The word epicurean I imagine to be rarely used. It seems to be colonized by an impossibly pretentious gaggle of gourmet food enthusiasts, who have perverted the name of a great historical figure. Somehow, they have decided to take the least materially hedonistic philosopher in two and a half thousand years of western philosophy, and apply his name-label to the act of being materially hedonistic! It is akin to starting a philanthropic movement and calling it napoleonic.
Those of us who respect the word epicurean beyond the consumption of some tortured animals flesh, or a quaff of pretentiously overpriced, fancy wine, should fight to have the theft of our beloved word revoked. And of course, we are not only fighting for a mere word, but the legacy it represents!
Yet before this article resumes, let us take pause and consider Epicurus of Samos, a philosopher who lived in Athens for most of his (incalculably happy) life. Epicurus lived in an academy of his own creation, The Garden, surrounded by his disciples and friends. He opened the doors of this academy to women and slaves, who at the time were not given the same opportunities as manly, beard-stroking men.
In summary, Epicurus taught that fear of death and general anxiety were the ultimate driving forces of misery, and that to live a happy life we must be free from them. As he did not believe in gods (at best considereding them distant and unconcerned with our affairs) or an afterlife, this meant that Epicurus' goal was the seeking of happiness in this life, with happiness as an end in itself - thus making him a hedonist.
However the epicurean is not a hedonist in the vein that the word has acquired, a pleasure seeker whose sole purpose is to obtain physical treats (the cyrenaics are an example of a greek philosophical school matching this description; a consumer is a modern example). Epicurus was a hedonist who considered friendship, independence, freedom from fear of death and an analysed life as the height of all pleasures.
He taught that the small joys in life will lead to a state of content happiness, a freedom from anxiety the Greek's named ataraxia. The hedonist who wants it all will find herself plunged into a world of anxiety and uncertainty in order to obtain her every whim - she will have to work extra hard to sustain her material treats; if she steals, she will always have to look over her shoulder. By asking for little we can stay out of danger, we can appreciate what we have, we can be happy right here, right now. We can gain control of our lives only when we have overcome desire.
This is the basis of Epicurean Virtues.
In summary, Epicurus taught that fear of death and general anxiety were the ultimate driving forces of misery, and that to live a happy life we must be free from them. As he did not believe in gods (at best considereding them distant and unconcerned with our affairs) or an afterlife, this meant that Epicurus' goal was the seeking of happiness in this life, with happiness as an end in itself - thus making him a hedonist.
However the epicurean is not a hedonist in the vein that the word has acquired, a pleasure seeker whose sole purpose is to obtain physical treats (the cyrenaics are an example of a greek philosophical school matching this description; a consumer is a modern example). Epicurus was a hedonist who considered friendship, independence, freedom from fear of death and an analysed life as the height of all pleasures.
He taught that the small joys in life will lead to a state of content happiness, a freedom from anxiety the Greek's named ataraxia. The hedonist who wants it all will find herself plunged into a world of anxiety and uncertainty in order to obtain her every whim - she will have to work extra hard to sustain her material treats; if she steals, she will always have to look over her shoulder. By asking for little we can stay out of danger, we can appreciate what we have, we can be happy right here, right now. We can gain control of our lives only when we have overcome desire.
This is the basis of Epicurean Virtues.
In contrast to ascetics:
We cannot truly call an epicurean ascetic. It is the contemplative monk we would call ascetic, for his self-denial is an extreme act of rejecting earthly experience in the name of some higher realm. The monk seems to thrive on a holier-than-thou attitude. He inadvertantly makes himself a novelty to be observed by people; his extremism is fascinating, but not inspirational. People will see the monk and think, 'Let us admire his holiness! Look at how he lives, what a moral character!' but they will not see the monk as a realistic example - the monk is too far removed from the onlookers goals of earthly physical pleasure to seriously affect those people.
The epicurean lifestyle may appear similar to the monk's. The epicurean shuns the so-called material pleasures drifting around her. Her refusal to participate may appear to have the same motives as the monk; a rejection of earthy pleasure for the sake of some higher spiritual ideal.
Yet how different the epicurean is from the monk! In fact, the epicurean has less in common with the monk than the holy man's supposed opposite; the pleasure seeker. The monk and the seeker have both acknowledged certain physical things as being desirable. The monk then refuses those desires, whilst the seeker indulges in them as often as possible. The epicurean says, 'Desire is not pleasurable'. The epicurean is not refusing (so-called) life, but is refusing the facade of happiness offered her. She has come to realize that self-denial ultimately lies in the endless desire for physical pleasures, and that by passing over these transient treats she can reach a state of constant happiness which is far more rewarding.
Unlike the monk, the epicurean is not chasing an afterworld, she is not relying on anything outside that which she can experience to give her life meaning - she is not denying this life for the next. The epicurean does not consider herself a sacrificial novelty for some higher goal - the epicurean rejects most physical pleasure and is happier for it! Whats more, the epicurean is not a novelty, but is someone who can argue her philosophy and actually live it. Epicureanism offers people the opportunity to be happy, not to deny themselves happiness like an ascetic.
The epicurean lifestyle may appear similar to the monk's. The epicurean shuns the so-called material pleasures drifting around her. Her refusal to participate may appear to have the same motives as the monk; a rejection of earthy pleasure for the sake of some higher spiritual ideal.
Yet how different the epicurean is from the monk! In fact, the epicurean has less in common with the monk than the holy man's supposed opposite; the pleasure seeker. The monk and the seeker have both acknowledged certain physical things as being desirable. The monk then refuses those desires, whilst the seeker indulges in them as often as possible. The epicurean says, 'Desire is not pleasurable'. The epicurean is not refusing (so-called) life, but is refusing the facade of happiness offered her. She has come to realize that self-denial ultimately lies in the endless desire for physical pleasures, and that by passing over these transient treats she can reach a state of constant happiness which is far more rewarding.
Unlike the monk, the epicurean is not chasing an afterworld, she is not relying on anything outside that which she can experience to give her life meaning - she is not denying this life for the next. The epicurean does not consider herself a sacrificial novelty for some higher goal - the epicurean rejects most physical pleasure and is happier for it! Whats more, the epicurean is not a novelty, but is someone who can argue her philosophy and actually live it. Epicureanism offers people the opportunity to be happy, not to deny themselves happiness like an ascetic.
To be fair, the word ascetic can also apply to one who 'abstains from the normal pleasures of life', yet even this definition, and its use of the word abstain, implies that the epicurean is somehow withdrawing from something; they are abstaining from normal pleasure. In my eyes, the epicurean has long since passed over those supposed pleasures, and is not so much abstaining as she is indifferent to them.
To conclude, please do not poison the concept and the word epicurean by associating it with the hedonistic morons who have so captured the beloved word, and next time you are at the table with a real epicurean, do not be surprised when she refuses your eloquently prepared veal steak, but rather understand that she is refusing your hard work in the name of her own state of happiness. She most certainly will not feel like she is missing out on anything, nor punishing herself for the love of some divine higher-realm.
Selim 'Selim' Talat
