Epicureanism as the spiritual essence or 'religion' of an entire community

We've been on a history of letter writing tangent on this thread; so, in an effort to get back on track, I'm copying and reformatting in the form of a list the initial questions that Peter Konstans posed in the first post. Feel free to respond to any or all of the individual questions:

Quote from Peter Konstans

1. Has anybody ever experimented with the idea of Epicureanism as a formal spiritual identity capable of defining entire communities? What would Epicureanism look like if it wasn't merely a brotherhood of friends discussing philosophy but was also a sort of quasi religious worldview with its own intricate rituals, symbols and ceremonies covering every aspect of life?
2. Could Epicureanism ever assume a form where it would be able to successfully compete with well-established religious traditions for the hearts and minds of huge numbers of people?
3. What would a 'holy book' of Epicureanism look like and what would it contain other than the letters of Epicurus and the poem of Lucretius?
4. To what extent can the views and advice of brilliant therapists or educators like John Gottman, Gigi Engle or Dan Buettner be thought of as Epicurean and admitted in some form in the 'scriptures' and literature of Epicureanism?
5. How would an Epicurean society raise and educate its kids? Since school is so horrendously boring, tedious and unpleasant to children (school is also the only place other than prison where people are quite likely to be bullied and tortured) how would an Epicurean society deal with the problem of educating the new generation?
6. Given that modern Western hyper-liberalism presents society and individuals with many obvious problems that are impossible to deny today what laws, customs and institutions would hypothetical Epicurean lawmakers create to avoid them?

Quote from Peter Konstans

A culture of modesty in politicians such as that enforced by the ancient Roman censors would be beneficial.

I fully agree and this reminds me of the story about the person whispering in the ear of the general in the triumph that he is only a mortal.

Quote from Peter Konstans

So for reasons rooted in Epicurean ethics, any action and attitude that could conceivably diminish the benevolent disposition of individuals towards the group (for example extreme wealth inequality or jailing people for trivial matters like drug possession for personal use or treating poor foreigners equally or better than the poorest natives) must be seen as unjust because it invites the violent forces of destruction.

I generally agree here, but the details are tricky. Cassius Longinus did not think that force / violence (presumably only in extreme circumstances) was off limits, and I do not consider him to be a bad Epicurean for so engaging. Or, at the very least, I don't have enough information to be comfortable concluding as to the extremity of the situation whether he was or was not correct in his choices. In any case I don't think there can be a "bright line" on these issues. I would see the following references as allowing for force or physical violence in the proper circumstances, and I suspect that there are others that could be drawn to the same conclusion with these simply being among the most prominent:

PD06. In order that men might not fear one another, there was a natural benefit to be had from government and kingship, provided that they are able to bring about this result.

PD07. Some men wished to become famous and conspicuous, thinking that they would thus win for themselves safety from other men. Wherefore if the life of such men is safe, they have obtained the good which nature craves; but if it is not safe, they do not possess that for which they strove at first by the instinct of nature.

PD14. The most unalloyed source of protection from men, which is secured to some extent by a certain force of expulsion, is in fact the immunity which results from a quiet life, and retirement from the world.

PD39. The man who has best ordered the element of disquiet arising from external circumstances has made those things that he could akin to himself, and the rest at least not alien; but with all to which he could not do even this, he has refrained from mixing, and has expelled from his life all which it was of advantage to treat thus.

PD40. As many as possess the power to procure complete immunity from their neighbors, these also live most pleasantly with one another, since they have the most certain pledge of security, and, after they have enjoyed the fullest intimacy, they do not lament the previous departure of a dead friend, as though he were to be pitied.

Torquatus in On Ends Book One -XVI: Yet nevertheless some men indulge without limit their avarice, ambition and love of power, lust, gluttony and those other desires, which ill-gotten gains can never diminish but rather must inflame the more; inasmuch that they appear proper subjects for restraint rather than for reformation. Men of sound natures, therefore, are summoned by the voice of true reason to justice, equity, and honesty. For one without eloquence or resources dishonesty is not good policy, since it is difficult for such a man to succeed in his designs, or to make good his success when once achieved.

This is a subject in which it is very difficult to talk without summoning up modern partisan political examples, but I think it's both important that we discuss this in generic terms as we are now doing, and also important to keep those modern hot-button examples at bay so that the discussion can be truly exhaustive. Once we flesh out the principles we can let people apply those principles to their personal situations as they see fit.

Edit: Cassius mentions in his letter to Cicero of January, 45 BC, that another general fighting on the same side as Cassius -- Panza -- was also a follower of Pleasure. ("Consequently Pansa, who follows pleasure, keeps his hold on virtue, and those also whom you call pleasure-lovers are lovers of what is good and lovers of justice, and cultivate and keep all the virtues."} And of course I have not listed in the above cites Torqatus' defense of his ancestors who fought enemies barehanded and even had members of their family executed for failing to obey military rules of order in explicitly Epicurean terms.

Quote from Peter Konstans

How would an Epicurean society raise and educate its kids? Since school is so horrendously boring, tedious and unpleasant to children (school is also the only place other than prison where people are quite likely to be bullied and tortured) how would an Epicurean society deal with the problem of educating the new generation?

I think that much of what makes school boring and unpleasant for children is their lack of choice in what exactly they are learning.

This isn't exactly a new approach but I think that giving kids the freedom to study what they are actually interested in, once they've got the essentials down, could very much make the whole "school" thing compatible with Epicureanism, without it being much of a dilemma at all. This could ensure that the children are actually happy to learn and that attending school causes them much less pain.

Bullying is of course a bit trickier. In my experience talking to people about these issues and having an authority figure (who actually knows what they are doing) appeal to the bully's sense of compassion is helpful, though I wouldn't presume my experience to be the only one. However I do believe that talking about it is always good and in the worst cases changing schools is definitely for the best.

The child would know that removing their pain is the top priority (and that this is more effective than comforting themselves by satisfying unnecessary desires). They might conclude that they should endure the potential pain of pointing out their troubles to avoid the greater pains of bullying or the fact that it interferes with their studying, which could cause them much pain later in life, should they fall behind in class.

Jo. raises good points and some interesting ideas.

One important thing to remember is that Epicurus wasn't opposed to education in the broad sense. He often uses words like study or meditate on and the like. The word he uses for what he opposed was παιδεία (paideia), as in:

Quote

Fragment 117: μακαρίζω σε, ᾧ Ἀπελλῆ, ὅτι καθαρὸς πάσης παιδείας ἐπὶ φιλοσοφίαν ὥρμησας.

I pronounce you blessed, O Apelles! You rush to the study of wisdom pure of all indoctrination (enculturation).

Fragment 163: παιδείαν δὲ πᾶσαν, μακάριε, φεῦγε τἀκάτιον ἀράμενος.

Flee from all indoctrination (enculturation), O blessed one, and hoist the sail of your own little boat.

(My literal translations)

VS45. The study of what is natural produces not braggarts nor windbags nor those who show off the culture that most people fight about, but those who are fearless and self-reliant and who value their own good qualities rather than the good things that have come to them from external circumstances.

οὐ κομποὺς οὐδὲ φωνῆς ἐργαστικοὺς οὐδὲ τὴν περιμάχητον παρὰ τοῖς πολλοῖς παιδείαν ἐνδεικνυμένους φυσιολογία παρασκευάζει, ἀλλὰ σοβαροὺς καὶ αὐτάρκεις καὶ ἐπὶ τοῖς ἰδίοις ἀγαθοῖς, οὐκ ἐπὶ τοῖς τῶν πραγμάτων μέγα φρονοῦντες.

(Saint-Andre translation)

Display More

Paideia - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Quote from Wikipedia

Paideia was meant to instill aristocratic virtues in the young citizen men who were trained in this way. An ideal man within the polis would be well-rounded, refined in intellect, morals, and physicality, so training of both the body and mind was important. Both practical, subject-based schooling as well as a focus upon the socialization of individuals within the aristocratic order of the polis were a part of this training.

“Paul and Paideia: Greco-Roman education as a background to Paul’s conflict in Corinth.” Ancient History Research Seminar, Macquarie University, Sydney, September 2011.

“Paul and Paideia: Greco-Roman education as a background to Paul’s conflict in Corinth.” Ancient History Research Seminar, Macquarie University, Sydney,…

www.academia.edu

PS. ἐπὶ φιλοσοφίαν ὥρμησας (epi philosophian ōrmēsas) from Fr.117: I *really* like the connotation of this phrase! Philosophy is obvious, so however you want to translate that. ὥρμησας conveys a sense of rushing headlong toward something. I get the image in my head of a young kid in a foot race, running with everything they have, toward the goal. Keep that in mind when you read rush or, worse, hasten in some translations. So, maybe: I call you blessed, Apelles! You rush headlong with all you have toward the study of wisdom, free and clear of all cultural indoctrination.

Quote from Peter Konstans

instead of wasting resources teaching kids lots of material they are either unwilling or unable to absorb, it would be better to pick those that have real talent and focus on educating them so that they can assume upon maturity those jobs and responsibilities that require specialization and education.

I would offer a rephrasing of that to:

Find out what talent (and interests) the children have and what excites them about learning and focus on educating that with an emphasis on the individual student.

This would be an overhaul of the entire educational system, but it could potentially have far reaching effects. From cookie cutter to artisanal pastries, so to speak.

Education can't be just about jobs and responsibilities. Yes, life skills and practical skills should be taught (and often aren't now). But education should provide a platform for exploration, experimentation, critical thinking, and finding out answers in a supportive environment.

Quote from Don

From cookie cutter to artisanal pastries, so to speak.

I was reading too fast and read: "cookie cutter artisanal pastries" - which made me think of how here in America some grocery stores turn out these "fake" artisanal breads and pastries (unlike the good quality that you find in Europe.) And then that had me thinking about how much comes out of "economies of scale" for the sake of efficiency and greater profits. So unless that shifts then we are stuck with things. Schools are run under the "economies of scale" mentality - with a focus almost like a "factory" setting. But I don't have school age kids, so probably a bit out of touch with things these days.

Quote from Peter Konstans

because peaceful co-existence with those faiths is impossible for us in the long run.

I would like us to be careful and avoid getting into modern politics, but in generic terms I think that this question falls under general issues of justice and is probably directly relevant to the ending of the ancient Epicurean school (and the ancient world in general).

The example you raise (religious aspects of marriage) could be a useful way of getting at the larger issue: Being free to pursue one's choices seems generally be conducive to pleasure, but enacting rules in a society can also be productive of the safety and ongoing pleasure of the society. Skepticism toward religious claims is a major aspect of Epicurean philosophy, but (being a philosophy rather than a political party) the philosophy gives you general principles to consider but doesn't tell you exactly which to pursue. I do think it's useful to discuss how far an Epicurean community would act on that religious skepticism, but it would probably be necessary to first be clear what kind of "Epicurean community" is being discussed. A regular nation in which many of the leading politicians were openly identifying as Epicurean? We might have an actual example of that in the Rome of 50 BC.

Quote from Peter Konstans

This assumes that all people have a special gift or talent waiting to be discovered and nurtured. This is an old Western humanist notion that I personally don't think is as true as we'd like to think. Some (probably most) people just don't have any hidden talent and that's ok. This mentality is liberating because it stops us from pressuring kids to 'prove themselves' or 'make something of themselves'. What if just accept that the most valid reason to stick around is to just be: to give pleasure and to take pleasure.

I should probably rephrase my original rephrasing again in light of your objection, but I'll just forge ahead. Upon reflection, I don't think every person has some innate, hidden "God-given" "special gift" or talent that needs uncovering. I do think everyone is interested in something, but without exposing students to a broad range of topics, they may never have another opportunity in having a glimpse of a wider world that's available to them, especially in smaller, rural communities. Speaking from a US perspective, as that's my background and experience.

I would agree that providing an education in the value of pleasure in one's life would be positive.

I don't think a strictly vocational education that it sounded to me like you were advocating is a positive direction. Are you implying only a select elite should be educated? You've also used the term "real talent," but are you referring to the select few who have "real talent" with the hoi polloi somehow being given a lesser education:

Quote

it would be better to pick those that have real talent and focus on educating them so that they can assume upon maturity those jobs and responsibilities that require specialization and education.

Of course, this begs the question "who determines what is a 'real talent'?"

Quote from Peter Konstans

What would a 'holy book' of Epicureanism look like and what would it contain other than the letters of Epicurus and the poem of Lucretius?

I believe it would look something like this:

https://www.amazon.com/Hedonicon-Holy…s/dp/B0CNTN6KH6

I aim to include Philodemus' prose and Diogenes of Oinoanda's etching in future editions.