I would think you'd have to throw something out to do so.
For one thing, neoplatonists believed that the world was essentially a product of your own (or perhaps God's) mind. Epicurus, however, seemed to follow Democritus in believing in a concrete external reality with orderly rules that it would suit you to understand and follow. In this regard, they are almost diametrically opposed.
Likewise, in believing in a God which has its own goals and motivations, neoplatonism starts to become concerned with things like the soul, the afterlife, and salvation. Epicureanism is again on the opposite end of the spectrum on this, concerned only with the physical world that is immediately around us and what might be obtained from it. The spirituality of neoplatonism would seem to have no place in Epicurus' philosophy.
They ALMOST come close to being similar in some of their aims. Epicurus encourages knowledge and asceticism, while Plotinus suggests philosophical contemplation and freedom from material distractions. Though even here we have another pronounced seperating of the ways - Epicurus would have us avoid rich food simply so we can enjoy all the other foods MORE... pretty much all his other limitations are for the same reasons. Plotinus would be appalled by this. To him this is just MAXIMIZING the kind of harmful distraction you should specifically not engage in.
But, you know, the fun thing about philosophy is you can decide for yourself. Mix it all together in your own way and maybe we'll be calling it 'likwiddraino000ism' someday. Heh.
2006-12-19 11:54:55
·
answer #1
·
answered by Doctor Why 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
sorry, i only speak english...
2006-12-19 19:55:08
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋