Epicurus

Epicurus (/ˌɛpɪˈkjʊərəs/;[2] Greek: Ἐπίκουρος Epikouros; 341–270 BC) was an ancient Greek
philosopher and sage who founded Epicureanism, a highly influent ial school of philosophy. He was
born on t he Greek island of Samos t o At henian parent s. Influenced by Democrit us, Arist ippus,
Pyrrho,[3] and possibly t he Cynics, he t urned against t he Plat onism of his day and est ablished his
own school, known as "t he Garden", in At hens. Epicurus and his followers were known for eat ing
simple meals and discussing a wide range of philosophical subject s. He openly allowed women
and slaves[4] t o join t he school as a mat t er of policy. Epicurus is said t o have originally writ t en
over 300 works on various subject s, but t he vast majorit y of t hese writ ings have been lost . Only
t hree let t ers writ t en by him—t he let t ers t o Menoeceus, Pythocles, and Herodotus—and t wo
collect ions of quot es—t he Principal Doctrines and t he Vatican Sayings—have survived int act ,
along wit h a few fragment s of his ot her writ ings. Most knowledge of his t eachings comes from
lat er aut hors, part icularly t he biographer Diogenes Laërt ius, t he Epicurean Roman poet Lucret ius
and t he Epicurean philosopher Philodemus, and wit h host ile but largely accurat e account s by t he
Pyrrhonist philosopher Sext us Empiricus, and t he Academic Skept ic and st at esman Cicero.
 Epicurus

Roman marble bust of Epicurus

Born February 341 BC

Samos, Greece

Died 270 BC (aged about 72)

Athens, Greece

Era Hellenistic philosophy

Region Western philosophy

School Epicureanism

Main interests ethics • epistemology • physics • theology

 Notable ideas aponia

ataraxia"

"moving" and "static" pleasures[1]

Attributed:
Epicurean paradox
Influences
Democritus, Plato, Aristotle, Aristippus, Pyrrho, Nausiphanes

Influenced
Seneca the Younger, Hermarchus, Diogenes of Oenoanda, Lucretius, Friedrich Nietzsche, Jeremy
Bentham, John Stuart Mill, Baruch Spinoza, Thomas Hobbes, Thomas Jefferson, Karl Marx, Isaac
Newton, Voltaire, Metrodorus, David Hume, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Philodemus, Gassendi

For Epicurus, t he purpose of philosophy was t o help people at t ain a happy (eudaimonic), t ranquil
life charact erized by ataraxia (peace and freedom from fear) and aponia (t he absence of pain).
He advocat ed t hat people were best able t o pursue philosophy by living a self-sufficient life
surrounded by friends. He t aught t hat t he root of all human neurosis is deat h denial and t he
t endency for human beings t o assume t hat deat h will be horrific and painful, which he claimed
causes unnecessary anxiet y, selfish self-prot ect ive behaviors, and hypocrisy. According t o
Epicurus, deat h is t he end of bot h t he body and t he soul and t herefore should not be feared.
Epicurus t aught t hat alt hough t he gods exist , t hey have no involvement in human affairs. He
t aught t hat people should behave et hically not because t he gods punish or reward people for
t heir act ions, but because amoral behavior will burden t hem wit h guilt and prevent t hem from
at t aining ataraxia.

Epicurus was an empiricist , meaning he believed t hat t he senses are t he only reliable source of
knowledge about t he world. He derived much of his physics and cosmology from t he earlier
philosopher Democrit us (c. 460–c. 370 BC). Like Democrit us, Epicurus t aught t hat t he universe is
infinit e and et ernal and t hat all mat t er is made up of ext remely t iny, invisible part icles known as
atoms. All occurrences in t he nat ural world are ult imat ely t he result of at oms moving and
int eract ing in empt y space. Epicurus deviat ed from Democrit us by proposing t he idea of at omic
"swerve", which holds t hat at oms may deviat e from t heir expect ed course, t hus permit t ing
humans t o possess free will in an ot herwise det erminist ic universe.

Though popular, Epicurean t eachings were cont roversial from t he beginning. Epicureanism
reached t he height of it s popularit y during t he lat e years of t he Roman Republic. It died out in
lat e ant iquit y, subject t o host ilit y from early Christ ianit y. Throughout t he Middle Ages Epicurus
was popularly, t hough inaccurat ely, remembered as a pat ron of drunkards, whoremongers, and
glut t ons. His t eachings gradually became more widely known in t he fift eent h cent ury wit h t he
rediscovery of import ant t ext s, but his ideas did not become accept able unt il t he sevent eent h
cent ury, when t he French Cat holic priest Pierre Gassendi revived a modified version of t hem,
which was promot ed by ot her writ ers, including Walt er Charlet on and Robert Boyle. His influence
grew considerably during and aft er t he Enlight enment , profoundly impact ing t he ideas of major
t hinkers, including John Locke, Thomas Jefferson, Jeremy Bent ham, and Karl Marx.

Life

Upbringing and influences

Lampsacus

Mytilene

Athens Colophon
Samos

Map of Greece showing locations associated with Epicurus

Epicurus was born in t he At henian set t lement on t he Aegean island of Samos in February
341 BC.[5][6][7] His parent s, Neocles and Chaerest rat e, were bot h At henian-born, and his fat her
was an At henian cit izen.[5] Epicurus grew up during t he final years of t he Greek Classical Period.[8]
Plat o had died seven years before Epicurus was born and Epicurus was seven years old when
Alexander t he Great crossed t he Hellespont int o Persia.[9] As a child, Epicurus would have
received a t ypical ancient Greek educat ion.[10] As such, according t o Norman Went wort h DeWit t ,
"it is inconceivable t hat he would have escaped t he Plat onic t raining in geomet ry, dialect ic, and
rhet oric."[10] Epicurus is known t o have st udied under t he inst ruct ion of a Samian Plat onist named
Pamphilus, probably for about four years.[10] His Letter of Menoeceus and surviving fragment s of
his ot her writ ings st rongly suggest t hat he had ext ensive t raining in rhet oric.[10][11] Aft er t he
deat h of Alexander t he Great , Perdiccas expelled t he At henian set t lers on Samos t o Colophon,
on t he coast of what is now Turkey.[12][11] Aft er t he complet ion of his milit ary service, Epicurus
joined his family t here. He st udied under Nausiphanes, who followed t he t eachings of
Democrit us,[11][12] and lat er t hose of Pyrrho,[13][14] whose way of life Epicurus great ly admired.[15]

Allocation of key positions and satrapies following the Partition of Babylon in 323 BC after the death of Alexander the
Great. Epicurus came of age at a time when Greek intellectual horizons were vastly expanding due to the rise of the
Hellenistic Kingdoms across the Near East.[16]

Epicurus's t eachings were heavily influenced by t hose of earlier philosophers, part icularly
Democrit us. Nonet heless, Epicurus differed from his predecessors on several key point s of
det erminism and vehement ly denied having been influenced by any previous philosophers, whom
he denounced as "confused". Inst ead, he insist ed t hat he had been "self-t aught ".[17][18][19]
According t o DeWit t , Epicurus's t eachings also show influences from t he cont emporary
philosophical school of Cynicism.[20] The Cynic philosopher Diogenes of Sinope was st ill alive
when Epicurus would have been in At hens for his required milit ary t raining and it is possible t hey
may have met .[20] Diogenes's pupil Crat es of Thebes (c. 365 – c. 285 BC) was a close
cont emporary of Epicurus.[20] Epicurus agreed wit h t he Cynics' quest for honest y, but reject ed
t heir "insolence and vulgarit y", inst ead t eaching t hat honest y must be coupled wit h court esy and
kindness.[20] Epicurus shared t his view wit h his cont emporary, t he comic playwright Menander.[21]

Epicurus's Letter to Menoeceus, possibly an early work of his, is writ t en in an eloquent st yle similar
t o t hat of t he At henian rhet orician Isocrat es (436–338 BC),[20] but , for his lat er works, he seems
t o have adopt ed t he bald, int ellect ual st yle of t he mat hemat ician Euclid.[20] Epicurus's
epist emology also bears an unacknowledged debt t o t he lat er writ ings of Arist ot le (384–322
BC), who reject ed t he Plat onic idea of hypost at ic Reason and inst ead relied on nat ure and
empirical evidence for knowledge about t he universe.[16] During Epicurus's format ive years, Greek
knowledge about t he rest of t he world was rapidly expanding due t o t he Hellenizat ion of t he
Near East and t he rise of Hellenist ic kingdoms.[16] Epicurus's philosophy was consequent ly more
universal in it s out look t han t hose of his predecessors, since it t ook cognizance of non-Greek
peoples as well as Greeks.[16] He may have had access t o t he now-lost writ ings of t he hist orian
and et hnographer Megast henes, who wrot e during t he reign of Seleucus I Nicat or (ruled 305–281
BC).[16]

Teaching career

Reconstruction by K. Fittschen of an Epicurus enthroned statue, presumably set up after his death. University of Göttingen,
Abgußsammlung.[22]

During Epicurus's lifet ime, Plat onism was t he dominant philosophy in higher educat ion.[23]
Epicurus's opposit ion t o Plat onism formed a large part of his t hought .[24][25] Over half of t he
fort y Principal Doct rines of Epicureanism are flat cont radict ions of Plat onism.[24] In around 311
BC, Epicurus, when he was around t hirt y years old, began t eaching in Myt ilene.[24][11] Around t his
t ime, Zeno of Cit ium, t he founder of St oicism, arrived in At hens, at t he age of about t went y-one,
but Zeno did not begin t eaching what would become St oicism for anot her t went y years.[24]
Alt hough lat er t ext s, such as t he writ ings of t he first -cent ury BC Roman orat or Cicero, port ray
Epicureanism and St oicism as rivals,[24] t his rivalry seems t o have only emerged aft er Epicurus's
deat h.[24][24]

Epicurus's t eachings caused st rife in Myt ilene and he was forced t o leave. He t hen founded a
school in Lampsacus before ret urning t o At hens in c. 306 BC, where he remained unt il his deat h.[6]
There he founded The Garden (κῆπος), a school named for t he garden he owned t hat served as
t he school's meet ing place, about halfway bet ween t he locat ions of t wo ot her schools of
philosophy, t he St oa and t he Academy.[26][11] The Garden was more t han just a school;[7] it was "a
communit y of like-minded and aspiring pract it ioners of a part icular way of life."[7] The primary
members were Hermarchus, t he financier Idomeneus, Leont eus and his wife Themist a, t he
sat irist Colot es, t he mat hemat ician Polyaenus of Lampsacus, and Met rodorus of Lampsacus, t he
most famous popularizer of Epicureanism. His school was t he first of t he ancient Greek
philosophical schools t o admit women as a rule rat her t han an except ion, and t he biography of
Epicurus by Diogenes Laërt ius list s female st udent s such as Leont ion and Nikidion.[27] An
inscript ion on t he gat e t o The Garden is recorded by Seneca t he Younger in epist le XXI of
Epistulae morales ad Lucilium: "St ranger, here you will do well t o t arry; here our highest good is
pleasure."[28]

According t o Diskin Clay, Epicurus himself est ablished a cust om of celebrat ing his birt hday
annually wit h common meals, befit t ing his st at ure as heros ktistes ("founding hero") of t he Garden.
He ordained in his will annual memorial feast s for himself on t he same dat e (10t h of Gamelion
mont h).[29] Epicurean communit ies cont inued t his t radit ion,[30] referring t o Epicurus as t heir
"saviour" (sot er) and celebrat ing him as hero. The hero cult of Epicurus may have operat ed as a
Garden variet y civic religion.[31] However, clear evidence of an Epicurean hero cult , as well as t he
cult it self, seems buried by t he weight of post humous philosophical int erpret at ion.[32] Epicurus
never married and had no known children. He was most likely a veget arian.[33][34]

Death

Diogenes Laërt ius records t hat , according t o Epicurus's successor Hermarchus, Epicurus died a
slow and painful deat h in 270 BC at t he age of sevent y-t wo from a st one blockage of his urinary
t ract .[35][36] Despit e being in immense pain, Epicurus is said t o have remained cheerful and t o have
cont inued t o t each unt il t he very end.[35] Possible insight s int o Epicurus's deat h may be offered
by t he ext remely brief Epistle to Idomeneus, included by Diogenes Laërt ius in Book X of his Lives
and Opinions of Eminent Philosophers.[37] The aut hent icit y of t his let t er is uncert ain and it may
be a lat er pro-Epicurean forgery int ended t o paint an admirable port rait of t he philosopher t o
count er t he large number of forged epist les in Epicurus's name port raying him unfavorably.[37]

I have written this letter to you on a happy day to me, which is also the
last day of my life. For I have been attacked by a painful inability to
urinate, and also dysentery, so violent that nothing can be added to the
violence of my sufferings. But the cheerfulness of my mind, which
comes from the recollection of all my philosophical contemplation,
counterbalances all these afflictions. And I beg you to take care of the
children of Metrodorus, in a manner worthy of the devotion shown by
the young man to me, and to philosophy.[38]

If aut hent ic, t his let t er would support t he t radit ion t hat Epicurus was able t o remain joyful t o t he
end, even in t he midst of his suffering.[37] It would also indicat e t hat he maint ained a special
concern for t he wellbeing of children.[39]

Teachings
Illustration from 1885 of a small bronze bust of Epicurus from Herculaneum. Three Epicurus bronze busts were recovered
from the Villa of the Papyri, as well as text fragments.[40]

Epistemology

Epicurus and his followers had a well-developed epist emology, which developed as a result of
t heir rivalry wit h ot her philosophical schools.[41][42] Epicurus wrot e a t reat ise ent it led Κανών, or
Rule, in which he explained his met hods of invest igat ion and t heory of knowledge.[43] This book,
however, has not survived,[43] nor does any ot her t ext t hat fully and clearly explains Epicurean
epist emology, leaving only ment ions of t his epist emology by several aut hors t o reconst ruct
it .[41][42] Epicurus was an ardent Empiricist ;[16][44][45] believing t hat t he senses are t he only reliable
sources of informat ion about t he world.[16][46][45] He reject ed t he Plat onic idea of "Reason" as a
reliable source of knowledge about t he world apart from t he senses[16] and was bit t erly opposed
t o t he Pyrrhonist s and Academic Skept ics, who not only quest ioned t he abilit y of t he senses t o
provide accurat e knowledge about t he world, but also whet her it is even possible t o know
anyt hing about t he world at all.[47]
Epicurus maint ained t hat t he senses never deceive humans, but t hat t he senses can be
misint erpret ed.[48][49] Epicurus held t hat t he purpose of all knowledge is t o aid humans in at t aining
ataraxia.[50][51] He t aught t hat knowledge is learned t hrough experiences rat her t han innat e [52] and
t hat t he accept ance of t he fundament al t rut h of t he t hings a person perceives is essent ial t o a
person's moral and spirit ual healt h.[53][51] In t he Letter to Pythocles, he st at es, "If a person fight s
t he clear evidence of his senses he will never be able t o share in genuine t ranquilit y."[54] Epicurus
regarded gut feelings as t he ult imat e aut horit y on mat t ers of moralit y and held t hat whet her a
person feels an act ion is right or wrong is a far more cogent guide t o whet her t hat act really is
right or wrong t han abst ract s maxims, st rict codified rules of et hics, or even reason it self.[55]

Epicurus permit t ed t hat any and every st at ement t hat is not direct ly cont rary t o human
percept ion has t he possibilit y t o be t rue.[56] Nonet heless, anyt hing cont rary t o a person's
experience can be ruled out as false.[57] Epicureans oft en used analogies t o everyday experience
t o support t heir argument of so-called "impercept ibles", which included anyt hing t hat a human
being cannot perceive, such as t he mot ion of at oms.[58] In line wit h t his principle of non-
cont radict ion, t he Epicureans believed t hat event s in t he nat ural world may have mult iple causes
t hat are all equally possible and probable.[59] Lucret ius writ es in On the Nature of Things, as
t ranslat ed by William Ellery Leonard:

There be, besides, some thing

Of which 'tis not enough one only cause
To state—but rather several, whereof one

Will be the true: lo, if thou shouldst espy

Lying afar some fellow's lifeless corse,

'Twere meet to name all causes of a death,
That cause of his death might thereby be named:

For prove thou mayst he perished not by steel,

By cold, nor even by poison nor disease,

Yet somewhat of this sort hath come to him

We know—And thus we have to say the same

In divers cases.[60]

Epicurus st rongly favored nat uralist ic explanat ions over t heological ones.[61] In his Letter to
Pythocles, he offers four different possible nat ural explanat ions for t hunder, six different
possible nat ural explanat ions for light ning, t hree for snow, t hree for comet s, t wo for rainbows,
t wo for eart hquakes, and so on.[62] Alt hough all of t hese explanat ions are now known t o be false,
t hey were an import ant st ep in t he hist ory of science, because Epicurus was t rying t o explain
nat ural phenomena using nat ural explanat ions, rat her t han resort ing t o invent ing elaborat e st ories
about gods and myt hic heroes.[62]

Ethics

Marble relief from the first or second century showing the mythical transgressor Ixion being tortured on a spinning fiery
wheel in Tartarus. Epicurus taught that stories of such punishment in the afterlife are ridiculous superstitions and that
believing in them prevents people from attaining ataraxia.[63][64]

Epicurus was a hedonist , meaning he t aught t hat what is pleasurable is morally good and what is
painful is morally evil.[65][66][67][7] He idiosyncrat ically defined "pleasure" as t he absence of
suffering[66][7] and t aught t hat all humans should seek t o at t ain t he st at e of ataraxia, meaning
"unt roubledness", a st at e in which t he person is complet ely free from all pain or
suffering.[68][69][70] He argued t hat most of t he suffering which human beings experience is
caused by t he irrat ional fears of deat h, divine ret ribut ion, and punishment in t he aft erlife.[63][64] In
his Letter to Menoeceus, Epicurus explains t hat people seek wealt h and power on account of
t hese fears, believing t hat having more money, prest ige, or polit ical clout will save t hem from
deat h.[63][64] He, however, maint ains t hat deat h is t he end of exist ence, t hat t he t errifying st ories
of punishment in t he aft erlife are ridiculous superst it ions, and t hat deat h is t herefore not hing t o
be feared.[63][64][71] He writ es in his Letter to Menoeceus: "Accust om t hyself t o believe t hat deat h
is not hing t o us, for good and evil imply sent ience, and deat h is t he privat ion of all sent ience;...
Deat h, t herefore, t he most awful of evils, is not hing t o us, seeing t hat , when we are, deat h is not
come, and, when deat h is come, we are not ."[72] From t his doct rine arose t he Epicurean epit aph:
Non fui, fui, non-sum, non-curo ("I was not ; I was; I am not ; I do not care"), which is inscribed on
t he gravest ones of his followers and seen on many ancient gravest ones of t he Roman Empire.
This quot at ion is oft en used t oday at humanist funerals.[73]

The Tet rapharmakos present s a summary of t he key point s of Epicurean et hics:[74]

Don't fear god

Don't worry about deat h

What is good is easy t o get

What is t errible is easy t o endure

Alt hough Epicurus has been commonly misunderst ood as an advocat e of t he rampant pursuit of
pleasure, he, in fact , maint ained t hat a person can only be happy and free from suffering by living
wisely, soberly, and morally.[66][75][76] He st rongly disapproved of raw, excessive sensualit y and
warned t hat a person must t ake int o account whet her t he consequences of his act ions will
result in suffering,[66][77][67][76] writ ing, "t he pleasant life is produced not by a st ring of drinking
bout s and revelries, nor by t he enjoyment of boys and women, nor by fish and t he ot her it ems on
an expensive menu, but by sober reasoning."[66] He also wrot e t hat a single good piece of cheese
could be equally pleasing as an ent ire feast .[67][78] Furt hermore, Epicurus t aught t hat "it is not
possible t o live pleasurably wit hout living sensibly and nobly and just ly", because a person who
engages in act s of dishonest y or injust ice will be "loaded wit h t roubles" on account of his own
guilt y conscience and will live in const ant fear t hat his wrongdoings will be discovered by
ot hers.[66][79][80] A person who is kind and just t o ot hers, however, will have no fear and will be
more likely t o at t ain ataraxia.[66][79]

Epicurus dist inguished bet ween t wo different t ypes of pleasure: "moving" pleasures (κατὰ
κίνησιν ἡδοναί) and "st at ic" pleasures (καταστηματικαὶ ἡδοναί).[81][82] "Moving" pleasures occur
when one is in t he process of sat isfying a desire and involve an act ive t it illat ion of t he senses.[81]
Aft er one's desires have been sat isfied (e.g. when one is full aft er eat ing), t he pleasure quickly
goes away and t he suffering of want ing t o fulfill t he desire again ret urns.[81][83] For Epicurus,
st at ic pleasures are t he best pleasures because moving pleasures are always bound up wit h
pain.[81][83] Epicurus had a low opinion of sex and marriage, regarding bot h as having dubious
value.[84] Inst ead, he maint ained t hat plat onic friendships are essent ial t o living a happy life.[85]
One of t he Principal Doctrines st at es, "Of t he t hings wisdom acquires for t he blessedness of life
as a whole, far t he great est is t he possession of friendship."[86][87] He also t aught t hat philosophy
is it self a pleasure t o engage in.[85] One of t he quot es from Epicurus recorded in t he Vatican
Sayings declares, "In ot her pursuit s, t he hard-won fruit comes at t he end. But in philosophy,
delight keeps pace wit h knowledge. It is not aft er t he lesson t hat enjoyment comes: learning and
enjoyment happen at t he same t ime."[88][87]

Epicurus dist inguishes bet ween t hree t ypes of desires: nat ural and necessary, nat ural but
unnecessary, and vain and empt y. Nat ural and necessary desires include t he desires for food and
shelt er. These are easy t o sat isfy, difficult t o eliminat e, bring pleasure when sat isfied, and are
nat urally limit ed. Going beyond t hese limit s produces unnecessary desires, such as t he desire for
luxury foods. Alt hough food is necessary, luxury food is not necessary. Correspondingly, Epicurus
advocat es a life of hedonist ic moderat ion by reducing desire, t hus eliminat ing t he unhappiness
caused by unfulfilled desires. Vain desires include desires for power, wealt h, and fame. These are
difficult t o sat isfy because no mat t er how much one get s, one can always want more. These
desires are inculcat ed by societ y and by false beliefs about what we need. They are not nat ural
and are t o be shunned.[89]

Epicurus' t eachings were int roduced int o medical philosophy and pract ice by t he Epicurean
doct or Asclepiades of Bit hynia, who was t he first physician who int roduced Greek medicine in
Rome. Asclepiades int roduced t he friendly, sympat het ic, pleasing and painless t reat ment of
pat ient s. He advocat ed humane t reat ment of ment al disorders, had insane persons freed from
confinement and t reat ed t hem wit h nat ural t herapy, such as diet and massages. His t eachings are
surprisingly modern; t herefore Asclepiades is considered t o be a pioneer physician in
psychot herapy, physical t herapy and molecular medicine.[90]

Physics

Epicurus writ es in his Letter to Herodotus (not t he hist orian)[91] t hat "not hing ever arises from t he
nonexist ent ", indicat ing t hat all event s t herefore have causes, regardless of whet her t hose
causes are known or unknown.[92] Similarly, he also writ es t hat not hing ever passes away int o
not hingness, because, "if an object t hat passes from our view were complet ely annihilat ed,
everyt hing in t he world would have perished, since t hat int o which t hings were dissipat ed would
be nonexist ent ."[93] He t herefore st at es: "The t ot alit y of t hings was always just as it is at present
and will always remain t he same because t here is not hing int o which it can change, inasmuch as
t here is not hing out side t he t ot alit y t hat could int rude and effect change."[93] Like Democrit us
before him, Epicurus t aught t hat all mat t er is ent irely made of ext remely t iny part icles called
"at oms" (Greek: ἄτομος; atomos, meaning "indivisible").[94] For Epicurus and his followers, t he
exist ence of at oms was a mat t er of empirical observat ion;[95] Epicurus's devot ed follower, t he
Roman poet Lucret ius, cit es t he gradual wearing down of rings from being worn, st at ues from
being kissed, st ones from being dripped on by wat er, and roads from being walked on in On the
Nature of Things as evidence for t he exist ence of at oms as t iny, impercept ible part icles.[95]

Also like Democrit us, Epicurus was a mat erialist who t aught t hat t he only t hings t hat exist are
at oms and void.[96][11] Void occurs in any place where t here are no at oms.[97] Epicurus and his
followers believed t hat at oms and void are bot h infinit e and t hat t he universe is t herefore
boundless.[98] In On the Nature of Things, Lucret ius argues t his point using t he example of a man
t hrowing a javelin at t he t heoret ical boundary of a finit e universe.[99] He st at es t hat t he javelin
must eit her go past t he edge of t he universe, in which case it is not really a boundary, or it must
be blocked by somet hing and prevent ed from cont inuing it s pat h, but , if t hat happens, t hen t he
object blocking it must be out side t he confines of t he universe.[99] As a result of t his belief t hat
t he universe and t he number of at oms in it are infinit e, Epicurus and t he Epicureans believed t hat
t here must also be infinit ely many worlds wit hin t he universe.[100]

Epicurus t aught t hat t he mot ion of at oms is const ant , et ernal, and wit hout beginning or end.[101]
He held t hat t here are t wo kinds of mot ion: t he mot ion of at oms and t he mot ion of visible
object s.[101] Bot h kinds of mot ion are real and not illusory.[102] Democrit us had described at oms
as not only et ernally moving, but also et ernally flying t hrough space, colliding, coalescing, and
separat ing from each ot her as necessary.[103] In a rare depart ure from Democrit us's physics,
Epicurus posit ed t he idea of at omic "swerve" (παρέγκλισις parénklisis; Lat in: clinamen), one of
his best -known original ideas.[104][a] According t o t his idea, at oms, as t hey are t ravelling t hrough
space, may deviat e slight ly from t he course t hey would ordinarily be expect ed t o follow.[104]
Epicurus's reason for int roducing t his doct rine was because he want ed t o preserve t he concept s
of free will and et hical responsibilit y while st ill maint aining t he det erminist ic physical model of
at omism.[105] Lucret ius describes it , saying, "It is t his slight deviat ion of primal bodies, at
indet erminat e t imes and places, which keeps t he mind as such from experiencing an inner
compulsion in doing everyt hing it does and from being forced t o endure and suffer like a capt ive
in chains."[106]

Epicurus was first t o assert human freedom as a result of t he fundament al indet erminism in t he
mot ion of at oms. This has led some philosophers t o t hink t hat , for Epicurus, free will was caused
directly by chance. In his On the Nature of Things, Lucret ius appears t o suggest t his in t he best -
known passage on Epicurus' posit ion.[107] In his Letter to Menoeceus, however, Epicurus follows
Arist ot le and clearly ident ifies three possible causes: "some t hings happen of necessit y, ot hers
by chance, ot hers t hrough our own agency." Arist ot le said some t hings "depend on us"
(eph'hemin). Epicurus agreed, and said it is t o t hese last t hings t hat praise and blame nat urally
at t ach. For Epicurus, t he "swerve" of t he at oms simply defeat ed det erminism t o leave room for
aut onomous agency.[108]

Theology

First-century AD Roman fresco from Pompeii, showing the mythical human sacrifice of Iphigenia, daughter of Agamemnon.
Epicurus's devoted follower, the Roman poet Lucretius, cited this myth as an example of the evils of popular religion, in
contrast to the more wholesome theology advocated by Epicurus.[109]

In his Letter to Menoeceus, a summary of his own moral and t heological t eachings, t he first piece
of advice Epicurus himself gives t o his st udent is: "First , believe t hat a god is an indest ruct ible
and blessed animal, in accordance wit h t he general concept ion of god commonly held, and do not
ascribe t o god anyt hing foreign t o his indest ruct ibilit y or repugnant t o his blessedness."[110]
Epicurus maint ained t hat he and his followers knew t hat t he gods exist because "our knowledge
of t hem is a mat t er of clear and dist inct percept ion", meaning t hat people can empirically sense
t heir presences.[111] He did not mean t hat people can see t he gods as physical object s, but
rat her t hat t hey can see visions of t he gods sent from t he remot e regions of int erst ellar space
in which t hey act ually reside.[111] According t o George K. St rodach, Epicurus could have easily
dispensed of t he gods ent irely wit hout great ly alt ering his mat erialist worldview,[111] but t he
gods st ill play one import ant funct ion in Epicurus's t heology as t he paragons of moral virt ue t o
be emulat ed and admired.[111]

Epicurus reject ed t he convent ional Greek view of t he gods as ant hropomorphic beings who
walked t he eart h like ordinary people, fat hered illegit imat e offspring wit h mort als, and pursued
personal feuds.[111] Inst ead, he t aught t hat t he gods are morally perfect , but det ached and
immobile beings who live in t he remot e regions of int erst ellar space.[112] In line wit h t hese
t eachings, Epicurus adamant ly reject ed t he idea t hat deit ies were involved in human affairs in any
way.[110][113] Epicurus maint ained t hat t he gods are so ut t erly perfect and removed from t he
world t hat t hey are incapable of list ening t o prayers or supplicat ions or doing virt ually anyt hing
aside from cont emplat ing t heir own perfect ions.[112] In his Letter to Herodotus, he specifically
denies t hat t he gods have any cont rol over nat ural phenomena, arguing t hat t his would cont radict
t heir fundament al nat ure, which is perfect , because any kind of worldly involvement would t arnish
t heir perfect ion.[113] He furt her warned t hat believing t hat t he gods cont rol nat ural phenomena
would only mislead people int o believing t he superst it ious view t hat t he gods punish humans for
wrongdoing, which only inst ills fear and prevent s people from at t aining ataraxia.[113]

Epicurus himself crit icizes popular religion in bot h his Letter to Menoeceus and his Letter to
Herodotus, but in a rest rained and moderat e t one.[114] Lat er Epicureans mainly followed t he same
ideas as Epicurus, believing in t he exist ence of t he gods, but emphat ically reject ing t he idea of
divine providence.[110] Their crit icisms of popular religion, however, are oft en less gent le t han
t hose of Epicurus himself.[115] The Letter to Pythocles, writ t en by a lat er Epicurean, is dismissive
and cont empt uous t owards popular religion[115] and Epicurus's devot ed follower, t he Roman poet
Lucret ius (c. 99 BC – c. 55 BC), passionat ely assailed popular religion in his philosophical poem On
the Nature of Things.[115] In t his poem, Lucret ius declares t hat popular religious pract ices not only
do not inst ill virt ue, but rat her result in "misdeeds bot h wicked and ungodly", cit ing t he myt hical
sacrifice of Iphigenia as an example.[109] Lucret ius argues t hat divine creat ion and providence are
illogical, not because t he gods do not exist , but rat her because t hese not ions are incompat ible
wit h t he Epicurean principles of t he gods' indest ruct ibilit y and blessedness.[116][117] The lat er
Pyrrhonist philosopher Sext us Empiricus (c. 160 – c. 210 AD) reject ed t he t eachings of t he
Epicureans specifically because he regarded t hem as t heological "Dogmat icist s".[118]

Epicurean paradox
The most famous version of the problem of evil is attributed to Epicurus by David Hume (pictured), who was relying on an
attribution of it to him by the Christian apologist Lactantius. The trilemma does not occur in any of Epicurus's extant
writings, however. If Epicurus did write some version of it, it would have been an argument against divine providence, not
the existence of deities.[119]

The Epicurean paradox or riddle of Epicurus or Epicurus' trilemma is a version of t he problem

of evil. Lact ant ius at t ribut es t his t rilemma t o Epicurus in De Ira Dei, 13, 20-21:

God, he says, either wishes to take away evils, and is unable; or He is

able, and is unwilling; or He is neither willing nor able, or He is both
willing and able. If He is willing and is unable, He is feeble, which is not
in accordance with the character of God; if He is able and unwilling, He
is envious, which is equally at variance with God; if He is neither
willing nor able, He is both envious and feeble, and therefore not God;
if He is both willing and able, which alone is suitable to God, from what
source then are evils? Or why does He not remove them?

In Dialogues concerning Natural Religion (1779), David Hume also at t ribut es t he argument t o
Epicurus:

Epicurus’s old questions are yet unanswered. Is he willing to prevent

evil, but not able? then is he impotent. Is he able, but not willing? then
is he malevolent. Is he both able and willing? whence then is evil?
No ext ant writ ings of Epicurus cont ain t his argument .[119] However, t he vast majorit y of
Epicurus's writ ings have been lost and it is possible t hat some form of t his argument may have
been found in his lost t reat ise On the Gods, which Diogenes Laërt ius describes as one of his
great est works.[119] If Epicurus really did make some form of t his argument , it would not have
been an argument against t he exist ence of deit ies, but rat her an argument against divine
providence.[119] Epicurus's ext ant writ ings demonst rat e t hat he did believe in t he exist ence of
deit ies.[110] Furt hermore, religion was such an int egral part of daily life in Greece during t he early
Hellenist ic Period t hat it is doubt ful anyone during t hat period could have been an at heist in t he
modern sense of t he word.[110] Inst ead, t he Greek word ἄθεος (átheos), meaning "wit hout a god",
was used as a t erm of abuse, not as an at t empt t o describe a person's beliefs.[110]

Politics

Epicurus promot ed an innovat ive t heory of just ice as a social cont ract . Just ice, Epicurus said, is
an agreement neit her t o harm nor be harmed, and we need t o have such a cont ract in order t o
enjoy fully t he benefit s of living t oget her in a well-ordered societ y. Laws and punishment s are
needed t o keep misguided fools in line who would ot herwise break t he cont ract . But t he wise
person sees t he usefulness of just ice, and because of his limit ed desires, he has no need t o
engage in t he conduct prohibit ed by t he laws in any case. Laws t hat are useful for promot ing
happiness are just , but t hose t hat are not useful are not just . (Principal Doctrines 31–40)

Epicurus discouraged part icipat ion in polit ics, as doing so leads t o pert urbat ion and st at us
seeking. He inst ead advocat ed not drawing at t ent ion t o oneself. This principle is epit omised by
t he phrase lathe biōsas (λάθε βιώσας), meaning "live in obscurit y", "get t hrough life wit hout
drawing at t ent ion t o yourself", i.e., live wit hout pursuing glory or wealt h or power, but
anonymously, enjoying lit t le t hings like food, t he company of friends, et c. Plut arch elaborat ed on
t his t heme in his essay Is the Saying "Live in Obscurity" Right? (Εἰ καλῶς εἴρηται τὸ λάθε
βιώσας, An recte dictum sit latenter esse vivendum) 1128c; cf. Flavius Philost rat us, Vita Apollonii
8.28.12.[120]

Works
Epicurus, in the Nuremberg Chronicle

Epicurus was an ext remely prolific writ er.[121][119][64][68] According t o Diogenes Laërt ius, he wrot e
around 300 t reat ises on a variet y of subject s.[119][64] More original writ ings of Epicurus have
survived t o t he present day t han of any ot her Hellenist ic Greek philosopher.[68] Nonet heless, t he
vast majorit y of everyt hing he wrot e has now been lost [121][119][64] and most of what is known
about Epicurus's t eachings come from t he writ ings of his lat er followers, part icularly t he Roman
poet Lucret ius.[64] The only surviving complet e works by Epicurus are t hree relat ively lengt hy
let t ers, which are quot ed in t heir ent iret y in Book X of Diogenes Laërt ius's Lives and Opinions of
Eminent Philosophers, and t wo groups of quot es: t he Principal Doctrines (Κύριαι Δόξαι), which
are likewise preserved t hrough quot at ion by Diogenes Laërt ius, and t he Vatican Sayings,
preserved in a manuscript from t he Vat ican Library t hat was first discovered in 1888.[64] In t he
Letter to Herodotus and t he Letter to Pythocles, Epicurus summarizes his philosophy on nat ure and,
in t he Letter to Menoeceus, he summarizes his moral t eachings.[64] Numerous fragment s of
Epicurus's lost t hirt y-seven volume t reat ise On Nature have been found among t he charred
papyrus fragment s at t he Villa of t he Papyri at Herculaneum.[64][68] Scholars first began
at t empt ing t o unravel and decipher t hese scrolls in 1800, but t he effort s are painst aking and are
st ill ongoing.[64]

According t o Diogenes Laert ius (10.27-9), t he major works of Epicurus include:

1. On Nature, in 37 books 2. On Atoms and the Void

 3. On Love 24. Essay on Touch

4. Abridgment of the Arguments employed 25. Essay on Fate

against the Natural Philosophers
26. Opinions on the Passions
5. Against the Megarians
27. Treatise addressed to Timocrates
6. Problems
28. Prognostics
7. Fundamental Propositions (Kyriai Doxai)
29. Exhortations
8. On Choice and Avoidance
30. On Images
9. On the Chief Good
31. On Perceptions
10. On the Criterion (the Canon)
32. Aristobulus
11. Chaeridemus,
33. Essay on Music (i.e., on music, poetry, and
12. On the Gods dance)

13. On Piety 34. On Justice and the other Virtues

14. Hegesianax 35. On Gifts and Gratitude

15. Four essays on Lives 36. Polymedes

16. Essay on Just Dealing 37. Timocrates (three books)

17. Neocles 38. Metrodorus (five books)

18. Essay addressed to Themista 39. Antidorus (two books)

19. The Banquet (Symposium) 40. Opinions about Diseases and Death,
addressed to Mithras
20. Eurylochus
41. Callistolas
21. Essay addressed to Metrodorus
42. Essay on Kingly Power
22. Essay on Seeing
43. Anaximenes
23. Essay on the Angle in an Atom
44. Letters

Legacy

Ancient Epicureanism
Bust of Epicurus leaning against his disciple Metrodorus in the Louvre Museum

Epicureanism was ext remely popular from t he very beginning.[122][123][124] Diogenes Laërt ius
records t hat t he number of Epicureans t hroughout t he world exceeded t he populat ions of ent ire
cit ies.[124] Nonet heless, Epicurus was not universally admired and, wit hin his own lifet ime, he was
vilified as an ignorant buffoon and egoist ic sybarit e.[66][125] He remained t he most simult aneously
admired and despised philosopher in t he Medit erranean for t he next nearly five cent uries.[125]
Epicureanism rapidly spread beyond t he Greek mainland all across t he Medit erranean world.[122]
By t he first cent ury BC, it had est ablished a st rong foot hold in It aly.[122] The Roman orat or Cicero
(106 – 43 BC), who deplored Epicurean et hics, lament ed, "t he Epicureans have t aken It aly by
st orm."[122]

The overwhelming majorit y of surviving Greek and Roman sources are vehement ly negat ive
t owards Epicureanism[126] and, according t o Pamela Gordon, t hey rout inely depict Epicurus
himself as "monst rous or laughable".[126] Many Romans in part icular t ook a negat ive view of
Epicureanism, seeing it s advocacy of t he pursuit of voluptas ("pleasure") as cont rary t o t he
Roman ideal of virtus ("manly virt ue").[127] The Romans t herefore oft en st ereot yped Epicurus and
his followers as weak and effeminat e.[128] Prominent crit ics of his philosophy include prominent
aut hors such as t he Roman St oic Seneca t he Younger (c. 4 BC – AD 65) and t he Greek Middle
Plat onist Plut arch (c. 46 – c. 120), who bot h derided t hese st ereot ypes as immoral and
disreput able.[124] Gordon charact erizes ant i-Epicurean rhet oric as so "heavy-handed" and
misrepresent at ive of Epicurus's act ual t eachings t hat t hey somet imes come across as
"comical".[129] In his De vita beata, Seneca st at es t hat t he "sect of Epicurus... has a bad reput at ion,
and yet it does not deserve it ." and compares it t o "a man in a dress: your chast it y remains, your
virilit y is unimpaired, your body has not submit t ed sexually, but in your hand is a t ympanum."[130]

Epicureanism was a not oriously conservat ive philosophical school;[6][18][19] alt hough Epicurus's
lat er followers did expand on his philosophy, t hey dogmat ically ret ained what he himself had
originally t aught wit hout modifying it .[6][18][19] Epicureans and admirers of Epicureanism revered
Epicurus himself as a great t eacher of et hics, a savior, and even a god.[131] His image was worn on
finger rings, port rait s of him were displayed in living rooms, and wealt hy followers venerat ed
likenesses of him in marble sculpt ure.[132] His admirers revered his sayings as divine oracles,
carried around copies of his writ ings, and cherished copies of his let t ers like t he let t ers of an
apost le.[132] On t he t went iet h day of every mont h, admirers of his t eachings would perform a
solemn rit ual t o honor his memory.[123] At t he same t ime, opponent s of his t eachings denounced
him wit h vehemence and persist ence.[123]

However, in t he first and second cent uries AD, Epicureanism gradually began t o decline as it
failed t o compet e wit h St oicism, which had an et hical syst em more in line wit h t radit ional Roman
values.[133] Epicureanism also suffered decay in t he wake of Christ ianit y, which was also rapidly
expanding t hroughout t he Roman Empire.[134] Of all t he Greek philosophical schools, Epicureanism
was t he one most at odds wit h t he new Christ ian t eachings, since Epicureans believed t hat t he
soul was mort al, denied t he exist ence of an aft erlife, denied t hat t he divine had any act ive role in
human life, and advocat ed pleasure as t he foremost goal of human exist ence.[134] As such,
Christ ian writ ers such as Just in Mart yr (c. 100–c. 165 AD), At henagoras of At hens (c. 133–c.
190), Tert ullian (c. 155–c. 240), and Clement of Alexandria (c. 150–c. 215), Arnobius (died c. 330),
and Lact ant ius (c. 250-c.325) all singled it out for t he most vit riolic crit icism.[134]

In spit e of t his, DeWit t argues t hat Epicureanism and Christ ianit y share much common language,
calling Epicureanism "t he first missionary philosophy" and "t he first world philosophy".[135] Bot h
Epicureanism and Christ ianit y placed st rong emphasis on t he import ance of love and
forgiveness[136] and early Christ ian port rayals of Jesus are oft en similar t o Epicurean port rayals
of Epicurus.[136] DeWit t argues t hat Epicureanism, in many ways, helped pave t he way for t he
spread of Christ ianit y by "helping t o bridge t he gap bet ween Greek int ellect ualism and a religious
way of life" and "shunt [ing] t he emphasis from t he polit ical t o t he social virt ues and offer[ing]
what may be called a religion of humanit y."[137]

Middle Ages
Dante Alighieri meets Epicurus in his Inferno in the Sixth Circle of Hell, where he and his followers are imprisoned in flaming
coffins for having believed that the soul dies with the body,[134] shown here in an illustration by Gustave Doré.

By t he early fift h cent ury AD, Epicureanism was virt ually ext inct .[134] The Christ ian Church Fat her
August ine of Hippo (354–430 AD) declared, "it s ashes are so cold t hat not a single spark can be
st ruck from t hem."[134] While t he ideas of Plat o and Arist ot le could easily be adapt ed t o suit a
Christ ian worldview, t he ideas of Epicurus were not nearly as easily amenable.[134] As such, while
Plat o and Arist ot le enjoyed a privileged place in Christ ian philosophy t hroughout t he Middle Ages,
Epicurus was not held in such est eem.[134] Informat ion about Epicurus's t eachings was available,
t hrough Lucret ius's On the Nature of Things, quot at ions of it found in medieval Lat in grammars
and florilegia, and encyclopedias, such as Isidore of Seville's Etymologiae (sevent h cent ury) and
Hrabanus Maurus's De universo (nint h cent ury),[134] but t here is lit t le evidence t hat t hese
t eachings were syst emat ically st udied or comprehended.[134]

During t he Middle Ages, Epicurus was remembered by t he educat ed as a philosopher,[134] but he

frequent ly appeared in popular cult ure as a gat ekeeper t o t he Garden of Delight s, t he "propriet or
of t he kit chen, t he t avern, and t he brot hel."[134] He appears in t his guise in Mart ianus Capella's
Marriage of Mercury and Philology (fift h cent ury), John of Salisbury's Policraticus (1159), John
Gower's Mirour de l'Omme, and Geoffrey Chaucer's Canterbury Tales.[134] Epicurus and his
followers appear in Dant e Alighieri's Inferno in t he Sixt h Circle of Hell, where t hey are imprisoned
in flaming coffins for having believed t hat t he soul dies wit h t he body.[134]

Renaissance
Epicurus is shown among other famous philosophers in the Italian Renaissance painter Raphael's School of Athens
(1509–1511).[138] Epicurus's genuine busts were unknown prior to 1742, so early modern artists who wanted to depict him
were forced to make up their own iconographies.[139]

In 1417, a manuscript -hunt er named Poggio Bracciolini discovered a copy of Lucret ius's On the
Nature of Things in a monast ery near Lake Const ance.[134] The discovery of t his manuscript was
met wit h immense excit ement , because scholars were eager t o analyze and st udy t he t eachings
of classical philosophers and t his previously-forgot t en t ext cont ained t he most comprehensive
account of Epicurus's t eachings known in Lat in.[134] The first scholarly dissert at ion on Epicurus,
De voluptate (On Pleasure) by t he It alian Humanist and Cat holic priest Lorenzo Valla was
published in 1431.[134] Valla made no ment ion of Lucret ius or his poem.[134] Inst ead, he present ed
t he t reat ise as a discussion on t he nat ure of t he highest good bet ween an Epicurean, a St oic, and
a Christ ian.[134] Valla's dialogue ult imat ely reject s Epicureanism,[134] but , by present ing an
Epicurean as a member of t he disput e, Valla lent Epicureanism credibilit y as a philosophy t hat
deserved t o be t aken seriously.[134]

None of t he Quat t rocent o Humanist s ever clearly endorsed Epicureanism,[134] but scholars such
as Francesco Zabarella (1360–1417), Francesco Filelfo (1398–1481), Crist oforo Landino (1424–
1498), and Leonardo Bruni (c. 1370–1444) did give Epicureanism a fairer analysis t han it had
t radit ionally received and provided a less overt ly host ile assessment of Epicurus himself.[134]
Nonet heless, "Epicureanism" remained a pejorat ive, synonymous wit h ext reme egoist ic pleasure-
seeking, rat her t han a name of a philosophical school.[134] This reput at ion discouraged ort hodox
Christ ian scholars from t aking what ot hers might regard as an inappropriat ely keen int erest in
Epicurean t eachings.[134] Epicureanism did not t ake hold in It aly, France, or England unt il t he
sevent eent h cent ury.[140] Even t he liberal religious skept ics who might have been expect ed t o
t ake an int erest in Epicureanism evident ly did not ;[140] Ét ienne Dolet (1509–1546) only ment ions
Epicurus once in all his writ ings and François Rabelais (bet ween 1483 and 1494–1553) never
ment ions him at all.[141] Michel de Mont aigne (1533–1592) is t he except ion t o t his t rend, quot ing
a full 450 lines of Lucret ius's On the Nature of Things in his Essays.[141] His int erest in Lucret ius,
however, seems t o have been primarily lit erary and he is ambiguous about his feelings on
Lucret ius's Epicurean worldview.[141] During t he Prot est ant Reformat ion, t he label "Epicurean"
was bandied back and fort h as an insult bet ween Prot est ant s and Cat holics.[141]

Revival

The French priest and philosopher Pierre Gassendi is responsible for reviving Epicureanism in modernity as an alternative
to Aristotelianism.[141]

In t he sevent eent h cent ury, t he French Cat holic priest and scholar Pierre Gassendi (1592–1655)
sought t o dislodge Arist ot elianism from it s posit ion of t he highest dogma by present ing
Epicureanism as a bet t er and more rat ional alt ernat ive.[141] In 1647, Gassendi published his book
De vita et moribus Epicuri (The Life and Morals of Epicurus), a passionat e defense of
Epicureanism.[141] In 1649, he published a comment ary on Diogenes Laërt ius's Life of Epicurus.[141]
He left Syntagma philosophicum (Philosophical Compendium), a synt hesis of Epicurean
doct rines, unfinished at t he t ime of his deat h in 1655.[141] It was finally published in 1658, aft er
undergoing revision by his edit ors.[141] Gassendi modified Epicurus's t eachings t o make t hem
palat able for a Christ ian audience.[141] For inst ance, he argued t hat at oms were not et ernal,
uncreat ed, and infinit e in number, inst ead cont ending t hat an ext remely large but finit e number of
at oms were creat ed by God at creat ion.[141]

As a result of Gassendi's modificat ions, his books were never censored by t he Cat holic
Church.[141] They came t o exert profound influence on lat er writ ings about Epicurus.[141]
Gassendi's version of Epicurus's t eachings became popular among some members of English
scient ific circles.[141] For t hese scholars, however, Epicurean at omism was merely a st art ing point
for t heir own idiosyncrat ic adapt at ions of it .[141] To ort hodox t hinkers, Epicureanism was st ill
regarded as immoral and heret ical.[141] For inst ance, Lucy Hut chinson (1620–1681), t he first
t ranslat or of Lucret ius's On the Nature of Things int o English, railed against Epicurus as "a lunat ic
dog" who formulat ed "ridiculous, impious, execrable doct rines".[141]

Epicurus's t eachings were made respect able in England by t he nat ural philosopher Walt er
Charlet on (1619–1707), whose first Epicurean work, The Darkness of Atheism Dispelled by the
Light of Nature (1652), advanced Epicureanism as a "new" at omism.[141] His next work Physiologia
Epicuro-Gassendo-Charletoniana, or a Fabrick of Science Natural, upon a Hypothesis of Atoms,
Founded by Epicurus, Repaired by Petrus Gassendus, and Augmented by Walter Charleton (1654)
emphasized t his idea.[141] These works, t oget her wit h Charlet on's Epicurus's Morals (1658),
provided t he English public wit h readily available descript ions of Epicurus's philosophy and
assured ort hodox Christ ians t hat Epicureanism was no t hreat t o t heir beliefs.[141] The Royal
Societ y, chart ered in 1662, advanced Epicurean at omism.[142] One of t he most prolific defenders
of at omism was t he chemist Robert Boyle (1627–1691), who argued for it in publicat ions such as
The Origins of Forms and Qualities (1666), Experiments, Notes, etc. about the Mechanical Origin
and Production of Divers Particular Qualities (1675), and Of the Excellency and Grounds of the
Mechanical Hypothesis (1674).[142] By t he end of t he sevent eent h cent ury, Epicurean at omism
was widely accept ed by members of t he English scient ific communit y as t he best model for
explaining t he physical world,[143] but it had been modified so great ly t hat Epicurus was no longer
seen as it s original parent .[143]

Enlightenment and after

The Anglican bishop Joseph But ler's ant i-Epicurean polemics in his Fifteen Sermons Preached at
the Rolls Chapel (1726) and Analogy of Religion (1736) set t he t une for what most ort hodox
Christ ians believed about Epicureanism for t he remainder of t he eight eent h and ninet eent h
cent uries.[143] Nonet heless, t here are a few indicat ions from t his t ime period of Epicurus's
improving reput at ion.[143] Epicureanism was beginning t o lose it s associat ions wit h indiscriminat e
and insat iable glut t ony, which had been charact erist ic of it s reput at ion ever since ant iquit y.[143]
Inst ead, t he word "epicure" began t o refer t o a person wit h ext remely refined t ast e in
food.[143][144] Examples of t his usage include "Epicurean cooks / sharpen wit h cloyless sauce his
appet it e" from William Shakespeare's Antony and Cleopatra (Act II. scene i; c. 1607)[144] and "such
an epicure was Pot iphar—t o please his t oot h and pamper his flesh wit h delicacies" from William
What ely's Prototypes (1646).[143]

Around t he same t ime, t he Epicurean injunct ion t o "live in obscurit y" was beginning t o gain
popularit y as well.[143] In 1685, Sir William Temple (1628–1699) abandoned a promising career as
a diplomat and inst ead ret ired t o his garden, devot ing himself t o writ ing essays on Epicurus's
moral t eachings.[143] That same year, John Dryden t ranslat ed t he celebrat ed lines from Book II of
Lucret ius's On the Nature of Things: "'Tis pleasant , safely t o behold from shore / The rowling ship,
and hear t he Tempest roar."[143] Meanwhile, John Locke (1632–1704) adapt ed Gassendi's
modified version of Epicurus's epist emology, which became highly influent ial on English
empiricism.[143] Many t hinkers wit h sympat hies t owards t he Enlight enment endorsed
Epicureanism as an admirable moral philosophy.[143] Thomas Jefferson (1743–1826), one of t he
Founding Fat hers of t he Unit ed St at es, declared in 1819, "I t oo am an Epicurean. I consider t he
genuine (not imput ed) doct rines of Epicurus as cont aining everyt hing rat ional in moral philosophy
which Greece and Rome have left us."[143]

The German philosopher Karl Marx (1818–1883), whose ideas are t he basis of Marxism, was
profoundly influenced as a young man by t he t eachings of Epicurus[145][146] and his doct oral
t hesis was a Hegelian dialect ical analysis of t he differences bet ween t he nat ural philosophies of
Democrit us and Epicurus.[147] Marx viewed Democrit us as a rat ionalist skept ic, whose
epist emology was inherent ly cont radict ory, but saw Epicurus as a dogmat ic empiricist , whose
worldview is int ernally consist ent and pract ically applicable.[148] The Brit ish poet Alfred
Tennyson (1809–1892) praised "t he sober majest ies / of set t led, sweet , Epicurean life" in his
1868 poem "Lucret ius".[143] Epicurus's et hical t eachings also had an indirect impact on t he
philosophy of Ut ilit arianism in England during t he ninet eent h cent ury.[143] Soviet polit ician Joseph
St alin (1878–1953) lauded Epicurus by st at ing: "He was t he great est philosopher of all t ime. He
was t he one who recommended pract icing virt ue t o derive t he great est joy from life".[149]
Friedrich Niet zsche once not ed: "Even t oday many educat ed people t hink t hat t he vict ory of
Christ ianit y over Greek philosophy is a proof of t he superior t rut h of t he former – alt hough in t his
case it was only t he coarser and more violent t hat conquered t he more spirit ual and delicat e. So
far as superior t rut h is concerned, it is enough t o observe t hat t he awakening sciences have
allied t hemselves point by point wit h t he philosophy of Epicurus, but point by point reject ed
Christ ianit y."[150]

Academic int erest in Epicurus and ot her Hellenist ic philosophers increased over t he course of
t he lat e t went iet h and early t went y-first cent uries, wit h an unprecedent ed number of
monographs, art icles, abst ract s, and conference papers being published on t he subject .[143] The
t ext s from t he library of Philodemus of Gadara in t he Villa of t he Papyri in Herculaneum, first
discovered bet ween 1750 and 1765, are being deciphered, t ranslat ed, and published by scholars
part of t he Philodemus Translat ion Project , funded by t he Unit ed St at es Nat ional Endowment
for t he Humanit ies, and part of t he Cent ro per lo St udio dei Papiri Ercolanesi in Naples.[143]
Epicurus's popular appeal among non-scholars is difficult t o gauge,[143] but it seems t o be
relat ively comparable t o t he appeal of more t radit ionally popular ancient Greek philosophical
subject s such as St oicism, Arist ot le, and Plat o.[151]

See also

Eikas

Epikoros

Philosophy of happiness

Separat ion of church and st at e

Notes

a. The only fragment in Greek about this central notion is from the Oenoanda inscription (fr. 54 in Smith's
edition). The best known reference is in Lucretius's On the Nature of Things, 2.251 (https://www.perseu
s.tufts.edu/hopper/text?docLucr.+) .

References

1. Bunnin & Yu (2004). The Blackwell Dictionary 2. Jones, Daniel (2006). Cambridge English
of Western Philosophy. Oxford: Blackwell Pronouncing Dictionary. 17th edition.
Publishing. Cambridge UP.