Epicurus' main ideas briefly. Basic ideas of the philosophy of Epicurus. Knowledge according to Epicurus

15. Epicurus and the Epicureans Outstanding representatives of Epicureanism are Epicurus (341–270 BC) and Lucretius Carus (c. 99–55 BC). This philosophical direction belongs to the border between the old and new eras. Epicureans were interested in questions of structure, comfort of the individual in a complex

Epicurus From the vast creative heritage of Epicurus, individual fragments, sayings, as well as the full texts of three letters have reached us, which contain a brief summary of the three parts of his philosophy - below is the text of the letter to Menoeceus, containing the author's summary

7. Epicurus The concept of legal understanding, based on the ideas of justice and law as a contract of general benefit to ensure individual freedom and mutual security of people in socio-political life, was developed in the Hellenistic era by Epicurus (341-270 BC).

7. How to be happy? (Epicureans, Stoics, Skeptics, Cynics) In 334 BC. e. The Greek army led by Alexander the Great began a campaign to the East, which lasted nine years. In Greek, Greece is Hellas, and the Greeks are Hellenes. They conquered

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation

NOU VPO "Ural Financial and Legal Institute"

Faculty of Law

Department of Philosophy

discipline: "Philosophy"

topic: “Teachings of Epicurus”

Completed by: student gr. Yu - 0814 Kopylova O. M.

Checked by: K.F.N., Associate Professor Meleshina S.N.

Ekaterinburg 2015

Introduction

Life and writings of Epicurus

The task of philosophy

Canon of Epicurus

Physics of Epicurus

Ethics of Epicurus

Conclusion

1. Introduction

Epicurus is characteristic of an era when philosophy begins to be interested not so much in the world as in the fate of man in it, not so much in the mysteries of the cosmos, but in an attempt to indicate how, in the contradictions and storms of life, a person can find the calm, serenity, and equanimity that he so needs and so desires. and fearlessness. To know not for the sake of knowledge itself, but exactly as much as is necessary to preserve the bright serenity of the spirit - this is the goal and task of philosophy, according to Epicurus. Materialism had to undergo a profound transformation in this philosophy. It had to lose the character of a purely theoretical, contemplative philosophy that only comprehends reality, and become a teaching that enlightens a person, freeing him from the fears that oppress him and rebellious worries and feelings. Epicurus' atomistic materialism underwent precisely such a transformation.

2. Life and writings of Epicurus

Epicurus (342/341--271/270 BC) - the great ancient Greek materialist, follower of Democritus and continuer of his atomistic teaching. His father is the Athenian Neocles, who moved to the island of Samos as an Athenian cleric, a teacher of literature. Epicurus was born in 341 and began to study philosophy early. Like his father, he was a school teacher and began to study philosophy after the works of Democritus fell into his hands. Epicurus's teacher in philosophy was a follower of Democritus, Navziphanes, of whom Epicurus later spoke ill, as well as the academician Pamphilus. However, as Epicurus matures, he asserts his independence from any teacher and complete philosophical independence. At the age of 18, he first came to Athens, and, perhaps, listened to the then Athenian celebrities there - Aristotle, the academician. (and at that time the head of the Academy) Xenocrates. Having reached the age of 32, being an energetic and creative person, Epicurus attracted many thinking people and formed his school, first on the island of Lesbos in Mytilene, and then in Lampsacus. With his friends and students in 306. BC. he arrives in Athens and buys a secluded garden with a house and settles there with his students. This is where the very name of the school “Garden of Epicurus” and the nickname of the Epicureans—philosophers “from the gardens”—later arose. This is how one of the most influential and famous schools of antiquity arose, known in history as the “Garden of Epicurus.” Above the entrance to it was inscribed: “Guest, you will feel good here; here pleasure is the highest good.” However, the school of Epicurus was not a public philosophical and educational school like the Academy or Lyceum. "Garden" is a closed partnership of like-minded people. Unlike the Pythagorean League, the Epicurean League did not socialize the property of its members: “Epicure did not believe that goods should be owned together, according to the Pythagorean saying that friends have everything in common - this meant distrust, and whoever does not trust is not a friend.” Also, unlike the Pythagorean League, Epicurus and his friends were not at all involved in political activities. The unwritten charter of the school was based on the principle: “Live unnoticed!” He was modest and did not touch on government affairs, since he believed that it was impossible to influence the development of political events and social phenomena under the conditions of despotic Hellenistic monarchies. However, he was a patriot and dreamed of liberating Greece from the Macedonian yoke. Epicurus spent the second half of his life in his “Garden”, occasionally traveling to its branch in Lampsacus. Epicurus strongly supported the cult of friendship, since “of the many things that wisdom brings for happiness, the main gift is friendship. Life in the “garden” was modest and unpretentious. Epicurus, like all wealthy Hellenes, was a slave owner, but he belonged to to his slaves meekly, some of his slaves even participated in philosophical studies.

Epicurus is one of the most prolific philosophical writers of antiquity. He owned about 300 papyrus scrolls ("books"), but mostly only the titles have survived from them: "On Nature" (his main work, which contained 37 books), "On Atoms and Emptiness", "Brief Objections against Physicists", " About the criterion, or the Canon", "About the way of life", "About the final goal". In other works of Epicurus, issues of music and medicine, problems of vision and justice were treated, but all this perished, therefore the main sources of our knowledge about Epicurus and his teachings are three letters to his students - Herodotus (a presentation of the atomic physics of Epicurus, including the doctrine of the soul and a number of the provisions of his doctrine of consciousness), Pythocles (the astronomical views of the philosopher) and Menoeceus (the main provisions of the author’s ethical teaching).

His works are devoid of literary merit, literary treatment, and figurative means of expression with which Democritus shone and delighted Cicero. At the end of the 19th century. Among the manuscripts found in the Vatican, “Main Thoughts” were discovered - 40 aphorisms of Epicurus. In addition, numerous fragments from other writings and letters survive. These fragments are collected in Usener's edition of the works of Epicurus.

3. The task of philosophy

Epicurus understands and defines philosophy as an activity that gives people, through reflection and research, a happy, serene life, free from human suffering. “The words of that philosopher are empty,” wrote Epicurus, “with which no human suffering can be healed. Just as medicine is of no use if it does not expel illnesses from the body, so philosophy is of no use if it does not expel illnesses of the soul.” And in a letter to Meneceus, he taught: “Let no one put off studying philosophy in his youth, and let no one in his old age tire of studying philosophy: after all, no one is either immature or overripe for the health of the soul. Anyone who says that the time for practicing philosophy has not yet come or has passed is like someone who says that there is either not yet or no longer time for happiness. Therefore, both a young man and an old man should engage in philosophy: the first - in order to, as he grows old, be young in blessings due to grateful recollection of the past, and the second - in order to be both young and old due to the absence of fear of the future. Therefore, we should reflect on what creates happiness, if indeed, when we have it, we have everything, and when we don’t have it, we do everything to have it.” Thus, for Epicurus, doing philosophy is the path to happiness; this is quite consistent with the general ethical orientation of Hellenistic philosophy.

According to Epicurus, a person would not even feel the need to study nature at all if he were not afraid of death and celestial phenomena. “If we were not at all disturbed by suspicions about celestial phenomena and suspicions about death, as if It had something to do with us,” he wrote, “then we would not have the need to study nature” (Main Thoughts, XI). However, all fears have no power in the eyes of a true philosopher. “Death is the most terrible of evils,” Epicurus taught Menoeceus, “has nothing to do with us, since when we exist, death is not yet present, and when death is present, then we do not exist.”

The goal of Epicurus' philosophy is not pure speculation, not pure theory, but the enlightenment of people. But this enlightenment must be based on the teaching of Democritus about nature, must be free from the assumption of any supersensible principles in nature, must proceed from natural principles and from causes discovered in experience.

Philosophy is divided into three parts. The main one is ethics, which contains the doctrine of happiness, its conditions and what prevents it. Its second part, which precedes ethics and substantiates it, is physics. It reveals in the world its natural principles and their connections and thereby frees the soul from oppressive fear, from faith in divine powers, in the immortality of the soul and in the rock or fate that weighs on man. If ethics is the teaching about the purpose of life, then physics is the teaching about the natural elements, or principles, of the world, about the conditions of nature through which this goal can be achieved.

4. Canon of Epicurus

However, without knowledge of nature, equanimity is impossible. Hence the need for physics. However, there is also a condition of physics itself. This is knowledge of the criterion of truth and the rules of its knowledge. Without this knowledge, neither intelligent life nor intelligent activity is possible. Epicurus calls this part of philosophy “canon” (from the word “canon”, “rule”). He dedicated a special essay to the canon, in which he indicated the criteria of truth. These are 1) perceptions, 2) concepts (or general ideas) and 3) feelings.

Epicurus called perceptions the sensory perceptions of natural objects, as well as images of fantasy. Both of them arise in us as a result of the penetration into us of images, or “videos” of things. In appearance they are similar to solid bodies, but are far superior to them in subtlety: “there are outlines (imprints, imprints) similar in appearance to dense bodies, but in subtlety they are far removed from objects accessible to sensory perception. For it is possible that such outflows can arise in air, that conditions favorable for the formation of depressions and subtleties can arise, and that outflows can arise that maintain the corresponding position and order that they had in dense bodies. We call these outlines then... images have unsurpassed subtlety.. . unsurpassed speed, for any path is suitable for them, not to mention the fact that nothing or little hinders their flow, while a large or unlimited number [of atoms in dense bodies] is immediately hindered by something. ... the emergence of images occurs with the speed of thought, for the flow [of atoms] from the surface of bodies is continuous, but it cannot be noticed by [observing] the reduction [of objects] due to the opposite replenishment [by bodies of what is lost]. The flow of images preserves [in a dense body] the position and order of atoms for a long time, although it, [the flow of images], sometimes becomes disordered. In addition, complex images suddenly appear in the air..."

All objects exist, as it were, in two ways: by themselves, primarily, and secondarily - as the subtlest material images, “idols” that constantly flow out from them. These “idols” exist as objectively as the things themselves that emit them. We live directly not among the things themselves, but among their images, which are constantly crowded around us, which is why we can remember an absent object: when remembering, we simply pay attention to the image of an object that exists objectively. These images flow, or peel away, from things. There are two possible cases here. In the first case, the images peel off in a certain stable sequence and retain the order and position that they had in the solid bodies from which they separated. These images penetrate our senses, and in this case sensory perception in the proper sense of the word arises. In the second case, images float in the air in isolation, like a cobweb, and then penetrate us, but not into the senses, but into the pores of our body. If at the same time they are intertwined, then as a result of such perceptions, individual representations of things arise in the mind. “And every idea that we receive, grasping with the mind or the senses,” Epicurus explained to Herodotus, “the idea of ​​a form or of essential properties, this [idea] is the form [or properties] of a solid object, an idea that arises as a result of sequential repetition image or remnant of an image [impression composed of an image].”

Concepts, or, in fact, general ideas, arise on the basis of individual ideas. They cannot be identified with either logical or innate ideas. Being obvious, perception, like the general idea, is always true and always accurately reflects reality. Even images of fantasy, or fantastic ideas, do not contradict this, and they reflect reality, although not the one that reflects the perceptions of our senses.

Therefore, it is sensory perceptions and general ideas based on them that ultimately turn out to be the criteria of knowledge: “If you struggle with all sensory perceptions, then you will have nothing to which to refer when judging those of them which, according to you, are false.” All criteria, except sensation, are secondary for Epicurus. In his opinion, knowledge that “anticipates” sensations is knowledge that we have already previously obtained from sensations. Thus, such knowledge does not anticipate sensations, not experience in general, but only new experience, allowing us to better navigate the world around us, to recognize similar and different objects. Anticipation is an impression, the anticipation of which was sensations."

A fallacy (or lie) arises as a result of a judgment or opinion that asserts something as a reality supposedly belonging to perception itself (in the proper sense of the word), although this is not actually confirmed by perception or is refuted by other provisions. According to Epicurus, the source of such a misconception, or error, is that in our judgment we attribute our idea not to the reality with which it is actually associated in our perception, but to some other. This happens, for example, when we attribute the fantastic idea of ​​a centaur, which arose as a result of the combination or interweaving of the images of a man and a horse, to reality perceived by our senses, and not to the image, or “vidik” (eidos), which penetrated the pores of “our body and woven from parts of a horse and a man.” “Falsehood and error,” explains Epicurus, “always lie in the additions made by thought [to sensory perception] regarding what awaits confirmation or non-refutation, but which is then not confirmed [or refuted]” (Letter to Herodotus). There, Epicurus further explains: “On the other hand, there would be no error if we did not receive in ourselves some other movement, although connected [with the activity of representation], but having differences. Through this [movement], if it is not confirmed or refuted, a lie arises, and if it is confirmed or not refuted, truth [arises]. Thus, the senses are not mistaken - the mind is mistaken, and this means that Epicurus’s theory of knowledge suffers from the absolutization of sensationalism, since he even claims that the visions of madmen and sleeping people are also true.

5. Physics of Epicurus

According to the explanations given above, the ethics of Epicurus requires support for itself in materialistic physics, independent of religion and mysticism. Such physics turned out to be the atomistic materialism of Democritus for him, which he accepts with some important changes. In a letter to Herodotus, Epicurus accepts as initial two physical propositions inaccessible to the senses: 1) “Nothing comes from what does not exist: [if this were so, then] everything would come from everything, without needing seeds at all. And [conversely] if If the disappearing would perish, [transitioning] into the non-existent, then all things would already be lost, since there would be no something into which they would be resolved"; 2) “The Universe has always been such as it is now, and will always be such, because there is nothing into which it changes: after all, apart from the Universe, there is nothing that could enter into it and make a change.”

These premises were accepted already in ancient times by the Eleatics (Parmenides, Zeno and Melissus), as well as by those who wanted, based on the Eleatic doctrine of eternal and unchanging existence, to explain diversity and movement in the world: Empedocles, Anaxagoras and atomistic materialists.

To explain movement, Leucippus and Democritus accepted, along with bodily existence, non-existence, or emptiness. Epicurus also accepted this teaching: he also claims that the universe consists of bodies and space, that is, emptiness. The existence of bodies is confirmed by sensations, the existence of emptiness by the fact that without emptiness movement would be impossible, since objects would have nowhere to move. "The universe consists of bodies and space; that bodies exist is evidenced by the very sensation of all people, on the basis of which it is necessary to judge by thinking about the hidden, as I said before. And if there were not what we call emptiness, a place inaccessible touch by nature, then the bodies would not have where to be and what to move through, as they obviously move..."

Bodies have permanent (shape, size, weight) and transient properties.

Epicurus also follows Democritus in his teaching that bodies represent either compounds of bodies, or that from which their compounds are formed. “Among bodies, some are compounds, and others are that from which compounds are formed. These latter are indivisible and unchangeable, if everything should not be destroyed into non-existence, but something should remain strong during the decomposition of compounds... Thus, it is necessary , so that the first principles are indivisible bodily natures (substances)..." Compounds are formed from very small indivisible, "uncut" dense bodies, which differ not only, as in Democritus, in shape and size, but also in weight. Differences between atoms in weight are an important distinguishing feature of the atomic physics of Epicurus and an anticipation of their characteristics in the latest atomistic materialism.

Claiming the indivisibility of atoms, Epicurus, like Democritus, denied the infinite divisibility of bodies. It was the assumption of such divisibility that was the basis for the arguments put forward by Parmenides' student, the Eleatic Zeno, against the existence of multitudes, against the divisibility of beings, and against motion. At the same time, Epicurus allows for minimal, or smallest, parts of atoms and thereby distinguishes the physical indivisibility of an atom from its mathematical indivisibility.

An essential characteristic of atoms is their movement. Atoms are forever moving through the void at the same speed for everyone. In this movement of theirs, some atoms are at a great distance from one another, while others are intertwined with each other and take on a trembling, oscillating movement, “if they are brought into an inclined position by the interweaving or if they are covered by those that have the ability to interweave.” As for the nature of the movement itself, it differs, according to Epicurus, from the movement of atoms according to Democritus. The physics of Democritus is strictly deterministic; the possibility of chance is denied in it. “People,” says Democritus, “have invented the idol of chance” in order to cover up their helplessness in reasoning. On the contrary, Epicurus’s physics should, in his opinion, substantiate the possibility of free will and the imputation of people’s actions. “Indeed,” Epicurus reasoned, “it would be better to follow the myth of the gods than to be a slave to the fate of the physicists: the myth [at least] gives a hint of the hope of propitiating the gods by worshiping them, and fate contains in itself inexorability.”

Having proclaimed in ethics the principle of free determination of the will, not subject to fate or necessity, Epicurus created in physics the doctrine of the free deviation of the atom from what is happening due to the necessity of rectilinear motion, which substantiates this principle. The doctrine of spontaneous deflection of atoms belonging to Epicurus is attested around 100 AD. doxographer Aetius and, a century later, Diogenes of Oenoande. Epicurus introduces the hypothesis of self-deflection of atoms to explain collisions between atoms. If atoms did not deviate from their straight paths, then neither their collision nor the collision of the things formed from them would be possible. There are no external reasons for self-deviation, no necessity; it occurs completely spontaneously in atoms. This is the minimum freedom that must be assumed in the elements of the microworld - in atoms, in order to explain its possibility in the macroworld - in man. epicures philosophy materialist education

Following these principles of atomic physics, Epicurus builds a picture of the world, or cosmology. The Universe has no boundaries either in the number of bodies inhabiting it or in the emptiness in which they reside and move. The number of worlds formed in the universe is limitless, since “Both in terms of the number of bodies and the size of the void (empty space) the Universe is limitless. For if the void were limitless, and the bodies were limited [in number], then the bodies would not stop anywhere, but would rush scattered throughout the boundless void, because they would not have other bodies that would support them and stop them with reverse blows. And if emptiness were limited, then bodies unlimited [in number] would have no place to stop. Further, worlds are limitless [in number], both similar to this [our world] and dissimilar. For atoms, the number of which is unlimited, as has just been proven, are carried even very far away. For such atoms, from which the world can be formed and with which it can be created, are not spent either on a single world, or on a limited number of worlds, both those that are such [like ours] and those that are different from them. Therefore, there is nothing that would prevent [the recognition of] an unlimited number of worlds."

All worlds and all the complex bodies in them have separated from the material masses, and over time everything decomposes at different rates. The soul is no exception here. It is also a body made up of fine particles dispersed throughout our body and is “much like the wind.” When the body decomposes, the soul decomposes along with it, it ceases to feel and ceases to exist as a soul. And in general, nothing incorporeal can be thought of except emptiness, and emptiness “can neither act nor experience action, but only through itself provides movement [the possibility of movement] to bodies. Therefore,” Epicurus concludes, “those who say that the soul is incorporeal are speaking nonsense.” In all astronomical and meteorological questions, Epicurus - no less than in the doctrine of knowledge - attached decisive importance to sensory perceptions. “For one should not study nature,” he explained, “on the basis of empty [unproven] assumptions [statements] and [arbitrary] laws, but should study it in the way that visible phenomena call for it.”

Epicurus’s trust in direct sensory impressions is so great that, contrary to, for example, the opinion of Democritus, who, relying on the processing of direct observations, considered the Sun to be enormous in size, Epicurus concluded about the size of celestial bodies on the basis not of scientific conclusions, but of sensory perceptions. So, he wrote to Pythocles: “And the size of the Sun, Moon and other luminaries, from our point of view, is what it seems: but in itself it is either a little more than visible, or a little less, or the same.” Epicurus considered the method of analogies based on taking into account data and phenomena of sensory perception to be a reliable means of avoiding fantastic fabrications when studying natural phenomena. Such plausible analogies, he thought, could provide serenity to the soul to a greater extent than the attraction of opposing and mutually exclusive theories.

This research method allows not just one, but many possible and probable explanations. He admits, as it were, epistemological pluralism, the fact that each phenomenon can have several explanations (for example, eclipses of the Sun and Moon can occur both as a result of the extinction of these luminaries, and as a result of their obstruction by another body. The only condition that is set for them is their unconditional naturalness , the absence of supernatural assumptions, divine powers, and complete freedom from contradictions with the data of sensory perception known from experience, Speaking about the research method of the philosophers of the Epicurean school, Epicurus explained to Pythocles: “They (i.e., celestial phenomena) admit several (more than one). ) reasons for its emergence and several judgments about its existence (its nature), consistent with sensory perceptions." In other places, Epicurus directly rejects attempts to give complex and incomprehensible phenomena observed in nature a single explanation: "But to give one (single) explanation for these. phenomena - this is only appropriate for those who want to fool the crowd.” The multiplicity of explanations satisfies not only theoretical curiosity, not only sheds light on the physical picture and the physical mechanism of phenomena. It contributes to the main task of knowledge - it frees the soul from the anxieties and fears that oppress it.. “Our life no longer needs unreasonable faith and unfounded opinions, but what we need to live without anxiety. So, everything (all life) happens without shocks in relation to everything that can be explained in various ways in accordance with visible phenomena, when plausible [convincing] statements about it are allowed, as they should. But if someone leaves one thing and discards the other, which is equally consistent with visible phenomena, he obviously leaves the field of any scientific study of nature and descends into the region of myths.”

6. Ethics of Epicurus

Aristippus defined pleasure as a positive state of pleasure generated by smooth movement. Epicurus, at least in the writings that have come down to us, defined pleasure as a negative sign - as the absence of pain. “The limit of the magnitude of pleasure,” Epicurus explained to Menoeceus, “is the elimination of all suffering, and where there is pleasure, there, as long as it exists, there is no suffering or sorrow, or not both.”

The principle or goal of Epicurus's ethics has, according to his own statement, nothing in common with the theory of pleasure, or with hedonism, with which it has often been confused. “When we say,” Epicurus explained to Menoeceus, “that pleasure is the final goal, we do not mean the pleasure of libertines and not the pleasure that lies in sensual pleasure, as some think who do not know or disagree or misunderstand, but we mean freedom from bodily suffering and mental anxieties." It is through liberation from them that the goal of a happy life is achieved - health of the body and serenity of the soul (ataraxia).

Epicurus distinguished two types of pleasures: the pleasure of rest and the pleasure of movement. Of these, he considered the main one to be the pleasure of peace (the absence of bodily suffering).

In pleasure understood in this way, Epicurus saw the criterion of human behavior. “We begin with him,” he wrote to Menoeceus, “every choice and avoidance; We return to it, judging with our inner feeling, as a standard, about every good.”

Taking pleasure as a criterion of good does not at all mean that a person should indulge in any kind of pleasure. Already the Cyrenaic Aristippus said that choice is necessary here and that prudence is required to obtain true pleasures. To an even greater extent, Epicurus considered prudence to be the greatest good, greater even than philosophy itself: “From prudence all other virtues originate: it teaches that one cannot live pleasantly without living wisely, morally and justly, and vice versa, one cannot live wisely, morally and justly, without living pleasantly.”

Epicurus based his classification of pleasures on these provisions. He divides desires into natural and absurd (empty). In turn, natural ones are divided into those that are natural and necessary, and those that, being natural, are not at the same time necessary: ​​“We must take into account that there are desires: some are natural, others are empty , and among the natural, some are necessary, and others are only natural; and among the necessary, some are necessary for happiness, others for the tranquility of the body, and others for life itself. An error-free consideration of these facts in every way. choice and avoidance can contribute to the health of the body and the serenity of the soul, since this is the goal of a happy life: after all, for the sake of this we do everything, precisely so as not to have either suffering or anxiety... We have a need for pleasure when we suffer from a lack of pleasure ; and when we don’t suffer, we no longer need pleasure. That’s why we call pleasure the beginning and the end of a happy life..."

Thus, Epicurus calls for satisfying only natural and necessary needs, and he demands that natural, but not necessary, or, especially artificial, far-fetched needs be left unsatisfied.

Epicurus examines the opinions that disturb a person and finds them primarily in three types of fear: fear of celestial phenomena, fear of the gods and fear of death. The entire atheistic teaching of Epicurus is aimed at overcoming these fears.

In some cases, it is necessary to avoid pleasures and choose or prefer suffering: “Since pleasure is the first and innate good for us, therefore we do not choose every pleasure, but sometimes we bypass many pleasures when they are followed by great trouble for us: we also consider many pain is better than pleasure when greater pleasure comes to us after we have endured pain for a long time. Thus. every pleasure, by natural affinity with us. there is good, but not all pleasure should be chosen, just as all suffering is evil, but not all suffering should be avoided.”

At the same time, Epicurus considered the suffering of the soul worse than the suffering of the body: the body suffers only because of the present, but the soul suffers not only because of this, but also because of the past and future; Accordingly, Epicurus regarded the pleasures of the soul as more significant.

The ethics of Epicurus are completely individualistic. Its main requirement is “live unnoticed.” Epicurus’s praise of friendship does not contradict her individualism. Although friendship is sought for its own sake, it is valued for the security it brings and, ultimately, for the serenity of the soul. In his “Main Thoughts,” Epicurus states: “The same conviction that gives us fearlessness that nothing terrible is eternal or lasting, also saw that security, even in our limited existence, is most fully realized through friendship.”

From this it is clear that Epicurus’ ethical worldview is utilitarianism. Corresponding to it is the doctrine of the origin of justice from contract: “Justice, which comes from nature, is an agreement about the useful - with the goal of not harming each other and not suffering harm.” And in another place: “Justice is not something in itself, but in the relations of people with each other in any place, it is always some kind of agreement not to harm and not to lose harm.”

Being the result of a contract, an agreement between people, the requirements of justice in their content are determined by the personal characteristics of their lives: “In general, justice is the same for everyone, because it is something useful in the relations of people with each other; but with regard to the individual characteristics of the country and any other circumstances, justice is not the same for everyone.”

7. Conclusion

The philosophy of Epicurus is the greatest and most consistent materialist teaching of Ancient Greece after the teachings of Leucippus and Democritus. Epicurus differs from his predecessors in his understanding of both the task of philosophy and the means leading to the solution of this task. Epicurus recognized the main and final task of philosophy as the creation of ethics - the doctrine of behavior that can lead to happiness. But this problem can be solved, he thought, only under a special condition: if the place that man - a particle of nature - occupies in the world is explored and clarified. True ethics presupposes true knowledge of the world. Therefore, ethics must be based on physics, which contains as its part and as its most important result the doctrine of man. Ethics is based on physics, anthropology is based on ethics. In turn, the development of physics must be preceded by research and the establishment of a criterion for the truth of knowledge.

New and original was Epicurus’s thought about the close connection between ethics and physics, about the theoretical conditioning of ethics by physics.

The central concept connecting Epicurus' physics with his ethics was the concept of freedom. The ethics of Epicurus is the ethics of freedom. Epicurus spent his entire life fighting against ethical teachings that were incompatible with the concept of human freedom. This put Epicurus and his entire school in a state of constant struggle with the school of the Stoics, despite a number of concepts and teachings common to these two materialistic schools. According to Epicurus, the doctrine of the causal necessity of all phenomena and all events of nature, developed by Democritus and accepted by Epicurus, should in no case lead to the conclusion that freedom is impossible for man and that man is enslaved by necessity (fate, fate, fate). Within the framework of necessity, the path to freedom must be found and indicated for behavior.

The Epicurean ideal man (sage) differs from the sage in its portrayal of the Stoics and Skeptics. Unlike the skeptic, the epicure has strong and well-thought-out beliefs. Unlike the Stoic, the Epicurean is not dispassionate. He knows passions (although he will never fall in love, for love enslaves). Unlike the Cynic, the Epicurean will not demonstratively beggar and despise friendship; on the contrary, the Epicurean will never leave a friend in trouble, and if necessary, he will die for him. An Epicurean will not punish slaves. He will never become a tyrant. The Epicurean does not subservient to fate (as the Stoic does): he understands that in life one thing is truly inevitable, but another is accidental, and the third depends on ourselves, on our will. The Epicurean is not a fatalist. He is free and capable of independent, spontaneous actions, being similar in this respect to atoms with their spontaneity.

As a result, the ethics of Epicurus turned out to be a teaching opposed to superstition and all beliefs that degrade human dignity. For Epicurus, the criterion of happiness (similar to the criterion of truth) is a feeling of pleasure. Good is what gives rise to pleasure, evil is what gives rise to suffering. The development of a doctrine about the path leading a person to happiness must be preceded by the elimination of everything that stands in this path.

The teachings of Epicurus were the last great materialist school of ancient Greek philosophy. Her authority - theoretical and moral - was great. Late antiquity highly revered the thought, character and strict, abstinent lifestyle and behavior of Epicurus, bordering on asceticism. Even the harsh and irreconcilably hostile polemics that the Stoics always waged against the teachings of Epicurus could not cast a shadow on them. Epicureanism stood firm under their attacks, and its teachings were strictly preserved in their original content. It was one of the most orthodox materialist schools of antiquity.

List of used literature

1. Anthology of ancient philosophy comp. S.P. Perevezentsev. M.: OLMA - PRESS, 2001. 415 p.

2. Gubin V.D. Philosophy: textbook. M.: TK Welby, Prospekt Publishing House, 2008. 336 p.

3. Copleston Frederick. History of philosophy. Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome. T.2./Trans. from English Yu.A. Alakina. M.: ZAO Tsentrpoligraf, 2003. 319 p.

4. Letters of Epicurus to Menoeceus, Herodotus.

Posted on Allbest.ru

Similar documents

General characteristics of the views of Epicurus. Overcoming fear of the gods, fear of necessity and fear of death. Followers of the views of Epicurus. Recognition of chance in the teachings of Epicurus. Eternity and the inevitability of existence. Materiality and mortality of the soul.

abstract, added 05/22/2014


Specifics of Greek philosophy. Protoscience, the desire to understand the essence of space, nature, the world as a whole. Basic principles of atomistic philosophy put forward by Leucippus. The role assigned to reason by Democritus. Epicurus' additions to the atomistic theory.

test, added 06/19/2015


Characteristics and features of the Hellenistic period in ancient philosophy. Schools and their outstanding representatives. Sources of Epicureanism. A biographical sketch of the life and work of Epicurus, an analysis of his works and an assessment of his contribution to the development of world philosophy.

test, added 10/23/2010


A brief sketch of the life, personal and creative development of the great philosopher of Ancient Greece, Epicurus. The essence of Epicurus' theory about the structure of the world and the meaning of life, the value of Epicurus' ethics. The purpose of building a state and politics, according to the thinker.

report, added 11/07/2009


The atomic picture of the world, the denial of providentialism and the immortality of the soul in the philosophy of Epicurus. The problem of pleasures in Epicureanism. Ataraxia as a state of a rational being, the ideal of human existence in conditions of social instability.

presentation, added 10/07/2014


Philosophical activity of Epicurus; he founded a school in Athens. The thinker divides human needs into necessary (food, clothing, food) and unnatural (power, wealth, entertainment). Epicurus' thoughts on death and the fate of the soul after death.

presentation, added 07/03/2014


The history of the consistent development of ancient philosophy. Hellenistic philosophy: schools of Cynics, Skeptics, Stoics and Epicureans. Ideas of atomism in the philosophy of Epicurus. Moral philosophy based on faith in life, in the possibilities of society and man.

test, added 02/25/2010


Atomists and Cyrenaics as the main predecessors of the Epicureans, analysis of activities. Characteristics of the philosophy of Epicurus, an introduction to his brief biography. The essence of the concept of "Epicureanism". Consideration of types of positive pleasures: physical, spiritual.

abstract, added 02/08/2014


Introduction to the life and work of Epicurus. Characteristics of perception, concept and feeling as the main criteria of truth according to the philosophy of the scientist. Creation of the theory of free deflection of the atom. Laws of ethics, atheism and linguistics in the works of the philosopher.

abstract, added 01/12/2011


Biography and development of Epicurus as a philosopher, his development of the atomistic ideas of Democritus, the formation of the principles of ethics and human education, the desire to provide practical guidance for life. Epicurus' teaching about nature, the essence of his mottos and aphorisms.

Outstanding representatives of Epicureanism are Epicurus (341 - 270 BC) and Titus Lucretius Carus (c. 99-55 BC). This philosophical direction belongs to the border between the old and new eras. The Epicureans were interested in questions of structure and personal comfort in the complex historical context of that time.

Epicurus developed ideas of atomism. According to Epicurus, only bodies located in space exist in the Universe. They are directly perceived by the senses, and the presence of empty space between bodies follows from the fact that otherwise movement would be impossible. Epicurus put forward an idea that differed sharply from Democritus's interpretation of atoms. This is the idea of ​​the "bending" of atoms, where the atoms move in a "coherent flow". Epicurus endows atoms with the ability of spontaneous deflection, which he considers by analogy with the internal volitional act of man. It turns out that atoms are characterized by “free will,” which determines “inevitable deviation.” Therefore, atoms are able to describe different curves, begin to touch and touch each other, intertwine and unravel, as a result of which the world arises. This idea made it possible for Epicurus to avoid the idea of ​​fatalism. Plutarch notes that the spontaneity of atomic deflection is what happens. From this Epicurus draws the following conclusion: “There is no need for necessity!” Thus, Epicurus, for the first time in the history of philosophical thought, put forward the idea of objectivity of chance.

According to Epicurus, life and death are equally not terrible for the sage: “As long as we exist, there is no death; when there is death, there is no more death.” Life is the greatest pleasure. Such as it is, with a beginning and an end. Characterizing the spiritual world of man, Epicurus recognized the presence of a soul. He characterized it this way: there is nothing subtler or more reliable than this essence (soul), and it consists of the smallest and smoothest elements. The soul was thought by Epicurus as the principle of the integrity of individual elements of the spiritual world of the individual: feelings, sensations, thoughts and will, as the principle of eternal and indestructible existence.

Knowledge, according to Epicurus, begins with sensory experience, but the science of knowledge begins primarily with the analysis of words and the establishment of precise terminology, i.e. sensory experience; acquired by a person must be comprehended and processed in the form of certain terminologically fixed semantic structures. In itself, a sensory sensation, not raised to the level of thought, is not yet genuine knowledge. Without this, only sensory impressions will flash before us in a continuous stream, and this is simply continuous fluidity.

The basic principle Epicurean ethics is pleasure - principle hedonism(from Greek hedone - pleasure). At the same time, the pleasures preached by the Epicureans are distinguished by an extremely noble, calm, balanced and often contemplative character.

The pursuit of pleasure is the original principle of choice or avoidance. According to Epicurus, if a person’s senses are taken away, there will be nothing left. Unlike those who preached the principle of “enjoying the moment”, and “what will be, will be!”, Epicurus wants constant, even and undecaying bliss. The sage’s pleasure “splashes in his soul like a calm sea on the solid shores” of reliability. The limit of pleasure and bliss is to get rid of suffering! According to Epicurus, one cannot live pleasantly without living rationally, morally and justly, and, conversely, one cannot live rationally, morally and fairly without living pleasantly!

Epicurus preached piety and worship of God: “a wise man must kneel before the gods.” He wrote: “God is an immortal and blissful being, as the general idea of ​​God was outlined (in the mind of man), and does not ascribe to him anything alien to his immortality or inconsistent with his bliss; but imagines everything about God that can preserve his bliss, combined with immortality. Yes, gods exist: knowing them is an obvious fact. But they are not what the crowd imagines them to be, because the crowd does not always retain its idea of ​​them.”

The Roman poet, philosopher and educator, one of the outstanding Epicureans, Titus Lucretius Carus, like Epicurus, does not deny the existence of gods consisting of the finest atoms and residing in the interworld spaces in blissful peace. In his poem “On the Nature of Things,” Lucretius elegantly, in poetic form, depicts a light and subtle, always moving picture of the influence that atoms have on our consciousness through the outflow of special eidols, as a result of which sensations and all states of consciousness arise. It is very interesting that atoms in Lucretius are not exactly the same as in Epicurus: they are not the limit of divisibility, but a kind of creative principles from which a specific thing is created with its entire structure, i.e. atoms are the material for nature, which presupposes some kind of creative principle located outside them. There are no hints of spontaneous activity of matter in the poem. Lucretius sees this creative principle either in the progenitor-Venus, or in the artificer-Earth, or in the creative nature - nature. A.F. Losev writes: “If we are talking about the natural philosophical mythology of Lucretius and call it a kind of religion, then let the reader not be confused here in three pines: the natural philosophical mythology of Lucretius ... has absolutely nothing in common with the traditional mythology that Lucretius refutes ".

According to Losev, the independence of Lucretius as a philosopher is deeply revealed in an episode in the history of human culture, which constitutes the main content of the fifth book of the poem. Taking from the Epicurean tradition a negative assessment of those improvements in the material environment of life, which, without ultimately increasing the amount of pleasure people receive, serve as a new object of acquisition, Lucretius ends the fifth book not with the Epicurean morality of self-restraint, but with praise to the human mind, mastering the heights of knowledge and art.

Are you familiar with the concept of an epicurean? This word has recently begun to sound more and more often. Moreover, it is not always mentioned appropriately. That is why it is appropriate to talk in more detail about the meaning and origin of this word.

Epicurus and the Epicureans

In the 3rd century. BC e. In Greece, in the city of Athens, there lived a man named Epicurus. He was an unusually versatile personality. From a young age he was fascinated by various philosophical teachings. Subsequently, however, he said that he was ignorant and self-taught, but this was not entirely true. According to contemporaries, Epicurus was an educated man, endowed with the highest moral qualities, had an even character and preferred the simplest lifestyle.

At the age of 32, he created his own philosophical doctrine, and subsequently founded a school, for which a large shady garden was purchased in Athens. This school was called the "Garden of Epicurus" and had many devoted students. Actually, an Epicurean is a student and follower of Epicurus. The teacher called all his followers who attended school “philosophers from the garden.” It was a kind of community in which modesty, lack of frills and a friendly atmosphere reigned. In front of the entrance to the “Garden” there was a jug of water and a simple loaf of bread - symbols of the fact that a person needs very little in this life.

Epicureans, philosophy

The philosophy of Epicurus can be called materialistic: he did not recognize gods, denied the existence of predestination or fate, and recognized man's right to free will. The main ethical principle in the Garden of Epicurus was pleasure. But not at all in the vulgar and simplified form in which it was understood by the majority of Hellenes.

Epicurus preached that in order to receive true satisfaction from life, you need to limit your desires and needs, and this is precisely the wisdom and prudence of a happy life. An Epicurean is a person who understands that the main pleasure is life itself and the absence of suffering in it. The more immoderate and greedy people are, the more difficult it is for them to achieve happiness and the sooner they doom themselves to eternal discontent and fear.

Distortion of the teachings of Epicurus

Subsequently, the ideas of Epicurus were greatly distorted by Rome. "Epicureanism" in its main provisions began to diverge from the ideas of its founder and approached the so-called "hedonism." In such a distorted form, the teachings of Epicurus have survived to this day. Modern people are often convinced that an epicurean is one who considers his own pleasure to be the highest good of life and, in order to increase the latter, lives immoderately, allowing himself all sorts of excesses.

And since there are many such people around today, one might think that the current world is developing according to the ideas of Epicurus, although in fact hedonism rules the roost everywhere. In fact, in this respect modern society is close to Ancient Rome during its decline. It is well known from history that, in the end, the widespread debauchery and excesses of the Romans led the once great empire to complete decline and destruction.

Famous Followers of Epicurus

The ideas of Epicurus were very popular and found many supporters and followers. His school existed for almost 600 years. Among the famous supporters of Epicurus' ideas is Titus Lucretius Carus, who wrote the famous poem "On the Nature of Things", which played a large role in the popularization of Epicureanism.

Epicureanism became especially widespread during the Renaissance. The influence of Epicurus's teachings can be traced in the literary works of Rabelais, Lorenzo Valla, Raimondi and others. Subsequently, the philosopher's supporters were Gassendi, Fontenelle, Holbach, La Mettrie and other thinkers.

The idea was to teach a person a happy life, because everything else is unimportant.

Epicurus' Theory of Knowledge - Briefly

IN theories of knowledge Epicurus called for trusting sensory perceptions, since we still have no other criterion of truth. He believed that the criticism of sensationalism by skeptics has a purely theoretical interest, but in practice it is completely fruitless. The main conclusion to which Epicurus leads the listener with these reasonings is: there is nothing supersensible. Even if it existed, we would not be able to perceive it, since we are given nothing but feelings. This conclusion is very important for the theory of Epicurus: it is from here that its materialism and atheism follow.

Physics of Epicurus, his atomism - briefly

In physics, Epicurus is an ardent supporter of Democritus's idea of ​​atoms. In his opinion, it is entirely confirmed by sensory experience, for the mixing of different media that constantly occurs before our eyes cannot be explained without the assumption that they consist of the smallest particles. At the same time, atoms cannot be divisible indefinitely (Democritus’s term “atom” literally means “indivisible”), because then matter would dissipate in emptiness, and there would be no bodies at all.

Roman follower of Epicurus Titus Lucretius Carus

The popularity of Epicurus was unusually great in Rome. A majestic exposition of his philosophy was given by Titus Lucretius Carus in his poem “On the Nature of Things.” During the period of the decline of the empire, the societies of the followers of Epicurus seemed to be quiet refuges from political storms. Under Hadrian, during the Antonine dynasty, the number of Epicureans increased. But from the middle of the 4th century AD, the influence of Epicurus’ philosophy declined: it died along with the entire ancient world, without surviving the triumph of Christianity.