Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Epicurus and the concept of death
Aristotle and Epictetus view on human happiness
Aristotle and Epictetus view on human happiness
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Epicurus and the concept of death
Inward Approach In Letter to Menoeceus, Epicurus writes to Menoeceus on the philosophy by which he follows with regards to creating pleasure while avoiding pain. That is, Epicurus argues that the ultimate meaning of life hinges on our perception of happiness and consequences, which are directly affected by our choices. For example, Epicurus describes this perception of the ultimate meaning through death. He states that death is, by logic, harmless to no one since when one is dead, he/she ceases to exist. Thus, nothing can harm him/her if he/she no longer exist, including death. Therefore, it is irrational and dangerous to “shun death” (Epicurus, 50) since it is only hurtful to people, who extensively ponder on it. Epicurus maintains that not thinking about death leads to happiness while the consequences of thinking about death leads to sadness. Furthermore, Epicurus discusses several consequences overly pursuing pleasure. For instance, he argues that we must not always decide on the basis of immediate pleasure and immediate pain …show more content…
This is especially evident in his portrayal of death, by which he considers the self when describing the “pain” of death. However, he does not consider that, others’ perception of our death will affect our own, which leads to external pain that we, by definition, cannot determine nor control. For example, a young child is dying of an unknown disease with no cure. According to his logic, the child must embrace because it is painless to him since he cannot receive any more pain after death. However, with considerations to his parents and their perception of the child’s death, it is rational to fear death due to his/her awareness of the parents’ feelings, which he/she cannot
Aristotle believed the highest good is happiness, once we choose happiness as an end that is the ultimate goal. The path a person takes to reach their end goal is numerous or can lead to more means and not to an end, in the New York Times article Man Who Gave Psychics $718,000 ‘Just Got Sucked In’ By Michael Wilson. Niall Rice, was placed in a strange situation he visited psychics whom claimed to reconnect him to his distant love no matter the cost or dimension.
Epicurus was a philosopher who was born in 341 BC and lasted until 270 BC. He examined the situation of death and came to the conclusion that once one is dead, no harm can be done, due to the fact that they no longer exist. Stephen E. Rosenbaum is a philosophy professor. Rosenbaum wrote the essay “How to Be Dead and Not care”, in which he explains Epicurus’ views and then defends Epicurus’ beliefs about death. The reason why he defends Epicurus, is because he’s being logical. Rosenbaum also believes that we spend too much time thinking about death, which is something we will never have to experience. However, Thomas Nagel who’s a philosophy and law professor, disagrees with both Epicurus and Rosenbaum. Nagel believes that one doesn’t have to experience
Every person in the world wants to be happy and what makes us happy? Well that would be pleasure. Pleasure is a feeling of happiness and satisfaction physically through our body and mentality in our mind. Everyone in the world will do anything for pleasure no matter what it is. But should every pleasure we seek be desired because not everything is free, but comes with a price? Is pleasure going to be our most important goal in life? Well to answer those questions, you should read Letter to Herodotus by Epicurus, who is a philosopher, and maybe he could answer that question. Epicurus will tell us how to live a full and successful life. Epicurus made Epicureanism where we will learn the important of pleasure and the decision that we made that will lead to happiness or the destruction of
“I said in mine heart, Go to now, I will prove thee with mirth therefore enjoy pleasure and behold, this also I vanity” (E 2:3). The preacher believes that enjoying pleasure is good, but he is still fixated on its fundamental meaningless. The meaning comes from God, and he does not believe is life is meaningful, so he must believe that he is not connect to God as the source of meaning. “And how dieth the wise man? As the fool. Therefor I hated life; because the work that is wrought under the sun is grievous unto me: for all is vanity and vexation of spirit” (E 2:16). The preacher is far from content with his life, and it is because he feels it is meaningless. His belief that “all is vanity and vexation of spirit” is the source of his frustration. If the preacher believed his work was meaningful, he would not hate life. “Yea, I hated all my labour which I had taken under the sun: because I should leave it unto the man that shall be after me” (E 2:18). The preacher feels his work is meaningless because he will die and not gain anything for all his troubles, and he is frustrated that after he dies the products of his work will go to a man that did not earn them. The preacher’s concern about his death sets him apart from Epicurus as Epicurus is not at all worried or afraid of his death. It also seems that value and meaning are not immediately given by God, but rather determined later. “For God shall bring every work into judgement, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil” (E 12:14). God is the ultimate arbiter of the value of one’s life, and God judges that value after the fact. Since the preacher believes that God has not judged the value of everything yet, he believes that everything is still meaningless, including his life. In this way, the lack of a direct connection between the preacher and God
Plato’s “Crito” and Sophocles’ “Antigone” both argue that it is better to die than live life in a different way. Contrary to that, some would make the point that one should do anything to save one’s life even if it meant conforming to the common belief. I agree with both of these claims. I agree that a life lived with constant guilt is not worth living. Rather live your life how you want and you will be content with it. This is because life should be pleasant and if one spends their whole life regretting something they did not do then how can one be happy with themselves. Rather committing the act and looking at the big picture not just the present creates contentment and allows you to be content with your life even if it means death as a punishment.
Intellectuals are philosophers, are writers, are artists. They are all those people who work with their minds by questioning the events that touch them and that are touched by them. To recall a Plato's famous allegory, we can say that intellectuals are those who are able to look beyond the shadows and never take concepts for granted. However, some questions as what their role is and, more specifically, whether they should be engaged in politics are still unanswerable. Over the years answers and behaviors towards the engaged culture have been various and we can assume that the intellectuals who cannot separate the two live their lives actively for they want to be part of the events that surround them and let awareness win over apathy. On the contrary, we can assume that those who let apathy win are the intellectuals that look at politics and culture as two different and specific concepts and live a solitary life far from society. However, this is not an appropriate judgment because it would be difficult to consider to which extent solitude can be regarded as cowardliness and to which extent action can be regarded as consciousness.
“Egoism, the fear or not near but of distant death… are not, I think, wholly natural or instinctive. They are all strengthened by the beliefs about personal identity which I have been attacking. If we give up these beliefs, they should be weakened” (Parfit, 1971, p. 4.2:14).
He begins by looking at the very common views of death that are held by most people in the world, and tells us that he will talk of death as the "unequivocal and permanent end to our existence" and look directly at the nature of death itself (1). The first view that
Epicurus. (2010). Letter to Menoeceus and The Principle Dotrines. In S. Brennan, & R. J. Stainton, Philosophy of Death Introductory Readings (pp. 163-171). Canada: Broadview Press.
Epicurus, the founder of Epicureanism, saw death as a total extinction with no afterlife to ensue, he regarded the universe as infinite and eternal and as consisting only of space and atoms; where the soul or mind is constructed of indestructible parts that can never be destroyed. He sought to free humanity from the fear of death and of the gods, which he considered the main cause of unhappiness.
Both Plato and Augustine offer unusual conceptions of what one must acquire to live a truly happy life. While the conventional view of happiness normally pertains to wealth, financial stability, and material possessions, Plato and Augustine suggest that true happiness is rooted in something independent of objects or people. Though dissimilar in their notions of that actual root, each respective philosophy views the attaining of that happiness as a path, a direction. Plato’s philosophy revolves around the attainment of eternal knowledge and achieving a metaphysical balance. Augustine also emphasizes one’s knowing the eternal, though his focus is upon living in humility before God. Both assert that human beings possess a natural desire for true happiness, and it is only through a path to something interminable that they will satisfy this desire.
3rd Paragraph – Famous Soliliquy Negating his initial beliefs in death, does not kill himself in the uncertainty of death and stops believing
One of Aristotle’s conclusions in the first book of Nicomachean Ethics is that “human good turns out to be the soul’s activity that expresses virtue”(EN 1.7.1098a17). This conclusion can be explicated with Aristotle’s definitions and reasonings concerning good, activity of soul, and excellence through virtue; all with respect to happiness.
Happiness can be understood as the moral goal of life or can be unpredictable and is something we create from ourselves and by ourselves. The idea of happiness was known as something we nurture on our own and is a state of emotion. Completing our everyday goals will soon bring us happiness, which seems to be very important to most humans and is what makes life worth living, but this is not certain. This conception of Eudemonia was common in ancient Greece as it is currently today. Aristotle had what he thought was an ideal activity for all those who wanted to live life to the fullest, be happy, and have purpose.
Epicurus was ascetic to his theories about pleasure and how a person should live their life. If pleasure is a source of enjoyment and delight then Epicurus believed that we should live our lives happy and to the fullest. Living in 2004--today--and reading about what philosophers wrote about long ago about how to life a pleasure-full life makes people reflect on their own lives and see if they are living a "good life."