The Essential Epicurus

by Epicurus, Eugene M. O'Connor (Translator)

Epicureanism is commonly regarded as the refined satisfaction of physical desires. As a philosophy, however, it also denoted the striving after an independent state of mind and body, imperturbability, and reliance on sensory data as the true basis of knowledge.Epicurus (ca. 341-271 B.C.) founded one of the most famous and influential philosophical schools of antiquity. In these remains of his vast output of scientific and ethical writings, we can trace Epicurus' views on atomism, physical sensation, duty, morality, the soul, and the nature of the gods.

Genres: Philosophy, Nonfiction, Classics, Greece, History, Self Help, Psychology

112 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 272

About the author

Epicurus (Greek: Ἐπίκουρος, Epikouros, "upon youth"; Samos, 341 BCE – Athens, 270 BCE; 72 years) was an ancient Greek philosopher and the founder of the school of philosophy called Epicureanism. Only a few fragments and letters remain of Epicurus's 300 written works. Much of what is known about Epicurean philosophy derives from later followers and commentators.

For Epicurus, the purpose of philosophy was to attain the happy, tranquil life, characterized by aponia, the absence of pain and fear, and by living a self-sufficient life surrounded by friends. He taught that pleasure and pain are the measures of what is good and bad, that death is the end of the body and the soul and should therefore not be feared, that the gods do not reward or punish humans, that the universe is infinite and eternal, and that events in the world are ultimately based on the motions and interactions of atoms moving in empty space.

His parents, Neocles and Chaerestrate, both Athenian citizens, had immigrated to the Athenian settlement on the Aegean island of Samos about ten years before Epicurus' birth in February 341 BCE. As a boy he studied philosophy for four years under the Platonist teacher Pamphilus. At the age of 18 he went to Athens for his two-year term of military service. The playwright Menander served in the same age-class of the ephebes as Epicurus.

After the death of Alexander the Great, Perdiccas expelled the Athenian settlers on Samos to Colophon. After the completion of his military service, Epicurus joined his family there. He studied under Nausiphanes, who followed the teachings of Democritus. In 311/310 BC Epicurus taught in Mytilene but caused strife and was forced to leave. He then founded a school in Lampsacus before returning to Athens in 306 BC. There he founded The Garden, a school named for the garden he owned about halfway between the Stoa and the Academy that served as the school's meeting place.

Even though many of his teachings were heavily influenced by earlier thinkers, especially by Democritus, he differed in a significant way with Democritus on determinism. Epicurus would often deny this influence, denounce other philosophers as confused, and claim to be "self-taught".

Epicurus never married and had no known children. He suffered from kidney stones, to which he finally succumbed in 270 BCE at the age of 72, and despite the prolonged pain involved, he wrote to Idomeneus:

"I have written this letter to you on a happy day to me, which is also the last day of my life. For I have been attacked by a painful inability to urinate, and also dysentery, so violent that nothing can be added to the violence of my sufferings. But the cheerfulness of my mind, which comes from the recollection of all my philosophical contemplation, counterbalances all these afflictions. And I beg you to take care of the children of Metrodorus, in a manner worthy of the devotion shown by the young man to me, and to philosophy."

-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epicurus

Reviews

[Glenn Russell · Rating 5 out of 5]

It is a great tragedy all the many books written by Epicurus have been lost to us. We know Epicurus wrote many books and we know the titles of these books since they are listed by Diogenes Laertius, the great third century biographer of the Greek philosophers. Of the books of Epicurus that Diogenes Laertius lists, the three books I really wish survived are: 1) Of Love 2) Of Music and 3) Symposium.

Although there is a world of difference between the philosophy of Epicurus and Buddhism, I am struck with the following similarities between Epicurus and the historical Buddha:

• Both studied with teachers and the teachings within their respective traditions before rejecting those teachings and striking out on their own, developing their own unique philosophy;

• Both examined their own direct experience in the world to understand the nature of human life;

• Both insisted on facing the inevitability of one’s own death directly and with courage;

• Both developed a series of principles to be memorized, internalized and lived by;

• Both encouraged their followers to practice in separate communities of like-minded seekers and at a remove from frenetic public life;

• Both highly valued a clear-headed understanding of the nature of desire and how desire is the root of suffering;

• Both outlined rules regarding the intake of food and drink as well as one’s attitude toward food and drink;

• Both encouraged their followers to adhere to specific principles to transcend suffering and reach a state of tranquil abiding;

• Both took on a superhuman-like status with their followers.

As a way of encouraging a study of Epicurus, the following is my commentary on the first five of his Principal Doctrines (Diogenes Laertius lists the 40 Principal Doctrines in his narrative biography of Epicurus - my commentary on 6-40 are in a series of messages below, starting with message #1):

1. A blessed and indestructible being has no trouble himself and brings no trouble upon any other being; so he is free from anger and partiality, for all such things imply weakness.

A perfect being is too pure, too blissful to feel in a limited human or earthly way. If you had the misfortune of being raised in a religion where children are told to fear an angry, jealous God, than this is something you must outgrow if you want to live at ease as an Epicurean. Perhaps a good first step is to simply realize such a religion is one of thousands of religions throughout human prehistory and history, and many religions view God in ways other than fear. Another suggestion would be to seek out like-minded friends where you can talk through emotional issues caused by religious teachings. Since emotions and memory are so much part of our physical body, start to exercise in ways that you enjoy and find relaxing - yoga, dance, jogging or walking. Appreciate the fact that you are a sensitive, aesthetic embodied being. Live in joy, joy as an ongoing experience. There is nothing more pleasurable than a life lived in joy.

2. Death is nothing to us; for that which has been dissolved into its elements experiences no sensations, and that which has no sensation is nothing to us.

Do you get the willies when something reminds you of death? When somebody talks about death, do you feel like jumping up and running out of the room in a panic? If so, then you don't need a doctor, you need an Epicurean philosopher. The first thing is to realize death is a complete dissolution where you experience no sensation, not even the tiniest pressure on your skin. According to Epicurus, death is a complete blank - no forms, no awareness, no sensation. In a very real sense, in a way we have this experience every night when we enter the deep sleep state. Of course, we wake up from our night's sleep but, even still, there is that 'blank' aspect of sleep. So, please see death as a close cousin to sleep. You don't have anxiety or misgivings about entering a deep, dreamless sleep, so you shouldn't be bothered by the idea of death. To put not only your mind, but also your body in harmony with this view of death, it would be wise to practice meditation or the practice of sleep done by the yogis of India, which is called yoga nidra -- very restful, very calming, giving you a deep acceptance of who you are and your own mortality. With even a small amount of practice, you will develop a deeper experience of tranquility and live with less agitation and nervousness.

3. The magnitude of pleasure reaches its limit in the removal of all pain. When such pleasure is present, so long as it is uninterrupted, there is no pain either of body or of mind or of both together.

The key is appreciating who we are and where we are. Easy to say and not so easy to do, since as humans we tend to be uncontrollable in our desires. Even when we are healthy and free of both physical and mental pain, we tend to always want more. The sickness of desire - more, more, more. Enough is never enough for the unwise man or woman. If we are not experiencing physical pain or mental pain, which is the vast majority of the time, we should enjoy and value the pleasures life affords. If you cannot enjoy the simple pleasure of taking a deep breath or the taste of your morning coffee or listening to the birds sing or the sight of trees turning in fall, you are missing the natural rhythms of being alive. In a very real sense, all we have is the present moment - relax and enjoy; be thankful you don't have a tooth ache or a pounding head ache or a sprained ankle or the memory of being held captive in a prison camp. To bring yourself to a richer appreciation of the moment, take up an enjoyable exercise, which can be as simple as a morning walk. Clear your head of chatter, focus on your kinesthetic sixth sense, that is, being mindful of your body moving in space. If you need help with developing this awareness, try the Alexander Technique or a comparable method. If you want a good practice for the mind - start by committing to memory these forty Principal Doctrines of Epicurus. There is so much pleasure available having our five senses and our body. It is simply a matter of developing the habit of wakefulness.

4. Continuous bodily pain does not last long; instead, pain, if extreme, is present a very short time, and even that degree of pain which slightly exceeds bodily pleasure does not last for many days at once. Diseases of long duration allow an excess of bodily pleasure over pain.

Unlike ancient times, our modern world has a sophisticated medical industry with its thousand and one ways to perform operations and provide treatments to keep people alive who otherwise would be pushing up daisies. Thus, in a very real sense, we have more possibilities for pain. However, our modern world has a sophisticated pharmacological industry with its thousand and one ways to kill pain. It is something of a trade-off, but on the whole, we deal with less pain than people in ancient times. However, one thing remains the same: the ancients feared pain, and we in the modern world fear pain. Pain has been and will continue to be a very real part of life. But, does that mean we have to live in fear of future physical pain? Epicurus says `no', and for good reason. Our fear of what could happen takes us out of the pleasures we can have right here and now. Nothing spoils our tranquility more than being anxious, continually worrying, fretting and fidgeting over the future. Do you have nervous habits - wringing of hands, fidgeting with a pen, tapping your foot, pacing back and forth? If so, time to take a deep breath and think things through with Epicurus. You have dealt with pain up to this point in your life and you can deal with any future pain even more effectively now that you are committed and dedicated to philosophy. Ups and downs, pleasure and pain are part of nature; fortunately for us, there is a lot more pleasure than pain. Are you experiencing physical pain right now? Probably not. Relax and sink deeper into the pleasure of what is happening in and around you. The richness of physical pleasure through our senses and mental pleasure by using our mind philosophically are very rich indeed, an endless ocean of rich experience. All we need do is become more attentive to the present and not allow ourselves to be pulled out of our on-going pleasure by fear of future pain.

5. It is impossible to live a pleasant life without living wisely and honorably and justly, and it is impossible to live wisely and honorably and justly without living pleasantly. Whenever any one of these is lacking, when, for instance, the man is not able to live wisely, though he lives honorably and justly, it is impossible for him to live a pleasant life.

Living pleasantly for Epicurus is living without agitation, anxiety, and fear, being comfortable and confident with who we are, far removed from even a trace of being sexually twisted or repressed or violent or greedy for such things as wealth, fame, status, and political advantage . Without being burdened by these negativites and hankerings, we are free to think in a calm and clear way. Rather than reacting in knee-jerk fashion, we interact and respond sensitively to others and the world around us. What is the natural result of living such a life of Epicurean philosophy? A life lived wisely and honorably and justly, where we are seen by others as we are in fact - kind, courteous, honest, considerate and full of good will. A life lived wisely, honorably, justly, and pleasantly are of one piece. Remove any one of these four qualities in us and our lives can quickly spin into a nail-biting, tension-riddled mess. Much better to stay with Epicurus in his garden and relax into the life we were meant by nature to lead. And remember, always mean what you say and say what you mean. A kind and gentle man or woman has no place for being snide or sarcastic or lashing out with a sharp tongue. We degrade ourselves when we are condescending, coarse, crude or mean-spirited.

My commentary on Principal Doctrines 6-40 are below in a string of posts.

[Orhan Pelinkovic · Rating 4 out of 5]

Epicurus and his renowned school of thought teaches us to pursue happiness by relishing life's pleasures. However, not the pleasures that you might have in mind, such as living in luxury, engaging in consumerism, and indulging in sensual elations, but more learning to release one's body of pain and mind of anticipation and anxieties.

Epicurus recommends a simple and healthier lifestyle that will maximize one's happiness. Although, to achieve happiness we have to begin with structuring our lives differently, changing our habits, mindset, and perceptions of things. In particular, we should frequently surround ourselves with friends, live unseen or without attracting attention from the public eye, free ourselves from everyday affairs and politics and create or become part of close-knit self-sufficient communes, even if it means living below your means or professions. A virtuous life that will bring you peace of mind.

Epicurus' advice on faith and God is to entirely free ourselves of superstitions and never ask a God for what we can obtain ourselves as he doesn't mingle in everyday affairs.

Epicurus (341-270 BCE) is an Empiricist and The Essential Epicurus are a few fragments of works and remaining letters written to his students discussing both cosmological and ethical questions. Almost all of the Epicurean 300 written works are lost but his philosophy influenced many of the later thinkers, namely Karl Marx who did a PhD thesis on Epicurus and his philosophy.

[Roy Lotz · Rating 4 out of 5]

In a philosophical dispute, he gains most who is defeated, since he learns the most.

There doesn’t seem much to say on Epicurus after Glenn’s magnus opus of a review, so I will keep this brief. Epicurus is one of the most influential thinkers from Ancient Greece. Unfortunately, although he wrote prolifically during his lifetime, we have lost most of his works. This slim book is all we have: a few letters preserved by Diogenes Laertius, and a list of the core tenets of his philosophy. Luckily these brief works, taken together, constitute a decent overview of his whole system.

Epicurus lived in Athens during the Macedonian domination. Although still a vibrant city, it had lost its political independence and was no longer a major power. This is partly why, I think, Epicurus’s philosophy is focused on the individual rather than the collective. Gone are Plato’s and Aristotle’s bold theories about the perfect state; instead, Epicurus is focused on how to live a perfect life in an imperfect world. There is a good deal of stoic resignation in Epicurus’s thought: you can’t change the world, but you can live comfortably in it.

Most modern people, I suspect, will find Epicurus a surprisingly relevant thinker. This is due to his naturalism. He believes that reality consists of nothing but atoms and empty space. Gods are real, but they’re too happy to trouble themselves with humans. Why would a perfect being disturb their rest by tormenting little ants? Disasters like lightning, earthquakes, tidal waves all have natural explanations. There is no such thing as a perfect justice; society is just a means to achieve security, and justice is relative to the rules of each society.

As a proper naturalist, Epicurus centers his concept of the good on the body. (For him the soul is just a particularly subtle form of matter that is distributed throughout the body.) What is good is what brings us pleasure. All pleasures are inherently good, although many should be avoided because they bring pain in their wake. (I’m writing this with a hangover, so I can attest to this fact.) Injustice should be avoided, not because it is inherently wrong, but because it makes us fear being discovered and punished. Thus, all unjust and immoral acts disturb our tranquility and make us live in fear; that’s why you should be just and moral: “Do nothing in your life that will cause you to fear if it is discovered by your neighbor.”

This is his system in a nutshell. For the most part, I find it very congenial. There are some things I disagree with, though. Painful experiences can sometimes teach us a great deal; and negative emotions, even physical pain, add an essential dimension to a full life. I also disagree with Epicurus’s attitude towards natural philosophy. For him the only important thing to know is that the world works according to natural laws and not supernatural intervention; but figuring out the details didn’t seem to interest him much. When you value tranquility, the travail of abstract argument and intellectual dispute must be shunned. But these are rather trivial criticisms of a worldview that I substantially agree with. I wish more of his works had come down to us.

[Manny]

Goodreads Recommendation Engine! I'm surprised at you! Now look me in the eye, have you been at the Nietzche again?

[Vipassana · Rating 5 out of 5]

It is a shame that so much of Epicurus' writings are lost. His thoughts span physics, astronomy, justice and self awareness. It's curious how anyone would have thought that of the school of Epicurus to be debased in moral values. Epicurus often speaks about striving for pleasure, but his description of pleasure does not lend to the hedonistic schools that claim to derive their ideas from him.

The beginning and root of every good is the pleasure of the stomach. Even wisdom and refinements are referable to this.

This goes along with:

Plain dishes offer the same pleasure as a luxurious table, when the pain that comes from want is taken away.

Epicurus' ideas of pleasure are about a middle ground, neither denying one's self nor indulging it. Epicurus recognises that the contribution of pleasure to a meaningful human like is not in itself but in the path that it could potentially lead too.

We need pleasure when we suffer pain because of pleasure's absence. But when we are not suffering pain, although in a state of sensation, there is no need for pleasure. For it is not natural pleasure that sets wrongdoing into action, but rather striving after idle fancies.

Some of the most interesting of observations of Epicurus are in astronomy and physics. They are not necessarily accurate, but his emphasis on understanding the limits of ones method at arriving to certain conclusions unveil the humility of his being.

As someone who is contemplating my career, the last aphorism was especially heartening.

We must say how a person will best observe the purpose of life, and how one will not willingly at first pursue public office.

--
January 20, 2016

[Regina Andreassen · Rating 4 out of 5]

I will say it in Epicurus’s words:

‘Let no one put off studying philosophy when he is young, nor when old grow weary of its study. For no one is too young or too far past his prime to achieve the health of his soul. The man who alleges that he is not yet ready for philosophy or that the time for it has passed him by, is like the man who says that he is either too young or too old for happiness’.

[Kenny · Rating 3 out of 5]

I've been a fan of Epicureanism since I encountered Lucretius in undergrad. Let's face it, they mostly got it right: matter is composed of tiny particles with empty space between them, most events are reducible to the motion of matter through space, the gods don't do anything, and death is non-existence and not as scary when you really think about it. On top of that, their ethical theory is actually all about classical Greek moderation, rather than what the modern meaning of "epicurean" would imply; and their political philosophy influenced Hobbes and the beginnings of modern social contract theory.

But what about this book in particular? Well, it should really be called "The Complete" rather than "The Essential Epicurus;" I don't know why the publishers decided to sell themselves short and imply this is just a sampling of his surviving fragments, because they're all here. So if you're looking to start at the beginning, with the founding documents of Epicureanism (or at least what's left of them, since only a few scraps survived the low Middle Ages), this is the right book for you. But for anybody just looking to get a handle on this ancient school of philosophy, I would really recommend Lucretius instead. There's very little Epicurus says here that Lucretius didn't say more eloquently, more persuasively, more coherently and in greater detail in his poem De Rerum Natura. So go read that if you haven't already.

[Erick · Rating 3 out of 5]

I was familiar with Epicurus' philosophy even before reading this. He is mentioned in many other sources; and, one should acknowledge, he was not well liked by other philosophical schools. That's what really surprised me when reading Seneca and seeing that he quoted him positively so often.
Epicurus' philosophy is mildly interesting. I'd be lying if I said I was that taken with it. My philosophical sympathies lie elsewhere. Another more current annoyance about Epicurus is that he has become another one of those philosophers that New Atheists like to quote ignorantly. As with most pre-enlightenment philosophers they like to claim as their own, Epicurus was more of a deist, not an atheist. As has been typical, atheists ride on the coat tails of deistic philosophy and science. Because Epicurus' physics is empiricist and his ethics utilitarian, it makes it easy for him to be superficially appropriated, and usually by people who have read almost nothing of him or about him. Obviously, using the terms "utilitarian" and "empiricist" in the sense of philosophical schools would be an anachronism, but his approach differs little from those later ideals.
Epicurus was associated with the philosophical school of atomism. His immediate influences were Leucippus and Democritus and was followed by Lucretius. He did reject the determinism that was common among the atomists, which was a bit novel. I do think he occasionally seemed to intuit things that could be construed as being close to physical reality as we know it. His belief in atoms and particles were at least in part proven to be accurate scientifically; not that there isn't much in here that is a bit naive. One should note as well that for Epicurus, atoms were of a particular shape and size. Most likely he believed, as other schools did at the time, that elements like fire were of a pyramidal shape and earth was of cubical shape. Epicurus seems to imply that when these different atomic shapes combine, unique qualities or properties are revealed. As differing atoms and elements combined, atmospheric phenomena emerge on a smaller scale, or possibly the formation of whole worlds on a larger scale. One might be tempted to read into his account of atoms colliding, combining and dividing, our current understanding of quantum reality, but it does differ in major ways. It is, however, interesting that the language seems to come so close in some cases. He does believe that "wind", or some kind of "flow", is what carries atoms along, which might be seen either as naive, or it maybe simply an interesting and suitable name for some other kind of force that seemed analogous to wind. It is regrettable that a greater elucidation of his theories are not extant; because some of his references are obscure and ambiguous. The temptation to read into them something that is not appropriate probably appeals to some readers.
He seems to have influenced various philosophers and schools later on. Like Epicurus, Bruno believed that the universe was infinite; I've addressed the problems I have with this view in a review of Bruno's philosophy, so I'm not going to repeat it here; needless to say, the idea lends itself to various absurdities. I've already made references above to deism, utilitarianism and empiricism. He certainly was a precursor to those philosophies.
I'm not sure I'd revisit Epicurus too often. I may pick this back up for reference and quotations, but I doubt I'll read it all the way through again. I'm giving it an average rating of about 2 and a half stars. I acknowledge that I am biased, but this sort of philosophy doesn't appeal to me that much.

[Ryan Holiday · Rating 4 out of 5]

I am not qualified to weigh in on the merits of Epicurus' school of philosophy. As Westerners, we've decided over that two thousand years that his thoughts on death and pleasure and pain are profound and provocative.

What's important to the average reader though is whether this is the book you should pick up to learn about him. The short answer is yes, the longer one is that it is not enough.

The book has a fairly weak introduction that doesn't provide much context. The author would have been well-served to have included the entirety of Laertius' essay on Epicurus to which he dedicated a large portion to in his biography of great philosophers.

Otherwise, the translation is good and the organization is helpful. The book is structured like a college reader - no frills, thin paper and a drab cover. It has all of Epicurus' fragments, letters and writings. Unfortunately many of the best ones are cut off or lost so we have to make due with what is left.

A first time reader or student looking to introduce themselves to Epicurus could do worse than starting here. I often refer back to my copy.

[Aygul A. Baghirova · Rating 5 out of 5]

As Epicurus puts it, "If you wish to make Pythocles wealthy, don't give him more money; rather, reduce his desires." By eliminating the pain caused by unfulfilled desires and the anxiety from fearing that one's desires won't be fulfilled in the future, the wise Epicurean attains tranquility and, thus, happiness.

[Einzige · Rating 4 out of 5]

Not so much the Essential Epicurus as it is the collected fragments of Epicurus. With that in mind you get that same magic you do with more earlier thinkers, namely a philosophical burlesque show which piques the interest whilst keeping the substantive parts hidden.

The first 60 pages of the book is composed of two letters wherein Epicurus viewing superstition as a major source of disturbance and misery attempts to provide a materialist (well a materialism that is only composed of atoms and void) explanation for natural events. Whilst Im sure that some people would enjoy seeing very rough hints of Newtonian thinking and Kantian epistemology. For most his discussion on why the moon glows and sound atoms will be rather dull as the reasoning isn't correct nor is it so incorrect as to be entertaining.

The balance of the book is where it gets interesting and where he through a letter and a collection of aphorisms his ethical teachings are outlined. Other reviews have done a much better job at outlining but suffice to say they do show a very interesting take on the question of pleasure and hedonism and an eastern and cynical (the Diogenes kind) flair that you might not be expecting in such a work.

Also has the distinction of being one the most misrepresented philosophers in Western History with the term "epicurean" gaining a meaning that is almost the polar opposite of his teachings.

[Alex Knipp · Rating 5 out of 5]

In Athens circa 310 BC, Epicurus founded the Garden School of Athens. He introduced a form of philosophy devoted to attaining happiness and peace, now called Epicureanism. He often said that the most important component of happiness was having friends, and that the height of earthly success was to have time for leisure and thinking. His Garden School was devoted to philosophies of self sufficiency, thoughtful conversation, and ultimately contentment.
——
- We have been born once and cannot be born a second time. But you, although you are not in control of tomorrow, are postponing your happiness. Life is wasted by delaying, and each one of us dies without enjoying leisure.
- Of all the means to ensure happiness throughout the whole life, by far the most important is the acquisition of friends.
- Not what we have, but what we enjoy, constitutes our abundance.
- Do not spoil what you have by desiring what you have not; remember that what you now have was once among the things you only hoped for.

[Brent · Rating 5 out of 5]

It’s a shame we don’t have more of Epicurus’ writings. Mostly what we have is in fragments through other authors quoting and attributing sayings to him. Nevertheless, it’s clear Epicurus stands in the succession of Socrates and was deeply concerned with how to live “the Good Life.”

I read this collection first. I have another collection “The Epicurus Reader” by Cambridge, I believe, that I will read next. The collection had some of his atomic and physical philosophy, among other things, which he inherits from Democritus and his successors, but I am mostly concerned with his ethics. Great aphorisms that are extremely apropos not only to me and my life presently, but to America at large —which I find decedent, ostentatious, and overindulgent.

Epicurus emphasizes living in accordance with nature (not in the Stoical way though, as he is vehemently anti-fatalist), self-sufficiency as a means to freedom of the soul, moderation and temperance, and attenuating desires so as to achieve satisfaction, happiness, and ultimately pleasure by limiting pain. For Epicurus, no pain is worse than unfulfilled desire OR fulfillment of desires. Both lead to ruin of the soul and ultimately being on more suffering than pleasure.

For the Epicurean, far be it from him to be the indulgent, decedent libertine that is associated with that word now. Rather, he is one who lives modestly, quietly, away from political life. He is not ostentatious, rather meek and humble. He maintains a small but close core circle of friends who share the same values and love of philosophy (which he saw as a healing balm for earthly pains). He lives happily off of bread and water and desires nothing more that if wealth or luxury should befall him, he would not overindulge but would take true pleasure. And if they should be taken away as quickly as they came, he wouldn’t care either, because he is not accustomed to those fine luxuries anyway.

There is much more I can say but I shall spare the pen for now. For I will be writing a book review later on my blog that I will link here in the next couple weeks so please be on the lookout for the link.

-b

[David Hendrickson · Rating 4 out of 5]

I enjoyed the ideas. I have been aware of Epicurean thought for quite awhile but always thought of him as an unapologetic hedonist. He was not, but used the language of pleasure and pain to describe a life of enjoyable moderation. I would take his philosophy one step farther and would extoll the pleasures of excess. Moderation is good over a life time but excess expands pleasure in the moment and is worth some pain. I'm just sayin'.

[Fede]

"Vain is the word of a philosopher, by which no mortal suffering is healed."

Harva antiikin ajattelija on niin väärinymmärretty (tai vääristelty) kuin Epicuros. Epicurolaisuus yhdistetään usein itsekkääseen tai lyhytkatseiseen hedonismiin, ruumiillisten ja ylellisten nautintojen tavoitteluun vailla jalompia päämääriä. Todellisuudessa Epicuroksen ajattelun ytimessä oli vaatimattomuus, harkintakyky ja yhteisen hyvän tavoittelu. Vaikka Epicuroksen mukaan nautinto tai mielihyvä (m.kreik. hedone ) on elämän keskeinen päämäärä ja avain onneen eikä mikään nautinto ollut Epicuroksesta itsessään paha, suhtautui Epikuros paheksuen ja torjuvasti nautinnoilla pröystäilyyn. Epicuros painotti, että on tärkeää erottaa onnellisuuden kannalta välttämättömät halut kaikesta muusta ja tyytyä vain välttämättömään.

"He who is not satisfied with a little, is satisfied with nothing".

"We have a need of pleasure when we suffer pain because of pleasure's absence. But when we are not suffering this pain, although in a state of sensation, there is no need for pleasure. For it is not natural pleasure that sets wrongdoing into action, but rather the striving after idle fancies."

Vaatimattoman elämän ohella Epicuros painotti mietiskelyä ja harkitsevaista asennetta elämään. Hänen mukaansa epävarmuus ja tietämättömyys johtaa pelkoon, joka on yksi suurimmista myrkyistä onnellisuuden ja nautinnon kannalta. Samasta syystä Epicuros kehottaa välttämään luottamasta hyvään tuuriin. Aikaansa edellä, Epicuros kehotti hylkäämään myytit ja suhtautumaan maailmaan tieteellisen asenteen kautta. Vain siten on mahdollista selvittää ne asiat, jotka ovat välttämättömiä, ne jotka ovat kontrollimme ulkopuolella ja ne, joihin voimme vaikuttaa. Jumalista Epicuros kehottaa olemaan välittämättä. Heidän Epicuros ajattelee olevan meistä ja maailmasta välinpitämättömiä ja sitäpaitsi kaiken vaikutusvaltamme ulkopuolella.

"The man who alleges that he is not yet ready for philosophy or that the time for it has passed him by, is like the man who says that he is either too young or too old for happiness".

"Whenever we admit one explanation but reject another that agrees equally well with the evidence, it is clear that we fall short in every way of true scientific inquiry and resort instead to myth".

"It is preferable to remain prudent and suffer ill fortune than to enjoy good luck while acting foolishly".

Epicuros ei tavoitellut vain omaa onnellisuuttaan vaan tahtoi mahdollisimman hyvää kaikille. Hän määritteli oikeudenmukaisuuden tapauskohtaiseksi ratkaisuksi tai päämääräksi, joka hyödyttää kaikkia osapuolia. He, jotka eivät halua tehdä yhteistyötä, jotka eivät halua myös muiden hyvää, eivät Epicuroksen mukaan tunne tai voi saavuttaa oikeudenmukaisuutta. Jokainen, joka toimii väärin, ottaa riskin kiinnijäämisestä ja siten kärsimyksestä ja näin ollen, kärsii aina myös itse.

"It is difficult for a wrongdoer to go undetected; to remain assured that he will go undetected is impossible".

Epicuroksen mukaan hyvän ja onnellisen elämän avaimet ovat siis vaatimattomuus, pohdiskelu, harkintakyky, oikeudenmukaisuus, mutta myös ystävyys. Ystävyyden Epicuros katsoikin olevan kenties tärkeintä kaikesta. Näinä aikoina, jos koskaan, olisi hyvä itse kunkin ottaa olalleen istumaan, ystäväksi, pieni Epicuros.

"Of all the things that wisdom provides for living one's entire life in happiness, the greatest by far is the possession of friendship".

[Mark]

This translation is clearer and more complete than the translation by Odysseus Makridis, and the book itself is clearly printed and decently sturdy for a paperback. Still, I'm leaning toward the Inwood & Gerson translation I'm currently going through.

[Tim Wu · Rating 5 out of 5]

I did not read this version of Epicurus, in fact I don't remember which I read, but anyhow the man has a way of getting to the point very cleanly and clearly.

The philosophy is unsatisfying in certain ways but has a simplicity and coherence that strong recommends it.

[Anmol · Rating 3 out of 5]

Letter to Herodotus & Letter to Pythocles: 2 stars.
Letter to Menoeceus, Principal Doctrines, and Vatican Sayings: 4 stars.
Fragments: 3.5 stars.

I'd recommend anyone interested only in Epicurus' opinions on ethics, materialism/asceticism, and death to only start reading from Letter to Menoeceus onwards. While everything before that is proto-scientific, based on atomism and is close to getting it right, I don't see how it's relevant to the modern reader and is frankly quite uninteresting. Though at one point, Epicurus argues that if you keep cutting down the body into infinitely small parts, then the size of the body also becomes infinite, which is impossible. This is an interesting argument that has at least some merit, because the total sizes of bodies are denoted by their constituents. If we keep reducing the unit of the constituents, the body would keep increasing. But this would of course only be according to that unit. The body isn’t increasing in size in any way, it’s just that we’re using infinitely small units to define it.

it is not possible to imagine the soul existing and having sensation without the body.

In his theory of knowledge applied to theism, Epicurus argues that "true knowledge derives from existing things: therefore, a sure knowledge that gods exists, shared by all men, derives from the fact that gods do exist". Obviously this is nonsense because all humans don’t think that gods exist. But he uses this to say that while gods exist, they are not like the majority supposes them to be — but then how does his theory of knowledge outlined above work at all? One the one hand, he relies on everyone’s theism to hold that gods exist. But then he rejects the specific form in which the majority conceives their theism.

The wise man neither rejects life nor fears not living. Life is not objectionable to him, nor is not living regarded as an evil.

The training for living well and dying well is the same.

I do like his views on death. In one sentence, death is nirvana for Epicurus: it’s the cessation of sensory feeling. His views are what I imagine Buddhism would be if there was no rebirth, which is pretty close to my own views (on good days). On bad days, I am a thorough antinatalist, which Epicurus is definitely against. His argument against antinatalism is: "if you think being born is an inherent negative, why not commit suicide?" This is the classic response to antinatalism, which anyone who frequents online communities like r/antinatalism would be familiar with. This is answered by David Benatar’s asymmetry argument: a person saying that being born is negative is not the same as that person being in favour of suicide. Once we’re here, one may choose to live on for any reason, but that does not change one’s opinion on birth being inherently negative. I’m not saying that the asymmetry argument makes perfect sense. Antinatalism could very well be promortalism in disguise, and Epicurus could be right.

He writes “we have need of pleasure at that time when we feel pain owing to the absence of pleasure.” — the parallels with Buddha are obvious, though Epicurus considers pain to be felt “owing to the absence of pleasure”, and not the other way around.

Epicureanism is not the crass hedonism it is portrayed to be, or became after the Middle Ages. Instead, Epicurus’ philosophy is more of an “intellectual hedonism”: one that recognises the possibility of immediate pain in contributing towards long-term pleasure, and is thus in favour of said pain. “Every pain is an evil, but not every pain is of a nature always to be avoided.” Entirely contrary to the hedonistic notions associated with his philosophy, Epicurus advocates for a minimalistic perspective, which is actually pretty ascetic, arguing that the simple things can give the greatest pleasure, and thus, one should restrict oneself from luxury to be happy: something with which I am in complete agreement.

An Epicurean love of life while it lasts, with a nonchalant shrug of the shoulders for death, which is out of our control: this is how Epicurus prefigured the Stoics.

We must free ourselves from the prison of everyday affairs and politics.

Nothing is sufficient for the man to whom the sufficient is too little.

Great abundance is heaped up as the result of brutalising labour, but a miserable life is the result.

I could share many more of his quotes, because they're brilliant. But I'll stop now.

[Brett Williams · Rating 3 out of 5]

Epicurus (341 B.C. – 271 B.C.) was the founder of Epicureanism, commonly taken as hedonism by, among others, Bishop John of Salisbury (1115-1180). This compilation of what’s left of Epicurus shows this conclusion could not be further from the truth. After a fine but far too short introduction, we find Epicurus sounding more like a Buddhist in his temperance toward earthly pleasures and desire, especially materialism and effete wealth, which was already a malady by the time of ancient Greece. “I have anticipated you, Fortune,” writes Epicurus, “and have barred your means of entry. Neither to you nor to any other circumstance shall we hand ourselves over as captives.”

While Epicurus wrote 300 books, none exist. Only a few letters, fragments, and what others said about him. As one of the great schools in Athens, Epicurus sought freedom from worry, fear, and angst through the pursuit of natural philosophy (eventually this became science) to dispel religious superstitions, while the opposite approach to enhance fear of Yahweh was taking place next door in Israel. And yet, like Israel, Epicurus wanted people to understand their mortal place in life. A life of quiet simplicity and self-sufficiency, Epicurus believed, allowed for a proper focus on worthy priorities. Very much Richard Gregg (1885–1974) and his Value of Voluntary Simiplicity.

A substantial portion of this book is made up of letters to students regarding the possible cause of things: wind, earthquakes, cyclones, rainbows, comets, the Moon’s halo. It might be this or that, or maybe… yet again, it might be XYZ. This can go on and on. For moderns, especially those in the sciences, this can try one’s patience. But what is notable, not once is the cause supernatural—echoes of Thales’ rudiment of science. With no concept of experimentation for another 1900 years, it’s all speculation rooted in imagination, sometimes wild.

In the Letter to Menoeceus, Principle Doctrines, and Vatican Sayings (ancient Greek writings discovered in the Vatican in 1888), the text ascends with the core Epicurean philosophy. Questions of death, morality, prudence, and—sounding like David Hume 2000 years later (or modern American politics)—the “rabble,” unable to comprehend, or entirely unconcerned with philosophy or truth. In these sections, many of Epicurus’ conclusions will ring true today. Too bad so much was lost, and for what’s there, there’s no index.

[Sean-Paul Kosina · Rating 5 out of 5]

“Therefore, foolish is the man who says that he fears death, not because it will cause pain when it arrives but because anticipation of it is painful. What is no trouble when it arrives is an idle worry in anticipation. Death, therefore- the most dreadful of evils- is nothing to us, since while we exist, death is not present, and whenever death is present, we do not exist. It is nothing either to the living or the dead, since it does not exist for the living, and the dead no longer are.” (Letter to Menoeceus- Death, pg. 63)

“We must free ourselves from the prison of everyday affairs and politics.” (Vatican Sayings, pg. 83)

“The tranquil man is not troublesome to himself or to another” (Vatican Sagings, pg. 85)

“Vain is the word of a philosopher, by which no mortal suffering is healed. Just as medicine confers no benefit if it does not drive away bodily disease, so is philosophy useless if it does not drive away the suffering of the mind.” (Fragments, pg. 97)

[Rick · Rating 4 out of 5]

Mostly Epicurus is about physics. But his so-called Epicurean philosophy about happiness and pleasure has quite a bit of value in it. It's worth it to read just those sections.

[Robyn Lowrie · Rating 4 out of 5]

The Essential Epicurus is a critical study of the Greek Philosopher Epicurus, who had a significant influence on Western civilization in the 4th century BC. When I first saw this book, my immediate thought was the quote “Eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow you will die” which I wrongly attributed to him. His teachings were adopted by many of the ancient Greek thinkers such as Aristotle and Plato, and they continue to influence modern thought today.

Epicurus was born in Samos Greece in the fourth century BC. He wrote over 300 works (on “rolls”) which unfortunately, except for writings preserved by Diogenes Laertius, Herodotus, Pythocles, and Menoeceus, only a few have survived. He wrote about the sciences–natural philosophy, meteorology, ethical theory—and the soul—happiness, friendship, and theology.

Epicurus was not well thought of according to the 3rd-century Greek Biographer, Diogenes Laertius. He was regarded as a “flatterer of persons in important positions, a plagiarizer of the doctrines of atoms and pleasure, a teacher of effeminacy, a lewd letter-writer, and a nasty name-caller” (17). So how could someone so disrepute in the 4th century still be so renowned today?

Based upon this critical essay, Epicurus, by George A. Panichas, Epicurus’ teachings about the importance of pleasure and the avoidance of pain have been highly influential in modern philosophy, psychology, and even economics. Despite his apparent moral shortcomings, Epicurus’ philosophy has lived on and continues to shape the way people think about life and the pursuit of happiness.

Biblical reference

Some scholars attribute the writers of Ecclesiastes and Isaiah to Epicureanism. The writer of Ecclesiastes in 8:15 writes “Then I commended mirth because a man hath no better thing under the sun than to eat, and to drink, and to be merry: for that shall abide with him of his labour the days of his life, which God giveth him under the sun.” Even though this is similar to Epicurus’ philosophy of life, which was to focus on pleasure and happiness without indulging in excess–the happiest life was one that was lived with moderation, Solomon wrote this 400 years before Epicurus was born.

Epicurus believed that the highest pleasure was to be found in the pursuit of knowledge and friendship. He also believed that a life without pain was the greatest measure of happiness. This idea is echoed in Ecclesiastes 8:15, where the writer encourages people to find joy in life’s simple pleasures.

In addition, a second attribution to Epicurus by some scholars can be found in Isaiah chapter 22:13: “But see, there is joy and revelry, slaughtering of cattle and killing of sheep, eating of meat and drinking of wine! Let us eat and drink, you say, for tomorrow we die!” This statement is meant to be an example of how one should live life to the fullest, as death is inevitable. Epicurus also said that pleasure was the chief good and that one should strive for a simple life, free from fear and anxiety.

Did Isaiah use the teachings of Epicurus in Ecclesiastes? It is not possible as Isaiah was written in 700 BC, again, 400 years before the birth of Epicurus.

Cosmology:

According to Epicurus, the natural laws that govern the universe are eternal and unchanging: “It is the task of natural science to determine with precision the causes of the most important phenomena and that our happiness is linked with a casual knowledge of the universe“. In his discussion of cosmology, he emphasizes the importance of mental composure and self-reliance and the study of the origin, evolution, and ultimate fate of the universe (61).

At the time of Epicurus’ writings in 300 BC, there had not yet been a Christian movement. According to Jewish belief of that time, God created the Earth, had a plan for the universe, and that it was His will that determined its fate. They believed that God had the power to intervene in the natural order of the universe and alter its course.

However, the Modern Philosophers of the day believed that the universe was created by something else. Philosophers such as these argued that the universe is governed by natural laws rather than by a divine being. They believed that the universe was infinite and eternal, and that the gods were symbols of the natural order of the universe. Furthermore, they believed that the universe was rational and that it could be understood through reasoning and logic.

Epicurus argued that the gods were distant and unconcerned with the lives of humans. He believed that the goal of life was to seek pleasure and avoid pain. Epicurus taught that pleasure was the highest good and that it could be achieved through living a simple life.

The Origins of Language (my wheelhouse!!):

Epicurus believed that words did not receive meanings by design; nor were the names of things created by convention. On the contrary, Epicures argues “on experiencing their own peculiar emotions and sensory impressions, uttered sounds conforming to these various emotions and impressions…corresponding to the geographical differences of the groups (58)”. These ethnic groups gave particular names to sounds as to make their meanings and intentions understandable and concise. (not unlike the Neanderthals who used vocalizations and gestures to communicate basic needs and emotions?)

Fast forward to the Greek language of Epicurus in 3rd century BC which was the standardized system of language developed by the Stoics, a group of Greek grammarians. The Stoics began to study the elements of language, including the sounds that make up words and developed a system of symbols to represent the sounds of speech, which they called “phonemes”. This system of symbols was the basis for the modern understanding of phonemes and the development of modern grammar. As the Stoics, began to study the elements of language using these phonemes, they were able to develop a more standardized language which also saw the beginnings of the Greek alphabet system (which is credited to Plato).

The Stoics believed that the alphabet could be used to represent the philosophical concepts they were advocating, and it was an effective way of expressing ideas and communicating their principles. This was seen as the first step to understanding and living in accordance with their philosophy. As a result, the Stoic alphabet system had a profound effect on the development of language and communication. So cool!

The Soul

As a Christian who lives in the 21st century, this chapter was very fascinating to me. As a Christian, I believe that following Jesus brings eternal life and forgiveness from sin. I have a personal relationship Jesus Christ based on faith. Because I grew up in a Christian environment with teachings and testimonies of this Faith, I learned about Jesus at an early age and had the opportunity to make a person commitment based upon this knowledge and the urging of the Holy Spirit working within me.

Who would have shared the message of Elohim, our Creator God, to the Gentiles at this time? If one was not of the Jewish faith, what teachings of God would they have access to? I do know that the Ancient Greeks were polytheistic, focusing on the worship of deities and heroes such as Zeus, Athena, and Heracles and that Zoroastrianism, Hinduism, and Buddhism. What were the religions in Greece in the 4th and 3rd centuries at the time of Epicurus, Plato, Aristotle?

Did the Greeks rely on the teachings of Homer from the 8th century BC, who wrote about the gods of Zeus, Poseidon, and Hades in the Iliad. Homer taught that the gods were real and powerful and could influence their destiny and were the ultimate authority in Greek society. The power of fate and destiny and were connected to natural forces and phenomena, such as storms, oceans, and earthquakes[ see my post “Did Homer use Biblical Language and Ideas in the Iliad?” ].

According to Panichas, although Homer sings of heroes and their exploits, he speaks of the mystery of what happens to the soul after death. Although his heroes are glorified in feats, he cannot escape the realization that there exists a realm in which “dwell the senseless dead” as Achilles tells Odysseus in his descent into Hades. (87). Life and death have been brough closer to life on earth but has also lost its power and intensity.

Epicurus’ concept of the soul, however, was in stark contrast with Homer’s concept of the soul as descending into the “hateful darkness” of the kingdom of the dead, ruled over by the detested Hades and Persephone.

He was also in contrast with Plato’s concept of the soul as finally descending into the light of a higher realm in a Heavenly Pilgrimage from which it originated (87). In Phaedo, life is preparation for death; death marks the point at which the soul in no longer ‘nailed and glued to the body’ and purity, eternity, and immorality are her kindred and with them she ever lives (89). Plato believes that the soul is older than the body. “That soul…herself invisible, departs to the invisible world—to the divine and immortal and rational (90)”.

Epicurus’ concept of the soul was as a healer of pain. His aim was always to overcome the enemies of happiness and tranquility; to lessen the pain of loss and to push aside the agitating desires for immortality that come with thoughts of the death of the body and the release of the soul.

Happiness–Some Epicureanisms:

“It is not possible to live pleasantly without living prudently and honorably and justly.”

“Pleasure is the highest good: it places resignation side by side with beatitude, melancholy with optimism; seeks its foundation in thought; is scornful of scientific truth; bases conduct on the knowledge of nature; combats superstition, and preaches a faith.”

“He who has learned the limits of life knows that that which removes the pain due to want and makes the whole of life complete is easy to obtain.”

“The stable condition of well-being in the body and the sure hope of its continuance holds the fullest and surest joy for those who can rightly calculate it.”

“Nothing is sufficient for him to whom what is sufficient seems little.”

Reputation and Influence

The spread of Epicurus’ doctrine and philosophy took place over seven centuries, especially between 300B.C. to 150 A.D. not only in Greece by in the whole Greco-Oriental world, in Rome, and Italy. As is obvious in previous sections, Epicurus clashed with Platonists, Stoicism, and also Christianity. His philosophy eclipsed during the thousand years of the Middle Ages. It is scorned in Dante’s Inferno but herald by Augustine.

Epicurus died 200 years before the ministry of St. Paul. Paul called himself “The Apostle to the Gentiles”: “He chose me to be a servant of Christ Jesus for the Gentiles and to do the work of a priest in the service of his good news. God did this so that the Holy Spirit could make the Gentiles into a holy offering, pleasing to him” (Romans 15:16, CEV). Paul was well aware of the teachings of Epicurus and the influence his philosophy had on the world.

In St. Paul and Epicurus, DeWitt argues that Epicurus acted as a bridge from Greek philosophy to the Christian religion. The Apostle Paul quotes Epicurus in his writings in Acts 17:18:

Some of the Epicurean and Stoic philosophers also conversed with him. And some said, “What does this babbler wish to say?” Others said, “He seems to be a preacher of foreign divinities”—because he was preaching Jesus and the resurrection.

“May we know what this new teaching is that you are presenting? You are bringing some strange ideas to our ears, and we would like to know what they mean.” (All the Athenians and the foreigners who lived there spent their time doing nothing but talking about and listening to the latest ideas.)

Paul then stood up in the meeting of the Areopagus and said:

“People of Athens! I see that in every way you are very religious. For as I walked around and looked carefully at your objects of worship, I even found an altar with this inscription: to an unknown god. So you are ignorant of the very thing you worship—and this is what I am going to proclaim to you.

“The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by human hands. And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything. Rather, he himself gives everyone life and breath and everything else. From one man he made all the nations, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he marked out their appointed times in history and the boundaries of their lands. God did this so that they would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from any one of us. ‘For in him we live and move and have our being’ [Epimenides]. As some of your own poets have said, ‘We are his offspring’ [Aratus].

“Therefore since we are God’s offspring, we should not think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone—an image made by human design and skill. In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent. For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to everyone by raising him from the dead.”

Work Cited

EPICURUS: George A Panichas/ Twayne Publishers. New York, 1967

[James Ford · Rating 3 out of 5]

Very short, which was nice but left me craving more (sadly it turns out most of his writings have been lost over time and this is all we have left). Not too much especially useful information but definitely some sections worth thinking about. Pleasant and relatable (i.e. logical) but I would say that based on everything I’ve heard about Epicurus I was expecting a little more insight. Perhaps my expectations were a little too high.

(Lecture notes: There are 4 main claims in Epicurus’ work - 1) Gods are nothing to fear [since they have ultimate power, the world is exactly as they wish it to be] 2) Death is nothing to fear [since while you live you are not dead andonce you die you wont exist] 3) what's good isn't that hard to get [by being happy with less] and 4) what's bad isn’t that hard to endure [because nothing lasts forever] - see Wikipedia article on “Tetrapharmakos”)

Notes:

Letter to Herodotus:
“We must maintain all our investigations in accordance with our sensations and especially our ready implication whether of mind or of any one of our means of judging, and likewise in accordance with our feelings. In this way, we shall have the means by which we may judge both the problem of sense perception and the nonapparent.”

“It is through the senses that we must by necessity form a judgement about the imperceptible by means of reason”

“There are images having the same shape as the solid objects, but far removed from objects apparent to the senses” (my note: seeing is not an object, only light reflecting an object - all sensory experience is simply ENERGY TRANSFER!)

“We must also consider that when something of external objects enters into us, we see and have in mind its shape.” (my note: enters into us is an interesting way of putting it)

“Regarding the infinite, we do not say ‘up’ or ‘down’ as though with reference to a topmost or bottommost point. Although it is possible to proceed to infinity starting from the point above our heads where we are standing, this absolute highest point will never be visible to us.” (my note: what is the relationship between direction and infinity? Change (ie becoming) and infinity?)

“What opinion adds to sense impressions regarding the invisible, namely, that the moments perceptible only by thoughts will have continuity of motion, is not true in this case, for only what is perceived by the senses or grasped by mental apprehension is true.”

“The soul is the chief cause of sensation. but it would not have acquired this faculty, if it were not somehow enclosed by the rest of the body.”

“It is not possible to imagine the soul existing and having sensation without the body, and experiencing these movements when there no longer exists that which encloses and surrounds the soul, in which it now exists and has these movements.”

“Accidents are to be regarded as they appear to be: neither attending permanently nor possessing the status of material substance; rather, they are seen in the manner in which the actual act of perception reveals their proper characteristics.”

My note: all senses are just touchpoints of self with the other world. What if all senses were removed?

“The chief disturbance in the minds of humankind arises when they think that these heavenly bodies are blessed and immortal but have at the same time wills, actions, and motives that are opposed to these divine attributes” (my note: fighting for control instead of embracing acceptance)

Letter to Pythocles:
“We must not think that there is any other aim of knowledge about the heavens, whether treated in connection with other doctrines or separately, than peace of mind and unshakable confidence, just as it is our aim in all other pursuits.”

“We must not theorize scientifically about nature by means of empty maxims and arbitrary principles, but as phenomena require. For our life has no need of foolishness and idle opinion, but of existence free from confusion.”

“If we dispute the evident facts, we will never be able to partake of genuine peace of mind.”

“Above all, devote yourself to the study of beginnings and infinitude and what is akin to them, and also of the criteria for judging and sensations, and the reasons why we reflect on these things. for these elements, when understood in their entirety, will enable you easily to comprehend the causes of particular details.”

Letter to Menoeceus:
“Let no one put off studying philosophy when he is young, nor when old grow weary of its study. For no one is too young or too far past his prime to achieve the health of his soul. The man who alleges that he is not yet ready for philosophy or that the time for it has passed him by, is like the man who says that he is either too young or too old for happiness.”

“Grow accustomed to the belief that death is nothing to us, since every good and evil lie in sensation. Therefore, correct understanding that death is nothing to us makes a mortal life enjoyable, not by adding an endless span of time but by taking away the longing for immortality. For there is nothing dreadful in life for the man who has truly comprehended that there is nothing terrible in not living. Therefore, foolish is the man who says that he fears death, not because it will cause pain when it arrives but because anticipation of it is painful. What is no trouble when it arrives is an idle worry and anticipation. Death, therefore - the most dreadful of evils - is nothing to us, since while we exist, death is not present, and whenever death is present, we do not exist. It is nothing either to the living or the dead, since it does not exist for the living, and the dead no longer are.” (my note: the most insightful note on death that I have read)

“Just as he assuredly chooses not the greatest quantity of food but the most tasty, so does he enjoy the fruits not of the lengthiest period of time but of the most pleasant.”

“We recognize pleasure as the first good and as inborn; it is from this that we begin every choice and every avoidance. It is to pleasure that we have recourse, using the feeling as our standard for judging every good.”

“There are times when we pass over many pleasures, whenever greater difficulty follows from them. Also, we regard many pains as better than pleasures, since a greater pleasure will attend us after we have endured pain for a long time. Every pleasure, therefore, because of its natural relationship to us, is good, but not every pleasure is to be chosen. Likewise, every pain is an evil, but not every pain is of a nature always to be avoided.” (my note: IP is multi-period)

“When we say that pleasure is the goal, what we mean is the freedom from bodily pain and mental anguish. [...] It is sober reasoning, which examines the motives for every choice and avoidance, and which drives away those opinions resulting in the greatest disturbance to the soul.”

Principle Doctrines:
“Those desires that do not lead to pain, if they are not fulfilled, are not necessary. They involve a longing that is easily dispelled, whenever it is difficult to fulfill the desires or they appear likely to lead to harm.” (my note: interesting)

“Of all the things that wisdom provides for living one's entire life and happiness, the greatest by far is the possession of friendship.” (my note: wisdom leads to good friends?)

“It is impossible for the one who commits some act and secret violation of the compact made among men not to do harm or to be harmed, to remain confident that he will escape notice, even if for the present he escapes detection a thousand times. for right up to the day of his death, it remains unclear whether he will escape detection.” (my note: interesting; even after death, really)

Vatican Sayings
“We must not resist nature but obey her. we shall obey her by fulfilling the necessary desires and the physical ones if they do not harm us, but harshly rejecting the harmful ones.”

“The wise man suffers No More Pain by being tortured himself and by seeing a friend being tortured.”

“Everyone departs from life as if he had only just been born.”

“Nothing is sufficient for the man to whom the sufficient is too little.”

“The following method of inquiry must be applied to every desire: what will happen to me if what I long for is accomplished? what will happen if it is not accomplished?”

Fragments
“I do not know how we ought to say that objects that are in darkness possess color.”

“I revel with pleasure in the body, living as I do on bread and water; I spit on extravagant pleasures, not for themselves before the difficulties that attend them.”

“Just as medicine confers no benefit if it does not drive away by the late disease, so is philosophy useless if it does not drive away the suffering of the mind.”

“Many men who acquire wealth do not find deliverance from evils but an exchange of their present evils for greater ones. [...] Self-sufficiency is the greatest of all wealth.”

“Great abundance is heaped up as the result of brutalizing labor, but a miserable life is the result.”

“A person is made unhappy either by fear or by endless and vain desire. the man who curbs these can attain for himself to blessed gift of reason.” (my note: reasons > emotions/desires)

“He who has least need of tomorrow will most gladly greet tomorrow.”

“Justice's greatest reward is peace of mind.” (my note: goodness leads to IP)

[Jalkukda · Rating 3 out of 5]

The doctrine of pleasure principles which Nietzsche adapted and admired epicurus for is absolutely lovely, apart from that his materialism as a contrast to theory of forms and finding his own voice is also brilliant, awesome book !

[Tayylor · Rating 3 out of 5]

I can see now how the belief that Epicureanism supports self-indulgent pleasure-seeking is a gross misunderstanding. Much of what Epicurus has to say is very true and wise. Some of what he has to say is less intelligible to me - particularly when he offers theories on the universe - but his approach is commendable. I like that he places great emphasis on being open to all possible causes. I only rate this a little lower than some other works because overall, there is not as much to find in this small book as in others, and some of what he has to say is perhaps best said by others. But still, worth the read.

[Aaron · Rating 3 out of 5]

I was interested to learn that the theory of multiple universes is 2300 years old. That and the (very simple) theory of atoms are the only two scientific conclusions that are still even remotely accurate. But his method of seeking multiple (non-mythical) hypotheses for observations (earthquakes, shoot stars, etc.) remains a sound approach. Many of his moral sayings and aphorisms remain useful, especially for people who want to live quiet, contemplative, pleasant lives rather than being wealthy or famous.

[Dan Carey · Rating 2 out of 5]

A terrible translation in that O'Connor's sentence structures are so opaque, I had to rewrite them in my mind in order to make sense of them. Also, I'm not sure in what sense the works collected here represent the "essence" of Epicuris' thought. if you are curious about Epicuris'philosophy, there are better books to be found.

[Harris Bolus · Rating 4 out of 5]

If you’re interested in stoicism, I highly recommend also picking up Epicurus. His ethical ideas are a nice counterpoint to theirs. I like both schools, but I think Epicurus ultimately was more accurate about what matters most deeply: the physical-psychological condition of human lives, rather than our duties or natural law.

[Richard · Rating 3 out of 5]

I guess I just wish more had survived from what Epicurus said:) I liked it - I really did. I just didn't feel there was very much meat. I read it, so I can safely say I admire him, but you get as much from his wikipedia entry as you do from this book. But it is really good for what it is.

[Kevin Cole · Rating 2 out of 5]

Unfortunately, I read Epicurus at a time when I was already gobbling up the Stoics, with the result that I remember them and barely him, which is probably a shame.