Let us now consider in more detail the main aspects of the Cyrenaic hedonism. It is important to bear in mind that the Cyrenaics take a diametrically opposed position with respect to each of the central claims of Epicurus’ ethical position. First, they think that bodily pleasures are preferable to mental pleasures—in fact, they even go as far as to argue that the main goal of one’s life is to pursue bodily pleasure (DL 2.87). The rationale behind this claim seems to be that bodily pleasures are, in general, much more intense than mental pleasures. The Cyrenaics also decidedly reject the proposed Epicurean account of katastematic pleasures and recognize only one type of pleasure—that is, kinetic pleasure. As Diogenes Laertius reports, they raise
Hedonism basically is how people chose pleasures over pain; pleasures are the thing that drives them in life. Aristippus’ view showed that pleasures and/or the good life were the end rather than happiness. He felt strongly that pleasures are often chased after by all people, whereas pain is often avoided. He also states that physical pleasures are valued more than intellectual pleasures because physical pleasures require more units of pleasure. Aristippus believed that people should go after the pleasures that are immediate as opposed to those that come over time.
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)
25. Epicurean teachings and politics were based on individual pleasure. The highest of all pleasures is the serenity of the soul, in complete absence of mental and physical pain. This can be achieved by eliminating fear.
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).
The philosophy of Epicurus sought virtue as a condition of serenity in the soul. According to his thought, Epicureanism is centered in the achievement of happiness through the elimination of one’s desires, and on pleasure and virtue claiming that “It is impossible to live pleasantly without living wisely and honorably and justly” (Epicurus, Doctrines, 1). This signifies that pleasure and virtue are interdependent and both sustain the concept of this ideology. To achieve happiness, one must do its best to live as virtuously as possible if they are to live a pleasant life. Pleasure is declared as the “beginning and end of the happy life” and by nature “the greatest good” (Epicurus, Doctrines, 13). This is so because living a life of pleasure means pain is absent and therefore makes life meaningful. Reason and virtue play an important role in the Epicurean notion of pleasure, leading the wise man to choose a simple life and rational action above
Epictetus, a Stoic philosopher who lived from 50-130 AD, was instrumental in allowing the Stoic philosophy to grow and flourish. As ideas have come and gone throughout the years, this is a philosophy, a way of thinking, or even a lifestyle that has maintained its validity ever since its inception into the human mind, and continues to be a formative way of thinking to this day. Without knowing it, I have adopted several of the views that are explicitly written in Epictetus’ The Handbook. As I grew tired and annoyed with the events happening around me, it dawned on me that I can only control how I live my life, and that has been a central philosophy in my life for several years. In this paper, I will use different excerpts from The Handbook to support my claim that this philosophical way of thinking is a superior path to eudaimonia, and I will look at counter-arguments and discuss why they are less valid than the Stoic outlook on life.
In this paper, I will examine the two arguments Socrates presents—the “mixed sensations” and “equal pleasures” arguments—and determine whether they succeed against Callicles’ position of what makes a person’s life “good”. My first argument reasserts Socrates’ conclusion that pleasure and “good” are independent of each other. My second argument contends that doing well cannot be quantified by balancing pleasure and pain. I will defend the arguments that Socrates utilizes against Callicles’ overly-hedonistic position.
Epicurus believes that pleasure leads to a good life and describes the most pleasant sort of life as one that is moderate and not filled with excess. While Epicurus says that it is pleasure that dictates whether a person has a blessed life or not, to him, pleasure means to be lacking needs. Furthermore, he considers pleasure to being in a state free of pain and fear in both mind and body. One of the biggest things that Epicurus says to not fear is death. If a person does not fear death, then they will have a more joyful life. Furthermore, Epicurus does not mean that pleasure is anything we want, when we want. Epicurus makes the argument that if a person is constantly surrounded by luxury, then they are no happier than someone who has enough
In part one of our book, “The Good Life,” we studied five different philosopher’s viewpoints on what is needed in order for a person to have a good, fulfilling life. They all included the concepts of pleasure and happiness to some extent in their theories, but they all approached the ideas in different ways. The two hedonists we studied, Epicurus and John Stuart Mill, place heavy emphasis on the importance of pleasure. They both believe that pleasure is a necessity in the ideal life. Jean Kazez agreed with their viewpoints in her theory and said that happiness was a necessity for a good life. Epicurus and Mill also argue that there is nothing else that we ultimately desire beyond pleasure and that it is an intrinsic good.
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
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.
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.
Explain and summarize Aristotle’s Nichomachean Ethics. Do you think it is a valid ethical system? Why or why not? Give your reasons.