Analyzing Epicurus 'Letter To Menoecceous'

The Leading Doctrines of Epicurean philosophy state that ‘it is impossible to live the pleasant life without also living sensibly, nobly and justly, and conversely it is impossible to live sensibly, nobly and justly without living pleasantly’ (Epicurus, 1998b, p.53). Therefore, the good Epicurean believes in order to live virtuously, one must adhere to a pleasurable life. For Epicureans it is impossible to live virtuously and unpleasantly or vice-versa. In addition, Epicurus describes pleasure as our ‘primary native good’ (Epicurus 1998a, p. 51), implying that all human actions are driven by pleasures and by the avoidance of pains. Another imperative concept to Epicurean philosophy is Epicurus’ idea of the three fundamental aspects in attaining pleasure, those of friendship, freedom and an analysed life

Thus although virtue is inseparable from pleasure and necessary if we are to be happy, it is to be chosen not for its own sake but for the sake of pleasure. Beauty and the virtues and the like are to be honored if they provide pleasure, but, if they do not, we must say goodbye to them.(Intro. Epicurus, 124)

The principal Doctrines, are written by Epicurus who lived from 341B.C. to 270 B.C. His theory is hedonism, which is rooted in pleasure. The book speaks of pain as being only temporary, and that it is only a pleasure over pain (V). This is a way of life to see the pleasures that life offers are what Epicurus is saying. And although, “no Pleasure is a bad thing in itself,” The results of obtaining the pleasure can bring greater displeasures (VIII). He is looking for the most pleasures one can get, and I suppose if he was not happy with his job, that he would quit. I can see Epicurus, avoiding a lot of things within his life because they would bring pain and frustration, like driving in rush hour. The idea sounds like he is living the simple life, or a hermit’s life.

In evaluating the philosopher’s goal of determining how to live a good life, Epicurean philosophers argue that pleasure is the greatest good and pain is the greatest bad. Foremost, for the purpose of this analysis, I must define the pleasure and pain described. Pleasure is seen as the state of being pleased or gratified. This term is defined more specifically by the subject to which the pleasure applies, depending on what he likes. Pain is the opposite of pleasure, which is a type of emotional or physical un-pleasure that results in something that the person dislikes. “Everything in which we rejoice is pleasure, just as everything that distresses us is pain,” (Cicero 1). Through this hedonistic assessment of pleasure and pain, epicurean philosophers come to the conclusion that, “the greatest pleasure [is that] which is perceived once all pain has been removed,” (Epicurus 1).

We are a pleasure driven society always waiting to be amused. Self indulgence is a very natural aspect of human life. Does pleasure affect our lives? Will it make us happy at the end? Well, Aristotle will let us know what it means to be happy and have a good life in the Nicomachean Ethics. In the process, he reveals his own account of pleasure as well as other philosophers opposing views on the subject. The author highlights the key them by telling us that pleasure is not the chief good. However, it is an end in itself, which makes it good. In addition, pleasure is also not a process because it doesn’t involve any movement from incompleteness to completeness. According to Aristotle, happiness is

The Letter from Epicurus to Menoeceus can be summarized in two words: chill out. Epicurus is saying that we can not achieve our full potential until we accept that death will come while also refusing to be afraid of death. His change in attitude has affected his general happiness greatly. When Epicurus says, “For all good and evil exists in sensation, and death is deprivation of sensation,” he is saying that goodness and evilness exist only within our own minds, and that death will bring about the end of all good and all evil. The only things that we believe are terrible in life are the ones that bring us closer to death, so it is much simpler and much easier to accept that death will come and that there is nothing terrible in it. Epicurus

To increase such kind of life, an individual needs a good surrounding of his/her companions. Friendship ought to be kept up generously and lure for wealth and influence ought to be stayed away from. Suit states that Epicurus gave extreme encouragement to the significance of friendship. This friendship prompts the hypothesis of social justice. To keep up peace in the society, Epicurus proposed to construct a society where individuals live with insignificant communication with one another.

In this essay, I will dissect the positions and beliefs of Epicurus from a letter he wrote to Menoeceus, and argue why I believe they are correct or incorrect. I will also elaborate on the ultimate goal for Epicurus and differentiate between the types of pleasures and why it is important to focus on particular types. Lastly I will analyze the principal things that give people anxiety, the method Epicurus recommend for applying his philosophy, and why I agree or disagree with particular positions Epicurus has. Epicurus uses several different instances about what he believes constitutes the good life and I found many of them to be right on target with my beliefs.

Aristotle was a particularly influential Grecian philosopher and student of Plato who lived from 384BC- 322BC (ADD CITATION). Within Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle outlines the thoughts of the general population along with his regards and rationales in explaining many philosophical premises. But to concentrate on how Aristotle feels about the role of pleasure in morality, Aristotle introduces the idea that “most people think happiness involves pleasure.” He goes on to interpret the roles of different pleasures and their virtues and vices, giving examples such as as bodily pleasures and soul pleasures.

The topic of this research paper is about Epicurus and how he played a role in Ancient Greece. This assignment had to be done individually. In this research paper I had to do many things. I first had to get sources of my philosopher. I had to obtain two physical sources and a minimum of one internet source. Then when I had my sources I had to write a 2-3 page research paper on philosophy and the role that it played in Ancient Greece pertaining to the value of individuals and the role government should play in society. This took two days for research and a week to type the essay. The critical thinking skills I learned was purpose, question,information, inference, concepts, assumptions, implications, and point of view. I like information

If I had to choose between Epicurus, Plato and Aristotle on who had the best ethical system, I would choose Aristotle. I would choose Aristotle because, he lays the ground work of what the virtues are in a person and how they should be exemplified in everyday life. He tells us about the vices of deficiency and excess and how we should reach a mean to help us achieve happiness in life. Aristotle gives a clear example between happiness and pleasure and how they don’t correlate between each other. He states pleasure is like grazing cattle, where one cannot truly get full. From this idea of trying to achieve happiness/ Eudemonia, one must practice achieving the mean of the virtues. I like Aristotle’s idea of achieving eudemonia, because I value

I am unwilling to commit to only one view presented by Anthony Kenny in his chapter on ethics. Aristotle’s theory on how we should live our lives is noble and worthy of being used as an example of what humans should attempt to become during the time allotted on the earth, but his theory seems to be unnecessarily complicated and tedious. Epicurus provides a theory that is more holistic but also is not without its defects, primarily that of treating the virtues as merely a means to an end. My want is to take portions of each philosopher’s theory and meld them into one synthesis, much like that of Plato in his attempt to combine opposing theories; albeit the views of Aristotle and Epicurus are not separated by as great a divide as those of Parmenides and Heraclitus. In this paper I will discuss aspects of each of the ethical theories that would be beneficial to a life well spent on the planet.

To Epicurus happiness was the same as pleasure. And pleasure was freedom from bodily pain and mental anguish. He lived a simple life, owning only two cloaks and only eating bread and olives. With the occasional slice of cheese for a treat. He believed desire was a form of pain and therefore should be eliminated, and thus one should be satisfied with the bare minimum of what is needed to be happy. Therefore, while it was not a life of many desires, it was filled with the only pleasures you would need to be happy. There was a certain joy he found, in pure existence. Today’s society could learn a thing or two from this philosophy, most of which being living simply. It was better to take pleasure in simple things, rather than to chase pleasure.

Epicureanism is a philosophical theme taught by Epicurus, this theme that stresses the goal of a joyful and a pleasurable life. In the Hellenistic Age, epicureanism was extremely influential. Epicurus, the founder of Epicureanism, is best known for his different personality, unlike all the other ancient philosophers, excluding Socrates (O 'Keefe). Epicurus accumulated a group of disciples and taught them, after that he became known as the “philosophy of the Garden.” The wisdom theory, epicureanism, is a form of the hedonism theory that describes different types of pleasure, different types of desires, the virtues, the importance of friendship, and death.

The Epicureans have always abided by the concept of living a pain-free life; their attainment of happiness and of living a good life has been obtained through means of high quality pleasure-seeking. In a sense, generally doing things that make you, as an individual person, happy. In the beliefs of epicureanism, they had divided our pleasures in two categories: Natural desire and Vain desire. Natural desire, was lead to be things that was only a necessity to live – Things such as sleeping, and eating would fall under this