The Reality Dysfunction was a hefty read and so I wanted lighter and different in between the volumes of the massive trilogy. I picked Marcus Aurelius’ famous Meditations both because it’s definitely different from my usual reading material and because I’m getting of constantly seeing references to it and not knowing what it’s about. It is prominently featured in The Holdovers for example. Unfortunately it was largely a waste of my time. This is basically a self-help book and a very repetitive one at that. It’s impressive that it was so far ahead of its time for its genre and was written by an actual emperor of the Roman Empire but that’s about it.

Marcus Aurelius was the emperor who ruled Rome from 161 to 180 CE and this book is a collection of his private writings. Though it does reference specific events in his life he was grappling with at the time, it isn’t really a diary. Instead, it seems to be him actively practicing what would today be called affirmations. He is writing to constantly affirm his own philosophy of life and exhorting himself to do better. He never meant for anyone else to read it and so he isn’t trying to teach others here or to even persuade them to change their views. This volume is composed of twelve supposed books but they’re very short and better described as chapters. Even this organization is a modern contrivance as the writings were divided into multiple papyrus scrolls, likely as Aurelius ran out of space on each rather than due to intentional design. Each such book in turn consists of quote, often only a sentence or two, up to several paragraphs in length. Sometimes he is quoting from others but mostly he is writing his own thoughts. A typical example might be this line from Book 4: “Not to be driven this way and that, but always to behave with justice and see things as they are.”

Aurelius is today considered one of the best known Stoics and this book is one of the more popular pathways into that philosophy. The version I bought includes an introduction by translator Gregory Hays, In it, Hays lays out not only a brief biography of Marcus Aurelius but also the essential elements of the Stoic philosophy. Most people will likely be familiar with its emphasis on self-control and moderation in all things, turning away from unbridled passion, anxiety and excessive expressions of emotion. New to me is the concept of logos, that the entire world operates according to a rational and organized logic. In this view, the everything and everyone has a preordained and natural place. Virtue then comes from accepting that everything happens for a reason and according to the will of the gods. This is how self-control and stoicism itself is justified in the face of hardship, misfortune and even death. Aurelius repeatedly states that all lives are brief when compared against the span of ages, all humans die and are eventually forgotten and it is not for us to rail against the course of nature.

It goes without saying that I do not agree in the least with this conception of the universe. It is, in modern parlance, pure cope. There’s no evidence for the existence of one or more deities, nor of some grand cosmic purpose for the universe. The only argument Aurelius offers is that if the gods aren’t real, then what are we even doing here. Also notable is that there is a lot of repetition in what Aurelius writes, effectively saying the same things in slightly different ways. As others have surmised, he isn’t trying to convince anyone of the correctness of his arguments. He’s trying to talk himself into keeping the faith at difficult moments when his experiences in life might have challenged his beliefs. While I can sympathize that there are those who might find some comfort in these homilies, this is no basis on which to form a coherent philosophy.

There are perhaps a few reasons why reading this might be wothwhile even if you find the message to be mostly bunk. For one thing, it’s quite marvelous that a man like Aurelius shares so much of the same concerns as us even separated by nearly two thousand years. He’s upset about work, annoyed by the people around him, fears death and questions the lasting value of his efforts. That he was then the emperor of Rome, perhaps the most powerful man in the world of his era, makes the comparison even more striking. At the same time, it’s nauseating to be told that suffering doesn’t really matter and that we should disdain frivolous luxuries by a man sitting in such a privileged position. Sure, Aurelius says that slaves should be treated well yet at the same time asserts that if someone is a slave, it was because the gods placed them in that position and they should be content with it. The same goes for poverty, illness, physical disability and so on. The way he puts it, we cannot change what happens to us or how others see or treat us, but we can change how we react so that is what we must control. Whether he consciously meant it or not, it amounts to a defense of the status quo whatever it may be. I can’t see that being satisfying to many people.

To me, most of the value of the book is probably in the introduction itself. Hays notes how Aurelius’ writings repeat the same themes, tell us something of the emperor’s background and how someone like him was likely to have been educated. It’s easy to see that Aurelius was one of the better emperors of Rome and perhaps a good example of Plato’s philosopher king. Yet he still was a king and should not be relied upon as a font of wisdom and knowledge for ordinary people. I don’t much care for nor need self-help books and this was not an exception. Fortunately it is very short so at least I didn’t have to waste much time on it.