/lit/ - Literature

It's a calm book. I find it just. He's a stoic so expect the whole book to be like this.

There are no mind-blowing truths but there are truths.

>>3811896
Sounds good enough to me! Thanks!

Its good.

Repetitive, but good.

>>3811887
It's good. My critique of the quote cited is that 'good' is a vague, relative, catch-all term, in my opinion. Still good stuff, though.

>>3811887
yep

>>3811887
A fun read, with some rather loose conclusions, but overall very enjoyable.

>>3812051

I'd suggest reading a bit more about what was understood back then as "good life", rather than applying current conceptions to another era.

>>3811887

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SztoKbvZ3oo&t=1m10s

Obligatory must watch Marcus Aurelius lecture.

>>3812120
This is pretty good stuff.

>>3812120

I like this guy's take on it, but I have only one question.

My knowledge on Roman history is shaky (I can tell you who ruled when, but beyond that I'm practically lost), but do we have accurate enough history records to know that Marcus Aurelius was as virtuous a man as he was in his Meditations?

>>3812218
>but do we have accurate enough history records to know that Marcus Aurelius was as virtuous a man as he was in his Meditations?

Yes there are tons of historical documents about him and his life, letters he sent and letters his teachers wrote about him. Also historians at the time recorded what was going on. Artists made plays about him, etc. He isn't some mystical figure people speculate about.

He was adopted by Hadrian and then Antonius and when Antonius died the senate made Marcus king. As a kid he never thought he would be king, he always wanted to be a philosopher.
As a king he dressed like a stoic in his greek robe, no fancy king suits or pomp.

He also made his brother Lucius co-emperor, it was the first time Rome had two emperors. They both were well received by the public, they allowed free-speech, " the comedy writer Marullus was able to criticize them without suffering retribution. At any other time, under any other emperor, he would have been executed."

>>3812318

That's interesting, thanks for the information.

What he does means with "live a good life"? What is a "good life"? What is "good"? Was "good life" back then the same thing as today?

sMarcus Aurelius acquired the reputation of a philosopher king within his lifetime, and the title would remain his after death; both Dio and the biographer call him "the philosopher".[254] Christians—Justin Martyr, Athenagoras, Melito—gave him the title too.[255] The last named went so far as to call Marcus "more philanthropic and philosophic" than Antoninus Pius and Hadrian, and set him against the persecuting emperors Domitian and Nero to make the contrast bolder.[256] "Alone of the emperors," wrote the historian Herodian, "he gave proof of his learning not by mere words or knowledge of philosophical doctrines but by his blameless character and temperate way of life."[257]

>>3812341

"Good life" is the stoic good life. To do your duty (whatever that duty may be) and to do the right thing in your everyday life. Not to give in to temptation or indulgence, and to control your thoughts and emotions.

It's remarkably similar to the Christian idea of a "good life", without the unquestioned reverence of God.

That quote in the op's picture. Where is it in the book? I have tried searching to no avail. There are these quotations pictures floating in the Internet and I am quite suspicious about them nowadays.

It has helped me a lot. When my dad died, and since, I read it several times together with Seneca's "Letters from a Stoic" and Epictetus' "Enchiridion".

The humility of Aurelius is astounding.

>>3812341

The good life is a life that questions and thinks about things; it is a life of contemplation, self-examination, and open-minded wondering. The good life is thus an inner life—the life of an inquiring and ever expanding mind.

>>3811887
>mfw biz marcus got spooked into compliance

Several of Marcus' children died early or at birth.
Marcus steadied himself: "One man prays: 'How I may not lose my little child', but you must pray: 'How I may not be afraid to lose him'."

He quoted from the Iliad what he called the "briefest and most familiar saying...enough to dispel sorrow and fear":
--
leaves,
the wind scatters some on the face of the ground;
like unto them are the children of men.
– Iliad 6.146[114]

>>3812341

That's what you're going to have to figure out for yourself, but I'd personally venture say that it's an examined life... of life of introspection.

Really, "what is a good life?" is probably one of the most important questions you'll ever have a conversation with yourself about, so you might as well start practicing now.

Protip: the conversation never ends.

>>3812369
that fucking privilege

>>3812372
>that fucking privilege

what do you mean?

>>3812381
he had it easy and he was a fraud and betrayer to the stoic school.

>>3812354
Seneca's letter from a stoic is a most amazing collection of thought.

>>3812389
Considering he had near-absolute power and everyone around him was constantly telling him he was a god, I think he did a pretty good job.

>>3812389
>he had it easy
>Several of Marcus' children died early or at birth.
Yeah right.

>>3812389

>>3812389

>multiple wars on different fronts
>kids dying at birth left and right
>senators trying to undermine you and kill your friends
>Tiber river floods causing a famine and destroys most major banks and much of rome

>Trying to be stoic among a billion temptations

Ya it was really easy for him.

>>3812351
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Marcus_Aurelius

Says its not him, but there is a similar quote in book 2

>>3812402
Best thing is: Meditations, Letters from a Stoic and Enchiridion are together small enough to carry in your jacket pocket, and I often do.

>>3812413
Thanks, just as I suspected. It is alarming if there is no source mentioned in image macros.

http://classics.mit.edu/Epicurus/menoec.html

Letter to Menoeceus by Epicurus.

>>3812403
>>3812405
>>3812408
>>3812412
>not distancing yourself from your mass murdering dictatorship and living a life of actual arete

Scum. Like a Christian crusader. Epictetus was the real deal.

Also, kids dying was normal at the time. That didn't make him special.

>>3812453

>>3812453

"Thou art a little soul bearing about a corpse, as Epictetus used to say. " - Marcus Aurelius

>>3812471

wtf is that from?

>>3812453
You seem quite bothered, that's not very stoic of you.

>>3812434
>That detail.
Sculptors back then didn't fuck around, did they.

>>3812488
Not only sculptors. It seems like people had pride AND love on what they did.

>>3812479
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Epictetus

It's like you people never even heard of Google

>>3812500

fuck you, i GIS'd, tineyed, and iqdb'd it and nothing came up, shithead.

>>3812500
>http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Epictetus

hey stupid: i meant the gif not the aurelius quote.

The feels when you have a picture saved

>>3812484
I'm a Cyrenaic cunt, nae bother tae me.

>>3812365

The Stoics concept of freedom (such as it was) is remarkably similar to Stirner's idea of ownness. Stirner himself was hardly a non-conformist off the page.

>>3812765
Marcus was a shitty Stoic though. And I'd say Stirner's iconoclasting, loli teaching, money grabbing, milkshopping, debt dodging ways weren't exactly the norm.

>>3812389

If we're going by the standard and doctrine that Zeno laid down then almost all subsequent Stoics need to be considered traitors.

Epictetus is the Stoic who really departed from traditional theology. That said, Stoicism was a remarkably diverse school.

>>3812775
Hardly the life of the Egoist he writes about though. He was a pretty pathetic and cowering man.
Quite aside from which, "Marcus was a shitty Stoic" is not an argument.

>>3812777
Actually all Stoics are conformist traitors to the Cynic school.

There's no evidence he said that quote.

>>3812781

They aren't traitors, given that none of them (aside from Zeno perhaps) were members of that school. That's as stupid as claiming that all Buddhists are traitors to Hinduism.

>>3812779
There is no specific normative life of the Egoist. He did as he pleased, nothing cowering about that. Not everyone goes full Novatore, it depends on one's nature.

>>3812785
They're actually more like Christians paying lip service to Christ and acting in the opposite way. The only reason stoicism even exists is because Zeno was too weak to be a Cynic. He's like the Paul of Cynicism, corrupting the teachings as he went along.

>>3812786

"He did as he pleased". That's not really true though. His life is a list of frustrated desires and social snubs.

>>3812801
He did as he pleased as well as he was able, silly. That doesn't mean he didn't practice what he preached.

>>3812795

Poor choice of comparison given they predate Christianity. If you want a good comparison then they are actually more akin to the middle way Buddhists who regarded extremes as stupid. Have you read the Stoic critiques of Cynicism?

>>3812802

Thing is, he didn't preach anything about desire or material freedom (my original point).Stirner is an idealist in regard to how the Egoist lives. He could have lived any life and said "ah, but it is my Own'. Pretty vacuous, despite his brilliant critique of everything existing.

>>3812804
I've read about Epictetus' objections and such, but they were objections in Roman times regarding Cynics not quite the Cynics like those of old. Are those the ones you are referring to?

I like Epictetus though, he praised the original Cynics, but I generally dislike Stoicism precisely because it's an offshoot of Cynicism that neglected it's core elements and conformed in a way that turned out to be the death of the original ideas.

>>3812808
It's not vacuous as I see it, it's precisely brilliant because he doesn't really go into the normative aspect. One is totally freed up to do as one pleases. It's the supreme theoretical negation leading to the extreme practical liberation.

Yün-men once said, “Our school lets you go any way you like. It kills and it brings to life–either way.”

A monk then asked “How does it kill?”

The master replied, “Winter goes and spring comes.”

“How,” asked the monk, “is it when winter goes and spring comes?

The master said, “Shouldering a staff you wander this way andthat, East or West, South or North, knocking at the wild stumps as you please."

>>3812816

The Greek Stoics also have critiques. For most Stoics the Cynic way of life isn't one that escapes the attachment to externals... Diogenes, no matter how brilliant, remains as obsessed with materiality as any vulgarite. That said, it is true that many Stoics (like Epictetus) thought that Diogenes life was one to attempt to imitate. They simply recognised that it was unlikely that most people could achieve it. This doesn't make them "traitors", it makes them people capable of recognising reality.

>>3812824

It leads to know practical liberation. I'm not going to rehearse the Marx-Stirner debate but come on, simply deciding you are an Einzige does not lead to practical freedom if you are a 19th century debtor (like he was), or if you are a contemporary Palestinian or Syrian.

His theoretical negation is nihilism. I agree that this is a very important first step, but its a mistake to think that staying with Stirner leads you anywhere.

>>3812833

Typo: "know"=no.

>>3812828
Diogenes realised this as well though, seeing himself as exaggerating in his example so that others may get it right.

Still, I would say that the Stoic path goes beyond a mere acceptance of limitations but uses this idea to gradually do away with any essential principles and blend wholly into the status quo, keeping stoicism merely as a so called internal set of principles. They don't merely conform to reality, they conform to normality. And even against this I don't really have any objection, but I see in the stoic the two faced priest that tries to claim piety while practising worldliness. It's this tendency towards compromise where stoicism becomes inherently corrupt, it gives too much wiggle room for the jaded and debased. Not that I have anything against being jaded and debased, but I despise hypocrisy. One can not be a Roman emperor in the context of Marcus and be a proper Stoic, for example. Which is why among the ancients I respect the actual Cynics the most together with the Sceptics, the Epicureans and the Cyrenaics. Perhaps the latter even more than the rest, since they so vulgarly owe up to their nature.

>>3812833
I think the realisation with Stirner thoroughly understood is that one doesn't need to be lead anywhere. Stirner frees you of your chains, how you frolic is up to you.

The 19th century debtor has chains and so does the contemporary Levant dweller, but whether they merely have actual chains of force or also additional chains of thought always makes an enormous difference. One is always more free without the spooks.

>>3812847

This is true of the Romans but less so of Greek and modern Stoics. It is also not really true of Stoics like Seneca (hardly a stranger to Epicureanism). If we return to what we know of Zeno, for instance, his political treatise included equality of the sexes, sexuality, and even had a justification for incest. His "Republic" was deeply anti-Platonist, advocating something not entirely dissimilar to what would later emerge with anarchism.

The idea that Marcus couldn't be a proper Stoic also contradicts your own objection.

>>3812868
Original Zeno who wrote the Republic when he still rocked the Cynic badana was both great and hilarious. I've read that the later Stoics tried to hide this work though, it being scandalous and all. I agree that my obligation is mostly towards Roman stoicism though, although I dislike theoretical cunts like Chrysippus.

>The idea that Marcus couldn't be a proper Stoic also contradicts your own objection.
Not really sure what you mean by this.

>>3812881

Just that it seems you're suggesting that the Stoics lack rigorous normativity, preserving the status quo...so it seems entirely in keeping for an Emperor to be a Stoic. For my own part, I kind of agree but see this as among its strengths,. You could just as well have a Stoic emperor or a Stoic anarchist,

>>3812890
Perhaps I stated it wrong, but I meant this is an inherent weakness of stoicism, not it's nature in the sense of what it's supposed to be. So Aurelius represents a fault in stoicism. It's not the stoic ideals that rub me the wrong way in this as much as the tendency among stoics to not live up to these ideals.

>>3812909

Ah, I agree. Epictetus is really the only one who thinks Stoic ideals can be lived up to. I rather prefer the image that John Sellars draws: the Stoic knows everyone is drowning and while others sink to the bottom, he swims to the top...but never manages to leave the water.

>>3812916
>that pleasant feel when disagreements were mostly agreements caught up in semantic differences

I'm not really acquainted with contemporary interpretations and perhaps followers of Stoicism though. Since you mentioned that before, is there anything you would recommend looking into?

>>3812933
John Sellars is pretty much the man, along with A.A Long (great book on Epictetus).
Martha Nussbaum's 'The therapy of desire' is excellent. Deleuze has some scattered stuff on Stoic physics and temporality, for the more technical aspects (esp. in the Logic of Sense). There are some pop-approaches that are worth checking out (like William B Irving- although he is incredibly status quo reader)... Pierre Hadot's "Philosophy as a way of life" is a great book on the ancients, and he also has a book on Marcus.

I canb't remember his name but there is some guy who has written a book on Stoicism as the root of CBT (a kinda reductive read, but interesting).

A;lmost forgot Laurence C. Becker's admirable attempt to make Stoicism fit with contemporary naturalist science.

>>3812949
Thanks friend, will keep it in the warm bosom of my fuuka warosu until further notice.

Perhaps you'll like this Cynicism collection that I tend to spam on this board: http://www.mediafire.com/folder/zp2ppnxjwj28c/Cynicism

You probably already know it though.

>That quote.

He never fucking said it. It's not in the Meditations.

>tfw Marcus disliked Christians for preaching doomsday, the end of the world, tempting the gullible with rewards in heaven and scaring the ignorant with punishments in hell

>>3812980
What a coincidence. It's why I dislike it too.
And the whole guilt tripping. I'd didn't ask Jesus to do shit.

>>3812350

>It's remarkably similar to the Christian idea of a "good life", without the unquestioned reverence of God.

You're absolutely right, and that's one of the reasons Meditations survived antiquity in the monasteries of Christendom. Are you aware the text surged in popularity during the reformation?

I sometimes call him St. Marcus Aurelius, after Erasmus' joking "St. Socrates."

>>3812960
It's not a straight quote, no, it's a sort of mashup of a couple different ones, but the sentiment is correct.

"Since it is possible that thou mayest depart from life this very moment, regulate every act and thought accordingly. But to go away from among men, if there are gods, is not a thing to be afraid of, for the gods will not involve thee in evil; but if indeed they do not exist, or if they have no concern about human affairs, what is it to me to live in a universe devoid of gods or devoid of Providence?"

and

"Either there is a fatal necessity and invincible order, or a kind Providence, or a confusion without a purpose and without a director. If then there is an invincible necessity, why dost thou resist? But if there is a Providence which allows itself to be propitiated, make thyself worthy of the help of the divinity. But if there is a confusion without governor, be content that in such a tempest thou hast in thyself a certain ruling intelligence. And even if the tempest carry thee away, let it carry away the poor flesh, the poor breath, everything else; for the intelligence at least it will not carry away."

I disagree on the part about "live on in the memories of your loved ones" though. Contradicts many of his sayings, for example:

"He who has a vehement desire for posthumous fame does not consider that every one of those who remember him will himself also die very soon; then again also they who have succeeded them, until the whole remembrance shall have been extinguished as it is transmitted through men who foolishly admire and perish. But suppose that those who will remember are even immortal, and that the remembrance will be immortal, what then is this to thee? And I say not what is it to the dead, but what is it to the living? What is praise except indeed so far as it has a certain utility? For thou now rejectest unseasonably the gift of nature, clinging to something else."

>>3812500
The gif, man, the gif!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLD09Qa3kMk

These few videos on Aurelius are excellent

>>3812862
MUH SPOOKS MUTHAFUCKA

Hell yeah.

Anyone shitting on stirner can go fuck themself. All they are arguing for is being a brainwashed faggot that does and thinks what they are told. Those kinds of people should stay in academics and preach to queers that slurp the same tenure-cum that they do and publish in journals that no one reads so that they can't infect anymore of us than they already have.

>>3812786
>Not everyone goes full Novatore
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renzo_Novatore

Edgy as fuck

>>3813085

>elevating Stirner to Spook status.

clearly you need to read him better, you're probably not even white

>>3813110
He was probably the supreme master of edge. Being an outlaw was merely complementary to his texts. Have you read them?

http://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/renzo-novatore-my-maxims-from-my-intimate-thoughts-notebook

Now that's edge.

>>3813085
>Marcus Aurelius, emperor of rome and philosopher
>Max Stirner, crazy german guy who went to prison several times, tried to make a business and failed, then died alone

I'm going all ad hominem up in this bitch.

>>3813121

What does being white have to do with anything?

>elevating Stirner to Spook status
I don't think you understood it, either

>>3813123
Arguably Casparus Maximator Stirnerii was more influential. Marcus just kept shit from falling apart, Stirner is in a way responsible for anarchism and marxism as we know it. Let alone his possible influence on the Nitch.

>>3813122
>all that edge

>>3813124

stirner's philosophy is your spook

>>3813125
>Stirner is in a way responsible for anarchism and marxism as we know it

All the more reason to go for Marcus.
Plus, Stirner never looked this cool.

>>3812471


can we have a serious discussion about this gif

>>3813123
> 123
Noice.

>>3813136
You do realize how paradoxical that is, right?

>>3813137
pls

>>3813144
Do you realise how shaky his whole philosophy is, then?

plus, what >>3813137 says.
He never did look that cool.

>>3813150
Thanks for proving my point.

>>3813152

I don't think it's wrong to say that we base our lives on frameworks that exist pre-formed for us, when we should live by our own ideals and question these frameworks (spooks). So I guess you could argue that Sternerism is a spook in itself...

>>3813159
zoom in in that fat marky face son

>>3813171
>So I guess you could argue that Sternerism is a spook in itself...

It can become a spook.

>>3812775

>Marcus was a shitty Stoic though.
Meditations wasn't written to be Stoic material. The man just wrote his thoughts.

>>3813216
>zooming in on a man's face

Are you gay, son?
All I need to see is dat sweet armour and dat posture.

Also, did Stirner even OWN a horse?
I bet the motherfucker didn't even own a goat.

pic related, marcus aurelius and his pimping bronze horse

>>3813171
Nope.

>What Stirner says is a word, a thought, a concept; what he means is no word, no thought, no concept. What he says is not what is meant, and what he means is unsayable.

Stirnboy is post-spook like Laozi.

>>3813370

All philosophical discussion ever does is devolve into an argument over semantics because you faggots can't control your autism.

>>3813398
Sums up post modernist philosophy to the dot.

what is a spook?

>>3813398
Philosophy is arguing over semantics, silly tits.