Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 22

Thread: Epicureanism

  1. Top | #11
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Bronx, NY
    Posts
    4,066
    Archived
    945
    Total Posts
    5,011
    Rep Power
    36
    Quote Originally Posted by untermensche View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by steve_bank View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by untermensche View Post

    What nail was hit?



    The sadist takes pleasure in the pain of others.

    Do we also blindly say their pleasure is the "chief good in life"?

    These ancient heroes have nothing to say to the modern world. They only have significance because there is so little serious writing from the time. Our world was not shaped by their ideas.

    They offer no respite or relief. They do not entertain or explain.

    But hero worship and dreams of magic wisdom from the past is comforting to some.
    Take the time to read the entire OP and the link. Sadism would not be Epicurianism.

    ' Epicureanism argued that pleasure was the chief good in life.[18] Hence, Epicurus advocated living in such a way as to derive the greatest amount of pleasure possible during one's lifetime, yet doing so moderately in order to avoid the suffering incurred by overindulgence in such pleasure.[18] Emphasis was placed on pleasures of the mind rather than on physical pleasures......
    There is nothing there that condemns sadism.

    It is a system focused purely on individual subjective pleasure and how to maximize it.

    The pleasure of the sadist is just as valid as the pleasure of the saint in this system.

    All this system does is say the sadist should periodically hold back for a while to make the pleasure greater.
    Epicurus is one of the first philosophers to give a well-developed contractarian theory of justice. Epicurus says that justice is an agreement "neither to harm nor be harmed," and that we have a preconception of justice as "what is useful in mutual associations." People enter into communities in order to gain protection from the dangers of the wild, and agreements concerning the behavior of the members of the community are needed in order for these communities to function, e.g., prohibitions of murder, regulations concerning the killing and eating of animals, and so on. Justice exists only where there are such agreements.

    Like the virtues, justice is valued entirely on instrumental grounds, because of its utility for each of the members of society. Epicurus says that the main reason not to be unjust is that one will be punished if one gets caught, and that even if one does not get caught, the fear of being caught will still cause pain. However, he adds that the fear of punishment is needed mainly to keep fools in line, who otherwise would kill, steal, etc. The Epicurean wise man recognizes the usefulness of the laws, and since he does not desire great wealth, luxury goods, political power, or the like, he sees that he has no reason to engage in the conduct prohibited by the laws in any case.

    Although justice only exists where there is an agreement about how to behave, that does not make justice entirely 'conventional,' if by 'conventional' we mean that any behavior dictated by the laws of a particular society is thereby just, and that the laws of a particular society are just for that society. Since the 'justice contract' is entered into for the purpose of securing what is useful for the members of the society, only laws that are actually useful are just. Thus, a prohibition of murder would be just, but antimiscegenation laws would not. Since what is useful can vary from place to place and time to time, what laws are just can likewise vary.
    https://www.iep.utm.edu/epicur/#SH5e

  2. Top | #12
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    21,766
    Archived
    16,553
    Total Posts
    38,319
    Rep Power
    73
    Quote Originally Posted by steve_bank View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by untermensche View Post

    There is nothing there that condemns sadism.

    It is a system focused purely on individual subjective pleasure and how to maximize it.

    The pleasure of the sadist is just as valid as the pleasure of the saint in this system.

    All this system does is say the sadist should periodically hold back for a while to make the pleasure greater.
    Atheism, Buddhist scripture, the bible and the rest do not specifically ban sadism. It is inherent in the philosophy. All philosophy is in a sense is ill defined with many variations through history. If you want you can trust any philosophy to your ends.

    Epicureanism appears to moderate hedonism in that living for pleasure is moderated by consequences.

    If that is not clear to you, not much I can do to connect the dots.
    There is nothing inherent to it.

    You are just rationalizing.

    These systems based on subjective "pleasure" all end up a can of worms.

    That is if one examines them truthfully and does not make arbitrary assumptions in their favor.

    One problem with humanity is the ability of some to get pleasure from seeing others suffer.

  3. Top | #13
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    seattle
    Posts
    5,078
    Rep Power
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by untermensche View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by steve_bank View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by untermensche View Post

    There is nothing there that condemns sadism.

    It is a system focused purely on individual subjective pleasure and how to maximize it.

    The pleasure of the sadist is just as valid as the pleasure of the saint in this system.

    All this system does is say the sadist should periodically hold back for a while to make the pleasure greater.
    Atheism, Buddhist scripture, the bible and the rest do not specifically ban sadism. It is inherent in the philosophy. All philosophy is in a sense is ill defined with many variations through history. If you want you can trust any philosophy to your ends.

    Epicureanism appears to moderate hedonism in that living for pleasure is moderated by consequences.

    If that is not clear to you, not much I can do to connect the dots.
    There is nothing inherent to it.

    You are just rationalizing.

    These systems based on subjective "pleasure" all end up a can of worms.

    That is if one examines them truthfully and does not make arbitrary assumptions in their favor.

    One problem with humanity is the ability of some to get pleasure from seeing others suffer.
    Do not know what it is, I sense unhappiness and suffering in your words. What is important and difficult is how you derive your sense of right and wrong, and how you express it in relations spoken and physical with your fellow human beings. When you walk down the street are you connected to humanity or are you angry and hostile?

    It is not what others do and justify, uit is what you do and why. As to Epecitus you are banging your head against the wall. There is no one singular morality, unless you are of an Abrahamic faith. In what we call the west we trace our intellectual beginnings to the Greeks, and with good reason. They put to paper all the questions we deal with today. Plato and justice vs civil law.

    Do you have an all encompassing moral philosophy you adhere to?

  4. Top | #14
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    21,766
    Archived
    16,553
    Total Posts
    38,319
    Rep Power
    73
    How you sense unhappiness and suffering in simple statements like that is a mystery.

    When you make pleasure the center of your philosophical system you are stuck with all the ways humans derive pleasure, not just an arbitrary few that you may like.

  5. Top | #15
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    seattle
    Posts
    5,078
    Rep Power
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by untermensche View Post
    How you sense unhappiness and suffering in simple statements like that is a mystery.

    When you make pleasure the center of your philosophical system you are stuck with all the ways humans derive pleasure, not just an arbitrary few that you may like.
    Lomg experoence. People who always jump to a negative and attack are usually expressing anger or discomfort. Word choice and sentece arrangement can express personality. Nothing mystical. In law enforcement and with con artists it is called cold reading. It is what psychics do. After I went through 2 years of physical rehab after letting myself go I can get a read on somebody by how they look, walk, and carry themselves. Mostly from my experience.

    As stated in the link Epicurious was not meaning pursuit of physical gratification. He was talking about pursuuits that make you feel good spiritually . The pursuit of plaesure can be doing charity work. Philosophy is about how you see your place in humanity and how you feel interacting with the world around you. It is not academic study, at least to the Greeks.

    Morality is not just about one set of rules vs anotyher, it is about how you feel. Epicurius was about what is the maximum good, meaning feelings and perceptions, without harming yourself or others. Confucious was about what it ment to be moraaly superior, in context of the world around you.

  6. Top | #16
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    21,766
    Archived
    16,553
    Total Posts
    38,319
    Rep Power
    73
    These are just horribly bad ideas.

    They are nothing but a can of worms.

    What pleasures are good? How much pleasure is good? Who exactly says which pleasures are desirable and which are not?

    The only reason some worship these bad ideas is because there are so few ideas from the time to talk about.

  7. Top | #17
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    seattle
    Posts
    5,078
    Rep Power
    13
    HeeHeeeHee. Socrates said a life unexamined is not worth living, or soemthing like that.

    Look at what drives your actions during the day.

    Get up shower, put on clean clothes, makes you feel good.
    Stop at a coffee shop for caffeine and a sugar pastry, makes you feel good.
    Listen to favorite music in the car, makes you feel good.
    Mid morning candy snack, makes you feel good.
    And so on and so forth.\\Hang out with your girlfriend or buddies drinking after work, makes you feel good.

    Pick up some Hagen Daz ice cream on the way home, definitely feels good.

    Our modern consumer culture is based on selling you comfort and instant gratification 24/7. Despite being majority Christian we are a somewhat Hedonistic or more likely Epicurean society. Just look at us. Christianity used to be about moderation in wordy pleasures and delayed gratification.

    Drugs are about pleasure.

    We are driven by what feels good. Epicurus argued as other philosophers the greatest good or pleasure is spiritual.

  8. Top | #18
    Contributor Speakpigeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Paris, France, EU
    Posts
    6,314
    Archived
    3,662
    Total Posts
    9,976
    Rep Power
    46
    Quote Originally Posted by steve_bank View Post
    Epicurus argued as other philosophers the greatest good or pleasure is spiritual.
    Sure but all pleasures are essentially and properly spiritual, so this isn't saying anything very much.
    EB

  9. Top | #19
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    seattle
    Posts
    5,078
    Rep Power
    13
    The western culture has become a glutinous self indulgent culture. Hard to say otherwise. Self restraint id no longer a cultural norm, eaten away by modern media.

  10. Top | #20
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    21,766
    Archived
    16,553
    Total Posts
    38,319
    Rep Power
    73
    Quote Originally Posted by steve_bank View Post
    The western culture has become a glutinous self indulgent culture. Hard to say otherwise. Self restraint id no longer a cultural norm, eaten away by modern media.
    This is a problem with humanity.

    In good times many become over indulgent and glutinous.

    Bad times creates people with more discipline.

    But nobody wants a constant state of bad times.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •