How Epicurean Metaphysics leads to Epicurean Ethics
1. The Epicurean position in metaphysics is materialistic.
Their particular form of materialism is known as "materialistic
atomism," which is the doctrine that all reality consists of indestructible
material elements called "atoms" which move through empty space, "The Void."
Atoms interact by collisions according to deterministic mechanical laws.
In the beginning all atoms "rained" downward in parallel paths, but some
occasionally swerved from these paths (Epicurus doesn't say why) setting
up chain reaction collisions which led to the clumping of atoms into the
physical objects which form the natural world from stars and planets to
2. The Epicurean position in epistemology is empiricistic.
Since humans are nothing more than giant collections of atoms
which can interact with other objects only through collisions between material
atoms, knowledge for epicureans simply is sensation. Sensation in
turn is nothing more than the collisions between atoms and human sense
organs, which of course themselves are just other bunches of atoms.
3. The Epicurean position in ethics is hedonistic.
Since all we can know are our sensations, amongst which are
the sensations of pleasure and pain, the Epicureans considered
that ethics, or what might be thought of as "how to live a virtuous (i.e.
"good") life" is in effect just learning how to maximize pleasure and
minimize pain. Thus Epicureans are hedonistic consequentialists:
ethical value lies in the consequence of an action, specifically,
whether it maximizes pleasure and minimizes pain.
4. The Epicurean psychology assumes psychological hedonism
as a theory of human motivation.
Epicurus takes it for granted that humans are motivated
to maximize their own pleasure and minimize their own pain.
He adds to this the ethical hedonistic doctrine which asserts that
they ought to so act. So we are in fact motivated by a desire for
our own happiness and we oughtto be so motivated. The problem
for Epicurus, therefore, becomes knowing how to achieve this
hedonistic end of maximizing my pleasure and minimizing my pains.
5. The Epicurean analysis of pleasure and "desire":
Epicurus deduces from his hedonism that the pleasures we ought
to pursue must be pure and not admixed with pain. Since pleasure is the
sensation which occurs when desire is satisfied and the satisfaction
of different desires yields different kinds of pleasures (and pains), the
trick to maximizing pleasure and minimizing pain becomes in effect
what we ought to desire.
6. Psychological hedonism implies some desires are natural.
From his analysis of human motivation, Epicurus concludes that
desires can be divided into "natural" (arising from human nature) and "unnatural"
(acquired as part of one's society). Unnatural desires, such as the desires
for power or fame or wealth, lead to pleasure which are very impurely mixed
with inevitable pains. Hence these desires are to be shunned. Of "natural
desires" some are "necessary" for maintaining life (the "bare necessities"),
while others are "unnecessary" for survival, but nevertheless natural
sexual desires). Fortunately natural and necessoppary desires are
relatively easy to satisfy. Their satisfaction would produce the life most
free of impure pleasures mixed with pain. Notice that this is almost the
from that often associated with the word "epicurean" today, which is a
life of highly unnatural unnecessary pleasures, i.e. "wine, women,
7. The ideal state for the believer in Epicurean ethics would
be a life of simple quiet pleasure.
Of the natural necessary pleasures, Epicurus considers
those of "repose" or "tranquility of soul" which arises from
being free of unnatural and unnecessary desires as the highest pleasure
attainable. In Greek this state was called "ataraxia" and was regarded
as the ideal of life, the attainment of which gives every act its moral
value. This life would be filled with the simple pleasures of a wholesome
diet, environment, and only the necessary creature comforts for sustaining
a quiet life, lived with close friends. In many ways it is reminiscent
of the monastic ideal of the middle ages or the back-to-nature movement
of the hippie days.
8. "Ataraxia" demands minimizing pain.
Hedonism also includes the minimizing of pain.
Epicurus argued that a good clean life will, with luck, be relatively free
of sickness and suffering of physical pain. But he regarded the primary
"pain" to be anxiety over two "fears": a) fear of death and b) fear
of the gods' anger. To these he replied that we should not fear death because
the only evil is pain, which is a sensation, and after you're dead there
is no more sensation. We need not fear the anger of the gods because the
gods are perfect beings, and hence live lives of "ataraxia". If
they were to intervene in human lives, it would disturb their divine ataraxia.
9. The Problem with Epicureanism:
Despite its popular appeal in ancient times and the return
of similar doctrines in later centuries, unfortunately Epicurean metaphysics
is inconsistent with its ethical theory. Atomism is deterministic,
but its ethics is normative. That means Epicurus holds a view of
reality which says in effect humans are nothing more than vast collections
of material atoms all which behave according to deterministic laws. His
hedonism is a consequence of this determinism. In other words he holds
that what we are determines us to seek to maximize our pleaasure
and minimize our pains. Thus human free will is an illusion. Really all
our actions are just as determined as the motions of billiard balls on
the billiard table. If this is the case, it makes no sense to say to someone
that he should pursue natural necessary pleasures and should
shun unnatural ones, for he is determined to do exactly what he
is going to do from the start. All normative "preaching" about what people
should or should not do is useless.
10. Epicurean ethics recommends withdrawal.
The Epicurean attitude towards involvement with public affairs
was that it disrupts ataraxia or tranquility of soul. There is no
doubt that the "crusader," the person who tries to change the world to
make it a better place, is not likely to find much tranquility or repose.
Thus Epicurus recommends withdrawing from the world and its problems. True
to his egoistic hedonism, Epicurus considers "the world and its problems"
are not his problems and counsels no involvement with it. This is not a
doctrine to produce revolutionaries or saints and martyrs.