I came here on this platform after reading the book "living for pleasure" By Emily Austin, she is a good writer and that book helped me a lot, and I am interested in reading more gems of such kind, so I would really appreciate it if you recommend me some good books on Epicureanism that you liked, (preferably about Ethics, but metaphysics and Epistemology also works ), and it should not be a heavy book, heavy in the sense of having too many pages or being too complex, thank you.
Posts by UnPaid_Landlord
-
-
Godfrey thanks for this brilliant post, I was wondering for the longest time what would an Epicureanism version of this would look like and I am delighted at this approach, I would try it out and add it to my Epicurean arsenel.
-
I watched a Youtube video on Camus tonight and i get the impression that interpretation of him is all over the board, all the way from existentialism, which he apparently strenuously denied, to there not being a dimes worth of difference between Camus and Nietzsche. It all seems to hinge on exactly who or what is being labeled as "absurd," and why, and that's where the lack of clarity is so glaring, much like the ambiguity of the legacy of Democritus leaves everyone wondering whether he was laughing "with" humanity or "at" humanity. I tend to think after brief exposure that Camus doesn't deserve to be considered to be on the "nihilist" team, but it also does not seem likely to me that his work could be interpreted so broadly if there were not some smoldering coals that create the smoke that surrounds him. I am thinking (so far) that there is probably a lot to learn from taking apart his views, but probably not much to be gained by holding up any system that he created as a model to emulate.
I know right ? It all depends on what he meant by "Absurd" and there are so many different definitions of the same, it can be quite confusing, btw, I would appreciate it if you share the link of the video you watched,
Here is a video from my end, I think he explains it well :-
-
Display More
Please don't take these or my prior remarks as being unfriendly, because I do not mean them in that way at all. All of us have gone through different philosophies in the past and we would not be here now if we have not.
Having said that, this is an Epicurean forum, and not a generalist philosophy group where all philosophies are equally "respected" and discussed dispassionately. And therefore I would say:
As I understand it, it's more about accepting the reality with it's absurd nature and still living passionately
This is exactly the point in issue --- life does NOT have an absurd nature, from my point of view, and from what I read of Epicurus, he would say the same. Giving in on the question of whether "life is absurd" and not challenging that perspective is to give up the issue at the beginning.
but I think it need not be a pessimistic philosophy, I don't why some people just misunderstand many things as negative, for example I have personally met some fellows who think Buddhism is really negative and pessimistic, and I can't understand what them at all,
Same perspective here, but in the reverse. I DO see Buddhism as essentially negative and pessimistic, and I cannot understand at all why someone would view it otherwise.
To repeat, we have all gone through different phases and perspectives and I don't make these statements to be argumentative. If we didn't have discussions with people who come to Epicurean discussion with different views, then we'd never give anyone the opportunity to engage with pro-Epicurean positions and potentially change their minds.
But we would not be an Epicurean forum if we did not --- at the same time that we welcome people who are not currently in tune with Epicuruean views - state clearly how we see Epicurus' views compare with others, and if we did not advocate for Epicurus' position, rather than accept very contradictory positions as if they were equally valid.
In this thread we're focusing on Absurdism and digging directly into the negative aspects, and it is unfortunate that we're doing so without having first engaged with you (talking to Unpaid_Landord) on the commonalities between what you're saying and Epicurus. I hope that you'll not get such an immediate bad impression from this thread that you don't continue to keep an open mind about this forum and Epicurus in general.
I don't think Epicurus would advise starting out tacking divisive subjects immediately, so this turn of discussion is probably unfortunate. But I think Epicurus would say that when clear issues arise, and others are watching (this is a public forum that anyone can read) it's best not to gloss over and defer deep issues for a later time that may never come. That's one reason why so much of the preliminary materials on this website that people go through in the registration process are geared toward putting such issues front and center, so they get discussed early.
It's fine my friend, I am not upset or anything, I don't actually care all that much about this, the simple reason I follow absurdism or anything for that matter is because it helped me or worked for me, that's it, I am not interested in convincing anyone of my philosophical stance, whether it's my absurdism or my Epicureanism, because I am not a propogator, just a follower, I follow it as long as it works and drop it if it doesn't,
The simple reason I commented earlier and gave a reply to your posts was to give my own point of view regarding what I thought of as 'Absurdism' ,
"Same perspective here, but in the reverse. I DO see Buddhism as essentially negative and pessimistic, and I cannot understand at all why someone would view it otherwise. ;)"
Note :- I don't get how to quote more than once so I am just copying pasting,
for me the best philosophy is the one that works for 'You', if it doesn't work for you, even the most beautiful and logical philosophies are useless, so yeah it seems like Buddhism didn't make sense to you but Epicureanism did, so that's good enough
"I hope that you'll not get such an immediate bad impression from this thread that you don't continue to keep an open mind about this forum and Epicurus in general."
Well no ? I didn't really get a bad impression or anything, so yeah, so don't worry about it, (I am just talking not arguing, I wonder if my posts come across like that ?)
Anyways I like Epicurus and his philosophy a lot, because he has worked so far for me, so not gonna stop learning it anytime soon.
The comments by everyone on the topic has been insightful, I am learning a lot, thanks
-
Display More
Thanks for the outline and it is a very good first post. My only comment to start out with would be as to this part:
What is the Goal of Epicureanism?
It's Aponia and Atraxia, basically a body free of pain and a mind free of trouble,
The highest pleasure itself is Aponia and Atraxia, the limit of pleasure is reached when we attain it.
Yes I think each sentence there is pretty much true, but just as you've commented on the tension between modern Science and Epicurean metaphysics, I'd suggest similar caution on the relationship between "Pleasure" and "Aponia" and "Ataraxia." Ultimately Epicurus identified the highest good as "Pleasure," and while the ideal and goal is certainly be to be as *totally* free of mental and bodily pain as possible, one important phrase I think you will see cited here a lot is to not let "the perfect be the enemy of the good."
Some people get puzzled by the relationship between the Greek words and the practical day to day seeking to maximize pleasure and minimize pain, so if you have any concerns about that please be sure to bring them up.
Again, welcome to the forum, and we look forward to getting to know you better.
I understand, I think of more like an ideal to go towards but not achieve, a direction, but I won't let it get in the way of my day to day pleasures, don't worry, and thanks for pointing out
-
Display More
What is the Goal of Epicureanism?
It's Aponia and Atraxia, basically a body free of pain and a mind free of trouble,
The highest pleasure itself is Aponia and Atraxia, the limit of pleasure is reached when we attain it.
Here is my take regarding the Epicurean goal:
There are all these pleasures:
- There are pleasures of the body - sights, sounds, smells, tastes, touches, movement, rest, etc. - and these last for a certain alotment of time (some of these pleasures are very short lived).
- There are pleasures of the mind - joy which arises from friendship, suffienciency, wisdom, learning, gratitude, and remembering pleasurable experiences of the past, etc., ...as well as the cultivated awareness of when body and mind are free from pain - and these pleasures also last for a certain alotment of time (these can have a longer duration (for example it is stated that friendship is an "immortal good").
We do see that eudaimonia is mentioned in the Letter to Menoeceus:
"Reflect on what brings happiness, because if you have that you have everything, but if not you will do everything to attain it."
Eudaimonia is also roughly translated as well-being. So for myself, I see eudaimonia as being the goal (and eudaimonia also includes pleasures).
Being that pleasure is a natural uprising of life, then we accept all pleasures which lead to a life well lived - a full life lived with joy and well-being, and a healthy mind in a healthy body.
Also, if you look at PD 4 again (in post 4), you'll see that there is the word "delight", so to me this points to the idea that pleasure is to actively be sought out.
"Pain does not last continuously in the flesh; instead, the sharpest pain lasts the shortest time, a pain that exceeds bodily pleasures lasts only a few days, and diseases that last a long time involve delights that exceed their pains." - PD 4
So an Epicurean would specifically seek out prudent pleasures.
I have a question Kalosyni I have heard somewhere that Epicurus favoured the pleasures of the mind over the pleasures of body, is that true ?
-
Display More
UnPaid_Landlord Great outline!
This section popped out at me:
I am of the nature to grow old. There is no way to escape growing old.
I am of the nature to have ill health. There is no way to escape ill health.
I am of the nature to die. There is no way to escape death.
All that is dear to me and everyone I love are of the nature to change
My actions are my only true belongings and I can't escape their consequences.
While these are somewhat true, I don't think Epicureans would say these kinds of things. (These sound Buddhist?...and they sound a bit depressing to me.
Ikr, they do sound somewhat depressing, and these sound Buddhist because they are Buddhist, that's why I said at the beginning of my outline that its not strictly Epicurean,
thanks for giving a Epicurean Take on these, these lines are called the 5 remembrances of Buddhism, their goal is to have the individual contemplate the impermanent nature of life to gain a different perspective, done in the right spirit, it invokes a sense of gratitude and humility, sometimes contemplating these harsh truths have their merit, but I can understand how someone would get depressed upon reading it, again thanks for making it more upbeat, I love this new positive take.
-
Little Rocker TauPhi Don Cassius This is what I think about Absurdism with the very limited rudimentary understanding and knowledge I have currently, I will continue to read more on the subject (reading the stranger by Albert camus currently) to further my knowledge and better understand what the heck is absurdism all about,
but I think it need not be a pessimistic philosophy, I don't why some people just misunderstand many things as negative, for example I have personally met some fellows who think Buddhism is really negative and pessimistic, and I can't understand them at all,
Buddhism for me is a very beautiful philosophy, I think it just depends on your way of looking at things ? Or maybe the many misconceptions that are spreading around?,
whatever the case, I am glad to be here in this wonderful community of people and would love to continue discussing similar things with you all in the future, don't hesitate to give constructive criticism if I say something ill informed or illogical, that would help me grow. 😊😆
-
One good example is this :-
In "The Myth of Sisyphus," Albert Camus explores the concept of the absurd and uses the story of Sisyphus as a powerful metaphor. According to Camus, Sisyphus's eternal struggle can be seen as a symbol of the human condition: repetitive and seemingly meaningless labor. However, Camus concludes that Sisyphus can find happiness in this eternal task.
Camus famously states, "One must imagine Sisyphus happy." This happiness arises from Sisyphus's acceptance of his reality and the conscious rebellion against it. By embracing the absurdity of his situation and continuing to push the boulder with full awareness of its futility, Sisyphus defies the gods and asserts his own human dignity and freedom. In this act of rebellion and acceptance, he finds a form of contentment and meaning.
-
"According to Camus, one's freedom—and the opportunity to give life meaning—lies in the recognition of absurdity. If the absurd experience is truly the realization that the universe is fundamentally devoid of absolutes, then we as individuals are truly free. "To live without appeal,"[60] as he puts it, is a philosophical move to define absolutes and universals subjectively, rather than objectively. The freedom of man is thus established in one's natural ability and opportunity to create their own meaning and purpose; to decide (or think) for oneself. The individual becomes the most precious unit of existence, representing a set of unique ideals that can be characterized as an entire universe in its own right. In acknowledging the absurdity of seeking any inherent meaning, but continuing this search regardless, one can be happy, gradually developing meaning from the search alone.
Camus states in The Myth of Sisyphus: "Thus I draw from the absurd three consequences, which are my revolt, my freedom, and my passion. By the mere activity of consciousness I transform into a rule of life what was an invitation to death, and I refuse suicide."[61] "Revolt" here refers to the refusal of suicide and search for meaning despite the revelation of the Absurd; "Freedom" refers to the lack of imprisonment by religious devotion or others' moral codes; "Passion" refers to the most wholehearted experiencing of life, since hope has been rejected, and so he concludes that every moment must be lived fully."
As I understand it, it's more about accepting the reality with it's absurd nature and still living passionately, full of life despite knowing the ultimate meaninglessness of it all, camus didn't think there was any ultimate or objective meaning, he thought we exist because we exist, as simple as that, The absurdity comes when we as rational and curious beings try to make rational sense of a ultimately irrational universe, when we try to find some deeper or ultimate meaning in a ultimately meaningless universe with no objective and absolute standards,
existentialism recognises that objective meaning, which is common to all human beings may not exist, so they think that an individual should find their own subjective meaning instead, Absurdism doesn't do that, they don't try to find meaning in a meaningless universe, reason in a irrational universe, they just accept the reality as it is, and still live in defiance of it, with freedom and passion, despite knowing the ultimate meaningless of it all,
it's a life affirming philosophy which is pretty vast and can mean many different things, I am only scratching the surface now, absurdity can mean the search of a grand reason in a ultimately meaningless world, or it can also mean signify the human limitation which constraints us from ever truly grasping the world, it means the rejection of absolute standards or values, because they change with time and circumstances and a lot more,
there a lot of definitions of what the word 'absurdity ' in absurdism actually means, but I am pretty sure it doesn't mean denying the world by calling it absurd and escaping into your little hole, instead it means recognising and making peace with the absurdity of it all and still living defiantly,
I am currently reading "the stranger" by Albert camus, I hope it will give me more Clarity on his philosophy.
Of course, I may be totally wrong about this, so take it with a grain of salt 🤷♂️
-
.And I will hold in contempt those who are so "otherworldly" minded that they rebel against the way things are and label it "absurd."
-
I am a student of BS Data Science ,
Former stoic,
have explored many philosophies starting from advaita vedanta /Non-dualism (Hinduism), then Buddhism and zen Buddhism, then taoism (china) then to western philosophy, from stocism to now finally Epicureanism and Absurdism.
It has been quite a fascinating journey but I feel like settling down with Epicureanism and Absurdism for now at least
Skeptism is on the list to explore for the future
My current philosophical inclinations :-
Epicureanism and Absurdism
My current religious inclinations:-
Atheism
My hobbies :-
reading and discussing philosophy, science, psychology with friends
Why am I here ? Why Epicureanism?
Well, Stoicism didn't work out all that much, when you take out the metaphysics and the virtues out of Stoicism, all that remains is bunch of useful psychological tools not a life philosophy, at least I think so,
Epicureanism is the closest philosophy to science, practical, relatively simple and easy to understand (when you compare to eastern philosophy) and just makes a hell lot of sense, having your basics needs met, chiling out and philosophising with like minded friends, seems like a no brainer to me, of course, a big Yes !
Things I don't quite like about or agree with in Epicureanism ?
Epicurean stance on free will and the lack of more ethical stuff like Stoicism (I know they lost lots of text that's why) but I wish we had more
I came here after reading a brilliant book by Emily Austin, I would love to know your thoughts on that, have you read that book ? What do you think about it ? Does it faithfully represent the authentic Epicurean view ?
That's all for now, everything I have written until now is subject to change, but I do plan to follow Epicureanism for a long while and see for myself if it works
-
Note:- this outline represent my own views, which may not be strictly Epicurean, I am kinda new to all this so feedback and guidance is much appreciated.
Date :- 3 July, 2024
Practicing Epicureanism
The Intent :- The intent should always be practical and relevant, not getting into strange metaphysics for the sake of metaphysics, not philosophising for the sake of intellectual entertainment,
Because Epicurus said, “Vain is the word of philosopher by which no human ills are cured”
He was a immensely practical man and his philosophy should be applied in that spirit
What is the Goal of Epicureanism?
It's Aponia and Atraxia, basically a body free of pain and a mind free of trouble,
The highest pleasure itself is Aponia and Atraxia, the limit of pleasure is reached when we attain it.
Epicurean Metaphysics:-
universe is materialistic, Atoms, void, energy and stuff
The modern science should take precedence over Epicurean metaphysics so far as the goal is to understand the nature of the universe to dispel fears, but Epicurean metaphysics should be also be given due consideration so far as to understand the Epicurean thought and it's implications on the rest of his philosophy.
No afterlife, by soul they mean mind, and it's material just like the rest of the body and hence dissolved into its constituent elements upon death.
Gods exist but don't interfere which as good as saying they don't exist
Epicurean Theory of knowledge:-
Senses are a reliable source of knowledge, No one, no priest, no mystic, no philosopher, No guru of any kind should ever lead you to doubt your own senses and the evidence they present, if you start doubting your senses, the only source of knowledge you have, everything else will fall apart.
The information the senses provide to us is real, and it is impossible for us to possess tranquility and happiness if we accept anything that contradicts the evidence of the senses.
Reason and logic is useful so far it relies on the sensory data, Reason relies on the senses for the accuracy of the conclusions that it reaches, and unless we accept the existence of the objects plainly before our eyes, there is nothing to which our reasoning minds can appeal to prove anything.
In order for your conclusions about the truth to be correct, your reasoning must be based on accurate information about reality. If you base your reasoning on anything other than accurate evidence from the sources provided by Nature (the senses, the pain/pleasure mechanism, and the anticipations) your reasoning will lead you astray.
Likewise, you must be sure to determine with exactness the meaning of each word, so that the chain of your understanding is clear to you. Only with clarity of meaning will each definition demonstrate another, and otherwise the entire exercise becomes mere words.xvi First make sure you have a firm grasp of what is certain, for only then are you ready to turn to the study of things for which the evidence is not immediately perceivable to you.xvii
You must always preserve the integrity of your mind. Never confuse what is certain with what is speculative.
It is crucial to realize that there will be times when you confront things that are new and unknown to you. In these situations, you may never be able to obtain sufficient information to be certain of the truth, and you must be content with identifying explanations that reasonably fit the observable facts. Your goal in such cases is not the vanity of inventing a system that cannot be proven, but in determining reasonable explanations that allow you to live your life and act with confidence, and thereby dismissing unnecessary fears.xviii
Proven and empirically verified scientific facts can be trusted to gain further understanding regarding the world, because as a single individual, it's not possible for your to verify every single thing yourself, but beware that the source of those facts is reliable
Epicurean Ethics (how to live) :-
A crucial part of Epicureanism is cataloguing, organizing, and minding the store of our desires.
Which are divided in three types,
Natural Desires:-
“Some are necessary for happiness and some for freeing the body from troubles and some for life itself.” As Epicurus said
Ex :- Includes all basic human needs like —food, health, drink, clothes, basic life-saving medicine, and shelter.
Also includes some rudimentary understanding of how the world and human psychology work, and Developing Prudence on which we can rely on to make good decisions.
trustworthy Epicurean friends
and cultivating virtues (as a means not an end in itself)
Epicureanism encourages us to that draw the line of “enough” at the edge of the necessary desires, seeing that as the limit that surrounds the ingredients of tranquility.
there are two requirements for satisfaction—having enough and appreciating it as enough. When we have enough, but we fail to appreciate that we have enough, we lack tranquility because we feel unsatisfied.
So gratitude and appreciation for what we have and seeing it as enough for happiness is a key necessary desire as well.
Natural and unnecessary desires :-
(unnecessary for Epicurean happiness and tranquility) :- they are basically fancier version of necessary desires, a luxurious home, expensive food etc.
Epicurean is not opposed to the enjoyment of these kind of desires as long as we have the right epicurean attitude towards them, which is
1) not confusing them with necessary desires
2) not thinking that consuming them would make us more happier than if we were without them
3) being cautious with them.
Unnatural and Unnecessary desires:-
Epicurus thinks that these desires take as their objects things that extend without natural limit—things about which someone might say “you can never have too much.” a consequence of having limitless desire is that you will be perpetually unsatisfied, because there is no point, where there is a limit, a "enough".
They require too much effort to get, also to keep and maintain and easier to lose, basically a great recipe for anxious mind.
Examples:- power, fame, wealth, Immortality etc
More on how to live :-
Pleasure and pain are the guide of life
Use hedonic calculus to make decisions
Practice gratitude
Go out and socialize more, or else it will impossible to make Epicurean friends
Practice virtue
Don't get into vices or do something immoral or illegal (fear of getting caught)
Live unnoticed (unless the circumstances need otherwise, don't chase after attention )
Don't get into politics and useless gossips (without careful deliberations at least)
Read and write Epicurean stuff
Epicurean said “death is nothing to us “ but he also said “think on death”
So always keep in mind these 5 remembrances, not to feel fear but to always remind you that this life is all you have, and to make best use of it :-
I am of the nature to grow old. There is no way to escape growing old.
I am of the nature to have ill health. There is no way to escape ill health.
I am of the nature to die. There is no way to escape death.
All that is dear to me and everyone I love are of the nature to change
My actions are my only true belongings and I can't escape their consequences.
(not a divine law like karma but mental anxiety, the fear of getting caught, the guilt etc )
Memorize the key principles if possible or keep them close at hand.
And a lot more (to be added and updated later).
