Epicureanism

Roman copy of a Greek bust of the centuryIIa. C. de Epicuro de Samos, founder of the epicureism.

Epicureanism is a philosophical movement founded around 307 BC. C. based on the teachings of the ancient Greek philosopher Epicurus of Samos, who founded a school called "The Garden" and whose ideas were followed by other philosophers, called "Epicureans". The Garden became famous for the cultivation of friendship and for being open to the participation of women, in contrast to what was usual in the Academy founded by Plato and in the Lyceum of his disciple Aristotle. In fact, Epicurus opposed Platonists and Peripatetics, and his teachings were collected in a very numerous set of works, according to the testimony of Diogenes Laertius, but of which only a very small part, although significant, essentially composed of by fragments. Nevertheless, Epicurus' thought was immortalized in the Latin poem De rerum natura / On Nature, by the Latin poet Titus Lucretius Caro.

Few of Epicurus's writings have survived. However, there is independent evidence of his ideas from his later disciples. While Stoicism had a long development, the Epicurean doctrines were fixed by its founder. Some scholars consider the epic poem De rerum natura (Latin: De The Nature of Things) by Lucretius presents in a unified work the central arguments and theories of Epicureanism. Many of the scrolls unearthed in the Villa of the Papyri in Herculaneum are Epicurean texts. At least some are believed to have belonged to the Epicurean philosopher Philodemus of Gadara. Epicurus also had a wealthy disciple from the II century AD. C., Diogenes of Enoanda, who had a portico inscribed with principles of philosophy erected in Enoanda, Lycia (present-day Turkey), from which we can know that it was still a thriving philosophical school more than four centuries after its creation.

Epicurus was an atomist, following in the footsteps of Democritus. His materialism led him to a general criticism against superstition and divine intervention. Like the Cyrenaic philosopher Aristippus, Epicurus was a hedonist, but believed that the highest good consisted in seeking modest and sustainable pleasure in the form of a state of ataraxia (tranquility and freedom from fear) and aponia (absence of bodily pain) through knowledge of how the world works and limiting desires. Consequently, Epicurus and his followers generally withdrew from politics and recommended doing so because it could lead to frustrations, upsets, and ambitions that can directly conflict with the Epicurean quest for peace of mind and virtue.

Although Epicureanism is a form of hedonism insofar as it declares that pleasure is its only intrinsic goal, the concept that the absence of pain and fear constitutes the greatest pleasure, and its defense of a simple life, make it make it very different from "hedonism" understood colloquially, more identified with the doctrine of Aristippus and the Cyrenaics.

Epicureanism flourished in the late Hellenistic era and during the Roman era, and many Epicurean communities were established, such as those in Antioch, Alexandria, Rhodes, and Herculaneum. Late in the III century d. C., Epicureanism almost disappeared, and was opposed by other philosophies (mainly Neoplatonism) that were then booming. During the Renaissance it was frequently reviled, although some humanists, among them Francisco de Quevedo, already in the Baroque, wrote to defend it (Defense of Epicurus against common opinion, 1635). Interest in Epicureanism revived, however, during the secular Enlightenment and continues into the Contemporary Age.

The Garden

This section is an extract from Garden (Epicuro).[chuckles]edit]

Details of the philosopher Epicuro according to Rafael in the fresco of The school of Athens (Vatican Museums).

The Garden (in Greek: kêpos According to Cicero to Latin: hortus) is the name of the philosophical school founded by Epicuro on the outskirts of Athens, next to the Platonic Academy, on the path of El Pireo. Epicuro was definitively established in Athens in 306 a. C. (near this date he must have founded his Garden) and remained here for the rest of his life. By then, the city had lost the political primacy it enjoyed in the classic period. He developed in the Garden his ideas of love for the countryside. More than a true garden, his school was a garden, a rural space outside the city, its ideal of hidden life and its rejection of the intellectual and political approaches of the Platonic Academy. The life of the community was simple and relied on the economy by voluntary contributions. The followers of Epicuro were known as the philosophers of the garden or those in the garden.

Dipilon Gate of Athens. Cicero places the location of the Garden on the road to the Plato Academy. Specifically, it indicates that you arrive at the Academy for a six-stage walk (1100m) from Dípilon.

Some Athenians believe that the Garden site was at the point where Leoforos Athinon ("Carretera de Athens") crosses the old Dromos.

The Garden coexisted with the two main teaching centers of the time: the Plato Academy, founded around 387 a. C. to the north of the city, in the olive grove of Academos, and directed in times of Epicuro by Crates de Triasio; and the Lyceum of Aristotle, founded in 335 B.C. and directed by Teofrasto, which was inside the city walls, in a gym near the Templo de Apolo Licio. The Garden was on the outskirts of the city near the Academy, in an agricultural property next to the road to the port of El Pireo, where the teacher organized a community that supported horticultural work. Epicuro preferred to live away from the urban environment, in a relaxed place for reflection. On the contrary, the stoic school was born in the bearers (stoa) of the agora of the Acropolis, whose members intervened in the political affairs of the city.

The Garden offered a quiet place, away from the hustle of the city, where they took place from talks and coexistence to meals and celebrations (symposium). It was, therefore, a place more for the intellectual withdrawal of a group of friends than a place for scientific research and paid superior, unlike the Plato Academy or the Liceus of Aristotle. "The desire to speak to a wide range of people was an important aspect of Epicuro's school." Seneca registers an inscription at the Garden Gate in the 21st Epistle of the Letters to Lucilio: «Extraño, your time will be pleasant here. In this place the greatest good is pleasure”. People of every condition and class were admitted to the Garden, which became a cause of scandal. It included respectable people, but equally dissolute people. Also women and slaves, which at that time was an unusual fact for a philosophical school.

The epicusal school possessed a religious court in imitating the semi-divine character of the teacher's aerial life (the divine man, theios aner). For Epicuro there were three types of people: the self-taught that come to the truth without help from anyone, those who need help but very capable of following, such as Metrodoro; and those who can be directed to the good but need not only help but even coercion, such as Hermarco. "Epicuro congratulates the first, but more admires the second, because even if both come to the same end, they deserve better praise of having done the same with a more difficult character." That is why the epicuary school gave vital importance to pedagogy. De Witt asserts that the epicusal school was organized according to a hierarchy: the philosophoi (philosophies), the philologoi (schools), kathegetai (professors), the synetheis (imiters) and kataskeuazomenoi, students in "preparation routes" (the Greek term kataskeuazomenoi is a precedent of the Christian term catechumen). The epicure teachings were transmitted in various formats such as letters, poems, and inscriptions to be accessible to a wide, literate audience in both Latin and Greek.

Epicuro taught in the Garden until his death in 270 BC when he was 72 years old. He left the direction of his school to Hermarco, who had been his disciple in Mitilene before the foundation of the Garden and who faithfully accompanied him since. His successor was Polístrate the Epicurean, who was the last survivor to have heard Epicuro. Dionisio and Basílides succeeded. Other known epicoreals were Metrodoro, Leontion, Colotes, Poliano, Apolodoro, Zenón Sidonio, Demetrio, Orion, Fedro and Patrón.

The Episcopal communities spread from Athens to Rhodes and the Middle East. Unlike stoicism, which had a long doctrinal development, epicureism remained faithful to the teachings of its founder without little change during the passage of time. Diogenes Laercio spoke of "true" epicures that called "sophists" to other epicures, which led to the consideration of two Garden currents: one that tolerated some doctrinal change and one that criticized it.

When Cicero visited Athens in 51 B.C., the original Garden of Epicuro in ruins and the Roman noble Memium, to whom the epicurus Lucrecio dedicated his poem The nature of thingsHe had obtained authorization from the Areopagus to use it as a construction site honoring Epicuro. Patron wrote to Cicero informed by Fedro of the situation and asked him to intervene and maintain "honour, duty, testamentary law, the mandate of Epicuro, the protest raised by Fedro, the abode, the abode, the footprints of illustrious men" (Philippines)honorem, officium, testamentorum ius, Epicuri auctoritatem, Phaedri obtestationem, sedem, domicilium, vestigia summorum hominum sibi tuenda esse dicit). The outcome of the intervention is unknown.

Cult of Epicurus

Reconstruction by K. Fittschen of an enthroned Epicuro sculpture, allegedly erected after his death. University of Göttingen.

According to Diskin Clay, Epicurus himself established the custom of celebrating his birthday annually with communal meals, befitting his stature as heros ktistes ("founding hero") of the Garden. He ordered in his will annual commemorative feasts for himself on the same date (10th of the month of Gamelion).Epicurean communities continued this tradition, referring to Epicurus as his 'savior'. (sóter) and celebrating him as a hero. Seneca quoted the Epicurean maxim: 'Do, he says, all things as though Epicurus were looking upon you.' Epicurus's hero-worship may have operated as a civic religion of variety in The Garden. Lucretius wrote from the very beginning of the poem De rerum natura his purpose to explain the philosophy of Epicurus in the most clear, faithful and persuasive way possible, whom he considers as the liberator of superstition by providing an explanation of the origin and the structure of the universe.

Do we not owe our most vivid gratitude to the one who, by giving ears, so to speak, to this voice of nature, understood it with so much security and depth that has led all men of a healthy mind to the way of a quiet, restful and happy life? And the fact that it seems to you unsuccessful is because, in his opinion, there was no other erudition than that which teaches the doctrine of happiness.

Nonne ei maximam gratiam habere mustmus, qui hac exaudita quasi voce naturae sic eam firme graviterque comprehenderit, ut omnes bene sana in viam placatae, tranquillae, stillae, beatae vitae deduceret? Qui quod tibi parum videtur eruditus, ea causa est, quod nullam eruditionem esse duxit, nisi quae beatae vitae disciplinem iuvaret.

Cicero. De finibus I, 71.

However, the clear evidence of an Epicurean hero cult, as well as the cult itself, seems buried under the weight of posthumous philosophical interpretation, but the fact of distinguishing Epicurus makes it clear that the Epicureans were not concerned by the search for truth through persuasive argumentation but rather by devotion to a unique spiritual guide and teacher.

Eikas

This section is an extract from Eikas.[chuckles]edit]

Double herma Metrodoro and Epicuro. La Eikas He commemorated the death of these two epicureans on the 20th day of each month.

Eikas (Greek: εκς, ε,κοσ:) eíkosi, "veinte"), Eikadenfest is a party celebrated among the epicureans in commemoration of Epicuro and Metrodoro. It is a monthly celebration that takes place on the 20th of every month. The practice was performed during the life of Epicuro, and in his will arrangements were made to continue the celebration. It became so characteristic of the epicureans that the detractors gave them the nickname of eikadistae (“the people of the twentieth day”).

The house that I have in Melite will be delivered by Aminomaco and Timocrates to Hermaco, to inhabit her during her life, and those who sympathize with him. Of the rents that make the goods that I have given to Aminomaco and Timocrates, according to Hermaco, will take the part that can be, and will invest it in sacrifices for my father, mother and brothers, and for me on the day of my birth that, as usual, is already celebrated every year in the first ten of Gamelion. And it will also be used in the expenses of the conlosophants who spend the 20th of every month, which is indicated for my memory and that of Metrodoro. They will also celebrate the day for my brothers in the month of Posidon, as I have practiced, and that of Polieno in the month of Metagithnion.

Epicuro Testament

The day had a special meaning among the Greeks before Epicuro, being the twentieth sacred for the Apollo god, and also corresponding to the final day of the rites of initiation to the mysteries of Deméter.

The celebration of Eikas has recently revived among modern epicureans and humanists.

Works and sources

Diogenes Laercio, Greek historian who collected the main philosophic sources that have allowed the reconstruction of epicurean thought.

Illustration of the Villa de los papiros restored, where texts of the epicole Filodemo of Gadara have been found.

Diogenes Laertius, a former biographer and doxographer who lived in the last century of Epicureanism (III century), dedicated the book tenth and last of his work Life and opinions of illustrious philosophers to the philosophy of Epicurus and his followers. According to Diogenes Laertius, Epicurus left more than 300 manuscripts, including 37 treatises on physics and numerous works on love, justice, the gods and other subjects. Diogenes Laertius collects the title of some forty works:

However, these works have been lost and only survived in collected citations. What we know of Epicurean philosophy is through the following sources:

• Three letters and several maxims of Epicuro that Diogenes Laercio reproduces in book X of his work:
  1. Letter to Herodotowhich treats atomistic physics and criterion of knowledge.
  2. Letter to Pytocles, referring to cosmology, astronomy and meteorology. a summary of his own moral and theological teachings,
  3. Letter to Meneceowhich addresses and summarizes his hedonistic and theological ethical teachings.
  4. Maximum capital, set of about forty dogmas of ethical and gnoseological content.
• A Vatican codex, the Gnomologium Vaticanumwhich contains 81 brief fragments found in the Vatican Apostolic Library in 1888 by Karl Wotke.
• Works of his disciples, such as the inscription of Enoanda Diogenes and About Nature (κερι σσεως) of the epicure philosopher Filodemo of Gadara from the calcined library in Herculaneum. Most of the surviving papyrus are in the National Library of Naples. Important parts of Book II are preserved in the British Museum. From this work fragments have also been preserved in the library of the Pisón epicure (perhaps Lucio Calpurnio Pisón Cesonino). Named in honor of the philosopher, the Philodemus Project It is an international effort, supported by an important grant from the National Fund for Humanities and by contributions from participating individuals and universities, to rebuild new texts of the works of Philosopher on poetics, rhetoric and music.
• allusions to the ideas of Epicuro to comment on or remove them in the writings of Empirical Sixth (in Against dogmatics and Against teachers), Plutarco (sections «Contra Colotes», «On the impossibility of living pleasantly according to Epicuro» and «If it is well said the “live hiddenly” thing in Moralia), Cicero De natura deorum and in book I of De finibus, where he critically summed up the natural epicure philosophy by reproducing a conversation held with the epicureans Lucio Manlio Torcuato and Gayo Valerio Triario (almost in all the first 99) Letters to Lucilio).
• The exhibition of the Epicuro doctrines made in the long teaching poem of the Roman Lucrecio, Rerum natura. The purpose was to bring humanity closer to happiness by saving it from fear of the gods and death. Lucrecio's poem has served as one of the main sources to convey the physical and gnoseological epicurean thought.

The most complete and widely used contemporary primary source of Epicurean doctrine is the collection of ancient texts, testimonies, and fragments edited by German philologist Hermann Usener entitled Epicurea (1887). This work contains the book X of Diogenes Laertius and a series of quotes from Greek and Latin literature on Epicurus. The only document that it does not include are the Vatican Sentences (discovered in 1888).

Philosophy

Epicureism consists of three parts: physics, which studies nature from an atomistic worldview; the canonical or criteria, which deals with epistemology and the criteria by which we come to distinguish the true from the false; and ethics, which develops ethical hedonism, which is the culmination of the system and to which the first two parts are subordinated. Georg Lukács emphasizes the general universality of Epicurus' philosophy along with other thinkers such as Aristotle, Spinoza, and Hegel when addressing social, ethical, metaphysical, or aesthetic issues "having their origin in social problems". Karl Marx first proposed in his doctoral thesis that "the doctrine Epicurean ethics is so closely linked to Epicurean physics and epistemology that it can be said to determine them. However, the three branches of Epicurean philosophy (canonical, physical, and ethical) are quite separable and it is possible to accept some doctrines and deny other teachings. This is best appreciated in the attempts to make it compatible with Christian teachings after the recovery of Epicurean thought during the Modern Age.

While for Plato and Aristotle philosophy is a continuous search for truth and the knowledge of this brings rectitude in human conduct, for Epicurus philosophy has as its goal the healing of the human soul. The Epicurean philosophy was not theoretical, but rather practical, which sought above all to provide the necessary calm for a happy and pleasant life in which fears of fate, the gods or death would be definitively eliminated. For this, the Epicurean philosophy was based on an empiricist theory of knowledge, on an atomistic physics inspired by the doctrines of Leucippus and Democritus, and on a hedonistic ethics.

"Let no one, for a young man, be late in Philosopher, nor, for an old man, be weary of Philosopher. For no one is too soon or too late in the health of the soul. The one who says that the time of philosophism has not yet come or that it has already passed is like the one who says that the time of happiness is not coming or that it is no longer present"

κοπτε ος τιος.ν ελλιτω φιλοσοσοσοφείν, μος γε γρων πρχων κοπικοπιεειειεεειν. ο.τε γρος κρος σγρος σγρος σγρος σιρος σγροιρος σγρος σγ.ιειειειειειειειειειειείοιεικος σγ.ιειειειειειειειειειειειειειειεικοικοπικοιειειειειειειειειειειειεικος σικοιειειειειειει δ. λγων.μειραρελειικικικικικειν πειν εινα.ι.ει.ειειειειεικεικικικειικιειεινανικειειειενικειεικειειειειειειειενιενιειειειεικειεικεικειειειειειειεικειειειειειεικειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειεινικεικεικεικεικειειειειειειειεικειειειειειειειεικειειειειειει

Epicuro, Letter to Meneceo (122)

Epicurus argued that pleasure was the main good of life. Epicurus therefore advocated living in such a way as to obtain as much pleasure as possible during life, but doing so in moderation to avoid suffering incurred by excess pleasure in such pleasure. Emphasis was placed on pleasures of the mind rather than physical pleasures. Unnecessary artificially produced desires were to be suppressed. Since political life could give rise to desires that could disturbing virtue and peace of mind, such as the lust for power or the desire for fame, participation in politics was discouraged. In addition, Epicurus tried to eliminate the fear of the gods and death, considering these two fears as the main causes of conflict in life. Death is nothing to us and pain is usually light, and if it is strong, it is usually brief. Epicurus actively recommended against passionate love, and sometimes believed that it was better to avoid marriage child. He viewed recreational sex as a natural, but not necessary, desire that should generally be avoided.

«[a young man] I understand that your natural disposition is too inclined to sexual passion. Follow your inclination as you wish, provided you do not violate the laws, disturb well established customs, hurt your neighbors, hurt your body or waste your possessions. It is impossible that you are not affected by one or more of these conditions, for a man never gets any of the sexual passion well, and is fortunate if he does not receive harm. »

Vatican judgments, 51.

The Epicurean understanding of justice was intrinsically self-interested. Justice was considered good because it was considered beneficial to both parties. Individuals would not act unfairly even if the act initially went unnoticed due to the possibility of being caught and punished. Both punishment and fear of punishment would disturb a person and prevent him from being happy. Epicurus placed great emphasis on developing friendships as the foundation of a fulfilling life.

"Epicuro says that of all the means that philosophy provides to live happy none is greater than friendship, none more fruitful, none more pleasant. »

Cicero. In the end, I, 65.

While the pursuit of pleasure formed the focal point of philosophy, it was largely directed at "static pleasures" to minimize pain, anxiety and suffering. In fact, Epicurus referred to life as a "bitter gift."

"And for this reason we say that pleasure is the beginning and end of ventful living. And since it is the first and connatural good, therefore we do not choose all pleasure, but sometimes we omit many pleasures, when from these a greater discomfort arises for us; and we consider many pains preferable to pleasures, when a greater pleasure is followed for us after having long been subjected to such pains. All pleasure, therefore, by having an appropriate nature [to ours], is a good; although not all pleasure must be chosen; so also all pain is a bad, but not all [dolor] must be forever avoided by nature. »

ενγνενιανειεν γ.γ.εικεν πνγ.ειεν καειειειειειαιειειαειειειαεικαρεεισμσμιμειεικεικικικεικεικεικικεικικεικεικικεικεικεικικεικικικεικεικεικικικεικεικικεικικικεικεικικικικικικικικεικικεικεικικεικεικικεικεικικικεικικικεικικικεικικικεικεικικικικικεικικεικεικικε κνος πνος ενος ος ονος ενος ενος ος ενος ος ονος ος ος ενος ος ονονο ονος ονονος ονονος δονονος ος ονος ονος ονονονονονονονονονονονονονονο ο ονονονονονονονονονονοοοονονονοο ονονοοοοοοοοοοο ο οοοοο ονονοο ο ονοοοοοοοοο ονοοο οοοοοοο οοοοονοοοοοοοοοοοοοοοοο π.σα ο.ν.δον. δον. διειν ειν ον ον ογον ον, ο. π. π.σα μθντοι α.ρετοι· καεερ κα. κα. καειειεικιεικεικειειενικεικεικειειειειεικεικεικεικειειειεικεικειειειειεν πικειεν πικειεν πιειειεικεικεν πεικειειεικεν πικεν πεν πιειεικεικειειειειειεικειειειεικειεν πικε

Epicuro, Letter to Meneceo (128-129).

Epicureanism does not deny the existence of the gods; rather it denies its participation in the world. According to Epicureanism, the gods do not interfere with human lives or the rest of the universe in any way. Some scholars say that Epicureanism believes that the gods exist outside of the mind as material objects (the realist position), while others they claim that the gods only exist in our minds as ideals (the idealist position).

Epicureans reject immortality. He believes in the soul, but suggests that the soul is mortal and material, just like the body. Epicurus rejected any possibility of an afterlife, continuing to maintain that death is not to be feared: "Death is nothing to us; for what dissolves has no sensation, and what lacks sensation is nothing to us". From this doctrine arose the Epicurean epitaph: Non fui, fui, non sum, non curo ("It wasn't; I; I'm not; I don't care"), which is inscribed on the tombstones of his followers and seen on many ancient tombstones from the Roman Empire. This quote is often used today at humanist funerals.

According to Adolfo Sánchez Vázquez, «the epicurean achieves good, withdrawn from social life, without falling into fear of the supernatural, finding in himself, or surrounded by a small circle of friends, peace of mind and self-sufficiency”.^{[citation required]}

Physics

The main purpose of the study of nature in Epicureanism is to replace our unstable and worrisome beliefs, such as religious superstitions, with stable and calm beliefs. Happiness consists in knowing the origin of the phenomena that we contemplate in the sky. Epicurus admits basing his natural philosophy on the atomistic theory of Democritus. Like him, Epicurus was a materialist who taught that the only things that exist are atoms and a vacuum. There is a vacuum anywhere there are no atoms. Epicurus and his followers believed that atoms and a vacuum are infinite. and that, therefore, the universe has no limits. The Epicurean physical doctrine can be summarized in these ten points:

1. Nothing is born of what is not (nothing is born of nothing).
2. Nothing dissolves in what is not.
3. Everything has always been the way it is now and it will always stay.
4. Everything is composed of body and vacuum.
5. The bodies are of two classes: atoms and compounds of atoms (the aggregates).
6. All is infinite.
7. Atoms are infinite in number and the void is infinite in extension.
8. Identical atoms are infinite in number, but their forms are indefinite in number, not infinite.
9. The movement of atoms is incessant.
10. Atoms have only three properties in common with sensitive things: form, volume and weight.

Epicurus learned the Democritean doctrine from Nausifanes, an atomist philosopher who was a disciple of Democritus and Pyrrho. Later Epicurus directed harsh criticism and insults against them. He said that Nausifanes "had this more than any other a sophistic boast, as if he gave birth through the mouth, similar to most slaves" and called Democritus as "Lerocritus", this is blind or blind. Epicurean physics is the addition of a deviation suffered by atoms when colliding with them in their fall.

Atoms and emptiness

"The nature of all existing things is the bodies and the void. »

Epicuro. Of natureBook I.

Democrit bust of the Villa de los Papiros in Herculano. "Democrite physical theory was adopted and revised by Epicuro, who made it the cornerstone of its natural philosophy."

Epicurus wrote in his Letter to Herodotus (not the historian) "that nothing comes from non-being", indicating that all events therefore have causes, regardless of whether those causes are known or unknown. In the same way, he also writes that nothing ever passes into nothing, because "if what disappears corrupts towards non-being, all [real] things would have already been destroyed.", since there is nothing in which to dissolve." Therefore, he affirms: "The totality of things (to pan) was always as it is at the present time and will continue to be the same because there is no nothing in which it can change, insofar as there is nothing outside the whole that can interfere and effect change." For the universe to persist, what it is ultimately composed of must not be able to be changed or, Otherwise, the universe would essentially destroy itself. As a result, Epicurus postulated, like Democritus before him, that every body is composed of parts. extremely tiny cells of matter called "atoms" (ἄτομος; atoms), "indivisible and immutable" bodies that only possess the qualities of shape, size, and weight. The number of shapes of atoms are "incalculable", but not "infinite".

Epicurus accepted the first two principles of Parmenides because they are approved by the senses. For Epicurus and his followers, the existence of atoms was a matter of empirical observation. Epicurus's devoted follower, the Roman poet Lucretius, cites numerous examples such as the specks of dust visible by sunlight, the gradual wear of rings by use, the statues by kisses, the stones by drops of water and the roads to be traveled in Of the nature of the things as evidence for the existence of tiny, imperceptible particles. Atoms were considered not to change because Epicureans believed that the world was ordered and that changes must have specific and consistent sources. For example: a species of plant only grows from a seed of the same species. So, things that are true must necessarily have causes (See: Principle of sufficient reason).

Epicureans assert that atoms cannot be divided into smaller parts, and Epicureans offered multiple arguments to support this position. They argue that "if there were not, on the other hand, what we call emptiness, space, and intangible nature, bodies would have nowhere to be or through which to move", but evidently we perceive bodies to move. Epicureans argue that because the void, as its own authentic "ontological substantiality", is necessary for matter to be move. Anything consisting of both emptiness and matter can be broken down, whereas if something contains no emptiness then there is no way to separate it because no part of the substance could be broken down into a smaller subsection of the substance. Lucretius cites the porosity of the rocks, the digestion of food, the sap given off by the trees and the sound that passes through walls as a demonstration of the vacuum in physical bodies. Unlike Leucippus and Democritus, Epicurus recognized that to affirm the existence of the vacuum requires deny that it is a "not being".

The atoms thus solve the problem of Parmedean change because "every quality changes but the atoms change nothing, since in truth something solid and indissoluble must remain after the dissolutions of the compounds". Epicurus also taught that the The motion of atoms is constant, eternal, and without beginning or end. He held that there are two types of motion: the motion of atoms and the motion of visible objects. Both types of motion are real and not illusory. Democritus had described atoms as not only eternally in motion, but also eternally flying through space, colliding, merging, and separating from each other as necessary. Different things in the world are the result of different combinations of atoms. The human being, in the same way, is nothing but a compound of atoms. Even the soul is made up of a special type of atoms, more subtle than those that make up the body, but this does not mean that the soul does not stop being material. Because of this, when the body dies, the soul dies with it.

Minimal parts

Ancient atomists had introduced the hypothesis of the vacuum and atoms as a response to the paradoxes raised by Parmenides and Zeno about the impossibility of movement. The Eleatians held that any movement would require a void, which is nothing, but nothing cannot exist. Parmenides' position was: «It is said that there is a void; therefore, the void is not a nothing; therefore, it is not the vacuum". For Democritus the vacuum exists between the atoms as a non-being that allows the plurality of differentiated particles and the space in which they move. Similarly, Zeno proposed that it is impossible to travel any distance that is infinitely divisible. This raises the question of whether atoms can be divided into parts, as evidenced by their variations in shape.

In contrast to the Stoics and Aristotle, who maintained that nature was an infinitely divisible continuum without a vacuum, Epicurus rejects the potentiality of an infinite that can never be actualized and responds to Aristotle's objections against Democritus by holding the existence of parts & #34;minimum" (elachiston) that the atoms occupy, thus rejecting the infinite indivisibility of space, just as Diodorus Cronus did. The minima in the atom "do not constitute component parts of it, but only units of measurement (καταμετρήματα) contemplated only through reason". The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy says: "This conception resembles the way in which points exist on a line, according to Aristotle, since they also do not touch and cannot exist independently. But Epicurean minima differ from points in that they are physical extensions and therefore have extension." Since space is discrete, Epicurus also held that motion is discontinuous. Following Aristotle, Epicurus said that an atom it does not move gradually in a minimal interval, rather it can only be said to "has moved"; at one instant they are located at one position, and at the next discrete instant at another position.

Similarly to Aristotelian physics, time is a measure of motion. It does not exist "by itself apart from the movement of things or their restorative immobility", unlike space, whose existence is independent of matter and movement. Because matter as "pure relationship with itself" it is eternal and independent, "it is freed from all relativity and variability" and it follows that time "is excluded from the concept of the atom, the world of essence". Time itself exists as an accident (symptōmata) of our imagination (phantasia). Accidents are the change of substance in general. This pure form of the world of appearances is time. It was not until the Modern Age that the concepts of space and time were combined. For example, Pierre Gassendi followed Epicurean physics but defended the reality of time independent of change and movement.

"We should not try to understand time how we do it with the other things that we seek in an object referring to the images that we have in the mind but should take it from the direct experience [...] This does not need demonstration, but only reflection on the fact that we associate time with the days and nights and with the parts of these, [...] with movement and rest, recognizing time as a particular accident of these things by virtue of what we call it time. »

Epicuro, Letter to Herodoto (72-73)

This "quantum" of space and movement had consequences that led Epicureanism to paradoxes with geometry, since the Pythagoreans demonstrated that there are units of incommensurable magnitudes such as that the diagonal of a square and the side of the same square do not have a proportion expressible by whole numbers, something impossible if there are minimal parts. Because of this, the Epicureans rejected mathematics. However, the epicurean Zeno of Sidon was a connoisseur and contributor in the field of mathematics. He criticized Euclid's axioms of Elements , even going so far as to suggest that he was "the first person to consider the possibility of a non-Euclidean geometry".

Clinemen theory

The clinamen is the name in which Lucrecio gave the deviation suffered by the atoms by colliding with them. This concept served the Greek philosopher as a guarantee of freedom.

Another consequence of least parts is the existence of a universal speed limit. Epicureans postulated a type of inertia principle, holding that atoms always move with the same speed through a vacuum without resistance regardless of their weight or weight. shape. As they move, atoms can bump into and bounce off each other, eventually joining together to form a larger object. Epicurus explained the magnetic attraction of certain bodies as magnets on account of the fact that "the atoms that flow from stone are related in form to those that flow from iron, and thus easily intertwine with each other; so, after colliding with each of the two compact masses (the stone and the iron) they then bounce in the middle and thus become entangled with each other, dragging the iron behind them". The atoms vibrate each other with the others as they maintain the general shape of the compound.

Epicurus' view of the motion of atoms also differs from Democritus'. Rather than speak of a movement toward the center of a given cosmos, possibly created by a cosmic vortex, Simplicio says that Epicurus, like Strato, endowed atoms with an innate natural tendency to move "downward."; relative to the rest of the world by their own weight when not prevented by other atoms colliding with each other in an infinite universe with no global orientation. This allowed against Aristotelian objection to democritical physics to give a type of arché or final cause to the very movement of atoms.

In response to another objection from Aristotle that atoms could never come together if they moved only vertically, this natural downward motion can deviate randomly from its usual downward path. Philodemus, Cicero, Lucretius, Plutarch, Aetius, Diogenes of Aenoanda, Galen, Plotinus, and Saint Augustine conveyed that the Epicureans postulated the idea of a "deviation" atomic (Greek: παρέγκλισις parenklisis; Latin: clinamen), one of his best-known original ideas. According to this idea, atoms, as they travel through space, they may deviate slightly from the course they would normally be expected to follow.

The only fragment in Greek on this central notion is from the inscription of Diogenes of Aenoanda:

"Do you not know that in reality there is a free circulation of atoms, that Democritus failed to discover but Epicuro brought into the light a gyre, as he demonstrates through phenomena?"

Diogenes de Enoanda (fr. 54)

Cyril Bailey believed that atomic drift would have been expounded in the Letter to Herodotus but that fragment would be lost. The best-known reference is found in On the Nature of Things of Lucretius:

For if they did not decline the principles, in the void, parallel, they fell like drops of the rain; if they did not have their reencuentro and shock, nothing would raise nature.

Quod nisi declinare solerent, omnia deorsum imbris uti guttae caderent per inane profundum nec foret offensus natus nec pest creata principiis; ita nihil umquam natura creasset.

Lucrecio, Rerum natura. II. 220-225

This deflection is what allowed the creation of the universe, for as more and more atoms deflected and collided with each other, objects could take shape as the atoms came together. By way of modus tollens, the atoms would never have interacted with each other without the yaw and would simply have continued moving downward at the same speed.

Such collisions and deviations can be situated as the archē of the cosmos."Given the infinite past history of the universe, Epicurus did not need to propose a first collision" as the first cause of eternal motion in the universe. Epicurus's reason for introducing this doctrine was because he wanted to preserve the concepts of free will and ethical responsibility while still maintaining the deterministic physical model of atomism. Lucretius describes it by saying: &# 34;It is this slight deviation from the primary bodies, at indeterminate times and places, that prevents the mind as such from experiencing an internal compulsion to do everything it does and being forced to endure and suffer like a chained captive" It is not entirely clear how the twisting of atoms works and a number of alternative interpretations of how it works have been put forward. For Karl Marx, twisting represents "the soul of the atom, the concept of abstract individuality".

The clinamen theory aroused the attention of philosophers such as Karl Marx, Simone de Beauvoir, Gilles Deleuze, Jacques Lacan, Jacques Derrida or Michel Serres. Nobel laureate in chemistry Ilya Prigogine appreciated the defense of indeterminism in the Epicurean clinamen, being a precursor of Werner Heisenberg's indeterminacy principle.

Free will

The Epicureans also rejected the principle of bivalence as applying to all statements. They argued that future statements such as "Philoctetes will be hurt" would necessarily be true or false, and therefore the future would be completely determined. If there is "motion without cause", then not all statements are true or false for Epicurus. He also rejected the law of the excluded middle, for if the disjunction "p or not-p" is necessarily as a whole is true, one of its disjunctions would have to be fatalistically true. Leibniz noted that the clinamen would reject the principle of sufficient reason and non-contradiction. Epicurus "would have to answer that there are "truth value gaps", so what the indeterminacy would be a third "truth value". (See: Trivalent Logic and Plurivalent Logic)

Epicurus was the first to affirm human freedom as a result of fundamental indeterminism in the movement of atoms to safeguard freedom, both physical and ethical. This has led some philosophers to think that, for Epicurus, free will (libera voluntas) was caused directly by chance. If it weren't for the turn, humans would be subject to an endless chain of cause and effect. This was a point that Epicureans often used to criticize Democritus. In his On the Nature of Things, Lucretius seems to suggest this in the best-known passage on Epicurus' position. and argues that voluntary movement comes from the animal soul (animus) located in the chest.

However, in his Letter to Meneceus, Epicurus follows Aristotle and clearly identifies three possible causes of events in the world:

«Well, to whom do you consider superior [...]? That he mocks what some introduces as despota of all, destiny, saying that some things arise from necessity, others of chance, and others of ourselves, for he sees that necessity is irresponsible, that chance is unstable, while what depends on us has no other master, and that naturally accompanies him or his opposite”

πνπνικρετοναντοναν, δ [...] γ [...] γ. γ. γ. γ. γ. γ. γ. γ. γ. γ. γ.ειειεεεεειειειειειειειειειειειεικ.γ.γ.ετικετικετικειει.τικειειειετικεικεικεικετικειει.τι.τικει.τικειειεικετικεικεικεικετικειεικεικει.εικεικεικεικεικεικειεικεικετικεικεικετικετικεικετιειεικει.ει.ειε

Epicuro, Letter to Meneceo (133-134)

Aristotle said that some things "depend on us" (ef'hemin) and Epicurus agreed. In Of Nature, XXV., Epicurus states that atomic composition possesses "germs" or "seeds" (spermata) from birth both wisdom and vices that influence our behavior but we also have an “anticipation (see prolepsis in the Canonical) of our causal responsibility” which naturally joins praise and blame. The "swerve" of atoms served to defeat determinism and make room for autonomous agency. Epicureans have been ridiculed for the idea of "free will" in random atomic motions, but a number of interpretations have been proposed in this regard.

Susanne Bobzien argues that for Epicurus, actions are completely determined by the mental disposition of the agent and moral responsibility arises if the person is not coerced and is causally responsible for the action. Lisa Wendlandt and Dirk Baltzly argue that Epicurus was an indeterminist and but "because of the practical and therapeutic nature of Epicurean philosophy, it is not necessary for Epicurus to provide an explanation of how deviance serves freedom of choice". On the other hand, Tim O" 39;Keefe has argued that Epicurus was not a libertarian, but rather a compatibilist and reductionist; Julia Annas argues that Epicurus was not a reductionist and Nick Gutiérrez argues that the Epicureans "maintained a primitive "emergentist" of mental properties". Alternatively, it has been proposed that the Epicureans were concerned not with freedom but with control over our character development. There have also been attempts to argue that the connection between human morality and chance was not conceived by Epicurus.

Natural phenomena

Epicures strongly favored mechanistic naturalistic explanations over teleological and theological explanations of natural and celestial phenomena. Epicurus spent a detailed analysis in the Letter to Pythocles offering four different possible natural explanations for thunder, six different possible natural explanations for lightning, three for snow, three for comets, two for rainbows, two for earthquakes, etc. Although all of these explanations are now known to be false, they were an important step in the history of science, because Epicurus was trying to explain natural phenomena using natural explanations, rather than resorting to inventing elaborate stories about gods and mythical heroes. His goal was to prove the falsity of the connection between the heavenly world and that of the humans.

"First it is to be known that the end in the knowledge of the meteors (already called related, already absolute) is none other than to rid ourselves of disturbances, and with greater security and satisfaction, as in other things. [...] But these have many causes from where they come from, and a consonous substance preaching to the senses. Nor should we speak of nature according to new axioms and laws, but establish them on phenomena; for our life has no need for private or own reasons, no less vain glory, but to spend it quietly."

Epicuro, Letter to Pytocles (85-86)

Cosmology

Lucrecio holds the infinity of the universe using the example of Arquitas where a man extends his arm in the theoretical boundary of the universe.

Unlike their contemporaries, the Epicureans believed that the universe without ends (akron) or limits (pears) with an unlimited number of atoms and an infinite amount of empty. Epicurus said that if the universe were finite it would have an end that can be seen from the other side, thus having no limit. Lucretius makes this point based on the example of Archytas with the thought experiment of a man throwing a javelin into the world. theoretical limit of a finite universe. It is claimed that the javelin must pass through the edge of the universe, in which case it is not really a limit, or it must be blocked by something to prevent it from continuing on its way, but, if that happens, then the object that blocks it must be outside the confines of the universe. Also, if it had a limit, everything would already have fallen to the bottom of the universe.

The Epicureans also held that there is an infinite supply of atoms, albeit only a finite number of types of atoms, as well as an infinite amount of vacuum. As a result of this belief, the Epicureans believed that there must also be infinitely many worlds (cosmoi). Some of these worlds could be very different from our own, others quite similar, and all the worlds were separated from each other by vast areas of emptiness (metakosmia). The Scottish Enlightenment philosopher, David Hume called the possibility that the world could have arisen by the random combination of atoms out of chaos naturally "the Epicurean hypothesis".

According to Epicurean cosmology, the Earth was not the center of the cosmos and Epicurus is believed to have held the shape of the Earth flat as Democritus did as a logical consequence of his atomic theory. Lucretius questioned the spherical Earth upon finding the idea of animals walking upside down at the antipodes is absurd. Epicureans also held that heavenly bodies were as small as they were observed, unlike Democritus.

Canonical

Fragment of inscription of Diogenes in the ruins of Enoanda.

Epicurus wrote a treatise titled the Κανών, or Canon, in which he explained his methods of inquiry and theory of knowledge. Cicero describes the Epicurean Canon as "that rule that has come down from heaven to teach us everything and by which all judgments about reality must be guided". This work has not survived nor has any other text that fully and clearly explains Epicurean epistemology, leaving only citations and mentions of several authors to be able to reconstruct it. Epicurus establishes knowledge in the study of nature, a knowledge that he considers useful and produces a high degree of enjoyment.

«So, Natural Philosophy provides courage to face the fear of death; resolution to resist the terrors of religion; mental peace, because it eliminates all ignorance of the mysteries of nature; self-control, because it explains the nature of desires and distinguishes its different classes»

Cicero. In the end, I, 19.

As a result of its rivalry against the teachings of Pyrrho's skepticism and Plato's idealistic rationalism, Epicurean philosophy employs an empiricist epistemology, according to which: "not only would reason collapse entirely, but life itself would perish without delay, if we did not dare to trust the senses...» Then, the wise man trusts his senses, "he will establish dogmas, and he will not doubt".

"[T]oda causal reason of the senses, and the truth of these is confirmed by the certainty of the sensations. Indeed, both the seeing and hearing, and the feeling of pain, remain in us. So uncertain things are noticed by the signs of evidence. Even the operations of the understanding (epinoiai) they emanate all the senses, already by incidence, already by analogy, already by likeness and already by complication; also contributing something the raciocinio. »

Diogenes Laercio, Lives, opinions and sentences of the most illustrious philosophers. X, Epicuro, 23.

The canonical is not the study of logic or dialectic, but the criteria that helps to distinguish what is true and false. The wise man "solves the most important and difficult things with his own judgment and reflection&# 34;. Epicurus' teaching system was organized with a procedure of general principles, which were assimilated summaries containing his doctrine. The Canon could have been based on The Tripod, an epistemological treatise by Nausifanes, although Epicurus claimed that he learned nothing from him.

The Epicureans held that the purpose of all knowledge is to help humans achieve ataraxia. He taught that knowledge is learned through experience rather than innate and that acceptance of the fundamental truth of the things a person perceives is essential to a person's moral and spiritual health. Epicurus regarded the instincts as the highest authority in matters of morality and held that if a person feels that an action is right or wrong is a much more convincing guide to determining whether that act is truly right or wrong than abstract maxims, strict codified rules of ethics, or even reason itself.

Psychology

In philosophy of mind, Epicurus can be considered one of the first philosophers to propose a theory of the identity of mind. According to the philosopher of Samos, the soul and the body are together from birth itself, but, at the moment of death, the atoms separate and both are destroyed. It is important to clarify that Epicurus was not a dualist, that is, he did not postulate the body-soul opposition; The soul, like the body, is material and is made up of atoms. Epicurus's understanding of the mind-body relationship can be understood as entirely physicalist, although Lisa Wendlandt and Dirk Baltzly argue that Epicurus 'had a non-reductionist view of mental states which is in the spirit of anomalous monism of [Donald] Davidson". Epicurus' main point is to establish that the soul is corporeal and is affected by the body (as by drunkenness and disease) and vice versa (as by the physiological effects of emotional states)..

"And after these things, it is necessary to repair, referring to the sensations and passions – since the conviction will be more accurate– in which the soul is a subtlely particulate body, designed by the whole organism and very similar to a breath that has a mixture of heat, in part similar to this [heat], in part similar to that [soplo], although there is a part that has reached a great [great] variation. And all this is evidenced by the powers of the soul, its passions, mobility, reflections and [how many things] deprived of which we rejoice. [...] So let those who say that the soul is uncorporeal, for nothing could do or suffer if it were such [as they say]."

Epicuro, Letter to Herodoto (63-67)

The soul is made up of atoms and basically has three faculties: the rational part (logos) that generates emotions located in the chest, the place where Greek philosophers such as Plato and Aristotle believed they reside the emotions of emotions; another irrational, dedicated to sensitivity, which is found in the entire human body; and finally the imagination (or mens according to Lucretius), which "fantastic representations" (see: Theory of knowledge). Polystratus the Epicurean argues that animals share broad general characteristics with us, but lack inferential abilities, "do not share reasoning (logismos )" or neither like ours".

Theory of perception

In the Letter to Herodotus he wrote that "it is also necessary to consider that, when external things burst [into us], we see and reflect on their forms". Epicureans believed that the senses also depended on the atoms. Each object continually emitted particles of itself that then interacted with the observer. The senses pick up what Democritus and Epicurus call images (Greek: τύποι "týpoi") or simulacra (from the Greek: εἴδωλα "eídola "; and Latin: simulacra ), "representations" that the bodies uninterruptedly detach. These eidola are formed by very subtle atoms and are transmitted as effluvia that penetrate the sensory organ and produce the impression. All sensations, such as sight, smell or hearing, were based on these particles in their different media, whether sound or smells, which explains the different sensations of the same object. Depending on the shape of the atoms, pleasant or unpleasant sensations are produced.

For the atomist Democritus, the only things that exist are just atoms and a vacuum. Secondary properties of objects, such as color or flavor, arise only "by convention" of atoms, which led to a contradictory skepticism of the senses. Similarly, the Cyrenaics thought that we can know with certainty our immediate sensory experiences (for example, the sweet sensation of honey) but we cannot know anything about them. the nature of the objects that cause these sensations. However, the Epicureans recognized the veracity of the senses and the subsistence of the secondary properties of matter born from the arrangement of the atoms. Although the atoms that are emitted do not they have the qualities that the senses perceive, the way in which they are emitted cause the observer to experience those sensations. For example, the bodies themselves do not have colors, but instead emit particles in such a way that they make the viewer experience color. Therefore, color does not exist in darkness. Although these properties are accidental to bodies, they are real in bodies (for example: hemlock has the property of being poisonous) but not of atoms. The atoms that make up are not perceived individually, but rather as a continuous sensation due to the speed with which they move. This reasoning also applies to the existence of composite bodies themselves.

Theory of Knowledge

The canon of Epicuro is part of the veracity of the senses as the source of knowledge, as well as its criterion of certainty. Ciclope marble head Polifemos of the centuryIIa. C.

Epicureans bitterly opposed Pyrrhonists and academic skeptics, who not only questioned the ability to have accurate knowledge about the world. Against Platonism, Epicurus emphasized natural philosophy rather than speculation by reason without evidence empirical. Epicurus proposed the following three criteria of truth (or iudicia rerum as Cicero calls them) that form the method of knowledge:

• The sensations (aisthêsis), they are the seat of all knowledge and originate when the atoms that emanate the bodies reach our senses (♪). Every reason, Epicuro says, "it depends on the senses, and the truth (aletheia) of these is confirmed by the certainty of sensations». Nature requires men to rely on their senses to live. «If a person fights against the clear evidence of his senses (enargeia), you will never be able to share a genuine tranquility." Thus, it is stated that sensitive perceptions are true and do not deceive us, since they correspond to the immediate atomic reality. "To say that a sensation is false would be tantamount to saying that nothing can be perceived." All sense “is irrational (alogoi) and incapable of memory, since it does not occur spontaneously {within the mind} nor can it add or subtract information from its external cause». Each sensory impression must be given the same credibility. Sensory appearances may differ, but they never contradict. As Aristotle said, "The sense of sight is not deceived in terms of colour, nor in the ear as to sound." The clashes between atoms can bring mixed sensations to our senses, resulting in distorted image composition.

• The anticipation (prolepsis), are sensations that engrave in memory and serve to predict future sensations. This mental capacity allows to abstract "general concepts" (the term coined by Epicuro according to Cicero) from particular beings, similar to Platonic ideas or universal aristotelians. For example, the idea of a horse. These concepts arise in the mind of a person through the sensory contribution over time and are kept in the mind, which has a finite limit for its material structure, thus preventing the infinite conservation of these memories. Epicureans were precursors of nominalism. Diogenes Laercio details this process like this:

"For all thoughts (epinoiai) have their origin in the sensation through the coincidence (periptosis) and analogy (analogy) and similarity (homoiotes) and the combination (sunthesis), the reason (logisms) also provides something. »

Κασι πι πι π. π. π. εσισισιμομοιμομομομοναεεινεειασι κατιειεεεεεεεεισισισμομοιν καναν καν καν καιειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειει

Diogenes Laercio, Lives, opinions and sentences of the most illustrious philosophers. X, Epicuro, 32.

• The conditions (pathê): are feelings of pleasure and pain (hêdonê, algêdôn). They are analogous to the sensations in which they are a means of perception, but they perceive our internal state in opposition to external things. If a disturbing feeling (tarakhê) the atomic movement of our body causes sadness, if cesa produces pleasure. According to Diogenes Laercio, feelings are how we determine our actions. If something is pleasant, we look for that thing, and if something is painful, we avoid it. The importance of the conditions lies in the direct influence they have on the ethical theory of pleasure (hedone).

Diogenes Laertius, mentions a fourth criterion called "fantastic accessions of the mind" or “projection (or apprehension) of thought” (phantastikai epibolai tês dianoias, also mentioned in the Letter to Herodotus as epibolai tês dianoias). This last criterion was probably added by later Epicureans. This criterion is interpreted as representing images without external impressions. «It is the spirit that tries to understand what is in infinity, outside the walls of the world, to where the intelligence wants to extend its vision and to where the gaze of the spirit flies freely (jactus animi) ». By this intuition it is possible to access the fundamental principles of science by inference or analogy, for example: atoms and gods. Then, the impressions of such things are received directly in our minds, instead of perceiving them through other senses (for example, a centaur that is the combination of the image of a man and that of a horse) as they occur in "ghosts of maniacs" and in dreams. These projections are also real in the sense that they correspond to an idola.

Research method

In Epicurean epistemology, the senses are the only reliable source of information and knowledge about the world, since what they derive from are in correspondence with those same things, it being necessary that what produces pleasure be pleasant and vice versa (see: aletheia). (logismos). Due to this, Epicureanism falls into a dogmatism of which they do not focus on the study of rhetorical discourse and logical reasoning.

"Therefore, says Epicuro, there is no need for reasoning or discussion to understand why pleasure should be sought and pain rejected. He thinks that this is perceived by the senses, like the fact that the fire warms, the snow is white and the honey is sweet, all of which does not need to prove it with subtle reasoning, because it is enough simply to warn it. »

Cicero. In the end, I, 30.

Epicurus conceded that any and all statements that are not directly contrary to human perception have a chance of being true. Anything contrary to a person's experience can be dismissed as false. that, for example, centaurs do not exist because such a combination is physically impossible.

To explain epistemology, David Sedley used as an analogy a photo camera, which "can't lie" about the light patterns that reach the lens. It is the resulting photograph remains to be interpreted by the observer.

Like Aristotle, Epicureans explain that error arises when judgments (hypolepsis) or opinions (to prosdoxazomenon) are formed about things that can be verified and be corrected through more sensory input. The observer makes the mistake of assuming that the image they receive correctly represents the object and has not been distorted in some way. If someone were to see a tower from a distance that appears to be round and when approaching the tower he sees that it is actually square, the person would realize that his initial judgment was wrong, and he can correct his mistake. The prolepseis "sometimes exceeds the guarantee of the perceptual information provided and causes us to form false opinions". (enargeia) of the perceptible by closer examination. The enargeia is characterized as the sensation of an object that has not been modified by judgments or opinions and is a clear and direct perception of that object.

Epicurus proposed two rules for research. The first rule of his is the requirement of & # 34;first concepts & # 34; which "require no demonstration" so that we can infer both what is expected and what is not apparent; and its second is "the requirement of observation carried out in accordance with one's perceptions and feelings". The concepts serve as a reference for the objects to which they are judged and observation is necessary as evidence of what is not manifest. Faced with the problem of induction carried out by the Stoics, the Epicureans anticipated John Stuart Mill by maintaining that all A conclusion drawn from general inferences, such as "all men are mortal," is valid as long as nothing stands in the way of its conclusion. This principle holds even beyond our experience, upholding a "uniformity between qualities and facts". They further differentiated between complete and incomplete induction.

In On Signs Philodemus of Gadara exposed the Epicurean theory of inductive reasoning as a process of analogy. According to Philodemus, only through the positive “attestation” (epimarturēsis) or “negative attestation” (ouk epimarturēsis) of the senses, in an empiricist way, the truth or falsity of phenomena is demonstrated. observables. Only from analogies are broader and imperceptible truths (adēla) known, such as atoms, the void, celestial phenomena and the gods. These phenomena can only be proven by inferences (sēmeiōseis) consistent with empirical observations.

Epicures hold that events in the natural world can have "multiple explanations" (pleonachos tropes) which are equally likely, as long as they do not contradict our senses, and reject those who propose a single explanation. Epicurus' principle of multiple explanations "leads to the principle of indifference which assumes that if there is no evidence in favor of a particular hypothesis, then we should weight them all as equally likely'. This attitude is shown in the multiple atomic explanations of natural phenomena. Lucretius develops this point with the following simile:

For some phenomena it is not enough to give an explanation; rather precise are many, to find one among them true; therefore, if you see from afar the body of a man lying on the ground, it is necessary to say all the causes of mortality so that you know the cause of the death of that man; because you cannot decide whether he has died of death given to true iron or cold, or by disease or with poison; in general we know that he has died by a mascise;

Sunt aliquot quoque res quarum unam dicere causam non satis est, verum pluris, unde una tamen sit; corpus ut exanimum siquod procul ipse iacere conspicias hominis, fit ut omnis dicere causa conveniat leti, quodicatur ut illius una; nam [ne]que e interum virro nec frigore item in multis hoc rebus dicere habemus.

Lucrecio, Rerum natura. VI. 1030-1045

Marx explains that once the myth is removed from the heavens every possible explanation is sufficient and Epicurus's task is to "trace its cause and banish the source of disturbance and dread".

Philosophy of language

In the philosophy of language, Epicurus was the first to formulate a theory about the origin of language as a natural product of the sonorous expression of emotions that was structured by social convention. The philosopher Rousseau defended this thesis.

"From which [results that] at the beginning the names were not generated by convention, but that the natures of men, suffering from particular passions and apprehending particular images according to each [one of the] peoples, issued in a particular way the air arranged by each of the passions and images, so that the difference [of languages] could exist according to the places [seat] of the peoples. And then the particularities [of each language] were established in common according to each people so that the indications would be less ambiguous for [the speakers] among themselves and indicated more concisely. »

Epicuro, Letter to Herodoto (75-76)

For Epicurus there is a relationship between knowledge and language. He follows a gradual evolutionary naturalistic theory of language. This is not a human invention, but a product of man's environment and his physical constitution. The meaning of a word is, therefore, a "natural" meaning, but this meaning is covered by the uses that men give it. To return to the first meaning is to return to preconceived ideas, and thus to resort to the source of human (as opposed to dialectical) knowledge.

"So, whatever, after the name is known to him, is already manifest; and we certainly would not inquire what we inquired if we did not know him before, v.gr., when we say what is far out there, is it horse or ox? For this it is necessary to have early knowledge of the shape of the horse and the ox, for we would not name one thing without having learned in advance his figure. Then the anticipations are evident. »

Diogenes Laercio, Lives, opinions and sentences of the most illustrious philosophers. X, Epicuro, 24.

Epicurus has been considered a precursor of nominalism given his materialism and empiricism. Only atoms and the void are truly real. Collections of individual atoms are what ultimately form the rest of the entities whose names are attributed by social convention. Both the Epicureans and the Stoics rejected the existence of Platonic ideas, appealing to an a posteriori generalization mental capacity. the word that is related to anticipation (prolepsis), the mind summons these anticipations in the person's thoughts. It is through our preconceived ideas (reminiscence) that we can make judgments about the things that we perceive. Preconceived ideas were also used by Epicureans to avoid the paradox proposed by Plato in the Meno about learning. Plato argues that learning requires that we already have knowledge of what we are learning, otherwise we would not be able to recognize when we had successfully learned the information. Preconceived ideas, the Epicureans argue, provide people with the prior knowledge required for learning.

Ethics

Recorded of Aristype, founder of the cirenaica school. Like cirenaics, epicureism bases its ethics on a set of hedonistic values, but Epicuro stated that the pleasures of the soul are greater than those of the body. He referred to them as “enemies of Greece”.

Ethics is the culmination of the Epicurean philosophical system: leading those who study and practice it to happiness (eudaimonia). Like Socrates, Epicurus considered moral issues to be more important than physical issues in philosophy. Since happiness is the goal of every human being, philosophy interests everyone, regardless of age, sex, social status, etc. "Vain is the word of that philosopher who does not remedy any ailment of man." In the Vatican Judgments it is added:

"We don't have to simulate philosophies, but we really do. Because we don't need to look healthy, but to be really healthy. »

Vatican judgments, 54.

In Lucretius there is a variation around the vision of ethics, which should be subject to physical and scientific explanation to find the true cause of things.

Like Aristippus and the Cyrenaics, Epicureanism bases its ethics on a set of hedonistic values. Epicurus affirmed that everything that produces pleasure (hedoné) is good, since pleasure, according to him, is the beginning and the end of a happy life. In the most basic sense, Epicureans see pleasure as the highest good (telos) or the purpose of life. Good is inconceivable without the pleasures of the senses. As evidence of this, Epicureans say that nature seems to command us to avoid pain, noting that all animals try to avoid pain as much as possible. But for pleasure to be real it must be moderate, controlled and rational. The Epicureans had a very specific understanding of what was the greatest pleasure, and the focus of their ethics was on avoiding pain rather than seeking pleasure. Although pleasure is good and pain is bad, one must manage pleasure and pain intelligently, because on some occasions one must reject pleasures that are followed by greater sufferings and accept pains when they are followed by greater pleasures.

"And since it is the first and connatural good, therefore we do not choose all pleasure, but sometimes we omit many pleasures, when from these a greater discomfort arises for us; and we consider many pains preferable to pleasures, when a greater pleasure is followed for us after having been subjected long to such pains. All pleasure, therefore, by having an appropriate nature [to ours], is a good; although not all pleasure must be chosen; so also all pain is a bad, but not all [dolor] must be forever avoided by nature"

ενταν γικ.ν γιεν, γνικενικ.ν γν.γνμεν, καεν, καεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικεικε κνος πνος ενος ος ονος ενος ενος ος ενος ος ονος ος ος ενος ος ονονο ονος ονονος ονονος δονονος ος ονος ονος ονονονονονονονονονονονονονονο ο ονονονονονονονονονονοοοονονονοο ονονοοοοοοοοοοο ο οοοοο ονονοο ο ονοοοοοοοοο ονοοο οοοοοοο οοοοονοοοοοοοοοοοοοοοοο π.σα ο.ν.δον. δον. διειν ειν ον ον ογον ον, ο. π. π.σα μθντοι α.ρετοι· καεερ κα. κα. καειειεικιεικεικειειενικεικεικειειειειεικεικεικεικειειειεικεικειειειειεν πικειεν πικειεν πιειειεικεικεν πεικειειεικεν πικεν πεν πιειεικεικειειειειειεικειειειεικειεν πικε

Epicuro, Letter to Meneceo (129)

Unlike the Cyrenaics, who focused on the search for bodily pleasure and whom Epicurus himself referred to as "enemies of Greece", the Epicureans understood pleasure as the tranquility of the soul (ataraxia ) based on the absence of physical pain or aponia, and on autonomy or autarky. For this, Epicurus made a careful classification of pleasures and desires which some had to be pursued or avoided. Epicurus came very close to scientific ethics. In moral philosophy, this approach led to a subjective theory of rational choice.

Classification of pleasures

Although Epicureanism reduced pleasure to sensibility, Epicureans made a broad classification of these. Epicurus differentiated two broad categories: pleasures of the body and pleasures of the soul or mind:

• Pleasures of the body: These pleasures involve sensations of the body, such as eating a delicious meal or being in a state of pain-free comfort, and exist only in the present. One can only experience the pleasures of the body at the time, which means they only exist when a person is experiencing them.
• Pleasures of the soul: these pleasures involve mental processes and states; feelings of joy (khara), the lack of fear and pleasant memories are all examples of pleasures of the mind.

Unlike the Cyrenaics, for whom "the delights of the body are far superior to those of the mind, and the afflictions of the body are far inferior to those of the mind", for the Epicureans they consider the pleasures of the soul greater than those of the soul. body, not because there is a moral superiority, but because the former are enduring. They exist in the present, but also in the past and the future, since the memory of a past pleasant experience or the expectation of a potentially pleasant future can be pleasant experiences, in addition to the fact that the pleasures of the soul can eliminate or attenuate the pains of the soul. body. In turn, the pains of the soul are worse than those of the body. However, Epicurus does not manage to avoid or eradicate bodily pleasures like the Stoics, but to find a balance between both pleasures.

Epicurus also distinguished between variable pleasures in motion or kinetics (in kinései) and stable pleasures at rest or catastematics (katastematikén):

• Cynetic pleasure: The kinetic pleasure describes the physical or mental pleasures that involve action or change. Eating delicious foods, as well as satisfying desires and eliminating pain, which in itself is considered a pleasant act, are all examples of kinetic pleasure in the physical sense. According to Epicuro, feelings of joy would be an example of mental kinetic pleasure.
• Catastematic pleasure: describes the pleasure one feels in a painless state. Like kinetic pleasures, catastematic pleasures can also be physical, such as the state of not being thirsty, or mental, as the liberation of a state of fear. Full corporeal catathematic pleasure is called apony, and full mental catastematic pleasure is called Ataraxia.

From this understanding, the Epicureans concluded that the greatest pleasure a person could achieve was the complete elimination of all pain, both physical and mental. The ultimate goal then of Epicurean ethics was to achieve a state of aponia and ataraxia. To do this, an epicure had to control their desires, because desire itself was seen as painful. Not just control of one's own desires will produce aponia, since rarely will one suffer from not being physically satisfied, but controlling one's own desires will also help to produce ataraxia because one would not be anxious to feel uncomfortable since one would have so few desires anyway. Consequently, unlike the Cyrenaics, Epicurus does not admit the existence of a middle state between pain and pleasure, because "when we are free from pain, the very liberation and absence of all pain brings us joy". Nietzsche compares this est I adore with "the happiness of a look before which the sea of existence has calmed down and that never tires of contemplating that surface".

Wish Classification

Epicurus says that "every pleasure is a good to the extent that it has nature as a companion." He thanked nature "for having made the necessary things easy to acquire, and those that are difficult to acquire, unnecessary". Due to this, Epicurus distinguished three types of desires or appetites: some natural (physikaì mónon), some of which may be necessary (anankaîai) and others unnecessary; and the vain (kenaí, neither natural nor necessary).

• Natural: these desires are limited and innately present in all human beings; it is part of human nature to have them.
  • RequirementsThey are “those who, if not satisfied, do not cry in pain” and are easy to dissipate. They are necessary for at least three reasons: necessary for happiness, necessary to be free from bodily discomfort and necessary for life. The clothes would belong to the first two categories, while something like food would belong to the third.
  • Not required: are “those who only vary pleasure, without suppressing pain”, such as sexual desire and desire for beauty. These desires are innate to humans, but they do not need to be satisfied for their happiness or survival. Wanting to eat delicious food when you are hungry is an example of a natural but not necessary desire. The main problem with these desires is that they fail to substantially increase the happiness of a person and at the same time require an effort to obtain them and are desired by people because of false beliefs that they are really necessary. This is why they must be avoided.
• Vanos: these desires are not innate to humans and are not necessary for happiness or health; in fact, they are also unlimited and can never be fulfilled. The desires of wealth or fame would fall within this category, and such desires must be avoided because ultimately they will only cause discomfort.

Vain pleasures are not good, because in the long run they will bring pain and are not only harder to get, but also easier to lose. If one follows only the natural and necessary desires, then, according to Epicurus, one could achieve aponia and ataraxia and thus the highest form of happiness. He concludes as fundamental pleasures the absence of disturbance in the soul (ataraxia) and the absence of physical pain (aponia), since these are stable pleasures; instead, "joy (khára) and fruition (euphrosíne) are seen according to the movement in their activity (katà kínesin energeía)". For this reason, Epicurus recommended an austere life (because "nothing is enough for whom enough is little" being "joyful poverty is a thing of great honor") and private, surrounded by friends and of moderate pleasures with the minimum of possible pains and tranquility in the soul, it offers happiness.

"Loving money in violation of justice is ungodly, and without violating it, shameful (aiskhron) because it is indecorous (aprepés) save with unclean greed, even if it is with justice. »

Epicuro, Vatican judgments, XLIII

Wealth

The Epicureans did not advocate poverty like the Cynics, but rather self-sufficiency (autarky), "not accumulating foreign goods, but cutting back on one's own needs". Epicurus further admitted the need for possessions, for there is "a small superiority in wealth over poverty." Consequently, the wise man "will worry about his property and future".

This also, said by Epicuro: "If you live according to nature, you will never be poor; if according to opinion, you will never be rich." Exiguo is the desire of nature, immense that of opinion.

Seneca, Letters to LucilioXVI, 7.

Philodemus of Gadara argued that wealth and poverty are neither good nor bad in themselves. Also in About Home Economics he discusses how to acquire and manage money in a way that does not inhibit pleasure. The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy says that this recommendation to make money with philosophy "is the first appearance of this idea in Greek literature".

Love and friendship

Epicurus had a dubious opinion about the pleasure of sex and marriage, it is disputed whether he rejected or accepted it in certain cases. Epicurus's opinion about marriage is believed to be positive and he considered sexual relations as natural but unnecessary. Diogenes Laertius says that in the opinion of the Epicureans that the wise should not love, nor that there are gods that influence love and that carnal congress has never been beneficial, and hopefully it has not been harmful. Epicureanism is adaptable to circumstances, as is the Epicurean approach to politics. The same approaches will not always work in protecting against 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 be involved in politics. Ultimately, it is up to the Epicureans to analyze their circumstances and take the measures that correspond to the situation. Philodemus of Gadara stated that the Epicureans did not respect marital fidelity. Cicero summarizes that for the Epicureans these pleasures "are desirable, if they do harm, but they are never useful."

Lucretius had a hostile view of romantic love as "a very dangerous disease, above all, for the mental balance of the human being". He recommended fleeing from those idealized images of love, which have negative effects on human beings.

The sweetness of Venus does not give up the one who flees from love: on the contrary, it takes its fruits only without disgust. They always enjoy the rational souls of a pure and safe delight, better than the unfortunate lovers, who at the same time enjoy fluttering on the spell of their uncertain love [...] but Venus mitigates the pains enjoyed by love gently, and with soft pleasure the healing sores. For lovers have hope that the same body that has swollen their breast in blind love, can himself extinguish the fire that has moved; but it opposes nature: And it is the only passion of whose goats with barbaric appetite burns the chest; for the hunger and thirst are easily satisfied within distributed drinks and food in the members, and can be glued to certain parts.

Nec Veneris fructu caret is qui vitat amorem, sed potius quae sunt sine poena commoda sumit; nam certe purest sanis magis inde voluptas quam miseris; etenim potiundi tempore in ipso fluctuat incertis erroribus ardor amantum nec constat quid primum oculis quod fieri contra totum natura repugnat; unaque res haec est, cuius quam plurima habemus, tam magis ardescit dira cuppedine pectus. nam cibus atque umor membris adsumitur intus; quae quoniam certas possunt obsidere partis, hoc facile expletur laticum frugumque coupido.

Lucrecio, Rerum natura. IV. 1455-1485

Instead, he held that friendships (philia) are essential for a happy life. For Bernard Frischer, the notion of the Epicurean school as an association of friends is consistent with Epicurean theory.

"As many things acquire wisdom for the happiness of all life, the greatest is the possession of friendship. Even in the midst of the courtship of goods, it must be certain that friendship gives security. »

Maximum capital, XXIX

Epicurus abandons his egotistical hedonism and advocates altruism towards friends. Epicurean friendship is a natural relationship based on mutual love and indispensable for personal identity, which reveals the epicurean friend as another self.

If rightly reproof in that letter Epicuro to those who say that the wise are enough to themselves and therefore do not need friends [...] The sage, although it is sufficient to itself, still wants to have friends [...] for the purpose that Epicuro said in that same letter "to have one who sits next to us if one gets sick, so that he can help us if they are thrown into the irons or in the indigence." [...]

Seneca, Letters to Lucilio, IX, 1-18.

The theme of friendship is a paradoxical theme in Epicurus. Like Aristotle, Epicurus considers that the wise man is self-sufficient, that self-sufficiency and autarky are a great good. The wise man must maintain his independence, and yet Epicurus considers that friendship is not a means for wise men. simple but a good in itself. On the other hand, Cicero explains that the value of Epicurean friendship arises only from the pleasure it produces. The academic position regarding Epicurean friendship is the following middle ground:

"All friendship must be sought by itself, but it has its origin in usefulness. »

Epicuro, Vatican judgments, 23

Animals and vegetarianism

In the fragments of his works he recommended a diet based on bread, water, wine and cheese, as he himself did.

Epicures have a certain tendency to establish continuities between animals and humans. Epicurus criticized Aristotelian anthropocentrism, although he did not reject the primacy of humans over animals, and affirmed that all living beings are endowed with sentience and seek pleasure like animals. men who try to avoid pain. Unlike the Platonists, their respect for animal life is based on sensory grounds and not purely religious or philosophical. In fragments of his works, he recommended a diet of bread, water, wine, and cheese, as he himself did, most likely a vegetarian. According to the testimony of the Platonic Porphyry, Epicurus urged his disciples to respect animals and a diet without meat.

Moral virtues

Epicuro also spoke of the importance of having a virtue to choose from and esteem in terms of the pleasures it can produce, since it is preferable to "be unfortunate reasoning well than lucky reasoning badly". All the virtues (simplicity, moderation, temperance, joy, etc.) tend to pleasure.

"Beauty and virtue and such things must be honored, if they give pleasure; but if they give no pleasure, we must say goodbye to them. »

Epicuro. About the end of life

The most important virtue is prudence (phrónesis) because it allows us to discern pleasures. Epicurus said that unfortunate prudence is better than fortunate foolishness.

The principle of all this and the greatest good is prudence. Therefore, more precious even that philosophy turns out to be prudence, of which all other virtues are born, for she teaches us that it is not possible to live pleasantly without [live] judicious, honest and just, without [live] pleasantly. In fact, virtues are connatural with pleasant living and pleasant living is inseparable from them.

Epicuro, Letter to Meneceo (132)

The Tetradrug

Metrodoro Mosaic of the CenturyII - IIId. C. at the Rolin Museum, France. The Vatican Judgment is inscribed, 14:

We were born once and there can be no second birth. For all eternity we will never be. But you, although you are not a lord of the morning, postpone your happiness. We waste our lives by delaying things, and each of us dies without having really lived.

The Tetradrug, or "The Cure in Four Parts", is a basic guide by Philodemus of Gadara on how to live the happiest life possible, based on the first four Main Doctrines of Epicurus. This poetic doctrine was handed down by an anonymous Epicurean who summed up Epicurus's philosophy of happiness in four simple lines:

Spanish translation: Do not fear the gods,

Don't worry about death;

What is good is easy to get,

What's terrible is easy to endure.

Transcription of Daddy in Greek: ,φοβον θεός,

ποπεον θον ανατος,

κα‐block Δγαθ,ν μ,ν ε,κττον,

τ δ δειν εεκαρτθ

The Tetrapharmaco as it is in Herculano's papyrus in the Villa de los Papiros.

The fight against the fears that grip the human being is a fundamental part of the Epicurean philosophy and must be counteracted with the Epicurean canon and physics; and learn the rational management of pleasures and pains. Most of the suffering that human beings experience is caused by irrational fears such as death or punishment in the afterlife. Diogenes of Enoanda, for his part, ignores the Four Remedies and in an inscription he commissioned in the Enoanda square to promote philosophy, he argues that the three roots of all evils are fear of the gods, fear of death, and endless desires or the inability to understand the natural limits of desires.

Fear of the gods

In his Letter to Menoeceus, Epicurus explains that people seek wealth and power because of these fears, believing that having more money, prestige, or political influence will save them from death. However, he maintains that death is the end of existence, that terrifying stories of punishment in the afterlife are ridiculous superstitions, and that death is therefore nothing to fear. Although Epicurus was not an atheist, I understood that the gods were beings too far from us humans, and they didn't care about our vicissitudes, so there was no point in fearing them. On the contrary, the gods should be a model of virtue and excellence to imitate, since according to the philosopher they live in mutual harmony. Epicurus, argued Marx, was the first to discover the alienation embedded through religion in the human conception of nature.

Fear of death

As for the fear of death, he considered it nonsense, since upon death, the atoms of the soul separate and as "all good and all evil is in the sensation" and "death is deprivation of sensation", then "death is nothing in relation to us", since while we live it has not arrived and when it arrived we are no longer there. Like the atoms they do not disintegrate, since they are eternal, for this reason death is not a concern for epicureans. Then, fearing death while alive is absurd because "that whose presence does not trouble us, when waiting for it makes us suffer in vain". Sextus Empiricus stressed that:

"Death is nothing to us" was probably said by Sophron, but Epicuro proved it; and it is not a matter of claiming one thing, but of proving what is a wonder. And, in fact, Epicuro did not say that 'death is nothing to us' because there is no difference between living or not living; life is preferable with much because the good belongs to the world of perception. But where there is no perception, there is neither good nor evil. The fact that the bodies do not feel is something that the poet knows along with the rest of the creation.”

θο εικικιεικιεικικιεικιεικιεικιειεικιεικιεικιειεικιειειεικειειειειειειειειεικειειειεικιειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειεικεικεικικειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειεικεικεικικεικεικικειεικικικειεικειειειειεικικειειειπιεικειειειειεικιπιειειει τ. μ.ν γにρ φναισθισθισθείν τιεκρικρι σων σων ο.χ ποιτ.ς μόνος οος ος ος οδεν σλλεν καικαείος σκεικικικιικικικεν σκικικικικικικικικεν σικικικικικεν σικικικικικικικικικικικικικικικικικικικεν κεν κεν κεν κεν κικικεν σικικικεν κεν κικικικικεν κικικικεν κικικι

Empirical sex, Against teachersI. 284-285.

The Roman poet Lucretius offered another argument against the fear of death, the so-called "argument from symmetry," where he argues that fearing non-existence for an infinite future after death is like fear of suffering a non-existence due to an infinite past before being born, but since there is no point in fearing not having been born, therefore, we should not fear death either.

If the soul is of immortal nature, If at birth in the body is insinuated, how can we not remember the past life, nor do we have of the old facts any rest? If the soul suffered such a great move that it forgot the past facts, I believe that this state looks like death; it confesses, therefore, that the soul of another time died, and that of the present has become formed again.

[... ]

See also the infinite centuries that have preceded our birth and nothing is for our life. Nature in them offers us as a mirror of the future time. Finally, after our death, is there anything here of horrible and angry? Isn't it safer than a deep sleep?

natura animai constat et in corpus nascentibus insinuatur, cur super ante actam aetatem meminisse nequimus [interisse et quae nunc est nunc esse creatam] nec vestigia gestarum rerum ulla tenemus? nam si tanto operest animi mutata potestas, omnis ut a quactarum

[... ]

Respect item quam nil ad nos ante acta vetustas temporis aeterni fuerit, quam nascimur ante. hoc igitur speculum nobis natura futuri temporis exponit post mortem denique nostram. numquid ibi horribile apparet, num sad videtur quicquam, non omni somno securius exstat?

Lucrecio, Rerum natura. III. 625-679 / 973-978

Similarly, Pliny the Elder writes in Natural History:

It is much easier and safer for everyone to trust in themselves, and for us, to derive our idea of future tranquility from our experience of it before our birth.

At quanto facilius certiusque sibi quemque credere, specimen securitatis antegenitali sumere experiment!

Plinio el Viejo, Natural History7, 55.

In On Death Philodemus of Gadara criticized non-legitimate fears related to death, such as dying without children or without glory, since they are irrelevant when one no longer exists. However, he recognizes situations that he urges to avoid when dying, such as leaving loved ones in a vulnerable position or dying young without knowing philosophy. David Hume defended the mortality of the soul and also used an argument from symmetry even assuming the immortality of the soul:

“... the incorruptible must also be ingenerable. The soul, therefore, if it was immortal, existed before our birth: and if the first existence does not concern us, neither does the second. "

“...what is incorruptible must also be ingenerable. The soul, therefore, if immortal, existed before our birth: And if the former existence nowise concerned us, neither will the latter. ”

From these doctrines arose the Epicurean epitaph: Non fui, fui, non sum, non curo ("It was not; I; I am not; I don't care"), which he is inscribed on the tombstones of his followers and seen on many ancient Roman tombstones. This quote is often used today at humanist funerals.

Fear of pain

There is also no sense in fearing the future, since: “neither completely not ours, so that we do not expect it with total certainty as if it had to be, nor despair of it as if it did not have to be at all”. Regarding the suffering of pain or the fear of suffering it, the Epicurean philosophy maintains, as previously shown, that natural pleasures keep us away from pain and are easy to obtain. Finally, what causes pain can be removed by focusing on pleasure.

"The pain in the flesh is not continually delayed, but the sharpest one endures the minimum time, and the one who only bestows the pleasantness of the flesh does not persist many days. And very durable diseases offer the flesh a greater amount of pleasure than pain. »

ο ου ου ον ον ον ον ον ον ον ον ον ον ον ον ον ον ον ον ον ον ον ον ον ον ον ον ονονον ον ον ον ον ον ον ονον ον ον ον ον ον ον ον ον ονον ον ον ον ον ον ον ον ονον ον ον ον ον ον ονονονον ον ον ον ον ον ον ον ονον ον ον ον ον ου ον ον ον ον ονονον ον ονο

Maximum capital, IV

Even if the pain is excessive, then it will lead to death, but, as stated above, it is not something to be feared and, as Philodemus explained, atoms are painlessly dislodged through the body at death. It is true for Epicurus that there are times when it is necessary to suffer pain in order to receive future pleasure, but it would be foolish to see life only as a vein of pain. Faced with pessimistic or anti-natalist positions, Epicurus stressed that it is better to stay alive, since the wise man is not afraid of not living and it is foolish to say that "it is good not to have been born, or, having been born, to cross the doors of heaven as soon as possible." Hades" Because if it were so, Epicurus wonders: "Well, if he is convinced of what he says, how is it that he does not abandon life?"

Epicuro disapproves both those who desire death and those who fear it, and says: "It is ridiculous to run to death by the ted of life, when it is the way to live the one that makes the death run." He also says (Epicuro) elsewhere "How ridiculous is it to desire death when the fear of death has made you anxious life?"

Seneca. Letters to LucilioXXIV.

Regarding suicide, Epicurus follows a position similar to the Stoic. He says that "there is no need to live in need." but this possibility is not desirable, since the sage, even in the most adverse conditions can affirm the pleasure of a lifetime Epicurus followed these principles until the end of his life. Diogenes Laertius collects a letter that Epicurus wrote on his deathbed to Idomeo that says: "Finding ourselves in the happy and last day of life, and even dying, we write to you like this: so much is the pain that strangury and dysentery cause us, which seems to be no longer vehement. However, he compensates in some way with the memory of our inventions and reasoning. »

"Absolutely small one for whom many are reasonable grounds for abandoning life. »

πικρ.ς παντάπασιν. πολλαίαίαι ε.λογοι εκογοι εος ίος ίοιγ.ν βίου.

Epicuro, Vatican judgments, XXXVIII

Politics

The epicurean vision of politics is the product of the emergence of Hellenism, which "brought with it a new sensation of living together in an unlimited space, where relations were much more lax than in the concrete framework of the city native" but "the citizen feeling of belonging to a self-sufficient and free community” disappeared. Epicureanism arose during the transition of the IV< century to the III century a. C., after the decline of the Greek polis and the wars between the Hellenic kings to succeed Alexander the Great. Then, "the wise man can no longer count on the security that the polis granted him in the past." In the midst of political and religious chaos, Hellenistic philosophy changes political course to individual happiness by taking as reference the laws of Nature, of the Cosmos subordinated to the practical purposes of existence. The wise man is not only the one who knows but "the one who knows how to live." Politics Epicurus explains how the sage can separate himself from the polis by creating good political relations with the State so that it will leave him alone.

Epicurean Counterculture

Manuscript of Rerum natura of Lucrecio (1483).

In contrast to the Stoic, Platonic, and Aristotelian philosophical traditions, Epicureans showed little interest in participating in the politics of the day, as doing so led to problems. Instead, they advocated the abandonment of the polis for a community of friends. Epicurus argued that thus politics and philosophy are irreconcilable, and that the philosopher must reject the political in favor of the political. contemplative life. He also discourages political participation, as doing so leads to disturbance and status seeking. This principle is summed up in the phrase láthê biosas (λάθε βιώσας), which means "live in the dark", "live life without attracting attention", that is, he lives without pursuing glory or wealth or power, but anonymously, enjoying little things like the company of friends. Plutarch elaborated on this theme in his essay Ei kalôs eírêtai tò láthê biôsas (in Latin: An rectum dictum sit latenter esse viendum) in his work Moralia; cf. Flavius Philostratus,Vita Apollonii XIII. 28.12.

"We must free ourselves from prison from the usual and political affairs. »

Epicuro, Vatican judgments, 58

However, Epicureans are not strictly apolitical. Epicurus recognizes the benefits of living in a society, whose laws are just if they are useful to promote happiness, but those that are not useful are not (Capital Maxims, XXXIII - XL). The Epicureans recognized that some political association could be seen as beneficial, for example, in maintaining security and acquiring wealth.

"When security has already been achieved to a certain extent by means of a solid position and abundance of resources, there is the most clear and pure, the security that comes from the tranquillity and detachedness of the crowd. »

Τικς χεείας τος τνος δος δονος δονιος δονειειει ειεειεεεεεεισεεεεειστικ. κα.πορειεειεικικιειεεεειειεεεειειεειειειειεεεειειεειεειεεεεειεειειειεεεειεεεειεειεεεεεεεεεεεεεεειεεεεεεεεειειειεειειεεεεειεεεεεεεεειειειειειειειειεειειειεειειειεειειειειεειειειεεεικε

Maximum capital, XIV

While this escape or freedom could be achieved by political means, Epicurus insisted that participation in politics would not free one from fear, and he advised against leading a political life. Seneca summarizes the Epicurean position thus: "A wise man will not approach public affairs unless something intervenes" (Non accedet ad rem publicam sapiens, nisi si quid intervenerit).; nor will he live as a cynic, as he says it & # 34;.

Epicureans make conscious of people's preference for solidarity and personal salvation over vague political utopias. Instead, Epicurus encouraged the formation of a community of friends outside the traditional political state. In the first generations of Epicureans there was an ideal of a "shared life" (contubernium) as "many members of one body." This community of virtuous friends would focus on internal affairs and justice. Some political associations could lead to certain benefits for the individual that would help to maximize pleasure and avoid physical or mental anguish. Regarding the epicurean organization, Georg Lukács makes his point to see how a group mediates theory and practice.

Benjamin Farrington saw Epicurus appear as a radical reformer of Greek society toward his ideal of "friendship and not justice, liberty and not authority, individuality and not universality, sensory experience and not a priori axioms". According to Emilio Lledó, Epicurus understood politics as the expansion of happiness, justice, wisdom, beauty, etc. In the Hedonist Manifesto , Michel Onfray characterized Epicurean politics by a lifestyle of activism and power over our world. He argues that this is no less political than other forms of activism that relate directly to the state.Epicurean thought influenced the thinking of politicians such as Thomas Jefferson, Frances Wright, and Karl Marx.

Origin of civilization

Paideia and parrhesia

Painting of a hether in a cyclic. The Episcopal school accepted its entrance, where they enjoyed the same status within.

The Epicurean teachings went beyond the realm of education in the Greek world or paideía, focusing on a training program for spiritual fulfillment rather than success in public life. in the typical studies of the time of the upper classes such as rhetoric, logic and poetry. Epicurus' anti-dialectical convictions were also anti-elitist.

For Epicureans, all our social relationships are a matter of how we perceive each other, of customs and traditions. No one is inherently of greater value or destined to dominate another. This is because there is no metaphysical basis for the superiority of one type of person, all people are made of the same atomic material and therefore are naturally equal. Even the slaves who were at the service of the teachings at the school. Even so, Philodemus of Gadara considered that it is acceptable to own slaves since it is miserable to cultivate the land oneself. Women enjoyed status in the school, both legitimate wives and Themista; as well as prostitutes (heteras) like Leontion, who traditionally were frequently mistreated. The playwright Menandro, a friend of Epicurus, represented in his work La Rada the way in which heteras were mistreated.

Coexistence among equals would form bonds of friendship that take precedence over any political or social virtue. The community of friends had to exercise parrhesia, an ideal of freedom of expression, correct reasoning and frank dialogue together with a sensible criticism between teachers and students, excluding falsehood, silence or simple flattery.

"We don't need both the help of our friends and the trust of their help in need. »

Epicuro, Vatican judgments, 25.

Justice

Reflection about the rational foundation of justice is a constant in ancient Greek philosophy. Plato, Aristotle and Zeno de Citio believed in the existence of a universal idea of justice (wisdom, prudence, natural law). Epicurus denied these principles and promoted a social contract theory of justice that could therefore be considered neither universal nor virtuous. Epicureanism incorporated a relatively comprehensive account of social contract theory and, in part, attempts to address problems with justice. society described in Plato's Republic. The social contract theory established by Epicureanism is based on mutual agreement, not divine decree.

"Justice was not from the beginning something by itself, but a certain pact about it not to do or suffer harm in the relationships of one another in certain places and occasions. »

πικ.κ.ν τι καθ'.αυτ. δικαιοσικιοσικισικισικ, σλλλ' καν σιεετος και.είος πκος πος δος πος πος πος πικος πος πος πος πος πος πος πος πος πος πος πικεεειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειειε

Maximum capital, XXXIII

"Unrighteousness is not in itself an evil, but by fear of suspicion that it will not go unnoticed to those established as punishers of such acts. »

. φδικαί ο. καθ'.αυτ.ν κακακόν κακόν κλλλλ' κατ. κατ.ν καυτ.ν κακακόν κιν κακακκκκκκκκκκιν κακκκκκκκκκόόιν κιν κιν κιν κκκκικκκκκκκκκκκκκικικικικικκιν κκικκκκικικικικικικικικιν, κικικικικικκικικικικικικικικικιν, κικικικικικικικικικικικικικιν σ κιν σ σ κι

Maximum capital, XXXIV

Epicurus defined justice as an agreement made by people not to hurt each other. The goal of living in a society with laws and punishments is to be protected from harm so that one is free to pursue happiness. Therefore, laws that do not contribute to promoting human happiness are not fair. You need to have a contract to fully enjoy the benefits of living in a well-ordered society, and you need laws and penalties to prevent you from breaking the contract.. The laws that are useful to promote happiness are fair, but those that are not useful are not (Maximum Capitals, XXXIII - XL).

Epicurus also wondered if the wise man would do things prohibited by law knowing that he would not be discovered as in the myth of Gyges. But the wise man values prudence and sees the utility of justice. Due to his limited desires, he has no need to engage in conduct prohibited by law in any case. The greatest fruit of justice is calm, and a man who causes fear cannot be calm. Consequently, the Epicurean attitude towards others follows a principle of solidarity. Epicurus gave his own unique version of the ethics of reciprocity, which differs from other formulations by emphasizing harm minimization and happiness maximization for oneself and others: "It is not only more beautiful, but also more pleasant, to do good than to receive it".

There can be no sweet life if it is not also prudent, honest and just; nor can it be lived with prudence, honesty and justice, without it also being sweetly alive. He, therefore, who does not live with prudence, honesty and justice, cannot live with sweetness.

.π.στιν.δέως φικικαίως, φρονερονεις καικαικαίως, καικαίως, φο,δ. φρονερονις κακαλις καος καος δικαος δικαος δικαος δικαος διος διος δικαος ος δικαος δικαος δικαος δικαος ος δικαος δικος ος ος ος ος ος ος ος ος ος ος ος ος ος ος ος ος ος καος ος ος ος ος.ει δ. το.το μ. το. كπάρχει ה ο. φρονίμωος, καίεις κακαλις καικαεικαεις πρει, ο,κ,στο.το.το.το.τον.τον.τον.τον.τον.τον.τον.τον.τον.τον.τον.τον.τον.τον.τον.τον.τον.τον.τον.τον.τος.τος.τον.τον.τον.τον.τον.τον.τον.τουδικι.τον.

Maximum capital, V

Religion

Relieve of marble of the centuryI or centuryIId. C. that shows the mythical transgressor Ixion being tortured on a fiery wheel with snakes that constantly turned on the Tatar. Epicuro taught that the stories of such punishment in the other life are ridiculous superstitions and that believing in them prevents people from acquiring Ataraxia.

Epicureanism does not deny the existence of the gods; rather it denies its participation in the world. According to Epicureanism, the gods do not interfere with human life or the rest of the universe in any way, so it rejects the idea that terrifying weather events are divine punishment. One of the fears that the Epicurean should be released is the fear related to the actions of the gods.

Epicurean Theology

In Greek mythology there are multiple myths and stories of the Olympic gods physically punishing other gods, titans (see: Prometheus and Atlas) and humans, both in life and after death (see: Tantalus, Sisyphus and Ixion). In addition, their punishments were also manifested with natural phenomena. For example, Poseidon flooded Athens after losing patronage of the city to Athena and Zeus destroyed and sank Odysseus's ship with lightning, killing his entire crew. Plato expressed in the Myth of Er his vision of the underworld, where souls were punished or rewarded for their actions while alive.

Like Xenophanes, Epicurus rejected the conventional Greek view of the gods as anthropomorphic beings who walked the earth like common people, sired illegitimate offspring with mortals, and pursued personal feuds. Instead, he taught that the gods are morally perfect, but separate and immobile beings who live in the remote regions of interstellar space (metakosmia), and do not care at all for the fate of men or interfere in the government of the universe; the sage, therefore, had to honor them.

"For indeed the gods exist: in fact, knowledge about them is evident. But they are not like the estimations of ≤3; for it does not preserve as what of them knows. And it is not ungodly that rejects the gods of the vulgo, but the one that imputes the gods the opinions of the vulgo. For the claims of the vulgo over the gods are not prenotions, but false assumptions. »

Epicuro, Letter to Meneceo (123-124)

In accordance with these teachings, Epicurus strongly rejected the idea that deities were involved in human affairs in any way. "What use does God make of man," says Epicurus, "to do it for himself? ». Similar to the Aristotelian immobile motor that is a "self-contemplating thought" (noeseos noesi), Epicurus held that the gods are so utterly perfect and so remote from the world that they are incapable of hearing prayers or supplications, or of doing practically anything besides contemplating their own perfections. In his Letter to Herodotus, he specifically denies that the gods have any control over natural phenomena, arguing that this would contradict their fundamental nature, which is perfect, because any mundane involvement would tarnish their perfection. He further warned that believing that the gods control natural phenomena would only mislead people into believing the superstitious view that the gods punish humans for wrongdoing, which only instills fear and prevents people from acquiring ataraxia. This critical attitude towards religion aroused hatred of Epicurus already in Antiquity.

"If the gods heard the prayers of men, all men would have perished quickly: for they are always praying for evil against one another. »

Fragments

In his Letter to Menoeceus, the first piece of advice that Epicurus himself gives his student is: «First, believe that a god is an indestructible and blessed animal, according to the general conception of commonly held god, and ascribe to god nothing alien to his indestructibility or repugnant to his bliss". Epicurus and his followers held that they knew the gods exist because "our knowledge of them is a matter of clear and distinct perception", which which means that people can empirically sense their presences. He did not mean that people can see the gods as physical objects, but rather that they can see visions of the gods sent from the remote regions of interstellar space in which they actually reside. The gods are imaginative projections (phantastikás) of thought, which could not be verified by sensations (like atoms). Epicurus said that reason leads us to think that there is a nature that is superior to human He understood that the supreme happiness, which resides in God, does not admit increase; while the human receives increase and decrease of pleasures. With the Epicurean understanding of the gods, it is said in the Letter to Menoeceus that with his teachings one will live "as a god among men". According to George K. Strodach, Epicurus could easily have dispensed with the gods. gods entirely without greatly altering his materialistic worldview, but the gods continue to play an important role in Epicurus' theology as models of moral virtue to be emulated and esteemed.

Epicurus criticized popular religion in both his Letter to Menoecus and his Letter to Herodotus in a sober and moderate tone. Later Epicureans mainly followed the same ideas than Epicurus, believing in the existence of the gods, but emphatically rejecting the idea of divine providence. However, his criticisms of popular religion are often less kind than those of Epicurus himself. The Letter to Pythocles is more contemptuous of popular religion. The devoted follower of Epicurus, the Roman poet Lucretius, passionately attacked popular religion in his philosophical poem On the Nature of Things. In this poem, Lucretius declares that popular religious practices not only fail to inculcate virtue, but rather result in "misdeeds both evil and impious", citing the mythical sacrifice of Iphigenia as an example. Lucretius argues that divine creation and providence are illogical, not because gods do not exist, but because these notions are incompatible with the Epicurean principles of the indestructibility and bliss of the gods. theological.

The way in which the Epicurean gods exist is still disputed. Some scholars say that Epicureanism believes that the gods exist outside of the mind as material objects (the realist position), while others claim that the gods only exist in our minds as ideals (the idealist position). he argues that Epicureans understand the gods to exist as physical, immortal beings made of atoms that reside somewhere in reality. However, the gods are completely separate from the rest of reality; they are not interested in it, play no role in it, and remain completely unperturbed by it. Instead, the gods live in what is called metacosmia, or the space between worlds., the idealist position holds that Epicurus did not actually conceive of the gods as actually existing. Rather, Epicurus is said to have seen the gods simply as idealized forms of the best human life, and the gods are thought to have been emblematic of the life to be aspired to. The debate between these two positions was revived by A. A. Long and David Sedley in their 1987 book, The Hellenistic Philosophers, in which both argued for the idealist position. While no scholarly consensus has yet been reached, the realist position remains the prevailing view at this time.

Epicurus Paradox

Lactancio attributes Epicuro to be the first exponent of the problem of evil in From Ira Dei. Possible portrait of Lactancio in a mural of the centuryIV

Epicureans also offered arguments against the existence of the gods in the way proposed by other belief systems. The Epicureans rejected the anthropocentric teleology of the Stoics, as well as the theodicy against the evil that the universe afflicts human life. Lucretius explains, for example, that inferring the divine creation of bodily organs by means of artifact analogies is invalid "for our members have not been formed for our service". A glass was created to facilitate drinking but the eye was not created to see, because before there were eyes there was no function of seeing (see: Teleological Argument and Watchmaker Analogy). He also said that "affirming, therefore, In addition, that the gods wanted to arrange this extraordinary nature of the world in favor of men... is madness. Indeed, what advantage can our gratitude give to the immortals and blessed, so that they decide to do anything in our favor? ". Finally Lucretius criticized divine providence appealing to the great number of natural evils.

"Nature in no way has been made by divinity looking for the good of men: so gifted is of guilt... What if it's not that the stations bring us the different diseases? How does death go around the children's cribs?"

Lucrecio, Rerum natura (V.198 - V.221)

The so-called Epicurus Paradox, or Problem of Evil, is a famous argument against the existence of an all-powerful and providential God or gods. As recorded by Lactantius in De Ira Dei:

God wants to eliminate bad things and cannot, or can, but does not want, or does not want, or can, or both will and can. If he wants and cannot, then he is weak, and this does not apply to God. If he can but does not want, then he is resentful, which is equally strange to the nature of God. If he does not want or can, he is weak and grim, and therefore he is not a god. If he wants and can, what is the only thing appropriate for a god, where the bad things come from? Or why don't you remove them?

This type of trilemma argument (God is omnipotent, God is good, but evil exists) was one favored by ancient Greek skeptics and this argument may have been wrongly attributed to Epicurus by Lactantius, who, from his Christian perspective, considered Epicurus to be an atheist. According to Reinhold F. Glei, the theodicy argument is established to come from a scholarly source that is not only non-Epicurean, but even anti-Epicurean. The oldest extant version of this trilemma appears in the writings of the Pyrrhonist philosopher Sextus Empiricus.

If [the gods] dispose of all things, there would be nothing wrong or evil in the universe; but [people] say that everything is full of evil. Therefore, it will not be said that the gods provide everything. But if they provide for some things, why do they provide for these and not those? Either they both want and can provide for everyone, or they want to, but they can't, or they can't, or they don't want to, or they can't. If both wanted and could, then they would provide for all; but they do not provide for all, for the reason I have just given; therefore, it is not the case that both will and can provide for all. If they want but cannot, they are weaker than the cause by which they cannot provide for the things they do not provide; but it is contrary to the concept of God that a god is weaker than anything else. If they can provide for all but do not want, they will be considered evil. If they do not want or can, they are both evil and weak, and only the wicked would say this about the gods. The gods, therefore, do not provide the things of the universe. But if they have no providence at all and have no function or effect, we cannot say how they learn that there are gods, since it is not apparent in itself or learned by any effect. That is why it is also inapprehensible that there are gods.

No extant writings of Epicurus contain this argument. However, the vast majority of Epicurus's writings have been lost and it is possible that some form of this argument may have been found in his lost treatise On the Gods, which Diogenes Laertius describes as one of his greatest works. If Epicurus actually made some form of this argument, it would not have been an argument against the existence of deities, but rather an argument against divine providence. Epicurus's extant writings show that he did believe in the existence of deities. Furthermore, religion was such an integral part of daily life in Greece during the early Hellenistic period that it is doubtful that anyone during that period could have been an atheist in the modern sense of the word. Instead, the Greek word & #34;atheist" (ἄθεος átheos), meaning "without a god", was used as an insult, not an attempt to describe a person's beliefs.

Parallels of Epicureanism can be drawn with Jainism and Buddhism, which also emphasize the lack of divine interference and aspects of their atomism. Epicureanism also resembles Buddhism in its temperance, including the belief that great excess leads to great dissatisfaction. Some modern Epicureans have argued that Epicureanism is a type of religious identity, arguing that it meets the "seven dimensions of religion" of Ninian Smart, and that the Epicurean practices of feasting on the 20th century and declaring the oath to follow Epicurus, the insistence in doctrinal adherence and the sanctity of Epicurean friendship make Epicureanism more similar to some non-theistic religions than to other philosophies.

Followers

Hermarco's bronze bust, epicurean disciple.

Lucrecio's bust, author of the epicure poem Rerum naturain the Pincio Gardens in Rome.

Epicureans were very popular from the beginning. Diogenes Laertius records that the number of Epicureans exceeded the populations of entire cities. He remained the most admired and despised philosopher in the Mediterranean for the next five centuries. However, Epicurus was not universally admired and, during his lifetime, was reviled as an ignorant buffoon and self-serving gourmet. He called Plato's disciples "Dionysus' flatterers", Aristotle he called "a loser, because having squandered all his assets, he had to give himself up to the militia, and even to sell medicines". He came to describe the Cyrenaics as “enemies of Greece” and the skeptics as “ignorant” and “illiterate.” The Epicurean doctrines were already established by their founder, with hardly any changes during their history.

Although not of great scientific importance, the followers and supporters of the Epicurean doctrine in Rome were quite numerous. Epicurus's teachings were introduced into medical philosophy and practice by the Epicurean physician Asclepiades of Bithynia, who was the first physician to introduce Greek medicine to Rome. In opposition to humorists, Asclepiades believed that diseases were due to disturbances in the movements of molecules (ὄγκοι). He presented a pleasant and painless treatment to his patients and advocated humane treatment of people with mental disorders. Asclepiades tried natural therapies such as diet and massage instead of medication. The surgeon Galen criticized Asclepiades' medicine, which denied, for example, that it held that "kidneys have been made by nature without any purpose"; and that "Nature does absolutely nothing for the conservation of the animal" demonstrating the homeostatic function of the kidney in De Naturalibus Facultatibus.

The names of Cacio and Amafanio are the first to appear in the history of Roman Epicureanism, in which the names, already better known and important, of C. Casio, Pomponio Attico, Veleyo, and above all of some of the main poets, among which Horace stands out.

Epicureanism had already made its way into Rome in the II century BCE. C.. Among the epicureans of this century, mention should be made of Demetrius de Lacón, of whose works there are some fragments, and Apolodoro, who wrote more than 400 books. The latter is unknown where he was born and was called kepotirannos (tyrant of the garden), perhaps because of his defense of the doctrines against other schools. His disciple Zeno of Sidon, who was Cicero's teacher, also wrote many works. His successor was Phaedrus, also a teacher of Cicero and highly esteemed by him Phaedrus had an epistemological concern and wrote a treatise & # 34; Peri theon & # 34; (On the gods) delving into Epicurean theology. Philodemus of Gadara is also noteworthy, part of whose production appears in the Herculan papyri, which include numerous epicurean works. Patro was the leader of the school until 51 BC. C. Other Epicurean masters, Alkios and Philiscos, were expelled from Rome. In the I century B.C. C. Epicureanism was, in fact, the philosophy in vogue; and the number of Romans who attached themselves to it was, according to Cicero, very large. The epicureans Lucio Manlio Torcuato and Gayo Valerio Triario expressed their admiration for the philosopher to Cicero:

nonne ei maximam gratiam habere mustmus, qui hac exaudita quasi voce naturae sic eam firme graviterque comprehenderit, ut omnes bene sana in viam placatae, tranquillae, stillae, beatae vitae deduceret? Qui quod tibi parum videtur eruditus, ea causa est, quod nullam eruditionem esse duxit, nisi quae beatae vitae disciplinem iuvaret.

Do we not owe our most vivid gratitude to the one who, giving ears, so to speak, to this voice of nature, understood it with so much security and depth that has led all men of a healthy mind to the way of a sordid, quiet, restful and happy life? And the fact that it seems to you unsuccessful is because, in his opinion, there was no other erudition than that which teaches the doctrine of happiness.

Cicero. De finibus I, 71.

The person to spread his doctrines in Latin prose was a certain one. The first Epicurean works of Gaius Amafinius, Rabirius and Cacio were the first philosophical treatises written in Latin. We can also cite Titus Cassius, Pliny the Younger, Titus Pomponius Atticus and in a certain sense the poet Horace, but especially Lucretius (c. 95–55 BC) who, in the poem De rerum natura (On the Nature of Things), left an almost complete and accurate exposition of Epicurean physics. Of Epicurus Lucretius says in his work:

e tenebris tantis tam clarum extollere lumen / qui primus potuisti inlustrans commoda vitae, / te sequor, o Graiae gentis decus, inque tuis nunc / ficta pedum vesigia signis, / non ita certandi cupidus quater amorem / quod te imitari aveo

Oh you, ornament of the Greek people, / That you carried the first one between darkness / The light of truth, adoctrinating / About the interests of life: / I go after you, and stampo now / My footprints on yours; not codicio / Being both your rival, like imitating / Ansio in love. Whether or not it enters into defiance with the swans / The swallow? or the trembling stumbles / Flying fortunately in the race / Just as the vigorous horse? / You are the father and creator of things: / Yes; you give us paternal lessons; / And the way they sand the sheep / In the forest blooming the honeys, / So also we of your books / Drink

Lucrecio, Rerum natura. III. 1-20

Seneca, who quoted and defended it, shows how popular Epicurus was still in the I century AD. C.: Despite his stoicism, he agreed with the precepts of Epicurus —which he considered "fair and upright"— and denounced that his school was "infamous without reason", but he also criticized him by defining Epicureanism as the philosophy "that which removes the citizen from public life and the gods from the world in which we live, and surrenders morality to pleasure". Between the centuries I and century II d. C.., Epicureanism went into decline as it could not compete with Stoicism, which had an ethical system more in line with traditional Roman values.

Epicureism was the one that clashed the most with Christian ideas, since its supporters believed that the soul was mortal, denying in turn the existence of an afterlife and that the divine had any active role in life. human life. Despite this, DeWitt argues that Epicureanism, in many ways, helped pave the way for the spread of Christianity by its strong emphasis on the importance of love and forgiveness; likewise, early Christian depictions of Jesus are often similar to Epicurus' depictions.

Some Romans had a negative view of Epicureanism, considering that its defense of the pursuit of voluptas ("pleasure") was contrary to the Roman ideal of virtus ("masculine virtue"). Therefore, his followers were often stereotyped as weak and effeminate. Prominent critics of his philosophy include authors such as Cicero and the Greek Neoplatonist Plutarch, while the Stoic Seneca was a proponent of his figure. The later skeptical philosopher Sextus Empiricus rejected the teachings of the Epicureans specifically because he regarded them as & #34;dogmaticists" On the other hand, Diogenes Laertius praised Epicurus saying that he "was an excellent man in all respects".

In the time of Marcus Aurelius, the population of Amastris in Bithynia was excommunicated from the use of an oracle by Apollo because the citizens, disciples of Epicurus, ridiculed the prophecy. The skeptical writer Lucian of Samosata once relied on Epicureanism to ridicule superstition, religious practices and belief in the paranormal. He wrote this commendation to Epicurus:

What blessings this book creates for its readers and what peace, tranquility and freedom engenders in them, freeing them as it does from the terrors, apparitions and portents, of vain hopes and extravagant anguish, developing in them intelligence and truth, and truly purifying their understanding, not with torches, albarranous onions and other nonsense, but with direct thought, truth and frankness.

In the II century d. C., Epicureanism experiences a renaissance thanks to Diogenes of Enoanda, who carved the works of Epicurus on a portico wall. Perhaps in the same century Diogenianus should be mentioned, who defended Epicureanism against Neoplatonism and whose polemic fragments against the Stoic Chrysippus can be found in the church historian Eusebius of Caesarea. At this stage the Epicureans participate, developing a certain harmonization of theories, of the characteristic attitude of eclecticism.

Epicurean Women

This section is an excerpt from Episcopal Women.[chuckles]edit]

The wife of Emperor Trajan, Pompeya Plotina, was influenced by epicureism.

Within the epicusal school (the Garden) access to the Epicuro teaching was allowed to marginal people within the society of ancient Greece, such as slaves, women and prostitutes. Aristotle considered that the woman was subject to man, but she was above the slaves. In chapter 12 of his Policy, writes: “The slave is absolutely deprived of will; the woman has it, but subordinated; the child only has it incomplete”. His opinion was more unfavorable than that of his master Plato, who affirms in the Republic that “women are weaker than men” but they have the ability to rule as any man. However, women with philosophical formation such as Aspasia, Hiparquia and Areta were already known at the time.

The philosophy of epicureism was not open to equality. In the same line as cynicism, the school advocated for the equality of women in thinking. Enoanda's Epicurean Diogenes offered to teach women. On the other hand, Bishop Lucrecio excluded women in his audience. In his poem Rerum naturaLucrecio refers to the goddess Venus. In book I it is pleasing and benign, natural and direct erotic energy, and in book IV, urban, degenerate and dangerous. Neither are women dangerous in themselves but the vain and crazy idealizations of men.

Most of the garden women were courtesans. Among the disciples of the Garden are Temista and Leontion, cited by the historians Diogenes Laercio, and several meretrics such as Marmario, Hedía, Erocio, Nicidion and the slave of Fedrión, who Timocrates claimed they lived with Epicuro and Metrodoro, in addition to Boídion, added to the list by Plutarco. According to Plinio el Viejo, the epichorees were sexual companions of the epicureans and philosophers delivered to the Garden. These were both admired and repudiated by their social status Several epicusal women were cited by authors such as Cicero, Diogenes Laercio, Plutarco and Clemente of Alexandria.

Influence

Epicureism is a doctrine of a typically secular and Mediterranean paganism, and in this area it gained a large number of followers who considered it a true doctrine that solved all problems. It was known throughout Greece and Rome, and even reached Asia and Egypt, despite always being under the shadow of the then predominant stoicism.

Followers of Epicurus's teachings in Ancient Rome included the poets Horace, whose famous statement Carpe Diem ("seize the day") illustrates his philosophy and in his Letter to Tibullus (Ep. I 4, 16) confesses he is proud to be Epicuri de grege porcum (“a pig from Epicurus' herd”); and Virgil. His teachings reached as far back as Julius Caesar. The greatest Roman epicurean, Lucretius, who lived during the I century a. C. wrote a On the nature of things (De rerum natura ), which undoubtedly represents the most important text of Epicureanism outside of Epicurus. The basic themes dealt with by Lucretius are the atomic constitution of the universe, a theory on empirical sensation, love passion, a praise of the person and the work of Epicurus, the phenomena of Epicurean astronomy, among others. However, contrary to popular belief, Lucretius does not copy Epicurus verbatim but differs in some aspects —for example, regarding the doctrine of happiness—, since Lucretius elaborates a pessimistic and dramatic theory of life.

His school of thought lasted long for seven centuries after Epicurus's death; however, by the IV century (according to the testimony of Saint Augustine) the Epicurean schools and the writings of Epicurus had completely disappeared they remained scattered throughout the ancient world, or else in some fragments of the works of writers such as Seneca, Plutarch, etc. He was forgotten at the beginning of the Middle Ages, a period in which most of the writings of this Greek philosopher were lost or destroyed due to the rejection that Christianity experienced for his ideas, which could not adapt them to its belief system due to the vision Christian of pain

However, through authors of humanism (such as Cosimo Raimondi) and Renaissance (such as Pierre Gassendi) Epicureanism finally made itself known throughout Europe. Baruch Spinoza and John Locke, for example, recognized the importance (both from a historical point of view and due to a certain influence on the writings themselves) of Epicurus and Lucretius. There are even resonances (or only mentions) of Epicureanism in more contemporary authors such as Jeremy Bentham, John Stuart Mill, Auguste Comte, Friedrich Hegel, Marx and Nietzsche.

Medieval decadence

Epicurus represented in the Nuremberg Chronicle (1493).

In the I centuries and II d. C., Epicureanism went into decline, since it could not compete with Stoicism, which had an ethical system more in line with traditional Roman values. Epicureanism was the one that clashed the most with the Christians, since they believed that the soul was mortal, denied the existence of an afterlife and denied that the divine had any active role in human life. Despite this, DeWitt argues that Epicureanism, in many ways, helped pave the way for the spread of Christianity by its heavy emphasis on the importance of love, forgiveness, and early Christian depictions of Jesus are often similar to depictions of Epicurus. Christianity took from the Epicureans the way of organizing base communities sustained in the personal relationship of brotherhood, very similar to the friendship of the Garden of Athens.

In the Middle Ages, Epicurus was known through Cicero and the polemics of the Church Fathers. Epicurean followers such as Diogenes of Oenoanda carved works of Epicurus on a portico and Diogenianus, whose polemic fragments against Chrysippus are found in the church historian Eusebius of Caesarea. Between the centuries IV and V , Epicurus was mentioned by Palladas. Before Constantine's decree, Epicureans and Christians had much in common: their methods of propaganda were oral to both, they maintained communities through loosely styled epistolary literature and they avoided with the most cultured forms of language.

By the early V century, Epicureanism was virtually extinct. By the 4th century, Emperor Julian the Apostate thanked the gods for not allowing any of Epicurus's books to survive. Augustine of Hippo (AD 354–430) stated: "his ashes are so cold that not a single spark can be emitted from them" While Plato and Aristotle could easily be adapted to a Christian worldview, Epicurus's ideas were not as easy to understand and he was not held in such high esteem. During the High Middle Ages, Epicurus was remembered by scholars as a philosopher, but with He often appeared in popular culture as the doorman of the Garden of Earthly Delights, the "owner of the kitchen, tavern and brothel". He appears in Geoffrey Chaucer's The Canterbury Tales and in Dante's Inferno in the Sixth Circle of Hell, imprisoned in fiery coffins for having believed that the soul dies with the body. until the Renaissance when interest in Epicureanism revived again.

Renaissance Recovery

The French priest and philosopher Pierre Gassendi is responsible for reviving epicureism in modernity as an alternative to aristotelism.

In 1417, Poggio Bracciolini discovered a copy of Lucretius' On the Nature of Things in a monastery near Lake Constance. The discovery of this manuscript was met with immense excitement, as scholars were eager to analyze and study the teachings of the classical philosophers, and this previously forgotten text contained the most complete account of Epicurus's teachings known in Latin. The first scholarly dissertation on the ethics of Epicurus, De voluptate (On Pleasure) by the Italian humanist and Catholic priest Lorenzo Valla, was published in 1431. Valla lent credibility to Epicureanism as a philosophy worth taking in seriously maintaining that the true good is pleasure and not virtue.

The Quattrocento Humanists did not clearly endorse Epicureanism, but scholars such as Francesco Zabarella (1360–1417), Francesco Filelfo (1398–1481), Cristoforo Landino (1424–1498), and Leonardo Bruni (c. 1370–1444) gave Epicureanism a fairer analysis than it had traditionally received and provided a less overtly hostile assessment of Epicurus himself. However, "Epicureanism" it remained a pejorative.

Michel Onfray, a French philosopher whose materialistic and hedonistic thought was influenced by epicureism. According to Onfray, Epicuro can be a powerful remedy against contemporary decadent fever.

In the 16th century, in terms of attitude and direction of thought, the first two great Epicureans were Michel de Montaigne in France and Francesco Guicciardini in Italy. In the 17th century, French Catholic priest and scholar Pierre Gassendi (1592 - 1655) tried to dislodge Aristotelianism from its position of highest dogma by presenting Epicureanism as a better and more rational alternative. In 1647, Gassendi published his book De vita et moribus Epicuri (The Life and Morals of Epicurus), a passionate defense of Epicureanism. Gassendi modified Epicurus's teachings to make them acceptable to a Christian audience. For example, he argued that atoms were not eternal, uncreated, and infinite, but rather held that an extremely large but finite number of atoms were created by God at creation. Thomas Hobbes, a friend of Gassendi, took up the pleasure theory and interpreted it in a sense closer to the Cyrenaic doctrine.

Modern renovation

Epicure's teachings were made respectable in England by the natural philosopher Walter Charleton (1619 - 1707), whose first Epicurean work, The Darkness of Atheism Dispelled by the Light of Nature (1652), modified in Epicureanism as a "new" atomism. The Royal Society, founded in 1662, advanced Epicurean atomism. One of the most prolific proponents of atomism was Robert Boyle. Francisco de Quevedo also defended the Greek philosopher by rehabilitating him as a Christian philosopher. Meanwhile, John Locke (1632 - 1704) adapted Gassendi's modified version of Epicurus's epistemology, which became very influential in English empiricism. Many thinkers with sympathies towards the Enlightenment endorsed Epicureanism as an admirable moral philosophy.

During the 17th and XVIII, the European nation in which Epicureanism was most active was France. Among them are François de La Rochefoucauld, Charles de Saint-Évremonde, Claude-Adrien Helvétius and the Baron de Holbach. Julien de La Mettrie was greatly influenced by Epicureanism. He wrote an exposition of Epicurus's ideas in Système d'Épicure (1750) and referred to his philosophy as an Epicurus-Cartesian system. Charles T. Wolfe describes him as a "medical epicureanism".

The Prussian philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724 - 1804) called Epicurus "the foremost philosopher of sensibility. In addition, for Kant, Epicurus proceeded in his philosophy in a much more consistent way than other sensualist philosophers such as Locke or Aristotle.

US President Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826), one of the Founding Fathers of the United States, declared in 1819: "I, too, am an Epicurean. I believe that the genuine (unimputed) doctrines of Epicurus contain everything rational in the moral philosophy that Greece and Rome have left us". Jefferson was the personal mentor of abolitionist and feminist Frances Wright, the author from the novel Several Days in Athens, which has been called the great epicurean masterpiece in the English language, where Epicurus engages in a fictional dialogue with the stoic Zeno of Citium.

Epicurus' hedonism was the key basis for the ethical doctrines of utilitarianism advocated by Jeremy Bentham (1748 - 1832) and John Stuart Mill (1806 - 1873). As in Epicurus, Mill advocated in The utilitarianism that ethics is an art of living based on the calculation of pleasures, where virtue and happiness are mutually conjugated.

On the other hand, Hegel (1770 - 1831) presented the metaphysical postulates of Epicurean atomism in Lectures on the Philosophy of Universal History unfavorably. Hegel finds Epicureanism "appears as a mindless victim of sensation, overwhelmed with details and incapable of higher orders of thought, concepts (Begriffe) and understanding (das Begreifen), and totally detached from teleology rational".

With such empty words and meaningless conceptions we will no longer stop; we cannot respect the philosophical thoughts of Epicuro, or rather he has no thoughts for us to respect them.

Hegel. Lessons on the Philosophy of Universal HistoryPart One: Greek Philosophy, Section Two, B. Epicuro.

Arthur Schopenhauer (1788 - 1860) understood the absence of pain of Epicurean aponia and ataraxia as a form of liberation from the "will to power". He also shared the Epicurean vision of death, since an evil presupposes existence to be experienced but death is complete non-existence and the absence of consciousness.

The German philosopher Karl Marx (1818 - 1883), whose ideas are the basis of Marxism, was profoundly influenced as a young man by the teachings of Epicurus and his doctoral thesis was a Hegelian dialectical analysis of the differences between natural philosophies of Democritus and Epicurus (see Difference between Democritus's and Epicurus's philosophy of nature). Marx proposed that Epicurean ethics is related to physics and epistemology. Marx viewed Epicurus as a dogmatic empiricist, whose world view is internally consistent and practically applicable. Marx considered Epicurus "the greatest Greek educator", most formidable and combative freethinker against religion. The Hegelian analysis in his doctoral thesis on Epicurus's atomism was of great influence on Marx to "synthesise the conception of alienation in praxis, associated with Hegel, and the conception materialism of the alienation of the human being from nature that is found in Epicurus". materialism of the French Enlightenment as thought by Gueorgui Plekhanov (1856 - 1918).

Although Friedrich Nietzsche (1844 - 1900) was antagonistic to the fathers of Greek philosophy (Plato and Socrates), he considered Epicurus as «one of the greatest men, the inventor in a heroic way- idyllic philosophizing». He pointed out that:

What is Europe, then? The Greek culture grew from tracios and Phoenician elements, helenism, the phylohelenism of the Romans, its World Empire, Christian, Christianity, the bearer of ancient elements, of these elements the scientific germs emerge, of phylohelenism becomes a philosophic body: as far as Europe is believed in science now comes. Romanity was eliminated, deflated Christianity. We have not gone beyond Epicuro; but his authority is infinitely more widespread—hellenization four times more gross and superficial.

Friedrich Nietzsche. Human, too human, 33 (9).

He also said of him:

Epicuro has lived in all periods, and still lives, without the knowledge of those who called and still call themselves epicures, and without reputation among the philosophers. He himself has forgotten his own name, that was the heaviest luggage he ever threw.

Friedrich Nietzsche. The walker and his shadow227.

In the 19th century, the interpretation of pleasure as a psychic principle of action was pioneered by Gustav Theodor, the founder of psychophysics, and developed later in the century by Sigmund Freud on the psychoanalytic level of the unconscious. Scholarly interest in Epicurus and other Hellenistic philosophers increased throughout the late century XX and early XXI century with an unprecedented number of monographs, articles, abstracts and conference papers that have been published on the subject. Texts from the Philodemus of Gadara library at the Villa of the Papyri in Herculaneum, first discovered between 1750 and 1765, are being deciphered, translated and published by scholars who are part of the Philodemus Translation Project, funded by the National Fund for the Humanities of the United States, and part of the Centro per lo Studio dei Papiri Ercolanesi in Naples. Modern philosophers such as Jun Tsuji and Michel Onfray were greatly influenced by Epicurus. Onfray expressed that: "Without Epicurus there would have been no Renaissance, no Montaigne, no libertine thought of the XVIIth century, neither the philosophy of the Enlightenment, nor the French Revolution, nor atheism, nor the philosophies of social liberation. Epicurus can be a powerful remedy against contemporary decadence fever." Philosophers Stephen E. Rosenbaum and Tim Burkhardt defended Epicurean doctrines about death.

The popular appeal of Epicurus among non-academics is difficult to gauge, but appears to be relatively comparable to the appeal of more traditionally popular ancient Greek philosophical subjects such as Stoicism, Aristotle, and Plato. Today there are a number of societies and groups of epicureans in countries like Greece, Italy and Australia.

Modern usages and misconceptions

Bronze statue of a pig in the Villa de los Papiros. Ethical Doctrine Epicurean has often been the object of mockery as a «doctrine worthy of the pigs». Horacio declared to be “a pig of Epicuro’s piara.”

In modern popular usage, an epicure is a connoisseur of the arts of life and the refinements of sensual pleasures; Epicureanism implies a wise love or enjoyment, especially of good food and drink.

Because Epicureanism posits that pleasure is the highest good (telos), it has been commonly misinterpreted since ancient times as a doctrine that advocates partaking in fleeting pleasures such as sexual excess and indulgence. decadent food. This is not the case. Epicurus considered ataraxia (tranquility, absence of fear) and aponia (absence of pain) as the height of happiness. He too regarded prudence as an important virtue and perceived excess and indulgence as contrary to the achievement of ataraxia and aponia .

Epicurus preferred "the good," and "even wisdom and culture," to the "pleasure of the stomach". Though he was also not averse to occasional luxury Later philosophers have separated the ancient Greek philosopher Epicurus from the debauchery, love of eating and drinking that bears his name. The modern academic purification belongs to the Platonic rejection of eating and drinking. Generally, a philosophy centered on food (foodismo), such as that of Brillat-Savarin, resembles that of Epicurus.

Criticism

Cicero criticized Epicurus' atomistic physics for not being able to explain the order in the universe and the clinamen theory for being an arbitrary ad hoc statement that would make it impossible to group atoms together. Leibniz criticized the Epicurean attempt to marry materialism and indeterminism with clinamen, not for its anti-teleological implications but for its rejection of the principle of sufficient reason.

For nothing gives a clearer indication of the imperfection of a philosophy than the need experienced by the philosopher to confess that something happens, according to his system, for which there is no reason. That applies to the idea of Epicuro on the deviation of atoms. Whether God or Nature is the one who operates, the operation will always have its reasons.

Francis Bacon wrote an apothegm related to Epicureanism:

There was an epicurean that boasted that thinkers of other sects of philosophers had become epicureans, but there was never any epicurean that turned to another sect. Before which a philosopher who was of another sect said: the reason is clear, because the cocks can be made caps, but the hoods can never be made roosters.

This echoed what the skeptical academic philosopher Arcesilaus had said when asked "why did the students of all the other schools go over to Epicurus, but the Epicureans never converted to other schools? ", to which he replied: "Because men can become eunuchs, but a eunuch never becomes a man."

List of Epicureans