EpicurusRezensionen

A terrible translation in that O'Connor's sentence structures are so opaque, I had to rewrite them in my mind in order to make sense of them. Also, I'm not sure in what sense the works collected here represent the "essence" of Epicuris' thought. if you are curious about Epicuris'philosophy, there are better books to be found.

I was aware that Epicurus wasn’t overly precipitate in his pursuit of pleasure. I was surprised at how, even in the old days, he felt the need to dispense with the Gods, you know, in order not to be a dignitary. That’s not how I feel—I love the Gods—but I can sorta get it, you know. (“ ‘Your mother told me you were already a warrior,’ Morgaine said, forgetting to pitch her voice low, and he smiled again at her.
‘And now I know your voice, Morgaine of the Fairies….how dare you come upon me as a priestess, kinswoman? Well, I suppose it is the Lady’s will. But I like you better like this than solemn as a Goddess,’ he said, with the familiar mischief, as if they had parted but the day before.
Clasping at shreds of her dignity, Morgaine said, ‘Yes, the Lady awaits us, and we must not keep her waiting.’
‘Oh yes,’ he mocked, ‘always we must scurry to do her will…. I suppose you are one of those to fetch and carry, and hang trembling on her every word.’
For that Morgaine found no answer except to say, ‘Come this way.’”, “The Mists of Avalon”. And those were the Celts, and not, indeed, the Romans or the Greeks, with their great cities and their officialdom and bureaucracy….)

I’m not exactly sure how to put it: dignity can be a sort of good, and yet people pay far more for it than it is really worth; the Gods love us and can help us, but people can misuse any religion, of course….

(shrugs) Anyway, there’s hardly fifty pages of Epicurus left, if you take away the (useful) notes, not that anybody except Plato and maybe Aristotle has all of most of their stuff left. But the Stoics did far better by the monks’ favors; when people in the language say ‘philosophical’, they usually mean stoic (and I think they usually understand the gist of that word). The monotheist clerics were sent a-riding by the rumors of Epicurus; they felt threatened, you know…. Not much merit in that, crushing your enemies, right…. There were some technological limitations back then, of course, but in general, I think they sorta acted out a sort of plan…. Can’t let the children know about Epicureanism….

As for me, I don’t know, even aside from the uninteresting physics discussions and the untrue ones about the Gods, whether I really believe that pleasure is ~the~ Good, and not just good. (Again, he understood that being impulsive doesn’t usually lead to ~net~ pleasure.) Knowledge ~should~ be seen at least ~mostly~ as a means rather than as an end, like he said, but I wonder if love isn’t just the whole thing, pleasurable or un-pleasurable, and the highest good…. Not that we should act impulsively. Indeed, people can get mighty pleased with themselves when they talk about “love is a temple, love the higher law”, you know…. And it is true really that many people might benefit from pissing on honor from time to time. Honor isn’t even knowledge, just an opinion, held as ~if~ it were knowledge, and love, and the law! And everything else, too!

…. “His sole aim is to convince himself that these terrors are unreal and imaginary, and if, incidentally, he discovers a great deal about the constitution of the world and man’s place in nature, it is because he cannot otherwise banish these terrors from his mind.”

I also, although we are so unalike. I suppose that the limitation is a gift for a mortal, and being limited the key to expansion. Very strange, of course.

…. It seems like the guy who wrote the introduction was a sort of old Apollo from the top of a tower in Oxford, who lived with a maid and didn’t put much by friendship and ethics and the everyday stuff that Epicurus valued and apparently wrote mostly about. However, the sort of strange, hard, knowledge of things in general stuff that he goes in for sounds like things that Epicurus knew as much about as he needed to, right. We, naturally, use reason and mind-activity to go from isolated perceived knowledges of the world towards more useful systems; however, it is at least as important, perhaps more, to check our mind activity and our logic if you will, with our actual experience, our actual perceptions. No theory of mine, about any god or anything else, is true because I have stubbornly laid it down as true beforehand, when my experience and sense-perceptions tell me that it isn’t the case.

…. (Cf Epicurus and atoms) As intellectual as I am, I’ve never understood the world of the Enneagram Five, and I don’t suppose I’ll ever really fully want to, you know.

…. It’s surprisingly Buddhistic/Stoic: happiness is being an eternal man without anger or preferences…. And so on. There are certainly differences among the various schools, but in their classic forms they’re all the inventions of avoidant men, you know.

…. Obviously it’s impossible to know, but I can’t help wonder if Epicurus had Venus in Aquarius like me: always wandering off by yourself, muttering high things to yourself about love and friendship….

…. I obviously don’t know much about Epicurus, being born when I was, but I can’t help confess a little suspicion. The world contains not a few intelligent people who refuse to be healthy, and some of them, like the art critics, claim to be interested in “pleasure”, etc—perhaps it’s some sort of cognate word, like some of the French and German words, or rather a Latin or Greek one, or more to the point, perhaps even at its most applicable-to-life, it’s a sort of anti-practical, replacement-for-practicality, that results in a sort of Ersatz life, you know: a cut-rate substitute that doesn’t cost you much blood, sweat and tears, you know. (Yes, BTS: or, I suppose, that “figure half in shadow” himself, from the old days.)

…. Anyway, it’s not everyone, clearly, who reads (listens to) “The Republic” and smiles at it, you know—Pleasure is to be laughed at; therefore, pleasure is to be laughed at ~I agree, Socrates—and then reads what’s left of Epicurus and feels that he was a bit of a stiff, but it’s like what the Bard said: All the world’s a stage…. And one man in his time plays many parts; or as the Beatles put it, “Nothing is real”, which is I suppose much the same.

…. Well, I certainly didn’t understand Epicurus, beforehand. Of course, we can’t know if only his most crusty sayings were recorded—it’s impossible for me to imagine any monk, or even: I mean, I had to watch this game show from 1978 (70s themed elevator music, the whole bit) in a waiting room just now, and it was so sterile the woman literally was Literally Afraid to say “sterile”, as in impotent, so she almost couldn’t play the game—but I mean, he does seem crusty. He doesn’t come off as very bold or very happy, like his reputation, (one thinks of a rich old man who never married and keeps a fancy table and doesn’t care what people think of him—which is misleading, except in that he is a rather un-marriage-y man who doesn’t care what people think of him, a rather different picture), or even really as especially happy at all, just…. Peacefully awaiting the coming of the Machine-Man, you know…. He’s like the protagonist of an Michelangelo Antonioni film, perhaps La Notte—and although I don’t hesitate to say that I prefer that to Action-Packed Eight: The Money Went Into the Special Effects Budget—but can you imagine what life was like when everyone generally was like that? If “Barbie” was too much of something, I can’t imagine “Oppenheimer” not being too little, you know. “I’m a scientist; I don’t have time for the mindset of the little people. I’ve chosen a very narrow sphere for myself—that’s the correct thing!” I feel like if you took Epicurus to see “Lady Bird”, he’d start mumbling about atoms, the collision of atoms….

(shrugs) But what you think is up to you. Even what you do is up to you, although with many people that’s a mostly theoretical sphere…. Though the reason is not in the saying so.

100 EPI 1

> « Habitue-toi à penser que la
mort n’est rien par rapport à
nous ; car tout bien — et tout
mal — est dans la sensation :
hors la mort est privation de
sensation. »
—Epicure, Lettre à Ménécée, 124.

> « Habitue-toi à penser que la
mort n’est rien par rapport à
nous ; car tout bien — et tout
mal — est dans la sensation :
hors la mort est privation de
sensation. »
—Epicure, Lettre à Ménécée, 124.

It is easy to snigger at Epicurus: there were so many things that we now take for granted that were not understood 2,500 years ago. If one rather tries to think how we would have explained the world, with such limited passed on knowledge, then he becomes pretty impressive.

Admittedly, the idea that everything is made of atoms came from Democritus, but Epi kept it alive in a period when it had become unfashionable. An amazing idea... OK, he got gravity wrong, but so did everyone pre-Newton. Epicurus thought the direction of travel was uniform so, if one happened to be upon another world (a pretty radical concept with which to deal) an object might fall upwards, if your planet was on a different plain. His view of items releasing atoms which enter the body and give an impression of the object was a little wide of the mark in the field of sight too, but he nailed thunder as being the rubbing together of clouds!

Epicurus taught that learning needed to go only so far as to discover a theory that could not be contradicted. At first sight, this seems very wrong: the examples that I've quoted where his theories have been superseded would indicate that more work would be valuable. If one looks at this in another light, however, there is some merit: when science moves on to disprove a theory, it will be re-examined. We take more care of our theories nowadays but, once they are enunciated, we tend to cling to them, even when they become questionable.

Epicurus strikes me as an early Hippie; he has a very liaises faire attitude to life. I like this chap.

Nichts genügt dem, dem das wenige nicht genügt.

RB-7

Os princípios enunciados por Epicuro (341-270 a.C.) e praticados pela comunidade epicurista poderiam ser resumidos em ”evitar a dor e procurar os prazeres moderados” para alcançar a sabedoria e a felicidade. Cultivar algumas virtudes, rejeitar o medo da morte e dos deuses são algumas fórmulas práticas recomendadas pelo famoso filósofo grego. Para Epicuro, o ser humano deve conservar o espírito imperturbável diante das vicissitudes da vida.

A obra de Epicuro contém mais de 300 volumes. Diógenes Laércio organizou uma lista de 40 pensamentos, conhecidos como Máximas Principais. Em 1888, descobriu-se na Biblioteca do Vaticano mais 81 máximas. Esse material literário-filosófico é conhecido no mundo moderno como O Pensamento de Epicuro.

> Babelio : https://www.babelio.com/livres/Brun-Epicure-et-les-epicuriens/203009

> Un livre précieux. le peu que l'on a gardé des textes d'Epicure sont très précieux, ce livre permet d'y trouver plus que les fameuses lettres qu'il a rédigé.
—Danieljean (Babelio)

> Babelio : https://www.babelio.com/livres/picure-Lettres-a-Herodote-Pythocles-et-Menecee/78...

> Plus qu'un livre de base en philo pour les étudiants car cette philosophie s'adresse à tous, puisqu'il n'y a pas d'âge pour philosopher, sauf celui de raison. Mais à quel âge se situe l'âge de raison ? C'est une question à se poser à la manière d'Epicure, donc en ayant de la bonté pour soi, ce qui implique d'en avoir pour autrui.
—Danieljean (Babelio)

La lettura, come le cose, spesso non è casuale. Avevo questo libro allo studio, tra quelli da portarmi a casa e leggere, da quasi quindici anni. L’ho portato all’Arenella qualche mese fa e finisco questa breve ma intensa lettura la sera in cui mi predispongo ad affrontare il calvario del pancreas di mamma. So che mi devo fare e dare forza, so che devo battere le mie ansie, il mio disorientamento, la mia paura, che diventa terrore. E mentre nel letto, con mamma, sento scariche di tensione che mi allappano il cuore leggo le considerazioni di Epicuro sulla vita e sulla morte, ecco prendiamo la seconda massima capitale “niente è la morte per noi: infatti ciò che si è dissolto non è più dotato di sensibilità; e ciò che non è più sensibile non è niente per noi”. Epicuro predica una vita semplice, in cui le sensazioni vanno dominate e non dobbiamo farci dominare da loro. La felicità è l’assenza del dolore, ma allora tutto questo dolore dove lo devo collocare. Nella non sensazione, perché il dolore è momentaneo, perché la morte significa di per sé assenza, e quindi l’impossibilità di essere associata al dolore. Ma questo vale per me, sicuramente, ma non per chi mi è vicino, e allora torno al tema della naturalezza delle cose della vita e al momento in cui il corso delle nostre vite prende direzioni impensabili. Rileggere Epicuro è sempre utile perché consente di entrare nelle nostre sensazioni, nel nostro modo di vivere. E poi vedendo bene il sostanziale rigore della mia vita attuale, fatta di sostanza, forse troppa, impegno e assenza di fronzoli rientra nella filosofia del vecchio filosofo di Samo. Anche se a volte provo invidia per chi se ne frega e vive la sua vita felicemente, sentendosi casomai epicureo perché mangia e beve, perché a volte l’ignoranza fa bene.

This was a great book by Epicurus that denotes his philosophy. His maxims, in French, come off strong and all encompassing. The language has its brilliant moments as well, expanding off the page to wrap itself into the corridors of the mind. This is a worthwhile reading and I recommend it to all those interested in classics.

4 stars!

So many treasures have been lost over the years, and that is quite apparent when reading what little remains of Epicurus' works, collected in this very nice Penguin Classics volume. Included here are the Letter to Herodotus, Letter to Pythocles (which may not have been written by Epicurus, but was certainly written by a follower of his philosophy), and the Letter to Menoecceus, along with a collection of his sayings (referred to as Leading Doctrines in this volume) and a collection of aphorisms which were discovered in the Vatican in 1888. Those five sources are all that remains of the works of Epicurus, who was known to be a prolific writer.

There is more in this book though, as Penguin Classics always include additional material and notes from scholars, and this one is no exception. There is a wonderful introduction by George K. Strodach, and they have included passages from Lucretius' "The Nature of Things" which add to the material contained in the three letters. I would recommend also getting the Penguin Classic version of "The Nature of Things" as the latter is the most complete exponent of Epicurus' philosophy. Also included are some Excerpts from the Life of Epicurus, by Diogenes Laertius.½

It is a great tragedy all the many books written by Epicurus have been lost to us. We know Epicurus wrote many books and we know the titles of these books since they are listed by Diogenes Laertius, the great third century biographer of the Greek philosophers. Of the books of Epicurus that Diogenes Laertius lists, the three books I really wish survived are: 1) Of Love 2) Of Music and 3) Symposium.

Although there is a world of difference between the philosophy of Epicurus and Buddhism, I am struck with the following similarities between Epicurus and the historical Buddha:

• Both studied with teachers and the teachings within their respective traditions before rejecting those teachings and striking out on their own, developing their own unique philosophy;

• Both examined their own direct experience in the world to understand the nature of human life;

• Both insisted on facing the inevitability of one’s own death directly and with courage;

• Both developed a series of principles to be memorized, internalized and lived by;

• Both encouraged their followers to practice in separate communities of like-minded seekers and at a remove from frenetic public life;

• Both highly valued a clear-headed understanding of the nature of desire and how desire is the root of suffering;

• Both outlined rules regarding the intake of food and drink as well as one’s attitude toward food and drink;

• Both encouraged their followers to adhere to specific principles to transcend suffering and reach a state of tranquil abiding;

• Both took on a superhuman-like status with their followers.

As a way of encouraging a study of Epicurus, the following is my commentary on the first five of his Principal Doctrines (Diogenes Laertius lists the 40 Principal Doctrines in his narrative biography of Epicurus - my commentary on 6-40 are in a series of messages below, starting with message #10):

1. A blessed and indestructible being has no trouble himself and brings no trouble upon any other being; so he is free from anger and partiality, for all such things imply weakness.

A perfect being is too pure, too blissful to feel in a limited human or earthly way. If you had the misfortune of being raised in a religion where children are told to fear an angry, jealous God, than this is something you must outgrow if you want to live at ease as an Epicurean. Perhaps a good first step is to simply realize such a religion is one of thousands of religions throughout human prehistory and history, and many religions view God in ways other than fear. Another suggestion would be to seek out like-minded friends where you can talk through emotional issues caused by religious teachings. Since emotions and memory are so much part of our physical body, start to exercise in ways that you enjoy and find relaxing - yoga, dance, jogging or walking. Appreciate the fact that you are a sensitive, aesthetic embodied being. Live in joy, joy as an ongoing experience. There is nothing more pleasurable than a life lived in joy.

2. Death is nothing to us; for that which has been dissolved into its elements experiences no sensations, and that which has no sensation is nothing to us.

Do you get the willies when something reminds you of death? When somebody talks about death, do you feel like jumping up and running out of the room in a panic? If so, then you don't need a doctor, you need an Epicurean philosopher. The first thing is to realize death is a complete dissolution where you experience no sensation, not even the tiniest pressure on your skin. According to Epicurus, death is a complete blank - no forms, no awareness, no sensation. In a very real sense, in a way we have this experience every night when we enter the deep sleep state. Of course, we wake up from our night's sleep but, even still, there is that 'blank' aspect of sleep. So, please see death as a close cousin to sleep. You don't have anxiety or misgivings about entering a deep, dreamless sleep, so you shouldn't be bothered by the idea of death. To put not only your mind, but also your body in harmony with this view of death, it would be wise to practice meditation or the practice of sleep done by the yogis of India, which is called yoga nidra -- very restful, very calming, giving you a deep acceptance of who you are and your own mortality. With even a small amount of practice, you will develop a deeper experience of tranquility and live with less agitation and nervousness.

3. The magnitude of pleasure reaches its limit in the removal of all pain. When such pleasure is present, so long as it is uninterrupted, there is no pain either of body or of mind or of both together.

The key is appreciating who we are and where we are. Easy to say and not so easy to do, since as humans we tend to be uncontrollable in our desires. Even when we are healthy and free of both physical and mental pain, we tend to always want more. The sickness of desire - more, more, more. Enough is never enough for the unwise man or woman. If we are not experiencing physical pain or mental pain, which is the vast majority of the time, we should enjoy and value the pleasures life affords. If you cannot enjoy the simple pleasure of taking a deep breath or the taste of your morning coffee or listening to the birds sing or the sight of trees turning in fall, you are missing the natural rhythms of being alive. In a very real sense, all we have is the present moment - relax and enjoy; be thankful you don't have a tooth ache or a pounding head ache or a sprained ankle or the memory of being held captive in a prison camp. To bring yourself to a richer appreciation of the moment, take up an enjoyable exercise, which can be as simple as a morning walk. Clear your head of chatter, focus on your kinesthetic sixth sense, that is, being mindful of your body moving in space. If you need help with developing this awareness, try the Alexander Technique or a comparable method. If you want a good practice for the mind - start by committing to memory these forty Principal Doctrines of Epicurus. There is so much pleasure available having our five senses and our body. It is simply a matter of developing the habit of wakefulness.

4. Continuous bodily pain does not last long; instead, pain, if extreme, is present a very short time, and even that degree of pain which slightly exceeds bodily pleasure does not last for many days at once. Diseases of long duration allow an excess of bodily pleasure over pain.

Unlike ancient times, our modern world has a sophisticated medical industry with its thousand and one ways to perform operations and provide treatments to keep people alive who otherwise would be pushing up daisies. Thus, in a very real sense, we have more possibilities for pain. However, our modern world has a sophisticated pharmacological industry with its thousand and one ways to kill pain. It is something of a trade-off, but on the whole, we deal with less pain than people in ancient times. However, one thing remains the same: the ancients feared pain, and we in the modern world fear pain. Pain has been and will continue to be a very real part of life. But, does that mean we have to live in fear of future physical pain? Epicurus says `no', and for good reason. Our fear of what could happen takes us out of the pleasures we can have right here and now. Nothing spoils our tranquility more than being anxious, continually worrying, fretting and fidgeting over the future. Do you have nervous habits - wringing of hands, fidgeting with a pen, tapping your foot, pacing back and forth? If so, time to take a deep breath and think things through with Epicurus. You have dealt with pain up to this point in your life and you can deal with any future pain even more effectively now that you are committed and dedicated to philosophy. Ups and downs, pleasure and pain are part of nature; fortunately for us, there is a lot more pleasure than pain. Are you experiencing physical pain right now? Probably not. Relax and sink deeper into the pleasure of what is happening in and around you. The richness of physical pleasure through our senses and mental pleasure by using our mind philosophically are very rich indeed, an endless ocean of rich experience. All we need do is become more attentive to the present and not allow ourselves to be pulled out of our on-going pleasure by fear of future pain.

5. It is impossible to live a pleasant life without living wisely and honorably and justly, and it is impossible to live wisely and honorably and justly without living pleasantly. Whenever any one of these is lacking, when, for instance, the man is not able to live wisely, though he lives honorably and justly, it is impossible for him to live a pleasant life.

Living pleasantly for Epicurus is living without agitation, anxiety, and fear, being comfortable and confident with who we are, far removed from even a trace of being sexually twisted or repressed or violent or greedy for such things as wealth, fame, status, and political advantage . Without being burdened by these negativites and hankerings, we are free to think in a calm and clear way. Rather than reacting in knee-jerk fashion, we interact and respond sensitively to others and the world around us. What is the natural result of living such a life of Epicurean philosophy? A life lived wisely and honorably and justly, where we are seen by others as we are in fact - kind, courteous, honest, considerate and full of good will. A life lived wisely, honorably, justly, and pleasantly are of one piece. Remove any one of these four qualities in us and our lives can quickly spin into a nail-biting, tension-riddled mess. Much better to stay with Epicurus in his garden and relax into the life we were meant by nature to lead. And remember, always mean what you say and say what you mean. A kind and gentle man or woman has no place for being snide or sarcastic or lashing out with a sharp tongue. We degrade ourselves when we are condescending, coarse, crude or mean-spirited.

My commentary on Principal Doctrines 6-40 are below in a string of posts.

I was familiar with Epicurus' philosophy even before reading this. He is mentioned in many other sources; and, one should acknowledge, he was not well liked by other philosophical schools. That's what really surprised me when reading Seneca and seeing that he quoted him positively so often.
Epicurus' philosophy is mildly interesting. I'd be lying if I said I was that taken with it. My philosophical sympathies lie elsewhere. Another more current annoyance about Epicurus is that he has become another one of those philosophers that New Atheists like to quote ignorantly. As with most pre-enlightenment philosophers they like to claim as their own, Epicurus was more of a deist, not an atheist. As has been typical, atheists ride on the coat tails of deistic philosophy and science. Because Epicurus' physics is empiricist and his ethics utilitarian, it makes it easy for him to be superficially appropriated, and usually by people who have read almost nothing of him or about him. Obviously, using the terms "utilitarian" and "empiricist" in the sense of philosophical schools would be an anachronism, but his approach differs little from those later ideals.
Epicurus was associated with the philosophical school of atomism. His immediate influences were Leucippus and Democritus and was followed by Lucretius. He did reject the determinism that was common among the atomists, which was a bit novel. I do think he occasionally seemed to intuit things that could be construed as being close to physical reality as we know it. His belief in atoms and particles were at least in part proven to be accurate scientifically; not that there isn't much in here that is a bit naive. One should note as well that for Epicurus, atoms were of a particular shape and size. Most likely he believed, as other schools did at the time, that elements like fire were of a pyramidal shape and earth was of cubical shape. Epicurus seems to imply that when these different atomic shapes combine, unique qualities or properties are revealed. As differing atoms and elements combined, atmospheric phenomena emerge on a smaller scale, or possibly the formation of whole worlds on a larger scale. One might be tempted to read into his account of atoms colliding, combining and dividing, our current understanding of quantum reality, but it does differ in major ways. It is, however, interesting that the language seems to come so close in some cases. He does believe that "wind", or some kind of "flow", is what carries atoms along, which might be seen either as naive, or it maybe simply an interesting and suitable name for some other kind of force that seemed analogous to wind. It is regrettable that a greater elucidation of his theories are not extant; because some of his references are obscure and ambiguous. The temptation to read into them something that is not appropriate probably appeals to some readers.
He seems to have influenced various philosophers and schools later on. Like Epicurus, Bruno believed that the universe was infinite; I've addressed the problems I have with this view in a review of Bruno's philosophy, so I'm not going to repeat it here; needless to say, the idea lends itself to various absurdities. I've already made references above to deism, utilitarianism and empiricism. He certainly was a precursor to those philosophies.
I'm not sure I'd revisit Epicurus too often. I may pick this back up for reference and quotations, but I doubt I'll read it all the way through again. I'm giving it an average rating of about 2 and a half stars. I acknowledge that I am biased, but this sort of philosophy doesn't appeal to me that much.

MÁXIMAS PARA UNA VIDA FELIZ

La convivencia serena, el cultivo de
la amistad, el rechazo de riquezas y
poderes, el encuentro con la naturaleza,
con la sabiduría... Estas son algunas
de las enseñanzas de Epicuro,
malinterpretadas y tergiversadas por sus
detractores, que jamás entendieron su
filosofía del placer.

Mucho es lo que el hombre moderno
puede aprender del gran filósofo antiguo,
y para la cabal comprensión de su ideal
esta edición se acompaña de textos
de Cicerón, Lucrecio, Horacio, Séneca,
Petronio, Boccaccio, Cosma Raimondi,
Valla, Erasmo, Quevedo, Feijoo,
Diderot, D Holbach, D Annunzio y
Russell, en un apasionante recorrido
intelectual cuyo tin es desvelar el contenido
de la felicidad

Come dimenticarlo? Letto quando ancora non sapevo che il greco antico alla fine sarei stata costretta a studiarlo, quando ancora non sapevo che su Epicuro avrei sudato freddo prima delle interrogazioni... E' bello, è importante e stimola riflessioni di ogni genere. Edizioni Millelire...

Epicurean (n) Ἐπικούρειος
ˌɛpɪkjʊ(ə)ˈriːən

1. A disciple or student of the Greek philosopher Epicurus. ✓
2. A person devoted to sensual enjoyment, especially that derived from fine food and drink. ✗ (See Cyrenaic)
__________
"Thus when I say that pleasure is the goal of living I do not mean the pleasures of libertines or the pleasures inherent in positive enjoyment, as is supposed by certain persons who are ignorant of our doctrine or who are not in agreement with it or who interpret it perversely. I mean, on the contrary, the pleasure that consists in freedom from bodily pain and mental agitation. The pleasant life is not the product of one drinking party after another or of sexual intercourse with women and boys or of the sea food and other delicacies afforded by a luxurious table. On the contrary, it is the result of sober thinking—namely, investigation of the reasons for every act of choice and aversion and elimination of those false ideas about the gods and death which are the chief source of mental disturbances." —Letter to Menoeceus

"Think about these and related matters day and night, by yourself and in company with someone like yourself. If you do, you will never experience anxiety, waking or sleeping, but you will live like a god among men. For a human being who lives in the midst of immortal blessings is in no way like mortal man!" —Letter to Meneoceus

"But those who have not fully committed themselves emotionally to these matters cannot properly view them as they are, nor have they grasped the purpose and the need for studying them." —Letter to Pythocles

__________
When you arrive at Epicurus' Gardens, and see what is written there:

Here, guest, will you be well entertained: here pleasure is the highest good—

—Seneca, Letter 21.9
__________
It is a great shame that rival philosophical schools heard the term pleasure and immediately interpreted the word as sensual delight, forever corrupting Epicurus' philosophy and the term Epicurean, and misleading anyone not caring to examine the philosophy for themselves.

Epicurus' ethical hedonism is laid out in the Letter to Menoeceus, Leading Doctrines, and the Vatican Collection of Aphorisms. There is much to be gained by applying certain aspects to one's own life, and are a great complement to Seneca's Letters, Cicero's Philosophical Works, and Montaigne's advocation for the cultivation of the self.
__________
As well as his system of ethics, Epicurus expanded on contemporary atomist theories, forwarding the notion that all matter is composed of indivisible atoms, and proposing the notion of Atomic Swerve, to allow for free-will.

These theories are interesting to read,

". . . yet the question of the best way to live remained Epicurus' fundamental consideration. His theories about the composition of matter, causation, perception, truth, and knowledge, are all in service of this ultimate concern."

Epicurus advocated an understanding of science, and believed that only through the study of Natural Philosophy could certain fears and delusions regarding the gods be eliminated; one could achieve mental peace by understanding the fundamental workings of the world in which we live, and therefore be freed from the false belief that the gods were behind all, intervening when and according to their wishes and whims.

"It is impossible to get rid of our anxieties about essentials if we do not understand the nature of the universe and are apprehensive about some of the theological accounts. Hence it is impossible to enjoy our pleasures unadulterated without natural science." —Leading Doctrines, 12

"With the Epicureans it was never science for the sake of science but always science for the sake of human happiness."
__________
Epicurus' extant works are sadly not very numerous. They consist of three letters, and two collections of aphorisms:

• Letter to Herodotus
• Letter to Pythocles
• Letter to Menoeceus
• Leading Doctrines
• Vatican Collection of Aphorisms*

This Penguin edition presents all the above works, (~50pp.), with parallel passages from Lucretius' epic poem On the Nature of Things (accompanied with lucid commentary from the translator) presented after each letter. Also included is an excerpt from Diogenes Laërtius' Life of Epicurus, as well as an extensive seven-part introduction (77pp.[!]), and detailed notes.

The translation is excellent, and all in all, a great copy of Epicurus' writings.

*This edition contains 33 of the 81 aphorisms in the Vatican Collection. A large amount overlap with the Leading Doctrines, but some do not. Complete collections can easily be found online (eg. Here and here).
__________
These splendid sayings of Epicurus also serve another purpose which makes me even more willing to mention them. They prove to those people who take refuge in him for base motives, thinking to find cover for their faults, that they need to live honourably no matter where they go. When you arrive at Epicurus' Gardens, and see what is written there:

Here, guest, will you be well entertained: here pleasure is the highest good—

then the keeper of that house will be ready to receive you and, being hospitable and kind, will serve you a plate of porridge and a generous goblet of water and say to you, "Is this not a fine welcome?" "These gardens," he will say, "do not stimulate appetite; they appease it. They do not give drinks that make one thirstier, but quench thirst with its natural remedy, which comes free of charge. This is the pleasure in which I have lived to old age."

I am speaking to you now of those desires that are not alleviated by soothing speech, desires that must be given something to put an end to them. For about those superfluous desires that can be put off, rebuked, or suppressed, I remind you only of this: such pleasure is natural but not necessary. You do not owe it anything: anything you do devote to it is voluntary. The belly does not listen to instructions: it merely demands and solicits. Still, it is not a troublesome creditor. You can put it off with very little, if you just give it what you owe rather than what you can.

—Seneca, Letter 21.9-11
__________
But now I must make an end; and as has become my custom, I must pay for my letter. This will be done, but not on my own charge. I am still plundering Epicurus, in whose work I today found this saying:

"You should become a slave to philosophy, that you may attain true liberty."

—Seneca, Letter 8.7
__________
"Sex has never benefitted any man, and it's a marvel if it hasn't injured him!" —Epicurus, Leading Doctrines, 51

OBRAS

«Que nadie, mientras sea joven, se muestre remiso en filosofar, ni, al llegar a viejo, de filosofar se canse. Porque, para alcanzar la salud del alma, nunca se es ni demasiado viejo ni demasiado joven [...].» Epicuro propone un remedio para contrarrestar las cuatro causas que, según el, hacen que el hombre esté encadenado al sufrimiento: el temor de los dioses, de la muerte, del dolor, y las ideas falsas sobre lo que en realidad constituye el bien.

Epicuro se puede considerar junto con los estoicos y los escépticos como uno de los pensadores mas importantes del periodo helenistico, que tuvo sus inicios luego del fallecimiento de Alejandro Magno y que se extendió casi hasta la era cristiana cuando en la batalla de Accio, el emperador augusto derroto a Marco Antonio. la diferencia entre la muerte de Epicuro y la de Cristo según los historiadores solo se marca en 60 años.

La filosofía de Epicuro muestra un ser escéptico a las preocupaciones comunes como lo son la muerte, la felicidad, y la no participación de los dioses en las actividades humanas, categorizando a los caracteres primordiales como la amistad, la justicia, que consistía en los valores humanos de comportamientos correctos, los mismos temas que afanosamente buscan los sistemas de control social actuales. Epicuro fundamento sus teorías en los acaboses de temores y miedos, pues nada perturba mas al espíritu que la indagación de lo que no existe.

Su remedio, su phármakon, será la filosofía, que se convierte fundamentalmente en buen juicio y se abre a todos, a los jóvenes y a los viejos, a hombres, mujeres y esclavos. Por este motivo, si, además de ser casi una revelación ética, el epicureísmo comporta una física y una canónica, esto se debe a que Epicuro está convencido de que el conocimiento de los fenómenos naturales condiciona el estado moral del hombre, y considera inútiles todas las demás ciencias que no sirven para mitigar el dolor.

La necesidad de saber se mantiene, por tanto, como una condición de la salud del alma, y cualquier fundamento de la felicidad que no sea la verdad racional, natural y objetiva es rechazado de forma categórica, a la vez que se menosprecian los conocimientos que no tienen connotaciones éticas. La doctrina epicúrea pretende ser esencialmente vital y moral, guardando siempre la eficacia para dispensar felicidad. Por esto mismo se ofrece sin distinción de condiciones sociales, de edad ni de sexo, y la filosofía, instrumento de esta felicidad, se considera fácil y asequible.

En esta quinta edición, después de un minucioso estudio preliminar, se reproducen su famoso testamento, las cartas a Heródoto, Pitocles y Meneceo, las Máximas capitales, las Exhortaciones (Gnomologio Vaticano) y, finalmente, los fragmentos de obras y cartas perdidas.

I found this book quite perplexing. I expected a hedonistic discussion of the life of reading, conversation, and communal living. Instead, I was learning about atomic theory and the atomic "swerve" (a way to explain randomness in the universe and the subsequent collision of atoms), the logic of the sun, moon,stars, and weather, and the need to be ever-vigilant to ignore the popular gods and to rely on empirical evidence rather than determinism (fate) and mythology to comprehend the otherwise unknown. The letters to Herodotus and Pythocles were all about such concepts, with only the letter to Menoeceus even touching upon the concept of happiness. I was surprised by the depth of the logos of Epicurean thought, and the loftiness of its ideals when compared to Stoic philosophy. Physics was originally known as natural philosophy, and out Epicurus' understanding of the universe (based on the ideas of others and not just his own, of course), led to an anti-religious philosophy. Yet God is not absent in Epicurean thought. In the "Leading Doctrines" (pp. 174-5), Epicurus explains:

10. If the things that produce the debauchee's pleasures dissolved the mind's fears regarding the heavenly bodies, death, and pain and also told us how to limit our desires, we would never have any reason to find fault with such people, because they would be glutting themselves with every sort of pleasure and never suffer any physical or mental pain, which is the real evil. 11. We would have no need for natural science unless we were worried by apprehensiveness regarding the heavenly bodies, by anxiety about the meaning of death, and also by our failure to understand the limitations of pain and desire. 12. It is impossible to get rid of our anxieties about essentials if we do not understand the nature of the universe and are apprehensive about some of the theological accounts. Hence it is impossible to enjoy our pleasures unadulterated without natural science.

For Epicurus, pleasure is the opposite of pain, rather than the charges of "high living" and debauchery laid by competing philosophies and later, Christianity. To be sure, "moral good" is pleasure, and "moral evil" is pain, but not in the way one might contemporarily view hedonism. Extrapolating from his understanding of atomic theory, Epicurus (p. 58) relates that:

Moral acts involve deliberate "choices" of possible concrete pleasures and "aversions", e.e., the deliberate avoidance of prospective pain. An act is moral if in the long run, all things considered, it produces in the agent a surplus of pleasure over pain; otherwise it is immoral.

Our choices, desires, and aversions play a prominent role in Stoic philosophy, too. So too, are our impressions, and Epicurus outlines his theology thus:

The gods do indeed exist, since our knowledge of them is a matter of clear and distinct perception.

However, Epicurus warned against anthropomorphising the gods or Gods, and that the gods did not control nature. Rather, their role was ethical, and the gods were abstract (p. 41):

psychological projections of what every good Epicurean wanted himself to be... Thus a relapse into "the old-time religion" of a god-controlled universe has very serious consequences: It cuts the worshipper off from the gods' images - that is, alienates him from the divine communion - and it plunges the naive believer once more into the ancient fears that Epicurus seeks to allay: namely, that the gods will avenge themselves on wicked men by causing natural disasters, political upheavals, and finally the torments of death and hell.

For the Roman poet, Lucretius:

True religion is rather the power to contemplate nature with a mind set at peace.

Nevertheless, Epicurus was keen to attack other philosophies and religions, so it is not surprising that he got some of his own back! When I was schooled in snippets of Greek philosophy, Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle were the godhead "gang of three" (see De Bono), and the Presocratics and others were treated as the great pretenders. Yet Epicurus, too, was asking those two great questions: How to live and what to believe (see Murray in my previous article), and his atomic theory addressed the second question in order to address the first. God exists, but, like the atomic swerve, free will exists otherwise there would be no need for ethics, for our behaviour would be pre-determined. According to Strodach's Introduction, the Epicurean materialism (which was morphed or "garbled" into "eat, drink, and be merry") was "so unpalatable" to the ancient and medieval worlds that Epicurus' atomic theory was lost until the 17th Century (uncovered by "the Jesuit priest Pierre Gassendi, a contemporary of Descartes", see p. 76). And so I find myself in agreement with Daniel Klein (see Foreword):

For a moment, the twenty-first-century mind might recoil at the idea of a self-anointed pundit proclaiming to his students - and to us - exactly how to live. But I, for one, read on for the simple reason that I suspect Epicurus may, in fact, have gotten it right.

It is a great tragedy all the many books written by Epicurus have been lost to us. We know Epicurus wrote many books and we know the titles of these books since they are listed by Diogenes Laertius, the great 3rd century biographer of the Greek philosophers. Of the books of Epicurus that Diogenes Laertius lists, the three books I really wish survived are: 1) Of Love 2) Of Music and 3) Symposium.

I am struck with the many similarities in the life, approach and philosophy between Epicurus and the historical Buddha. For example:

• Both studied with teachers and the teachings within their respective traditions before rejecting those teachings and striking out on their own, developing their own unique philosophy;
• Both examined their own direct experience in the world to understand the nature of human life;
• Both insisted on facing the inevitability of one’s own death directly and with courage;
• Both developed a series of principles to be memorized, internalized and lived by;
• Both encouraged their followers to practice in separate communities of like-minded seekers and at a remove from frenetic public life;
• Both highly valued a clear-headed understanding of the nature of desire and how desire is the root of suffering;
• Both outlined rules regarding the intake of food and drink as well as one’s attitude toward food and drink;
• Both encouraged their followers to adhere to specific principles to transcend suffering and reach a state of tranquil abiding;
• Both took on a God-like status with their followers.

Sidebar: I have not read of any philosopher or scholar who has noted the similarities between Epicurus and Gautama Buddha. If anybody has come across any writing on the subject, please let me know.

As a way of encouraging a study of Epicurus, the following is my commentary on the first five of his Principal Doctrines (Diogenes Laertius lists the 40 Principal Doctrines in his narrative biography of Epicurus):

1. A blessed and indestructible being has no trouble himself and brings no trouble upon any other being; so he is free from anger and partiality, for all such things imply weakness.

A perfect being is too pure, too blissful to feel in a limited human or earthly way. If you had the misfortune of being raised in a religion where children are told to fear an angry, jealous God, than this is something you must outgrow if you want to live at ease as an Epicurean. Perhaps a good first step is to simply realize such a religion is one of thousands of religions throughout human prehistory and history, and many religions view God in ways other than fear. Another suggestion would be to seek out like-minded friends where you can talk through emotional issues caused by religious teachings. Since emotions and memory are so much part of our physical body, start to exercise in ways that you enjoy and find relaxing - yoga, dance, jogging or walking. Appreciate the fact that you are a sensitive, aesthetic embodied being. Live in joy, joy as an ongoing experience. There is nothing more pleasurable than a life lived in joy.

2. Death is nothing to us; for that which has been dissolved into its elements experiences no sensations, and that which has no sensation is nothing to us.

Do you get the willies when something reminds you of death? When somebody talks about death, do you feel like jumping up and running out of the room in a panic? If so, then you don't need a doctor, you need an Epicurean philosopher. The first thing is to realize death is a complete dissolution where you experience no sensation, not even the tiniest pressure on your skin. According to Epicurus, death is a complete blank - no forms, no awareness, no sensation. In a very real sense, in a way we have this experience every night when we enter the deep sleep state. Of course, we wake up from our night's sleep but, even still, there is that 'blank' aspect of sleep. So, please see death as a close cousin to sleep. You don't have anxiety or misgivings about entering a deep, dreamless sleep, so you shouldn't be bothered by the idea of death. To put not only your mind, but also your body in harmony with this view of death, it would be wise to practice meditation or the practice of sleep done by the yogis of India, which is called yoga nidra -- very restful, very calming, giving you a deep acceptance of who you are and your own mortality. With even a small amount of practice, you will develop a deeper experience of tranquility and live with less agitation and nervousness.

3. The magnitude of pleasure reaches its limit in the removal of all pain. When such pleasure is present, so long as it is uninterrupted, there is no pain either of body or of mind or of both together.

The key is appreciating who we are and where we are. Easy to say and not so easy to do, since as humans we tend to be uncontrollable in our desires. Even when we are healthy and free of both physical and mental pain, we tend to always want more. The sickness of desire - more, more, more. Enough is never enough for the unwise man or woman. If we are not experiencing physical pain or mental pain, which is the vast majority of the time, we should enjoy and value the pleasures life affords. If you cannot enjoy the simple pleasure of taking a deep breath or the taste of your morning coffee or listening to the birds sing or the sight of trees turning in fall, you are missing the natural rhythms of being alive. In a very real sense, all we have is the present moment - relax and enjoy; be thankful you don't have a tooth ache or a pounding head ache or a sprained ankle or the memory of being held captive in a prison camp. To bring yourself to a richer appreciation of the moment, take up an enjoyable exercise, which can be as simple as a morning walk. Clear your head of chatter, focus on your kinesthetic sixth sense, that is, being mindful of your body moving in space. If you need help with developing this awareness, try the Alexander Technique or a comparable method. If you want a good practice for the mind - start by committing to memory these forty Principal Doctrines of Epicurus. There is so much pleasure available having our five senses and our body. It is simply a matter of developing the habit of wakefulness.

4. Continuous bodily pain does not last long; instead, pain, if extreme, is present a very short time, and even that degree of pain which slightly exceeds bodily pleasure does not last for many days at once. Diseases of long duration allow an excess of bodily pleasure over pain.

Unlike ancient times, our modern world has a sophisticated medical industry with its thousand and one ways to perform operations and provide treatments to keep people alive who otherwise would be pushing up daisies. Thus, in a very real sense, we have more possibilities for pain. However, our modern world has a sophisticated pharmacological industry with its thousand and one ways to kill pain. It is something of a trade-off, but on the whole, we deal with less pain than people in ancient times. However, one thing remains the same: the ancients feared pain, and we in the modern world fear pain. Pain has been and will continue to be a very real part of life. But, does that mean we have to live in fear of future physical pain? Epicurus says `no', and for good reason. Our fear of what could happen takes us out of the pleasures we can have right here and now. Nothing spoils our tranquility more than being anxious, continually worrying, fretting and fidgeting over the future. Do you have nervous habits - wringing of hands, fidgeting with a pen, tapping your foot, pacing back and forth? If so, time to take a deep breath and think things through with Epicurus. You have dealt with pain up to this point in your life and you can deal with any future pain even more effectively now that you are committed and dedicated to philosophy. Ups and downs, pleasure and pain are part of nature; fortunately for us, there is a lot more pleasure than pain. Are you experiencing physical pain right now? Probably not. Relax and sink deeper into the pleasure of what is happening in and around you. The richness of physical pleasure through our senses and mental pleasure by using our mind philosophically are very rich indeed, an endless ocean of rich experience. All we need do is become more attentive to the present and not allow ourselves to be pulled out of our on-going pleasure by fear of future pain.

5. It is impossible to live a pleasant life without living wisely and honorably and justly, and it is impossible to live wisely and honorably and justly without living pleasantly. Whenever any one of these is lacking, when, for instance, the man is not able to live wisely, though he lives honorably and justly, it is impossible for him to live a pleasant life.

Living pleasantly for Epicurus is living without agitation, anxiety, and fear, being comfortable and confident with who we are, far removed from even a trace of being sexually twisted or repressed or violent or greedy for such things as wealth, fame, status, and political advantage . Without being burdened by these negativites and hankerings, we are free to think in a calm and clear way. Rather than reacting in knee-jerk fashion, we interact and respond sensitively to others and the world around us. What is the natural result of living such a life of Epicurean philosophy? A life lived wisely and honorably and justly, where we are seen by others as we are in fact - kind, courteous, honest, considerate and full of good will. A life lived wisely, honorably, justly, and pleasantly are of one piece. Remove any one of these four qualities in us and our lives can quickly spin into a nail-biting, tension-riddled mess. Much better to stay with Epicurus in his garden and relax into the life we were meant by nature to lead. And remember, always mean what you say and say what you mean. A kind and gentle man or woman has no place for being snide or sarcastic or lashing out with a sharp tongue. We degrade ourselves when we are condescending, coarse, crude or mean-spirited.

My commentary on Principal Doctrines 6-40 are below in a string of posts.

Epicurus was not remembered well by history. Many ancient writers who comment on his thinking have nothing but terrible things to say about him. The Epicureans were ridiculed for being extravagant, over-indulgent, and obsessed with pleasure. However, reading the extant writings of Epicurus introduces us to a much different version of the philosophical school. Epicurus' principle idea was that rational humans seek to avoid pain thoughtfully: we should not, in fact, rush into luxury and pleasure because the costs of doing can be quite high. The wise person weighs everything carefully: should I take the easy 'win' and enjoy pleasure now? What are the likely consequences of my indulgence in the long term?

Similar to many of his philosophical contemporaries, Epicurus concludes that we are better off to distant ourselves from the pursuit of pleasure for pleasure's sake. In fact, he sees the life of "one drinking party after another" to be a road to nowhere. Instead, he advocates the simple life: the person who is happy with their barely bread and water possesses a true sense of "pleasure" -- some more like wholesome contentment.

Why Epicurus is so often lambasted for his supposedly hedonistic ideology? This is an interesting question for history. Indeed, many of the other writers who oppose Epicurus would seem to more or less agree with his idea that unbridled hedonism is the game of fools. Why then do so many attack him?

Interestingly, Epicurus seems to have a response for this. He contends that the people who malign his doctrines by painting him as a luxury, sex-obsessed maniac are out to intentionally misrepresent his school of thought. I wonder how much of this goes back to the science of Epicurus, which in his extant writings takes up a far greater degree of his energy than his philosophizing about pleasure. The purpose of science, according to Epicurus, is to explain all natural phenomena without imputing any divine intervention. Thunder, lightning, storms -- everything, he insists, must have a natural explanation. The gods have nothing to do with human affairs, and the people who are terrified of their wrath are foolish, in desperate need of being saved from the "mythologizing" of dominate religious culture. (Epicurus' 'proof' that all things arise from natural causes was something he couldn't actually prove: a theory of atoms.) Fear of the gods, for Epicurus, is the height of irrationality and a principle error of human thought/society.

With a broader perspective on the scope of his ideas, we can imagine how his position on pleasure could be twisted to undermine support for his critical arguments against theism. Fear of divine punishment has a long history imposing moral social norms, and anyone who did not like Epicurus' vision of distant, aloof, non-intervening deities was compelled to either a) logically show his arguments were faulty or b) discredit him and his philosophical school in the eyes of others. I have a hunch that the second option became the easiest way to write him off, and subsequently led to a concept of the 'epicurean' that is more of a straw man than a cogent representation of his actual philosophy.

If you are a reader of classical literature, no doubt you have come across a ridicule or two of Epicurus. If so, it is very much worth reading this book to give the earliest fragments of the Epicurean school a chance to 'speak'. This book is much more about science than a philosophy of pleasure... and one gets the sense that maybe even Epicurus himself was much more concerned about his burgeoning ideas about empiricism and natural causes than he is about anything else. In fact, he virtually says as much in his own words. The reason we do science in the first place, he insists, to rise above the irrational fear that there's some cosmic intelligence pulling the strings on our reality. For him, the drive to study nature and the drive to liberate people from the fear of the gods are part in parcel of one another. From a history of science perspective alone, these texts well worth examining.

Strodach's academic introduction is terrific for getting orientated with Epicurus' writings, and for discovering a version of Epicurus apart from his chorus of critics who get far more airtime in literature than Epicurus himself does to actually plead his case.

An ancient philosopher who has been greatly misunderstood throughout history. If you lack the belief in a god, his philosophy is based on: good is what brings pleasure and avoids pain - but not what is recognized as being self-indulgent. Some pleasures work against you, some pains are beneficial. Much modern philosophy builds upon this foundation.

A small collection of Epicurus's work. Very little remains of this prolific author, but these letters and fragments do a good job of laying out his philosophy. At times it is startling how modern it sounds, reminding us that our ancestors were often thinking about the same things we are, and smart enough to figure a lot of things out, even if they were unable to establish proof without the modern scientific apparatus. Many of the things he got wrong at least made sense based on his observations.