Meditations 5
Study Guide Questions for Book v
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)
Virtue, Memento Mori, Temperance, Justice, Fortune
Grammar Questions: (The Information of the Text)
What did Aurelius say he was “rising to” each morning?
What did Aurelius claim “men cannot admire” him for?
What are the three kinds of men whom Aurelius described in section 6?
What did Aurelius think people ought to do concerning prayer?
What are the two ways the term “prescribed” are being used in section 8?
How did Aurelius advise one should and should not “return to philosophy?
What did Aurelius say was always in his power to not do?
What did Aurelius say he was “composed of?”
What did Aurelius say was the case about “habitual thoughts?”
According to Aurelius, how should we view “an obstacle on the road?”
What did Aurelius hope people might say of him in light of how he had “hitherto behaved?”
How did Aurelius think a man could come to “an equable flow of happiness” in this life?
How did Aurelius define “good fortune?”
Logic Questions: (Interpreting, Comparing/Contrasting, Reasoning)
What was Aurelius’ point when discussing “rising to the work of a human being?” What is the particular work of a human being?
Aurelius spoke of nature having “fixed bounds” for certain things like “eating and drinking.” What did he mean by this? What other kinds of things might nature have fixed bounds for?
What did Aurelius mean when he said a man should “judge every word and deed that are naturally fit for you, and do not be diverted by words of blame or criticism?”
Of the three men who have “done a service” for another, which of the three is Aurelius most praising and why?
What is Aurelius’ point when he discusses the prescriptions of “Aesculapius” and of the “nature of the universe?” How are they similar and different and what does Aurelius mean for us to learn from these different prescriptions?
When Aurelius speaks of things “said by the comic writer” in relation to what is “conceived as good” to the many, what is his point?
Aurelius said, “I am composed of the formal and the material; and neither of them will perish into non-existence.” What did he mean by this? What are these two different parts which make up Aurelius’ whole and how is that neither will cease to exist?
When Aurelius wrote, “None of these things ought to be called a man’s that do not belong to a man, as man,” what did he mean by this?
When Aurelius said, “I choose to do what is according to the nature of the rational and social animal” what did he mean by that?
What did Aurelius mean by saying, “But fidelity and modesty and justice and truth have fled ‘up to Olympus from the wide-spread earth?’”
When Aurelius wrote that one ought to “emulate the old man who, when he went away, asked for his foster-child’s top, knowing that it was only a top?”
Rhetoric Questions: (The Analysis of Ideas in the Text)
Aurelius said, “it is in my power never to act contrary to my god and daimon: for there is no man who will compel me to this.” Do you agree or disagree that it is always in our power to “never act contrary” to God’s will? Why or why not?
In section 14 Aurelius discusses making ethical decisions (“right acts”) by means of following “first principles.” What does he mean by “first principles?” How does having first principles help guide our ethical decision making? What kind of first principles ought we to have to ensure that we really do end up with “right acts” or just behavior? What should one do if he determines one or another of his first principles is wrong? How might we subject our first principles to proper scrutiny in order to make sure they are good to begin with?
Consider what Aurelius says in section 19 about things not being able to “touch the soul.” Is it true that things external to the soul cannot touch it or affect it? Why or why not?
Aurelius claimed “That which does no harm to the state does no harm to the citizen.” Evaluate this statement. What does he mean and do you agree or disagree with his claim? Explain your reasoning for your position.
Consider Aurelius’ claim in section 34 about how to have happiness. What is the means by which he claims happiness may be attained? Do you agree or disagree with his position? Why or why not?
Theological Analysis: (Sola Scriptura)
Read Romans 7. In light of this passage of Scripture, consider again the first rhetoric questions above. How does this passage impact your thinking on the question?
Read Matthew 11:28-29 and Hebrews 4:14-16 and relate it to what Aurelius says in section 9 of our current reading.
How might we relate Philippians 4:8-9 to Aurelius’ meditation in section 16?