epicurean?

Question

ive never believed much in an afterlife...just not too synchronized with science... can someone give me a few details on epicureanism? a brief history or ...going above and beyond..and trying to explain it all...SIMPLY...easy to understandable words

Answer 1

A man whom lived 2000 years ago died on a tree built by Romans. He laid in a tomb for three days and then for another 40 days was seen by friends, family and just plan folks all around a City and a nation he lived in. He was witness by three men to have ascended up into the sky and disappear in a ball of light. He has promised that he is sitting on a throne in a possible other dimension and will return when all humankind becomes so evil that it can no long be tolerated. He will return and then rule for 1000 years as king of the Earth and all Nations. THIS IS NOT FICTION.

Answer 2

Epicurean is based on the philosophy of Epicurus who subscribed to a hedonistic ethics that considered an imperturbable emotional calm the highest good and whose followers held intellectual pleasures superior to transient sensualism.

Basically an epicurean person puts intellectual achievment above pursuit of sensuality.

Answer 3

This fellow would sell a peanut to see it sold next day for luck. Bad luck was a common virtue to him and he would disecrate truth to find common ocurrances. Being simple he was a bit excentric yet did comprehend well enough big concepts like geometry and astronomy. This means he made an impact with formulas and some developments to astrophisics and calculus.
Later in life he gave to philosophy and death was only natural amongst gods and mithology, he would say death is the departure of reason in search for magical experience, if he meant greatness he was absolutely right. Many see coincidances as the subtle or casual intercesion of cartesian figures meaning poligons, but other actions are at large then, like convex pentagons and irregular triangles. Geometry did explain largely figures are arranged, and it was rather obvious then collision was not fully represented in triangles, so there was a glimpse of piramids in five dimensions and some cubic derangements or icosaedric forms in seven dimensions, giving to cloricosinidonsaedres (620 sides). This is common truth to arrays and matrix, because it shows simbology and history, the common basis to come and departure. Given two points we provide 63 planes and two cloricosinidonsaedres, this by traslative formula alone. All this leads to belief and departure proved, so afterlife and beneath became one, it was also proved glands would suffocate extinction into closeness, so sinergy and rapport would come closer and together give intuition and general satisfaction to readers and moviewatchers, given already to love who they see through images, very much family too (at least for next 3 to 8 lifes).
The pirate´s life is for me too reader!

Answer 4

If given simply or easily would it be correctly understood?

http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1841/dr-theses/index.htm

The Difference Between the Democritean and Epicurean Philosophy of Nature.
with an Appendix

Part One: Difference between the Democritean and Epicurean Philosophy of Nature in General
I. The Subject of the Treatise

II. Opinions on the Relationship Between Democritean and Epicurean Physics

III. Difficulties Concerning the Identity of the Democritean and Epicurean Philosophy of Nature

IV. General Difference in Principle Between the Democritean and Epicurean Philosophy of Nature

V. Result

Part Two: Difference between the Democritean and Epicurean Philosophy of Nature in detail
Chapter One: The Declination of the Atom from the Straight Line

Chapter Two: The Qualities of the Atom

Chapter Three: Atomoi archai and atoma stoicheia

Chapter Four: Time

Chapter Five: The Meteors

http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1841/dr-theses/appendix.htm

"Appendix Critique of Plutarch's Polemic against the Theology of Epicurus

The Difference Between the Democritean and Epicurean Philosophy of Nature
Fragment from the Appendix


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Critique of Plutarch's Polemic against the Theology of Epicurus
I. The Relationship of Man to God
1. Fear and the Being Beyond
(1) Plutarch, That Epicurus Actually Makes a Pleasant Life Impossible (published by Xylander), 1 I, 1100. ...one point, that of pleasure they derive from these views, has, I should say, been dealt with (i.e., from Epicurus): ... their theory ... does remove a certain superstitious fear; but it allows no joy and delight to conic to us from the gods.

(2) [Holbach,] System of Nature (London, 1770), I, P. 9. [32] The idea of such powerful agencies has always been associated with that of terror; their name always reminded man of his own calamities or those of his fathers; we tremble today because our ancestors have trembled for thousands of years. The idea of Divinity always awakens in us distressing ideas ... our present fears and lugubrious thoughts ... rise every time before our mind when we hear his name. Comp. p. 79. When man bases morality on the not too moral character of a God who changes his behaviour, then he can never know what he owes to God nor what he owes to himself or to others. Nothing therefore could be more dangerous than to persuade man that a being superior to nature exists, a being before whom reason must be silent and to whom man must sacrifice all to receive happiness."

Answer 5

Epicurean is the idea that believes that people should do things in moderation.

Answer 6

Some pretty good arguments.

Answer 7

This is bad

Answer 8

The Principal Doctrines of Epicurus

The four-fold cure for anxiety:
Don't fear the gods; Nor death; Goods are easy to obtain; Evils are easy to endure

1) A blessed and imperishable being neither has trouble itself nor does it cause trouble for anyone else; therefore, it does not experience feelings of anger or indebtedness, for such feelings signify weakness.

2) Death is nothing to us, because a body that has been dispersed into elements experiences no sensations, and the absence of sensation is nothing to us.

3) Pleasure reaches its maximum limit at the removal of all sources of pain. When such pleasure is present, for as long as it lasts, there is no cause of physical nor mental pain present – nor of both together.

4) Continuous physical pain does not last long. Instead, extreme pain lasts only a very short time, and even less-extreme pain does not last for many days at once. Even protracted diseases allow periods of physical comfort that exceed feelings of pain.

Pleasure and virtue are interdependent

5) It is impossible to live pleasantly without living wisely and honorably and justly, and it is impossible to live wisely and honorably and justly without living pleasantly. Whenever any one of these is lacking (when, for instance, one is not able to live wisely, though he lives honorably and justly) it is impossible for him to live a pleasant life.

Social and financial status have recognizable costs and benefits

6) That natural benefit of kingship and high office is (and only is) the degree to which they provide security from other men.

7) Some seek fame and status, thinking that they could thereby protect themselves against other men. If their lives really are secure, then they have attained a natural good; if, however, they're insecure, they still lack what they originally sought by natural instinct.

8) No pleasure is a bad thing in itself, but some pleasures are only obtainable at the cost of excessive troubles.

Through the study of Nature, we discern the limits of things

9) If every pleasure could be prolonged to endure in both body or mind, pleasures would never differ from one another.

10) If the things which debauched men find pleasurable put an end to all fears (such as concerns about the heavenly bodies, death, and pain) and if they revealed how we ought to limit our desires, we would have no reason to reproach them, for they would be fulfilled with pleasures from every source while experiencing no pain, neither in mind nor body, which is the chief evil of life.

11) If we were never troubled by how phenomena in the sky or death might concern us, or by our failures to grasp the limits of pains and desires, we would have no need to study nature.

12) One cannot rid himself of his primal fears if he does not understand the nature of the universe but instead suspects the truth of some mythical story. So without the study of nature, there can be no enjoyment of pure pleasure.

13) One gains nothing by securing protection from other men if he still has apprehensions about things above and beneath the earth and throughout the infinite universe.

Unlike social and financial status, which are unlimited,
Peace of mind can be wholly secured

14) Supreme power and great wealth may, to some degree, protect us from other men; but security in general depends upon peace of mind and social detachment.

15) Natural wealth is both limited and easily obtained, but vanity is insatiable.

16) Chance has little effect upon the wise man, for his greatest and highest interests are directed by reason throughout the course of life.

17) The just man is the freest of anyone from anxiety; but the unjust man is perpetually haunted by it.

18) When pain arising from need has been removed, bodily pleasure cannot increase – it merely varies. But the limit of mental pleasure is reached after we reflect upon these bodily pleasures and the related mental distress prior to fulfillment.

19) Infinite and finite time afford equal pleasure, if one measures its limits by reason.

20) Bodily pleasure seems unlimited, and to provide it would require unlimited time. But the mind, recognizing the limits of the body, and dismissing apprehensions about eternity, furnishes a complete and optimal life, so we no longer have any need of unlimited time. Nevertheless, the mind does not shun pleasure; moreover, when the end of life approaches, it does not feel remorse, as if it fell short in any way from living the best life possible.

21) He who understands the limits of life knows that things which remove pain arising from need are easy to obtain, and furnish a complete and optimal life. Thus he no longer needs things that are troublesome to attain.

Happiness depends on foresight and friendship

22) We must consider the ultimate goal to be real, and reconcile our opinions with sensory experience; otherwise, life will be full of confusion and disturbance.

23) If you argue against all your sensations, you will then have no criterion to declare any of them false.

24) If you arbitrarily reject any one sensory experience and fail to differentiate between an opinion awaiting confirmation and what is already perceived by the senses, feelings, and every intuitive faculty of mind, you will impute trouble to all other sensory experiences, thereby rejecting every criterion. And if you concurrently affirm what awaits confirmation as well as actual sensory experience, you will still blunder, because you will foster equal reasons to doubt the truth and falsehood of everything.

25) If you do not reconcile your behavior with the goal of nature, but instead use some other criterion in matters of choice and avoidance, then there will be a conflict between theory and practice.

26) All desires which create no pain when unfulfilled are not necessary; such desires may easily be dispelled when they are seen as difficult to fulfill or likely to produce harm.

27) Of all things that wisdom provides for living one’s entire life in happiness, the greatest by far is the possession of friendship.

28) The same conviction which inspires confidence that nothing terrible lasts forever, or even for long, also enables us to see that in the midst of life's limited evils, nothing enhances our security so much as friendship.

29) Among desires some are natural and necessary, some natural but not necessary, and others neither natural nor necessary, but due to baseless opinion.

30) Those natural desires which create no pain when unfulfilled, though pursued with an intense effort, are also due to baseless opinion; and if they are not dispelled, it is not because of their own nature, but because of human vanity.

The benefits of natural justice are far-reaching

31) Natural justice is the advantage conferred by mutual agreements not to inflict nor allow harm.

32) For all living creatures incapable of making agreements not to harm one another, nothing is ever just or unjust; and so it is likewise for all tribes of men which have been unable or unwilling to make such agreements.

33) Absolute justice does not exist. There are only mutual agreements among men, made at various times and places, not to inflict nor allow harm.

34) Injustice is not an evil in itself, but only in consequence of the accompanying fear of being unable to escape those assigned to punish unjust acts.

35) It is not possible for one who secretly violates the provisos of the agreement not to inflict nor allow harm to be confident that he won’t get caught, even if he has gotten away with it a thousand times before. For up until the time of death, there is no certainty that he will indeed escape detection.

36) Justice is essentially the same for all peoples insofar as it benefits human interaction. But the details of how justice is applied in particular countries or circumstances may vary.

37) Among actions legally recognized as just, that which is confirmed by experience as mutually beneficial has the virtue of justice, whether it is the same for all peoples or not. But if a law is made which results in no such advantage, then it no longer carries the hallmark of justice. And if something that used to be mutually beneficial changes, though for some time it conformed to our concept of justice, it is still true that it really was just during that time – at least for those who do not fret about technicalities and instead prefer to examine and judge each case for themselves.

38) Where, without any change in circumstances, things held to be just by law are revealed to be in conflict with the essence of justice, such laws were never really just. But wherever or whenever laws have ceased to be advantageous because of a change in circumstances, in that case or time the laws were just when they benefited human interaction, and ceased to be just only when they were no longer beneficial.

So happiness can be secured in all circumstances

39) He who desires to live in tranquility with nothing to fear from other men ought to make friends. Those of whom he cannot make friends, he should at least avoid rendering enemies; and if that is not in his power, he should, as much as possible, avoid all dealings with them, and keep them aloof, insofar as it is in his interest to do so.

40) The happiest men are those who enjoy the condition of having nothing to fear from those who surround them. Such men live among one another most agreeably, having the firmest grounds for confidence in one another, enjoying the benefits of friendship in all their fullness, and they do not mourn a friend who dies before they do, as if there was a need for pity.