I am a “cradle atheist”, born to 1st generation atheists and raised in the Bible Belt of Alabama. On my own, I developed a particular way of looking at life, but my way seemed so different from what I heard from others, including other atheists, and I didn’t know why that was. After decades of looking, I finally found a philosopher who lived in ancient Greece, Epicurus, whose perspective seemed to match mine. I was thrilled to find out I was not alone! This led to the pleasure of finding new friends online, from all over the world, who also enjoyed practicing and talking about his philosophy.
Epicurus saw that the universe was material. He extended the work of early atomists and proposed a whole system of physics to explain what he saw in nature. He noticed that logic was not a way of actually getting data but a secondary process of working with data. He realized that there is no such thing as universal, absolute ethics, no realm of ideals or abstract virtues, and that what makes humans endorse certain social behaviors is that these behaviors tend to lead to our pleasure in life. He went beyond the early hedonists in realizing that pleasure is not just sensory but intellectual and social. In his Garden, he taught his students physics and how to observe nature. They practiced pleasurable friendship. He taught them how to make wise decisions, considering all the pain and pleasure consequences of their actions. Epicurus found the pleasure of friendship to be essential to his happy (pleasurable) life. It is the most joyful philosophy I know of!
By studying how Epicurus differed from competing philosophers of his time, I realized the specific reasons why my own outlook disagreed with many of my own contemporaries– I saw that I was surrounded with modern-day Stoics, Platonists, and occasionally Skeptics, in addition to believers in various religions. Epicurus’ words and discussions with friends in the philosophy helped me organize my thoughts more clearly. I have especially enjoyed participating in a podcast discussion of Lucretius’ On the Nature of Things. The joy of invigorating conversations with people who understand each other, even on points where we differ, is beyond compare!
Gradually, however, I began to see some difficulties with presenting my personal philosophy as Epicurean. Mainly, the modern academic interpretation of Epicurus converts him to some Stoic-lite or perhaps pop-Buddhism figure who endorsed painlessness without actual pleasure. It was frustrating to spend so much time arguing what I thought Epicurus was saying, as opposed to focusing on the philosophy itself.
Then a new member on one of the websites I helped moderate joined with the purpose of exploring the religious aspects of Epicurean Philosophy. This new member asserted that it was Epicurean doctrine that humans could receive “images” of the Epicurean Gods, from outer space, directly to our brains, and she wanted to find others to develop worship practices with.
I’ll write more on these gods later– they were described as material beings, not supernatural. I had been willing to consider that since pleasurable living skills occur on a spectrum, it is reasonable to propose that somewhere in the universe live the most pleasure-filled beings. However, the idea that we can directly receive an “image” in our brains, through some means which can traverse space, penetrate bone, and affect neurons, but not produce any detectible evidence of effects on matter besides people having thoughts about gods? That is not plausible.
Epicurus anticipated an amazing number of ideas now considered standard in modern physics– and of course, many of his specific conclusions have been updated by newer research. I had been more interested in his methods of deciding what was real, and in his practical ethics, and less concerned about specific details needing revision. After all, our knowledge base in science is constantly developing. A textbook in medicine is slightly out of date the moment it is printed on paper.
The new member’s religious statements caught me by surprise. She was unwilling to consider the possibility that any evidence could show that religious imagination could come from within the brain and not from actual beings elsewhere, because the images seemed so real. From my standpoint, her assertions were indistinguishable from supernaturalism as long as they were not subject to verification by other evidence besides the imagination. I wondered if Epicurean Philosophy contained arguments that could counter her, or if a new philosophy was necessary– and if so, what would need to be different to rule out this type of direction?
One of the problems with Epicurean Philosophy is that we are missing so much, really most, of his extensive writings. So it may well be that he wrote things which would have supported my perspective on this… but it is also possible he didn’t. I objected to people who twisted Epicurus’ words for their own purposes. Would I be doing the same thing, if I argued that based on current physics and neuroscience evidence, we should require actual evidence before making such implausible statements about getting images from outer space?
Maybe so. I thought about what would need to change, for a philosophy to be resistant to religious intrusion– faith instead of evidence– and I decided I would need to make it clear that evidence from sensory data (or instrumental extensions of our senses) is required to conclude that something is real. Imagination alone is not evidence for reality, in my philosophy, anymore than reason can replace evidence. Rather than worry about whether Epicurus said this or not, I decided to say it myself!
Epicurus was the first Epicurean, totally free to develop his philosophy as he saw fit. Like many of you, I enjoy having freedom of thought, and I want to make use of historical thinking without being confined by it. So let us be as free to think as Epicurus was! I hope you will read what I write here with a mind to decide on your own perspective. When you agree with me– why? Disagree– why, and how can you describe that so that you know your own philosophy? I look forward to hearing from you.
Next, read the details: https://pleasureinpractice.wordpress.com/2020/11/19/the-details/
then https://pleasureinpractice.wordpress.com/2020/11/19/who-i-think-may-benefit-from-this-page/
and https://pleasureinpractice.wordpress.com/2020/11/19/philosophy-in-action/
Pleasure in Practice 