Have PD35 and Vatican Saying 7 been straw-manned?

New Graphics: Are You On Team Epicurus? | Comparison Chart: Epicurus vs. Other Philosophies | Chart Of Key Epicurean Quotations | Accelerating Study Of Canonics Through Philodemus' "On Methods Of Inference" | Note to all users: If you have a problem posting in any forum, please message Cassius  

PDF

    EDIT: Grammar got screwed up as Eikadistes pointed out, so i corrected it.

    Hello all,

    I’ve been thinking about PD 35 and Vatican Saying 7, A common interpretation (especially in modern discussions) is that even a single unjust act results in ever-lasting fear or instability until death, since one can never be certain of escaping detection. But I’m wondering whether that overstates the claim and may be a strawman to knock down Epicurus more by imagining that Epicurus says that someone who stole a DVD as a kid 10 years ago will still live in constant fear. To be clear he's absolutely against all injustice for it's anxiety but i wonder if the points on it destroying happiness are more about a single act or a persistent trait or lifestyle.

    Both texts use present participles (τὸν λάθρῃ τι ποιοῦντα, δύσκολον), in Vatican Saying 7 it is "A wrongdoer (someone who is persistent in wrongdoing)" and in PD35 it is "One who secretly violates the pact (a persistent trait)" which might suggest not merely a one-off action but someone engaged in injustice as an ongoing practice or disposition.

    My main question is as follows: Did Epicurus claim that any single act of injustice (no matter how small) ruins a life through constant anxiety unless caught or turning oneself in, or is he primarily targeting those who engage in injustice as a recurring pattern or stable trait being filled with fear because they constantly violate the pact?

    I’d be especially interested in how people read the Greek participles here, perhaps people like Don and Bryan could help in clarifying whether Epicurus’ point is meant to apply universally to even a single unjust act, or more specifically to injustice as a way of life or permanent trait.

    Thanks!

    Edited 2 times, last by wbernys (May 25, 2026 at 1:17 AM).

    Quote

    "Who that is wise practices that which the laws forbid, knowing that they will escape notice? A simple-minded accusation is easy to pass." (Usener 18, from Against Kolṓtēs.)

    Epíkouros stops short of saying, 'don't ever break the law'.

    This reflection seems poignant in times of lawlessness and collapse, when "someone establishes a law" that "no longer possesses the nature of the just" (KD 37), or when many "things appear not to fit the definition of what is considered to be just" (KD 38).

    When this is the case, I think the wise person would continue using comparative analysis to determine which options are most profitable (including potential law-breaking). In the case of betraying a friend versus breaking the law, the suffering one commits to the soul is greater with betrayal:

    Quote

    "And so the wise tortured on a rack [suffer] no [more] pain than the torture of a friend, and in defense of them will die. For if one betrays a friend everything through one’s life will become frustrated by doubt and strained" (Vatican Sayings 56-57)

    I have no ability to add anything to your parsing of the Greek, but I strongly agree with the direction you are going in each of your evaluations.

    1 - Certainly we are going to sometimes break the law - that's inherent in the full analysis of how justice is contextual andchanges over time. When something becomes unjust, you aren't going to wait for the next procedural permission-granting to consider the situation unjust and act on that consideration. Sure you have to take into consideration who has power and how they may punish you, but we're talking philosophy and justice, and there's no cosmic enforcement mechanism that would convert "the law" into something any more than it is - a social structure among living people.

    2 - Certainly Epicurus would not consider "all sins to be equal" such that stealing a DVD when you are six years old leads to a life of torment.

    Any readings which would go in the opposite direction from your thoughts would be highly suspect.

    Quote from Eikadistes

    I'm curious about the phrasing you got. I might have it wrong and need to review.

    Hmm. Odd. You're right. I asked ai for grammar help and it may have f'd up the greek. Can't edit my original post to change it though for some reason.

    For what I've seen the point still stands, relied on Cyril Bailey who translates it as "evil-doer" and "one who acts in secret contravention" with present tense. And Tim J. Young in classic caves translation does the same.

    • New
    Quote from wbernys

    Did Epicurus claim that any single act of injustice (no matter how small) ruins a life through constant anxiety unless caught or turning oneself in, or is he primarily targeting those who engage in injustice as a recurring pattern or stable trait being filled with fear because they constantly violate the pact?

    To your original question above: I'm concluding (perhaps from ingnorance) that these PDs and VSs as well as interpretations of Epicurus' meanings are generally focused on why you shouldn't do unlawful or unjust acts that are immoral is because you won't be able to live happily since the pain will outweigh the pleasure of feeling good about yourself.

    I can't get away from a belief that laws and morals are not REALLY established by social compact. Obedience to laws is by social compact, but the laws are not created that way. They are established by those who have power withinof the community by lineage, or military or economic might. Is there an objection that in a democratic system that can't happen? I hope a comparative study of power politics today, will show that power was exercised in Epicurus' time too by virtue of power exercised by wealth etc in the same way. THEREFORE a discussion of just or unjust laws is missing the point within this discussion topic.

    Lastly, I've always taken this PD 35 with a measure of salt. Our mental power of rationalizing allows us to violate every law we've ever violated. And our capacity to forget over time, allows us to suffer less and less over time. And don't forget the concept of self foregiveness which itself is a major factor in it's use or abuse. I'm not in favor of saying people are evil or stupid for thinking they can get away with it. But I think if you balance the real and potential pleasures of life actions against the real and potential pains of one's actions in life, that is still powerfully within Epicurus' message.

    Dave Tamanini

    Harrisburg, PA, USA

    • New
    Quote from DaveT

    I can't get away from a belief that laws and morals are not REALLY established by social compact. Obedience to laws is by social compact, but the laws are not created that way. They are established by those who have power withinof the community by lineage, or military or economic might.

    I might have said some of what Dave said differently, but I think this part I quoted is especially correct. Some laws may actually be by compact but the evolution of the laws as set out by Lucretius makes clear that force has always been a factor and is a factor that never really goes away no matter how much we might like it to do so. if we perceive that there is no actual thread of someone punishing us for committing a crime, that's going to make a big difference, and I presume that's why Epicurus says that such circumstances (as when we are confident we won't ever be discovered) pose more difficult questions.

    One thing is for sure - there are no supernatural forces that will punish us, so there have to be real-world factors in play to cause us real concern.

    • New
    Quote from Bryan

    Many harmful actions can be committed without much fear if the perpetrator has enough power or protection.

    Interesting point, I feel Epicurus would mainly counter this by saying that the power or protection that allows one to commit harmful actions is itself a constant source of stress and fear, they have to constantly be on watch to preserve their wealth and benefactors, they also tainted with restless desires which limit their own happiness along with shame or a "bad conscience".

    Corrupt leaders need a ton of bodyguards for a reason. Besides even if they can feel freedom from fear of imprisonment, they will at least still live in some fear of keeping their crimes secret, leading to disgrace or political revolutions against them. One may imagine situations like corrupt presidents or oligarchs in Africa committing all sorts of acts of corruption due to their power, they are constantly under threat of politics and potential coups and the like and have to constantly watch for any developments with striking workers or something to keep their power.

    It's always important to remember the firm confidence you see so many dictators and the powerful have on tv is mainly the face they want you to see and like to imagine themselves as having, and not what goes on behind the scenes. Which i like to think is more stressful than most think, perhaps that is naivety talking though.

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.