Letters and Sayings of Epicurus

I just finished my first read-through of a the Letters and Sayings of Epicurus (Amaxon; Barnes and Noble), as translated by Jean Makridis. It's quite an enjoyable read, especially as it is clear that the Greeks were starting to work their way towards a scientific conception of the world. They aren't quite there yet, as they're relying heavily on "thought-experiments" rather than actual observations, but Epicurus comes close. He even gets some stuff almost right, surprisingly close to right for the time period. I'll try to give a brief run-down by section.

Letter to Herodotus
This seems to be a primer of the minimum that students should know by rote. First is a summary of current beliefs/knowledge of the structure and origin of the universe. "Nothing comes into existence from what does not exist." Later Epicurus uses this to argue that the universe must be infinitely old. "[T]he building blocks of bodily natures are the atoms or indivisibles." He argues to these by reason, that if matter could be infinitely subdivided, it would have done so in the infinite time span of the universe and there would be no substance left to comprise the world.

He goes through quite a lot relating to the ways we perceive the world, then comes very close to one of Newton's Laws: "[T]he atoms move with equal velocities when they move through empty space because nothing collides with them there to block and retard their motion. And the heavier things will not move any more quickly than the smaller and hollow ones whenever there is nothing to meet them in their paths. Likewise, the small things will not move more slowly than the large ones ..." Some of his reasoning is just a touch off, but he has the basic idea that, lacking interference, objects will move at the same rate independent of size.

Epicurus also maintains that the soul is the source of the ability for all varieties of sense perception, even if the body itself is required for said abilities to function. He believed, also, that the soul perished with the body. He equates the idea of an incorporeal soul to empty space, which, he argues, "cannot make anything happen and cannot itself be affected by anything in any way. ... So those who say that the soul is incorporeal are speaking in vain."

Another point of interest: he believes that the words used to describe things were not chosen randomly, but developed from perceived properties of objects which had some association with a particular sound. The only detail I remember from something I read discussing language origins was that the vast majority of languages have a word for mother that starts with "m", possibly because this is the easiest sound for a newborn to generate, and so that sound would become associated with mothers.

The rest mainly discusses "meteorological phenomenon", which includes weather, lightning, meteors, eclipses, phases of the moon... pretty much anything that happens in the sky. In his discussion of methods, he verges on the scientific method: "take an all-around survey of the many ways in which the same phenomenon [is observed to] take place." He has the first step, at least: gather data. In his Letter to Pythocles, he also admonishes against favoring one interpretation over another when both are equally supported by the evidence. What he lacks is the idea of testing the validity of these ideas by any means other than theorizing.

Letter to Pythocles
This letter is a deeper discussion of the "meteorological phenomenon." This is simply a fascinating read. I won't go into a lot of detail, because it needs to be read in its entirety to be appreciated, but here are some interesting bits: Volcanoes erupt and earthquakes happen when "winds become confined within the earth." Though with earthquakes he adds, "also because small masses of earth, which are situated adjacent to each other, move constantly." Ice is produced when "the rounded configuration is squeezed out of the water-mass" and triangular particles in the water "happen to converge". Comets occur when "flames gather and are nourished together in one place."

Letter to Meneoceus
I probably enjoyed this one the most, as it is a discussion of Epicurus's views on philosophy. The entirety is well-summed up in this short paragraph:

It is indeed imperative to attend to all those things that produce well-being and happiness. For, when happiness is ours, we have everything; and, when happiness is absent, we do everything to acquire it.

Epicureanism is often oversimplified to pursuit of pleasure, but it stresses moderation. Note the emphasis on "well-being." Pursuit of unhealthy pleasure will not result in well-being, so there's a built-in safeguard.

I also rather like his views on the Divine:

[T]he divine is a living entity which is indestructible and blessed*—a view that is indeed underwritten even by the commonly held view of the divine.
And never attach to the divine nature any [characteristics] which are incompatible with indestructibility or are not akin to blessedness.
...
And [don't think that it is] impious to reject the gods of the many. What is impious is to adhere to and internalize the common beliefs about the gods.

*He uses the same words to describe heavenly bodies, like the sun and the stars.

As far as death, since Epicurus believes that the soul perishes with the body, his emphasis is on living this life to the fullest and not worrying about death. "So, death exists neither for those who are alive nor for those who have died: because it is not an actual present thing for the former and the latter do not exist themselves." Recently, and I didn't bookmark the page, I came across a critique of Epicureanism that suggested this near indifference toward death was the primary reason that Epicureanism did not really catch on: people wanted reassurance rather than rationality.

The largest discussion concerns pleasure and pain. Short version: pursue the former and avoid the latter. When it's shortened this far, critics have a tendency to equate Epicureanism with hedonism, but it's nothing like that. It's pleasure as in 'that which leads to an enjoyable life.' The translation uses "pleasant" rather than "enjoyable," but I think enjoyable fits the spirit of the passage better. Binge-drinking, for instance, produces pain as well as pleasure, and thus is to be avoided. And this passage sums of that idea:

Prudence teaches that it is impossible to live pleasantly without leading a life of moderation, honorable civility, and justice; and that it is impossible to live such a life without living pleasantly.

Principle Doctrines: Diogenes Laertius X
Roughly the first half is a summary of what was in the Letter to Meneoceus, then there's a detailed discussion of the Epicurean notion of justice. I'll just share one passage: "Injustice is not a moral evil in itself: what is bad about injustice consists in the wearying apprehension that one might fail to escape detection by those who mete out punishments."

The rest of the book consists of short fragments. The first section are those that have been attributed to Epicurus, not necessarily with certainty, and the second section consists of comments made by other philosophers about Epicurus. Amusingly, he's called an atheist for not believing that the gods interfere with earthly matters.

I'd recommend this book to anyone interested in Greek philosophy, particularly Epicurean thought.