In this article we will have a hypothetical discussion with one of the most prominent Stoic philosophers and Roman emperors, Marcus Aurelius. We will consider any weak spots in his thinking and also attempt to clarify his theoretical position.
Before we begin, it is important to note that even philosophers are not immune to errors in thinking. There is no such thing as absolute knowledge, because every period of intellectual thought was determined by the limits of their time. Our combined knowledge grows as humanity evolves and progresses, but even our current understanding of the world is limited. This is why we can’t attach our present values to our intellectual predecessors; however, we can look to the intellectual legacy they left us.
We could not expect ancient Greeks or Romans to think as we do now, and we will probably never truly understand what it was like to live in their ancient world. We can only try to understand their lives while looking at the larger picture, which is subject to our interpretation.
A Discussion With Marcus Aurelius on Intellectual Elitism
There are many passages in Marcus Aurelius’ Meditations where he talks about general unification and how humans are social by nature and, therefore, connected. Marcus Aurelius provided a metaphysical foundation to this claim, as he believed all minds are one because they stem from the greater whole, which is God or the universe.
However, this metaphysical concept disabled Marcus from truly connecting with others, because “he had seen the nature of good and evil, and others didn’t“. He was also not afraid to be on the less popular side of society, as he said “The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane“.
The above quotes suggest that the emperor was potentially a bit vain in an intellectual sense. It is possible that this characteristic developed from his admiration of other philosophers, as they were very influential at the time. Despite his views, Marcus Aurelius deeply cared about his people and he understood that he was identical to them; he simply couldn’t connect with them.
It is likely that the emperor’s social status might have prevented him from taking a truly objective view. He was evidently capable of holding a metaphysical and cosmological view, but an objective, social perspective was what he lacked. However, it is not a wonder for a Stoic to be socially estranged from the world. The Stoics learned many things from Socrates, but this was evidently one thing they did not learn. In other words, philosophers could only connect with others by stripping every quality from them so that their worlds and differing point of views no longer mattered.
Connecting With Others
Ideally, we would love to ask Marcus Aurelius the question: if we follow the path of Stoic teachings, don’t we risk ending up alone and estranged from others in our social world? How can we connect with those who are not on the same track as we are?
To be clear, I am not suggesting that the ancient Stoics were a bunch of anti-social and prideful intellectuals. Any school of philosophy will expand your horizons, and people who practice philosophy will naturally notice the difference between themselves and the others who are not so philosophically inclined. It is only natural, then, that Marcus Aurelius struggled to connect with those who did not share the same intellectual background as him. However, he also understood the natural laws of our world and the value of connectedness.
“We were born to work together like feet, hands and eyes, like the two rows of teeth, upper and lower. To obstruct each other is unnatural. To feel anger at someone, to turn your back on him: these are unnatural.”
Marcus Aurelius
If philosophers retreat into intellectual elitism, how can they reconcile that position with their belief in cosmopolitanism, which they advocate as their main socio-political thesis? What Marcus Aurelius focused on was the “functioning of the mind” – the idea that, from birth, we are programmed to connect with other people and in that respect we need each other.
We are all equal on a metaphysical basis (in which we are essentially identical parts of matter). Intellectual elitism arguably comes from the metaphysical grounds of Stoicism. The problem isn’t to connect metaphysically via logically deduced conclusions; the problem lies in connecting with common people without retreating into our ranks of intellectualism.
However, when social questions are raised, Stoics would be the first to pull themselves away from it. They viewed action in a different light, where we should learn how to understand our own nature (our mind). From that point, we will be able to act purely and unaffected by the external things that cross our path. In other words, we need to build up an immunity in order to not succumb to these external influences. Once we achieve that, we are ready for true action to make the world a better and more connected place.
“Waste no more time arguing what a good man should be. Be one.”
Marcus Aurelius
