Criticism of Dewitt's interpretation of Principal Doctrine 5.

    • New

    Dewitt in his "Epicurus and his Philosophy" interprets Principal Doctrine 5 "as follows.

    Quote

    "It is impossible to live pleasurably without living according to reason, honor, and justice, nor to live according to reason, honor, and justice without living pleasurably."

    Incidentally, it may be recalled that by reason is meant the practical reason, which guides the individual in every choice between doing and not doing a given thing; by honor is meant the unwritten law that determines the conduct of a gentleman; and by justice is meant obedience to the written laws of the country. (Pg.246)

    It seems everyone I've seen agrees with this idea, at least if they have commented on it.

    For my part, i actually disagree with this interpretation, largely because Epicurus gives his own definition of Justice in Principal Doctrine 37 especially, which goes beyond simple obedience to the written laws of the country, even saying some laws can be unjust. But i also softly disagree with his take on Wisdom.

    Quote

    Among the things accounted just by conventional law, whatever in the needs of mutual association is attested to be useful, is thereby stamped as just, whether or not it be the same for all; and in case any law is made and does not prove suitable to the usefulness of mutual association, then this is no longer just. And should the usefulness which is expressed by the law vary and only for a time correspond with the prior conception, nevertheless for the time being it was just, so long as we do not trouble ourselves about empty words, but look simply at the facts.

    Furthermore, one of Epicurus own works seems to hint at a conception of Justice beyond simple obedience to the law, with the working being called "On Just Dealing" (Hicks), with some like White and Bailey going even further in translating it as "On Just Action", which i doubt is just a work that says "just obey the law" for a couple paragraphs straight if the Principal Doctrines are any indication.

    With all this in mind, i would like to propose a different interpretation than DeWitt, on Justice especially.

    Quote

    By Wisdom is meant making the proper choices and avoidances to live a pleasant life, as well as knowing the truth about various things in order to understand our own world and make proper choices and live pleasantly, such as Tetrapharmakos, necessity of Friendship, knowledge of Nature, the truth of our senses, etc.

    By Honor is meant to character of a gentleman, as well as noble lady for our own Kalosyni, this is all the socially acceptable conduct which, even if not technically harming someone, is still seen as socially repugnant, such as a refusal to help others, being greedy, making other people take care of you via your own laziness, if you could help yourself, uncleanliness, or lying outside of harming others, along with other generally shameful practices. Obviously a lot of overlap with Justice here, just as Wisdom overlaps with all the other virtues.

    By Justice is meant acting according to what is mutually beneficial for people, not murdering, cheating, stealing, or assaulting, which mostly means obedience to the law, but sometimes means changing the law so that it comes into conformity with what is mutually beneficial.

    I hope you all like this, and let me know your thought.

    Edited once, last by wbernys (October 4, 2026 at 6:11 PM).

  • wbernys October 4, 2026 at 5:45 PM

    Changed the title of the thread from “Criticism of Dewitt's interpretation of Justice in Principal Doctrine 5.” to “Criticism of Dewitt's interpretation of Principal Doctrine 5.”.
    • New
    Quote from wbernys

    For my part, i actually disagree with this interpretation, largely because Epicurus gives his own definition of Justice in Principal Doctrine 37 especially, which goes beyond simple obedience to the written laws of the country, even saying some laws can be unjust. But i also softly disagree with his take on Wisdom.

    If I am reading your post correctly, you're focusing on DeWitt's comment which focuses on justice meaning "obedience to the written laws of the country."

    I agree that it's far too narrow to equate "obedience to the written law of a country " with justice. The PD's make clear that when circumstances changes written laws can become unjust, so I think it's clear that it would be overbroad to say as a blanket rule that you would always continue to obey them.

    So I agree with you that DeWitt's statement is off in that respect. I think it's very important to observe that Epicurus saying that justice changes with circumstance - so whether it's a written law OR a written contract, changes in circumstances will often lead to changes in the justice of either situation and therefore whether you should continue to abide with it. In fact that's a major problem I have with people who imply that Epicurus endorsed a general sort of "social contract" view of justice. Those people rarely seem to point out that yes, justice is a sort of agreement neither to harm or be harmed, but they seem to talk as if such an agreement is fixed in stone, and that to BREAK the agreement would always be wrong. I think Epicurus is very clear that when circumstances change enough to make staying in the agreement harmful to either side, then the side that would be harmed is perfectly appropriate to break the agreement.


    As to the second part of your comment as to disagreeing with DeWitt on wisdom, could you make that a little more clear because I am not sure you spelled that out as clearly as the other part.

    • New
    Quote from Cassius

    As to the second part of your comment as to disagreeing with DeWitt on wisdom, could you make that a little more clear because I am not sure you spelled that out as clearly as the other part.

    Sure, it seems like DeWitt thinks of Epicurean reason as just prudence only, knowing how to make proper decisions.

    While that is an important part, I also think Epicurus count theoretical wisdom as well, like The Nature of the Gods, the nothingness of Death, and the limits of pain and our desires, if that makes sense.

    Torquatus seems to make clear the necessity of theoretical knowledge beyond just prudence, especially in his call for science.

    Quote

    Natural Philosophy is what Epicurus deemed all-important. This science explains to us the meaning of terms, the nature of predication, and the law of consistency and contradiction; secondly, a thorough knowledge of the facts of nature relieves us of the burden of superstition, frees us from fear of death, and shields us against the disturbing effects of ignorance, which is often in itself a cause of terrifying apprehensions; lastly, to learn what nature's real requirements are improves the moral character also. (On Ends, 1.63)

    • New

    in fact, how can you be "prudent" unless you have firm knowledge of the consequences of the relevant choices? That's a major problem with talking about any virtue in the first place - unless you can predict the consequences of the actions you don't know if its wise or foolhardy to take any particular action in any particular circumstance. Wisdom doesn't just float in the air with no attachment to reality.

    • New

    wbernys we could also approach the question from the opposite direction: "what causes people to make imprudent choices?" Off the top of my head, I would say there's an easy problem and a harder problem.

    The easy problem involves people who make choices based on empty opinion or pursuit of unnatural desires. In those cases, the answer seems simple: they have not acquired knowledge (nature, tetrapharmakon) and thus are driven by false assumptions or dispositions untempered by wisdom.

    The harder problem involves the category of "natural but unnecessary," as there seems to be no fixed rule and prudent action depends on correct operation of the hedonic calculus. But (to echo Cassius's point) how do we learn to calculate correctly? Might it require obtaining sufficient data, in the form of pleasurable and painful experiences, until we are able to arrive at general guidelines?

Finding Things At EpicureanFriends.com

Here is a list of suggested search strategies:

  • Website Overview page - clickable links arrranged by cards.
  • Forum Main Page - list of forums and subforums arranged by topic. Threads are posted according to relevant topics. The "Uncategorized subforum" contains threads which do not fall into any existing topic (also contains older "unfiled" threads which will soon be moved).
  • Search Tool - icon is located on the top right of every page. Note that the search box asks you what section of the forum you'd like to search. If you don't know, select "Everywhere."
  • Search By Key Tags - curated to show frequently-searched topics.
  • Full Tag List - an alphabetical list of all tags.