Posts

Posted on

Marc Aurel Book 11

Throughout the Meditations, Marc Aurel concerns himself with the idea and importance of the common good. Based on his experience as Consul and Roman Emperor, the common good is of primary concern. At least in his thinking and writing these concerns play a very prominent role just like the “social“. In order to ensure his own successor, as described by Katherine Kennedy (2020 through www.classicalwisdom.com) he was only the 2nd Roman Emperor  to appoint a biological heir as his successor, which met a lot of criticism already at that time. Nevertheless, in his philosophical thinking and leadership guidelines he cherished the common good above all. “Have I done something for the common good? Then I too have benefited. Have this thought always ready to hand: and no stopping.” (Book 11 paragraph 4, Penguin Classics edition). This is in contrast to the predominant utilitarian thoughts many centuries later where the pursuit of your own benefit will further the benefit for society. The reversal of the logical sequence in later thoughts is particularly remarkable as well. The process of individualisation seems to be another additional factor in the lack of concern for the common good in the 21st century. Raising the awareness to further the common good is a continued challenged in most societies.

Posted on

Marc Aurel Book 10

Book 10 offers some referrals to previous books and topics: Marc Aurel defends a wholistic vision as in book 10 paragraph 17: “Keep constantly in your mind an impression of the whole of time (χρόνον) and the whole of existence (οὐσίαν)…” (Penguin Classics version, also in Greek original/French translation). In the same vein, he wants all this knowledge and considerations to be “actionable”. This reads in his words: “No more roundabout discussion of what makes a good man. Be one!” (book 10, paragraph 16 in the same two editions). As the late Marc Aurel’s writings progress, he becomes even more “exigent” in the sense of demanding ever higher standards (of himself). “Whole-ism” paired with a request to, nevertheless, be ready for action at any time is not only a high cognitive demand, but also a reminder to leave procrastination behind. The virtue of a stoic leadership style remains an ambitious challenge.
(Image: Trier Exhibitions on Marc Aurel, 2025-9)

Posted on

Marc Aurel Book 9

For students of economics or business the paragraph 10 provides an interesting precursor of the concept of capital, interest and maybe even on human capital: „Man, god, and the universe all bear fruit, each in its own due season. No matter if common use confines the strict sense of ‚bearing fruit‘ to vines and the like. Reason too has its fruit, both universal and particular: other things grow from it which share its own nature.“  (Penguin edition) There are so many examples of the fruits that have grown on the trees of knowledge that we have become accustomed to the idea and continue to reap the benefits of those vines. Of course, some of these fruits have turned out to be more of a curse than a blessing. We seem to neglect the wise judgment which Marc Aurel mentioned along with the use of logic. (Also in this version Link)

 

Posted on

Marc Aurel Book 8-9

In book 7 paragraph 38 the stoic wisdom is exemplified in the the the short phrase „If you have sharp sight, use it: but, as the poet says, add wise judgment“. Being sharp in your reasoning or data collection is only part of the human endeavor. A wise judgement is, however, an ambitious aim as judgments have different short term and long term consequences. Intergenerational considerations as for climate change ask for respect of other species, biodiversity and to take into account very long time horizons.  The quote from book 8 paragraph 5 appears very modern or post-modern in this context. „There can often be wrongs of omission as well as commission.“ (both citations from Penguin Classics edition) Not acting on behalf of future generations and disappearing species is the most crying omission of our time.

Posted on

Marc Aurel Book 7

In paragraph 63 Marc Aurel refers to Plato as one of his sources: “No soul”, says Plato, “likes to be robbed of truth” ( and continues himself) “– and the same holds of justice, moderation, kindness, and all such virtues. Essential that you should keep this constantly in your mind: this will make you more gentle to all.” The remarkable reasoning is to transform the own generalized experience into a behavioural recommendation. It may be argued that Marc Aurel starts from a kind of Aristotelian empirical study of persons in different life domains to derive an empirical fact. Based on this he develops a more Plato inspired “idealistic picture of mankind”. He is very much preoccupied with the philosophical question, how is a good life for all possible. In a previous paragraph (55) he outlined his 3 guiding fundamentals: (1) “The main principles in a man’s constitution is the social; (2)… resistance to the promptings of the flesh, like impulses; (3) judgement unhurried and undeceived”.
With such a claim for a “rational constitution” of man, he puts himself into the footsteps of previous philosophers of the ancient Greek tradition and, therefore, his writing in Greek rather than Latin is also a homage to this philosophical heritage.
(Image: parts of Installation by Fujiko Nakaya in Neue Nationalgalerie Berlin 2025)

Posted on

Marc Aurel Book 6

Some passages of Book 6 can be understood like quotes of much later works, even like writings of the enlightenment period. Take this one: “If someone can prove me wrong and show me my mistake in any thought or action, I shall gladly change. I seek the truth, which never harmed anyone: the harm is to persist in one’s own self-deception and ignorance.” (para 21 in Penguin Classics version, also in Greek original and French translation).
The same passage in historic English: “If anybody shall reprove me, and shall make it apparent unto me, that in any either opinion or action of mine I do err, I will most gladly retract. For it is the truth that I seek after, by which I am sure that never any man was hurt; and as sure, that he is hurt that continueth in any error, or ignorance whatsoever.” (Para XX in Gutenberg.org online reader).
Why is this already an enlightened vision of truth? In the search for truth, he is open to criticism or doubt by others (maybe even irrespective of societal standing) and, moreover, ready to change his conviction and action. Religious doctrines of the time and many centuries after his writings would not have accepted such a doubtful mind who might change due to (scientific) reasons. Long before “Cogito ergo sum” (René Descartes, (1637), I think, therefore I am, of the early enlightenment, Marc Aurel might be summarized in this paragraph as “Cogito, ergo dubio”, I think, therefore I doubt – and I may change accordingly.
(Image: Ossip Zadkine, Forêt humaine, Musée Zadkine Paris)

Posted on

Marc Aurel Book 2-5

There are several translations of Marc Aurel. In the Shakespeare English translation from the Greek original of the Meditations a passage (Book 5 paragraph XXIII) describes or idealises humans as a “reasonable and sociable creature, regulated and directed.” The same short quote of this paragraph in the English translation by Martin Hammond (Penguin Classics p.43) reads: “…my wish is to follow the nature of a rational and social being.” Of course, both translations are pretty similar at first glance, but the difference of “reasonable” versus “rational” and “sociable” versus social” mark very important differences that had and have different impacts throughout the following centuries up to today. As in many other instances going back to the original version in Greek (book link) might clarify the issue, however, the entry barrier is access to the bilingual version and use of an ancient Greek dictionary.
With almost 2000 years of advances in rational approaches and its tools like mathematics, the scope of the rational is huge and the behavioural turn in the social sciences demonstrates the limitations of human’s use of rationality (λογικός) in decision-making. Reasonable seems to come closer in today’s “post-enlightenment” world.
There is also quite a divergent connotation in the simply “sociable” (κοινωνικός) being or the “social” being, which has a wider scope attached to it. Hence, lets be aware of the implicit interpretations of translations. For a start the parallel reading of translation and original (Link) might enhance our understanding and spur even new translations and interpretations, which speak with the classic originals to today’s audiences (with or without AI).
A witty joinder of both previous translations is “And my will is the will of a reasonable and social being”. (Link Book V, paragraph 29 bottom).
From the Greek to French in book V (Link)  with an even broader understanding of the social as “la société universelle”.

(Image: Camille Claudel 1905: “Persée et la Gorgone, Lucile Audouy collection Paris, exhibited in Berlin 2025, Alte Nationalgalerie)

Posted on

Marc Aurel Book 1

The reading of Marc Aurel’s Meditations in its Book 1 offers first of all his acknowledgments of people who had a lasting impact on him or offered learnings to him. He presented these learnings or take-home lessons as we call this nowadays in a style of “positive psychology”. This means writes about the positive influences and which kinds of positive behaviors he saw in living examples of others and which he felt were particularly worthy of general consideration. In philosophical retrospect we might read the book 1 as a list of “categorical imperatives” which would make a decent life feasible for all. His acknowledgments start with 1 line on his grandfather (decency and mild temper), 2 lines on his biological father (integrity and manliness), 3 lines on his mother (piety, generosity, avoidance of wrongdoing and simplicity of living), but 4 lines on his tutor, even more on other advisers, 20+ on his adoptive father, which is more than on “the gods”.  All these experiences impregnated him with a sense for a “ruler’s responsibility for the common good”. (p.8). The stoic virtue lies in the extensive list of positive contributions from others to make him the rather unique philosopher and emperor.

Posted on

Chatbot Me We

In order to dig deeper into the functioning of AI, I deemed it expedient to construct, for example, a simple chatbot on a limited knowledge base from my own writings on AI (link to reader in previous blog entry here).
A toolbox from Google offers powerful assistance in such an endeavour. The outcome uses only my input text and no other sources. It is dynamic in the sense that it interprets questions and searches within the text file provided only. The answers are edited with a LLM (large language model) and provide flawless English texts. You can try it here using catchat as magic formula and Google account so far.
With a bit of programming knowledge (htlm, python, Java) and related learning sites it is feasible to come up with a “static” chatbot hosted at a free of charge provider as well. For learning purposes this step by step building and coding of a chatbot is helpful. The outcome is rather limited or requires a lot of time to increase the scope of Q & A interactions and to move from a static (predefined Q & As) to dynamic ones.
Full control of answers, excluding any hallucinations and high-speed replies, come at a cost. Take a look here. It is a very basic version so far, just to get the idea of it. full web address:
https://schoemannchatbot.eu.pythonanywhere.com/

Posted on

Chatbot Me

Chatbots are helpful to allow queries to larger data sets like the blog entries here. So here is a try of a Chatbot to query all entries on AI using ChatGPT to create a Chatbot that uses and references it source from www.schoemann.org/tag/ai and the AI reader in pdf-format.
Please send me an email if the hallucinations of this Chatbot 1.0 on AI from a social science perspective are giving strange results. I’ll get back to you. Please use at your own risk as I cannot guarantee for all answers. The usual disclaimer applies here.

ChatGPT proposed the following set of Questions and Answers on the blog for an entry into the chat: Example Q&A with the chatbot

Q: What are the social science concerns with AI?
A: Bias in results, job shifts, democracy risks, privacy, and new inequalities.

Q: What does the text say about reinforcement learning?
A: It’s seen as the next step for AI: focusing on learning and reasoning, not just predicting text. It also uses fewer resources.

Q: How are robots described in the document?
A: Robots are mostly assistants. They can follow people or carry small items, but more complex tasks need sensors and AI training.

Q: What about biased results?
A: Studies can be misleading if control groups are flawed. AI faces the same challenge — social scientists warn: “handle with care”.

Q: What is Schoemann’s blog view on AI?
A: He links AI to energy use, fairness, and its role in the “all-electric society” — stressing efficiency and responsibility.

More on the chatbot (in testing phase) and the Link to the coding help received from ChatGPT on this mini-test-project :
https://chatgpt.com/share/68c1d160-0cc0-8003-bf04-991b9e7c3b24