If you order your custom term paper from our custom writing service you will receive a perfectly written assignment on Epicureanist Pleasure, Hedonism and Good Life. What we need from you is to provide us with your detailed paper instructions for our experienced writers to follow all of your specific writing requirements. Specify your order details, state the exact number of pages required and our custom writing professionals will deliver the best quality Epicureanist Pleasure, Hedonism and Good Life paper right on time.
Out staff of freelance writers includes over 120 experts proficient in Epicureanist Pleasure, Hedonism and Good Life, therefore you can rest assured that your assignment will be handled by only top rated specialists. Order your Epicureanist Pleasure, Hedonism and Good Life paper at affordable prices!
Introduction
Happiness and Good Life in Epicureanism
Epicureanism A General Glance
Cheap custom writing service can write essays on Epicureanist Pleasure, Hedonism and Good Life
A Deeper Look
Bibliography 1
Introduction
The Hellenistic Age was a period of dislocation, a senselessness of the public order having resulted from the conquest of Greece by Alexander The Great who thus took over all the Greek ctiy-states and in a sense made their citizens alienated from their native societies. From this moment onwards many attempts were done to place the individual in a sensible role in the world that philosophies of self-sufficiency were some of the most significant ones. It was Cynicism, Epicureanism and Gnostic Religions which defended this self-sufficiency notion for all of them suggested to an extent a withdrawal from the community and reach self-sufficiency. Among them, I've found interesting to study Epicureanism since they are thought to have contributed the materialism of our age, being mostly favoured. Yet, it has been subject to lots of misreadings and distortions that it has often been perceived as becoming slaves of our passions. Nevertheless, it is worth to take a look at Epicirus and his teachings to see what morality they recommended.
Happiness and Good Life in Epicureanism
Epicureanism A General Glance
Before starting the analysis of our core concepts, I think a brief summary of Epicureanism will be helpful to understand further arguments. First of all, this philosophy is greatly influenced by the materialism of Democritus who suggested an atomistic theory for the basis of everything. All we see consist of homogenous atoms whose motions on the senses create the qualities of things. Such a point of view has further implacations that when employed to human nature, that materialism considers human beings formed by a collection of physical sensations. Thus, there is no soul, but just our bodies and our minds. Moreover, this body of our is engaged in a constant exchange of motion with its environment and that the wise and happy man according to Epicurus is the one who is capable of directing this relationship in a way that he/she perceives pleasure the most. Therefore, we see in the centre of his theory the concept of pleasure, seeking for it in the form of hedonism and thus through this process, reaching happiness and good life. Yet, his conceptualization of these terms are a bit different than that of we perceive today.
A Deeper Look
Like every philosophy tries to do, Epicurean ethics puts forward the necessary steps to be taken in order to live a happy life. However, what distinguish them is their fundemental unit guiding to the good life. In turn, what Epicurus considers the main unit of happiness is the concept of pleasure.
Actually, Epicurus wasn't the first hedonist, for we may refer to Aristippus who suggested a different pleasant life than that of Epicurus. While the former considers the absence of pain as an intermediate condition, Epicurus, as I am going to deal with closer in following sections, equated teh removal of pain with pleasure and that there was no such intermediate between them. In fact this assumption is one of the central arguments of distinct Epicurus' hedonism.
Later, the concept of pleasure was examined by both Plato and Aristotle. Yet, there is a clear distinction between on one hand Plato and Arsitotle and on the other Epicurus. Such a difference can be portrayed in terms of the relationship they offer between happiness and pleasure. Although all of them deal with the necessary conditions for the provision of happiness, only Epicurus identifies happiness with a pleasant life. Despite such a distinction, they have something in common, especially Arsitotle and Epicurus happiness is the final end of action. It is something that other things are chosen for its sake and it can't be chosen for the sake of anything else. "... which is always desirable in itself and never for the sake of something else" Whenever we act, we try to gain a surplus of pleasure and our action is successful provided that it aims at happiness. To Aristotle, happiness is achieved by being engaged in some intellectual activities nad having some virtues which are "intrinsically valuable and thus the components of happiness" Yet, a clear difference is still obvious that for Plato and Aristotle, some pleasures are good and contribute to happiness while some are bad. On the other hand, Epicurus denies such a situation and accounts the pleasure as being good since the good means what causes pleasure. Therefore, he takes pleasure as something intrinsically valuable. While Aristotle and Plato think it is through virtues that the human excellence is what produces happiness, the hedonist equates it with pleasure "We begin every act of choice and avoidance from pleasure and it is to pleasure that we return using our experience of pleasure as the criterion of every good thing."
Furthermore, the goodness of pleasure doesn't need any proof that the cradle argument should be taken into consideration in this sense. It means Epicurus' taking happiness as a fact that all living creatures seek for and avoid pain, the latter meaning perceiving pleasure. "It rests on a conclusion supplied by nature herself and is the ground and basis of all our doing and not doing." The main point in this argument that the pain is bad and pleasure is good. What is more, the case needs no proof since it is evident in their perception. Such matters are sensed just like we do the heat of fire or sweetness of sugar, meaning they are never theorises. Therefore, I guess, Epicurus would never be in pains of doing so, since avoiding pain is pleasure.
"Men pursue pleasure that it is what they ought to pursue." We are sort of genetically programmed to seek what produces pleasure and to avoid what causes pain. According to Epicurus, probably no living creature can have any other goals since such a state will lead directlt to the good and happy life.
Having adopted the natural goodness of pleasure, we may now go on with a deeper analysis of the concept of pleasure and its relevance to hedonism, happy and good life.
"Since pleasure is the good which is primary and innate ,we don't chose every pleasure, but there are times when we pass over many pleasures of greater pain in their consequence for us. And we regard many pains as superior to pleasures when a greater pleasure arises for us after we have put with pains over a long time. Therefore, although every pleasure on account of its natural affinity to us is good, not every pleasure is to be chosen; similarly, though every pain is bad, not every pain is always to be avoided. It is proper to evaluate these things by a calculation and consideration of advantages and disadvantages. For sometimes we treat the good as bad and conversely the bad as good."
Most probably, this paragraph of Epicurus is the one explaining his distinct hedonism and pleasure-oriented philosophy in the most proper manner. Yet, there are more than just meets the eye if we do a reading of between lines. One of the most important feature of his hedonism, as mentioned above, is his refusal of any intermediate between pleasure and pain. They are related to each other in the sense that they are contradictories. Pleasure is in fact the logical opposite of pain, meaning nonpain or generally speaking, the absence of pain in mind and body the physical comfort or well-being of mind. The absence of one brings about the presence of the other. The real aim of all pleasure is thus obtaining freedom from pain, "the emancipation from evil." Therefore, as far as pleasure is concerned, we had better be saying that Epicurus employed a negative meaning of the concept. Furthermore, in physical terms, the pleasure is the result of the appropriate movement of atoms in the body. If such an harmony is distorted, pain comes to existence. Thus, pain can be thought as the disturbance of our natural constitution. "Pleasure is perceived when atoms are restored to their appropriate position within the body."
Yet, more things have to be said about the Epicurean pleasure. When we call it, we don't mean the pleasures of gratification neither the pleasures of the body, of the flesh, nor the sensual enjoyments as excitment, competition, money, prestige, etc... This is one of the most striking features of Epicurean theory that such an argument totally contrasts with our time's lifestyle which underlines those values. Then, isn't is odd to blame Epicureanism for being a slave of passion while it deemphasizes them?
"So, when we say that pleasure is the end of action, we don't mean the pleasures pf the dissipated and those that consist in having a good time, rather we mean the freedom from pain in the body and from disturbance in the mind. The pleasant life isn't the product of drinking party after another or of sexual intercourse with women and boys or of the sea food and other delicacies afforded by a luxurious table."
We may infer from this paragraph that Epicurus' ideal is far from what we mean by a pleasant life today. We furher understand that he employs a clear distinction within pleasure positive and negative or in other words kinetic and static pleasure. He undermined the importance of the former while emphasizing the latter in the route to happiness.
"The kinetic pleasures are composed of a process of removing pain which results in pleasurable sensations." For example, suppose that a man is hungry. He will naturally desire to eat and that satistfying this desire produces kinetic pleasure. However, to satisfy completely the desire for food just puts off the hunger to a later time. From the complete satisfaction of desire, in turn, Epicurus introduces the static pleasure. What is significant in this kind of pleasure is there is the comlplete absence of pain and enjoymant of this condition.
"The pleasure which we pursue isn't merely that which excites our nature by some gratification and which is felt with delight by the senses. We regard that as the greatest pleasure which is felt when all pain has been removed." What Ciceor describes here is nothing but solely the static pleasure.
Therefore, the complete satisfaction of desire is the static pleasure. Our needs lead us to desires which mean perceiving pain because of lacking something. In order to remove this pain and thus reach pleasure, desire has to be satisfied and this process is pleasurable. "Thus, the kinetic pleasure is a necessary condition of at least some static pleasure, but it isn't regarded by Epicurus as equivalent in value to static pleasure." If freedom from pain is the greatest pleasure, then we should satisfy our desires not for the sake of the pleasurable sensations as drinking or eating, but for the sake of the well-being of mind which emerges when all pain has been removed.
The significance of the distinction between kinetic and static pleasure is that it helps to show the identification of happiness wtih pleasure as mentioned before, in De Finibus, it is argued that the greatest pleasure isn't any kind of gratification, but it is what is perceived when all the pain has been removed. "For when we are freed from pain, we rejoice in the actual freedom and absence of all distress." Pleasure is thus the necessary consequence of pain's removal.
Epicurus doesn't deny kinetic pleasures are sources of pleasure. Rather, those pleasures are rejected to form a stable avoidance of pain in body and mind. This isn't not because he denies they are good, but they are the wrong kind of pleasure to be thought as the final end of action, it it the freedom from pain which is the final end. In fact, this is the motto of Epicurean philosophy. Being happy is directly identified with the state of aponia and ataraxia, meaning freedom from bodily adn mental pains. This is further provided by the perception of static pleasures. These two states together form happiness. The main point in Epicurean hedonism is that the state of the body isn't very important and this is reinforced by the humiliation of positive pleasures. Rather, the state of mind is of great importance since bodily pleasures are of short duration while "mental enjoyments are incorruptible." Actually, for the same reason, mental pains are more severe than those of the body because the body suffers from only present pains whereas the mind feels those of the past and the future. Being incorruptible, it is the satisfaction of our mental pleasures as aponia and ataraxia, which would supply us with a process culminating in happiness.
Because Epicurus argues the greatest pain is the mental disturbance, he also introduces some enemies causing a disturbance in the name of the fear of gods, fear of death and fear of torments of hell. "Before one can enjoy the fruits of living, one must free oneself of certain crippling liabilities." Both Epicurus an Lucreitus try to show that such liabilities were groundless on the basis of the atomic theory. The first fear, fear of gods is groundless since even if gods existed, they don't intervene to the human world. The fear of death is also futile because there is no soul, just a body and mind, thus the death just means the termination of the exchange of motion. Moreover, the torment of hell doesn't exist since there is no afterlife because there is no soul, even if it existed, it would be mortal. Yet, the fear of death is in turn the main cause for many human vices as greed, murder, envy, etc... "The blind avarice and lust for office are fed byt the dread of death. In order not to fall into poor ills, men are driven by the spurious fear to inflate their means through civic strife and to compound murder with murder whilst they avidly triple their wealth... This fear plagues their self-respect, ruptures the bonds of affection."
Consequently, to sum up, Epicurus' hedonism should exhibit such qualities The miniziming of all pains of living including those three big fears, the maximizing of "inner peace and serenity " and well being of mind. Moreover, in order to judge whether an act is moral or immoral, our criterion shouldn't be the act itself, nor rules of any behaviour, but according to the experience it causes, meaning its long-term consequences. It was in fact on this basis Epicurus developed its theory of not every pleasure is desirable and not every pain is rejected, since their consequences may lead us to greater pleasures or pains. "Any pleasure... which fails to remove the greatest pain is ruled out as an ultimate object of choice by this rule absence of pain determines the magnitude of pain... A man may enjoy an evening's drinking or the thrill of betting, but the pleasure which he derives from satisfying his desires for drink and gambling must be set against the feeling of the morning after the anxiety of losing money"
Furthermore, Epicurus' hedonism is a limited and moderate one in the sense that whenever one isn't experiencing pain or distress, one will be in a state of pleasure and such a situation can't be made more pleasurable. The comlpete absence of pain determines the limit of the greatest pleasure and from this degree on, it can be varied, but not increased. Therefore, a combination of aponia and ataraxia provides one to be in a state of pleasure that can't be improved. This is where the life can't get better. Thus, there is a line boyond which pleasure can't be expanded. As far as gratification is concerned, the limit is when the pain is removed. However, such a boundary requires an intellectual process since the body recognizes no limits of pleasure. For there is no intermediate between pleasure and pain, as long as one isn't in pain or distress, then one is in the state of pleasure which can't be improved by any addition of kinetic pleasures.
Therefore, a simple life is recommended by Epicurus because its needs and desires are just simple. In order to provide happiness for his argument, he introduces a further classification of desires into three classes
1. Natural and necessary
. Natural but not necessary
. Neither natural nor necessary
The first category consists of the desires for the things which bring relief from pain. These desires' satisfaction are necessary if one wishes to reach happiness. Yet, moreover, they are further required for the health and equilibrium of the body and of the life. Such disres are based on knowing how we refer to choice and avoidance to the health of the body and freedom from mental disturbance. The main point is its removal is to live happy. Their final form can be found in a state of aponia and ataraxia.
The second class are the desires for things which will vary pleasure rather than remove pain. The distinction between the fisrt and the second categories can be illustrated as follows we may be at the needs of food for survival. However, it is up to us to eat food or to eat expensive food, while the former is necessary and natural, the latter isn't a necessary desire, but just a verison of it. For it isn't necessary for one's survival.
The third division are the desires for the things as"crowns or erection of states" . They are originated in false beliefs acquired through false perceiption of the truth. Thus, they arise from "empty belief."
Consequently, having described the qualities of Epicurean hedonism and the concept of happiness through pleasure, we may now sum them up to a description of the good life. According to Epicurus, a good life is the one involving disciplining the appetites, curtailement of desires and needs to the possible minimum for the healthy living. Moreover, the detachment from the most favoured goals of society and a withdrawal from the active participation in the life of the society. What is prescribed, in turn, is to retreat to the company of our friends and living a world of non-worldy, intellectual life as contemplation.
Such a lifestyle was that of Epicurus. First, he withdrew from active participation in the life of the society and secluded himself with friends in a "walled Garden" . Second, he lived a simple life, an easy one to satisfy, especially in terms of diet. He ate no meat, drank no wine. Third, he spent his time to unworldy concerns as study and contemplation. Fourth, he didn't engage himself in sexual intercourse, which he thinks the most painful pleasure, thus had better be avoided. He suggests that, as he did in his life, a rational calculation of pleasure-pain relationship is vital. For instance, if one can judge that six beers will bring about a serious hangover, it will be wise to take only three. Thus by analyzing its long-term consequences, pleasures or pains should be preferred with a great care. A choice between a luxurious diet and a simple pne or a life of contemplation and life of politics must be an easy one, being in favor or simplicity and intellectual activity since they offer minimum pain, then greatest pleasure.
Lastly, the position of old goods of Greek philosophy like prudence, justice, moderation, courage or virtue should be examined from the Epicurean perspective. Since the pleasure is the olny good thing, all those other values are of secondary importance for they may be called as means of happiness, not as ends. For example moderation is required because it provides well-being of mind by allowing us to choose simple desires of the simple life. Similarly, courage offers us to live without anxiety, which may harm ataraxia. Actually, Epicurus considered such values as inseparable with happiness since they may serve as means to achieve it. The relationship between virtue and pleasure is of great significance that Epicureanism emphasizes its importance by saying that pleasure requires a reasoned activity of the advantages and disadvantages of an action. Thus, virtue can't be evaluated in the sense it has in pre-Epicurean philosophers who suggested virtue benefits whole society. Yet, such a view isn't valid in our inquiry for it is at his core individualistic, a situation apparent in its name self-sufficiency philosophy.
Therefore to employ virtue for its own sake is nothing but imagination to Epicurus' opinion. Pleasure and happiness are the only objective of our actions and all other things are taken up for their sake. Virtue by itself means nothing in pleasurable terms, yet when it leads the way to pleasure, it becomes loaded with meaning. Its specific task is to free individuals from the worries and fears of the world, which all carry the potential to generate a mental disturbance. Virtue helps us in subordianting our worldy passions to avoidance of pain, in living a simple life, in achieving self-control and sufficiency. Thus, Epicurean virtue is never an end by itself. However, it is closey realted to pleasure as being a means to it. The wisest man in fact is the one being capable of directing his desires and life in the proper way to maximise his/her pleasure. To sum up, it serves to reach complete freedom of mental pain.
Finally, if Epicurean ethics suggested such a positive way of living, a one of simplicity and happiness, why is it always badly approached in our age? The answer is obvious for there were Epicureans and Epicureans "sectarians suggesting a secluded life and Epicureans in the world." The second group is who distorted Epicureanism since they always sought for the maximisation of positive pleasures. Yet the main point is that, "where ideals are too light and austere, they are bound to be dilluted and corrupted by that coarse breed, man-in-the-world." It was this move from negative pleasures to positive pleasures which discredited Epicureanism in time and turned it into a slavery of passions. This can be also valid for Christianity that in some cases, it has been misinterpreted and distorted. "In each case the pearl of great price has been trampled by the herd."
Bibliography
§ Everson, Stephen. History of Philosophy From Aristotle to Augustine Vol., Edited by David Furley, Routlegde Press, New York,1
§ Lung, A.A. Hellenistic Philosophy Stoics, Epicureans, Sceptics, Second Edition, Edited by Hugh Lloyd Jones, Gerald Duckworth-company Limited Press, London, 180
§ Striker, Gisele. Essays on Hellenistic Epistemology and Ethics, Cambridge Press, USA, 16
§ Strodach, George K. Philosophy of Epicureans, Books on Demand, Northwestern University Press, USA, 16
§ Zeller, E. Stoics, Epicureans, Sceptics pt., Books on Demand, Bell&Howell Company, Michigan, 18
Please note that this sample paper on Epicureanist Pleasure, Hedonism and Good Life is for your review only. In order to eliminate any of the plagiarism issues, it is highly recommended that you do not use it for you own writing purposes. In case you experience difficulties with writing a well structured and accurately composed paper on Epicureanist Pleasure, Hedonism and Good Life, we are here to assist you. Your cheap custom college paper on Epicureanist Pleasure, Hedonism and Good Life will be written from scratch, so you do not have to worry about its originality.
Order your authentic assignment and you will be amazed at how easy it is to complete a quality custom paper within the shortest time possible!
