There Is No Necessity To Live Under the Control of Necessity

Regularly Checking In On A Small Screen Device? Bookmark THIS page!

You are currently viewing an older version of the Entry. Click here, to view the current version.

    1. Major Implications:
      1. "Hard determinism" is observably wrong because we can control when we exit life.
      2. This is not an invitation to conclude that suicide is a proper course because necessity rules our existence, but to the contrary an affirmation that the fact that we have the power to end our lives is an example of how necessity does not rule every aspect of our existence, implying also that not only life and death but many decisions of lesser importance are also under our control.
    2. Citations:
      1. Epicurus' Vatican Saying 9
        1. Bailey: "Necessity is an evil, but there is no necessity to live under the control of necessity."
      2. Epicurus' Vatican Saying 40
        1. Bailey: "The man who says that all things come to pass by necessity cannot criticize one who denies that all things come to pass by necessity: for he admits that this too happens of necessity."
      3. Epicurus to Menoeceus Line 133
        1. Bailey: "[133] For indeed who, think you, is a better man than he who holds reverent opinions concerning the gods, and is at all times free from fear of death, and has reasoned out the end ordained by nature? He understands that the limit of good things is easy to fulfill and easy to attain, whereas the course of ills is either short in time or slight in pain; he laughs at (destiny), whom some have introduced as the mistress of all things. (He thinks that with us lies the chief power in determining events, some of which happen by necessity) and some by chance, and some are within our control; for while necessity cannot be called to account, he sees that chance is inconstant, but that which is in our control is subject to no master, and to it are naturally attached praise and blame. [134] For, indeed, it were better to follow the myths about the gods than to become a slave to the destiny of the natural philosophers: for the former suggests a hope of placating the gods by worship, whereas the latter involves a necessity which knows no placation. As to chance, he does not regard it as a god as most men do (for in a god’s acts there is no disorder), nor as an uncertain cause (of all things) for he does not believe that good and evil are given by chance to man for the framing of a blessed life, but that opportunities for great good and great evil are afforded by it. [135] He therefore thinks it better to be unfortunate in reasonable action than to prosper in unreason. For it is better in a man’s actions that what is well chosen (should fail, rather than that what is ill chosen) should be successful owing to chance.
    3. Notes:
    4. Discussion Forum

Share

Unread Threads

    1. Title
    2. Replies
    3. Last Reply

    2. Best Lucretius translation? 12

      • Rolf
      • July 1, 2025 at 1:59 PM
    3. Replies
      12
      Views
      634
      12

    4. Eikadistes

      July 1, 2025 at 1:59 PM

    2. Philodemus' "On Anger" - General - Texts and Resources 19

      • Cassius
      • June 30, 2025 at 8:54 AM
    3. Replies
      19
      Views
      6.1k
      19

    4. Don

      June 30, 2025 at 8:54 AM

    2. The Religion of Nature - as supported by Lucretius' De Rerum Natura 4

      • Kalosyni
      • June 23, 2025 at 12:36 AM
    3. Replies
      4
      Views
      682
      4

    4. Godfrey

      June 23, 2025 at 12:36 AM

    2. New Blog Post From Elli - " Fanaticism and the Danger of Dogmatism in Political and Religious Thought: An Epicurean Reading"

      • Cassius
      • June 20, 2025 at 4:31 PM
    3. Replies
      0
      Views
      1.6k

    2. New Translation of Epicurus' Works 1

      • Eikadistes
      • June 16, 2025 at 6:32 PM
    3. Replies
      1
      Views
      564
      1

    4. Cassius

      June 16, 2025 at 6:32 PM