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 Cassius

    Another very interesting post and I am glad you are pleased with the level of engagement. I am no longer sure if you are Greek or German but your English is top notch!

    Thanks! I am Greek with no foreign roots as far as I can tell. Having studied German philology I teach the language as a part-time job.

    Quote from Cassius

    So are you saying that you have found in your studies that there is in fact not much of a historical precedent for the use of letter-writing for spread of philosophical ideas before Epicurus?

    The use of literary letters in the Greek world is older than Epicurus though not very much older. This genre was originally developed by ancient orators and it was adopted by philosophers (Epicurus was also trained in oratory). Of course the distinction between orators and philosophers was muddy back then. That's why the professional orator and statesman Cicero is also labeled a 'philosopher' even though we was not much of an original thinker.

    Paul was a missionary theologian but the distinction between theologians and philosophers also tended to be murky in antiquity. This is seen for example in how Christian theology adopted many philosophical terms like e. g. the Stoic term pronoia (providence) and changed their content. Just like Paul's letters (which were read during mass for the purposes of catechism) so did the letters of Epicurus function as materials for philosophical catechism.

    The fact that the only specimens coming directly from the pen of Epicurus other than the Kyriai Doxai that survived intact are such letters indicates that their use was more popular among Epicureans to gain new converts and educate themselves compared to his many other authored texts which were voluminous and highly technical and as such not suitable for mass consumption. The Kyriai Doxai is also highly convenient so it's no wonder this managed to survive too.

    Epicureanism had a mission and Epicureans were highly motivated to do what it takes to get as many people as they could to hear their message. Epicurus didn't think of his philosophy as a philosophy like any other. He thought of it as the only true philosophy and the only one of practical and real value.

    It was this missionary-like spirit that goaded Diogenes to take up the expense of erecting a massive rock to transmit Epicurus' message to coming generations. I don't know any other example of people using inscriptions to spread an entire belief system and I don't know any other tradition before Epicureanism that did exactly the same thing using literary epistles. The use of epistles for catechism can't possibly have escaped the notice of non-Epicureans if Epicureanism was indeed popular back then (as it was). But nobody would have had any motive to copy this practice unless they also had their own message to spread to everybody and a strong missionary zeal to go with it. The early Christians were precisely such a movement.

    Edited 2 times, last by Peter Konstans: Forgot to mention the PDs (October 6, 2023 at 4:04 PM).

    Here are some thoughts about how a theory regarding politics that is compatible with Epicureanism could look like.

    Because justice is relative in Epicureanism it follows that the desire to pursue politics is not ultimately rooted in the pursuit of justice. Politics is rooted in two things: the individual desire for power and recognition on one hand and on the other the collective desire to work together in solidarity for common insurance against the forces of nature as well as against depredations by other human groups.

    From an Epicurean viewpoint, the first desire is natural but not necessary. So for reasons rooted in Epicurean ethics, keeping political ambitions and passions to a bare minimum is always advisable. A culture of modesty in politicians such as that enforced by the ancient Roman censors would be beneficial.

    The second desire is as natural as eating and hydrating and yet fulfilling it is actually painful since it involves individual duties and costs. So justice comes in as a necesssary weapon for ensuring that everyone in a political entity contributes his fair share to our common insurance. The urge for someone to conform with justice as defined above is rooted in two things: 1) personal affinity and benevolence towards the group 2) subtle or violent coercion. The less affinity people have for the group the more coercion is required to have them behave justly and as more coercion is used to that end, overt violence rears its head until a vicious cycle finally tears the group asunder in flames. 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.

    So a hypothetical Epicurean society would be incompatible with the political culture of ancient Greco-Roman society because the desire for individual glory was too strong. And it would be incompatible with contemporary Western political culture because it encourages habits and attitudes that result in weak affinity towards the group.

    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.

    In the first century BC the forces of destruction (emanating from the domestic political mistakes of the previous century) were already working in full swing and the situation was no longer salvageable for the Roman Republic. In such a titanic implosion it was impossible for anyone to stand by the wayside and watch. All Epicureans could do at this point is pick the side that suited their personal interests best. And the side that suited the interests of the little guys best was clearly the populist camp. So I agree with you that engaging in violence is not always avoidable for Epicureans and in certain irreversible historical situations engaging in it is the only possible option left for a more pleasant future. Israeli military historian Martin Van Creveld has even cited examples convicingly demonstrating that in periods of war and instability hedonism of all sorts actually tends to flourish and bonds of friendship between people grow stronger and more sensuous. He notes how after the war period people tend to recall the memories of those times with fondness and longing.

    Has anybody noticed that? Great news for pleasure! The legendary silphium plant from Cyrene which Epicurus must have known and possibly even tasted - thought to have gone extinct by the time of Pliny - may have resurfaced in Cappadocia, modern Turkey. There are other proposed candidates as to the identity of this ancient herbaceous rockstar but this is the best bet.

    Hopefully we'll be able to get hold of some seeds in the future so we can resurrect its culinary delights. As an Epicurean I am excited about this. The intoxicatingly attractive smell of this plant would procure us a concrete sensory experience that comes to us directly from the age of Epicurus without the mediation of later centuries. It would be the pure smell of BC antiquity, capable of carrying us aloft and thrusting us though time before gently dropping us in the middle of Epicurus' garden.

    Because of silphium's unique connection with the Greco-Roman world and the association of its native Cyrene with the hedonist school, I think it would be a good idea to incorporate ferula drudeana into the symbolic imagery of modern Epicureanism.

    This miracle plant was eaten into extinction 2,000 years ago—or was it?
    Silphion cured diseases and made food tasty, but Emperor Nero allegedly consumed the last stalk. Now, a Turkish researcher thinks he’s found a botanical…
    www.nationalgeographic.com
    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:

    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 Jo.
    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.

    This assumes that most kids are - at least potentially - interested in something taught in school. I would say that, sadly, more than half are not really interested in anything school has to offer and that there's no trick that can change that. Of course everybody - whether they like it or not - has to be literate and numerate in a modern society. But other than that, 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.

    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.

    Hello fellow garden dwellers. Have a happy and pleasurable new year. I was reading this book recently by Clare Chambers https://www.amazon.com/Against-Marria…l/dp/0198744005 which makes the case that we should abolish marriage as a state-recognized institution and permit it only as a private ceremony bereft of all legal significance. Maybe this is the course that a society founded on Epicurean principles would opt for. Epicurus himself never married and expressed reservations when it comes to marriage. An Epicurean society should permit Epicurean marriages (they are a perfect opportunity to throw a party!) but we should allow for them to be terminated at any time by any of the two parties without the slightest legal hassles. Christian or Muslim marriages should in my view not be allowed in an Epicurean society.

    Quote from Don
    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 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.

    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.

    Quote from Cassius
    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.

    A hypothetical Epicurean community could be anything from a small village where the majority are Epicureans to a state where Epicureanism is the officially sponsored state ideology or 'religion', kind of like Confucianism was in pre-modern China. 1st century ancient Rome did contain many Epicureans in privileged positions but it was not a society founded and operating on avowedly Epicurean values. Similarly there are powerful people today who claim to represent Christian values and genuinely see themselves as Christians but they live in a society that was actually founded on secular - or to use 19th century terminology 'bourgeois' values - and operates according to them. In this particular sense we can say for example that some genuinely Islamic societies do exist today whereas genuinely Christian societies have all but disappeared.

    Quote from Nate
    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.

    That's awesome! Maybe the Epicurean community could expand the hedonicon in the future with texts written today by living Epicureans such as yourself. Would you consider authoring an essay or maybe a literary letter for inclusion in future editions?

Unread Threads

    1. Title
    2. Replies
    3. Last Reply

    2. Evidence of Survivors of Pompeii and Herculaneum 1

      • kochiekoch
      • November 20, 2024 at 8:17 PM
    3. Replies
      1
      Views
      102
      1

    4. Don

      November 20, 2024 at 8:17 PM

    2. “Better to lose the money because of me than to lose me because of the money.” 3

      • TauPhi
      • November 19, 2024 at 9:30 PM
    3. Replies
      3
      Views
      232
      3

    4. Don

      November 19, 2024 at 9:30 PM

    2. An Anti-Epicurean Article - "The Meaning of Life Is Not Happiness" (For Future Reference) 12

      • Cassius
      • November 19, 2024 at 12:17 PM
    3. Replies
      12
      Views
      902
      12

    4. Pacatus

      November 19, 2024 at 12:17 PM

    2. Was De Rerum Natura intended as satire? A lecture by THM Gellar-Goad. 14

      • Julia
      • November 11, 2024 at 4:09 PM
    3. Replies
      14
      Views
      1.1k
      14

    4. Julia

      November 11, 2024 at 4:09 PM

    2. New Slideshow: Nothing Comes From Nothing

      • Cassius
      • November 10, 2024 at 3:51 PM
    3. Replies
      0
      Views
      538