In the letter to Menoeceus, Epicurus rebukes what I call 'refined pleasures':

When we say, then, that pleasure is the end and aim, we do not mean the pleasures of the prodigal or the pleasures of sensuality, as we are understood to do by some through ignorance, prejudice, or willful misrepresentation. By pleasure we mean the absence of pain in the body and of trouble in the soul. It is not an unbroken succession of drinking-bouts and of merrymaking, not sexual love, not the enjoyment of the fish and other delicacies of a luxurious table, which produce a pleasant life; it is sober reasoning, searching out the grounds of every choice and avoidance, and banishing those beliefs through which the greatest disturbances take possession of the soul

What Epicurus calls pleasures of the prodigal seems to refer to excessive, extravagant pleasures. And pleasures of sensuality seems to be pleasures that have a strong and immediate hold on our senses, pleasures that overwhelm our reason.

Now it seems to me that the key issue Epicurus was touching at was his displeasure with refined pleasures. Refined pleasures are much more intense as pleasures or they provide infinite novelty, to the point that it seems to go much longer in duration than your average unrefined pleasure. I am trying to understand the real reason why Epicurus seemed to dislike refined pleasures.

Consider this thought experiment: Imagine you go to sleep and wake up in a garden, with a banquet of the most exciting and delectable pleasures of food and drink. Imagine that once you are satisfied with your meal and drink you are offered an endless variety of sexual pleasure. And once you are satisfied, you go to sleep on the most comfortable bed you have ever had with the softest pillows you have ever experienced. The next day, you wake up in the same garden but with a new banquet of thrilling foods and drink, and an endless variety of sexual pleasure. You are not spending any money for any of these pleasures, it is all free. So is there anything wrong with indulging in these pleasures, from an Epicurean perspective?

​

​

Hey there! I’m writing a paper which includes a section where I discuss Epicurus and views around Euthanasia - is there any writings by Epicurus where he discusses Euthanasia? I’ve seen other academic articles says that he states that Euthanasia is acceptable in cases of unbearable pain, but I can’t find a quote from his writings specifically that support that. Any help is appreciated!!

Can someone provide a comprehensive list of natural and necessary desires for a modern individual.

Necessity according to Epicurus here would be:

• Necessary for survival or existence
• Necessary for happiness
• Necessary for tranquility

Some I have already include Food, Shelter, Health, Recreation, Work, Exercise, Sleep,

Are there any others I am missing?

I tried to find more informations about relationship between famous philosopher Epicurus and playwright of comedies Menander. I had read that they grew up together and were childhood friends but thats all I guess. Can anyone provide more informations about their relationship and if they both influenced each other- in philosophy and literature.

I'm new to the study of Epicureanism, but I've studied Stoicism a fair amount. From what I've learned so far, Epicureanism is descriptive and realistic about human nature, whereas Stoicism is more idealistic and prescriptive. I just had a short conversation with ChatGPT to flesh out that idea. See what you think. I'd love to hear your thoughts.

___________________________________

Me What is Epicureanism?

ChatGPT

Epicureanism is a philosophical system founded by the ancient Greek philosopher Epicurus (341–270 BCE). Epicureanism emphasizes the pursuit of pleasure and the avoidance of pain as the ultimate goals of life. However, this pleasure is understood in a more nuanced way than mere hedonism.

In Epicurean philosophy, pleasure is not just immediate gratification but rather a state of tranquility and absence of disturbance (ataraxia) resulting from the satisfaction of natural and necessary desires. Epicurus classified desires into three categories:

1. Natural and necessary desires: These include desires for food, shelter, and companionship. Fulfilling these desires leads to pleasure and is therefore considered essential for a happy life.
2. Natural but not necessary desires: These are desires for luxury and extravagance, which Epicurus believed should be moderated since they can lead to unnecessary pain if they are not satisfied.
3. Vain and empty desires: These are desires that are neither natural nor necessary, such as the desire for fame or power. Epicurus taught that these desires should be completely eliminated as they only lead to dissatisfaction and suffering.

Epicureanism also advocates for the cultivation of friendships, intellectual pursuits, and the study of nature as means to achieve happiness and fulfillment. It promotes a simple and modest lifestyle, free from unnecessary desires and anxieties.

In summary, Epicureanism encourages the pursuit of pleasure through the fulfillment of natural and necessary desires while advocating for moderation and the avoidance of unnecessary pain and anxiety. It emphasizes the importance of living a tranquil and contented life.

___________________________________

Me Epicureanism emphasizes the pursuit of pleasure and the avoidance of pain as the ultimate goals of life. How does this view compare to Stoicism?

ChatGPT

Epicureanism and Stoicism are two distinct philosophical schools that emerged in ancient Greece and Rome, and while they share some similarities, they also have significant differences, especially concerning their views on pleasure, pain, and the ultimate goals of life.

• View on Pleasure and Pain:

  • Epicureanism: Epicureans view pleasure, particularly the absence of pain and tranquility (ataraxia), as the ultimate goal of life. They believe that pursuing pleasure in moderation and avoiding unnecessary desires lead to a state of contentment and happiness.
  • Stoicism: Stoics, on the other hand, do not see pleasure as the ultimate goal of life. They advocate for living in accordance with nature and virtue, believing that virtue (excellence of character) is the only true good. Stoics regard pain as indifferent and believe that one should cultivate resilience and inner strength to endure hardship with equanimity.

• Attitude towards External Circumstances:

  • Epicureanism: Epicureans believe that happiness can be achieved by seeking pleasure and avoiding pain, primarily through the cultivation of inner tranquility. They advocate for withdrawing from unnecessary desires and minimizing external disturbances.
  • Stoicism: Stoics emphasize the importance of accepting external circumstances, including pain and adversity, as they are beyond one's control. They teach that one should focus on developing resilience, virtue, and a mindset of acceptance rather than seeking to control external events.

• View on Emotions:

  • Epicureanism: Epicureans believe that emotions, particularly those arising from desires and fears, should be moderated and minimized to achieve tranquility. They advocate for cultivating a sense of detachment and equanimity towards external events.
  • Stoicism: Stoics acknowledge the existence of emotions but advocate for maintaining control over them through reason and virtue. They believe that one should cultivate virtues such as courage, wisdom, and self-discipline to navigate through life's challenges with clarity and resilience.

In summary, while both Epicureanism and Stoicism offer philosophical frameworks for living a good life, they differ in their views on pleasure, pain, and the ultimate goals of life. Epicureanism prioritizes the pursuit of pleasure and tranquility, while Stoicism emphasizes living in accordance with virtue and accepting external circumstances with equanimity.

___________________________________

Me It seems like Epicureanism is descriptive of human nature, and Stoicism is prescriptive. What do you think?

ChatGPT

Your observation captures a significant aspect of the difference between Epicureanism and Stoicism quite well.

Epicureanism tends to align more closely with descriptive elements of human nature by acknowledging the pursuit of pleasure and the avoidance of pain as natural inclinations. Epicureans believe that humans naturally seek pleasure and that by understanding and moderating these desires, one can achieve a state of tranquility and contentment. In this sense, Epicureanism reflects an understanding of human psychology and desires.

On the other hand, Stoicism is more prescriptive in nature. Stoics provide a set of principles and practices aimed at guiding individuals toward living a virtuous life, regardless of their natural inclinations or emotional responses. Stoicism prescribes practices such as cultivating resilience, practicing self-discipline, and focusing on virtue as the ultimate good, which may sometimes go against natural human impulses or desires.

While Epicureanism acknowledges and works with human nature, Stoicism often challenges individuals to rise above their immediate impulses and emotions, emphasizing the importance of reason and virtue in guiding one's actions and responses to life's challenges.

In summary, Epicureanism tends to describe and work within the framework of human nature and desires, while Stoicism offers a prescriptive approach aimed at guiding individuals toward a virtuous and fulfilling life, sometimes requiring them to transcend their natural inclinations and impulses.

​

a blend of Stoicism and elements of Epicureanism might resonate well:

Stoicism: The principles of Stoicism, with its emphasis on resilience, self-discipline, and rationality, can provide valuable tools for navigating the challenges of work and life. Stoicism encourages focusing on what is within one's control, cultivating inner strength, and living in accordance with one's values, which can be particularly beneficial for someone in a demanding working-class environment.

Epicureanism: Incorporating aspects of Epicureanism, such as seeking simple pleasures, cultivating friendships, and striving for tranquility, can complement Stoic practices by providing moments of relaxation, enjoyment, and social connection outside of work. This balance can help maintain mental well-being and prevent burnout in a demanding job.By blending Stoic resilience with Epicurean enjoyment of life's simple pleasures, an intelligent working-class individual can cultivate a mindset that fosters both productivity and contentment, allowing them to navigate their professional and personal lives with greater fulfillment and resilience.

In his letter to Menoeceus, on one hand he said:

Our every action is done so that we will not be in pain or fear. As soon as we achieve this, the soul is released from every storm, since an animal has no other need and must seek nothing else to complete the goodness of body and soul. Thus we need pleasure only when we are in pain caused by its absence.

Suggesting that life is ultimately about avoiding pain. (in which case, wouldn't suicide be obligatory?)
But right after he says:

This is why we say that pleasure is the beginning and the end of a completely happy life. For we recognize it as the primary and innate good, we honor it in everything we accept or reject, and we achieve it if we judge every good thing by the standard of how that thing affects us. [...] And we consider many pains to be better than pleasures, if we experience a greater pleasure for a long time from having endured those pains.

Suggesting that life is all about weighting expected pleasure and pain against each other.

To my best understanding, these are two entirely different and mutually exclusive positions on the same topic. Saying that only avoiding pain matters and immediately contradicting this by saying both pain and pleasure matter. Who here can help me resolve my confusion?

According to Epircurus death is not a problem as when it occurred we are no longer there. But what does it mean for those surviving the dead one? Should they feel pain or will it be no sense as Stoics teach us.

What is the epicurean take on poverty?

In a socialist garden, the good is easy to get.

But when you are limited by the amount of private property you own, the good isn't easy to get.

Also I am curious how Epicurus was able to sustain himself as he went about teaching, how he got money to buy a home and garden and basically how he sustained himself and a large group of followers for years.

Banish the Big Liars: Epicurus on True Pleasure – Antigone (antigonejournal.com)

​

Interesting article about our favorite philosopher.

Not all of them, and it's suspected there may be many more scrolls, but what a moment this is.

https://scrollprize.org/grandprize

Interesting article on the classics site Antigone: Banish the Big Liars: Epicurus on True Pleasure. Gives a good summary of Epicureanism but focuses more on how others have reacted to it.

The divine are perfectly happy, in that they are completely free fear and worry. I find that I'm living in a deep pit of Epicurean hell as I continue to lose friends due to my negligence and fear of not being worthy of their friendship, as i lose bonds and become afraid of creating new ones and as a result living in reclusivity, doing the best I can to prevent a thought from forming , as I continue to overeat on poisons as my mouth, such as my soul, feels empty, as I continue to neglect my health as I use less and less energy and as a result continue having less of it, as I continue to do things which do not make me happy, engaging in activities because of the routine that I have established, rather than the joy that i derive from them. as I continue to excessively utilize pornography as sex is only form of intimacy that I've known, and yet it keeps failing to fill that void in my soul. as I continue to abuse substances that make me ok with my current situation, or plunge me deep into them till it provides catharsis and it is the morning and I can move on and repeat the cycle

The one thing that I have going for me, is that I do not fear death. For truly, death is nothing, and nothingness presents the absence of pain and fear on a silver platter, and I can't wait to be served.

Hello 👋! I'm new this subreddit, and hate to start by asking a question, but here it goes.

I've got a project that I'm working on and need translations of Epicurus' works that are in the public domain. I've been using the Dover Thrift Editions reprint of Strodach's "The Philosophy of Epicurus" ("The Art of Happiness"), but can't figure out if it's public domain as many of Dover's reprints are. Ideally I'm looking for a translation that is fair to the original and readable to non-academic modern audiences. What is out there and what do you like best? I've stumbled across the Cyril Bailey translations but haven't yet had the time to read them so don't know how modern/readable they are.

Hello!

I was wondering how I could apply epicurean philosophy to becoming a better leader. I’m a coordinator with 30+ direct reports in food service. I’m working on becoming a better leader but frankly I’m not a huge fan of a lot of Jocko or marine type or even stoicism leadership stuff.

I feel like there is potential to apply this I just haven’t fully figured it out. I would think being open and building a team of trust would be important and also studying what brings each employee pleasure?

Negative utilitarianism (NU) is the view that we should minimise total suffering.

According to Epicureanism, pleasure is viewed as the absence of suffering. The best possible state is a combination of ataraxia (absence of mental disturbances) and aponia (absence of physical disturbances).

So, according to Epicurean inspired NU view, non existence, unconsciousness and conscious states that are completely free of mental and physical disturbances would have zero value.

States that contain mental or physical disturbances (e.g. hunger, thirst, boredom, discomfort, loneliness, pain, fear, anger, sadness, jealousy, sickness) would have negative value.

In fiction you can much easily point to character that have a stoic personality, like on top of my head Optimus prime(not the movies one but from animated show transformers prime) is I think a good example but I can't think of single one ,that I can describe epicurean in the true sense not like the misconception people have of it being about sex and food.so I decided to write my own webcomic in which I would have a character modeled after epicures himself so I needed some advice.

Currently have a wee neurological disorder and while I can read and comprehend a lot of advanced texts- this is not that week for me. My brain is cooked mush.

Is there an Epicurean for dummies book anyone could kindly recommend? I know it’ll likely be watered down but I need a more simple text to get my feet wet in this world.

Help a girl out?

Hi, I’m new to this philosophy. Stumbled upon it while searching for something in this ballpark.

I want to be content with the life I have instead of the life I was traumatically taught to pursue: a life of greatness, success, money, etc.

Found this philosophy and it’s really speaking to me from the little I’ve read (already started downloading books from my library).

But.

I have a very vague question that I’m hoping someone can help me with. Chronic pain. I became disabled a year ago and pain is right there with me most days.

I’ve noticed a lot written about avoiding pain but is there any writing or discussion on unavoidable constant pain?