فلسفهٔ اپیکوری

Very Short Introductions #452

by Catherine Wilson, مجتبی پردل (Translator)

فلسفۀ اپیکوری را معمولاً با دیدگاهی بی غمانه به زندگی و جست و جوی لذت در پیوند می دانند،
به ویژه لذت های خوان و خوراک. با این همه، اپیکوریسم نظام فلسفیِ پیچیده و متمایزی بود که بر سادگی
و میانه روی تأکید می نهاد و طبیعت را برساختۀ اتم و خلأ می دانست. فلسفۀ اپیکوری مکتبی اندیشگانی است که مُرده ریگ
آن امروزه نیز همچنان طنین افکن است.
در فلسفۀ اپیکوری، کاترین ویلسون که یکی از برجسته ترین صاحب نظران دربارۀ فلسفۀ اپیکوری است،
اندیشه های کلیدی این مکتب را روشن داشته آن ها را با اندیشه های مکتب های رقیب یعنی رواقیگری و اخلاق
کانتی همسنجی می کند، و به پی جویی تأثیرشان بر رویش و بالش تفکر علمی و سیاسی، از لاک و نیوتن و گالیله گرفته تا
روسو، مارکس، بنتام و میل، می پردازد. ویلسون دربارۀ اتخاذ و تعدیل بن مایه های اندیشۀ اپیکوری در علم، اخلاقیات و دانش سیاسی
از سدۀ هفدهم بدین سو بحث می کند و اهمیت فلسفۀ اپیکوری را در زمینه های گوناگون زندگی مُدرن امروزی آشکار می سازد.
از رهگذر این بررسی ها، کتاب حاضر درکی از تأثیر فلسفۀ اپیکوری و اندیشه های آن بر تفکر فلسفی در گذر سده ها
برای خوانندگان فراهم می آورد و نشان می دهد چه سان پیام اپیکوریِ «میانه روی متمدنانه» امروزه نیز همچنان مطرح است.

Genres: Philosophy, History, Nonfiction, Ebooks

156 pages, Paperback

Published April 1, 2025

About the author

Librarian note:
There is more than one author in the GoodReads database with this name

Current Academic Position:
Distinguished Professor of Philosophy
Andrew Heiskell Research Scholar

Education:
Ph.D. Princeton University
B.Phil. University of Oxford
B.A. Yale University

Research Interests:
17th and 18th Century History and Philosophy of Science
Moral and Social Theory
Philosophy of Literature

Courses Recently Taught:
Biology and Morality (Spring 2008)
Empiricism: Bacon to Hume (Fall 2007)
Egalitarianism: For & Against (Spring 2007)
Rationalists (Fall 2006)
Evolution and Ethics (Spring 2006)
Materialism, Politics and Morals in 17th Century Philosophy (Fall 2005)

Representative Publications:
Moral Animals: Ideals and Constraints in Moral Theory. Oxford University Press, 2004.
Descartes's Meditations: An Introduction. Cambridge University Press, 2003.
The Invisible World: Early Modern Philosophy and the Invention of the Microscope. Princeton University Press, 1995. 2nd ed. (paperback) 1997.
Leibniz's Metaphysics: A Historical and Comparative Study. Princeton University Press/Manchester University Press, 1989.
"What is the Importance of Descartes's Sixth Meditation?" Accepted for publication in Philosophica 74 (2006).
"Evolutionary Ethics." (12,000 words) To appear in Handbook of the Philosophy of Biology, ed. M. Matthen and C. Stephens, Elsevier, 2006.
"Love of God and Love of Creatures: The Astell-Masham Debate," History of Philosophy Quarterly, 21 ( 2004).
"Simone de Beauvoir and Human Dignity." In The Legacy of Simone de Beauvoir, edited by Emily Grosholz, Oxford University Press, 2004, pp. 90-114.
"Kant and Leibniz," Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy, 2004.
"Epicureanism in Early Modern Philosophy: Leibniz and his Contemporaries," in Brad Inwood and Jon Miller, eds., Hellenistic and Early Modern Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2003, p. 90-115.
"Capability and Language in the Novels of Tarjei Vesaas" Philosophy and Literature 27 (2003) pp. 21-39.
"A Humean Argument for Benevolence to Strangers," Monist 86:3 on Moral Distance, edited by Deen Chatterjee., (2003) p. 454-468.
"The Role of a Merit Principle in Distributive Justice," Journal of Ethics 7 (2003) pp. 1-38.
"Morphogenesis, Organisation, Teleology," Enciclopedia Italiana, Rome, 2003.
"Corpuscular Effluvia: Between Imagination and Experiment," in Claus Zittel and Wolfgang Detel eds., Ideals and Cultures of Knowledge in Early Modern Europe/Wissensideale und Wissenskulturen in der frühen Neuzeit. Concepts, Methods, Historical Conditions and Social Impact. 2 vols., Frankfurt, Akademie-Verlag 2002, pp. 161-184.

Reviews

[Maziyar Yf]

شتک زده است به خورشید خون بسیاران

فلسفه اپیکوری کتابی است از کاترین ویلسون ، نویسنده آمریکایی . او در این کتاب کوشیده تا فلسفه اپیکور را شرح دهد و نشان دهد که این مکتب، صرفاً دعوت به لذت‌گرایی افراطی نیست، بلکه راهی است برای رسیدن به آرامش، رهایی از ترس و زیست خردمندانه
ویلسون اصول بنیادین اندیشه‌ی اپیکور را تمایز میان لذت‌های ضروری و بیهوده، اهمیت دوستی و عدالت، و نگاه طبیعت‌گرایانه‌ای که جهان را مجموعه‌ای از اتم‌ها و خلأ می‌بیند ، می داند . او همچنین نشان می‌دهد که چگونه این فلسفه بر اندیشه‌های مدرن تأثیر گذاشته است؛ از فیلسوفان روشنگری گرفته تا متفکران معاصر.
ویلسون در نه فصل به اپیکور و اندیشه های او پرداخته ، اما شاید خلاصه اندیشه های او را بتوان سه محور جهان اتمی ، اخلاق اپیکوری و زندگی ، عشق دانست .

جهان اتمی از نگاه اپیکور
اپیکور جهان را صحنه‌ای می‌دید که تنها دو عنصر بنیادین دارد: اتم‌ها و خلأ. همه‌چیز، از کوه گرفته تا بدن و روح انسان، از ذرات ریز و تجزیه‌ناپذیر ساخته شده. از نگاه اپیکور این ذرات در خلأ بی‌پایان حرکت می‌کنند و با برخورد و پیوندشان، شکل‌های گوناگون جهان پدید می‌آید. اپیکور برای توضیح آزادی و امکان نوآوری، نظریه‌ انحراف کوچک را بیان کرد . او می‌گفت حرکت اتم‌ها همیشه مستقیم نیست، گاهی اندکی از مسیر منحرف می‌شوند و همین انحراف، سرچشمه‌ی پیدایش نو و آزادی انسان است. در این نگاه، روح نیز از اتم‌ها ساخته شده و فناپذیر است ، پس مرگ چیزی جز پراکندگی ذرات نیست و تجربه‌ای پس از آن وجود ندارد. خدایان نیز اگر باشند، از جنس اتم‌اند و در جهانی آرام و بی‌دغدغه زندگی می‌کنند، بی‌آنکه در کار انسان دخالت کنند. بنابراین ترس از مرگ و خدایان بی‌معناست.
اپیکور از این جهان‌بینی نتیجه‌ای اخلاقی گرفت: چون جهان بر اساس قوانین طبیعی عمل می‌کند، انسان باید زندگی خوب را در شناخت طبیعت، لذت‌های ساده، دوستی و آرامش روانی بجوید. بنابر این جهان اتمی او هم تصویری علمی از هستی بود و هم راهی برای رهایی انسان از اضطراب و رسیدن به سکون درونی.
اخلاق اپیکوری
اخلاق اپیکوری بر این باور استوار است که هدف نهایی زندگی، رسیدن به آرامش و رهایی از رنج است. اپیکور لذت را خیر برتر می‌دانست، اما نه هر لذتی؛ او میان لذت‌های ضروری و بیهوده تمایز می‌گذاشت. لذت‌های ضروری مانند غذا، آب، سرپناه و دوستی، پایه‌های زندگی خوب‌اند و نبودشان رنج مستقیم به همراه دارد. در مقابل، لذت‌های بیهوده همچون جاه‌طلبی، ثروت بی‌پایان یا شهرت، نه تنها آرامش نمی‌آورند بلکه اضطراب و نگرانی بیشتری ایجاد می‌کنند.
از نگاه اپیکور، زندگی خوب همان نبود درد جسمی )آپونیا ) و نبود اضطراب روانی (آتاراکسیا) است. از نگاه اپیکور انسان باید از ترس‌های بی‌اساس، به‌ویژه ترس از مرگ و خدایان، رها شود، زیرا مرگ چیزی جز پراکندگی اتم‌ها نیست و خدایان دخالتی در زندگی انسان ندارند.
اخلاق اپیکوری در نهایت انسان را به سادگی، میانه‌روی و خرد دعوت می‌کند؛ به زیستی که در آن لذت‌های ضروری تأمین می‌شوند، از افراط پرهیز می‌شود، و آرامش درونی بر هیاهوی بیرونی ترجیح داده می‌شود.
زندگی و عشق از نگاه اپیکور
عشق در نگاه اپیکور بیش از آنکه شور و هیجان باشد، نشانه دوستی و اعتماد است . اپیکور دوستی را بزرگ‌ترین منبع لذت پایدار می داند ، رابطه‌ای که امنیت و آرامش می‌آورد و انسان را از تنهایی و اضطراب می‌رهاند. در مقابل عشق اگر به افراط کشیده شود ، می‌تواند رنج و اضطراب بیافریند، اما اگر با دوستی و میانه‌روی همراه می‌شد، بخشی از زندگی خوب خواهد بود. ویلسون کوشیده تا نشان ‌دهد که فلسفه‌ اپیکور، تنها برداشت سطحی از لذت‌گرایی نیست ، بلکه راهی برای زیستن خردمندانه است ، راهی که انسان را شاید از ترس مرگ و خدایان رها کرده و به آرامش، دوستی و عدالت دعوت می کند .
در نهایت، پیام اپیکور ساده اما عمیق است: زندگی خوب نه در افراط و جاه‌طلبی، که در آرامش، دوستی و شناخت طبیعت نهفته است.

[Jordan B Cooper · Rating 3 out of 5]

The descriptions of Epicureanism were helpful enough, but the author's constant derogatory comments about Christianity (and religion in general) were obnoxious.

[C. Varn · Rating 4 out of 5]

While far from perfect, Catherine Wilson treats Epicureanism from Epicureanism and Lucreatius as more than an ethical philosophy. Indeed, many of the treatments of the Stoics and Epicureanism (or Hellenistic philosophical schools in general), ignore the physics, metaphysics, and politics that grounded the various schools ethical assumption. Wilson starts with atomism, works through materialism, Epicurean theories of life and theology, Epicurean political and ethical assumptions, and the pure Epicurean ethics. Wilson also shows its historical reemergence in the late Renaissance and early Enlightenment and traces Epicureanism influence from Baron Holbach to David Hume to Thomas Hobbes to the Utilitarians as well as responses against Epicureanism. While some many find this overly sceintific and metaphysical, it is a stark contrast to those treatments that concern themselves almost solely with ethics.

[Vikas Datta · Rating 5 out of 5]

A lucid introduction to the misunderstood philosophy..

[Frank · Rating 3 out of 5]

Surprisingly far ahead of its time.

[Jeremy · Rating 3 out of 5]

This seemed like a pretty good introduction to Epicureanism, a philosophical school from classical times. It was in direct competition with Stoicism, but even less source material about Epicureanism has survived. This is probably due to the fact that other philosophical schools were more popular and also were more easily adaptable to Christianity, which held a stranglehold on intellectual thought during the Middle Ages.

A renewed interest in Epicureanism increased starting in the 17th century, and this book talks not only about the foundational ideas of Epicureanism but also about how they have affected modern science and philosophy.

The author talks in turn about Epicurean ideas about atomism, knowledge, life and love, materialism, religion, politics, and ethics. One of the most interesting chapters to me was on atomism. The Epicureans believed that everything was made up of small, indivisible things they called atoms ("uncuttable"). Atoms had shape, size, and weight, but no color, odor, or taste, and were too small to be seen. Atoms came together to create everything in the world, and existed in a void. This idea was completely opposed to Stoicism, which believed there was no such thing as a void and everything was made of one consistent piece of matter, just in different forms.

What was fascinating to me was the author describing the empirical way that the Epicureans developed this idea. First, nothing can come from nothing. But things are destructible, and they come into being and fade away. Mountains, houses, animals, and plants all appear and disappear. Wet clothes dry out, roads wear into ruts, an herb rubbed between fingers creates a smell. All of these things were seen as evidence of atoms. Parts of this idea have been shown to be true, but Wilson also points out places where the Epicureans got it wrong.

Another interesting part of Epicureanism is their ethics. To them, being happy consisted of having as much pleasure and as little pain as possible. This led to accusations of them being hedonists, seeking pleasure above all things, but they did argue that unbounded pleasure seeking leads to pain, so moderation is necessary. One of the reasons Epicureanism was unpopular is because it is very selfish. Stoicism, on the other hand, promoted civic duty and helping others, and both of those were valued by the civilizations of the day.

Finally, it was interesting to read the author's views on how Epicurean ideas influenced modern politics. The idea that people are fundamentally motivated to seek pleasure and avoid pain got expanded into societies banding together and creating governments and laws so that individuals could avoid pain as much as possible. This leads to the idea of the social contract, where individuals give up their liberty to do whatever they want, including taking whatever they can by force, in order to be protected from having someone else do whatever they want to them and cause them pain. The social contract idea is fundamental to many of today's democracies, but the Epicureans would not argue that there are any such things as fundamental human rights, such as those enumerated in the Declaration of Independence of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

The duty and altruism of Stoicism appeal more to me and I don't really agree with Epicurean ethics, but it was really interesting to learn not only about what they taught but how their reasoning got them there and how Epicurean ideas have influenced the world we have today.

[Managing my virtual footprint · Rating 3 out of 5]

Not a bad introduction, but the author spends way too much time talking of modern alternatives and challenges, to the point that most of the time is not relevant to epicureanism. There must be better and more concise introductions out there.

[Kevin · Rating 3 out of 5]

If you only know one thing about the Epicureans, you probably know that they were party animals addicted to hard-drinking and fine-dining. You’d be wrong.

It’s true that the Epicureans valued pleasure as the highest of goods and that actions were only valued to the extent that they led to pleasure but, for Epicurious, fine-dining meant a hearty bowl of barley gruel rather than Lobster Thermidor with a bottle of Champagne. The rumour that Epicureans loved to party and hang out with prostitutes was propaganda invented by rival schools to discredit them. They did like to hang out in the garden with friends and enjoy life but, for an Epicurean, enjoyment did not imply sex and drugs and rock ’n’ roll— they preferred to banter about the meaning of life. The thing about the prostitutes came about because the Epicureans invited women to their soirées to discuss philosophy at a time when women were barred from other schools.

Epicureanism: A Very Short Introduction gives us a whirlwind tour of Epicurus’s teaching in Athens in 300 BC. Epicureanism was one of several schools in Athens around this time (rival schools included Plato’s, Aristotle’s, the Cynics and the Stoics). Epicureanism waned as Roman influence grew and was pretty much wiped out once the Romans found God. Almost everything written by Epicurus was lost and most of what we know about his philosophy we know from a poem written in the last days of the Roman Republic by Lucretius. Even this poem was lost until it was discovered tucked into a scroll hidden in the back of a dusty library some 1500 years later. Though epicureanism was long forgotten, anti-epicureanism lived on as an atheist, sensualist bogeyman held up as a warning to budding philosophers. Even Dante put Epicureans into one of his circles of hell.

After it was rehabilitated by the humanists of the 17th century, epicureanism made enormous contributions to the science of the day.

Did you know that the Epicureans had an atomic theory that was better than any other theory of matter for another 2000 years? And, when the theory was rediscovered in the Middle Ages, it had to be hidden away because it challenged the (wrong) competing theories championed by the church?

Epicureans had a credible theory of evolution (without the natural selection bit) which, not surprisingly, also had to be hidden away because it made a nonsense of Genesis. In another nail in the creation story’s coffin, Epicurus told a story of how men had once lived in caves but, over time, invented language, clothing and other technologies long before they came up with civilisation. Predating Marx by millennia, they taught that society had gone through a series of economic structures before settling on the one that emerged in classical Athens.

While they did believe in the gods, Epicureans thought the gods were remote beings who cared nothing about puny humans. Our planet is just one of an infinite number of worlds. Epicureans figured out how sex led to reproduction with a theory more advanced than Aristotle’s and the Christians didn’t like that theory very much either.

Epicureanism: A Very Short Introduction book is structured with short chapters that describe an Epicurean theory and then contrasted it with the equivalent modern theory in surprisingly rich detail. While it’s nice to see the comparisons, the book is about twice the size that it would have been if it was just about Epicureanism. Unlike most of the other books in the series, it’s not “Very Short”. Well worth a read though.

[Matthew Lloyd · Rating 2 out of 5]

It might be fair to say that I am beyond the need for an introduction to Epicureanism, let alone a very short one. I studied Lucretius across four separate courses at the University of Oxford, although that was around twenty years ago so it's not fresh. More recently, I've read in translation the works of Epicurus and Lucretius, and a couple of additional books on the subject matter. I still think it is worthwhile to reinforce what I know, though. Furthermore, John Sellars called this a 'fuller account' of Epicureanism than his The Fourfold Remedy: Epicurus and the Art of Happiness , so I thought it might go a bit deeper. Unfortunately, I found this a confusing account of Epicureanism that seemed more focused on its reception in the seventeenth through nineteenth centuries and assessing its relevancy to modern life without any consideration for how it might be updated under the influence of modern science.

Here are a few positives to make myself feel a little better about any harshness in this review. I do like that Wilson begins with the atomic, materialist principles that underlie Epicureanism. Other recent books I've read on Epicureanism tend to downplay atomism as natural science, although that is usually because they are making a more earnest attempt than Wilson to think about how Epicureanism is relevant to the modern world. I am also interested in if and how Epicurean atomic principles relate to the atomic principles of the twenty-first century, which Wilson sort of brings up. For the most part, I don't think Wilson shows whether or how the seventeenth century and later philosophy that she discusses is based on the "rediscovered" De rerum natura. Sometimes, the connection is drawn; other times it seems like Wilson could just be drawing connections between ancient Epicureanism and something that sounds a bit like what Epicurus was saying. My lack of context for the philosophy of the Enlightenment meant that I don't really know.

Ultimately there's a part of me that thinks I might know less about Epicureanism after reading his book than I did when I started. I didn't feel, at most points, that the philosophy itself was illuminated any more than it is in Lucretius as translated by A.E. Stallings. To understand the basics of the philosophy, John Sellars's book is shorter, easier to read, and more aware of the ancient Greek and Roman contexts of the authors (as well as Epicurean literature beyond Epicurus and Lucretius). I really hate being this negative about a book but I just don't think it did a good job of talking about the thing it's supposed to be about.

[Bernie Gourley · Rating 5 out of 5]

Like all ancient schools of philosophy, Epicureanism birthed an adjectival oversimplification that has eclipsed the word’s original meaning and obscured the full story of this philosophical system. Platonic refers to the teachings of Plato, but platonic is a friends-without-benefits scenario. A Cynic is a minimalist who eschews comfort and rejects social norms, but to be cynical is to think the worst. A Stoic believes that there are things one can control and things one can’t and that one should act virtuously in the former case and indifferently in the latter, but a stoic is an emotionless automaton. Epicureans developed a comprehensive system of philosophy that included metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, and political philosophy, but an epicurean is a hedonist, probably dripping butter from his chin. The tenet that there is nothing wrong with seeking pleasure became the whole picture, and lost was the understanding that moderation is a virtue.

Being unacquainted with Epicureanism, I was surprised to learn that it was the least superstitious, as well as the most compassionate, of all the ancient Greek philosophies. Like most people studying ancient philosophies, I’m most interested in those aspects that might be called “philosophy of life” - i.e. ethics, politics, and other aspects that deal in how one should live. [As opposed to the more arcane questions of metaphysics and epistemology.] The reason is simple; the former ideas have aged better, while ancient metaphysics, for example, appears ridiculous in light of all the science that has come along. For this reason, I tend to overlook the long-discredited ideas of ancient philosophers. However, I’ve come to see that these ideas informed the life philosophy of each school (and, also, that there are degrees of wrong.) For example, the Epicureans, being atomists, were correct to a point, and in rooting their entire system in nature (rather than gods and the supernatural) they avoided preoccupation with pleasing the gods and developed an acceptance of the fact that sh!% happens (and it’s not due to angry gods.) So, while many of the details of Epicurean atomism were far from the mark, it did yield a less superstitious outlook (and was less wrong than most ancients.) My point is that I ended up benefiting from this guide’s comprehensive approach.

If you’re looking for an overview of Epicureanism, or you think the defining characteristic of an Epicurean is a love of heavy sauces, you should definitely check this book out.

[Gumbo Ya-ya · Rating 3 out of 5]

Wilson presents a highly readable, easily digested introduction to the philosophy of Epicurus and its legacy.

the metaphysics of the Epicurean school is given, to my mind, a disproportionate word count relative to what it has to say on ethics; what interests me in philosophy is the art of living well, rather than the speculation as to the nature of reality, and Wilson seems to veer reasonably heavily the other way.

My other gripe with this account is its focus on the legacy of Epicureanism, particularly the resurgence of many of its ideas during and following the Enlightenment. While this is certainly of interest, it felt like most of the book was given over to what people have made of Epicureanism since the 17th century rather than how it was originally presented and lived.

Of particular interest to me were the exposition of the Epicurean atomic model, which I had not previously known any detail of, and the chapter on politics and society.

Wilson is very evenhanded in her approach, citing supporters and critics both across the centuries, without seeming to really come down on one side or the other but instead to focus on what positive lesson can be, and have been, taken from this ancient philosophy.

[Simon · Rating 3 out of 5]

A pleasant read. More than about Epicureanism, I would say it deals with the legacy of Epicurus and Lucretius. Very little is said about Epicureanism in its own days, yet a lot about how the rediscovery of Lucretius “On The Nature of Things” inspired many thinkers from the renaissance on, including Spinoza, Hobbes, Rousseau, Bacon, Locke, Leibniz, Hume, Kant, Marx, but also Noam Chomsky is named. Personally I think there is an over emphasis on the - less interesting - scientific, religious, political aspects of Epicureanism, namely atomism, religion as fear, social rules from nature instead of god, and way less on their ethical views of limiting pains and increasing pleasure, and the subtleties of these views. For example the importance of friendship for a good life is hardly mentioned at all in this book, while this is a prime and exceptional component of epicureanism. Personally I prefer Pierre Hadot's approach way better, namely looking at ancient philosophy as "philosophies of life", much different from the current fragmented academy philosophy.

An overly scientific and “history of western philosophy” view of Epicureanism, yet valuable in its own regard.

[Keith · Rating 3 out of 5]

“The Epicurean hope is that the provision of a scientific account of the origins of the cosmos and of life, and an account of the causes of belief in powerful supernatural persons, can overcome the human tendency to believe that gods are involved in human life.” (p. 72)

This Very Short Introduction provides a useful look into the philosophy of Epicureanism and its influence on later human endeavors, including on the physical sciences and rationalism.

Title: Epicureanism
Author: Catherine Wilson
Series: The Oxford Very Short Introductions Series
Year: 2015
Genre: Nonfiction - Philosophy, science
Page count: 160 pages
Date(s) read: 5/4/23 - 5/6/23
Reading journal entry #101 in 2023

[Austin · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is more than an introduction to the philosophy of Epicureanism -- it also discusses the ways in which the doctrines of this philosophy have affected the development of the modern world. From the belief in Atomism, the idea that everything is composed of tiny indivisible particles, to an ethic that seeks to maximize pleasure and minimize pain (a predecessor to the post-enlightenment ethic of Utilitarianism), many of the tenets of this belief system have found their way into the modern world (for better or worse).

I am looking forward to reading Wilson's more in depth/scholarly treatment of this subject -- Epicureanism at the Origins of Modernity.

[Ystradclud · Rating 5 out of 5]

"Death is nothing to us. When we exist, death is not; and when death exists, we are not. All sensation and consciousness ends with death and therefore in death there is neither pleasure nor pain. The fear of death arises from the belief that in death, there is awareness."

I only specifically cared about the sections on politics and ethics, but the rundown on Epicurean atomism was a welcomed surprise.

[Eli Pollack · Rating 3 out of 5]

It was a sin that I was allowed to graduate high school, college and get a post-graduate degree knowing so little about epicurean-ism, but I have atoned for it - a very well done summary of the philosophy that is clearly written and very concise.

[Jeffrey · Rating 4 out of 5]

Covers topic well

Covers the basis of Epicurean philosophy, atomism, epistemology, love, life, death, mind, religion, politics and ethics. Also discusses the evolution of Epicurean like thinking through its inception to the contemporary.

[Javier Rivero · Rating 4 out of 5]

While the author does a good job in the segmentation of Epicureanisms main pillars, fails to provide a simple explanation on each one of them. Reading becomes complex due to the introduction of many other complex concepts within (what is supposed to be) an introductory book.

[Frank Lawton · Rating 4 out of 5]

Despite the author treating her metaphysical and cultural opinions as the baseline facts across which epicureanism and other philosophies evolve, this book was very informative and engaging as a first introduction to the history and content of epicureanism.

[Andre · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book is exactly what it advertises: a short concise intro that puts Epicureans in a historical context.

[Joni · Rating 2 out of 5]

Accessible,yes. And very short as the name implies. But also quite dull...

[Pidge · Rating 3 out of 5]

A very quick read. If you're curious about Epicureanism but have no prior knowledge, like me, then I would say this is a good read to gauge if you want to read more on it.

[Samuel · Rating 4 out of 5]

Fascinating discussion of Epicurean physics and its reception history. Different way in to the philosophy than works that focus on Epicurean ethics.

[Roy Kenagy]

RK NOOK 2024_01_14 Announcement

[Camilla Rose · Rating 2 out of 5]

It's ok, and worth reading. I wish there had been more info about Epicurus and Epicureanism instead of comparisons to modern philosophy. It's not objective enough for my taste.

[Ricardo · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5

[Paul · Rating 4 out of 5]

Helpful introduction to Epicureanism. I did not agree with some of the authors assumptions and biases. For instance, she wonders whether or not people could live as well without religion. The data is already out there. She might have benefited from doing more research on that issue.

[Designated Hysteric · Rating 3 out of 5]

In my opinion, the work excessively accentuates the physics and epistemology of epicureans and perhaps those sections should have been briefer while expanding on the sections covering epicurean ethics.