Pierre-Marie Morel - "The Epicurean 'Up To Us' - Not To Be Proved"

  • I haven't had a chance to look at this but it appears directly on point with the forum topic - https://www.academia.edu/42855…_work_card=download-paper

    This paper deals with the Epicurean conception of responsibility. There are many issues about the so-called Epicurus’ demonstration of freedom. Now, if we consider Epicurus’ remains, it is not obvious that Epicurus’ texts explicitly demonstrate the eph’ hêmin thesis. It will be argued, that the Epicurean eph’ hêmin, in this context, is not a demonstrandum because responsibility is a primary evidence. Arguments in this sense are of three kinds: cosmological, ethical and epistemological. I will show that Epicurus, when he depicts the sage’s life and behaviour, invokes the cosmological conditions of action, particularly in Letter to Menoeceus, arguing that the sage does not absolutely depend on a causal chain. Then I will focus on the arguments he develops in his Peri phuseôs about the ethical consequences of the denial of human freedom. Finally I will deal with the logical absurdity of such a denial. I will defend the view that this use of the eph’ hêmin thesis is closely connected with the Epicurean theory of knowledge and with its logical requirements.

  • Cassius

    Changed the title of the thread from “Pierre-Marie Morel - "The Epicurean 'Up To Us'"” to “Pierre-Marie Morel - "The Epicurean 'Up To Us' - Not To Be Proved"”.