1. New
    1. Member Announcements
  2. Home
    1. Get Started - Activities
    2. Posting Policies
    3. Community Standards
    4. Terms of Use
    5. Moderator Team
    6. Site Map
    7. Quizzes
    8. Articles
      1. Featured Articles
      2. Blog Posts at EpicureanFriends
  3. Wiki
    1. Wiki Home
    2. FAQ
    3. Classical Epicureanism
    4. Physics
    5. Canonics
    6. Ethics
    7. Search Assistance
    8. Not NeoEpicurean
    9. Foundations
    10. Navigation Outlines
    11. Key Pages
  4. Forum
    1. New Activity
    2. New Threads
    3. Welcome
    4. General Discussion
    5. Featured
    6. Activism
    7. Shortcuts
    8. Dashboard
    9. Full Forum List
    10. Level 3+
    11. Most Discussed
  5. Podcast
    1. Lucretius Today Podcast
    2. Episode Guide
    3. Lucretius Today At Youtube
    4. EpicureanFriends Youtube Page
  6. Texts
    1. Overview
    2. Diogenes Laertius
    3. Principal Doctrines
    4. Vatican Sayings
    5. Lucretius
    6. Herodotus
    7. Pythocles
    8. Menoeceus
    9. Fragments - Usener Collection
    10. Torquatus On Ethics
    11. Velleius On Gods
    12. Greek/Latin Help
  7. Gallery
    1. Featured images
    2. Albums
    3. Latest Images
    4. Latest Comments
  8. Calendar
    1. Upcoming Events List
    2. Zoom Meetings
    3. This Month
    4. First Monday Zoom Meetings
    5. Wednesday Zoom Meeting
    6. Twentieth Zoom Meetings
    7. Zoom Meetings
  9. Other
    1. Featured Content
    2. Blog Posts
    3. Files
    4. Logbook
    5. EF ToDo List
    6. Link-Database
  • Login
  • Register
  • Search
This Thread

Welcome To EpicureanFriends.com!

"Remember that you are mortal, and you have a limited time to live, and in devoting yourself to discussion of the nature of time and eternity you have seen things that have been, are now, and are to come."

Sign In Now
or
Register a new account
  1. New
  2. Home
  3. Wiki
  4. Forum
  5. Podcast
  6. Texts
  7. Gallery
  8. Calendar
  9. Other
  1. Forum
    1. New Activity
    2. New Threads
    3. Welcome
    4. General Discussion
    5. Featured
    6. Activism
    7. Shortcuts
    8. Dashboard
    9. Full Forum List
    10. Level 3+
    11. Most Discussed
  1. EpicureanFriends - Home of Classical Epicurean Philosophy
  2. Forum
  3. Canonics - The Tests of Truth
  4. Rejection Of Atomic Reductionism
  • Sidebar
  • Sidebar

Epicurus' Rejection of "Reductionist Atomism" (And The Related Issues of Skepticism and Determinism)

  • Cassius
  • April 1, 2023 at 10:23 PM
  • Go to last post
Regularly Checking In On A Small Screen Device? Bookmark THIS page!
  • Online
    Cassius
    05 - Administrator
    Points
    101,662
    Posts
    13,915
    Quizzes
    9
    Quiz rate
    100.0 %
    • April 1, 2023 at 10:23 PM
    • #1

    This is an important topic that bleeds over into epistemology / canonics, but given how closely it is related to atomism it needs a thread here. I will try to go through the forum and crossreference threads to Democritus' statement about "....in reality, only atoms and void..." and why Epicurus would not have accepted this viewpoint. At the moment, one of the best discussions of this is in David Sedley's "Epicurus's Refutation of Determinism.

    Hard to overstate how critical this paragraph is:

    As Sedley says, Epicurus rejects "reductionist atomism," in favor of the common sense perspective: "that there are truths at the microscopic level of elementary particles, and further very different truths at the phenomenal level; that the former must be capable of explaining the latter, but that neither level of description has a monopoly of truth.'


  • Online
    Cassius
    05 - Administrator
    Points
    101,662
    Posts
    13,915
    Quizzes
    9
    Quiz rate
    100.0 %
    • April 13, 2023 at 8:48 AM
    • #2

    This is an important topic that bleeds over into epistemology / canonics, but given how closely it is related to atomism it needs a thread here. I will try to go through the forum and collect threads or references to Democritus' statement about "....in reality, only atoms and void..." and why Epicurus would not have accepted this viewpoint. At the moment, one of the best discussions of this is in David Sedley's "Epicurus's Refutation of Determinism" which we will also link here.

  • Online
    Cassius
    05 - Administrator
    Points
    101,662
    Posts
    13,915
    Quizzes
    9
    Quiz rate
    100.0 %
    • April 13, 2023 at 8:51 AM
    • #3

    There is a great deal of good information, which leads to explanation of why Epicurus disagreed with Democritus on a number of key things, in this article:

    Democritus (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

    The article points out that there is a lot of controversy about what Democrtus was really saying, but to the extent that he was interpreted to be saying that things which we perceive at the macroscopic level are "unreal," it is easy to see why Epicurus would object to that. Sedley's summary that Epicurus was holding that that there are two levels - microscopic and macroscopic for shorthand - and that neither level has a monopoly on truth seems to me to be pretty good phrasing of Epicurus's position.

    Quotes from the article:

    He famously denies that perceptible qualities other than shape and size (and, perhaps, weight) really exist in the atoms themselves: one direct quotation surviving from Democritus claims that ‘by convention sweet and by convention bitter, by convention hot, by convention cold, by convention color; but in reality atoms and void’ (DK 68B9, trans. Taylor 1999a).


    While several reports of Democritus’ view, apparently direct quotations, mention exclusively sensible qualities as being unreal, a report of Plutarch includes in the list of things that exist only by convention the notion of ‘combination’ or sunkrisis. If this report is genuinely Democritean, it would broaden the scope of the claim considerably: the idea that any combination—by which he presumably means any cluster of atoms—is ‘unreal’ or merely ‘conventional’ suggests that Democritus is drawing a more radical distinction than that between sensible and nonsensible qualities. The implication would be that anything perceived, because it is a perception of combinations of atoms and not atoms themselves, would be suspect, not merely the qualia experienced by means of individual sense organs. One report indeed attributes to Democritus a denial that two things could become one, or vice versa (DK 68A42), thus suggesting that combinations are regarded as conventional.

    However, Furley concedes that Plutarch at least understands the earliest atomists to be committed to the view that all combinations of atoms, as much as sensible qualities, should be understood as conventional rather than real (Furley 1993 pp. 76–7n7). This would suggest that everything at the macroscopic level—or, strictly, everything available to perception—is regarded as unreal.

  • Online
    Cassius
    05 - Administrator
    Points
    101,662
    Posts
    13,915
    Quizzes
    9
    Quiz rate
    100.0 %
    • April 13, 2023 at 8:52 AM
    • #4

    This topic is discussed in the threads for podcast 168 and 169, especially 168:

    Post

    RE: Episode 168 - "Epicurus And His Philosophy" Part 21 - Chapter 10 - The New Freedom 01

    There is a great deal of good information, which leads to explanation of why Epicurus disagreed with Democritus on a number of key things, in this article:

    https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/democritus/

    The article points out that there is a lot of controversy about what Democrtus was really saying, but to the extent that he was interpreted to be saying that things which we perceive at the macroscopic level are "unreal," it is easy to see why Epicurus would object to that. Sedley's summary that…
    Cassius
    April 3, 2023 at 12:49 PM
  • Cassius April 13, 2023 at 9:06 AM

    Changed the title of the thread from “Epicurus' Rejection of Atomic Reductionism” to “Epicurus' Embrace of Atomism But Rejection of Atomic Reductionism”.
  • Kalosyni
    Student of the Kepos
    Points
    16,690
    Posts
    2,019
    Quizzes
    2
    Quiz rate
    90.9 %
    • April 13, 2023 at 10:05 AM
    • #5
    Quote from Cassius


    "He famously denies that perceptible qualities other than shape and size (and, perhaps, weight) really exist in the atoms themselves: one direct quotation surviving from Democritus claims that ‘by convention sweet and by convention bitter, by convention hot, by convention cold, by convention color; but in reality atoms and void’ (DK 68B9, trans. Taylor 1999a)."

    What comes to mind for me is that this claim by Democritus is slightly similar but yet different to the Buddhist "Two Truths" which according to a Tricycle article is: "The doctrine of two truths—the absolute and the relative—holds that there are two ways of viewing the world: as things appear to be, and as they are. In other words, existence is both relative (or conventional) and absolute. The relative or conventional explanation of reality is what we know and experience, while the ultimate or absolute truth is inexpressible, empty (sunya), and lies outside of conventional experience and language. The conventional truth about something is its dependence on conditions. The ultimate truth is its emptiness. This doctrine has its roots in the words of the historical Buddha, who acknowledged that some experiences, in particular nirvana, lie beyond the ability of language to describe."(Source)

    I confess that I would need to read more of the Sedley article and a lot more on this to fully understand what Epicurus' stance was. I personally reject any idea of "two truths" (no matter the source) because it leads to meaninglessness and passivity. Yet there is one thing that I do hold to be true which is that the use of language is conventional, and that we must always take that into consideration - language is just a symbol pointing toward reality and it is not reality. Is there any indication of this in Epicurus, that language is understood as conventional?

  • Online
    Cassius
    05 - Administrator
    Points
    101,662
    Posts
    13,915
    Quizzes
    9
    Quiz rate
    100.0 %
    • April 13, 2023 at 10:27 AM
    • #6
    Quote from Kalosyni

    [..in Buddhism..] The ultimate truth is its emptiness.

    Quote from Kalosyni

    I personally reject any idea of "two truths" (no matter the source) because it leads to meaninglessness and passivity.

    Yes, that is the point. And as Dewitt says in the chapter we are discussing in the podcast right now, to a moral reformer like Epicurus, skepticism and determinism, which go hand in hand with meaningless and passivity, have to be exposed as illogical and denounced as unacceptable:

    "To [Epicurus] as a moral reformer two things ranked foremost as abominations, skepticism and physical determinism."

    "In the domain of physics the charge of ingratitude is aggravated because the sin is against Democritus. "What is there in the Physics of Epicurus that is not from Democritus?" demands Cicero, and elsewhere he says: "What he changes he seems to spoil." Incidentally, every offense that was charged to Epicurus seemed more heinous than those of others. The defection of Epicurus from the teachings of Democritus, however, is almost wholly in the domain of ethics. To him as a moral reformer two things ranked foremost as abominations, skepticism and physical determinism. To such moral indignation Nausiphanes seems to have been immune; even if he rejected Pyrrhonian skepticism, this need not mean that he became alert to the evil of skepticism in general. To Epicurus he seemed insensate. The pupil was advancing beyond the teacher.

    As for Democritus himself, he committed himself to a certain degree of skepticism when he declared "atoms and void to be the only existences and all else to exist by convention." 45 This, however, was only individual skepticism, which did not prevent him from practicing cheerfulness (euthumia) any more than Pyrrho was prevented from enjoying indifference. To Epicurus, on the contrary, belief or disbelief had become a matter of morals and the happiness of mankind. He was incapable of taking comfort in a negative attitude, as did Democritus and Pyrrho. Thus he was compelled by the inward urge to become a pragmatist as well as a dogmatist and to insist that knowledge must not only be possible but also have relevance to action and to happiness. In this matter none of his teachers had set him an example.

    "A second ground of his defection from Democritus was physical determinism. Determinism is not offensive to intellectuals, but to moral reformers it is neither conceivable nor tolerable. Moral reform is synonymous with the experience of conversion, and conversion presumes freedom of the will. To Democritus the prime and only causation in the universe was the motion of the atoms. In this motion there was no deviation, no freedom possible. It constituted an absolute determinism. In order to open an escape from this intolerable physical necessity Epicurus postulated sufficient play in the motion of the atoms to permit of freedom of the will. Thus he introduced into the sum of things a new cause, human volition, which was to him at one and the same time a necessity of thought and a necessity of action. This innovation may not be commendable in physics, but ethical considerations had become paramount and in ethics the desired end had been served by the innovation. For this invention he was in debt to no teacher."

  • Online
    Cassius
    05 - Administrator
    Points
    101,662
    Posts
    13,915
    Quizzes
    9
    Quiz rate
    100.0 %
    • April 13, 2023 at 1:48 PM
    • #7

    I was tracing down one of Sedley's footnotes as to Democritus and it appears that for citing Democritus he is using a collection from  Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker. : Hermann Diels; Walther Kranz :

    Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker. : Hermann Diels; Walther Kranz : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive
    Berlin : Weidmannsche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1959-60.
    archive.org

    I haven't had time to see whether there is an English equivalent but it sure looks like this would be a nice collection to find. Maybe there is a collection at Attalus.org.

    The cite Sedley refers to is from that work at 68 B 7; cf. B 9, which Sedley implies contains essentially this argument as self-refuting on skepticism:

    "The argument is essentially that of J.B.S. HALDANE, Possible Worlds (London 1927), p. 209: «If my mental processes are determined wholly by the motion of atoms in my brain, I have no reason to suppose that my beliefs are true ... and hence I have no reason for supposing my brain to be composed of atoms ». (I think it was Bob Sharples who first drew my attention to this passage)."

  • Cassius April 13, 2023 at 4:23 PM

    Changed the title of the thread from “Epicurus' Embrace of Atomism But Rejection of Atomic Reductionism” to “Epicurus' Rejection of "Reductionist Atomism"”.
  • Online
    Cassius
    05 - Administrator
    Points
    101,662
    Posts
    13,915
    Quizzes
    9
    Quiz rate
    100.0 %
    • April 13, 2023 at 4:25 PM
    • #8

    From the inscription of Diogenes of Oinoanda:

    Fr. 54

    ...

    If anyone adopts Democritus’ theory and asserts that because of their collisions with one another the atoms have no free movement, and that consequently it appears that all motions are determined by necessity, we shall say to him: «Do you [not] know, whoever you are, that there is actually a free movement in the atoms, which Democritus failed to discover, but Epicurus brought to light, —a swerving movement, as he proves from phenomena?» The most important consideration is this: if fate is believed in, all admonition and censure are nullified, and not even the wicked [can be justly punished, since they are not responsible for their sins.]

  • Online
    Cassius
    05 - Administrator
    Points
    101,662
    Posts
    13,915
    Quizzes
    9
    Quiz rate
    100.0 %
    • April 13, 2023 at 4:32 PM
    • #9

    While mentioning Diogenes of Oinoanda, here is the fragment that includes the "Who will choose to seek what he can never find?" argument that to me seems very powerful in the context of this discussion.

    Who will seek knowledge of any kind if he is convinced that knowledge is impossible?

    Who will seek to be free of the supernatural gods or of fear of death or pain of any kind if he is convinced that everything happens by necessity?

    Here's the fragment:

    Fr. 5

    [Others do not] explicitly [stigmatise] natural science as unnecessary, being ashamed to acknowledge [this], but use another means of discarding it. For, when they assert that things are inapprehensible, what else are they saying than that there is no need for us to pursue natural science? After all, who will choose to seek what he can never find?

    Now Aristotle and those who hold the same Peripatetic views as Aristotle say that nothing is scientifically knowable, because things are continually in flux and, on account of the rapidity of the flux, evade our apprehension. We on the other hand acknowledge their flux, but not its being so rapid that the nature of each thing [is] at no time apprehensible by sense-perception. And indeed [in no way would the upholders of] the view under discussion have been able to say (and this is just what they do [maintain] that [at one time] this is [white] and this black, while [at another time] neither this is [white nor] that black, [if] they had not had [previous] knowledge of the nature of both white and black.

  • Online
    Cassius
    05 - Administrator
    Points
    101,662
    Posts
    13,915
    Quizzes
    9
    Quiz rate
    100.0 %
    • April 13, 2023 at 4:39 PM
    • #10

    I do not think it would be going too far to assert that in fighting against skepticism and determinism Epicurus realized those doctrines ultimately deny the validity - the reality - of the world revealed to us by our senses (and our feelings and prolepsis).

    Since the world revealed to us by our senses / feelings / prolepsis is the only one we have, and the only one we are ever going to have, few doctrines could be so destructive of human happiness than these.

    They can't be left in the category of "Too complicated - I don't know."

    It seems to me that Epicurus was emphasizing that we should place them in the category of "incorrect - wrong" - and that given the arguments we already have, no "waiting" is required for us to consider those theories as invalid and harmful.

    And as we mentioned in the most recent podcast, given how many times this issue is hammered over and over in the letter to Menoeceus, in Lucretius, in Diogenes of Oinoanda, and in other places in the texts we still have, it seems a reasonable conclusion that refutation of determinism and skepticism deserves to be considered at the very core of Epicurean philosophy.

  • Cassius April 13, 2023 at 4:41 PM

    Changed the title of the thread from “Epicurus' Rejection of "Reductionist Atomism"” to “Epicurus' Rejection of "Reductionist Atomism" (And The Related Issues of Skepticism and Determinism)”.
  • TauPhi
    03 - Member
    Points
    1,672
    Posts
    188
    Quizzes
    3
    Quiz rate
    92.5 %
    • April 13, 2023 at 9:58 PM
    • #11

    Considering determinism as harmful or destructive is giving it too much power. I don't think it's such powerful concept. If this is fallacy on my behalf, feel free to point it out but let me explain how I see it.

    From Epicurean perspective, wouldn't it be more accurate to consider determinism similar to death? These should be nothing to us as we simply cannot experience them.

    You mentioned that '[...] the world revealed to us by our senses / feelings / prolepsis is the only one we have, and the only one we are ever going to have [...]'. I see it exactly the same way. As humans, we perceive time linearly. There's no other way for us. Therefore, it doesn't make any difference if the world is deterministic or non-deterministic. We always experience it in non-deterministic way. Whether free will is objectively true or not, it is true to us. Even if we are automata, we're not able to experience autopilot mode.

    To be clear, I'm not advocating for determinism. Not in the slightest. I'm just making a point that determinism seems to be like death. These concepts can be harmful only if we allow them to be by thinking about them in a way that make our lives unpleasant. In reality, we all experience free will in our lives. Then we die and we don't.

  • Cassius September 5, 2023 at 11:36 AM

    Moved the thread from forum Atoms and Void - Properties, Qualities, Emergence, And Rejection of Atomic Reductionism to forum Rejection Of Atomic Reductionism.
  • Online
    Cassius
    05 - Administrator
    Points
    101,662
    Posts
    13,915
    Quizzes
    9
    Quiz rate
    100.0 %
    • February 24, 2024 at 2:12 PM
    • #12
    Quote from TauPhi

    Considering determinism as harmful or destructive is giving it too much power. I don't think it's such powerful concept. If this is fallacy on my behalf, feel free to point it out but let me explain how I see it.

    I was looking for something else today and came across this. Given the recent discussions with Onenski, Tau Phi, are you of the same opinion today? ;)

Unread Threads

    1. Title
    2. Replies
    3. Last Reply
    1. ⟐ as the symbol of the philosophy of Epicurus 40

      • Like 1
      • michelepinto
      • March 18, 2021 at 11:59 AM
      • General Discussion
      • michelepinto
      • May 12, 2025 at 7:20 AM
    2. Replies
      40
      Views
      7.5k
      40
    3. Don

      May 12, 2025 at 7:20 AM
    1. Is All Desire Painful? How Would Epicurus Answer? 24

      • Like 1
      • Cassius
      • May 7, 2025 at 10:02 PM
      • General Discussion
      • Cassius
      • May 10, 2025 at 3:42 PM
    2. Replies
      24
      Views
      861
      24
    3. sanantoniogarden

      May 10, 2025 at 3:42 PM
    1. Pompeii Then and Now 7

      • Like 2
      • kochiekoch
      • January 22, 2025 at 1:19 PM
      • General Discussion
      • kochiekoch
      • May 8, 2025 at 3:50 PM
    2. Replies
      7
      Views
      1.1k
      7
    3. kochiekoch

      May 8, 2025 at 3:50 PM
    1. Names of Bits of Reality 4

      • Thanks 2
      • Eikadistes
      • May 8, 2025 at 12:12 PM
      • General Discussion
      • Eikadistes
      • May 8, 2025 at 1:31 PM
    2. Replies
      4
      Views
      240
      4
    3. Eikadistes

      May 8, 2025 at 1:31 PM
    1. Why pursue unnecessary desires? 74

      • Like 1
      • Rolf
      • May 2, 2025 at 12:41 PM
      • General Discussion
      • Rolf
      • May 8, 2025 at 12:17 AM
    2. Replies
      74
      Views
      2.2k
      74
    3. Joshua

      May 8, 2025 at 12:17 AM

Latest Posts

  • ⟐ as the symbol of the philosophy of Epicurus

    Don May 12, 2025 at 7:20 AM
  • Introductory Level Study Group via Zoom - Interest Level and Planning

    Kalosyni May 11, 2025 at 7:34 PM
  • Episode 280 - Wrapping Up Cicero's Arguments On Death

    Cassius May 11, 2025 at 10:58 AM
  • Ancient Greek Gods and Goddesses Positive Attributes

    Cassius May 11, 2025 at 7:10 AM
  • Is All Desire Painful? How Would Epicurus Answer?

    sanantoniogarden May 10, 2025 at 3:42 PM
  • Happy Birthday General Thread

    Cassius May 10, 2025 at 4:08 AM
  • Welcome LukeTN!

    Cassius May 9, 2025 at 9:34 PM
  • Pompeii Then and Now

    kochiekoch May 8, 2025 at 3:50 PM
  • Names of Bits of Reality

    Eikadistes May 8, 2025 at 1:31 PM
  • Episode 279 - On "Dying Before One's Time"

    Cassius May 8, 2025 at 11:15 AM

EpicureanFriends - Classical Epicurean Philosophy

  1. Home
    1. About Us
    2. Classical Epicurean Philosophy
  2. Wiki
    1. Getting Started
  3. Frequently Asked Questions
    1. Site Map
  4. Forum
    1. Latest Threads
    2. Featured Threads
    3. Unread Posts
  5. Texts
    1. Core Texts
    2. Biography of Epicurus
    3. Lucretius
  6. Articles
    1. Latest Articles
  7. Gallery
    1. Featured Images
  8. Calendar
    1. This Month At EpicureanFriends
Powered by WoltLab Suite™ 6.0.22
Style: Inspire by cls-design
Stylename
Inspire
Manufacturer
cls-design
Licence
Commercial styles
Help
Supportforum
Visit cls-design
  • Everywhere
  • This Thread
  • This Forum
  • Forum
  • Articles
  • Blog Articles
  • Files
  • Gallery
  • Events
  • Pages
  • Wiki
  • Help
  • FAQ
  • More Options
foo
Save Quote