Risk Aversion / Risk Management / Risk Avoidance / Risk Assessment in Epicurean Philosophy

This is to start a thread on "Risk" and how it relates to the way people choose between actions depending on the pleasures and pains they expect to result from those choices. Obviously in Epicurean philosophy there is no Fate nor is there 100% necessity in all things, so predicting the likelihood of a particular action producing a particular result is going to be a part of every decision.

To some extent this consideration is not always stated consciously: when we evaluate whether to take an action, we often make unstated presumptions about the likelihood of obtaining the result. One person may think that a choice to pursue a particular pleasure is absurd because it is very difficult or impossible or highly risky for them. Another person in other circumstances may see the likelihood of obtaining the goal as virtually guaranteed. If the people discussing the choice do not state their Risk Assessment as a factor in their opinions, there can be a huge failure to communicate. Someone including but not identifying risk in their assessment of a choice may look like they are employing an absolute standard of desirability of something, when in reality they are saying that they don't think the goal is achievable, not that it is pleasurable or how pleasurable the goal might be.

So this post is to start a thread for discussion. This is a big topic, but among the issues to include over time would be:

1. What category does this topic fall under best? Prudence? Courage? For the time being I am placing it under Courage, but clearly prudence is involved as well.
2. What is the relationship between this topic and the natural/necessary desire classification? Clearly "easy to get" (to the extent that is a well documented consideration, which is debatable) relates to risk assessment.
3. There would seem to be a hierarchical approach to this topic. For an Epicurean we would probably emphasize eliminating fear of supernatural gods and reward or punishment after death, but as hard as those may be, it doesn't take 100% of our attention to deal with those. How do you calculate prudently here and now issues of lesser importance?
4. One source of information might be Philodemus' property management text. Also the discussion in Jefferson's "Head and Heart" letter.
5. How do we incorporate self-sufficiency and self-knowledge into this topic. We can think about, for example, how risk tolerant / risk averse we "are." What about how risk tolerant / risk averse we "should be?" Is risk tolerance a "given" for a particular person, or is it something that can and should be worked on and "improved?"
6. How do we articulate in words - clearly - what a "proper" level of risk tolerance is or should be?
7. There is for example the old Boy Scouts - "Be Prepared" motto.
8. Analysis Paralysis - Do some people avoid risk-taking because they don't want accountability, and they prefer to debate risk endlessly rather than force the issue?
9. Epicurus doesn't seem to focus as much on length of life (or pleasure) as he is about quality. Does that tell us something about Epicurus' view of risk? What conclusions can we draw from real-life Epicureans and how they made their choices?
10. We could factor in the difference in perspective on pleasure that is assumed to be the case between Cyreniacs and Epicureans (and here consider Sedley's take on the meaning of happiness in his article on Epicurean vs Cyreniac happiness
11. Is it true that there is possibly an "objective" percentage of risk from an activity that is applicable to "most people" (such as insurance companies use) but there is not a way to objectively weigh the pleasure or pain that comes from the activity and therefore the desirability of assuming that risk?
12. This issue clearly relate to the Benthamite "pushpin" question as to the interchangeability of pleasures, Why take a risk to obtain a particular pleasure if any old pleasure is equally interchangeable? (Is it?)