Marcus Aurelius and non-tragic living

Author: Wolf, Edita
Source document: Graeco-Latina Brunensia. 2015, vol. 20, iss. 2, pp. [189]-198
Extent
[189]-198
  • ISSN
    1803-7402 (print)
    2336-4424 (online)
Type: Article
Language
English
License: Not specified license
Abstract(s)
The focus of the article is the recurring appeal in Marcus Aurelius' Meditations to live nontragically. This appeal presents an original usage of the theatrical metaphor for life rooted in stoicism. The usage is based on the opposition of proper (oikeios) and alien (xenos) which can be understood within the framework of the Stoic theory of appropriation (oikeiosis) and particularly the Chrysippean differentiation between appropriation and alienation (DL VII, 85). An alienated person, carried away by passions and surprised by events, is perceived as alienated from nature, an actor of life's tragedy. On the contrary, the one who acts rightly is presented as an actor of non-tragic theatre who at the same time unifies themself with the universal cause and nature and distances themself from passions and usual roles distributed in life.
Note
  • This article was written in the framework of the project "Marcus Aurelius and imperial Stoicism in the contemporary Classical studies" realized by Faculty of Arts of Charles University in Prague financed by the Specific higher education research for 2014.
Document
References:
[1] LS: The Hellenistic Philosophers (1997–2000). Eds./transl./comm. by A. Long, & D. Sedley (Vol. I–II.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

[2] Hierocles (2009). Elements of ethics, fragments, and excerpts. Ed./comm. by I. Ramelli, transl. by D. Konstan. Leiden, Boston: Brill.

[3] Marcus Aurelius (1944 [1968]). The Meditations of the Emperor Marcus Aurelius. Ed./transl./comm. by A. S. L. Farquharson. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

[4] Marcus Aurelius (2013). Meditations, Books 1-6. Ed./transl. by Ch. Gill. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

[5] Marcus Aurelius (1930). Meditations. Ed./transl. by C. R. Haines. London, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

[6] Annas, J. (1993). The Morality of Happiness. New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

[7] Brecht, B. (1967). Schriften zum Theater 2. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

[8] Dross, J. (2004–5). De l'imagintion à l'illusion: quelques aspects de la phantasia chez Quintilien et dans la rhétorique impériale. Incontri triestini di filologia classica, 4, 273–290.

[9] Engberg-Pedersen, T. (1990). The Stoic theory of oikeiosis: Moral development and interaction in early Stoic philosophy. Aarhus: Aarhus University Press.

[10] Horst, C. (2013). Marc Aurel: Philosophie und politische Macht zur Zeit der Zweiten Sophistik. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner.

[11] Guérin, Ch. (2011). Persona: l'élaboration d'une notion rhétorique au Ier siècle av. J.-C., vol. II Cicero. Paris: Vrin.

[12] Guérin, Ch. (2009). La persona oratoire entre rhétorique, biographie et histoire. Interférences, 5, 25pp. Retrieved from http://interferences.revues.org/897.

[13] Meijer, P. A. (1981). Philosophers, Intellectuals and religion in Hellas. In H. Versnell (Ed.), Faith, Hope and Worship (pp. 217–262). Leiden: Brill.

[14] Pià-Comella, J. (2011). Philosophie et religion dans le stoïcisme impérial romain. Dissertation Université Paris-IV Sorbonne.

[15] Ramelli, I. (2014). The Stoic Doctrine of Oikeiosis and its Transformation in Christian Platonism. Apeiron, 47(1), 116–140. | DOI 10.1515/apeiron-2012-0063

[16] Reydams-Schils, G. (2012). Social Ethics and Politics. In M. van Ackeren (Ed.), A Companion to Marcus Aurelius (pp. 437–452). Malden: Wiley-Blackwell.

[17] Reydams-Schils, G. (2005). The Roman Stoics: Self, responsibility and affection. Chicago: Chicago University Press.

[18] Salles, R. (2012). Oikeiosis in Epictetus. In A. Vigo (Ed.), Oikeiosis and the Natural Basis of Morality (pp. 95–121). Hildesheim, Zurich, New York: Olms.