5 ms·

How to Be an Epicurean

101 points by nocoder 7y ago

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
mjfisher 7y ago
A nicely entertaining read. Does anyone else find the author's characterisation of Stoicism a little reductive? My reading of the Stoics has been limited so far, but at least as far as Marcus Aurelius writes one of the primary Stoic paths to peace and virtue is through helping others.
- Tim0theus 7y ago
  Yes I did, I think the contrast is much better explored in this lecture: http://rickroderick.org/102-epicureans-stoics-skeptics-1990/ http://rickroderick.org/102-epicureans-stoics-skeptics-1990/ Worth listening if you have the time.
  - mjfisher 7y ago
    That looks absolutely perfect for me. I've found some Stoic attitudes and practices a great help over the past year or so, but suspect there's some really valuable knowledge from the other schools I've yet to learn about. I'm working my way through Seneca's letters at the moment. He keeps quoting Epicurus, so that's a pretty decent recommendation right there! Anything that builds out context around that era of philosophy is massively interesting to me. Thank you very much :)
- taberiand 7y ago
  I agree, my understanding of Stoicism leads me to the same conclusion. Epicureans and Stoics seem to have always had a friendly rivalry going on, though they feel a lot like two sides to the same coin. In some ways, to me, Epicureanism is what a Stoic does on their day off.
  - mcguire 7y ago
    The rivalry isn't always friendly. If your connotation of epicureanism involves "pleasures of the flesh", it's probably because stoics painted them as hedonists.
- billfruit 7y ago
  If I'm not wrong, the author is a noted critic of the Stoics and especially of the recent revival of interest in Stoicism, and their promotion of Epicureanism may well be originating from that end. So I guess we can't trust them to give an impartial view of Stoicism.
myusername334 7y ago
This is a branch of the culture wars I am sorry to report. Anything that smells of self control is equated with masculinity which is, as we all know, toxic. This and articles like it, such as the one the other day about the "downside of citizenship", are the soft sell of globalism -statism. Be rootless, follow your bliss, be happy creative and think about and have sex, a lot...that's the Goodlife. Being self directed, struggling against your own (and others') base instincts leads to repression and hatred and war. That is the basic theme of these velvet glove pieces. The iron fist is the inexplicable - what man would dare inveigh against women discussing amongst themselves their own sexualry- attack on no-fap and more broadly, self restraint and self discipline. People who live according to an inward set of values are unmanageable and unpredictable and, well, deplorable. Get high, says London's mayor, in a desperate attempt to stem the city's world leading homicide rate. Smoke dope, masturbate, calm down, have a nice meal. This is that.
myusername334 7y ago
Censor much? What goes around, comes around.
myusername334 7y ago
Hacker news censors 100 percent of my posts for three years running folks including the one previous to the above, which of course you can't see. But they let ONE post through, mocking them for censorship, just so I look like a fool.. Clever, No?
pyyding 7y ago
I feel bad I only found out about this "ism" now because it aligns with many of my values I've had to figure out myself. Thanks for posting!
gtirloni 7y ago
About Stoics: >The world, they thought, is ruled by providence; all that happens is fated to happen, and we must embrace our individual fates and the past and the future that has been determined for us. That's not the understanding I got from reading about Stoicism. Sure, some of it could be "fate" and out of your control but there is a lot of emphasis on what you can control. I think the author simplified this too much to the point of making it incorrect.
- the_bowme 7y ago
  It was in the stoicism I studied in college, and stoics took it to be important to justify why their prescriptions were valid. But nowadays we don't need an argument, we can just point out that ancient people believed it and that's difficult convincing.
  - shantly 7y ago
    Yeah, the difference between Stoicism-as-philosophy and Stoicism-as-self-help-book is that the former finds it necessary to justify the accuracy or reasonableness of its advice, starting from fundamentals like what physical reality consists of. Most people interested in Stoicism don't really care about that part now.
    - gtirloni 7y ago
      I never heard of this distinction (self-help vs "true" philosophy). Wikipedia[0] has this: Stoics outlined what we have control over categories of our own action, thoughts and reaction. The opening paragraph of The Enchiridion states the categories as; "Things in our control are opinion, pursuit, desire, aversion, and, in a word, whatever are our own actions. Things not in our control are body, property, reputation, command, and, in a word, whatever are not our own actions.". These suggest a space that is within our own control. Is that based on the self-help book approach? 0 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoicism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoicism
      - shantly 7y ago
polytronic 7y ago
How to be an Epicurean? That's easy! Start by using his Tetrapharmakon (means the quadruple remedy) to live a happy life, which is the following: Θεός Άφοβον - God is not to be feared Θάνατος Αναίσθητον - You don't feel (sic or meet with) death Τ'αγαθόν μεν εύκτητον - It is easy to acquire goods Το δε δεινόν ευκαρτέρητον - So is easy to withstand rough times
- thope 7y ago
  Absolutely. Also, a point I found interesting is that we can classify desires in three categories: - natural and necessary, e.g drink, eat - natural but not necessary, e.g sex - not natural and not necessary, e.g smartphones Epicure advised to fulfill only the first type of desires, that is, drink water and eat bread, period. As a sidenote, the goal of his philosophy was not to experience pleasures, but instead to avoid pain, which is quite different.
  - mcguire 7y ago
    Well, in comparison with stoicism, epicureanism is more about experiencing pleasure than avoiding pain, given that the latter tries to avoid all feeling. But yeah, they're more fundamentally alike there.
HNLurker2 7y ago
Epicurean said something and the sceptic showed a middle finger.
earthboundkid 7y ago
BRB, buying some barrels and lanterns for the revival of cynicism. I’ll sell them as “honest philosopher’s goods” and make a fortune.
- FranzFerdiNaN 7y ago
  Im sure you could build a lucrative career out of giving workshops and talks about how to incorporate cynic attitudes in your daily life to combat burnouts and stress. Or how to be a cynic business leader trying to extract as much productivity out of people.
  - whatshisface 7y ago
    Why is it better to extract more productivity than it is the extract less productivity? I think the only thing that's really worth doing is sleeping in a barrel.
    - mcguire 7y ago
      I'm sorry, I can't hear you. My lantern went out.
viburnum 7y ago
I read about Epicurus when I was a little kid and it really resonated with me (basically, the “hang out with your friends and don’t get too worked up about things” part). Now that I’m getting old and basically wasted most of my life, I wish I had done the “have a mission in life” track. But really I think people are born with a temperament and personality that mostly shapes how they react to their environment, and I’m not sure I could have ended up any different.
- mcguire 7y ago
  Me, as well. I wanted a "mission", but everything I've done is more about the content, quiet life.
hunterloftis 7y ago
> Fame and wealth are zero-sum. For some to be wealthy, powerful and famous, others must be poor, obedient and disregarded. Is this accurate? My understanding of wealth might be simplistic or reductive, but I have equated it to two neighbor craftsmen producing and trading goods. Each benefits from the other’s specialty and increases overall wealth, which is not zero-sum. I can agree with the statement regarding fame, since fame is more directly correlated with time, which is strictly zero-sum.
- woadwarrior01 7y ago
  One could argue that fame too is not a zero-sum game. With increasing populations, wouldn’t it be easier to have a million fans today than say during Shakespeare’s times? This could be one possible explanation for the rise of the influencers on YouTube, Instagram and the ilk.
- mcguire 7y ago
  Consider the extremes: if everyone only has $1, they are all objectively "poor", but without a comparison, they do not feel any difference. If they all have a great deal of resources, again, they have no grounds to compare. On the other hand, if one has great resources and the others little, then they have a noticable in wealth and power.
- fao_ 7y ago
  > Is this accurate? My understanding of wealth might be simplistic or reductive, but I have equated it to two neighbor craftsmen producing and trading goods. Each benefits from the other’s specialty and increases overall wealth, which is not zero-sum. It's accurate for the society we live in, but not for all possible societies.
mcguire 7y ago
"Epicurus was notorious for his nonmarital relationships that combined sex and philosophy." The major problem of studying Epicurean philosophy is that few original sources have survived and almost all of the writing about it is from its opponents. As far as I have ever seen, the only source for sexual promiscuity is that women were allowed in to his school.

101 points by nocoder 7y ago

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

A nicely entertaining read. Does anyone else find the author's characterisation of Stoicism a little reductive? My reading of the Stoics has been limited so far, but at least as far as Marcus Aurelius writes one of the primary Stoic paths to peace and virtue is through helping others.

Tim0theus 7y ago
Yes I did, I think the contrast is much better explored in this lecture: http://rickroderick.org/102-epicureans-stoics-skeptics-1990/ http://rickroderick.org/102-epicureans-stoics-skeptics-1990/ Worth listening if you have the time.
- mjfisher 7y ago
  That looks absolutely perfect for me. I've found some Stoic attitudes and practices a great help over the past year or so, but suspect there's some really valuable knowledge from the other schools I've yet to learn about. I'm working my way through Seneca's letters at the moment. He keeps quoting Epicurus, so that's a pretty decent recommendation right there! Anything that builds out context around that era of philosophy is massively interesting to me. Thank you very much :)
taberiand 7y ago
I agree, my understanding of Stoicism leads me to the same conclusion. Epicureans and Stoics seem to have always had a friendly rivalry going on, though they feel a lot like two sides to the same coin. In some ways, to me, Epicureanism is what a Stoic does on their day off.
- mcguire 7y ago
  The rivalry isn't always friendly. If your connotation of epicureanism involves "pleasures of the flesh", it's probably because stoics painted them as hedonists.
billfruit 7y ago
If I'm not wrong, the author is a noted critic of the Stoics and especially of the recent revival of interest in Stoicism, and their promotion of Epicureanism may well be originating from that end. So I guess we can't trust them to give an impartial view of Stoicism.

myusername334 7y ago

This is a branch of the culture wars I am sorry to report. Anything that smells of self control is equated with masculinity which is, as we all know, toxic. This and articles like it, such as the one the other day about the "downside of citizenship", are the soft sell of globalism -statism. Be rootless, follow your bliss, be happy creative and think about and have sex, a lot...that's the Goodlife. Being self directed, struggling against your own (and others') base instincts leads to repression and hatred and war. That is the basic theme of these velvet glove pieces. The iron fist is the inexplicable - what man would dare inveigh against women discussing amongst themselves their own sexualry- attack on no-fap and more broadly, self restraint and self discipline. People who live according to an inward set of values are unmanageable and unpredictable and, well, deplorable. Get high, says London's mayor, in a desperate attempt to stem the city's world leading homicide rate. Smoke dope, masturbate, calm down, have a nice meal. This is that.

myusername334 7y ago

Censor much? What goes around, comes around.

myusername334 7y ago

Hacker news censors 100 percent of my posts for three years running folks including the one previous to the above, which of course you can't see. But they let ONE post through, mocking them for censorship, just so I look like a fool.. Clever, No?

pyyding 7y ago

I feel bad I only found out about this "ism" now because it aligns with many of my values I've had to figure out myself. Thanks for posting!

gtirloni 7y ago

About Stoics: >The world, they thought, is ruled by providence; all that happens is fated to happen, and we must embrace our individual fates and the past and the future that has been determined for us. That's not the understanding I got from reading about Stoicism. Sure, some of it could be "fate" and out of your control but there is a lot of emphasis on what you can control. I think the author simplified this too much to the point of making it incorrect.

the_bowme 7y ago
It was in the stoicism I studied in college, and stoics took it to be important to justify why their prescriptions were valid. But nowadays we don't need an argument, we can just point out that ancient people believed it and that's difficult convincing.
- shantly 7y ago
  Yeah, the difference between Stoicism-as-philosophy and Stoicism-as-self-help-book is that the former finds it necessary to justify the accuracy or reasonableness of its advice, starting from fundamentals like what physical reality consists of. Most people interested in Stoicism don't really care about that part now.
  - gtirloni 7y ago
    I never heard of this distinction (self-help vs "true" philosophy). Wikipedia[0] has this: Stoics outlined what we have control over categories of our own action, thoughts and reaction. The opening paragraph of The Enchiridion states the categories as; "Things in our control are opinion, pursuit, desire, aversion, and, in a word, whatever are our own actions. Things not in our control are body, property, reputation, command, and, in a word, whatever are not our own actions.". These suggest a space that is within our own control. Is that based on the self-help book approach? 0 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoicism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoicism
    - shantly 7y ago

polytronic 7y ago

How to be an Epicurean? That's easy! Start by using his Tetrapharmakon (means the quadruple remedy) to live a happy life, which is the following: Θεός Άφοβον - God is not to be feared Θάνατος Αναίσθητον - You don't feel (sic or meet with) death Τ'αγαθόν μεν εύκτητον - It is easy to acquire goods Το δε δεινόν ευκαρτέρητον - So is easy to withstand rough times

thope 7y ago
Absolutely. Also, a point I found interesting is that we can classify desires in three categories: - natural and necessary, e.g drink, eat - natural but not necessary, e.g sex - not natural and not necessary, e.g smartphones Epicure advised to fulfill only the first type of desires, that is, drink water and eat bread, period. As a sidenote, the goal of his philosophy was not to experience pleasures, but instead to avoid pain, which is quite different.
- mcguire 7y ago
  Well, in comparison with stoicism, epicureanism is more about experiencing pleasure than avoiding pain, given that the latter tries to avoid all feeling. But yeah, they're more fundamentally alike there.

HNLurker2 7y ago

Epicurean said something and the sceptic showed a middle finger.

earthboundkid 7y ago

BRB, buying some barrels and lanterns for the revival of cynicism. I’ll sell them as “honest philosopher’s goods” and make a fortune.

FranzFerdiNaN 7y ago
Im sure you could build a lucrative career out of giving workshops and talks about how to incorporate cynic attitudes in your daily life to combat burnouts and stress. Or how to be a cynic business leader trying to extract as much productivity out of people.
- whatshisface 7y ago
  Why is it better to extract more productivity than it is the extract less productivity? I think the only thing that's really worth doing is sleeping in a barrel.
  - mcguire 7y ago
    I'm sorry, I can't hear you. My lantern went out.

viburnum 7y ago

I read about Epicurus when I was a little kid and it really resonated with me (basically, the “hang out with your friends and don’t get too worked up about things” part). Now that I’m getting old and basically wasted most of my life, I wish I had done the “have a mission in life” track. But really I think people are born with a temperament and personality that mostly shapes how they react to their environment, and I’m not sure I could have ended up any different.

mcguire 7y ago
Me, as well. I wanted a "mission", but everything I've done is more about the content, quiet life.

hunterloftis 7y ago

> Fame and wealth are zero-sum. For some to be wealthy, powerful and famous, others must be poor, obedient and disregarded. Is this accurate? My understanding of wealth might be simplistic or reductive, but I have equated it to two neighbor craftsmen producing and trading goods. Each benefits from the other’s specialty and increases overall wealth, which is not zero-sum. I can agree with the statement regarding fame, since fame is more directly correlated with time, which is strictly zero-sum.

woadwarrior01 7y ago
One could argue that fame too is not a zero-sum game. With increasing populations, wouldn’t it be easier to have a million fans today than say during Shakespeare’s times? This could be one possible explanation for the rise of the influencers on YouTube, Instagram and the ilk.
mcguire 7y ago
Consider the extremes: if everyone only has $1, they are all objectively "poor", but without a comparison, they do not feel any difference. If they all have a great deal of resources, again, they have no grounds to compare. On the other hand, if one has great resources and the others little, then they have a noticable in wealth and power.
fao_ 7y ago
> Is this accurate? My understanding of wealth might be simplistic or reductive, but I have equated it to two neighbor craftsmen producing and trading goods. Each benefits from the other’s specialty and increases overall wealth, which is not zero-sum. It's accurate for the society we live in, but not for all possible societies.

mcguire 7y ago

"Epicurus was notorious for his nonmarital relationships that combined sex and philosophy." The major problem of studying Epicurean philosophy is that few original sources have survived and almost all of the writing about it is from its opponents. As far as I have ever seen, the only source for sexual promiscuity is that women were allowed in to his school.