Epicurus on the Self (original) (raw)
Related papers
2014
Faculté des arts et des sciences Mémoire présenté à la Faculté des études supérieures en vue de l'obtention du grade de Maîtres ès arts (M.A.) en philosophie. Août 2013 © Fabian Garcia, 2013 Ultimately, as an exercise, it has helped see joy in the world and discover new friends. And this echoes even beyond the harshest critiques and my often estranged ambition. I thank Horst Hutter. From no one else have I better understood the healing value of philosophy. I am deeply thankful to him for offering me his guidance both as teacher and friend. I am also thankful to professor Richard Bodéüs for giving me the freedom to explore Hadot's ideas concerning the predominance of ethics in ancient philosophy. His work has certainly inspired my life and these pages. Finally, I thank my friends, my partner and my children for all the great chats and support and especially for being such great part of my day-today life, for allowing me to test over and over again the value of the things I learn and still be there with me.
INTRODUCTION TO EPICURUS' ETHICAL THEORY
Epicurus' Ethical Theory, 1988
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Epicurus and the Epicurean Tradition, 2011
In this chapter, I defend (once again) the view that the Epicurean gods are real, in the sense that they exist as atomic compounds and possess the properties that pertain to the concept, or prolêpsis, that people have of them. The contrary view-that the Epicurean gods have no objective existence, and that the notion of them is a consequence of 'psychological processes. .. within the human soul', 1 was proposed in the nineteenth century 2 and revived in the twentieth by Jean Bollack; 3 more recently, it has received support from Long and Sedley and Dirk Obbink, 4 and, most forcefully, in the chapter by David Sedley in this volume. The physical existence of the gods has been reasserted, in turn, by Jaap Mansfeld, Gabriele Giannantoni, Maria Carolina Santoro and Michael Wigodsky. 5 Given that Epicurus, in the Letter to Menoeceus (123-4), flatly declares that 'there are gods' (qeoª mn gr e«s©n), and that this dictum is echoed by all subsequent Epicureans who have pronounced on the matter, 6 I The original draft of this chapter was written independently of the contribution by David Sedley, as his was of mine; but I have benefited enormously from discussions with him, in which he generously shared his thoughts with me. In addition, David was kind enough to read and comment on a revised version of this paper. I wish to express my gratitude to all the members of the group, and especially to Michael Wigodsky and Holger Essler, for their acute observations; Holger too graciously commented on the revised version.
Moral Responsibility and Moral Development in Epicurus
ABSTRACT: 1. This paper argues that Epicurus had a notion of moral responsibility based on the agent’s causal responsibility, as opposed to the agent’s ability to act or choose otherwise; that Epicurus considered it a necessary condition for praising or blaming an agent for an action, that it was the agent and not something else that brought the action about. Thus, the central question of moral responsibility was whether the agent was the, or a, cause of the action, or whether the agent was forced to act by something else. Actions could be attributed to agents because it is in their actions that the agents, qua moral beings, manifest themselves. 2. As a result, the question of moral development becomes all important. The paper collects and discusses the evidence for Epicurus views on moral development, i.e. (i) on how humans become moral beings and (ii) on how humans can become morally better. It becomes clear that Epicurus envisaged a complex web of hereditary and environmental factors to shape the moral aspect of a human being. 3. In line with Epicurus’ theory of moral responsibility and moral development, Epicurus ethics does not have the function of developing or justifying a moral system that allows for the effective allocation of praise and blame. Rather, for him the function of ethics – and in fact of the whole of philosophy – is to give everyone a chance to morally improve.