seen all things, both all that has come to pass from everlasting and all that will be for eternity: all things are related and the same" (Meditations 6.37).

And later on he added, "Whatever happens to you was being prepared for you from everlasting, and the mesh of causes was ever spinning from eternity both your own existence and the incidence of this particular happening" (Meditations 10.5).

Hadot continues, "At each moment and every instant, we must say 'yes' to the universe; that is, to the will of universal reason.  We must want that which universal reason wants" (p. 230).  Hence Marcus cries out:

Universe, your harmony is my harmony: nothing in your good time is too early or too late for me. Nature, all that your seasons bring is fruit to me: all comes from you, exists in you, returns to you. The poet says, 'Dear city of Cecrops': will you not say, 'Dear city of Zeus'? (Meditations 4.23)

And for Seneca, he notes that the Stoic sage "plunges himself into the whole of the universe (toti se inserens mundo)" (p. 230).

This mindset helps produce, within the individual, an attitude of "giving your all" and being fully engaged with life.  It leaves behind the victim mentality and empowers the individual to carpe diem and confront the events of life.  And the more this mindset becomes entrenched in an individual, the more the individual begins to want events to happen exactly as they do.  There is no more cowering or disengagement or cordoning of "safe zones."  Rather, there is active participation in life and the whole world and cosmos becomes your home.

To finish, let me quote two passages from the essay that encapsulate what has been discussed.

"The ultimate meaning of Goethe's attitude toward the present is thus, as it was for ancient philosophy, the happiness and the duty of existing in the cosmos.  It is a profound feeling of participation in and identification with a reality which transcends the limits of the individual."

Hadot, quotes Nietzsche again in this essay (p. 235).

Let us assume we say "Yes!" to one single, unique moment: we have thus said yes, not only to ourselves, but to the whole of existence.  For nothing is isolated, neither in ourselves nor in things.  And if, even once, our soul has vibrated and resounded like a string with happiness, all eternity was necessary to created the conditions for this one event; and all eternity has been approved, redeemed, justified, and affirmed.

Commentary on Meditations: B10:15-18

The time you have left is short. Live it as if you were on a mountain. Here or there makes no difference, if wherever you live you take the world as your city. Let men see, let them observe a true man living in accordance with nature. If they cannot bear him, let them kill him - a better fate than a life like theirs.

No more roundabout discussion of what makes a good man. Be one!

Keep constantly in your mind an impression of the whole of time and the whole of existence - and the thought that each individual thing is, on the scale of existence, a mere fig-seed; on the scale of time, one turn of a drill.

Consider any existing object and reflect that it is even now in the process of dissolution and change, in a sense regenerating through decay or dispersal: in other words, to what sort of 'death' each thing is born.

Life is short.  Some will spend what little time they have left, filling their life with pleasures and desires.  Stoics spend what little time they have left, trying to practice courage, temperance, carrying out justice and living wisely.  Stoics will live this way whether living in a city or on a mountain - it makes no difference.  The world is their city.  To put this thought in modern day vernacular: the world is my safe zone.  So many try to cut out a "safe zone" where they won't or can't be hurt.  But by so doing, they cheat themselves of precious learning experiences.  The world should be your safe zone - interact with everyone - treat everyone with respect and kindness - teach and help others to see wisdom.  Marcus goes so far as to say that if the world can't bear you, then let it kill you!  It's better to die free than live in slavery.

While you live - while you can - be a good man now!

Never, ever forget the little speck of dust you dwell on; and the minute speck of time you occupy in eternity.  This puts everything in proper perspective.

Everything is in the process of changing and dying.  Each second, minute, hour, day we march closer to decay and dissolution.  Life is short.  Use your time now to be a good human.

(see also Citadel p. 171, 291)

Commentary on Meditations: B9:42

Whenever you are offended at someone's lack of shame, you should immediately ask yourself: 'So is it possible for there to be no shameless people in the world?' It is not possible. Do not then ask for the impossible. This person is just one of the shameless inevitably existing in the world. Have the same thought ready for the rogue, the traitor, every sort of offender. The recognition that this class of people must necessarily exist will immediately make you kinder to them as individuals.

Another useful thought of direct application is the particular virtue nature has given us to counter a particular wrong. Gentleness is given as the antidote to cruelty, and other qualities to meet other offences. In general, you can always re-educate one who has lost his way: and anyone who does wrong has missed his proper aim and gone astray. And what harm have you suffered? You will find that none of these who excite your anger has done anything capable of affecting your mind for the worse: and it is only in your mind that damage or harm can be done to you - they have no other existence.

Anyway, where is the harm or surprise in the ignorant behaving as the ignorant do? Think about it. Should you not rather blame yourself, for not anticipating that this man would make this error? Your reason gave you the resource to reckon this mistake likely from this man, yet you forgot and are now surprised that he went wrong.

Above all, when you complain of disloyalty or ingratitude, turn inwards on yourself. The fault is clearly your own, if you trusted that a man of that character would keep his trust, or if you conferred a favour without making it an end in itself, your very action its own and complete reward. What more do you want, man, from a kind act? Is it not enough that you have done something consonant with your own nature - do you now put a price on it? As if the eye demanded a return for seeing, or the feet for walking. Just as these were made for a particular purpose, and fulfil their proper nature by acting in accordance with their own constitution, so man was made to do good: and whenever he does something good or otherwise contributory to the common interest, he has done what he was designed for, and inherits his own.

What should your reaction be to shameless people, to rogues (dishonest or unprincipled people), traitors and people with little to no virtues?  Marcus says, you should ask yourself a question.  Is it possible for these type of people not to exist in the world?  The answer is: no.  In other words, there will always be people in the world with little to no virtue.  And this doesn't mean those people are condemned to live a virtue-less life, rather perhaps, they don't know better and have yet to learn.  Again - give people the benefit of the doubt; all our journeys are different.

This leads to the next point Marcus makes with regard to dealing with people who lack virtue.  Marcus suggests being gentle and attempting to educate people who may lack virtue.  There is no harm done to you, if you are a prokopton, for you have used the opportunity of a virtue-less person to exercise the virtues of patience and gentleness.  Which leads to Marcus' next thought.

Be prepared to encounter ignorant people - expect it.  And if you find yourself annoyed or shocked by ignorant people, then blame yourself for not anticipating that.

And lastly, some parting advice from Marcus - if you trust a man who is untrustworthy, clearly you should blame yourself.  However, let me add a wrinkle and some food for thought to this idea.  How can an untrustworthy person gain or regain your trust?  Should you give them an opportunity to establish or regain your trust?  To which I would respond - yes, but start little.  Entrust them with little things to establish a track record and then move on to bigger things if they succeed in keeping that trust.  I think age of the person ought to be considered.  For a young child, teenager or young adult, we must do this.  But for an ignorant person who has a long, bad track record, proceed with caution!

Also, in the last part of chapter 42 of Book 9, Marcus clearly counsels that good, right action is your duty and there should never be expectations of reward.  His analogy of an eye demanding payment for simply seeing (doing its duty).  Therefore, do good and leave it be.  You have done your duty - it is enough.

(see also Citadel p. 201, 225-226, 271)

Commentary on Meditations: B6:46-47

Just as all the business of the amphitheatre and such places offends you as always one and the same sight, and this monotony of the spectacle bores you, so it is too with your experience of life as a whole: everything, up or down, is the same, with the same causes. How much longer, then?

Think constantly of all the sorts of men, of various professions and of all the nations on earth, who have died: and so bring your thought down to Philistion, Phoebus, and Origanion. Pass now to the other classes of men. We too are bound to change our abode to that other world, where there are so many skilled orators, so many distinguished philosophers - Heraclitus, Pythagoras, Socrates - so many heroes of old, so many later commanders and kings.

Add Eudoxus, Hipparchus, Archimedes; add other men of penetrating intellect, men of great vision, men dedicated to their work; add rogues, bigots, and even satirists of this transient mortal life, like Menippus and his kind. Reflect of all of these that they are long dead and buried. So is this anything terrible for them - or indeed for men whose very names are lost? In this world there is only one thing of value, to live out your life in truth and justice, tolerant of those who are neither true nor just.

Marcus speaks to me!  I cannot help but see, on every side, the "business of the amphitheater."  Star athletes and movie stars and the drama that follows them ad nauseam on TV and the Internet.  Observing high school students and listening to their conversations is also revealing - about the repetitive topics, the endless selfies and the total lack of living an examined life.  I am convinced more and more of Marcus' opinion that forty years is as good as ten thousand years of seeing all that can happen in this life (B7.49 & B11.1).

While Marcus reminds us to not get worked up into a frenzy, nor be bothered by the business of the amphitheater, it is always wise to recall that everyone passes on to death and oblivion.  Pillars of men and nations disappear and succumb to The Agent of Change.  What's left?  What's the purpose?  What is it all about?  For the Stoics, tt is about attaining a life of moral excellence or virtue.  Is living a life of wisdom, justice, courage, temperance and other virtues the true purpose of our existence? For the Stoics, the answer is yes. They believe living these virtues is resting on the foundation of bedrock which won't move or shift with the tides of fads and popularity.  For this Stoics, this is the only thing of value.  Pursuit of fame, fortune, notoriety, pleasure / avoiding pain, are all futile and useless endeavors.

(see also Citadel p. 48, 164, 177-178, 228, 242, 276, 286)

Commentary on Meditations: B3:6

If you discover in human life something better than justice, truth, self-control, courage - in short, something better than the self-sufficiency of your own mind which keeps you acting in accord with true reason and accepts your inheritance of fate in all outside your choice: if, as I say, you can see something better than this, then turn to it with all your heart and enjoy this prime good you have found. But if nothing is shown to be better than the very god that is seated in you, which has brought all your own impulses under its control, which scrutinizes your thoughts, which has withdrawn itself, as Socrates used to say, from all inducements of the senses, which has subordinated itself to the gods and takes care for men - if you find all else by comparison with this small and paltry, then give no room to anything else: once turned and inclined to any alternative, you will struggle thereafter to restore the primacy of that good which is yours and yours alone. Because it is not right that the rational and social good should be rivalled by anything of a different order, for example the praise of the many, or power, or wealth, or the enjoyment of pleasure. All these things may seem to suit for a little while, but they can suddenly take control and carry you away. So you, I repeat, must simply and freely choose the better and hold to it. 'But better is what benefits.' If to your benefit as a rational being, adopt it: but if simply to your benefit as an animal, reject it, and stick to your judgement without fanfare. Only make sure that your scrutiny is sound.

The four virtues, as Marcus notes here are:

- justice

- truth (wisdom)

- self-control (temperance)

- courage

Practicing and living these virtues is how you find contentment and happiness.

Furthermore, practicing the three Stoic disciplines, where are:

- self-sufficiency of your mind (discipline of assent)

- act in accord with true reason (discipline of action)

- accept your inheritance of fate (discipline of desire)

will bring you contentment and happiness.

Marcus boldly tells himself, if he can find anything better than these virtues and disciplines, he should turn to it with all his heart.  But if nothing is better than the god within, which has controlled his impulses and which has helped him scrutinize (examine or inspect closely and thoroughly) his thoughts and has helped him "take care of men", then he should not give any room for other philosophies.

He says it isn't right that rational and social good should be "rivaled" by any different order - such as vanity, power, prestige, money and pleasure.  All these pursuits may bring short-term happiness and joy, but ultimately they control you and carry you away to a place that ends in dejection and a life of emptiness.  (This is why Stoicism wins over Hedonism).

Arriving at this conclusion, what is left?  To "simply" and "freely choose the better and hold to it."

(See also Citadel pp. 124, 179, 186, 237-238, 242, 265)