| 293BCE | Letter to Herodotus |
| 38 | p.6 | 14027 | If we are to use words in enquiry, we need their main, unambiguous and uncontested meanings |
| Full Idea: It is necessary that we look to the primary conception corresponding to each word and that it stand in no need of demonstration, if, that is, we are going to have something to which we can refer the object of search or puzzlement and opinion. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Letter to Herodotus [c.293 BCE], 38) | |||
| A reaction: This either points to definition or to consensus, and since definition seems in danger of some sort of Quinean circularity, I favour consensus. Philosophy is, after all, people discussing things, not inscriptions sent to the gods. |
| 38 | p.6 | 14028 | Nothing comes to be from what doesn't exist |
| Full Idea: Nothing comes into being from what is not. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Letter to Herodotus [c.293 BCE], 38) | |||
| A reaction: King Lear puts it better: Nothing will come of nothing [1.i]. There seems to be an underlying assumption that coming into being out of nothing is much weirder than just existing, but I am not convinced about that. It's all equally weird. |
| 39 | p.6 | 14029 | If disappearing things went to nothingness, nothing could return, and it would all be gone by now |
| Full Idea: If that which disappears were destroyed into what is not, all things would have been destroyed, since that into which they were dissolved does not exist. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Letter to Herodotus [c.293 BCE], 39) | |||
| A reaction: This follows on from Idea 14028. Theologians will immediately spot that this is the underlying principle cited by Aquinas in his Third Way for proving God's existence (Idea 1431). |
| 39 | p.6 | 14030 | The totality is complete, so there is no room for it to change, and nothing extraneous to change it |
| Full Idea: The totality of things has always been just like it is now and always will be. For there is nothing for it to change into. For there exists nothing in addition to the totality, which could enter into it and produce the change. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Letter to Herodotus [c.293 BCE], 39) | |||
| A reaction: This smacks of the sort of dubious arguments that the medieval theologians fell in love with. I never thought I'd say this, but I think Epicurus needs a comprehensive course in set theory before he makes remarks like this. |
| 40 | p.6 | 14031 | Space must exist, since movement is obvious, and there must be somewhere to move in |
| Full Idea: If there did not exist that which we call void and space and intangible nature, bodies would not have any place to be in or move through, as they obviously do move. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Letter to Herodotus [c.293 BCE], 40) | |||
| A reaction: The observation that 'they obviously do move' must be aimed at followers of Parmenides. The idea of the void seems to contain a Newtonian commitment to absolute space. |
| 41 | p.7 | 14032 | Totality has no edge; an edge implies a contrast beyond the edge, and there can't be one |
| Full Idea: The totality is unlimited. For what is limited has an extreme; but an extreme is seen in contrast to something else, so that since it has no extreme it has no limit. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Letter to Herodotus [c.293 BCE], 41) | |||
| A reaction: I presume that the 'limit' is the edge, and the 'extreme' is what is beyond the edge. Why could not the extreme be nothingness, which then contrast dramatically with what exists? |
| 42 | p.7 | 14033 | Bodies are unlimited as well as void, since the two necessarily go together |
| Full Idea: The number of bodies and the magnitude of the void are unlimited. If void were unlimited, and bodies limited, bodies move in scattered fashion with no support of checking collisions; in limited void, unlimited bodies would not have a place to be in. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Letter to Herodotus [c.293 BCE], 42) | |||
| A reaction: Seems good. The point is that without collisions, bodies would not stop relative to one another, and combine to form the objects we perceive. Of course if the started off (anathema!) stuck together, they may not have dispersed yet. |
| 42 | p.7 | 14034 | There exists an infinity of each shape of atom, but the number of shapes is beyond our knowledge |
| Full Idea: For each type of shape there is an unlimited number of similar atoms, but with respect to the differences they are not simply unlimited but ungraspable. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Letter to Herodotus [c.293 BCE], 42) | |||
| A reaction: Epicurus's view of the nature of atoms rests on his empiricism, so while he can reason from experience to how they must be, he admits (impressively) his ignorance of the full facts. He has arguments for the unlimited number. |
| 44 schol | p.8 | 14035 | Atoms just have shape, size and weight; colour results from their arrangement |
| Full Idea: There are not even any qualities in atoms, except shape and size and weight; their colour changes according to the arrangement of the atoms. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Letter to Herodotus [c.293 BCE], 44 schol) | |||
| A reaction: [This is quoted by a 'scholiast' - an early writer quoting from Epicurus's '12 Basic Principles'] He appears to have got this one wrong, as it is evidently the type of atom, as well as the arrangement, which contributes to the colour. |
| 45 | p.8 | 14036 | There are endless cosmoi, some like and some unlike this one |
| Full Idea: There is an unlimited number of cosmoi, and some are similar to this one and some are dissimilar. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Letter to Herodotus [c.293 BCE], 45) |
| 47-53 | p.347 | 6010 | Illusions are not false perceptions, as we accurately perceive the pattern of atoms |
| Full Idea: Epicurus says illusions are not false perceptions, because the senses accurately report the pattern of atoms; for instance, the edges are worn off the pattern produced by a square tower, so its perception as a round tower is true. | |||
| From: report of Epicurus (Letter to Herodotus [c.293 BCE], 47-53) by Deborah K.W. Modrak - Classical theories of Mind | |||
| A reaction: As so often, Epicurus got it right, because Democritus got it right, thus demonstrating that good philosophy must be preceded by good physics. However, good physics must be preceded and followed by good philosophy. |
| 54 | p.10 | 14037 | Atoms only have shape, weight and size, and the properties which accompany shape |
| Full Idea: One must believe that the atoms bring with them none of the qualities of things which appear except shape, weight, and size and the properties which necessarily accompany shape. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Letter to Herodotus [c.293 BCE], 54) | |||
| A reaction: This appears to be fairly precisely a claim that atoms only have primary qualities, though that terminology only came in in the seventeenth century. I take the view to be more or less correct. |
| 56 | p.11 | 14038 | There cannot be unlimited division, because it would reduce things to non-existence |
| Full Idea: One must eliminate unlimited division into smaller pieces (to avoid making everything weak and being forced in our comprehensive grasps of compound things to exhaust the things which exist by reducing them to non-existence). | |||
| From: Epicurus (Letter to Herodotus [c.293 BCE], 56) | |||
| A reaction: A basic argument for atoms, but it seems to rest on Zenonian paradoxes about infinite subdivision. An infinite subdivision of a unit doesn't seem to turn it into zero. |
| 60 | p.12 | 14039 | Above and below us will never appear to be the same, because it is inconceivable |
| Full Idea: What is over our heads ...or what is below any point which we think of ...will never appear to us as being at the same time and in the same respect both up and down. For it is impossible to conceive of this. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Letter to Herodotus [c.293 BCE], 60) | |||
| A reaction: Note that he says it will 'never appear to us' as both - not that it absolutely cannot be both. Both Aristotle and Epicurus are much more focused on how our humanity shapes our metaphysics than the modern pure metaphysicians are. |
| 62 | p.13 | 14040 | Observation and applied thought are always true |
| Full Idea: Everything that is observed or grasped by the intellect in an act of application is true. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Letter to Herodotus [c.293 BCE], 62) | |||
| A reaction: Not quite clear what he means, but Epicurus is committed to perception as the source of knowledge, with the intellect extending the findings of the senses. He might subscribe to Descartes's 'clear and distinct' perceptions. |
| 63 | p.13 | 14041 | The soul is fine parts distributed through the body, resembling hot breath |
| Full Idea: The soul is a body made up of fine parts distributed throught the entire aggregate, most closely resembling breath with a certain admixture of heat, in one way resembling breath and in another resembling heat | |||
| From: Epicurus (Letter to Herodotus [c.293 BCE], 63) | |||
| A reaction: Remember that 'psuché' refers as much to the life within a creature as it does to the consciousness. The stoics seem to have held a similar view. |
| 67 | p.14 | 14043 | The void cannot interact, but just gives the possibility of motion |
| Full Idea: The void can neither act nor be acted upon but merely provides the possibility of motion through itself for bodies. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Letter to Herodotus [c.293 BCE], 67) | |||
| A reaction: Epicurus follows this with the anti-dualist Idea 14042, but he is at least offering the notion of something which exists without powers of causal interaction. Does space undermine the causal criterion for existence? |
| 67 | p.14 | 14042 | The soul cannot be incorporeal, because then it could neither act nor be acted upon |
| Full Idea: Those who say that the soul is incorporeal are speaking to no point; for if it were of that character, it could neither act nor be acted upon at all. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Letter to Herodotus [c.293 BCE], 67) | |||
| A reaction: This just is the causal argument, which is espoused by Papineau and other modern physicalists. Personally I am inclined to agree with Papineau, that it is so simple and conclusive that it is hardly worth discussing further. Dualism needs a miracle. |
| 68 | p.14 | 14044 | The perceived accidental properties of bodies cannot be conceived of as independent natures |
| Full Idea: The shapes, colours, sizes and weights which are predicated of body as accidents, ...and are known by sense-perception, must not be thought of as independent natures (for that is inconceivable). | |||
| From: Epicurus (Letter to Herodotus [c.293 BCE], 68) | |||
| A reaction: I take this to be an anti-platonist remark, though he is not denying that the accidental properties may have some universal character. I'm struck by how close the basic metaphysics of Epicurus is to that of Aristotle. |
| 69 | p.14 | 14045 | Accidental properties give a body its nature, but are not themselves bodies or parts of bodies |
| Full Idea: Accidental qualities are not non-existent, nor are they distinct corporeal entities inhering in the body, nor parts of it. We should think that the whole body throughout derives its permanent nature from these properties, though not as a compound of them. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Letter to Herodotus [c.293 BCE], 69) | |||
| A reaction: 'Permanent' nature sounds more like essential than accidental properties. This is uncomfortably negative in its attempt to pin down what accidental properties are. The last bit seems to deny the bundle view of objects. Would he like tropes? |
| 69 | p.14 | 14046 | A 'body' is a conception of an aggregate, with properties defined by application conditions |
| Full Idea: Properties are known by their peculiar forms of application and comprehension, in close accompaniment with the aggregate [of atoms], which is given the predicate 'body' by reference to the aggregate conception. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Letter to Herodotus [c.293 BCE], 69) | |||
| A reaction: There is an interesting hint here of how to think of properties (as both applying and comprehended in some distinctive way), and a suggestion that there is something conventional about bodies, depending on how we conceive them. |
| 70 | p.15 | 14047 | Bodies have impermanent properties, and permanent ones which define its conceived nature |
| Full Idea: Impermanent properties do not have the nature of an entire thing, which we call a body when we grasp it in aggregate, nor the nature of permanent accompaniments without which it is not possible to conceive of a body. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Letter to Herodotus [c.293 BCE], 70) | |||
| A reaction: Epicurus doesn't discuss essences, but this seems to commit to the basic Aristotelian idea, that there there are some properties which actually bestow identity, and then others which are optional for that thing. The 'conception' is always mentioned. |
| 76 | p.17 | 14048 | Astronomical movements are blessed, but they don't need the help of the gods |
| Full Idea: Movements, turnings, risings, settings, and related phenomena occur without any god helping out and ordaining or being about to ordain things, and at the same time have complete blessedness and indestructibility. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Letter to Herodotus [c.293 BCE], 76) | |||
| A reaction: Epicurus is sometimes accused of atheism for remarks like these, but he is always trying to show piety in his attitudes. We might now call this attitude 'deism' (see alphabetical themes). |
| 78 | p.17 | 14049 | We aim to know the natures which are observed in natural phenomena |
| Full Idea: Blessedness lies in knowing the natures which are observed in meteorological phenomena. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Letter to Herodotus [c.293 BCE], 78) | |||
| A reaction: This pursuit of 'natures' seems to be at the heart of scientific essentialism. Epicurus demonstrates his proposal, by offering speculations about the natures of all sorts of phenomena (esp. in 'Letter to Pythocles'). |
| 82 | p.18 | 14050 | We aim to dissolve our fears, by understanding their causes |
| Full Idea: If we give a correct and complete causal account of the source of our disturbance and fears, we will dissolve them, by accounting for the phenomena to which we are constantly exposed, and which terrify other men most severely. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Letter to Herodotus [c.293 BCE], 82) | |||
| A reaction: Notice 'other' men! This eudaimonist aim lies at the heart of Epicurus's physical account of the world. He was primarily interested in living better, rather than in physical science. He seeks 'tranquillity' and 'freedom from disturbance'. |
| 292BCE | Letter to Pythocles |
| p.459 | 1828 | God does not intervene in heavenly movements, but is beyond all action and perfectly happy | |
| Full Idea: Let us beware of making the Deity interpose in heavenly movements, for that being we ought to suppose exempt from all occupation and perfectly happy. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Letter to Pythocles [c.292 BCE]), quoted by Diogenes Laertius - Lives of Eminent Philosophers 10.25 |
| 88 | p.20 | 14051 | A cosmos is a collection of stars and an earth, with some sort of boundary, movement and shape |
| Full Idea: A cosmos is a circumscribed portion of the heavens containing stars and an earth; it is separated from the unlimited, with a boundary which is rare or dense; it is revolving or stationary; it is round or triangular, or some shape. All these are possible. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Letter to Pythocles [c.292 BCE], 88) | |||
| A reaction: Notice that there seem to exist the 'heavens' which extend beyond the cosmos. See Idea 14036, saying that there are many other cosmoi in the heavens. |
| 94 | p.22 | 21386 | We should accept as explanations all the plausible ways in which something could come about |
| Full Idea: The phases of the Moon could happen in all the ways [at least four] which the phenomena in our experience suggest for the explanation of this kind of thing - as long as one is not so enamoured of unique explanations as to groundlessly reject the others. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Letter to Pythocles [c.292 BCE], 94) | |||
| A reaction: Very interesting, for IBE. While you want to embrace the 'best', it is irrational to reject all of the other candidates, simply because you want a single explanation, if there are no good grounds for the rejection. |
| 291BCE | Letter to Menoeceus |
| 122 | p.28 | 14052 | Begin philosophy when you are young, and keep going when you are old |
| Full Idea: Let no one delay the study of philosophy while young nor weary of it when old; for no one is either too young or too old for the health of the soul. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Letter to Menoeceus [c.291 BCE], 122) | |||
| A reaction: I agree with this on both accounts. I think the correct age to begin the study of philosophy is four, and it is vital to continue its study up to the point where you can no longer remember your own name. 'Health of the soul' sounds right too. |
| 125 | p.29 | 14053 | It is absurd to fear the pain of death when you are not even facing it |
| Full Idea: He is a fool who says that he fears death not because it will be painful when present but because it is painful when it is still to come. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Letter to Menoeceus [c.291 BCE], 125) | |||
| A reaction: Not very plausible, I'm afraid. It provides a good argument in favour of smoking, if the lung cancer is far in the future. Paralysing fear is daft, but some remote fears should be heeded. |
| 125 | p.29 | 14054 | Fearing death is absurd, because we are not present when it occurs |
| Full Idea: Death, the most frightening of bad things, is nothing to us; since when we exist, death is not yet present, and when death is present, then we do not exist. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Letter to Menoeceus [c.291 BCE], 125) | |||
| A reaction: This is a fairly accurate observation. To fear not being in this life is a bit like fearing not being in Vancouver next Tuesday. It also involves the paradox of the present moment. E.g. Idea 1904. |
| 126 | p.29 | 14055 | The wisdom that produces a good life also produces a good death |
| Full Idea: The same kind of practice produces a good life and a good death. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Letter to Menoeceus [c.291 BCE], 126) | |||
| A reaction: This is the kind of old fashioned observation which we would do well to hang on to. The ideal of dying well has vanished from our culture. |
| 128 | p.30 | 1833 | Pleasure is the first good in life |
| Full Idea: Pleasure is the beginning and end of living happily, and we recognise this as the first good. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Letter to Menoeceus [c.291 BCE], 128) | |||
| A reaction: We might enquire what we would live for if our capacities for pleasure were surgically removed. Would we still experience intellectual curiosity, or an aspiration to some cold and remote goodness? |
| 128 | p.30 | 14056 | We only need pleasure when we have the pain of desire |
| Full Idea: We are in need of pleasure only when we are in pain because of the absence of pleasure, and when we are not in pain, then we no longer need pleasure. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Letter to Menoeceus [c.291 BCE], 128) | |||
| A reaction: This Buddhist aspiration to eliminate desire has no appeal for me. It just sounds like a recipe for boredom, and an aversion to risk-taking. Start by asking what is best in life; it inevitably involves pleasure of some sort. Anyway, desire isn't painful. |
| 129 | p.30 | 14057 | All pleasures are good, but it is not always right to choose them |
| Full Idea: Every pleasure is a good thing, since it has a nature congenial to us, but not every one is to be chosen, just as every pain is a bad thing, but not every one is such as to be always avoided. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Letter to Menoeceus [c.291 BCE], 129) | |||
| A reaction: This kind of sensible remark would be wholly endorsed by Bentham and Mill. This fits in with the excellent distinction between what is right and what is good. |
| 131 | p.30 | 14058 | Pleasure is the goal, but as lack of pain and calm mind, not as depraved or greedy pleasure |
| Full Idea: When we say that pleasure is the goal we do not mean the pleasures of the profligate or the pleasures of consumption, but rather the lack of pain in the body and disturbance in the soul. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Letter to Menoeceus [c.291 BCE], 131) | |||
| A reaction: I don't really understand the aspiration to a 'calm mind'. No one likes stress, but total calmness sounds close to non-existence. The mean! There is no achievement without pain. |
| 131 | p.471 | 1835 | True pleasure is not debauchery, but freedom from physical and mental pain |
| Full Idea: When we say that pleasure is the chief good, we do not mean debauchery, but freedom of the body from pain, and of the soul from confusion…. which requires sober contemplation. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Letter to Menoeceus [c.291 BCE], 131), quoted by Diogenes Laertius - Lives of Eminent Philosophers 10.27 | |||
| A reaction: I'm not clear how lack of pain and confusion counts as pleasure. Also the concepts of debauchery held by the puritan and the sybarite are wildly different. |
| 132 | p.31 | 14060 | Prudence is the greatest good, and more valuable than philosophy, because it produces virtue |
| Full Idea: Prudence is the principle of the rational life and is the greatest good. That is why prudence is more valuable than philosophy, for prudence is the source of all the other virtues. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Letter to Menoeceus [c.291 BCE], 132) | |||
| A reaction: ['prudence' will be Greek 'phronesis']The interest of this is that it is almost copied straight out of Aristotle's Ethics. Epicurus was an opponent of the Peripatetics, but greatly influenced by them. |
| 132 | p.31 | 14059 | The best life is not sensuality, but rational choice and healthy opinion |
| Full Idea: It is not drinking bouts or enjoying boys and women or consuming fish which produces the pleasant life, but sober calculation which searches out reasons for every choice, and drives out opinions which produce turmoil of the soul. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Letter to Menoeceus [c.291 BCE], 132) | |||
| A reaction: This more or less sums up what I would call the philosophical life. Spontaneity is good, and some pleasures are killed by excessive thought, but on the whole actions are always better if good reasons are found, and error brings chaos. |
| 132 | p.471 | 1836 | Prudence is more valuable than philosophy, because it avoids confusions of the soul |
| Full Idea: The greatest good in avoiding confusion of the soul is prudence [phronesis], on which account prudence is something more valuable than even philosophy. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Letter to Menoeceus [c.291 BCE], 132), quoted by Diogenes Laertius - Lives of Eminent Philosophers 10.27 |
| 133 | p.31 | 14061 | Our own choices are autonomous, and the basis for praise and blame |
| Full Idea: What occurs by our own agency is autonomous, and it is to this that praise and blame are attached. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Letter to Menoeceus [c.291 BCE], 133) | |||
| A reaction: I don't think this should be understand as an assertion of free will in the modern sense. The 'swerve' of the atoms just means that decisions can arise out of us - not that they are somehow outside of nature. |
| 133 | p.472 | 1837 | We should not refer things to irresponsible necessity, but either to fortune or to our own will |
| Full Idea: The best men have no belief in necessity (set up by some as mistress of all), but refer some things to fortune, some to ourselves, because necessity is irresponsible, and fortune is unstable, while our own will is free. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Letter to Menoeceus [c.291 BCE], 133), quoted by Diogenes Laertius - Lives of Eminent Philosophers 10.27 |
| 134 | p.31 | 14062 | Sooner follow mythology, than accept the 'fate' of natural philosophers |
| Full Idea: It would be better to follow the stories told about the gods than to be a slave to the fate of the natural philosophers. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Letter to Menoeceus [c.291 BCE], 134) | |||
| A reaction: At this point in history there is a blurring between autonomous decisions and what we now call free will, and also between fate and determinism, which we try to keep distinct. |
| 135 | p.31 | 14063 | Sooner a good decision going wrong, than a bad one turning out for the good |
| Full Idea: It is better for a good decision not to turn out right in action than for a bad decision to turn out right because of chance. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Letter to Menoeceus [c.291 BCE], 135) | |||
| A reaction: This sounds right, and on the whole the law agrees. Notice that what we need is a 'good decision', and not just to 'mean well'. The well-meaning fool is wicked. I am opposed to consequentialism, and agree with this idea. |
| 290BCE | Principle Doctrines ('Kuriai Doxai') (frags) |
| p.89 | 14524 | Bodies are combinations of shape, size, resistance and weight | |
| Full Idea: Epicurus said that body was conceived as an aggregate of shape and size and resistance and weight. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Principle Doctrines ('Kuriai Doxai') (frags) [c.290 BCE]) | |||
| A reaction: [Source Sextus 'Adversus Mathematicos' 10.257] Note that this is how we 'conceive' them. They might be intrinsically different, except that Epicurus is pretty much a phenomenalist. |
| 15 | p.36 | 14517 | We value our own character, whatever it is, and we should respect the characters of others |
| Full Idea: We value our characters as our own personal possessions, whether they are good and envied by men or not. We must regard our neighbours' characters thus too, if they are respectable. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Principle Doctrines ('Kuriai Doxai') (frags) [c.290 BCE], 15) | |||
| A reaction: I like this because it introduces a metaethical dimension to the whole problem of virtue. We should value our own character - so should we try to improve it? Should we improve so much as to become unrecognisable? |
| 27 | p.37 | 14518 | In the study of philosophy, pleasure and knowledge arrive simultaneously |
| Full Idea: In philosophy the pleasure accompanies the knowledge. For the enjoyment does not come after the learning but the learning and the enjoyment are simultaneous. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Principle Doctrines ('Kuriai Doxai') (frags) [c.290 BCE], 27) |
| 31 | p.35 | 14513 | Justice is a pledge of mutual protection |
| Full Idea: The justice of nature is a pledge of reciprocal usefulness, neither to harm one another nor to be harmed. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Principle Doctrines ('Kuriai Doxai') (frags) [c.290 BCE], 31) | |||
| A reaction: Notice that justice is not just reciprocal usefulness, but a 'pledge' to that effect. This implies a metaethical value of trust and honesty in keeping the pledge. Is it better to live by the pledge, or to be always spontaneously useful? |
| 32 | p.38 | 14519 | It is a great good to show reverence for a wise man |
| Full Idea: To show reverence for a wise man is itself a great good for him who reveres [the wise man]. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Principle Doctrines ('Kuriai Doxai') (frags) [c.290 BCE], 32) | |||
| A reaction: It is characteristic of Epicurus to move up a level in his thinking, and not merely respect wisdom, but ask after the value of his own respect. Compare Idea 14517. Nice. |
| 33 | p.294 | 3560 | Justice is merely a contract about not harming or being harmed |
| Full Idea: There is no such things as justice in itself; in people's relations with one another in any place and at any time it is a contract about not harming or being harmed. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Principle Doctrines ('Kuriai Doxai') (frags) [c.290 BCE], 33), quoted by Julia Annas - The Morality of Happiness 13.2 |
| 37 | p.35 | 14515 | A law is not just if it is not useful in mutual associations |
| Full Idea: If someone passes a law and it does not turn out to be in accord with what is useful in mutual associations, this no longer possesses the nature of justice. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Principle Doctrines ('Kuriai Doxai') (frags) [c.290 BCE], 37) |
| 38 | p.38 | 14520 | It is small-minded to find many good reasons for suicide |
| Full Idea: He is utterly small-minded for whom there are many plausible reasons for committing suicide. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Principle Doctrines ('Kuriai Doxai') (frags) [c.290 BCE], 38) | |||
| A reaction: It is a pity that the insult of 'small-minded' has slipped out of philosophy. The Greeks use it all the time, and know exactly what it means. We all recognise small-mindedness, and it is a great (and subtle) vice. |
| 40 | p.38 | 14521 | If everything is by necessity, then even denials of necessity are by necessity |
| Full Idea: He who claims that everything occurs by necessity has no complaint against him who claims that everything does not occur by necessity. For he makes the very claim in question by necessity. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Principle Doctrines ('Kuriai Doxai') (frags) [c.290 BCE], 40) |
| 5 | p.340 | 3563 | Pleasure and virtue entail one another |
| Full Idea: It is not possible to live pleasantly without living intelligently and finely and justly, nor to live intelligently and finely and justly without living pleasantly. | |||
| From: Epicurus (Principle Doctrines ('Kuriai Doxai') (frags) [c.290 BCE], 5), quoted by Julia Annas - The Morality of Happiness Ch.16 |
| 71 | p.40 | 14522 | What happens to me if I obtain all my desires, and what if I fail? |
| Full Idea: One should bring this question to bear on all one's desires: what will happen to me if what is sought by desire is achieved, and what will happen if it is not? | |||
| From: Epicurus (Principle Doctrines ('Kuriai Doxai') (frags) [c.290 BCE], 71) | |||
| A reaction: Yet another example of Epicurus moving up a level in his thinking about ethical issues, as in Idea 14517 and Idea 14519. The mark of a true philosopher. This seems to be a key idea for wisdom - to think further ahead than merely what you desire. |
| 289BCE | fragments/reports |
| p.35 | 22733 | Epicurus accepted God in his popular works, but not in his writings on nature | |
| Full Idea: Epicurus in his popular exposition allows the existence of God, but in expounding the real nature of things he does not allow it. | |||
| From: report of Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE]) by Sextus Empiricus - Against the Physicists (two books) I.58 | |||
| A reaction: Plato and Aristotle also distinguished their esoteric from their exoteric writings, but this is an indication that thei popular works may always have presented safer doctrines. |
| p.46 | 13291 | Slavery to philosophy brings true freedom | |
| Full Idea: To win true freedom you must be a slave to philosophy. | |||
| From: Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE]), quoted by Seneca the Younger - Letters from a Stoic 008 | |||
| A reaction: A lovely idea. It is one thing to free the body, or to free one's social situation, but the challenge to 'free your mind' is either romantic nonsense or totally baffling, apart from the suggestion offered here. Reason is freedom. Very Kantian. |
| p.48 | 7814 | It was Epicurus who made the question of the will's freedom central to ethics | |
| Full Idea: Epicurus was responsible for the innovatory recognition that the question of the will's freedom is central to ethics. | |||
| From: report of Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE]) by A.C. Grayling - What is Good? Ch.3 | |||
| A reaction: Compare Ideas 7672 and 6018. Obviously ethical action needs freedom, but the idea of a 'free will' is quite different. It is a fiction, created to give some sort of arrogant ultimate responsibility to our actions, like God. |
| p.62 | 6035 | Soul is made of four stuffs, giving warmth, rest, motion and perception | |
| Full Idea: Epicurus says the soul is a blend of fiery stuff (for bodily warmth), airy stuff (rest), breath (motion), and a nameless stuff (sense-perception). | |||
| From: report of Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE]) by Aetius - fragments/reports 4.3.11 | |||
| A reaction: Obviously Epicurus thought the four stuffs were different combinations of atoms, rather than being elements. Is there no stuff which gives reason? Reason must reduce to motion, presumably. |
| p.81 | 14523 | We should come to philosophy free from any taint of culture | |
| Full Idea: I congratulate you, sir, because you have come to philosophy free of any taint of culture. | |||
| From: Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE]) | |||
| A reaction: [source: Athenaeus, 'Deipnosophists' 13 588b] No one nowadays thinks such an aspiration remotely possible, not least because the culture is embedded in your native language, but I find the idea very appealing. |
| p.87 | 2633 | Epicurus saw that gods must exist, because nature has imprinted them on human minds | |
| Full Idea: Epicurus alone saw that gods must exist because nature herself has imprinted an idea of them in the minds of all mankind. | |||
| From: report of Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE]) by M. Tullius Cicero - On the Nature of the Gods ('De natura deorum') I.43 |
| p.89 | 12044 | Only Epicurus denied purpose in nature, for the whole world, or for its parts | |
| Full Idea: Epicurus alone among the ancient schools denies that in nature we find any teleological explanations. Nothing in nature is for anything, neither the world as a whole nor anything in it. | |||
| From: report of Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE]) by Julia Annas - Ancient Philosophy: very short introduction | |||
| A reaction: This may explain the controversial position that epicureanism held in the seventeenth century, as well as its incipient atheism. |
| p.92 | 14525 | Stoics say time is incorporeal and self-sufficient; Epicurus says it is a property of properties of things | |
| Full Idea: Stoics posited that time is an incorporeal which is conceived of all by itself, while Epicurus thinks that it is an accident of certain things, ...and he called in a property of properties. | |||
| From: Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE]) | |||
| A reaction: [Source Sextus 'Adversus Mathematicos' 10.219-227] |
| p.94 | 14526 | The rational soul is in the chest, and the non-rational soul is spread through the body | |
| Full Idea: Democritus and Epicurus say the soul has two parts, one which is rational and is situated in the chest area, and the other which is non-rational and is spread throughout the entire compound of the body | |||
| From: Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE]) | |||
| A reaction: [source Aetius 4.4.6] |
| p.96 | 2637 | For Epicureans gods are made of atoms, and are not eternal | |
| Full Idea: For Epicureans the gods are made of atoms, so in that case they are not eternal. | |||
| From: report of Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE]) by M. Tullius Cicero - On the Nature of the Gods ('De natura deorum') I.68 |
| p.98 | 14527 | If god answered prayers we would be destroyed, because we pray for others to suffer | |
| Full Idea: If god acted in accordance with the prayers of men, all men would rather quickly be destroyed, since they constantly pray for many sufferings to befall each other. | |||
| From: Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE]) | |||
| A reaction: [source Maximus the Abbott 'Gnom.' 14] |
| p.104 | 2639 | Some say Epicurus only pretended to believe in the gods, so as not to offend Athenians | |
| Full Idea: Some believe that Epicurus gave lip-service only to the gods, so as not to offend the Athenians, but in fact did not believe in them. | |||
| From: report of Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE]) by M. Tullius Cicero - On the Nature of the Gods ('De natura deorum') I.84 |
| p.107 | 6018 | Epicurus was the first to see the free will problem, and he was a libertarian | |
| Full Idea: By posing the problem of determinism, Epicurus became arguably the first philosopher to recognise the philosophical centrality of what we call the Free Will Question. His strongly libertarian approach is strongly contrasted with Stoic determinism. | |||
| From: report of Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE]) by AA Long / DN Sedley - Hellenic Philosophers commentary | |||
| A reaction: Epicurus introduced the rather dubious 'swerve' of the atoms to make room for free will. It seems to me more consistent to stick with the determinism of Democritus. Zeno became a determinist in reaction to Epicurus. |
| p.109 | 20907 | Democritus says atoms have size and shape, and Epicurus added weight | |
| Full Idea: Democritus said that the properties of the atoms are in number two, magnitude and shape, but Epicurus added to these a third one, weight. | |||
| From: report of Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE]) by Pseudo-Plutarch - On the Doctrine of the Philosophers 1.3.18 | |||
| A reaction: The addition of Epicurus seems very sensible, and an odd omission by Democritus. He seems to think that atoms have a uniform density, so that volume indicates weight. |
| p.188 | 3557 | The end for Epicurus is static pleasure | |
| Full Idea: Epicurus identifies our final end with what he calls tranquillity or 'ataraxia', which is static pleasure. | |||
| From: report of Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE]) by Julia Annas - The Morality of Happiness Ch.7 |
| p.201 | 1482 | If two people disagree over taste, who is right? | |
| Full Idea: If one person says the wine is dry and the other that it is sweet, and neither errs in his sensation, how is the wine any more dry than sweet? | |||
| From: report of Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE]) by Plutarch - 74: Reply to Colotes 1109b |
| p.201 | 1483 | Bath water is too hot for some, too cold for others | |
| Full Idea: In the very same bath some treat the water as too hot, others as too cold. | |||
| From: report of Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE]) by Plutarch - 74: Reply to Colotes 1109b |
| p.203 | 1484 | We should say nothing of the whole if our contact is with the parts | |
| Full Idea: We should make no assertion about the whole when our contact is with the parts. | |||
| From: report of Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE]) by Plutarch - 74: Reply to Colotes 1109e |
| p.209 | 1487 | When entering a dark room it is colourless, but colour gradually appears | |
| Full Idea: On entering a dark room we see no colour, but do so after waiting a short time. | |||
| From: Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE]), quoted by Plutarch - 74: Reply to Colotes 1110d |
| p.217 | 21668 | Epicurus rejected excluded middle, because accepting it for events is fatalistic | |
| Full Idea: Epicurus said that not every proposition is either true or false. ...Epicurus was afraid that if he admits that every proposition is true or false he will also have to admit that all events are caused by fate (if they are so from all eternity). | |||
| From: report of Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE]) by M. Tullius Cicero - On Fate ('De fato') 10.21 | |||
| A reaction: Epicurus proposed his 'swerve' in the movements of atoms to avoid this fatalism. Epicurus is agreeing with Aristotle, who did not accept excluded middle for a future contingent sea-fight. |
| p.219 | 21669 | Atoms don't swerve by being struck, because they move in parallel, so the swerve is uncaused | |
| Full Idea: The swerve of Epicurus takes place without a cause; it does not take place in consequence of being struck by another atom, since how can that take place if they are indivisible bodies travelling perpendicularly in straight lines by the force of gravity? | |||
| From: comment on Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE]) by M. Tullius Cicero - On Fate ('De fato') 10.22 | |||
| A reaction: The swerve is the most ad hoc proposal in the history of theoretical physics. This is interesting for spelling out that the travel in vertical parallels. What's that all about, then? |
| p.235 | 21676 | Epicureans say disjunctions can be true whiile the disjuncts are not true | |
| Full Idea: Epicureans make the impudent assertion that disjunctions consisting of contrary propositions are true, but that the statements contained in the propositions are neither of them true. | |||
| From: report of Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE]) by M. Tullius Cicero - On Fate ('De fato') 16.36 | |||
| A reaction: Is that 'it is definitely one or the other, but we haven't a clue which one'? Seems to fit speculations about Goldbach's Conjecture. It doesn't sound terribly impudent to me. Or is it the crazy 'It's definitely one of them, but it's neither of them'? |
| p.243 | 21680 | What causes atomic swerves? Do they draw lots? What decides the size or number of swerves? | |
| Full Idea: What fresh cause exists in nature to make the atom swerve (or do the atoms cast lots among them which is to swerve and which not?), or to serve as the reason for making a very small swerve and not a large one, or one swerve, and not two or three swerves? | |||
| From: comment on Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE]) by M. Tullius Cicero - On Fate ('De fato') 20.46 | |||
| A reaction: This is an appeal to the Principle of Sufficient Reason, which seems to be the main ground for rejecting the swerve. The only reason to accept the swerve is reluctance to accept determinism or fatalism. |
| p.252 | 1909 | How can pleasure or judgement occur in a heap of atoms? | |
| Full Idea: If Epicurus makes the end consist in pleasure and asserts that the soul, like all else, is composed of atoms, it is impossible to explain how in a heap of atoms there can come about pleasure, or judgement of the good. | |||
| From: comment on Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE]) by Sextus Empiricus - Outlines of Pyrrhonism III.187 | |||
| A reaction: This is a nice statement of the mind-body problem. Ontologically, physics still seems to present reality as a 'heap of particles', which gives no basis for the emergence of anything as strange as consciousness. But then magnetism is pretty strange. |
| p.310 | 4549 | Epicurus denied knowledge in order to retain morality or hedonism as the highest values | |
| Full Idea: Epicurus denied the possibility of knowledge in order to retain moral (or hedonistic) values as the highest values. | |||
| From: comment on Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE]) by Friedrich Nietzsche - The Will to Power (notebooks) §578 | |||
| A reaction: The history of philosophy suggests that this dichotomy is unnecessary. Dogmatist place a high value on multitudes of things. |
| p.340 | 3562 | Fine things are worthless if they give no pleasure | |
| Full Idea: I spit on the fine and those who emptily admire it, when it doesn't make any pleasure. | |||
| From: Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE]), quoted by Julia Annas - The Morality of Happiness Ch.16 | |||
| A reaction: in Athenaeus |
| p.435 | 1820 | The criteria of truth are senses, preconceptions and passions | |
| Full Idea: The criteria of truth are the senses, the preconceptions, and the passions. | |||
| From: report of Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE]) by Diogenes Laertius - Lives of Eminent Philosophers 10.20 |
| p.435 | 1821 | Sensations cannot be judged, because similar sensations have equal value, and different ones have nothing in common | |
| Full Idea: Sensation is out of reach of control, because one sensation cannot judge another which resembles itself, as they have equal value, and different sensations have different objects. | |||
| From: report of Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE]) by Diogenes Laertius - Lives of Eminent Philosophers 10.20 | |||
| A reaction: Scepticism about the possibility of purely empirical knowledge; an interesting comment on the question of whether perceptions contain any intrinsic knowledge. |
| p.435 | 1822 | Reason can't judge senses, as it is based on them | |
| Full Idea: Reason cannot judge the senses, because it is based on them. | |||
| From: report of Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE]) by Diogenes Laertius - Lives of Eminent Philosophers 10.20 |
| p.436 | 1823 | We can't seek for things if we have no idea of them | |
| Full Idea: We could not seek for anything if we had not some notion of it. | |||
| From: report of Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE]) by Diogenes Laertius - Lives of Eminent Philosophers 10.21 |
| p.436 | 1824 | To name something, you must already have an idea of what it is | |
| Full Idea: We could not give names to things, if we had not a preliminary notion of what the things were. | |||
| From: report of Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE]) by Diogenes Laertius - Lives of Eminent Philosophers 10.21 |
| p.459 | 20922 | Epicurus showed that the swerve can give free motion in the atoms | |
| Full Idea: There is a free motion in the atoms, which Democritus did not discover, but which Epicurus brought to light, and which consists in a swerve, as he demonstrated on the basis of what is seen to be the case? | |||
| From: report of Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE]) by Diogenes (Oen) - Wall inscription 54.II-III | |||
| A reaction: I presume the last bit means that we see that we have freedom of choice, and infer the swerve in the atoms as the only possible explanation. The worry for libertarians is, of course, who is in charge of the swerve. |
| p.465 | 22758 | Philosophy aims at a happy life, through argument and discussion | |
| Full Idea: Philosophy is an activity which secures the happy life by arguments and discussions. | |||
| From: Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE]), quoted by Sextus Empiricus - Against the Ethicists (one book) VI.169 | |||
| A reaction: Presumably this aims at the happiness of the participant. Universal happiness would need to be much more political. If this is your aim then you can't just follow the winds of the argument, but must channel it towards happiness. No nasty truths? |
| p.466 | 1829 | A wise man would be happy even under torture | |
| Full Idea: Even if the wise man were put to the torture, he would still be happy. | |||
| From: report of Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE]) by Diogenes Laertius - Lives of Eminent Philosophers 10.26 |
| p.467 | 1831 | Wise men should partake of life even if they go blind | |
| Full Idea: Even though he lose his eyes, a wise man should still partake of life. | |||
| From: report of Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE]) by Diogenes Laertius - Lives of Eminent Philosophers 10.26 |
| p.473 | 1840 | Pleasure is the chief good because it is the most natural, especially for animals | |
| Full Idea: Pleasure is the chief good, because all animals from the moment of their birth are delighted with pleasure and offended by pain by their natural instinct, without the employment of reason. | |||
| From: report of Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE]) by Diogenes Laertius - Lives of Eminent Philosophers 10.29 | |||
| A reaction: The highest pleasure of predators is likely to be the killing of weaker animals. What all animals do isn't much of a criterion for the natural chief good. They also breathe. |
| p.473 | 1841 | We choose virtue because of pleasure, not for its own sake | |
| Full Idea: We choose the virtues for the sake of pleasure, and not on their own account. | |||
| From: report of Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE]) by Diogenes Laertius - Lives of Eminent Philosophers 10.30 |
| p.473 | 1839 | Pains of the soul are worse than pains of the body, because it feels the past and future | |
| Full Idea: The pains of the soul are worst, for the flesh is only sensible of present affliction, but the soul feels the past, present and future. | |||
| From: report of Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE]) by Diogenes Laertius - Lives of Eminent Philosophers 10.29 | |||
| A reaction: I don't think feeling extended across time is very relevant. What matters is that pains of the soul usually endure far longer than physical suffering. |
| p.475 | 1842 | Pleasures only differ in their duration and the part of the body affected | |
| Full Idea: If every pleasure lasted long, and affected the whole body, then there would be no difference between one pleasure and another | |||
| From: Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE]), quoted by Diogenes Laertius - Lives of Eminent Philosophers 10.31.08 | |||
| A reaction: This seems to miss out on intensity, which is of great importance to most pleasure seekers. Also it is a pleasure to be alive, which is lifelong, but we barely notice it. |
| p.477 | 1843 | Friendship is by far the most important ingredient of a complete and happy life | |
| Full Idea: Of all the things which wisdom provides for the happiness of the whole life, by far the most important is the acquisition of friendship. | |||
| From: Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE]), quoted by Diogenes Laertius - Lives of Eminent Philosophers 10.31.28 |
| p.478 | 1845 | Justice has no independent existence, but arises entirely from keeping contracts | |
| Full Idea: Justice has no independent existence; it results from mutual contracts, and establishes itself wherever there is a mutual engagement to guard against doing or sustaining mutual injury. | |||
| From: Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE]), quoted by Diogenes Laertius - Lives of Eminent Philosophers 10.31.35 |
| p.567 | 2668 | Epicurus says if one of a man's senses ever lies, none of his senses should ever be believed | |
| Full Idea: Epicurus says that if one sense has told a lie once in a man's life, no sense must ever be believed. | |||
| From: report of Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE]) by M. Tullius Cicero - Academica II.25.79 |
| p.591 | 2670 | Epicurus despises and laughs at the whole of dialectic | |
| Full Idea: Epicurus despises and laughs at the whole of dialectic. | |||
| From: report of Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE]) by M. Tullius Cicero - Academica II.30.97 |
| 9 | p.36 | 14516 | There is no necessity to live with necessity |
| Full Idea: Necessity is a bad thing, but there is no necessity to live with necessity. | |||
| From: Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE], 9) |
| fr 221 | p.78 | 22240 | The aim of medicine is removal of sickness, and philosophy similarly removes our affections |
| Full Idea: Just as there is no benefit to medicine if it does not heal the sicknesses [nosos] of bodies, so too there is none to philosophy unless it expels that affections of the soul. | |||
| From: Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE], fr 221), quoted by James Allen - Soul's Virtue and the Health of the Body p.78 | |||
| A reaction: This sounds rather Buddhist, if the only route to happiness is to suppress the emotions. Epicurus probably refers to the more extreme desires, which only lead to harm. Galen quotes Chrysippus as endorsing this idea (see footnote 5). |
| Fr 30 | p.207 | 5949 | Epicurus says colours are relative to the eye, not intrinsic to bodies |
| Full Idea: Epicurus says that colours are not intrinsic to bodies but a result of certain arrangements and positions relative to the eye, which implies that body is no more colourless than coloured. | |||
| From: report of Epicurus (fragments/reports [c.289 BCE], Fr 30) by Plutarch - 74: Reply to Colotes §1110 | |||
| A reaction: This seems to me such a self-evident truth that I am puzzled as to why anyone would claim that colours are real features of bodies. Epicurus points out that entering a dark room we see no colour, but then colour appears after a while. |