The Thoughts Of The Emperor Marcus Aurelius Antoninus Part 14

Nor, I think, does he speak conclusively on another Stoic doctrine, which some Stoics practiced,--the antic.i.p.ating the regular course of nature by a man's own act. The reader will find some pa.s.sages in which this is touched on, and he may make of them what he can. But there are pa.s.sages in which the emperor encourages himself to wait for the end patiently and with tranquillity; and certainly it is consistent with all his best teaching that a man should bear all that falls to his lot and do useful acts as long as he lives. He should not therefore abridge the time of his usefulness by his own act.

Happiness was not the direct object of a Stoic's life. There is no rule of life contained in the precept that a man should pursue his own happiness. Many men think that they are seeking happiness when they are only seeking the gratification of some particular pa.s.sion, the strongest that they have. The end of a man is, as already explained, to live conformably to nature, and he will thus obtain happiness, tranquillity of mind, and contentment (III. 12; VIII 2). As a means of living conformably to nature he must study the four chief virtues, each of which has its proper sphere: wisdom, or the knowledge of good and evil; justice, or the giving to every man his due; fort.i.tude, or the enduring of labor and pain; and temperance, which is moderation in all things. By thus living conformably to nature the Stoic obtained all that he wished or expected.

His reward was in his virtuous life, and he was satisfied with that.

Epictetus and Antoninus both by precept and example labored to improve themselves and others; and if we discover imperfections in their teaching, we must still honor these great men who attempted to show that there is in man's nature and in the const.i.tution of things sufficient reason for living a virtuous life. It is difficult enough to live as we ought to live, difficult even for any man to live in such a way as to satisfy himself, if he exercises only in a moderate degree the power of reflecting upon and reviewing his own conduct; and if all men cannot be brought to the same opinions in morals and religion, it is at least worth while to give them good reasons for as much as they can be persuaded to accept.

FOOTNOTES:

1: This pa.s.sage is corrupt, and the exact meaning is uncertain.

2: Lorium was a villa on the coast north of Rome, and there Antoninus was brought up, and he died there. This also is corrupt.

3: This is corrupt.

4: Antoninus here uses the word [Greek: kosmos] both in the sense of the Universe and of Order; and it is difficult to express his meaning.

5: This is corrupt.

6: It appears that there is a defect in the text here.

7: The story is told by Horace in his Satires and by others since, but not better.

8: "Seen even with the eyes." It is supposed that this may be explained by the Stoic doctrine, that the universe is a G.o.d or living being (IV.

40), and that the celestial bodies are G.o.ds (VIII. 19). But the emperor may mean that we know that the G.o.ds exist, as he afterwards states it, because we see what they do; as we know that man has intellectual powers, because we see what he does, and in no other way do we know it.

9: The Stoics made three divisions of philosophy,--Physic, Ethic, and Logic (VIII. 13). This division, we are told by Diogenes, was made by Zeno of Citium, the founder of the Stoic sect, and by Chrysippus; but these philosophers placed the three divisions in the following order,-- Logic, Physic, Ethic. It appears, however, that this division was made before Zeno's time, and acknowledged by Plato, as Cicero remarks. Logic is not synonymous with our term Logic in the narrower sense of that word.

Cleanthes, a Stoic, subdivided the three divisions, and made six,-- Dialectic and Rhetoric, comprised in Logic; Ethic and Politic; Physic and Theology. This division was merely for practical use, for all Philosophy is one. Even among the earliest Stoics Logic, or Dialectic, does not occupy the same place as in Plato: it is considered only as an instrument which is to be used for the other divisions of Philosophy. An exposition of the earlier Stoic doctrines and of their modifications would require a volume. My object is to explain only the opinions of Antoninus, so far as they can be collected from his book.

According to the subdivision of Cleanthes, Physic and Theology go together, or the study of the nature of Things, and the study of the nature of the Deity, so far as man can understand the Deity, and of his government of the universe. This division or subdivision is not formally adopted by Antoninus, for, as already observed, there is no method in his book; but it is virtually contained in it.

Cleanthes also connects Ethic and Politic, or the study of the principles of morals and the study of the const.i.tution of civil society; and undoubtedly he did well in subdividing Ethic into two parts, Ethic in the narrower sense and Politic; for though the two are intimately connected, they are also very distinct, and many questions can only be properly discussed by carefully observing the distinction. Antoninus does not treat of Politic. His subject is Ethic, and Ethic in its practical application to his own conduct in life as a man and as a governor. His Ethic is founded on his doctrines about man's nature, the Universal Nature, and the relation of every man to everything else. It is therefore intimately and inseparably connected with Physic, or the nature of Things, and with Theology, or the Nature of the Deity. He advises us to examine well all the impressions on our minds and to form a right judgment of them, to make just conclusions, and to inquire into the meaning of words, and so far to apply Dialectic; but he has no attempt at any exposition of Dialectic, and his philosophy is in substance purely moral and practical. He says, "Constantly and, if it be possible, on the occasion of every Impression on the soul, apply to it the principles of Physic, of Ethic, and of Dialectic": which is only another way of telling us to examine the impression in every possible way. In another pa.s.sage (III. 11) he says, "To the aids which have been mentioned, let this one still be added: make for thyself a definition or description of the object which is presented to thee, so as to see distinctly what kind of a thing it is in its substance, in its nudity, in its complete entirety, and tell thyself its proper name, and the names of the things of which it has been compounded, and into which it will be resolved." Such an examination implies a use of Dialectic, which Antoninus accordingly employed as a means towards establis.h.i.+ng his Physical, Theological, and Ethical principles.