Epicurus Views on Politics, Stoicism and Epicureanism - Essay Example

Introduction Stoicism and Epicureanism are two of the most famous philosophies during the Hellenistic period and Roman. The two depicts a life that lives happily with certain instances and how people should live their lives to the fullest. Living a happy life may mean differently for various people and this may somehow appears to be vague. As many writers have come out with the concept of what is happiness, Epicurus has his own philosophy of what and how to achieve happiness and be able to define the two major fears that could ruin the human soul as well as the physical body. Accordingly, in order to attain a happy life, people should avoid the primary sources of unhappiness which are the fear of death and the fear of gods. Discussion According to Epicurus, fear of death and fear of the gods are the chief sources of unhappiness in life. The definition of unhappiness seems to be simple though and that is the absence of happiness. But, for Epicurus, Happiness is the outcome pleasure. Basically pleasure is good and pain is bad. The absence of pain in the body and trouble in the soul can describe pleasure. Gods do not really castigate humans nor reward which makes sense in thinking that a happy life comprises of being free from the fear of gods and death (Boeree, 2000). A tranquil life, coined as ‘ataraxia’ and ‘aponia’, significantly means being free from fear and not experiencing pain. “Ataraxia” is like the real happiness of a person and surpassing the material world who embraces the principles of philosophy. And ‘aponia’ caters to the belief that happiness is the main goal of the human life. The two terms is apparent to a tranquil life where trouble in the soul can be taken away as well as the inhibition of physical pain. Pleasure is good and this state can be maximized through the absence of pain in physical and mental senses. For Epicurus, fear of gods and fear of death are the primary sources of unhappiness that greatly affect the views of a person. Some people choose pain over pleasure because of thinking that this might lead to a greater pleasure. Epicurus insists that living a quiet and private life could be the best in order to live a happy life (Epicurus, 2000). This is because he rejects the popular perspective of the time. Pointless or the unnecessary desire can cause mental disquiet which should be avoided. Accordingly, human should look into the desires in different perspectives like the natural ones and the unjustified ones. Thus, specific grounds for happiness or achieving the necessary desires should be distinguished between what type of desire (natural and unnatural) because it may lead to the cause of pain in the body and trouble in the soul. Natural desires can scope the physical and social needs like friends, food and the like. In addition to, according to the identity theory of mind (soul) of Epicurus, the main soul of human is in the chest which is significant for how the person thinks. Thus, the mind and soul is only affianced in the thinking and sensation when it is part of a living body. Epicurus suggests that if gods occurred, they must be unnecessary and in the form of material things. Gods will be largely distinguished from the human beings and live in the state of contentment. Hence, gods will not be involved in any sense of human affairs. Human should realize that the fear of death or being punished after like can just cause trouble in the soul. This should be avoided because according to Epicurus, if death exists, we do not and if we exist, death does not. QII On the other hand, if Epicurus suggests that living a tranquil life is the main factor in order to achieve happiness, the Stoics have got a different version of what happiness is. Primarily, the Stoics’ philosophy is somehow related to the Taoist philosophy. The teachings of Stoicism suggest a simple living and being contented with the present life. Some of the teachings include, “The Unity of All; all gods; all substance; all virtue; all mankind into a Cosmopolis” that depicts universality (Irwin, 1998). It is usual that the teachings and beliefs of Stoicism are misunderstood because of using more of the past than in the contemporary era. Literary, Stoic means being indifferent to pain as the Stoics teach freedom from ardour (Irwin, 1998). It pursues the logical reflection of having an inner calm that defines a person’s self- discipline. Being indifferent means developing the natural goodness of a human soul with the use of wisdom and self-control. People should dissent passions because it just mean sufferings for the soul. Indifference in philosophy is standing neutrally in the sense of moral law. Actions are not being considered nor disregarded by the moral law. Indifferent things are believed to be a lame source of happiness and thus it has no capability of causing real happiness to people. People are usually distracted by the perceptions and ideas that they think of and not by the things. As such, the politicians do not cause people to get annoyed, but it is just their own perspective toward the politician. According to the stoics, living a life which pact with the world is living a life well where in the divine reason has defined. Divinity in life or being on its natural way is the main centre for the regulation of life. It does not only suggest the proper action of the humans but also the result of the events. Particularly, fate comprises of the things that further than the control of a person (Sellars, 2006). In that sense, the stoics make a distinction between the good things, bad things and the things indifferent. Good things account for the virtues and good feelings; bad things are the vices and bad feelings while things indifferent are beyond the preferred things and those things that are rejected. The issue between vice and virtue serves as the main characterization of what is bad and good. Virtue is important in living a happy life while those things indifferent are regarded as useless for determining a happy life. For the stoics, they believe on what is good, dissent what is bad and discount the things indifferent. The external goods are disregarded and instead, the stoics account for the internal desires and feelings that promote the self in doing good things (Stephens, 2007). Virtue is just the outcome of what humans can control within a conscious preference. QIII Having a clearer view of how Stoicism and Epicureanism view happiness, it is important to note their significance on the social relationships of people and how they become vital to the politics. Assuming a correlation between the two philosophies, comparing them would likely make sense on the nature, the good and reasoning. In addition to, unreasonable opinions and “patheia” or mental distractions are both present on the two philosophies but distinctions should be made through because Epicureanism believes that understanding the nature can lead to a happy life while stoicism holds that virtues are good things and can lead to happiness. In a political sense, Epicurus discourages the inclusion of people to politics because of the personal disturbance and trouble it brings. Primarily, for him, the important state for the development of civil society is the withdrawal of the instigation of force. The purpose of civil society is to put off those who might intimidate and cause pain upon other individuals. According to him, political power is not absolutely necessary and inappropriate which can cause disadvantages to the efforts of the person in living a happy life. It is better to have an individual life which is free to be able to plan his life well. What provides pleasure is the moral and there is no social dissonance. Today, Epicurus’ views on politics applying his philosophies depict the controversies of the political leaders. Being on the position, it started living a complicated life because of the responsibilities and temptations for power and authority have. On the other hand, stoics on political views have a strong grapple for emotions (Rorty, 1998). Vices may arise through the involvement of people in politics as the person will have power and wealth. Thus, this leads to the suppression of having a happy life. Conclusion Understanding the teachings of Epicurus can help people to relieve these fears that naturally come out. People can overcome the two main forms of fear through understanding the nature. Stoicism has a point of being neutral which pertains to being universal in all aspects. Indifferent things for stoics are disregarded while virtue is what they embrace and given importance because it brings good feelings. But, any philosophies that people might learn with regard to happiness, still depends on the how people make themselves happy or unhappy by responding and acting the right way upon certain situations. God gave us the knowledge to distinguish what is good from bad. Works Cited Boeree, G.C. (2000). “The Ancient Greeks, Part Three: Epicureans and Stoics”. (April 7, 2009). Epicurus (2000). [trans. Robert Drew Hicks] Letter to Menoecus. The Internet Classics Archive.< http://classics.mit.edu/Epicurus/menoec.html> (April 6, 2009). Irwin, T.H. (1998) “Stoic Inhumanity”. In Juha Silvola & Troels Engberg- Pedersen (eds.) The Emotions in Hellenistic Philosophy. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Rorty, A.O. (1998) “The Two Faces of Stoicism: Rousseau and Freud”. In Juha Silvola & Troels Engberg-Pedersen (eds.) The Emotions in Hellenistic Philosophy. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Sellars, J. (2006). Stoicism. Berkeley: University of California Press. Stephens, W.O. (2007). Stoic Ethics: Epictetus and Happiness as Freedom. London: Continuum. Read More