4 ms·

You mean the Roman Emperor telling everyone they should be happy with less money, less food, less water, less everything ? The Roman Emperor who got the positi

by iofj 10y ago

You mean the Roman Emperor telling everyone they should be happy with less money, less food, less water, less everything ? The Roman Emperor who got the position because he was his father's favorite nephew ? The Marcus Aurelius who got a special exception on at least 2 laws just for him personally from the Senate for his first job on special request from his father ? Whose first job was qaestor ("minister of finance" - sort of) ? That Marcus Aurelius ? Actions speak louder than words, and given the fact that this guy was an emperor (and is thus rather unlikely to have written those books himself) ... probably were a PR campaign. A very successful one, but mostly nothing more than a PR campaign. Granted these are all cases of other people acting in a corrupt manner to provide him with advantages in life no-one else had. It doesn't necessarily reflect on his character ... however ... especially his succession ...

manmal 10y ago
You are trying to point out Aurelius' corruption by critizising the way he became emperor, which I find a bit weak. Is there evidence that he actually mis-used his power when he already held that power? Also, how did he compare to other emperors of his time? The things you mentioned could easily have been culturally accepted.
- iofj 10y ago
  Everything he ever did is one big billboard screaming he doesn't believe in stoicism. First, Of the things mentioned in my own post, which focus on the start of his reign. His rise to power. Do you seriously believe he had no hand in that ? He must have fought, in many ways, to get the position of emperor. He pursued power, and not by working hard in any stoic sense (stoicism accepts only actual "hand" labour as labour, and worthy of reward. Things like holding senate/government/management positions, no matter how well executed, no matter how punctual you are, aren't ever very stoic at all). That, by itself, is very very very very un-stoic of him. Second argument is his reign. He was an emperor advocating stoicism, known for ... being extremely generous when it came to "bread and circuses". His power was built on what is close to the opposite of what his books advocate. And third argument is the end of his reign, his kid (and his family, but that would take us too far), and his succession. Clearly the behavior of his kid was an indication of how his household functioned. His kid, Commodus, was described as an extremely self-obsessed neurotic drunk ... It is not physically possible to become either self-obsessed or drunk in a stoic household.

by iofj 10y ago

manmal 10y ago

You are trying to point out Aurelius' corruption by critizising the way he became emperor, which I find a bit weak. Is there evidence that he actually mis-used his power when he already held that power? Also, how did he compare to other emperors of his time? The things you mentioned could easily have been culturally accepted.

iofj 10y ago
Everything he ever did is one big billboard screaming he doesn't believe in stoicism. First, Of the things mentioned in my own post, which focus on the start of his reign. His rise to power. Do you seriously believe he had no hand in that ? He must have fought, in many ways, to get the position of emperor. He pursued power, and not by working hard in any stoic sense (stoicism accepts only actual "hand" labour as labour, and worthy of reward. Things like holding senate/government/management positions, no matter how well executed, no matter how punctual you are, aren't ever very stoic at all). That, by itself, is very very very very un-stoic of him. Second argument is his reign. He was an emperor advocating stoicism, known for ... being extremely generous when it came to "bread and circuses". His power was built on what is close to the opposite of what his books advocate. And third argument is the end of his reign, his kid (and his family, but that would take us too far), and his succession. Clearly the behavior of his kid was an indication of how his household functioned. His kid, Commodus, was described as an extremely self-obsessed neurotic drunk ... It is not physically possible to become either self-obsessed or drunk in a stoic household.