Epicurus advocated that people were best able to pursue philosophy by living a self-sufficient life surrounded by friends; he and his followers were known for eating simple meals and discussing a wide range of philosophical subjects at "The Garden", the school he established inAthens. Epicurus taught that although the gods exist, they have no involvement in human affairs. Like the earlier philosopherDemocritus, Epicurus claimed that all occurrences in the natural world are ultimately the result of tiny, invisible particles known asatoms moving and interacting in empty space, though Epicurus also deviated from Democritus by proposing the idea ofatomic "swerve", which holds that atoms may deviate from their expected course, thus permitting humans to possessfree will in an otherwisedeterministic universe.
Of the over 300 works said to have been written by Epicurus about various subjects, the vast majority have been lost. Only a few letters and a collection of quotes—thePrincipal Doctrines—have survived intact, along with several fragments of his other writings, such as his major workOn Nature; most knowledge about his philosophy is due to later authors.
Epicureanism reached the height of its popularity during the late years of theRoman Republic, but by late antiquity, it had died out. Throughout theMiddle Ages, Epicurus was popularly, though inaccurately, remembered as a patron of drunkards, whoremongers, and gluttons. His teachings gradually became more widely known in the fifteenth century with the rediscovery of important texts, but his ideas did not become acceptable until the seventeenth century, when the French Catholic priestPierre Gassendi revived a modified version of them, which was promoted by other writers, includingWalter Charleton andRobert Boyle. His influence grew considerably during and after theEnlightenment, impacting the ideas of major thinkers, includingJohn Locke andKarl Marx.
Map of Greece showing locations associated with Epicurus
Epicurus was born in the Athenian settlement on theAegean island ofSamos in February 341 BC.[1] His parents, Neocles and Chaerestrate, were both Athenian-born, and his father was an Athenian citizen. Epicurus grew up during the final years of the Greek Classical Period. Plato had died seven years before Epicurus was born and Epicurus was seven years old whenAlexander the Great crossed theHellespont into Persia. As a child, Epicurus would have received a typical ancient Greek education. Epicurus is known to have studied under the instruction of a Samian Platonist named Pamphilus, probably for about four years. HisLetter of Menoeceus and surviving fragments of his other writings strongly suggest that he had extensive training in rhetoric. After the death ofAlexander the Great,Perdiccas expelled the Athenian settlers on Samos toColophon, on the coast of what is now Turkey. Epicurus joined his family there after the completion of his military service. He studied underNausiphanes, who followed the teachings ofDemocritus.[2]
Epicurus's teachings were heavily influenced by those of earlier philosophers, particularly Democritus. Nonetheless, Epicurus differed from his predecessors on several key points of determinism and vehemently denied having been influenced by any previous philosophers, whom he denounced as "confused". Instead, he insisted that he had been "self-taught".[3]
Epicurus'sLetter to Menoeceus, possibly an early work of his, is written in an eloquent style similar to that of the Athenian rhetoricianIsocrates (436–338 BC), but, for his later works, he seems to have adopted the bald, intellectual style of the mathematicianEuclid. Epicurus's epistemology also bears an unacknowledged debt to the later writings ofAristotle (384–322 BC), who rejected the Platonic idea of hypostaticReason and instead relied on nature and empirical evidence for knowledge about the universe. During Epicurus's formative years, Greek knowledge about the rest of the world was rapidly expanding due to theHellenization of the Near East and the rise ofHellenistic kingdoms. Epicurus's philosophy was consequently more universal in its outlook than those of his predecessors, since it took cognizance of non-Greek peoples as well as Greeks. He may have had access to the now-lost writings of the historian and ethnographerMegasthenes, who wrote during the reign ofSeleucus I Nicator (ruled 305–281 BC).[2]
During Epicurus's lifetime, Platonism was the dominant philosophy in higher education. Epicurus's opposition to Platonism formed a large part of his thought. Over half of the forty Principal Doctrines of Epicureanism are flat contradictions of Platonism. In around 311 BC, Epicurus, when he was around thirty years old, began teaching inMytilene. Around this time,Zeno of Citium, the founder ofStoicism, arrived in Athens, at the age of about twenty-one, but Zeno did not begin teaching what would become Stoicism for another twenty years. Although later texts, such as the writings of the first-century BC Roman oratorCicero, portray Epicureanism and Stoicism as rivals, this rivalry seems to have only emerged after Epicurus's death.[2]
Epicurus's teachings caused strife in Mytilene and he was forced to leave. He then founded a school inLampsacus before returning to Athens inc. 306 BC, where he remained until his death.[1] There he founded The Garden (κῆπος), a school named for the garden he owned that served as the school's meeting place, about halfway between the locations of two other schools of philosophy, theStoa and theAcademy.[4]
Philodemus of Gadara lists four "guides" (hoi kathēgemones) of the first generation of the Garden who worked to establish its fundamental principles:Metrodorus,Hermarchus,Polyaneus, and Epicurus himself. Other disciples of Epicurus whose doctrines are known includeColotes, whose workOn the Impossibility of Living According to the Doctrines of Other Philosophers was disputed in two extant works byPlutarch, andCarneiscus, whose work criticizing theperipatetic conception of friendship survives in a fragmentary state.[5] Other students includeIdomeneus,Pythocles, and Epicurus's three brothers:Neocles,Chaeridemus, andAristobulus. The Garden also welcomed many female students during Epicurus's tenure, includingThemista,Batis,Boidion,Demetria,Hedeia,Leontion,Mammarion, andNikidion.[6]
During the first generation, Epicurus and the other members of The Garden practiced a communal lifestyle, with the assets of all the members held in common, and no rigid hierarchy between teachers and students. They shared celebrations, festivals, banquets and funerals. Several rites that were celebrated at different times of the year: an annual funeral rite established by Epicurus in memory of his brothers and parents, two rites established for Epicurus himself; an annual one on his birthday (the 20th ofGamelion month) and one celebrated on the 20th of every other month in honor of both Epicurus and Metrodorus, another day dedicated to the memory of his brothers in the month ofPoseidon, and another one forPolyaenus in the month ofMetageitneon.[7]
Diogenes Laërtius records that, according to Epicurus's successorHermarchus, Epicurus died a slow and painful death in 270 BC at the age of seventy-two from astone blockage of his urinary tract. Despite being in immense pain, Epicurus is said to have remained cheerful and to have continued to teach until the very end. Possible insights into Epicurus's death may be offered by the extremely briefEpistle toIdomeneus, included by Diogenes Laërtius in Book X of hisLives and Opinions of Eminent Philosophers. The authenticity of this letter is uncertain; it may be a later pro-Epicurean forgery intended to counter the large number of forged epistles in Epicurus's name portraying him unfavorably.[8]
I have written this letter to you on a happy day to me, which is also the last day of my life. For I have been attacked by a painful inability to urinate, and also dysentery, so violent that nothing can be added to the violence of my sufferings. But the cheerfulness of my mind, which comes from the recollection of all my philosophical contemplation, counterbalances all these afflictions. And I beg you to take care of the children ofMetrodorus, in a manner worthy of the devotion shown by the young man to me, and to philosophy.[9]
If authentic, this letter would support the idea that Epicurus was able to remain joyful to the end, even in the midst of his suffering. It would also indicate that he maintained a special concern for the well-being of children.[8]
Epicurus believed in aneternal universe, where anything that comes into being must come from something that exists, all that is destroyed does not cease to exist, but all that exists always will.[10] He held that this universe consists of two things;matter and void.[11] Matter is made up ofatoms, tiny bodies that are unable to be broken down into smaller parts, that only have the unchanging qualities of shape, size, and weight.[12] There are an infinite number of these atoms, though only a finite number of types, and an infinite amount of void. Because of the infinite supply of atoms, there are an infinite number of worlds, each separated from each other by vast areas of void, some of which could be vastly different from our own.[13]
The atoms are in constant motion through the void, moving in one of four different ways. They can collide with each other, either bouncing back, or joining together and vibrating to maintain the overall shape of the larger object.[14] When not prevented by other atoms, all atoms naturally move at the same speed downwards in relation to the rest of the world, though they must also occasionally "swerve" randomly out of their usual path; without the swerving motion, atoms would never collide with each other from their parallel trajectory downwards.[15] Epicurus argued that the swerve, which was absent inDemocritus' earlieratomic theory, was also what accounted for humanity's free will; if it were not for the swerve, humans would be subject to a never-ending chain of cause and effect.[16]
Epicurus also believed that senses relied on atoms; which were constantly being emitted from every object. Atoms themselves, which only had size, shape, and weight, did not possess the qualities perceived by the senses, such as redness, but instead would cause the observer to experience them in their mind. Because atoms moved sufficiently quickly, this would be experienced as a continuous sensation of vision.[17]
Epicurus consideredsense perception to be the foundation of knowledge. Although he had explained perception in terms of his atomic theory, he also designed his theory of knowledge to be independent of atomism, because he intended it to serve as justification for his philosophy of nature. Since Epicurus believed that sense perceptions were the basis of our knowledge, errors can only arise in how we judge those perceptions; although the senses sometimes receive contradictory information, they are the only means by which we receive information from the external world, and, recognizing the limits of our senses, it is necessary to use reason (dianoia) in order to organize the information we receive and determine whether our sense-organs are functioning correctly. However, reason still ultimately depends on the senses; Epicurus did not believe in the existence ofabstract objects such asPlato'sTheory of Forms that are derived entirely from thought.[18]
In order to make judgements about the information we receive from our senses, Epicurus proposed threecriteria of truth constituting the method through which we gain knowledge:[19] sensations (aisthêsis), preconceptions (prolepsis), and feelings (pathê).[20]
Sensations are the first and main criterion of truth for Epicureans; when judgments about things are formed, they can be verified or corrected through further closer examination,[21] which eventually allows the observer to obtain "clear vision" (enargeia), a sensation of an object that is unchanged by further judgments or opinions and is a clear and direct perception of that object.[22][23]
Preconceptions, Epicurus's second criterion of truth, are the concepts of what different things are that are formed in a person's mind through prior sense data. They are the background knowledge required for learning, allowing an observer to make judgments about perceivedphenomena. When a word that relates to the preconception is used, these preconceptions are brought by the mind into the person's thoughts.[24]
Epicurus's third criterion of truth are "choices and avoidances" which are the feelings of pleasure and pain that determine our actions. If something is pleasurable, we pursue it, and if something is painful, we avoid it. They are analogous to sensations in that they are a means of perception, but they perceive our internal state as opposed to external things.[20]
Epicurus applied his theory of knowledge to his understanding of nature; for understanding natural phenomena, we cannot rely on direct sense impressions alone, but must rely on inferences based on preconceptions. Hypotheses about phenomena that cannot be directly observed must be tested via relation to known observable facts, from which they are considered either contested or non-contested; a hypothesis that is not observable can be accepted as true if it is not contested by any explanations or observable phenomena.[25]
However, a hypothesis can still be contested by other explanations without being directlycontradicted by observable phenomena, so long as it is inconsistent with other potential explanations for how similar phenomena that can be closely observed are produced. For example, with the existence of atoms and void, Epicurus argues that there are no other possible explanations for the world we observe, so we must accept them as true. On the other hand, for various meteorological and cosmological phenomena, such as thunder and lightning or the waxing and waning of the moon and the motions of the stars, Epicurus produces several different possible explanations for the causes underlying the observed phenomena. Since none of the multiple explanations proposed can be verified or falsified, we must list them all and consider each of them to be possible, and cannot accept any of them as true.[25]
Although Epicurus conceded that it may not be feasible to exhaustively list all possible causes, he believed it is still preferable to list several, rather than one, as becoming fixated on one possible explanation for all phenomena allows for the possibility ofmythology anddivine intervention as explanations, despite the fact that these have never been directly observed.[25]
In addition to deductions based on the criteria of truth and inference of explanations based on observation, Epicurus also used a proof-free method of philosophical argumentation which he calledEpilogism (ἐπίλογισμός), often translated as "appraisal" or "assessment," which was intended to provide insight via reflection when neither observation nor preconceptions about a given phenomena could provide a consistent answer. For example, Epicurus claimed that although we do not have a preconception of time as an independent object, we nonetheless speak of having "a lot of time" or "little time" and we can arrive at a better understanding of how we conceive of time falling into discrete periods by reflecting on what we mean when we say "a lot of time." Epicurus also argued that we can arrive at insight on the relations between pleasure and pain, desire, and happiness through an assessment of our own sense experience, preconceptions and feelings beyond what we already know from them alone.[26]
Epicurus was ahedonist, meaning he taught that what is pleasurable is morally good and what is painful is morally evil. For his ethical system he redefined "pleasure" as the absence of suffering and taught that all humans should seek to attain the state ofataraxia, meaning "untroubledness", a state in which the person is completely free from all pain or suffering.[1]
Epicureans had a very specific understanding of what the greatest pleasure was, and the focus of their ethics was on the avoidance of pain rather than seeking out pleasure.[27] As evidence for this, Epicureans say that nature seems to command us to avoid pain, and they point out that all animals try to avoid pain as much as possible.[28]
Epicureanism divided pleasure into two broad categories:pleasures of the body andpleasures of the mind.Pleasures of the body involve sensations of the body, such as the act of eating delicious food or of being in a state of comfort free from pain, and exist only in the present. One can only experience pleasures of the body in the moment, meaning they only exist as a person is experiencing them.Pleasures of the mind involve mental processes and states; feelings of joy, the lack of fear, and pleasant memories are all examples of pleasures of the mind. These pleasures of the mind exist not only in the present, but also in the past and future, since memory of a past pleasant experience or the expectation of some potentially pleasing future can both be pleasurable experiences. Because of this, the pleasures of the mind are considered to be greater than those of the body.[27] Emphasis was placed on pleasures of the mind rather than on physical pleasures.[29]
The Epicureans further divided each of these types of pleasures into two categories:kinetic pleasure andkatastematic pleasure.Kinetic pleasure is the physical or mental pleasures that involve action or change. Eating delicious food, as well as fulfilling desires and removing pain, which is itself considered a pleasurable act, are all examples of kinetic pleasure in the physical sense. According to Epicurus, feelings of joy would be an example of mental kinetic pleasure.Katastematic pleasure is the pleasure one feels while in a state without pain. Like kinetic pleasures, katastematic pleasures can also be physical, such as the state of not being thirsty, or mental, such as freedom from a state of fear. While the pursuit of pleasure formed the focal point of the philosophy, this was largely directed to the "katastematic pleasures" of minimizing pain, anxiety and suffering. From this understanding, Epicureans concluded that the greatest pleasure a person could reach was the absence of pain,aponia, and lack of disturbance of mind,ataraxia, and, therefore, the ultimate goal then of Epicurean ethics was to reach a state ofaponia andataraxia.[27]
In order to do this an Epicurean had to control their desires, because desire itself was seen as painful. Not only will controlling one's desires bring aboutaponia, as one will rarely suffer from not being physically satisfied, but controlling one's desires will also help to bring aboutataraxia because one will not be anxious about becoming discomforted since one would have so few desires anyway. The Epicureans divide desires into three classes: natural and necessary, natural but not necessary, and vain and empty:[30]
Natural and necessary: These desires are limited desires that are innately present in all humans; it is part of human nature to have them. They are necessary for one of three reasons: necessary for happiness, necessary for freedom from bodily discomfort, and necessary for life. Clothing and shelter would belong to the first two categories, while something like food would belong to the third.[30]
Natural but not necessary: These desires are innate to humans, but they do not need to be fulfilled for their happiness or their survival. Wanting to eat delicious food when one is hungry is an example of a natural but not necessary desire. The main problem with these desires is that they fail to substantially increase a person's happiness, and at the same time require effort to obtain and are desired by people due to false beliefs that they are actually necessary. It is for this reason that they should be avoided.[30]
Vain and empty: These desires are neither innate to humans nor required for happiness or health; indeed, they are also limitless and can never be fulfilled. Desires of wealth or fame would fall in this class, and such desires are to be avoided because they will ultimately only bring about discomfort.[30]
If one follows only natural and necessary desires, then, according to Epicurus, one would be able to reachaponia andataraxia and thereby the highest form of happiness. Unnecessary and, especially, artificially produced desires were to be suppressed.[30]
Epicurus laid great emphasis on developing friendships as the basis of a satisfying life. The avoidance or freedom from hardship and fear is ideal to the Epicureans. While this avoidance or freedom could conceivably be achieved through political means, Epicurus insisted that involvement in politics would not release one from fear and he advised against a life of politics. Epicurus also discouraged contributing to political society by starting a family, as the benefits of a wife and children are outweighed by the trouble brought about by having a family. Instead Epicurus encouraged a formation of a community of friends outside the traditional political state. This community of virtuous friends would focus on internal affairs and justice. However, Epicureanism is adaptable to circumstance as is the Epicurean approach to politics. The same approaches will not always work in protection from pain and fear. In some situations it will be more beneficial to have a family and in other situations it will be more beneficial to participate in politics. It is ultimately up to the Epicurean to analyse their circumstance and take whatever action befits the situation.[31]
Epicurus was also an early thinker to develop the notion of justice as asocial contract, and in part attempts to address issues with the society described inPlato'sRepublic. The social contract theory established by Epicureanism is based on mutual agreement, not divine decree. He defined justice as an agreement made by people not to harm each other. The point of living in a society with laws and punishments is to be protected from harm so that one is free to pursue happiness. Because of this, laws that do not contribute to promoting human happiness are not just. He gave his own unique version of theethic of reciprocity, which differs from other formulations by emphasizing minimizing harm and maximizing happiness for oneself and others.[32]
The Epicurean understanding ofjustice was inherently self-interested. Justice was deemed good because it was seen as mutually beneficial. Individuals would not act unjustly even if the act was initially unnoticed because of possibly being caught and punished. Both punishment and fear of punishment would cause a person disturbance and prevent them from being happy.[33]
Epicurean ideas on politics disagree with other philosophical traditions, namely the Stoic, Platonist andAristotelian traditions.[34] To Epicureans all our social relations are a matter of how we perceive each other, of customs and traditions. No one is inherently of higher value or meant to dominate another.[35] That is because there is no metaphysical basis for the superiority of one kind of person, all people are made of the same atomic material and are thus naturally equal.[35] Epicureans also discourage political participation and other involvement in politics.[35] However Epicureans are notapolitical; it is possible that some political association could be seen as beneficial by some Epicureans. Some political associations could lead to certain benefits to the individual that would help to maximize pleasure and avoid physical or mental distress.[34]
Epicurus does not deny the existence of the gods; rather he denies their involvement in the world. According to Epicureanism, the gods do not interfere with human lives or the rest of the universe in any way[36] – thus, it shuns the idea that frightening weather events are divine retribution.[37] One of the fears the Epicurean ought to be freed from is fear relating to the actions of the gods.[38]
The manner in which the Epicurean gods exist is still disputed. Some scholars say that Epicureanism believes that the gods exist outside the mind as material objects (therealist position), while others assert that the gods only exist in our minds as ideals (theidealist position). The realist position holds that Epicureans understand the gods as existing as physical and immortal beings made of atoms that reside somewhere in reality. However, the gods are completely separate from the rest of reality; they are uninterested in it, play no role in it, and remain completely undisturbed by it. Instead, the gods live in what is called themetakosmia, or the space between worlds. Contrarily, the idealist (sometimes called the "non-realist position" to avoid confusion) position holds that the gods are just idealized forms of the best human life, and it is thought that the gods were emblematic of the life one should aspire towards. While a scholarly consensus has yet to be reached, the realist position remains the prevailing viewpoint at this time.[39][40]
God, he says, either wishes to take away evils, and is unable; or He is able, and is unwilling; or He is neither willing nor able, or He is both willing and able. If He is willing and is unable, He is feeble, which is not in accordance with the character of God; if He is able and unwilling, He isenvious, which is equally at variance with God; if He is neither willing nor able, He is both envious and feeble, and therefore not God; if He is both willing and able, which alone is suitable to God, from what source then are evils? Or why does He not remove them?
Although no extant writings of Epicurus contain this argument, it is possible that some form of this argument may have been found in his lost treatiseOn the Gods. However, since Epicurus did believe in the existence of gods, if he really did make some form of this argument, it would have been an argument against divine providence, the idea that the gods interfere in the world.[41]
Epicurus rejectedimmortality. Epicureans believe in the soul, but Epicureanism suggests that the soul is mortal and material, just like the body.[42] Epicurus rejected any possibility of an afterlife, while still contending that one need not fear death: "Death is nothing to us; for that which is dissolved, is without sensation, and that which lacks sensation is nothing to us."[43] From this doctrine arose the Epicurean Epitaph:Non fui, fui, non sum, non curo ("I was not; I have been; I am not; I do not mind."), which is inscribed on the gravestones of his followers and seen on many ancient gravestones of theRoman Empire.[44]
Although more original writings of Epicurus have survived to the present day than of any other Hellenistic Greek philosopher,[1] the vast majority of everything he wrote has still been lost.[41] The only surviving complete works by Epicurus are thePrincipal Doctrines (Κύριαι Δόξαι) and a few letters which summarize Epicurean doctrines. Numerous fragments of Epicurus's lost thirty-seven volume treatiseOn Nature have also been found among the charredpapyrus fragments at theVilla of the Papyri atHerculaneum.[47]
On Nature (Ancient Greek:Περὶ φύσεως) is Epicurus's main philosophical work, a treatise in 37 books. The work is not preserved intact, however, many parts have been discovered among theHerculaneum papyri, a collection of papyrus scrolls carbonized by the eruption ofMount Vesuvius in 79 AD, which were discovered at anEpicurean villa inHerculaneum:[47]
Book 2 discusses the existence, formation, and motion ofsimulacra, the objects of perception.
Book 11 discusses cosmology, the shape and stability of the earth, and an argument against the use of astronomical instruments.
Book 28 contains a record of a discussion between Epicurus andMetrodorus, among other members of the Garden, focused on the use of philosophical terminology to convey concepts accurately, and whether or not a philosopher can verify the truth of statements made usingordinary language without risking inaccuracy or ambiguity.
Book 34 discusses fear that arises from superstition, and the problem ofmental perception.
Another book, whose number has not been preserved, discusses the Epicurean theory of time.
Canon (Ancient Greek:Κανών lit.Rule) was Epicurus's principal work on epistemology, the theory of knowledge, which was intended to serve as a justification for his philosophy of nature.[48]
Although this work has not survived, a brief summary of its contents has been preserved by Diogenes Laertius, which can be compared with other testimonies of Epicurus's epistemology in order to reconstruct an outline of its contents. The title, which was likely taken from a similar work,Canons, written byDemocritus, is a reference to amason'srule, the straightedge instrument used as a standard to determine the straightness of beams and walls, which was a metaphor for thecriteria of truth set out in the work, which were intended to be used as a standard to assess the truth of other beliefs.[49]
The Principal Doctrines are forty authoritative conclusions set up as official doctrines by Epicurus. Some of the Principal Doctrines are organized into groups and are meant to be studied together. The first four doctrines make up the Tetrapharmakos (Four Cures). Doctrines 5-21 and 26-30 discuss other topics in ethics, 22-25 deal with epistemology, and 31-40 explain the Epicurean doctrines on justice and societal relations.[50]
Part of Herculaneum Papyrus 1005 (P.Herc.1005), col. 5. Contains Epicurean tetrapharmakos from Philodemus' Adversus Sophistas.
Tetrapharmakos (τετραφάρμακος), or "The four-part cure", is a basic guideline as to how to live the happiest possible life, based on the first four of the doctrines. These are short recommendations to avoidanxiety orexistential dread.[51] The name "tetrapharmakon" comes from a compound of four drugs (wax,tallow,pitch andresin); used metaphorically by Roman-era Epicureans to refer to the four remedies for healing the soul.[52]
Don't fear god, Don't worry about death; What is good is easy to get, and What is terrible is easy to endure.[53]
A collection of at least 24 of Epicurus's letters organized by date circulated in antiquity, referred to by Philodemus, the majority of which are lost.[54] Three letters of Epicurus are preserved by Diogenes Laertius in hisLife of Epicurus: theLetter to Herodotus and theLetter to Pythocles, Epicurus summarizes his philosophy on nature and, in theLetter to Menoeceus, he summarizes his moral teachings.[50] Another letter is preserved byDiogenes of Oenoanda, theLetter to Mother, which discusses overcoming fears with an understanding of natural science as a means of attaining happiness.[55]
Epicurus'sLetter to Herodotus was written as an introduction toEpicurean philosophy and method of studying nature. It is divided into three parts: the first deals with physical principles, the second deals with compound structures that are formed from the motions of atoms within the void, and the third deals with the purposes for studying nature.[50]
Epicurus'sLetter to Pythocles deals with meteorological and astronomical phenomena, arguing that the knowledge of learning such things has no purpose other than the attainment ofataraxia. After discussing methodology, Epicurus moves on to cosmology, including the stars and the movement of the sun and moon, and then weather patterns, concluding with other astronomical topics. Epicurus's authorship of this letter has occasionally been contested.[50]
Epicurus'sLetter to Menoeceus is a summary of his ethical teachings. It addresses theology, the hierarchies of desires, how to weigh choices and avoidances in order to achieve net pleasure and self-sufficiency, and then concludes with a discussion ofphronesis and the Epicureansage in terms of the tetrapharmakos.[50]
Epicurus'sLetter to Mother was inscribed onto the portico walls of the 2nd century Epicurean philosopherDiogenes' residence inOenoanda,Lycia, in modern dayTurkey, along with numerous other Epicurean letters and treatises.
Epicurus'sLetter to Mother is a letter addressed to Epicurus's mother, reassuring her that the disturbing dreams that she had about him do not reflect reality and asking her to stop sending him supplies and money rather than saving it for herself, as he is already well supported by his friends. As a means of combating her superstitions about dreams, he describes the mechanics of dreams from a scientific perspective, comparing a vision in a dream to the process of how images formed in the mind from ordinary sight.[55] Epicurus then discusses incremental progress towards happiness, and how doing so allows a philosopher to emulate the gods, not by becoming immortal, but by experiencing what it feels like to be a god during one's mortal life, by attaining the long-term stability associated withataraxia.[56]
The majority of scholars attribute this letter to Epicurus himself, on the basis of a comparison with doctrines in other fragments of his writing, other independent characterizations of his mother as a superstitious person, and a linguistic analysis of the use of accurate terminology from his own time period. However, it has also been suggested that the letter was written byDiogenes of Oenoanda, who preserved the letter, or that the letter is part of a lostepistolary novel written by a later author, such as the collection of letters attributed to the Platonist philosopherChion of Heraclea.[55]
In 1888, another collection of eighty-one Epicurean sayings was discovered in a manuscript in theVatican Library, now commonly referred to as theVatican Sayings, which repeats many of thePrincipal Doctrines and likely preserves the views of Epicurus and some of his immediate followers.[50]
There were also several divisions within the school early on; even in Epicurus's lifetime,Timocrates of Lampsacus, the brother of his closest disciple Metrodorus, had left the school and published several tracts critical of Epicureanism. During the 2nd and 1st centuries BC, dissident sects of Epicureans established themselves inCos andRhodes who broke with the scholarchs of the Garden. While these Epicureans still considered the works of Epicurus and his closest followers to be authoritative, disputes arose about the interpretation of the works; determining which works were genuine,textual criticism of corrupt or contradictory passages, and clarification of difficult passages, which occasionally seemed to present errors.[58]
In Rome, the first Epicureans to attempt to spread their doctrines there,Alcaeus and Philiscus, had been expelled from the city in 155 BC, while the earliest Epicurean writers in Latin,Amafinius,Catius, andRabirus, mostly drew the ire ofCicero for their ethical shortcomings and poor prose. However, three Epicurean philosophers in the 1st century BC,Philodemus,Lucretius, andSiro, did much to establish Epicurus's reputation in Italy, even as it began to decline in Athens. Philodemus, a student of Zeno of Sidon, attracted a wealthy patron,Calpurnius Piso the father-in-law ofJulius Caesar, and founded a school that was intended to be a continuation of the Epicurean Garden in Athens, circulating the works of his predecessors and writing treatises on the whole scope of Epicurean philosophy, many of which have been found at theVilla of the Papyri.Lucretius, a poet who seems to have read Epicurus's works outside the Epicurean school tradition, wroteDe rerum natura, a long didactic poem in Latindactylic hexameter verse, which is still extant, that explained Epicurus's natural philosophy to a Roman audience, covering roughly the first 15 books of Epicurus'sOn Nature. Meanwhile, Siro established another school in Italy where he instructed a circle of Roman poets in Epicureanism, which includedVirgil.[60]
Diogenes of Oenoanda, an Epicurean philosopher living inLycia, in the early 2nd century AD, inscribed roughly 260 square meters of Epicurean writings onto the portico walls of his own residence, which were rediscovered in the 1880s.
In the first and second centuries AD, Epicureanism gradually began to decline as it failed to compete with Stoicism, which had an ethical system more in line with traditional Roman values. Prominent critics of his philosophy include prominent authors such as the Roman StoicSeneca the Younger (c. 4 BC – AD 65) and the GreekMiddle PlatonistPlutarch (c. 46 –c. 120).[61] Some time in the 2nd century CE, an otherwise an unknown Epicurean philosopher,Diogenes of Oenoanda, attempted to preserve the doctrines of his school in an enormous wall inscription inLycia that originally spanned 260 square meters and contained several treatises totalling over 25000 words of writing, roughly a third of which has been preserved.[62]
Mosaic from a Roman villa, from the late 2nd or early 3rd century AD, depicting the Epicurean philosopher Metrodorus of Lampsacus
By the early fifth century AD, Epicureanism was virtually extinct. The ChristianChurch FatherAugustine of Hippo (354–430 AD) declared, "its ashes are so cold that not a single spark can be struck from them."[61]
Epicurus inRaphael'sSchool of Athens (1509–1511). In the Middle ages, Epicurus was depicted in popular culture as a vain pleasure-seeker.
While Plato and Aristotle enjoyed a privileged place in Christian philosophy throughout theMiddle Ages, Epicurus, whose ideas could less easily be adapted to suit a Christian worldview, was not held in such esteem. Information about Epicurus's teachings was available, through Lucretius'sOn the Nature of Things, quotations of it found in medieval Latin grammars andflorilegia and encyclopedias, such asIsidore of Seville'sEtymologiae (seventh century) andHrabanus Maurus'sDe universo (ninth century), but there is little evidence that these teachings were systematically studied or comprehended.[61]
During the Middle Ages, Epicurus frequently appeared in popular culture as a gatekeeper to the Garden of Delights, the "proprietor of the kitchen, the tavern, and the brothel." He appears in this guise inMartianus Capella'sMarriage of Mercury and Philology (fifth century),John of Salisbury'sPolicraticus (1159),John Gower'sMirour de l'Omme, andGeoffrey Chaucer'sCanterbury Tales. Epicurus and his followers also appear inDante Alighieri'sInferno in the Sixth Circle of Hell, where they are imprisoned in flaming coffins for having believed that the soul dies with the body.[61]
InMedieval Jewish philosophy, several philosophers discussed Epicurean doctrines. Although the first apparent reference to Epicurus inRabbinic literature appears much earlier, the termepikoros, cited in theMishnah,[63] meaning "a heretic," earlier uses of the term do not show any knowledge of specific Epicurean doctrines.[64] However, in the 10th through 12th centuries,Abraham ibn Ezra,Abraham ibn Daud, andJudah Halevi reference specific Epicurean doctrines, such as the treatment of pleasure as the only good and the eternity of the world, which they were likely introduced to via Arabic translations of the works of the Aristotelian commentatorAlexander of Aphrodisias. A much fuller discussion of Epicurean doctrines, however, is given byMaimonides inThe Guide to the Perplexed, where he compares Epicurean atomism to the atomistic doctrines ofSaadia Gaon and other philosophers of theJewish Kalam school, which Maimonides believed were ultimately derived from Epicurus, and may derive from earlier encounters betweenRabbinic Judaism and Epicurean literature duringLate antiquity.[65]
In 1417,Poggio Bracciolini discovered a copy of Lucretius'sOn the Nature of Things in a monastery nearLake Constance, which contained a comprehensive account of Epicurus's teachings. The first scholarly dissertation on Epicurus,De voluptate (On Pleasure) by the Italian Humanist and Catholic priestLorenzo Valla was published in 1431. In the treatise, Valla presented the treatise a discussion on the nature of the highest good between an Epicurean, a Stoic, and a Christian. Although Valla's dialogue ultimately rejects Epicureanism, by presenting an Epicurean as a member of the dispute, Valla lent Epicureanism credibility as a philosophy that deserved to be taken seriously.Francesco Zabarella (1360–1417),Francesco Filelfo (1398–1481),Cristoforo Landino (1424–1498), andLeonardo Bruni (c. 1370–1444) also gave Epicureanism a fairer analysis than it had traditionally received.[61]
Nonetheless, "Epicureanism" remained a pejorative, synonymous with extreme egoistic pleasure-seeking, rather than a name of a philosophical school. Even liberal religious skeptics who might have been expected to take an interest in Epicureanism evidently did not;Étienne Dolet (1509–1546) only mentions Epicurus once in all his writings andFrançois Rabelais (between 1483 and 1494–1553) never mentions him at all. AlthoughMichel de Montaigne (1533–1592) quoted 450 lines of Lucretius'sOn the Nature of Things in hisEssays, his interest in Lucretius, however, seems to have been primarily literary and he is ambiguous about his feelings on Lucretius's Epicurean worldview.[61]
The French priest and philosopherPierre Gassendi is responsible for reviving Epicureanism in modernity as an alternative to Aristotelianism.[61]
The French Catholic priest and scholarPierre Gassendi (1592–1655) published several books expounding Epicureanism that exerted a profound influence on later writings about Epicurus. However, he modified some of Epicurus's doctrines in order to make them more palatable for a Christian audience; for example, by stating that atoms were not eternal, uncreated, and infinite in number, instead contending that an extremely large but finite number of atoms were created by God at creation. Gassendi's version of Epicurus's teachings became popular among some members of English scientific circles, who treated Epicurean atomism as a starting point for their own idiosyncratic theories. To orthodox thinkers, however, Epicureanism was still regarded as immoral and heretical untilWalter Charleton (1619–1707) provided the English public with readily available descriptions of Epicurus's philosophy and assured orthodox Christians that Epicureanism was no threat to their beliefs. TheRoyal Society, chartered in 1662, advanced Epicurean atomism; one of its most prolific defenders of atomism was the chemistRobert Boyle (1627–1691).John Locke (1632–1704) also adapted Gassendi's modified version of Epicurus's epistemology, which became highly influential on English empiricism.[61]
Epicureanism was also beginning to lose its associations with indiscriminate and insatiable gluttony, which had been characteristic of its reputation ever since antiquity. Instead, the word "epicure" began to refer to a person with extremely refined taste in food, for example, "such an epicure wasPotiphar—to please his tooth and pamper his flesh with delicacies" fromWilliam Whately'sPrototypes (1646).[61]
Around the same time, the Epicurean injunction to "live in obscurity" was beginning to gain popularity as well. In 1685,Sir William Temple (1628–1699) abandoned a promising career as a diplomat and instead retired to his garden, devoting himself to writing essays on Epicurus's moral teachings. That same year,John Dryden translated the celebrated lines from Book II of Lucretius'sOn the Nature of Things: "'Tis pleasant, safely to behold from shore / The rowling ship, and hear the Tempest roar."[61]
Imagined reconstruction of the EpicureanVilla of the Papyri, which was rediscovered inHerculaneum in the 18th century. TheHerculaneum Papyri, which were carbonized by the eruption of Mount Vesuvius in 79 AD, contain numerous Epicurean treatises.
In 19th century Britain,Jeremy Bentham,John Stuart Mill, andHenry Sidgwick adapted Epicurus'spsychological hedonism to their own ethical theories ofUtilitarianism, which sought to maximize overall happiness.[66] Although Epicurus himself, unlike the Utilitarians, did not promote the idea of pursuing happiness as a general ethical goal, these philosophers drew on Epicurus explanations of happiness (Eudaimonia) in terms of the relations between pleasures and pains for insight into their own ethical theories.[67]
TheBritish poetAlfred Tennyson (1809–1892) praised "the sober majesties / of settled, sweet, Epicurean life" in his 1868 poem "Lucretius". Epicurus's ethical teachings also had an indirect impact on the philosophy ofUtilitarianism in England during the nineteenth century.[61]
Friedrich Nietzsche once noted: "Even today many educated people think that the victory of Christianity over Greek philosophy is a proof of the superior truth of the former – although in this case it was only the coarser and more violent that conquered the more spiritual and delicate. So far as superior truth is concerned, it is enough to observe that the awakening sciences have allied themselves point by point with the philosophy of Epicurus, but point by point rejected Christianity."[69]
Academic interest in Epicurus and other Hellenistic philosophers increased over the course of the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries, with an unprecedented number of monographs, articles, abstracts, and conference papers being published on the subject. The texts from the library ofPhilodemus of Gadara in theVilla of the Papyri inHerculaneum, first discovered between 1750 and 1765, are being deciphered, translated, and published by scholars part of the Philodemus Translation Project, funded by theUnited StatesNational Endowment for the Humanities, and part of the Centro per lo Studio dei Papiri Ercolanesi inNaples. Epicurus's popular appeal among non-scholars is difficult to gauge, but it seems to be relatively comparable to the appeal of more traditionally popular ancient Greek philosophical subjects such as Stoicism, Aristotle, and Plato.[61]
The Epicurea is a collection of texts, fragments, and testimonies by Epicurus that was collected byHermann Usener in 1887. This work features a collection of writings by Epicurus that explain the values and beliefs of Ancient Epicurian philosophy.
Barnes, Jonathan (1986), "15: Hellenistic Philosophy and Science", in Boardman, John; Griffin, Jasper; Murray, Oswyn (eds.),The Oxford History of the Classical World, Oxford, England: Oxford University Press, pp. 365–385,ISBN978-0198721123
Brown, Eric (2009). "Politics and society". In Warren, James (ed.).The Cambridge Companion to Epicureanism. New York: Cambridge University Press. pp. 179–196.ISBN978-05218-7347-5.
Clay, Diskin (1998).Paradosis and survival: three chapters in the history of Epicurean philosophy. University of Michigan Press.ISBN978-0-472-10896-1.
Danzig, Gabriel (2020). "Epicurus and the Epicureanism in Rabbinic Literature". In Mitsis, Phillip (ed.).The Oxford handbook of Epicurus and epicureanism. Oxford: Oxford university press. pp. 549–581.ISBN9780199744213.
Dorandi, Tiziano (2020). "Epicurus and the Epicurean School". In Mitsis, Phillip (ed.).The Oxford handbook of Epicurus and epicureanism. Oxford: Oxford university press. pp. 13–42.ISBN9780199744213.
Erler, Michael (2011), "Chapter II: Autodidact and student: on the relationship of authority and autonomy in Epicurus and the Epicurean tradition", in Fish, Jeffrey; Sanders, Kirk R. (eds.),Epicurus and the Epicurean Tradition, Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, pp. 9–28,ISBN978-0-521-19478-5
Gordon, Pamela (1996).Epicurus in Lycia. The Second-Century World of Diogenes of Oenoanda. Ann Arbor: Univ. of Michigan Press.ISBN978-0-472-10461-1.
Gordon, Pamela (2020). "Diogenes of Oenoanda". In Mitsis, Phillip (ed.).The Oxford handbook of Epicurus and epicureanism. Oxford: Oxford university press. pp. 531–548.ISBN9780199744213.
Hickson, Michael W. (2014),"A Brief History of Problems of Evil", in McBrayer, Justin P.; Howard-Snyder, Daniel (eds.),The Blackwell Companion to The Problem of Evil, Hoboken, New Jersey: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 26–27,ISBN978-1-118-60797-8
Long, A. A. (2020). "Epicureanism and Utilitarianism". In Mitsis, Phillip (ed.).The Oxford handbook of Epicurus and epicureanism. Oxford: Oxford university press. pp. 742–760.ISBN9780199744213.
O'Keefe, Tim (2010).Epicureanism. University of California Press.
Striker, Gisela (2020). "Epistemology". In Mitsis, Phillip (ed.).The Oxford handbook of Epicurus and epicureanism. Oxford: Oxford university press. pp. 43–58.ISBN9780199744213.
Taub, Liba (2009). "Cosmology and meterology". In Warren, James (ed.).The Cambridge Companion to Epicureanism. New York: Cambridge University Press. pp. 105–124.ISBN978-05218-7347-5.
Tsouna, Voula (2020). "Hedonism". In Mitsis, Phillip (ed.).The Oxford handbook of Epicurus and epicureanism. Oxford: Oxford university press. pp. 141–188.ISBN9780199744213.
Wilson, Catherine (2015).Epicureanism: a very short introduction. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.ISBN9780199688326.OCLC917374685.
Gordon, Pamela (2013),"Epistulatory Epicureans", in Boter, G. J.; Chaniotis, A.; Coleman, K. M.; de Jong, I. J. F.; Reinhardt, T. (eds.),Epistolary Narratives in Ancient Greek Literature, Mnemosyne: Supplements: Monographs on Greek and Latin Language and Literature, vol. 359, Leiden, The Netherlands: Koninklijke Brill,ISBN978-90-04-25303-2
Jones, Howard (1989).The Epicurean Tradition. London: Routledge.ISBN978-0-415-02069-5.
Warren, James (2002).Epicurus and Democritean Ethics: An Archaeology of Ataraxia. New York, NY: University of Cambridge.
Warren, James (2009).The Cambridge Companion to Epicureanism. New York: Cambridge University Press.ISBN978-05218-7347-5.
%2c_discovered_in_Rome%2c_Louvre_Museum_-_51036370948.jpg)
