Relationships and The City Theme Analysis

Marcus Aurelius’s Meditations are directed to himself alone—they’re short excerpts from his personal journals, and he designed them to help him think and act well. But just because Marcus wrote his Meditations for himself, that doesn’t mean he saw life as an individualistic endeavor. The Stoic belief that “we are what we think”—that one’s actions proceed from their thoughts—also impacts the way people relate to those around them. Plus, Stoic thought holds that being connected to a healthy community is integral to living a good life (the goal of the practice of philosophy). This is because human nature is social; humans are meant to come together to form harmonious cities, which in turn make up the world as a whole. Because the health of the individual soul is tied to the community’s health, individuals should strive to benefit one another. And in order to live together harmoniously, people should also be realistic about one another’s behavior. Marcus suggests that people must be mindful of two things—collective obligations and individual limitations—to live well in a community, or city.

According to Marcus’s Stoic mindset, human beings are not meant to live in isolation; they share common life in a community, or “city,” and should strive to mutually benefit one another. Human nature is “civic,” or belongs to a community, so what’s good for a person must also be good for the city and the world, and vice versa: “[My nature is] [r]ational and civic. My city and state are Rome […] But as a human being? The world [is my city]. So for me, ‘good’ can only mean what's good for both communities.” To live well, a human shouldn’t regard oneself as an isolated individual; one must remember one’s nature as a citizen of one’s city and of the world, and determine what’s “good” (what makes for a good life) in relationship to those entities.

One way to know something is “good” is if it benefits one’s fellow citizens. Marcus explains, “So by keeping in mind the whole I form a part of […] I will do nothing selfish, but aim instead to join them, to direct my every action toward what benefits us all and to avoid what doesn't. If I do all that, then my life should go smoothly.” Under normal circumstances, in other words, someone who strives to benefit one’s peers and humanity as a whole can expect to live a harmonious life, with the individual’s life contributing to and reflecting the larger whole.

Because a person is part of a community, they consequently have certain obligations to others and shouldn’t resist this: “You participate in a society by your existence. Then participate in its life through your actions […] Any action not directed toward a social end [is] a source of dissension. Like the man in the Assembly—a faction to himself, always out of step with the majority.” From Marcus’s perspective, individualism is antisocial, not virtuous. A person should always avoid dissension and instead seek what promotes social harmony.

People should be realistic about others’ behavior, neither expecting too much nor letting others’ behavior affect them too much. A person can try to persuade other people to act well, but there’s only so much one can do: “Do your best to convince [other people]. But act on your own, if justice requires it. If met with force, then fall back on acceptance and peaceability. Use the setback to practice other virtues.” In other words, Marcus advises against using other people’s failures as an excuse for one’s own actions; in fact, facing such setbacks is one of the best ways to practice virtue.

No matter how other people act, recognizing common humanity (especially the limitations all human beings face) can promote harmony within relationships. Marcus writes, “To feel affection for people even when they make mistakes is uniquely human. You can do it, if you simply recognize: that they're human too […] And, above all, that they haven’t really hurt you. They haven't diminished your ability to choose.” Another person’s mistakes, that is, can’t take away a person’s ability to make one’s own decisions—plus, all people face similar limitations, so it’s worthwhile to be compassionate.

Ultimately, even when keeping mutual limitations in mind and striving for compassion, it’s not reasonable to expect virtue from bad people. Keep in mind, Marcus writes, “that to expect a bad person not to harm others is like expecting trees not to secrete juice, babies not to cry, horses not to neigh—the inevitable not to happen. […] If you're still angry then get to work on that.” There’s no point in resenting a person for acting according to their nature; it only harms the one who’s being resentful.

Marcus’s views of life in the city reflect his approaches to individual life. It’s not possible to live harmoniously without paying attention to one’s role within the community. At the same time, living with other people is complicated, and since we can’t change others, we ultimately promote harmony by controlling our own reactions rather than having unrealistic expectations of others.