Category: Philosophy

Stoicism as The Serenity Prayer on Steroids

Stoicism as The Serenity Prayer on Steroids

Every so often I receive emails from people who have struggled to cope with their own alcoholism or that of their loved ones. They tell me how they’ve found great support and consolation in the writings of ancient Stoic philosophers, such as The Meditations of Roman emperor Marcus Aurelius. Those who are familiar both with the Stoics and the Twelve Step Program often recognize connections between them. The Serenity Prayer, for instance, made famous by Alcoholics Anonymous, neatly encapsulates one of the most characteristic doctrines of Stoic philosophy.

God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
Courage to change the things I can,
And wisdom to know the difference.

The Stoic philosopher Epictetus taught his students the same thing:

What, then, is to be done? To make the best of what is in our power, and take the rest as it naturally happens. — Discourses, 1.1

There are countless other references in the Stoic literature to making a firm distinction between what’s under our control and everything else: what we do versus what merely happens to us. We should take greater responsibility for what’s up to us, according to Stoicism, and get less upset about what is not. Wisdom consists largely in bearing this simple — almost commonsense — distinction in mind and being clearer about its practical and emotional implications for us in daily life.

Modern Stoics tend to call this idea the “dichotomy of control” or “Stoic fork”. However Stoicism offers much more than just this wise maxim — it’s a complete philosophy of life. One person who contacted me about alcoholism and Stoicism therefore described it as “the Serenity Prayer on steroids”.

Stoic Therapy

The most influential psychological principle of Stoicism comes from another one of Epictetus’ sayings:

It’s not things that upset us but our judgments about things. — Encheiridion, 5

That became the inspiration for modern cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT), the leading evidence-based approach to psychotherapy today. Both Stoicism and CBT are based on the idea that our emotions are largely — if not exclusively — determined by our underlying beliefs. From that shared premise they draw similar conclusions about how best to change feelings by changing our voluntary thoughts (cognitions) and actions (behaviour).

For the Stoics, the beliefs that upset us ultimately take the form of strong value judgments about things outside our direct control being either extremely bad or extremely good, leading to excessive fear or desire respectively. The Stoics argued that it was irrational — a veritable recipe for neurosis — to have a strong desire to get or avoid external things insofar as they are beyond our direct control. It’s healthier to focus on our own voluntary actions instead and take more responsibility for the way we respond to the situations that befall us.

We need to learn to do our own work, in a sense, by focusing more attention on what we can do rather than worrying about the things fate throws at us. When we can’t change something we need to learn to accept that fact with Stoic indifference. As Shakespeare put it:

Things without all remedy should be without regard. — Macbeth

The Eleventh Step uses more religious language to express this attitude of emotional acceptance in dealing with alcoholism:

[We sought] through prayer and meditation to improve our conscious contact with God as we understood Him, praying only for knowledge of His will for us and the power to carry that out.

We should, in other words, learn to accept reality — the Will of God, if you prefer theological language — and adapt accordingly to the demands of our situation.

The Eleventh Step also contains the following retrospective meditation technique.

When we retire at night, we constructively review our day. Were we resentful, selfish, dishonest or afraid? Do we owe an apology? Have we kept something to ourselves which should be discussed with another person at once? Were we kind and loving toward all? What could we have done better? Were we thinking of ourselves most of the time? Or were we thinking of what we could do for others, of what we could pack into the stream of life? But we must be careful not to drift into worry, remorse or morbid reflection, for that would diminish our usefulness to others.

“After making our review”, the authors say, “we ask God’s forgiveness and inquire what corrective measures should be taken.” This obviously resembles an influential technique described in The Golden Verses of Pythagoras, which was adopted by the Stoics. We find it in the writings of Epictetus, Seneca, and also in a book by Galen, Marcus Aurelius’ court physician, about Stoic therapy practices. Before retiring to sleep each night, it advises us to review the events of the day three times asking ourselves three questions: What we did well? What we did badly? What we omitted to do?

The Big Book continues by describing a complementary prospective meditation technique:

On awakening let us think about the twenty-four hours ahead. We consider our plans for the day. Before we begin, we ask God to direct our thinking, especially asking that it be divorced from self-pity, dishonest or self-seeking motives. Under these conditions we can employ our mental faculties with assurance, for after all God gave us brains to use. Our thought-life will be placed on a much higher plane when our thinking is cleared of wrong motives.

This also resembles morning meditation practices found in The Golden Verses of Pythagoras, and the writings of the Stoics.

The Stoics on Alcohol

So how did the Stoics view alcohol? The historian Diogenes Laertius, a “doxographer” who recorded the views of Greek philosophers, says that the Stoics typically drank wine in moderation, but would not allow themselves to get drunk. Stobaeus, another doxographer, tells us that the Stoics classified excessive love of wine as a disease, although curiously they considered hating it too much to be one as well. Although the Stoics typically appear to have favoured moderation, they may perhaps have agreed with the Twelve Step Program’s abstinence approach for individuals who struggle to limit their drinking.

Stoics had to be careful they were abstaining for the right reasons, though. Epictetus seems to assume that his students have sometimes become “water drinkers”, presumably abstaining from wine, for the purposes of training in Stoicism (Discourses, 3.14). He criticizes them for telling everyone they meet “I drink water”, as if the goal is to show off. He says that if what they’re doing is good for them they should be satisfied with that and shut up instead of going on about it to the annoyance of others.

The Stoic wise man (or woman) views alcohol itself with studied indifference and focuses instead on the use he makes of it. Everything can be used either well or badly, according to the Stoics. So the wise man pays attention to the present moment and whether he is acting wisely or foolishly, with self-discipline or recklessness, in a healthy manner or an unhealthy one, and so on. To help ourselves make progress in this direction, we should actually set aside time to study how people we admire cope with temptation, trying to learn from their attitude and emulate their behaviour.

Marcus Aurelius’ most important role model was his adoptive father the emperor Antoninus Pius. Marcus writes in his notes that what was traditionally said of Socrates could be said of Antoninus: he was able to abstain from or enjoy those things that the majority of us are either too weak to abstain from or enjoy over-indulgently (Meditations, 1.16). Marcus says that Antoninus showed strength, endurance, and restraint whether he chose to abstain from something or partake in it, and that this is “the mark of someone who possesses a well-balanced and invincible character”.

The Emperor Lucius Verus

In my recent book, How to Think Like a Roman Emperor, I used stories from the life of Marcus Aurelius to illustrate ways Stoicism can be applied in practice to help us deal with psychological problems today. However, we can also learn from other people’s mistakes. Marcus’ temperance stood in contrast to the notorious self-indulgence of his adoptive brother and co-emperor, Lucius Verus. From the way Roman historians describe him it appears likely that he was an alcoholic. We’re told that when he was meant to be commanding the legions in the Parthian war instead he would spend his time throwing parties, gambling, and drinking. He was obsessed with the chariot races and had a huge crystal goblet made, named Volucer after his favourite horse, which we’re told “surpassed the capacity of any human draught”.

Lucius would get drunk and “wander about at night through taverns and brothels with only a common travelling-cap for a head-covering, revel with various rowdies, and engage in brawls, while concealing his identity”, according to the Historia Augusta. Sometimes he would stagger drunk into the cook-shops and throw heavy coins at the cups, smashing them, and “often, they say, when he returned, his face was beaten black and blue”. He liked to feast late into the night, until he passed out at his banqueting table, and had to be carried to bed by his servants. We’re told his health was “weakened by such follies of debauchery and extravagance”.

The same historian claims that shortly after being acclaimed emperor, Lucius’ character was revealed to be “weak and base” when he was supposed to be leading the Roman counter-offensive against a Parthian invasion. Indeed, “while a legate [a Roman general] was being slain, while legions were being slaughtered, while Syria meditated revolt, and the East was being devastated”, Lucius spent all of his time hunting in the countryside or partying with his entourage in the brothels and taverns of one pleasure resort after another.

We’re told Marcus was sorely tested by the vices of his brother, particularly his “excessive candour and hot-headed plain speaking”, described as the result of “natural folly”. Lucius was struggling to cope with his feelings, though. During the Parthian War, Lucius wrote to a family friend complaining in desperation of “the anxieties that have rendered me very miserable day and night, and almost made me think that everything was ruined.” He’s probably referring to problems negotiating with the hostile Parthians, but he was clearly overwhelmed by emotional distress. Binge drinking, casual sex, gambling, and partying became his way of coping, albeit badly, with the pressures of his role as Marcus’ junior co-emperor.

In The Meditations, Marcus arguably damns him with faint praise and says only that observing Lucius’ character compelled him to take better care of his own, although he was also reassured by his brother’s respect and affection (1.17). I think Marcus perhaps watched helpless as Lucius’ life disintegrated, and vowed that he would never let himself make the same mistakes. Instead, he spent decades improving his character through training in Stoicism. If Lucius had practised Stoicism like his brother could it have helped him?

Frank’s Recovery Story

Frank, a retired NYPD Officer, got in touch to tell me about the role Stoicism played in his own recovery:

In the rooms of AA with the Twelve Steps and my sponsor I built the archway that I walked through a free man, and which lead me to the Stoics. On my journey I was searching for anything that might help me spiritually because my childhood faith did not help nor did I want it. Then I found some old quotes and everything changed. They fell in line with what I was learning from going through the Twelve Steps. I read in The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius “Such as are your habitual thoughts, such also will be the character of your mind; for the soul is dyed by the thoughts.” I identified with these sayings and realized that they were along the same lines as the principles I was learning in AA. So I looked up Marcus Aurelius and discovered he was an emperor of Rome. The words “Stoic philosopher” appeared next to his name. So I began reading up on the Stoics.

Frank’s embrace of Stoicism reinforced and expanded what he’d learned from the Twelve Step Program. He was now more focused on taking responsibility for his own actions, more philosophical about setbacks, and more contented with life.

I’ve come to learn that I control very little! However, Stoic and Twelve Step principles such as looking for opportunities to experience gratitude in everything that happens to me good or bad — amor fati or “love of one’s fate” — have helped put me on the path of living happy joyous and free.

(Frank’s blog article Gratitude in my Attitude goes into more detail about his personal journey and Stoicism.)

Stoicism and Alcoholism

So what did the ancient Stoics have to say about alcohol and addiction? Well, the Stoics trained themselves to develop the virtue of temperance by practising various psychological techniques on a regular, often daily, basis. For example, they would often make an effort to describe things to themselves in very matter-of-fact language, like an ancient natural philosopher making observations about animal behaviour or a physician describing the symptoms of a disease. Stripping away emotive language and strong value judgments allowed them to retain a stronger grip on reality, which Stoics called having an “objective representation” (phantasia kataleptike).

When Marcus Aurelius gazed upon a bottle of the exquisite Falernian wine, therefore, he would remind himself that it was merely fermented grape juice, and that the fine meat dishes set before him were just the corpses of fish, birds, and pigs (Meditations, 6.13). We should strip away all the verbal embellishments that cloud our judgement of the things we desire and view the naked truth with total objectivity. Napoleon employed the same down-to-earth strategy by saying that a throne is merely a bench covered in velvet.

I think Stoicism appeals to many people who struggle with alcoholism because it offers more than just self-help advice. The language in which it’s expressed in the classics is often striking, beautiful, and memorable. These stories from ancient philosophy stick in people’s minds and their constant presence can help us to gradually find a new orientation in life whereas sound advice from modern self-help books is often more forgettable. Stoicism isn’t just a therapy, either, but a whole philosophy of life. People who embrace it find that it can give them the opportunity to recover a sense of purpose and direction in life, and in some cases that can help fill a void that they’d previously been using drugs or alcohol to conceal from themselves.

Most importantly, though, Stoicism is a philosophy that contains a call to action. The Stoics wanted us to apply reason to our lives, and engage in philosophical discussions about the meaning of life, but only insofar as it actually helps us to improve our characters. We also have to make decisions, arrive at conclusions, and put wisdom into practice. As Marcus Aurelius said:

Waste no more time arguing about what it means to be a good man and just be one. — Meditations, 10.16

Donald Robertson’s ‘How to live like a Roman Emperor’ is full of gems from r/Stoicism

Interview About How to Think Like a Roman Emperor for High Existence Podcast

Interview About How to Think Like a Roman Emperor for High Existence Podcast

How my daughter helped me write my book…

How my daughter helped me write my book…

This is an excerpt from my book How to Think Like a Roman Emperor: The Stoic Philosophy of Marcus Aurelius.

A few years ago, when my daughter Poppy was four, she began asking me to tell her stories. I didn’t know any children’s stories, so I told her what came to mind: stories about Greek myths, heroes, and philosophers. One of her favorites is about the Athenian general Xenophon. Late one night, as a young man, he was walking through an alleyway between two buildings near the Athenian marketplace. Suddenly a mysterious stranger, hidden in the shadows, blocked his path with a wooden staff. A voice inquired from the darkness, “Do you know where someone should go if he wants to buy goods?” Xenophon replied that they were right beside the agora and the finest marketplace in the world. There you could buy any goods your heart desired: jewelry, food, clothing, etc. The stranger paused for a moment before asking another question: “Where, then, should one go in order to learn how to become a good person?” Xenophon was dumbstruck. He had no idea how to answer. The mysterious figure then lowered his staff, stepped out of the shadows, and introduced himself as Socrates. Socrates said that they should both try to discover how someone could become a good person, because that’s surely more important than knowing where to buy all sorts of other goods. So Xenophon went with him and became one of his closest friends and followers.

I told Poppy that most people believe there are lots of good things — nice food, clothes, houses, money, etc. — and lots of bad things in life, but Socrates said perhaps they’re all wrong. He wondered if there was perhaps only one good thing, and if it was inside of us rather than outside. Maybe it was something like wisdom or bravery. Poppy thought for a minute, then, to my surprise, she shook her head, saying, “That’s not true, Daddy!” which made me smile. Then she said something else: “Tell me that story again,” because she wanted to continue to think about it. She asked me how Socrates became so wise, and I told her the secret of his wisdom: he asked lots of questions about the most important things in life, and then he listened very carefully to the answers. So I kept telling stories, and she kept asking lots of questions. As I came to realize, these little anecdotes about Socrates did much more than just teach her things. They encouraged her to think for herself about what it means to live wisely.

One day, Poppy asked me to write down the stories I was telling her, so I did. I made them longer and more detailed, then I read them back to her. I started sharing some of them online, via my blog. Telling her these stories and discussing them together made me realize that this was, in many ways, a better approach to teaching philosophy as a way of life. It allowed us to consider the example set by famous philosophers and whether or not they provide good role models. I began to think that a book that taught Stoic principles through real stories about its ancient practitioners might prove helpful not just to my little girl but to other people as well.

Next, I asked myself who was the best candidate I could use as a Stoic role model, about whom I could tell stories that would bring the philosophy to life and put flesh on its bones. The obvious answer was Marcus Aurelius. We know very little about the lives of most ancient philosophers, but Marcus was a Roman emperor, so far more evidence survives about his life and character. One of the few surviving Stoic texts consists of his personal notes to himself about his contemplative practices, known today as The Meditations. Marcus begins The Meditations with a chapter written in a completely different style from the rest of the book: a catalogue of the virtues, the traits he most admired in his family and teachers. He lists about sixteen people in all. It seems he also believed that the best way to begin studying Stoic philosophy is to look at living examples of the virtues. I think it makes sense to view Marcus’s life as an example of Stoicism in the same way that he viewed the lives of his own Stoic teachers.

What might the Stoic philosopher say about Trump’s leadership qualities?

What might the Stoic philosopher say about Trump’s leadership qualities?

Ever on [Marcus Aurelius’] lips was a saying of Plato’s, that those states prospered where the philosophers were kings or the kings philosophers. — Historia Augusta

Roman emperor Marcus Aurelius’ (121–180 AD) was the most famous proponent of the Greek philosophy known as Stoicism. Having just written a book about Marcus, I’m often asked what the Stoic emperor would think of the current US president, Donald Trump. How would their political ideals and leadership qualities compare?

Stoicism has experienced a resurgence over recent decades, which extended into the political realm. Recently, Pat McGeehan, a Republican legislator in the West Virginia House of Delegates, wrote a book titled Stoicism and the Statehouse (2017). It was inspired, in part, by the example of James Stockdale, who drew on his knowledge of Stoic philosophy while enduring torture for over seven years in the notorious Hanoi Hilton, during the Vietnam War. Stockdale later ran as a vice presidential candidate in the 1992 election, on the same ticket as the independent Ross Perot. He once wrote that the sine qua non of a leader lies “in his having the character, the heart, to deal spontaneously, honorably, and candidly with people, perplexities, and principles.” Stoicism is a virtue ethic, which prizes moral wisdom and strength of character. Stockdale agreed with Will Durant’s statement that it therefore “produced the strongest characters of its time”, exceptional leaders, “men of courage, and saintliness, and goodwill,” including Marcus Aurelius.

When General James Mattis announced he was a fan of Stoicism recently, it raised the question of how Stoic virtue ethics might inform his conduct as Secretary of Defence under the leadership of President Trump. While in office, Mattis told an audience of military cadets that the one book every American should read is The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius. “In combat”, he said, “the reason I kept a tattered copy in my rucksack to pull out at times was it allowed me to look at things with a little distance.” Mattis drew inspiration from Stoicism when frustrated with all “the political heave ho” in Washington and the apparent inexperience of certain individuals around him. He mused that the Empress Faustina, and Marcus’ son and co-emperor, Commodus, “were not people that you’d want to spend much time with”. Marcus Aurelius’ attitude toward these challenges clearly struck a chord with Mattis. What he admired most was the “humility and the dignity with which he conducted his life” as a ruler, even in the face of extreme circumstances. A few months later, General Mattis resigned from the Trump administration, citing a lack of alignment between his own views and those of the president.

At the beginning of The Meditations, Marcus Aurelius sets forth his Stoic political ideals. Marcus’ friend and tutor, the Aristotelian Claudius Severus, taught him what it meant to love truth, justice, and his fellow man. He also introduced him to the political values of famous Roman Stoic republicans, such as Cato the Younger and Thrasea Paetus who sacrificed their lives opposing despots — Julius Caesar and Emperor Nero respectively. From their example, Marcus learned to cherish:

[…] the idea of a republic in which there is the same law for all, a republic administered with regard to equal rights and equal freedom of speech, and the idea of a kingly government which respects most of all the freedom of the governed. — Meditations, 1.14

We can see that he lived and ruled by these principles. Marcus was acclaimed emperor with the full support of the Senate and yet he insisted that, for the first time in Roman history, power should be shared by two co-emperors. His adoptive brother and son-in-law, Lucius Verus, was therefore appointed to rule alongside him.

Marcus typically confirmed appointments and ratified important decisions through the Senate. The Historia Augusta states that he significantly extended the powers of Senators, making them “the judge in many inquiries and even in those which belonged to his own jurisdiction.” We’re told that Marcus showed more respect to the Senate than any other emperor. The Stoics believed that a mixed constitution was the best form of rule because it could combine the best elements of different political systems by allowing different branches of government to provide checks and balances for one another. Marcus genuinely viewed himself as a servant of the people therefore and actively sought to share power with his co-emperor and the Senate. In other words, despite being a Roman emperor, he was, at least in some key regards, arguably perceived as less autocratic than President Trump is today.

We’re told that he ruled in such an exceptionally tolerant manner that even though a popular satirist constantly ridiculed him, Marcus was not offended. He refused to do anything to punish such critics or restrict their freedom of speech. The same historian writes:

Toward the people he acted just as one acts in a free state. He was at all times exceedingly reasonable both in restraining men from evil and in urging them to good, generous in rewarding and quick to forgive, thus making bad men good, and good men very good, and he even bore with unruffled temper the insolence of not a few. — Historia Augusta

The Stoics believed that a true ruler, or leader, must be unswayed by flattery and unperturbed by insults. This notion perhaps goes back to Antisthenes whose saying Marcus Aurelius quoted with approval: “It is a king’s part to do good and be spoken of ill” (Meditations, 7.36). In his play Hercules Furens, the Stoic philosopher Seneca likewise wrote “’Tis the first art of kings, the power to suffer hate.” Arguably, though, President Trump has been rather less tolerant of criticisms in the free press and other media than the Emperor Marcus Aurelius would have been.

General Mattis also mentioned to those cadets that Marcus Aurelius spent much of his reign far from home, fighting the northern tribes along the Danube. The First Marcomannic War was interrupted by a civil war in 175 AD. An uprising instigated by Marcus’ most senior general in the east, Avidius Cassius, who had presumptuously acclaimed himself emperor in Egypt. Mattis admired the way Marcus Aurelius responded to this and other events, observing that “the commitment to his country, to his troops, really comes through” as you read the pages of The Meditations.

Marcus’ response to the usurper Avidius Cassius is one of the clearest examples in the history books of Stoic philosophy being put into action by a political leader. As soon as news reached Rome of the rebellion the Senate freaked out. Their knee-jerk reaction was to officially denounce Cassius as an “enemy of the people” (hostis publicus) and seize his assets. This, of course, escalated the crisis. The populace became afraid that Cassius would march on Rome, sacking the city to exact revenge. It would probably have taken over a week for a dispatch rider bearing the news to reach Marcus Aurelius’ army camp on the northern frontier. What the emperor did next was reported in detail by the Roman historian Cassius Dio, who even provides the reputed text of the speech he delivered before the gathered legionnaires — it’s frankly astounding.

Marcus declared that if Cassius had sought to impeach his authority peacefully he would have voluntarily stepped down from office and spoken before a Senate hearing where the claims against him could have been judged impartially, through due process. One of the most important ethical principles that the Stoics inherited from Socrates was the doctrine that no man does evil knowingly. Based on this premise, Marcus overcame his naturally quick temper, developing instead empathy and a reputation for showing clemency and forgiveness. He refused to blame Cassius or express anger toward him. Instead he insisted the most plausible explanation was that the rebels had acted in error, mistakenly believing rumours of his death from illness. Marcus therefore announced that he was officially pardoning everyone involved in the rebellion against him.

Cassius refused to stand down so, ironically, his own officers turned on him, beheading him in an ambush. They deemed that preferable to facing the might of the loyalist army advancing toward them under the rightful emperor’s command. Having been pardoned they had no more reason to fight. The civil war ended with minimal bloodshed about three months after it had begun. Cassius was a strict disciplinarian, notorious for his cruelty, who dismissed Marcus as a “philosophical old women” and a weak leader. However, though they feared Cassius, his officers weren’t willing to risk their skins for him, whereas Marcus’ troops loved him and remained steadfastly loyal.

Another Roman historian, Herodian, wrote of Marcus Aurelius:

The ruler who emplants in the hearts of his subjects not fear resulting from cruelty, but love occasioned by kindness, is most likely to complete his reign safely. For it is not those who submit from necessity but those who are persuaded to obedience who continue to serve and to suffer without suspicion and without pretense of flattery. And they never rebel unless they are driven to it by violence and arrogance.

President Trump has watched one after another of his former allies leak information, turn on him, and even testify against him in court. These are the fairweather friends the Stoics warn us against: friendships of expediency. The president has also been quick to get rid of appointees who questioned his judgement. Marcus Aurelius, by contrast, surrounded himself with a handful of carefully chosen “friends of the emperor”, hand-picked for their wisdom and strength of character. He encouraged them to speak plainly to him, and he retained them even when they challenged his decisions. I think perhaps Marcus, in his capacity as imperator, would have welcomed General Mattis’ views, whether or not they aligned with his own.

I think it’s fair to conclude that President Trump cuts a very different figure from Marcus Aurelius in terms of his leadership style. Presidential historian Jon Meacham, wrote of the surprising relevance Marcus Aurelius’ “optimistic Stoicism” has for the crises faced by contemporary US politicians. In doing so, Meacham noted some the most relevant qualities Marcus sought to embody as emperor were truthfulness, humility, and affection for his neighbours.

The Stoics, who were notorious for their paradoxes, would say that true leadership, or as they put it kingship, is a state of mind. Kingship can be possessed by anyone no matter how humble their station in life. Diogenes the Cynic was an exile who lived like a beggar but somehow more majestically than Alexander the Great, whom legend claims he looked upon as, at best, an equal. Whether or not any given king is kingly, or president presidential, we should all aspire to possess the virtues of leadership ourselves by living as wisely and responsibly as we can, treating others courteously, and so on.

“Only the virtuous man rules,” say the Stoics, “and even if he does not in all circumstances do so in actuality, still in all circumstances he does so by disposition.” In other words, leadership is a state of mind, a truly “kingly” or “presidential” character can be exhibited regardless of our station in life. Indeed, the virtues of leadership potentially exist within each and every one of us and that’s the first place we should start looking for them.

On the Origin of Society and Justice

On the Origin of Society and Justice

Towards that for the sake of which each being has been constituted and for which it was made, towards that it strives; now in what it strives towards, there resides its end; and where its end lies, there also lies its specific advantage and good. It follows that the good of a rational being must be fellowship with others; for it has long been proved that we were born for fellowship. — Marcus Aurelius, Meditations, 5.16

Although Socrates often criticized the Sophists he also admired much of what they said in praise of virtue. Protagoras was the first and greatest of them. This is my paraphrase of his most famous oration, known as the Great Discourse, based on the version described in Plato’s Protagoras…

At first there were gods but no mortal creatures. When the time came, the gods fashioned countless animals by mixing together the elements of fire and earth. Zeus then commanded the titan Prometheus to assign different abilities to each living thing.

Some creatures were slow moving and so to make up for this he gave them great strength. Others were weak and so to these Prometheus granted speed. Some he armed while others were given various forms of protection. Small creatures were granted the capability for winged flight or for concealing their dwellings underground. Large beasts had their size for protection. And he took care to grant all creatures some means for their own preservation so that no species should be in danger of elimination by others.

Having equipped them to survive among each other in this way Prometheus then granted them protection against their environment and the harshness of the seasons. He clothed some creatures with dense hair or thick skin, sufficient to endure the heat of summer and ward off the cold through winter months. To some he gave strong hooves, to others claws and hard bodies that did not easily shed blood. And every creature was assigned its own source of food. Some pastured on the earth, others ate fruits hanging from trees or roots from beneath the ground. Yet others were predators who fed upon other animals for their meat. To these he assigned limited offspring whereas their prey were more abundant so that there would always be enough to serve as food.

However, having assigned to each species its own special capabilities, Prometheus realized that he had nothing left to give the race of man. Humans are born naked, unshod, unarmed, and with no bed in which to lay their head and rest safely. Not knowing what else to do, he stole the technical expertise of the gods Hephaestus and Athena and gave it to mankind, along with the gift of fire.

Once human beings were granted these divine gifts, they sensed their kinship to the gods and began praying and building altars to them. They invented clothing, bedding, dwellings, agriculture, and even the use of language to express their thoughts and acquire learning. Men lived apart at first but finding themselves beset continually and harassed by wild beasts they sought to build cities for their own mutual protection.

However, the wisdom that concerns our relations with others belonged to Zeus alone, king of the gods and patron of friendship and families. No sooner than men gathered together trying to save themselves, being lawless, they began instead to wrong one another and fighting broke out among them. Scattering once again from their failed cities, they continued to perish in the wild.

Looking down upon this chaotic scene with dismay, Zeus feared for the destruction of the entire human race. He therefore sent Hermes, the messenger of the gods, to teach mortals about justice and to instil in them a sense of shame concerning wrongdoing, as a deterrent against injustice. By this means Zeus now granted mankind the capacity to unite themselves in cities, maintaining order through the bonds of friendship and fostering their sense of community.

Hermes asked Zeus whether he should distribute justice, and other social and political arts, among men in the same way as technical knowledge concerning the other crafts. One man who possesses the knowledge of medicine, he said, was enough to benefit many men, and so on. However, Zeus decreed that every human being must be granted some knowledge of justice and the arts needed to unite society. He even laid down the law that anyone who was found unable to respect justice and the rule of law should be put to death, being a plague on the city.

For this reason, said Protagoras, we seek the advice only of those few who are experts with regard to crafts such as medicine or carpentry but concerning justice we allow every citizen to have his say. Further, if someone boasts of being an expert in playing the flute or some such art but is found to be nothing of the sort then he is ridiculed as a fool. However, anyone who claims not to participate in justice risks being expelled from society because each and every citizen is expected to share at least somewhat in this capacity, which allows him to live harmoniously in the company of others.

Protagoras expressed the doctrine that humans are naturally social creatures in the guise of a myth. According to the philosophers, we are obliged to realize our potential for wisdom by exercising the gift of reason to the best of our ability. So also are we obliged to fulfil our natural potential for friendly collaboration with others by exhibiting the virtue of justice.

Five Stoic Lessons Marcus Learned From Emperor Antoninus Pius

Five Stoic Lessons Marcus Learned From Emperor Antoninus Pius

The Roman emperor Marcus Aurelius was the most famous proponent of the ancient philosophy known as Stoicism. He was also one of the most powerful leaders in European history, assuming control of the Roman empire aged 39, during the height of its power.

This article explores the five key leadership qualities that Marcus talks about admiring:

1. Develop your character

2. Be hardworking and conscientious

3. Don’t over-value praise

4. Don’t be afraid of criticism

5. Be content to live simply

Marcus’ own reign as emperor was notoriously challenging. After a period of exceptional peace and stability during the reign of his adoptive father, Emperor Antoninus Pius, Marcus faced a series of disasters. Shortly after he was acclaimed emperor, the River Tiber suffered one of its most severe floods ever, destroying homes and livestock, which led to a famine at Rome. Around this time, the Parthians invaded Armenia, a Roman ally, instigating a war in the east that would last five years.

Rome’s eventual victory in the Parthian War was soured when returning legionaries spread a deadly virus throughout the empire. The Antonine Plague took the lives of an estimated five million people, over the course of roughly fifteen years. To make matters worse, while the empire was struggling to recover enemy tribes along the northern frontier seized the opportunity to invade. The young King Ballomar of the Marcomanni led a vast army, which overran Pannonia and the other northern provinces. They proceeded to loot and plunder their way down the Amber Road, across the Alps, and into Italy itself, finally laying siege to the wealthy Roman city of Aquileia.

I admire him all the more for this very reason, that amid unusual and extraordinary difficulties he both survived himself and preserved the empire.

Marcus nonetheless faced these unprecedented challenges head on, with total Stoic equanimity and endurance. The Roman historian Cassius Dio could therefore conclude:

[Marcus Aurelius] did not meet with the good fortune that he deserved, for he was not strong in body and was involved in a multitude of troubles throughout practically his entire reign. But for my part, I admire him all the more for this very reason, that amid unusual and extraordinary difficulties he both survived himself and preserved the empire.

After the sudden death of his adoptive brother and co-emperor, Lucius Verus, Marcus was unexpectedly left in sole command of the army. Rather than run the war from behind a desk back in the safety of Rome, he donned the military cape and boots and rode forth to battle. Indeed, Marcus stationed himself in the military camps along the front line throughout the Marcomannic War, in modern-day Austria, Hungary, and Serbia. With no military experience whatsoever, he found himself at the head of the largest army ever deployed on a Roman frontier, numbering approximately 140,000 men in total.

During this time Marcus wrote down his personal reflections on Stoic philosophy in a text that would later become known as The Meditations, one of the most influential spiritual and self-help classics of all time. Marcus opens the book with a chapter written in a different style from the rest. He lists the virtues or qualities he most admires from about sixteen different people: teachers or members of his family. In doing so, he was clearly attempting to study attitudes and behaviours worth emulating.

The Meditations

At the time of writing, Marcus had known three other Roman emperors in person: Hadrian, his adoptive grandfather; Antoninus Pius, his immediate predecessor and adoptive father; and Lucius Verus, his adoptive brother and junior co-emperor. It’s notable that Marcus virtually relegates Lucius Verus to a footnote, almost as though damning him with faint praise. Hadrian gets even worse treatment and is completely ignored, as though Marcus can’t think of anything positive to say about him at all. However, these omissions are all the more apparent because of the way Marcus heaps praise at length upon Antoninus Pius, his adoptive father and predecessor as emperor. Not only does he expend spend far more words on Antoninus here than on any other individual but Marcus returns to him later in the text, providing another list of his virtues and stating quite categorically that he views himself as the “disciple of Antoninus” in all matters.

Marcus, in other words, was carefully modelling the leadership qualities he saw exemplified in the emperor Antoninus Pius.

We also have a letter addressed to a young Marcus from his celebrated Latin rhetoric tutor, Marcus Cornelius Fronto, in which Fronto advises Marcus on writing speeches in praise of the Emperor Antoninus, who was still alive at the time. Marcus, he says, should thank his father eloquently and “be most full and copious”,

For there is nothing that you can say in all your life with more honour or more truth or more liking than that which concerns the setting forth of your father’s praises.

It’s crystal clear that, even a decade or more after his demise, Marcus was still turning to his adoptive father’s memory to find a guide and role model, particularly in relation to his duties as emperor. Marcus, in other words, was carefully modelling the leadership qualities he saw exemplified in the emperor Antoninus Pius. Although Antoninus wasn’t a Stoic, Marcus saw him as naturally embodying the sort of virtues Stoics wanted to cultivate. This seems to have been a common practice. For example, Seneca had earlier written:

We can remove most sins if we have a witness standing by as we are about to go wrong. The soul should have someone it can respect, by whose example it can make its inner sanctum more inviolable. Happy is the person who can improve others, not only when present, but even when in their thoughts! (Moral Letters, 11.9)

I’ve combed through the various remarks Marcus makes about the traits in his father he most admired and discovered that they fall under a handful of broad headings. We can view these as some of the characteristics Marcus associated with the ideal leader or ruler.

1. He had equanimity and a pleasant character

Marcus mentions that he admired the emperor Antoninus Pius for being mild tempered. He became very famous for the air of serenity that accompanied his presence. Hadrian, by contrast, was notoriously volatile and quick tempered — he made people nervous. Marcus tells us that he suffered from a temper himself, which he struggled to control, so it’s tempting to imagine that he wanted to be more like Antoninus and less like Hadrian in this regard.

Marcus also said that Antoninus always seemed to be cheerful and satisfied with life. He therefore came across as very natural and agreeable in conversation, and Marcus even calls his adoptive father “sweet-natured”. He also noted that Antoninus kept very few secrets and those he did concerned matters of state. He perceived him as a genuinely pious man, while nevertheless above superstition. He had a calm and reassuring presence and it was pleasant dealing with him. It may surprise many people to know that Stoics, like Marcus, were often cheerful and pleasant company.

2. He was patient, hardworking and conscientious

Antoninus would research his decisions meticulously beforehand, minimizing the likelihood he’d have to change course at a later date. He’d therefore find himself able to stick to his original plan of action more consistently than other rulers. He wasn’t content with a superficial understanding but sought to think through his decisions very carefully, even anticipating events in the distant future. Marcus says his adoptive father would usually examine the problems he faced one aspect at a time as if he had ample time, proceeding vigorously and in a focused, organized, and determined manner. He would never allow an important decision to be made until he was satisfied that he’d given it enough thought to understand what was at stake. Once he’d determined the most rational course of action, though, he would act accordingly, ensuring that it was put into practice. He seemed to enjoy working and was therefore able to labour patiently at things for long hours, even returning to work immediately after recovering from severe bouts of headache.

He was also very prudent and conscientious in managing both his own affairs and those of others, and careful to avoid wasting public money. He was cautious about putting on crowd-pleasing spectacles or constructing public buildings. He sincerely respected the institutions of his country. He wasn’t desperate for change, for its own sake, but content to remain in the same place, working consistently on the same tasks. This was quite the opposite of Hadrian who constantly travelled and sought novelty and stimulation. Marcus admired this because Stoicism teaches us to value strength of character, and virtue, first and foremost. That leads to a hard-working attitude because taking pride in what you do is more important than avoiding discomfort.

3. He neither flattered others nor sought to win praise himself

Marcus said that Antoninus helped cure him of pride and affectation and showed him that he could live in a palace almost as if he were a common citizen, minimizing the trappings of imperial office. Antoninus was neither pretentious nor pursued acclaim. He was above flattery himself and put a stop to it at court. He didn’t try to win popularity by heaping praise on others or showering them with gifts. He had a natural lack of interest in empty fame and instead focused on doing what was actually required rather than what would win him admirers.

However, he showed loyalty and consistency in his friendships. He sought genuine friends rather than being seduced into flattering others to win fairweather friendships. He treated people justly, giving them what they deserved, and never imposed unreasonable demands on his companions. This indifference to flattery was integral to the Stoic philosophy followed by Marcus Aurelius. It’s easy to be mesmerized and lured off course by fame but the wise person remains aloof from these things and committed to doing what reason determines to be the right course of action.

4. He was unafraid of criticism

Antoninus didn’t consider himself superior to anyone and was happy to listen to whoever had potentially useful information or advice. Nevertheless, he would very carefully study the manners and actions of others to determine their character. He honoured true philosophers, but was not easily led by pseudo-intellectuals. He was ready to give way to experts on matters of law or ethics, or those who were more skilled speakers, without any envy or resentment, and he helped competent individuals to advance in their careers. Moreover, Antoninus never listened to slanderous gossip and didn’t indulge in idle complaints about others himself. Marcus was impressed by how his adoptive father tolerated freedom of speech in those who opposed his opinions and, indeed, rather than being indignant he was extremely pleased whenever anyone could show him a better way of looking at things.

“It is kingly to do good and yet be spoken of ill.”

Antoninus was therefore neither timid nor aggressive; neither a sloppy thinker, like the Sophists, nor a pedant. He would challenge other people’s views where necessary but was also willing and able to accept criticism from others. For example, Marcus says his adoptive father endured a considerable amount of criticism for being too cautious with regard to public expenditure, etc. He patiently put up with individuals who blamed him unjustly without blaming them in return. In The Mediations, Marcus quotes an old saying from Antisthenes: “It is kingly to do good and yet be spoken of ill” (7.36). In his play Hercules Furens, the Stoic philosopher Seneca likewise wrote “’Tis the first art of kings, the power to suffer hate.” A truly wise leader, in other words, must be able to ignore insults and be tolerant of criticism.

5. He was content with simple things in life

Marcus was impressed by how little was necessary to satisfy Antoninus, in terms of his lodgings, bed, dress, food, servants, etc. He looked after his own health in a simple down-to-earth way, without becoming overly-preoccupied with diet or exercise. When he had access to luxuries he enjoyed them without any reservations but when he didn’t have them he didn’t want them. Marcus says that like Socrates, Antoninus was able both to abstain from, and to enjoy, those things which many are too weak to abstain from and cannot enjoy without excess. However, to be strong enough both to bear abstaining from desires and yet sober enough to enjoy satisfying them without excess is the mark of a perfect and invincible soul, he says. In other words, this sort of moderation and self-discipline was integral to Stoic philosophy and its conception of leadership.

Socrates himself had long ago made the point that, on reflection, nobody with any sense would rather entrust the care of their loved ones to someone reckless who lacks self-control than to someone self-disciplined and moderate. He concluded that these are obviously traits we should desire in any leader because it’s impossible to act consistently in accord with wisdom if we lack self-control. Marcus clearly saw Antoninus as embodying the sort of self-mastery required for a leader to live consistently in accord with wisdom and justice.

The Historia Augusta portrays the emperor Antoninus’ character as a ruler in a way that’s broadly consistent with Marcus’ personal notes on him in The Meditations:

In personal appearance he was strikingly handsome, in natural talent brilliant, in temperament kindly; he was aristocratic in countenance and calm in nature, a singularly gifted speaker and an elegant scholar, conspicuously thrifty, a conscientious land-holder, gentle, generous, and mindful of others’ rights.

It adds that he “possessed all these qualities, moreover, in the proper mean and without ostentation”, and was praiseworthy in every conceivable respect. Moreover, “for three and twenty years [Marcus Aurelius] conducted himself in his [adoptive] father’s home in such a manner that [Antoninus] Pius felt more affection for him day by day, and never in all these years, save for two nights on different occasions, remained away from him”. By all accounts, therefore, Antoninus was both an excellent father and a role model to Marcus, especially in his capacity as a leader and the emperor of Rome.

See my latest book, How to Think Like a Roman Emperor: The Stoic Philosophy of Marcus Aurelius, for a more in-depth discussion of Marcus Aurelius’ life and use of Stoic philosophy.

What might Stoic Philosophy say about the Raptors Star?

What might Stoic Philosophy say about the Raptors Star?

Toronto Raptors player Kawhi Leonard is often praised for his “stoicism”. CBC call him “a stoic NBA superstar.” He’s even been dubbed “the Crown Prince of Stoicism”.

Despite his claim to be a “fun guy”, Kawhi doesn’t usually talk much and his poker-face doesn’t give much away either. He seldom gives interviews and he has no social media presence. His celebrations during and after games are muted. He’s been described as “the most modest, non-confrontational superstar in a league full of attention-seekers”.

Some people trace this sober demeanour back to his way of coping with adversity during childhood. When Kawhi was sixteen years old and still in high school, his father was shot and killed at the car wash he owned in Compton, where they had worked together. Kawhi nevertheless got on the basketball court and played the following evening, although he reputedly broke down afterwards. His father’s killer was never found.

Whatever the influences were that forged his personality, the media have settled on dubbing him a stoic. The word “stoic” (lower case) has come to denote someone who is, like Kawhi, generally unemotional and calm in the face of adversity. Curiously, the word “philosophical” is often used to mean virtually the same thing. For instance, someone facing hardship or misfortune is described as “maintaining a philosophical attitude toward events”. Kawhi certainly appears “stoic”, and even “philosophical”, in the sense that his trademark characteristic has become his impassive and unemotional way of coping with events. On the other hand, though, the word “Stoic” (capitalized) refers to an ancient Greek school of philosophy, from which the adjective “stoic” and our notion of a “philosophical attitude” are only rather loosely derived. There’s a lot more to being a Stoic philosopher, in other words, than just having a stoic personality.

Nevertheless, the Greek philosophy of Stoicism has experienced a resurgence of popularity in recent decades. That’s partly because it provided the philosophical inspiration for cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT), the leading evidence-based approach to modern psychotherapy. Both Stoicism and CBT share the premise that our emotions are largely (if not exclusively) determined by certain underlying beliefs. Perhaps the most famous Stoic quotation of all, from Epictetus, states “It’s not events that upset us but our judgements about them” — and those precise words have been taught by CBT practitioners to countless thousands of clients since the 1950s. By identifying, evaluating, and changing relevant irrational beliefs we can change the way we feel and improve our mental health. The large volumes of scientific research that now support CBT’s therapeutic benefits for common problems like anxiety and depression have lent indirect support to some of the ideas and practices of Stoicism. There’s therefore been renewed interest in the philosophy as a way of life, which promises to help us build emotional resilience.

Often the distinction between “stoic” and “Stoic” gets blurred. Kawhi has never mentioned “Stoicism” or given any indication of having read the classic texts of the philosophy: the letters of Seneca, The Discourses of Epictetus, or The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius. However, it wasn’t unusual for the Stoics to praise as role-models other non-Stoic individuals who happened to embody the virtues their philosophy praised. Indeed, some people have already drawn parallels between Kawhi’s mindset and the ancient Greek philosophy. For example, Avel Ivanov, over at The Bench, wrote of Kawhi: “If the ancient Stoics were tasked with creating a model of what the Stoic basketball player would look like he would look an awful lot like #2 on the Toronto Raptors.” So to what extent does Kawhi actually exhibit the sort of attitudes taught in Stoic philosophy?

First of all, we shouldn’t be surprised to find a player’s character being interpreted in terms of Stoic principles. Stoic philosophy has influenced players in other sports. The NFL exec and former New England Patriots coach, Michael Lombardi, began to draw on Stoicism after reading The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius. One of the main things Lombardi takes from Stoicism is a psychological principle that modern Stoics tend to refer to as the “Dichotomy of Control”. This entails making a clear distinction between things that are up to you and things that are not. “In a profession that has many outside influences,” he says, “it is always good to remind yourself each day to worry and work on only that you can control.” Lombardi names several basketball players and coaches who particularly exemplify Stoic qualities, including Tim Duncan, who played for the San Antonio Spurs, and Gregg Popovich, their head coach and president. Kawhi’s naturally Stoic qualities were perhaps reinforced when he played for the Spurs and he clearly brought those traits with him when he was transferred to the Toronto Raptors.

Lombardi’s Stoic advice applies to life in general but also seems consistent with Kawhi’s approach to playing basketball:

Control the things you can control and only worry about them. Stay in the moment, don’t listen to the negative or the positive, be grounded and most of all keep striving for improvement.

The maxim “never too low, never too high” has likewise become part of the Raptors’ winning formula. Kawhi’s own level-headed approach to the game particularly exemplifies this philosophy. “I don’t like to bring attention to myself,” he has said. “I don’t like to make a scene.”

Teammates and coaches have also noted Kawhi’s habit of speaking to the point in short phrases. When playing defense and blocking another player, for instance, he’d just firmly say the word “No.” We traditionally describe this terse way of speaking as being “laconic”, after Laconia the region of Greece in which the city of Sparta is located. The Stoics admired certain aspects of Spartan society and they were also known for speaking laconically. The philosopher Cicero even described the Spartans as “the originators of that [Stoic] way of living and that sort of language”. Zeno of Citium, the founder of Stoicism, was particularly known for his personal economy of speech. Moreover, the Stoic theories of rhetoric he taught praised “conciseness” as a virtue, “a style that employs no more words than are necessary for setting forth the subject in hand.” Stoic language also sticks to the facts rather than speculating or embellishing things — it makes a virtue out of simplicity. When asked by a reporter if he could describe his favourite Christmas moment, perhaps a silly question, Kawhi merely replied “Not right now.” When asked how he coped with the change in climate following his transfer from San Antonio to Toronto he patiently explained to reporters, with a straight face, that it wasn’t a big deal because: “I just wear a jacket. We’re in buildings a lot. We’re not outside playing in the snow.”

Kawhi’s relative indifference toward the external trappings of fame and success echo a fundamental distinction made two and a half thousand years ago by Socrates. The previous generation of intellectuals in Athens had focused mainly on oratory, or public speaking, and the use of sophisticated rhetoric designed to fire up emotions and win praise and applause from large audiences. The Sophists, as these teachers were known, often became greedy for wealth and fame. Socrates argued that they had fallen into one of the most common and fundamental traps in life by confusing appearance and reality. They’d been lured away from the pursuit of real wisdom by the promise of achieving the mere appearance of wisdom, in the eyes of others.

Socrates turned this on its head and repeatedly encouraged his young students to become in reality as they wished to appear — to try actually to become wise rather than merely appear so. Kawhi likewise shows no interest in cultivating his public image in order to try to appear important and successful. He just seems to be focusing on his game, and actually “striving for improvement”, to the best of his ability, rather than troubling himself over what the public might think of him. Whereas so many people care about being popular, a childhood friend confirms that Kawhi never did. He’s more interested in his own performance than other people’s opinions. He once said in an interview “I’m just going out there and playing as hard as I can… As long as you give your best effort, I feel like that’s all you can do.” He is also reported as saying:

You know, I’ll never try to win an award. I’m out there just playing for my team. If I get noticed for my individual performance, that’s what happens. Other than that, I’m just trying to win the game.

The Stoics believed that because the wise man is relatively indifferent to either praise or criticism, especially from the masses, and he even views success and failure with equal detachment. He therefore exhibits a more stable and consistent frame of mind across whatever situations he encounters. He won’t allow his mood to be lifted and then cast down, blown one way and then another by the winds of fortune. Kawhi likewise told an interviewer that “My mindset is the same every game.” He explained this mindset to reporters as follows:

I’m not describing my game; I’m just trying to win. That’s for you guys to do. I’m living in the moment.

The Stoic wise man (or woman) likewise lives grounded in the present moment. Like Kawhi, Stoics were taught to be relatively indifferent to either success or failure, focusing instead on doing the best they can in any given situation. We are to take more responsibility for what is up to us, from moment to moment, i.e., our own actions, and we’re to calmly accepts the fact that other things are not entirely under our control.

Cicero described the Stoic attitude as being like that of an archer who carefully draws his bow and takes aim at a target — doing what is up to him well. Ultimately, however, once the arrow has flown, he’s indifferent to whether it hits the target or not because it’s no longer under his control. He just does his best and lets happen what may. He may prefer to hit the target but if he misses that’s not worth getting upset about. That focus on his own performance and relative indifference to the outcome allows him to remain grounded in the present moment, unswayed by either external success or failure. As Kipling said “If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster and treat those two impostors just the same”, the earth will be yours. No mortal provides a perfect role model. However, I think the ancient Stoics would probably have been able to use Kawhi’s “stoic” demeanour as a (workable if imperfect) example of this inner calm and the sort of “constancy” or steadiness of character that they associated with moral wisdom.