An Epicurean Understanding of Valentine's Day: Love, Romance, and Free-will

Quote from smoothiekiwi

I see the concept of marriage as... strange. I understand that there may be many advantages- I immediately think of security.

As far as security, there is also long-term committed co-habitation, as there are some people who do stay together for many years without being legally married (but this may be a low number).

In any long-term relationship there is the main benefit of sexuality -- especially during the ages of 30's and 40's...married people have more sex (unless they are in an unhappy marriage).

Married people also tend to do better financially when both are adequately employed and they can then afford to buy a home.

In marriage there is the benefit of companionship. A married couple might move one or more times during their lifetime, or might lose some of their friends due to changes in employment. The couple stays together no matter if employment requires relocation, and so the long-term companionship gives a continuity. Also during retirement and in the later part of life, the companionship is very important.

Quote from Cassius

As in some other current threads where we are discussing pain and pleasure, I don't think that Epicurus was unrealistic about pain: pain is required in order to live to any degree, and more pain is often required for more pleasure. So while "Absence of disturbance" and "absence of pain" are goals in the Epicurean system, they are not in themselves the ultimate goal or the highest goal. PLEASURE trumps both of those, and we can and do accept some degree of both disturbance and pain in order to achieve the pleasures we want in life.

Posing the question in this way really exhibits - in my view - how terrible a mistake it is to postulate ataraxia and aponia as the highest goods rather than pleasure. (And I will add that it makes it worse to leave them untranslated, because that makes it harder for newer people to understand what really is being discussed.) When you make it clear what is involved, it seems to me that it's easy to see that OF COURSE the avoidance of disturbance and the avoidance of pain do not trump all other considerations. Over and over Epicurus makes that clear, and in those situations where it can be argued that he seems to be saying something else, you override that interpretation by looking to the foundations and the full context of the philosophy, and adopt a construction that is consistent with both

The pain that is taken on should be in service to long-term pleasure...so if marriage over-all turns out to be 50/50, then it is a tough call. Having been married I would say that the pleasure was high in the early years, and much lower in the later years. The reason that I divorced was because it at times became unbearable with no hope for reconciling the irreconcilable differences.

I begin to think that marriage is going to be difficult unless both people possess certain characteristics. Here is my "recipe" for a happy marriage, both people must have:

1) superb negotiation skills

2) high emotional intelligence

3) very grounded in reasoned thinking and general intelligence

4) highly co-operative and generous dispositions

5) a people-centered approach to life (hold people as more important than ideas or objects)

6) a shared worldview and goals in life

Quote from smoothiekiwi

I think that most of the stuff you've mentioned is a model of a "perfect partner".

Okay...then not so much as possessing the qualities perfectly, but rather at some level, and also able to improve, otherwise marriage will be a difficult experience and end up in divorce.

Also, I read this somewhere in the past...people who have a drive for extreme novelty...they make bad marriage partners. You'll be able to judge this trait in the way that people enjoy eating because they will be the ones who are continually seeking out new restuarants to try...so eventually they will lose interest in the "comfort sex" of marriage.

The above list I wrote is just some ideas about why it is difficult to be happy in marriage...because there are so many variables. And there could be other variables that I left out.

Statistics show that better educated people tend to be less likely to divorce, and one would hope that they would be happier in their marriages. Perhaps this is because their intelligence and emotional stability leads to a better "hedonic calculus" (or "prudent calculus") during the initial dating process...being better able to vet out their dating choices, before coming to find a life partner.

The quality of one's marriage has such an influence on whether one lives pleasantly and pleasurably...so it is paramount to choose well.

Quote from smoothiekiwi

I can agree with that- but doesn't every human being possesses these traits at least in some quantity? where would you draw the line of "that's enough"?

I also completely agree that these traits help you to live happily- that's extremely important. But when will you stop seeking and being content with the possible partner you have? Pure hedonistic calculus?

The question of...how do you know if someone will make a good life partner?

There are certain personality traits that lead to better outcomes in marriage...conscientiousness and agreeableness:

Quote

Conscientiousness and Agreeableness

As might be expected, high levels of conscientiousness and agreeableness predict relationship satisfaction, in part because these traits signify low impulsivity and high interpersonal trust, respectively.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/insigh…r-romantic-life

And the personality trait of neuroticism is negatively correlated with marriage satisfaction:

Quote

By a broad (and rare) scholarly consensus, neuroticism is the personality trait most strongly predictive of a person’s romantic destiny. High neuroticism is uniformly bad news in this context. For example, in 1987 University of Michigan researchers Lowell Kelly and James Connelly published a study that followed 300 married couples over 30 years. The neuroticism of one spouse predicted dissatisfaction in marriage and divorce. Adding insult to injury, research has also shown that high neuroticism predicts low resilience post-divorce.

Neuroticism appears to interfere with relationship satisfaction in multiple ways. By definition, neurotic individuals tend to be highly reactive to stress and prone to experiencing negative emotions. These tendencies are likely to radiate onto the partner and create problems over time.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/insigh…r-romantic-life

Should you stay with your partner or leave them to find someone better?

There is no reason to stay in a bad relationship unless you already have children. Especially if the relationship is toxic, that would be a good reason to end it for the sake of protecting the children...physical or mental abuse, substance abuse or addiction, and anger management issues. And when there are children, then going to a therapist to improve the relationship would be a good idea, and would also help determine if the relationship can be mended or if the couple should separate or divorce.

If there are no children, then it comes down to a "prudent calculus" and also if the couple is willing to put work into improving the relationship.

Quote from Cassius

In regard to what Kalosyni's comment on always looking for new restaurants being an indicator of marriage failure (kind of funny even to say that)

More specifically the personality trait of extoversion and "adventurism":

Quote

high extroversion can undermine relationships because it is associated with adventurism. A 2008 study by David Schmidt involving more than 13,000 participants in 46 countries found high extroversion to be “positively correlated with interest in short-term mating, unrestricted sociosexuality, having engaged in short-term mate poaching attempts, having succumbed to short-term poaching attempts of others, and lacking relationship exclusivity.”

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/insigh…r-romantic-life

Perhaps it is a litmus test for extravagant tastes that are never satisfied.

Vatican Sayings:

Quote from smoothiekiwi

A toxic environment is far, far worse for a child than a divorce.

Yes I agree. If it sounded as if I thought differently, then it was probably due to my poor writing skills which made it confusing, and apologize for that. Divorce would most likely be best in cases of physical or mental abuse, substance abuse or addiction, and anger management issues. If these aren't present, and one has children, then staying together may be okay.

Quote from Cassius

It's probably true that in some significant number of cases an unhappy marriage can be hidden from the children so that they are not as affected as they would be by divorce. I would dress "sometimes" and that we have another situation where it depends on details and "always" isn't going to apply.

I have a old out-of-state friend, who a while back, told me that he is staying in a unhappy and sexless marriage because he says he doesn't want another man becoming a step-father to his daughter and raising her. It is his second marriage and he became a father later in life...I also suspect that he may think that it would take too much effort to divorce and try to find a new partner later in life...as well as deal with the financial hardship that would come with divorce.

Happy Valentine's Day everyone!

Epicurean wisdom is to enjoy pleasures which do not result in an excess of pain, but to pursue those things which produce more pleasures in the long run. Perhaps then we must use the virtue of love to create pleasure, for it is a pleasure and a joy to love, and to love one's own beloved and to love one's friends.

As an aside...here is a link to "Carte de Tendre"...a 1654 French "map of love", showing the many dangers that can befall the path of romance.

Map of Tendre - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

A wise person will make good choices and will be able to enjoy love and loving with less pain than an unwise person who rushes in too quickly.

It is important to note that Epicurus wrote a book on "Love" and it is listed in third place in Diogenes Laertius book 10...and also a book on "Touch" (much further down on the list)...we can only guess, since these were lost.

Quote

Such then, so numerous are the works of Epicurus; the chief of which are the following:

• thirty-seven treatises on Natural Philosophy;
• one on Atoms and the Void;
• one on Love;
• an abridgment of the Arguments employed against the Natural Philosophers;
• one against the Doctrines of the Megarians;
• Problems;
• Fundamental Propositions;
• a treatise on Choice and Avoidance;
• another on the Chief Good;
• another on the Criterion, called also the Canon;
• Chaeredemus, a treatise on the Gods;
• one on Piety;
• [28] G   Hegesianax
• four essays on Lives;
• one on Just Dealing;
• Neocles;
• one essay addressed to Themista;
• the Banquet;
• Eurylochus;
• one essay addressed to Metrodorus;
• one on Seeing;
• one on the Angle in an Atom;
• one on Touch;
• one on Fate;
• Opinions on the Passions;
• one treatise addressed to Timocrates;
• Prognostics;
• Exhortations;
• a treatise on Images;
• one on Perceptions;
• Aristobulus;
• an essay on Music;
• one on Justice and the other Virtues;
• one on Gifts and Gratitude;
• Polymedes;
• Timocrates, a treatise in three books;
• Metrodorus, in five books;
• Antidorus, in two books;
• Opinions about Diseases, addressed to Mithras;
• Callistolas;
• an essay on Kingly Power;
• Anaximenes;
• Letters.

Since pleasure is our guide, we can know the right path to take by paying attention.

May you love with pleasure, joy, and prudence!