The Full Epicurean Reasoning Regarding a Material Universe

    • New

    I wanted to start this thread so that we can create a concise explanation of the reasoning from start to finish about how we come to understand that the universe is a material universe. This would be based on both Letter to Pythocles and Letter to Herodotus...as well as Lucretius. The purpose of this is so that we can all easily explain this both to ourselves and to others.

    Also, to see if there is anything we need to add from modern understanding, or is the Epicurean explanation complete.

    More coming soon.

    • New

    Creating a concise explanation would also be the basis and reasoning behind recognizing that the soul is mortal and that the gods are indifferent.

    This might be of interest: Chapter 2 - "Atomic Worlds" of Catherine Wilson's book Epicureanism: A Very Short Introduction (but I don't have it)...here is a link to the overview:

    https://academic.oup.com/book/746/chapter-abstract/135401379?login=false&redirectedFrom=fulltext

    Quote

    Wilson's insights into atomic worlds highlight a shift from traditional philosophical views that often incorporate divine oversight or eternal consequences. Instead, she advocates for a perspective grounded in materialism and the understanding of nature, which can lead to a more liberated and pleasurable existence.

    • New

    We had a good discussion of this topic in our live meeting of October 14.

    It's not enough just to have a passing familiarity with genera Epicurean physics or even atomnism. Simply granting that the universe is made of particles does not at all guarantee that you are going to reach the same conclusions Epicurus did - Democritus famously reached very different conclusions, and as a result the Skeptic were able to throw Democritus' positions against both the Epicureans and the Stoics in the way they impact a coherent theory of knowledge.

    The full Epicurean argument is presented first in the letters to Herodotus and Pythoces, but in its most complete form in Lucretius. Important aspects of it are also preserved in the presentation of Velleius in Cicero's "On The Nature of The Gods."

    And as we discussed last night, I think David Sedley's "Inferential Foundations of Epicurean Ethics" is very helpful because it explains the Epicurean technique of reasoning about the nature of the universe before it explains how that technique is applied to ethics.

    So while this post doesn't really answer your question, it points in the direction that the answer can be found, and these resources can serve as a basis for a full answer. Simply listing out core positions such as that the univserse is composed of matter and void does little to assist you unless you are prepared to take the next steps of studying and understanding the reasons why Epicurus was persuaded that the universe is composed ONLY of matter and void.

    This is parallel to why it is so hard for people to understand what "absence of pain" refers to when they fail to take to heart that human feeling can be categorized down into ONLY pleasure and pain. If you don't follow the reasoning on the exclusivity of matter/void and pleasure/pain, then you aren't going to appreciate the strength of the conclusions. And in BOTH cases the ultimate proof comes down to understanding Epicurus' position on why "all sensations are true" and that we do not entertain as possibly true speculative assertions for which there is no supporting evidence.


    Thread

    Inferential Foundations of Epicurean Ethics - Article By David Sedley

    In researching other issues I came across this article by David Sedley: Inferential Foundations of Epicurean Ethics

    While I have some issues with the first section, but that's only a brief summary of Epicurean ethics and not essential to the main point of the article. The main part thrust of the article is to examine how Epicurus constructed his argument that in ethics good and bad divides into pleasure and pain in much the same way that in physics everything int he universe divides into bodies…
    Cassius
    January 22, 2026 at 2:28 PM
    • New

    Here are my notes from last night's Zoom meeting:

    Apologies as these are pretty rough. After the topic was presented, we went around the Zoom circle to ask for thoughts. I did not take note of who said what, so these are anonymous.

    ***

    atomic theory --> occums razor --> no way of verifying after-life --> different religions have different views

    ***

    Why does a material soul not continue on?

    ***

    traditions embedded in the culture

    ***

    science agrees with Epicurus ---> no supernatural/ no life after death/ no god(s)

    ***

    law of excluded middle --> either matter or not matter

    ***

    energy [not just atoms]

    ***

    continuity of memory is a sticking point

    memory as a physical explanation (loss of memory)

    ***

    black box thinking

    kids grow up with this supernatural thinking

    God is one big black box

    ***

    Lucretius Book 3 presents relevant argument

    soul comes from the body, soul is part of the body, literally physically part of your body, your psyche

    just like you can't remove a hand and have the hand still stay alive

    your body is a vessel --> just lik a vessel leaks away water when it breaks --> and smoke wafts away --> when the body breaks the soul leaks away

    ***

    need to reason through --> one argument is better than another

    viable, consistent, with evidence

    attestation --> reason to think this

    ***

    Inferential Foundations of Epicurean Ethics - David Sedley

    ***

    attestation from the senses

    ***

    observable and measurable

    can never have evidence of going to heaven and some things can't be measured

    people are hoping for their own immortality

    ***

    doxa ---> judgement

    junk assertion, no way to prove or disprove

    ***

    Christopher Hitchens quote: what is presented without evidence can be dismissed without evidence

    • New

    Thanks for the link. I think I've seen people link to this before but I've never listened myself and it would be interesting to get feedback from those who have.

    In the meantime, I have to question the attention to detail, or sympathy to Epicurus, of a professor who would post a video with an image of a man who is not only clearly not Epicurus (as we know from the ancient busts) bit who is also not nearly as impressive visually as the real Epicurus.

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.