Epicureanism is a philosophy developed the teachings and ideals of a man named Epicurus. Epicureanism is defined by Epicurus as the pleasure for the end of all morality and that real pleasure is attained through a life of prudence, honor, and justice. Epicurus introduced this philosophy around 322 B.C, and two schools established in Athens. Epicurus taught the ethics of his philosophy in his school, that a person should live by “the art of making life happy”, and that “prudence is the noblest part of philosophy”(newadvent.org). Epicurus ideals for life intrigued people and they began to think that perhaps the ethics of Epicureanism had some truth behind it; a person should live his/her life to the fullest in order to become happy. Epicurus also made judgments on theology, logic and psychology. Throughout the life of Epicurus and his teachings of Epicureanism, the people of Greece and the world widened their view of life as a result of Epicurus teachings. Epicureanism provided a great out-look on what life should be.
During the age of Epicureanism, people questioned the philosophy of Epicurus. In order to understand the history of Epicureanism, the person must first understand the knowledge of how and why it came to be. The how part which helps people to better understand the teachings of Epicureanism is “the art of making life happy.” To people in Athens this was reflected by the people as to why they not live their lives to fully while they are in this world. As for the why part, Epicurus decided in 310 B.C that people should want to live their lives knowing that they are living for themselves and not the purpose of pleasing others or society. Epicurus then began to form a new school which would explain why someone would want to live for themselves and not for the satisfaction of someone else. Epicurus said, “We cannot live pleasurably without living prudently, gracefully, and justly; and we cannot live prudently gracefully, and justly, without living pleasurably” (newadvent.org). This made people think that Epicurus was correct. Why should someone live life to in submission when, in fact, if he/she lives life to be fulfilled then they would feel better about their life and not have so many worries. Thus, the Epicurean way isn’t too far from today’s world views on how Americans live. Thomas Jefferson, during the history of Ame...
... middle of paper ...
...the demands of others on society. Epicureanism teaches that free will is in fact the only thing that matters in life, for if a person does not have free will and freedom of their mind, and then what does the person have. Epicureanism, I do believe, helps the people of the world to see that they could fight back when they are doing something they do not want to do. The quotes from Epicurus are powerful and should not be taken lightly. If a person really dissects the quotes and sayings of Epicurus, they do make a great deal of sense. They provide a sense of life and happiness, which is a defining factor in Epicureanism. Thus, this philosophy is very important to all mankind.
Bibliography:
Website:
1) “Epicureanism” CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: 29 Nov 2004. 18 Aug 2004.
2) “Epicureanism” Epicurus & Epicurean Philosophy: 27 Nov 2004. 12 Jan 1990
Books:
1) Holy Bible: Information from John, Paul.
2) “Epicureanism” 2004, Encyclopedia of Britannica v.5 pp. 758-805
3) J. M. Rist Cambridge. Epicurus; an introduction University Press, 1972
The foremost difference between Aristotle and Hobbes, and in turn classical and modern political philosophies’, with regard to a good life and happiness is that of normative judgments about the good life. While Hobbes rejects normative judgments about the good life and discusses human actions without attributions of moral quality, Aristotle offers the exact opposite. In Ethics, Aristotle differentiates between good and evil actions along with what the best good, or summum bonum, for all humans while Hobbes approach argues that good and bad varies from one individual to another with good being the object of an individuals appetite or desire, and evil being an object of his hate and aversion. In addition, Aristotle makes it clear that individuals have an ultimate purpose—that of political animals—that they should strive to become through trial and error throughout their life. Hobbes on the other hand rejects the idea of life having an ultimate purpose, “for there is no such finis ultimus (utmost aim) nor summum bonum (greatest good) as is spoken of in the books of the old moral philosophers…Felicity is a continual progress of the desire, from one object to another, the attaining of the former being still but the way to the latter”. Hobbes defines felicity as the satisfaction of one’s passions as stated in Leviathan “continual success in obtaining those things which a man from time to time desireth, that is to say, continual prospering, is that men call felicity.
“All men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” (D of I 261). This statement, written by Thomas Jefferson, has to be one of the most controversial statements ever written. It does however agree with one of our earlier authors we read. Epicurus would agree with Jefferson in the manner that everyone should search for happiness. He tells us that “one must practice the things that produce happiness, since if that is present we have everything and if it is absent, we do everything in order to have it” (Letter to Menoeceus). It is apparent to Epicurus that the search for happiness is an absolute goal. Everyone either gets it or spends their life looking for it. Because of this, it is obvious to see how this author would agree with Jefferson by saying that we are given an unalienable right to pursue happiness. Another philosopher of our first semester that would have to agree with Jefferson is Aristotle. Unlike his teacher, Plato, Aristotle believed in the senses and also felt happiness was, what he called, one of the goods. “We think happiness is the most choiceworthy of all goods” (Nicmachean Ethics: Bk1 ch.
...death, and the supernatural. Money cannot buy you analyzed thoughts about your life, or help you cope with the emotional effects of illness or death. Epicureans are looking for peace and freedom from fear and pain. Pleasure is how human beings can sense they are doing something right.
As said before, this is an unanswerable question, but to find a few conclusions it would be essential to look back at what Epicurus thought of what was life all about and to look back at what Gramsci meant about be a partisan. Equally important, is to look back at how these two philosophies influenced literature and art, by reading Sartre's thoughts on the engaged writer and by recalling to our minds some i...
Stoicism was the belief that emotions were only because of an error in judgment and those that were true intellectuals would be able to forgo all emotion. They felt that all things, including God and the soul were material, because they felt that in order to have true pairs, body and soul, God and the world, that both must be the same substance. (Stoicism [The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]) While Epicureanism was the belief that pleasure is the absence of pain and confusion. To truly follow this line of belief, the believer must seek reas...
Simply defined, happiness is the state of being happy. But, what exactly does it mean to “be happy?” Repeatedly, many philosophers and ideologists have proposed ideas about what happiness means and how one attains happiness. In this paper, I will argue that Aristotle’s conception of happiness is driven more in the eye of ethics than John Stuart Mill. First, looking at Mill’s unprincipled version of happiness, I will criticize the imperfections of his definition in relation to ethics. Next, I plan to identify Aristotle’s core values for happiness. According to Aristotle, happiness comes from virtue, whereas Mill believes happiness comes from pleasure and the absence of pain. Ethics are the moral principles that govern a person’s behavior which are driven by virtues - good traits of character. Thus, Aristotle focuses on three things, which I will outline in order to answer the question, “what does it mean to live a good life?” The first of which is the number one good in life is happiness. Secondly, there is a difference between moral virtues and intellectual virtues and lastly, leading a good life is a state of character. Personally and widely accepted, happiness is believed to be a true defining factor on leading a well intentioned, rational, and satisfactory life. However, it is important to note the ways in which one achieves their happiness, through the people and experiences to reach that state of being. In consequence, Aristotle’s focus on happiness presents a more arguable notion of “good character” and “rational.”
Epictetus says, "Men are disturbed not by things which happen, but by the opinions about the things"(Epictetus, Ch. 5). He is saying that men cannot control things that happen but can control the judgement of that object. Another example of this is when he says, "Disease is an impediment to the body, but not to the will, unless the will chooses." One cannot control what happens, therefore, should not be influenced by external forces. Epictetus maintains the common stoic thought that a happy life is derived from excellence. Marcus was exposed to many schools of thought, growing up in a wealthy family, but had a strong inclination towards Stoicism, especially Epictetus. Marcus writes that man must welcome all that happens, implying that it is out of one's control. He says, "A disposition to welcome all that happens…" Both Marcus and Epictetus have the same idea that one cannot control external forces. They also both write that no-one should be afraid of death. Marcus says that it is not death that one should fear but rather never beginning life. Epictetus says that it is not death or pain that is to be feared, but the fear of pain or death. It is quite prevalent that Marcus was influenced by Epictetus while writing about this specific topic. Reverting back to one's power, Epictetus states, "Within our power are opinion, aim, aversion, and, in one word, whatever affairs are our own"(Epictetus Ch. 1). Epictetus is reiterating the idea that you cannot control what happens around you. There is a similar parallel in the Mediations when Marcus Aurelius says that you have power of your mind - not outside
With their philosophical roots grounded in ancient Greece, Stoicism and Epicureanism had contrary yet significant impacts on Roman society. These two philosophies differed in many of their basic theories. Stoics attempted to reach a moral level where they had freedom from passion, while Epicureans strove for pleasure and avoided all types of pain. Stoics like the Epicureans, emphasized ethics as the main field of knowledge, but they also developed theories of logic and natural science to support their ethical doctrines.
Happiness is often viewed as a subjective state of mind in which one may say they are happy when they are on vacation with friends, spending time with their family, or having a cold beer on the weekend while basking in the sun. However, Aristotle and the Stoics define happiness much differently. In Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle describes happiness as “something final and self-sufficient, and is the end of action” (NE 1097b20). In this paper, I will compare and contrast Aristotle and the Stoics’ view on human happiness. Aristotle argues that bodily and external goods are necessary to happiness, while Epictetus argues they are not.
Amillenianism literally means no millennium. This name stems from the disbelief that there will be a literal thousand year period called the golden age, either before or after the return of Christ (Gregg 459). This view unlike the others, is not a new concept, even though the name is new. In fact, R.B. Strimple claims this particular view has been around as long as Christianity (83).
The Dark Knight Returns Part Two, is an animated film released on January 29, 2013 which is adapted from the 1986 comic book by the same name written by Frank Miller. The story follows a retired Batman who has decided to come out of retirement because he knows that his days are numbered and that it is time to look for a good death. The vigilante’s comeback sparks the comeback of the Joker and gets the attention of the United States government. This all leads to a legendary fight between Batman and Superman, in which one is fighting for a purpose and the other is blindly following authority, and it all ends with Batman dying but not really. The Dark Knight Returns is a romance story that is set on an epic scale, involves a figure of great cosmic importance, and has the Dark Knight go on a
What establishes a noble, valuable, enjoyable life? Many philosophers tried their own beliefs to these ancient and most persistent of philosophical question. Most of Philosophers have agreed that the best possible life is a life where the ideas of “virtue” and “happiness” are fulfilled. Nevertheless expected differences in terms, many great minds theorized that the road to a joyful, flourishing, happy life is paved with virtues. For example, Aristotle believed that anyone keen to live a virtuous life will reach happiness (Aristotle 1992).
It was Aristotle’s belief that everything, including humans, had a telos or goal in life. The end result or goal was said to be happiness or “eudaimonia”. He explained that eudaimonia was different for each person, and that each had a different idea of what it meant. Further, he said that people must do things in moderation, but at the same time do enough. The theory, of “the golden mean of moderation” was the basis to Aristotle's idea of the human telos and concluded that living a virtuous life must be the same for all people. Aristotle maintained that the natural human goal to be happy could only be achieved once each individual determined his/her goal. A person’s telos is would usually be what that individual alone can do best. Aristotle described the humans as "rational animals" whose telos was to reason. Accordingly, Aristotle thought that in order for humans to be happy, they would have to be able to reason, and to be governed by reason. If a person had difficulty behaving morally or with ethics, he was thought to be “imperfect”. Moral virtue, a principle of happiness, was the ability to evade extremes in behavior and further to find the mean between it and adequacy. Aristotle’s idea of an ideal state was one where the populous was able to practice eth...
The pursuit for happiness has been a quest for man throughout the ages. In his ethics, Aristotle argues that happiness is the only thing that the rational man desires for its own sake, thus, making it good and natural. Although he lists three types of life for man, enjoyment, statesman, and contemplative, it is the philosopher whom is happiest of all due to his understanding and appreciation of reason. Aristotle’s version of happiness is not perceived to include wealth, honor, or trivial
Aristotle feels we have a rational capacity and the exercising of this capacity is the perfecting of our natures as human beings. For this reason, pleasure alone cannot establish human happiness, for pleasure is what animals seek and human beings have higher capacities than animals. The goal is to express our desires in ways that are appropriate to our natures as rational animals. Aristotle states that the most important factor in the effort to achieve happiness is to have a good moral character, what he calls complete virtue. In order to achieve the life of complete virtue, we need to make the right choices, and this involves keeping our eye on the future, on the ultimate result we want for our lives as a whole. We will not achieve happiness simply by enjoying the pleasures of the moment. We must live righteous and include behaviors in our life that help us do what is right and avoid what is wrong. It is not enough to think about doing the right thing, or even intend to do the right thing, we have to actually do it. Happiness can occupy the place of the chief good for which humanity should aim. To be an ultimate end, an act must be independent of any outside help in satisfying one’s needs and final, that which is always desirable in itself and never for the sake of something else and it must be