If you are looking for the beginning of the study for Marcus Aurelius’ Meditations then you can go HERE for a brief introduction. At the bottom of the introduction you will find the links to each section of the study guide as it becomes available. If you would like to see the growing list of book studies available for free on this site you can go HERE. Enjoy!
Virtues/Vices/Great Ideas: (Find them in the Text)
Justice, Fame, Death, Memento Mori, Providence, Goodness, Truth, Beauty, Fate, Time, Temperance
Grammar Questions: (The Information of the Text)
Rather than retreating to houses in the country, where does Marcus Aurelius think men should retreat to?
What are at least two reasons given by Aurelius as to why a person might be “discontented” or “dissatisfied?”
What two ideas did Aurelius say should be “readiest to hand” when focusing on being content?
What two things did Aurelius label a “mystery of nature?”
What “two rules” should a man always have in readiness?
What does the person “who has a vehement desire for posthumous fame” fail to consider?
What, according to Aurelius, neither gets “better nor worse” as a result of praise or the lack thereof?
According to Aurelius, what ought a person to “occupy” himself with if he is to be more “tranquil” in life?
What did Aurelius call “the only true wisdom?”
What did Aurelius call “ephemeral and worthless?”
What exercise did Aurelius call “vulgar but still a useful help toward contempt of death?”
Logic Questions: (Interpreting, Comparing/Contrasting, Reasoning)
What did Aurelius mean when he wrote, “The universe is transformation: life is opinion?”
In section 4 of this present reading Aurelius commits the fallacy of circular reasoning. Where and how does he do this?
What did Aurelius mean when he wrote, “Take away your opinion, and then there is taken away the complaint, ‘I have been harmed.’ Take away the complaint, ‘I have been harmed,’ and the harm is taken away?”
If Aurelius is right and “a thing is neither better nor worse for having been praised,” what inference might we make about the nature of things which are praised (or not praised) and about the nature of praise itself?
Consider section 21 of this reading where Aurelius ponders, “If souls continue to exist, how does the air contain them from eternity?” What assumption(s) does Aurelius seem to make about the nature of souls and how might these account for his particular position on what happens to souls after the death of a body?
Aurelius said, “Does anyone do wrong? It is to himself that he does the wrong.” In what way is this true?
What was Aurelius' point in considering “the time of Vespasian” and “the times of Trajan?”
What point is Aurelius trying to make about “evil” in section 39 of this reading?
What is Aurelius’ purpose in stating that “the things that come into existence exhibit no mere succession but a certain wonderful relationship?”
Rhetoric Questions: (The Analysis of Ideas in the Text)
Aurelius wrote that a man ought to “change [his] opinion, if anyone sets [him] right and dissuades [him] from any opinion. But this change of opinion must proceed only from a genuine conviction about what is just or of common advantage, and the like, not because it appears pleasant or brings reputation.” In your own words, restate the point he is making. In order to follow his advice, what must matter most to a person? How can we become the kind of person which does not simply express whatever opinion will gain us favor or popularity but only that which accords with the truth?
Aurelius wrote, “Do not act as if you were going to live ten thousand years. Death hangs over you. While you live, while it is in your power, be good.” To what degree should the reality of our imminent death be upon our mind? What is the good in thinking about it regularly? Can thinking about it too much be harmful or is there no such thing as thinking about it too much? What should be the proper effect of thinking about our coming death? In other words, when we contemplate the brevity of our life, what should this motivate us to do differently? Explain your answer thoughtfully.
Aurelius wrote discoursed upon the concept of beauty in section 20 of this present reading. Offer a definition for the concept of beauty. Is beauty a matter of personal opinion only or is beauty objective (like truth and moral goodness)? What makes something beautiful or ugly? Can something participate in beauty by degree or is beauty something that is either wholly present or wholly absent? By what standard ought we to judge whether or not someone or something is beautiful? Explain your thoughts in careful detail.
Consider Aurelius’ statement, “Since the greatest part of what we say and do is unnecessary, dispensing with such activities affords man more leisure and less uneasiness.” Do you agree or disagree that we should only focus on that which is necessary? What might be the good in following this advice? What might be the harm in following this advice? How does leisure itself fit into this discussion? What is the purpose of leisure? Explain your thoughts carefully.
Aurelius wrote, “‘I am unhappy, because this has happened to me.’ Not so: say ‘I am happy, though this has happened to me, because I continue free from pain, neither crushed by the present nor fearing the future.’” To what extent is happiness a choice? To the degree that happiness is a choice, even amid great difficulties, how do we cultivate the kind of character that is settled in happiness no matter what comes our way? Conversely, what kind of habits might a person develop which might tend to make him more susceptible to feelings of misery when he encounters the difficulties of this life?
Theological Analysis: (Sola Scriptura)
Consider the dictum of Aurelius “he is poor, who has need of another, and has not from himself all things that are useful for life.” Read 1 Corinthians 12:12-26 and compare and contrast this passage with Aurelius’ philosophy of personal independence.
Aurelius places a lot of emphasis on the brevity of life and asks, in light of the infinity of time past and future, “what is the difference between him who lives three days and him who lives three generations?” Read Psalm 103:15-19, Psalm 144:3-4, and Job 19:25-27. To what degree does Scripture affirm Aurelius’ perspective about the brevity of life? To what degree does it perhaps challenge his perspective?
Aurelius speaks of developing a contempt of death. How does good Christian theology help us to have a true contempt of death, based upon something more than just our own will power? What Scripture would you take someone to in order to explain why Christians can have a complete contempt of death?