by Tim O'Keefe
10. The canon
Ancient sources Epicurus Ep. Hdt. 37–8, 49–51, 76–80 (IG I-2 37–8, 49–51, 76–80; LS 17C, 15A); Ep. Pyth. 85–8, 92–115 (IG I-3 85–8, 92–155; LS 18C, 13B); KD 23, 24 (IG I-5 23, 24; LS 16D); Epicurus On Nature XXV 26–30 (IG I-34; LS 20C); DL X 30–34 (IG I-7; LS 17A, 19I, 16B, 15F, 17E, 18B, 19J); DRN IV 379–499 (LS 16A, 16H), V 509–33 (LS 18D), V 592–770, VI 703–11 (LS 18E); Sext. Emp. Math. VII 203–16 (IG I-68; LS 18A), XIII 63–4 (IG I-70; LS 16F); Plut. Adv. Col. 1120d–e, 1121c–e (IG I-29).
Elizabeth Asmis’s Epicurus’ Scientific Method (1984) is the most detailed and comprehensive treatment of Epicurean epistemology available. Gisela Striker’s “Epicurus on the Truth of Sense-impressions” in her Essays on Hellenistic Epistemology and Ethics (1996) argues that sensations are alēthēs in the sense of all being true, not merely real, and concludes that the theory is an interesting (if ultimately unsuccessful) attempt to find an infallible ground for knowledge.
11. Pleasure, the highest good
Ancient sources Epicurus Ep. Men. 129–30 (IG I-4 129–30; LS 21B); Cic. Fin. I 29–33 (IG I-21; LS 21A).
Jacques Brunschwig’s “The Cradle Argument in Epicureanism and Stoicism” (1986) is, as the title says, a detailed examination of how examining infant behaviour is supposed to establish what the highest good is. A different analysis of the functioning of the cradle argument can be found in Sedley’s “The Inferential Foundations of Epicurean Ethics” (1998), as part of a larger (and quite fruitful) discussion of the foundations of Epicurean ethics. John Cooper’s “Pleasure and Desire in Epicurus”, in his Reason and Emotion (1998), argues that Epicurus is only an ethical hedonist, not both an ethical and psychological hedonist. Reading this essay paired with Raphael Woolf’s rebuttal “What Kind of Hedonist is Epicurus?” (2004) would be a nice introduction to the issues and texts regarding Epicurean hedonism.
12. Varieties of pleasure, varieties of desire
Ancient sources Epicurus Ep. Men. 127–8, 130–31 (IG I-4127–8, 130–31; LS 21B); KD 3, 9, 18, 19, 29, 30 (IG I-5 3, 9, 18, 19, 29, 30; LS 21C, 21D, 23E1, 24C, 21E3); SV 33, 59, 69, 71 (IG I-6 33, 59, 69, 71; LS 21G1, 21G4, 21H2); DL X 22 (IG I-41; LS 24D), X 136–7 (IG I-9; LS 21R); DRN II 963–6, III 28–30, IV 858–76; Cic. Fin. I 37–9 (IG I-22; LS 21A), 55–7 (IG I-23; LS 21U), II 28–35; Porph. Abst. 1.51.6–52.1 (LS 21J).
In J. Gosling and C. Taylors The Greeks on Pleasure (1982), chs 18–20 concentrate on Epicurus and make the controversial argument that Epicurus himself does not sharply distinguish between kinetic and katastematic pleasures. But the whole book is well worth reading. Jeffrey Purinton’s “Epicurus on the Telos” (1993) argues that the state of being free from pain is not itself a pleasure, but instead is the intentional object in which we take pleasure.
13. The virtues and philosophy
Ancient sources Epicurus Ep. Men. 122, 132 (IG I-4 122, 132; LS 25A, 21B); KD 5, 10–13 (IG I-5 5, 10–13; LS 21D, 25B); SV27, 54 (IG I-6 27, 54; LS 25I1, 25D2); DL X 120 (IG I-8; LS 22Q); DRN I 62–79, III 1–30; Cic. Fin. I 34–6, 42–9; Stob. Anthology 3.17.33 (IG I-59); Ath. Deipnosophists 12, 547a (IG I-151); Porph. To Marcella 31 (IG I-124).
Martha Nussbaum’s “Therapeutic Arguments: Epicurus and Aristotle” (1986) argues (from a broadly Aristotelian perspective) that the Epicureans take a strictly instrumental view of the value of arguments, and that this view has troubling implications. Pierre Hadot’s What is Ancient Philosophy? (2002) contends that ancient philosophy is primarily a way of life instead of a system of theories. It includes extensive consideration of the Epicurean communities in chapter 7.
14. Justice
Ancient sources KD 6–7, 14, 31–40 (IG I-5 6–7, 14, 31–40; LS 22C1, 22a, 22B1–2, 22C2); SV 51, 58 (IG I-6 58; LS 21G3, 22D1); DIX 117–20 (IG I-8; LS 22Q); DRN V 925–1135 (LS 22K, 19B, 22L); Cic. Fin. I 50–53; Porp. Abst. I.44.2–I.55.4, I.7.1–12.7 (LS 22M-N); Stob. Anthology 4.143 (IG I-154).
Paul Vander Waerdt’s “Hermarchus and the Epicurean Genealogy of Morals” (1988) is a good introduction to Hermarchus’ account of the origin of justice (as preserved in Porphyry), an understudied text. Vander Waerdt argues that Hermarchus adapts the Stoic doctrine of oikeiosis, a natural kinship between members of the same species, to help explain the origin of justice and the exclusion of animals from the justice contract, and that in so doing Hermarchus enriches the basic Epicurean doctrine. John Armstrong’s “Epicurean Justice” (1997) contains a nice discussion of how justice as a virtue relates to justice as a property of social institutions.
15. Friendship
Ancient sources KD 27, 40 (IG I-5 27, 40; LS 22E, 22C2); SV34, 39, 52, 56–7, 66, 78 (IG I-6 34, 39, 52, 56–57, 66, 78; LS 22F3, 22F4, 22F5, 22F6, 22F7); DIX 120–21 (IG I-8; LS 22Q); Cic. Fin. I 65–70 (IG I-26; LS 220), II 78–85; Sen. Ep. 9.8 (IG I-54).
Matt Evans’s “Can Epicureans Be Friends?” (2004) answers “yes” to the title’s question, and provides an extended and convincing argument that the Epicurean position on friendship can be reconciled with their hedonism. Voula Tsouna’s The Ethics of Philodemus (2007) is a wide-ranging reconstruction of the ethics of this later Epicurean, who was an important source of information for Cicero. Among many other topics, such as Philodemus on property management, Tsouna argues that Philodemus was most probably the source for the “timid” revisionist account of friendship that Torquatus lays out in On Ends, so that Philodemus was the source of one of the most important modifications of Epicurean orthodoxy.
16. The gods
Ancient sources Epicurus Ep. Men. 123–4 (IG I-4 123–4; LS 23B), 135 (IG I-4 135; LS 23J); KD 1 (IG I-5 1; LS 23E4); DRN II 600–660, III 1–30, V 146–55 (LS 23L), VI 68–79 (LS 23D); Cic. Nat. D. I 43–56 (IG I-16; LS 23E), 69–76 (IG I-17); Sext. Emp. Math. IX43–7 (LS 23F); Phld. On piety 105 (IG I-56), 112.5–12 (LS 23H).
M. Erler’s “Epicurus as dues mortalis: Homoiosis theoi and Epicurean Self-cultivation” (2002) examines Epicurus himself as an instantiation of the Epicurean ideal of “becoming godlike”, as Lucretius describes him, and argues that this Epicurean doctrine is rooted in similar ideas put forward in Plato’s Timaeus. André-Jean Festugière’s short book Epicurus and his Gods (1955) does not much engage with the questions that have dominated most of this chapter, about the exact ontological status of the gods. Instead, it places Epicurean religious practices within the contexts of religious practices of the day and the ways in which members of Epicurean communities embody the Epicurean ideals of friendship.
17. Death
Ancient sources Epicurus Ep. Men. 124–5 (IG I-4 124–5; LS 24A); KD 19–21 (IG I-5 19–21; LS 24C); SV 14 (IG I-6 14); DRN III 630–1094 (LS 14G, 14H, 24E, 24F, 24G); Plut. Non posse 1101a–b (IG I-40); Phld. On Death XXV 2–10.
Warren’s Facing Death (2004) is an excellent book that tries to bridge the gap between the modern discussions of the harmfulness of death and the Epicurean texts that inspire those discussions. It is hard to overestimate the impact that Thomas Nagels admirably short, clear and provocative article “Death” (1979) has had on subsequent discussions of the Epicurean arguments concerning death. Nagels article is also included in John Fischer’s The Metaphysics of Death (1993), an outstanding compilation of articles dealing with death, most inspired by the Epicurean arguments.
Bibliography
Annas, J. 1993a. The Morality of Happiness. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Annas, J. 1993b. “Epicurus on Agency”. In Passions and Perceptions: Studies in Hellenistic Philosophy of Mind, Proceedings of the 5th Symposium Hellenisticum, J. Brunschwig & M. Nussbaum (eds), 53–71. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Annas, J. (ed.) 2001. Cicero: On Moral Ends, R. Woolf (trans.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Arenson, K. 2009. Pleasure and the Absence of Pain: Reading Epicurus’ Hedonism Through Plato’s Philebus. PhD dissertation, Emory University.
Armstrong, J. 1997. “Epicurean Justice”. Phronesis 42: 324–334.
; Asmis, E. 1984. Epicurus’ Scientific Method. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Asmis, E. 1990. “Free Action and the Swerve”. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 8: 275–290.
Atherton, C. 2007. “Reductionism, Rationality and Responsibility: A Discussion of Tim O’Keefe, Epicurus on Freedom”. Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 89: 192–230.
Bailey, C. [1928] 1964. The Greek Atomists and Epicurus. New York: Russell and Russell.
Bailey, C. 1947. Titi Lvcreti Cari: De Rervm Natvra: Libri Sex. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Brunschwig, J. 1986. “The Cradle Argument in Epicureanism and Stoicism”. In The Norms of Nature, M. Schofield & G. Striker (eds), 113–144. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Burnyeat, M. 1978. “The Upside-down Back-to-front Sceptic of Lucretius IV 472”. Philologus 122: 197–206.
Burnyeat, M. 1980. “Can the Sceptic Live his Scepticism?” In Doubt and Dogmatism, J. Barnes, M. Burnyeat & M. Schofield (eds), 20–53. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Reprinted in The Original Sceptics: A Controversy, M. Burnyeat & M. Frede (eds), 25–57 (Indianapolis, IN: Hackett, 1998).
Cambiano, G. 1999. “Philosophy, Science and Medicine”. In The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy, K. Algra (ed.), 585–613. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Campbell, G. 2003. Lucretius on Creation and Evolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Chisholm, R. [1964] 1982. “Human Freedom and the Self”. Reprinted in Free Will, G. Watson (ed.), 7–29. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Clay, D. 1998. Paradosis and Survival: Three Chapters in the History of Epicurean Philosophy. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Cooper, J. 1998. “Pleasure and Desire in Epicurus”. In his Reason and Emotion: Essays on Ancient Moral Psychology and Ethical Theory, 485–514. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Curd, P. 1997. The Legacy of Parmenides: Eleatic Monism and Later Presocratic Thought. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Curd, P. 2001. “Why Democritus Was Not a Skeptic”. In Essays in Ancient Greek Philosophy, Vol. 6: Before Plato, A. Preus (ed.), 149–169. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
De Lacey, P. & E. De Lacey (trans.) 1978. Philodemus, On Methods of Inference, 2nd edn. Naples: Bibliopolis.
Englert, W. 1987. Epicurus on the Swerve and Voluntary Action. Atlanta, GA: Scholar’s Press.
Erler, M. 2002. “Epicurus as dues mortalis: Homoiosis theoi and Epicurean Self-cultivation”. In Traditions of Theology, D. Frede & A. Laks (eds), 159–181. Leiden: Brill.
Evans, M. 2004. “Can Epicureans Be Friends?” Ancient Philosophy 24: 407–424.
Festugière, A. 1955. Epicurus and his Gods. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Fischer, J. (ed.) 1993. The Metaphysics of Death. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Fowler, D. 2002. Lucretius on Atomic Motion: A Commentary on De rerum natura 2.1–332. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Furley, D. 1967. Two Studies in the Greek Atomists. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Furley, D. 1981. “The Greek Theory of the Infinite Universe”. Journal of the History of Ideas 42: 571–585.
Furley, D. 1989a. Cosmic Problems: Essays on Greek and Roman Philosophy of Nature. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Furley, D. 1989b. “Aristotle and the Atomists on Motion in a Void”. See Furley (1989a), 77–90.
Furley, D. 1989c. “Weight and Motion in Democritus’ Theory”. See Furley (1989a), 91–102.
Furley, D. 1993. “Democritus and Epicurus on Sensible Qualities”. In Passions and Perceptions, J. Brunschwig & M. Nussbaum (eds), 72–94. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ganson, T. 1999. “Democritus against Reducing Sensible Qualities”. Ancient Philosophy 19:201–215.
Gosling, J. & C. Taylor 1982. The Greeks on Pleasure. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Grice, P. 1957. “Meaning”. Philosophical Review 65: 141–158.
Hadot, P. 2002. What is Ancient Philosophy? Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Hankinson, R. 1995. The Sceptics. London: Routledge.
Hankinson, R. 1998. Cause and Explanation in Ancient Greek Thought. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Huby, P. 1967. “The First Discovery of the Freewill Problem”. Philosophy 42: 353–362.
Flume, D. 1985. Essays: Moral Political, and Literary, rev. ednx. Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund.
Humphries, R. (trans.) 1968. Lucretius: The Way Things Are. The De Rerum Natura of Titus Lucretius Carus. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Inwood, B. & L. Gerson 1994. The Epicurus Reader: Selected Writings and Testimonia. Indianapolis. IN: Hackett.
Inwood, B. & L. Gerson 1997. Hellenistic Philosophy: Introductory Readings, 2nd edn. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.
Kontan, D., D. Clay & C. Glad (ed. & trans.) 1998. Philodemus: On Frank Criticism. Atlanta, GA: Society of Biblical Literature.
Kripke, S. 1980. Naming and Necessity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Laursen, S. 1995. “The Early Parts of Epicurus On Nature 25th Book”. Cronache Ercolanesi 25: 5–109.
Laursen, S. 1997. “The Later Parts of Epicurus On Nature 25th Book”. Cronache Ercolanesi 27: 5–82.
Lee, M. 2005. Epistemology after Protagoras: Responses to Relativism in Plato, Aristotle, and Democritus. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Long, A. A. & D. N. Sedley 1987. The Hellenistic Philosophers, 2 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mackie, J. L. 1982. The Miracle of Theism. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Mitsis, P. 1988. Epicurus’ Ethical Theory: The Pleasures of Invulnerability. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Nagel, T. 1979. “Death”. In his Mortal Questions, 1–10. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Originally published in Noûs 4 (1970): 73–80.
Nussbaum, M. 1986. “Therapeutic Arguments: Epicurus and Aristotle”. In The Norms of Nature, M. Schofield & G. Striker (eds), 31–74. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
O’Brien, D. 1981. Theories of Weight in the Ancient World: Four Essays on Democritus, Plato and Aristotle. A Study in the Development of Ideas. Volume One: Democritus, Weight and Size: An Exercise in the Reconstruction of Early Greek Philosophy. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.
O’Connor, D. 1989. “The Invulnerable Pleasures of Epicurean Friendship”. Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 30: 165–186.
O’Keefe, T. 1996. “Does Epicurus Need the Swerve as an Archê of Collisions?” Phronesis. 41:305–317.
O’Keefe, T. 1997. “The Ontological Status of Sensible Qualities for Democritus and Epicurus”. Ancient Philosophy 17: 119–134.
O’Keefe, T. 2001a. “Would a Society of Wise Epicureans Be Just?” Ancient Philosophy 21: 133–146.
O’Keefe, T. 2001b. “Is Epicurean Friendship Altruistic?” Apeiron 34: 269–305.
O’Keefe, T. 2003. “Lucretius on the Cycle of Life and the Fear of Death”. Apeiron 36: 43–65.
O’Keefe, T. 2005. Epicurus on Freedom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
O’Keefe, T. 2006. Review of Warren, Pacing Death (2004). Ancient Philosophy 26: 430–435.
O’Keefe, T. 2009. “Action and Responsibility”. In The Cambridge Companion to Epicureanism, J. Warren (ed.), 142–157. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Parfit, D. 1971. “Personal Identity”. Philosophical Review 80: 3–27.
Parfit, D. 1984. Reasons and Persons. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Pasnau, R. 2007. “Democritus and Secondary Qualities”. Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 89: 99–121.
Purinton, J. 1993. “Epicurus on the Telos”. Phronesis 38: 281–320.
Purinton, J. 1999. “Epicurus on Free ‘Volition’ and the Atomic Swerve”. Phronesis 44: 253–299.
Sedley, D. 1982. “Two Conceptions of Vacuum”. Phronesis 27: 175–193.
Sedley, D. 1983. “Epicurus’ Refutation of Determinism”. In Suzètèsis: Studi sull’epicureismo greco e ro
mano offerti a M. Gigante, vol. I, 11–51. Naples: Bibliopolis.
Sedley, D. 1988. “Epicurean Anti-Reductionism”. In Matter and Metaphysics, J. Barnes & M. Mignucci (eds), 295–327. Naples: Bibliopolis.
Sedley, D 1989. “Philosophical Allegiance in the Greco-Roman World”. In Philosophia Togata, M. Griffin & J. Barnes (eds), 97–119. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sedley, D. 1998a. Lucretius and the Transformation of Greek Wisdom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sedley, D. 1998b. “The Inferential Foundations of Epicurean Ethics”. In Ethics, S. Everson (ed.), 129–150. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Smith, M. (ed. & trans.) 1993. Diogenes of Oinoanda: The Epicurean Inscription. Naples: Bibliopolis.
Smith, M. 1998. “Excavations at Oinoanda: the New Epicurean Texts”. Anatolian Studies 48: 125–170.
Smith, M. 2001. Lucretius: On the Nature of Things. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.
Stallings, A. (trans.) 2007. Lucretius: The Nature of Things. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Strahm, M. 2009. Epicurean Friendship: How are Friends Pleasurable? Master’s thesis, Georgia State University.
Striker, G. 1993. “Epicurean Hedonism”. In Passions and Perceptions, J. Brunschwig & M. Nussbaum (eds), 3–17. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Reprinted in her Essays on Hellenistic Epistemology and Ethics, 196–208 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996).
Striker, G. 1996. “Epicurus on the Truth of Sense-impressions”. In her Essays on Hellenistic Epistemology and Ethics, 77–91. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Taylor, C. 1999. The Atomists: Leucippus and Democritus. Fragments: A Text and Translation with a Commentary. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Thorsrud, H. 2008. Ancient Scepticism. Stocksfield: Acumen.
Tsouna, V. 2007. The Ethics of Philodemus. Oxford: Oxford University Press.