Welcome To EpicureanFriends!
Listen to the latest Lucretius Today Podcast! Episode 231 is now available. This week we discuss Empedocles and take a general view of the question of how we would live if we were certain of that there are no supernatural gods and no life after death.
How would you live if you were certain that there are no supernatural gods and no life after death?
That's what we explore here at Epicureanfriends.com, the internet home of Classical Epicurean Philosophy.
EpicureanFriends was established in 2015 by a group of friends interested in the study of Epicurus freed from the intrusion of contemporary politics, Stoicism, Platonism, Humanism, and other "isms" with which many seek to combine it. At EpicureanFriends, we focus on the fundamentals of life as Epicurus taught them himself:
The Epicurean Worldview: A Revolutionary Paradigm For The Best Life
Epicurus held taught that there are no supernatural gods and no life after death, and that the goal of life should be "pleasure." What Epicurus meant by "pleasure," however, has been disputed for 2000 years. Those who knew the Epicureans best were clear: they understood Epicurus as teaching that Nature gives us only pleasure and pain by which to determine what to choose and what to avoid in life, and that if we are aware of feeling anything at all we are feeling one of the two, with no middle ground or third alternative.
Quote from Diogenes Laertius 10:34”The internal sensations they say are two, pleasure and pain, which occur to every living creature, and the one is akin to nature and the other alien: by means of these two choice and avoidance are determined.“
Quote from Torquatus, Speaking for Epicurus in Cicero's On Ends 1:38Therefore Epicurus refused to allow that there is any middle term between pain and pleasure; what was thought by some to be a middle term, the absence of all pain, was not only itself pleasure, but the highest pleasure possible. Surely any one who is conscious of his own condition must needs be either in a state of pleasure or in a state of pain. Epicurus thinks that the highest degree of pleasure is defined by the removal of all pain, so that pleasure may afterwards exhibit diversities and differences but is incapable of increase or extension.“
Thus if you are not feeling pain you are feeling pleasure, and so to Epicurus the word "pleasure" refers not only to agreeable sensory stimulation of mind and body but also to all normal and healthy experiences of mind and body, as these too are not painful and are therefore pleasurable.
Quote from Torquatus, Speaking For Epicurus in Cicero's On Ends 1:39For if that were the only pleasure which tickled the senses, as it were, if I may say so, and which overflowed and penetrated them with a certain agreeable feeling, then even a hand could not be content with freedom from pain without some pleasing motion of pleasure. But if the highest pleasure is, as Epicurus asserts, to be free from pain, then, O Chrysippus, the first admission was correctly made to you, that the hand, when it was in that condition, was in want of nothing; but the second admission was not equally correct, that if pleasure were a good it would wish for it. For it would not wish for it for this reason, inasmuch as whatever is free from pain is in pleasure.
Seen in this way, Epicurean philosophy is neither "hedonistic" nor "ascetic." Instead, Epicurus assures us that all types of healthy non-painful function of both body and mind as desirable. This revolutionary paradigm of the best life was stated explicitly by the Epicureans in the following terms:
Quote from Torquatus, Speaking For Epicurus In Cicero's "On Ends""Again, the truth that pleasure is the supreme good can be most easily apprehended from the following consideration. Let us imagine an individual in the enjoyment of pleasures great, numerous and constant, both mental and bodily, with no pain to thwart or threaten them; I ask what circumstances can we describe as more excellent than these or more desirable? A man whose circumstances are such must needs possess, as well as other things, a robust mind subject to no fear of death or pain, because death is apart from sensation, and pain when lasting is usually slight, when oppressive is of short duration, so that its temporariness reconciles us to its intensity, and its slightness to its continuance. When in addition we suppose that such a man is in no awe of the influence of the gods, and does not allow his past pleasures to slip away, but takes delight in constantly recalling them, what circumstance is it possible to add to these, to make his condition better?" (On Ends [40] XII)
In a universe where every space is occupied either by matter or by void, human life is understood in a similar way - every feeling in life is either pleasure or pain. Therefore any feeling which is not a pleasure is a pain, and any feeling which is not a pain is a pleasure. This sweeping redefinition of pleasure - rather than gluttony or asceticism - is the hallmark of the Epicurean approach to living. As one biographer of Epicurus observed:
Quote from Norman DeWitt, "Epicurus And His Philosophy"The extension of the name of pleasure to this normal state of being was the major innovation of the new hedonism. It was in the negative form, freedom from pain of body and distress of mind, that it drew the most persistent and vigorous condemnation from adversaries. The contention was that the application of the name of pleasure to this state was unjustified on the ground that two different things were thereby being denominated by one name. Cicero made a great to-do over this argument, but it is really superficial and captious. The fact that the name of pleasure was not customarily applied to the normal or static state did not alter the fact that the name ought to be applied to it; nor that reason justified the application; nor that human beings would be the happier for so reasoning and believing.
Epicurus' rejection of commonplace assumptions was by no means limited to the prevailing definition of "pleasure." Epicurean philosophy leads to a redefinition of many other common misconceptions, including "gods," "virtue," and even "good and evil." In Epicurean terms, "gods" do exist, and it is important to act "virtuously," but "gods" are not supernatural or omniscient beings which create universes or control human affairs, and "virtue" is not desirable as an end it itself, but as a means of obtaining pleasure. "Good" and "evil" are not abstract absolutes, but are ultimately evaluations based on sensations of pleasure and pain felt by real living things. "Practical Reason" is held to be essential for living wisely, but "dialectical logic" is rejected as misleading. It is a major goal of EpicureanFriends to explore Epicurean terminology in these and other areas so we can appreciate the philosophy as the ancient Epicureans understood it.
For more on terminology and similar topics, check out our FAQ page. We also particularly recommend Episode 222 of the Lucetius Today Podcast where we discuss key terminology issues surrounding "happiness" and "pleasure" and "virtue."