<p>J. W. <SPAN name="link2H_4_0015" id="link2H_4_0015"></SPAN></p>
<br/>
<h2> EPICURUS </h2>
<p>Epicurean.—One who holds the principles of Epicurus—<br/>
Luxurious, contributing to luxury.<br/>
<br/>
Epicurism—The principles of Epicurus—Luxury, sensual<br/>
enjoyment, gross pleasure.<br/></p>
<p>The words with which this page is headed may be found in the current and
established dictionaries of the present day; and it shall be our task to
show that never was slander more foul, calumny more base, or libel more
cowardly, than when it associated the words luxury and sensuality with the
memory of the Athenian Epicurus. The much-worn anecdote of the brief
endorsed "The Defendant has no case, abuse the Plaintiffs Solicitor," will
well apply here. The religionists had no case, the Epicurean Philosophy
was impregnable as far as theological attacks were concerned, and the
theologians have, therefore, constantly and vehemently abused its founder;
so that, at last, children have caught the cry as though it were the
enunciation of a tact, and have grown into men believing that Epicurus was
a sort of discriminating hog, who wallowed in the filth which some have
miscalled pleasure.</p>
<p>Epicurus was born in the early part of the year 344, B. C, the third year
of the 109th Olympiad, at Gargettus, in the neighborhood of Athens. His
father, Neocles, was of the Ægean tribe. Some allege that Epicurus was
born in the island of Samos; but, according to others, he was taken there
when very young by his parents, who formed a portion of a colony of
Athenian citizens, sent to colonize Samos after its subjugation by
Pericles. The father and mother of Epicurus were in very humble
circumstances; his father was a schoolmaster, and his mother, Chærestrata,
acted as a kind of priestess, curing diseases, exorcising ghosts, and
exercising other fabulous powers. Epicurus has been charged with sorcery,
because he wrote several songs for his mother's solemn rites. Until
eighteen, he remained at Samos and the neighboring isle of Teos; from
whence he removed to Athens, where he resided until the death of
Alexander, when, disturbances arising, he fled to Colophon. This place,
Mitylene, and Lampsacus, formed the philosopher's residence until he was
thirty-six years of age; at which time he founded a school in the
neighborhood of Athens. He purchased a pleasant garden, where he taught
his disciples until the time of his death.</p>
<p>We are told by Laertius, "That those disciples who were regularly admitted
into the school of Epicurus, lived together, not in the manner of the
Pythagoreans, who cast their possessions into a common stock; for this, in
his opinion, implied mutual distrust rather than friendship; but upon such
a footing of friendly attachment, that each individual cheerfully supplied
the necessities of his brother."</p>
<p>The habits of the philosopher and his followers were temperate and
exceedingly frugal, and formed a strong contrast to the luxurious,
although refined, manners of the Athenians. At the entrance of the garden,
the visitor of Epicurus found the following inscription:—"The
hospitable keeper of this mansion, where you will find pleasure the
highest good, will present you with barley cakes and water from the
spring. These gardens will not provoke your appetite by artificial
dainties, but satisfy it with natural supplies. Will you not, then, be
well entertained?" And yet the owner of the garden, over the gate of which
these words were placed, has been called "a glutton" and "a stomach
worshipper!"</p>
<p>From the age of thirty-six until his decease, he does not seem to have
quitted Athens, except temporarily. When Demetrius besieged Athens, the
Epicureans were driven into great difficulties for want of food; and it is
said that Epicurus and his friends subsisted on a small quantity of beans
which he possessed, and which he shared equally with them.</p>
<p>The better to prosecute his studies, Epicurus lived a life of celibacy.
Temperate and continent himself, he taught his followers to be so
likewise, both by example and precept. He died 273 B. C, in the
seventy-third year of his age; and, at that time, his warmest opponents
seem to have paid the highest compliments to his personal character; and,
on reading his life, and the detailed accounts of his teachings, it seems
difficult to imagine what has induced the calumny which has been heaped
upon his memory.</p>
<p>We "cannot quote from his own works, in his own words, because, although
he wrote very much, only a summary of his writings has come to us
uninjured; but his doctrines have been so fully investigated and treated
on, both by his opponents and his disciples, that there is no difficulty
or doubt as to the principles inculcated in the school of Epicurus.</p>
<p>"The sum of his doctrine concerning philosophy, in general, is this:—Philosophy
is the exercise of reason in the pursuit and attainment of a happy life;
whence it follows, that those studies which conduce neither to the
acquisition nor the enjoyment of happiness are to be dismissed as of no
value. The end of all speculation ought to be, to enable men to judge with
certainty what is to be chosen, and what to be avoided, to preserve
themselves free from pain, and to secure health of body, and tranquillity
of mind. True philosophy is so useful to every man, that the young should
apply to it without delay, and the old should never be weary of the
pursuit; for no man is either too young or too old to correct and improve
his mind, and to study the art of happiness. Happy are they who possess by
nature a free and vigorous intellect, and who are born in a country where
they can prosecute their inquiries without restraint: for it is philosophy
alone which raises a man above vain fears and base passions, and gives him
the perfect command of himself. As nothing ought to be dearer to a
philosopher than truth, he should, pursue it by the most direct means,
devising no actions himself, nor suffering himself to be imposed upon by
the fictions of others, neither poets, orators, nor logicians, making no
other use of the rules of rhetoric or grammar, than to enable him to speak
or write with accuracy and perspicuity, and always preferring a plain and
simple to an ornamented style. Whilst some doubt of everything, and others
profess to acknowledge everything, a wise man will embrace such tenets,
and only such as are built upon experience, or upon certain and
indisputable axioms."</p>
<p>The following is a summary of his Moral Philosophy:—</p>
<p>"The end of living, or the ultimate good, which is to be sought for its
own sake, according to the universal opinion of mankind, is happiness; yet
men, for the most part, fail in the pursuit of this end, either because
they do not form a right idea of the nature of happiness, or because they
do not make use of proper means to attain it. Since it is every man's
interest to be happy through the whole of life, it is the wisdom of every
one to employ philosophy in the search of felicity without delay; and
there cannot be a greater folly, than to be always beginning to live.</p>
<p>"The happiness which belongs to man, is that state in which he enjoys as
many of the good things, and suffers as few of the evils incident to human
nature as possible; passing his days in a smooth course of permanent
tranquillity. A wise man, though deprived of sight or hearing, may
experience happiness in the enjoyment of the good things which yet remain;
and when suffering torture, or laboring under some painful disease, can
mitigate the anguish by patience, and can enjoy, in bis afflictions, the
consciousness of bis own constancy. But it is impossible that perfect
happiness can be possessed without the pleasure which attends freedom from
pain, and the enjoyment of the good things of life. Pleasure is in its
nature good, as pain is in its nature evil; the one is, therefore, to be
pursued, and the other to be avoided, for its own sake.—Pleasure, or
pain, is not only good, or evil, in itself, but the measure of what is
good or evil, in every object of desire or aversion; for the ultimate
reason why we pursue one thing, and avoid another, is because we expect
pleasure from the former, and apprehend pain from the latter. If we
sometimes decline a present pleasure, it is not because we are averse to
pleasure itself, but because we conceive, that in the present instance, it
will be necessarily connected with a greater pain. In like manner, if we
sometimes voluntarily submit to a present pain, it is because we judge
that it is necessarily connected with a greater pleasure.—Although
all pleasure is essentially good, and all pain essentially evil, it doth
not thence necessarily follow, that in every single instance the one ought
to be pursued, and the other to be avoided; but reason is to be employed
in distinguishing and comparing the nature and degrees of each, that the
result may be a wise choice of that which shall appear to be, upon the
whole, good. That pleasure is the first good, appears from the inclination
which every animal, from its first birth, discovers to pursue pleasure,
and avoid pain; and is confirmed by the universal experience of mankind,
who are incited to action by no other principle than the desire of
avoiding pain, or obtaining pleasure. There are two kinds of pleasure: one
consisting in a state of rest, in which both body and mind are undisturbed
by any kind of pain; the other arising from an agreeable agitation of the
senses, producing a correspondent emotion in the soul. It is upon the
former of these that the enjoyment of life chiefly depends. Happiness may
therefore be said to consist in bodily ease, and mental tranquillity, When
pleasure is asserted to be the end of living, we are not then to
understand that violent kind of delight or joy which arises from the
gratification of the senses and passions, but merely that placid state of
mind, which results from the absence of every cause of pain or uneasiness.
Those pleasures, which arise from agitation, are not to be pursued as in
themselves the end of living, but as means of arriving at that stable
tranquillity, in which true happiness consists. It is the office of reason
to confine the pursuit of pleasure within the limits of nature, in order
to the attainment of that happy state, in which the body is free from
every kind of pain, and the mind from all perturbation. This state must
not, however, be conceived to be perfect in proportion as it is inactive
and torpid, but in proportion as all the functions of life are quietly and
pleasantly performed. A happy life neither resembles a rapid torrent, nor
a standing pool, but is like a gentle stream, that glides smoothly and
silently along.</p>
<p>"This happy state can only be obtained by a prudent care of the body, and
a steady government of the mind. The diseases of the body are to be
prevented by temperance, or cured by medicine, or rendered tolerable by
patience. Against the diseases of the mind, philosophy provides sufficient
antidotes. The instruments which it employs for this purpose are the
virtues; the root of which, whence all the rest proceed, is prudence. This
virtue comprehends the whole art of living discreetly, justly, and
honorably, and is, in fact, the same thing with wisdom. It instructs men
to free their understandings from the clouds of prejudice; to exercise
temperance and fortitude in the government of themselves: and to practice
justice towards others. Although pleasure, or happiness, which is the end
of living, be superior to virtue, which is only the means, it is every
one's interest to practice all the virtues; for in a happy life, pleasure
can never be separated from virtue.</p>
<p>"A prudent man, in order to secure his tranquillity, will consult his
natural disposition in the choice of his plan of life. If, for example, he
be persuaded that he should be happier in a state of marriage than in
celibacy, he ought to marry; but if he be convinced that matrimony would
be an impediment to his happiness, he ought to remain single. In like
manner, such persons as are naturally active, enterprising, and ambitious,
or such as by the condition of their birth are placed in the way of civil
offices, should accommodate themselves to their nature and situation, by
engaging in public affairs; while such as are, from natural temper, fond
of leisure and retirement, or, from experience or observation, are
convinced that a life of public business would be inconsistent with their
happiness, are unquestionably at liberty, except where particular
circumstances call them to the service of their country, to pass their
lives in obscure repose.</p>
<p>"Temperance is that discreet regulation of the desires and passions, by
which we are enabled to enjoy pleasures without suffering any consequent
inconvenience. They who maintain such a constant self-command, as never to
be enticed by the prospect of present indulgence, to do that which will be
productive of evil, obtain the truest pleasure by declining pleasure.
Since, of desires some are natural and necessary; others natural, but not
necessary; and others neither natural nor necessary, but the offspring of
false judgment; it must be the office of temperance to gratify the first
class, as far as nature requires: to restrain the second within the bounds
of moderation; and, as to the third, resolutely to oppose, and, if
possible, entirely repress them.</p>
<p>"Sobriety, as opposed to inebriety and gluttony, is of admirable use in
teaching men that nature is satisfied with a little, and enabling them to
content themselves with simple and frugal fare. Such a manner of living is
conducive to the preservation of health: renders a man alert and active in
all the offices of life; affords him an exquisite relish of the occasional
varieties of a plentiful board, and prepares him to meet every reverse of
fortune without the fear of want.</p>
<p>"Continence is a branch of temperance, which prevents the diseases,
infamy, remorse, and punishment, to which those are exposed, who indulge
themselves in unlawful amours. Music and poetry, which are often employed
as incentives to licentious pleasure are to be cautiously and sparingly
used.</p>
<p>"Gentleness, as opposed to an irrascible temper, greatly contributes to
the tranquillity and happiness of life, by preserving the mind from
perturbation, and arming it against the assaults of calumny and malice. A
wise man, who puts himself under the government of reason, will be able to
receive an injury with calmnese, and to treat the person who committed it
with lenity; for he will rank injuries among the casual events of life,
and will prudently reflect that he can no more stop the natural current of
human passions, than he can curb the stormy winds. Refractory servants in
a family should be chastised, and disorderly members of a state punished
without wrath.</p>
<p>"Moderation, in the pursuit of honors or riches, is the only security
against disappointment and vexation. A wise man, therefore, will prefer
the simplicity of rustic life to the magnificence of courts. Future events
a wise man will consider as uncertain, and will, therefore, neither suffer
himself to be elated with confident expectation, nor to be depressed by
doubt and despair: for both are equally destructive of tranquillity. It
will contribute to the enjoyment of life, to consider death as the perfect
termination of a happy life, which it becomes us to close like satisfied
guests, neither regretting the past, nor anxious for the future.</p>
<p>"Fortitude, the virtue which enables us to endure pain, and to banish
fear, is of great use in producing tranquillity. Philosophy instructs us
to pay homage to the gods, not through hope or fear, but from veneration
of their superior nature. It moreover enables us to conquer the fear of
death, by teaching us that it is no proper object of terror; since, whilst
we are, death is not, and when death arrives, we are not: so that it
neither concerns the living nor the dead. The only evils to be apprehended
are bodily pain, and distress of mind. Bodily pain it becomes a wise man
to endure with patience and firmness; because, if it be slight, it may
easily be borne; and if it be intense, it cannot last long. Mental
distress commonly arises not from nature, but from opinion; a wise man
will therefore arm himself against this kind of suffering, by reflecting
that the gifts of fortune, the loss of which he may be inclined to
deplore, were never his own, but depended upon circumstances which he
could not command. If, therefore, they happen to leave him, he will
endeavor, as soon as possible, to obliterate the remembrance of them, by
occupying his mind in pleasant contemplation, and engaging in agreeable
avocations.</p>
<p>"Justice respects man as living in society, and is the common bond without
which no society can subsist. This virtue, like the rest, derives its
value from its tendency to promote the happiness of life. Not only is it
never injurious to the man who practices it, but nourishes-in his mind
calm reflections and pleasant hopes; whereas it is impossible that the
mind in which injustice dwells, should not be full of disquietude.—Since
it is impossible that iniquitous actions should promote the enjoyment of
life, as much as remorse of conscience, legal penalties, and public
disgrace, must increase its troubles, every one who follows the dictates
of sound reason, will practice the virtues of justice, equity, and
fidelity. In society, the necessity of the mutual exercise of justice, in
order to the common enjoyment of the gifts of nature, is the ground of
those laws by which it is prescribed. It is the interest of every
individual in a state to conform to the laws of justice; for by injuring
no one, and rendering to every man his due, he contributes his part
towards the preservation of that society, upon the perpetuity of which his
own safety depends. Nor ought any one to think that he is at liberty to
violate the rights of his fellow citizens, provided he can do it securely;
for he who has committed an unjust action can never be certain that it
will not be discovered; and however successfully he may conceal it from
others, this will avail him little, since he cannot conceal it from
himself. In different communities, different laws may be instituted,
according to the circumstances of the people who compose them. Whatever is
thus prescribed is to be considered as a rule of justice, so long as the
society shall judge the observance of it to be for the benefit of the
whole. But whenever any rule of conduct is found upon experience not to be
conducive to the public good, being no longer useful, it should no longer
be prescribed.</p>
<p>"Nearly allied to justice are the virtues of beneficence, compassion,
gratitude, piety, and friendship.—He who confers benefits upon
others, procures to himself the satisfaction of seeing the stream of
plenty spreading around him from the fountain of his beneficence; at the
same time, he enjoys the pleasure of being esteemed by others. The
exercise of gratitude, filial affection, and reverence for the gods, is
necessary, in order to avoid the hatred and contempt of all men.
Friendships are contracted for the sake of mutual benefit; but by degrees
they ripen into such disinterested attachment, that they are continued
without any prospect of advantage. Between friends there is a kind of
league, that each will love the other as himself. A true friend will
partake of the wants and sorrows of his friend, as if they were his own;
if he be in want, he will relieve him; if he be in prison, he will visit
him; if he be sick, he will come to him; nay-situations may occur, in
which he would not scruple to die for him. It cannot then be doubted, that
friendship is one of the most useful means of procuring a secure,
tranquil, and happy life."</p>
<p>No man will, we think, find anything in the foregoing summary to justify
the foul language used against Epicurus, and his moral philosophy; the
secret is in the physical doctrines, and this secret is, that Epicurus was
actually, if not intentionally, an Atheist. The following is a summary of
his physical doctrine:—</p>
<p>"Nothing can ever spring from nothing, nor can anything ever return to
nothing. The universe always existed, and will always remain; for there is
nothing into which it can be changed. There is nothing in Nature, nor can
anything be conceived, besides body and space. Body is that which
possesses the properties of bulk, figure, resistance, and gravity: it is
this alone which can touch or be touched. Space is the region which is, or
may be, occupied by body, and which affords it an opportunity of moving
freely. That there are bodies in the universe is attested by the senses.
That there is also space is evident; since otherwise bodies would have no
place in which to move or exist, and of their existence and motion we have
the certain proof of perception. Besides these, no third nature can be
conceived; for such a nature must either have bulk and solidity, or want
them; that is, it must either be body or space: this does not, however,
preclude the existence of qualities, which have no subsistence but in the
body to which they belong.</p>
<p>"The universe, consisting of body and space, is infinite, for it has no
limits. Bodies are infinite in multitude; space is infinite in magnitude.
The term above, or beneath, high or low, cannot be properly applied to
infinite space. The universe is to be conceived as immoveable, since
beyond it there is no place into which it can move; and as eternal and
immutable, since it is neither liable to increase nor decrease, to
production nor decay. Nevertheless, the parts of the universe are in
motion, and are subject to change.</p>
<p>"All bodies consist of parts, of which they are composed, and into which
they may be resolved; and these parts are either themselves simple
principles, or may be resolved into such. These first principles, or
simple atoms, are divisible by no force, and, therefore, must be
immutable. This may also be inferred from the uniformity of Nature, which
could not be preserved if its principles were not certain and consistent.
The existence of such atoms is evident, since it is impossible that
anything which exists should be reduced to nothing. A finite body cannot
consist of parts infinite, either in magnitude or number; divisibility of
bodies <i>ad infinitum</i>, is therefore conceivable. All atoms are of the
same nature, or differ in no essential qualities—From their
different effects upon the senses, it appears, however, that they differ
in magnitude, figure, and weight. Atoms exist in every possible variety of
figure—round, oval, conical, cubical, sharp, hooked, etc. But in
every shape, they are, on account of their solidity, infrangible, or
incapable of actual division.</p>
<p>"Gravity must be an essential property of atoms; for since they are
perpetually in motion, or making an effort to move, they must be moved by
an internal impulse, which may be called gravity.</p>
<p>"The principle of gravity, that internal energy which is the cause of all
motion, whether simple or complex, being essential to the primary
corpuscles or atoms, they must have been incessantly and from eternity in
actual motion."</p>
<p>Epicurus, who boasts that he was an inquirer and a philosopher in his
thirteenth year, was scarcely likely to bow his mind to the mythology of
his country. The man who, when he was but a schoolboy, insisted upon an
answer to the question, "Whence came chaos?" could hardly be expected to
receive as admitted facts the fabulous legends as to Jupiter and the other
gods. His theology is, however, in some respects, obscure, and
unintelligible; for while he zealously opposed the popular fables, which
men misname God-ideas, he at the same time admitted the existence of
material gods, whom he placed in the intervals between the infinite
worlds, where they passed a life undisturbed by aught, and enjoyed a
happiness which does not admit of augmentation. These inactive gods play a
strange part in the system of Epicurus; and it is asserted by many that
these extraordinary conceptions of Deity were put forward by the
philosopher to screen him from the consequences attaching to a charge of
Atheism. Dr. Heinrich Ritter, who does not seem very friendly disposed
towards Epicurus, or his philosophy, repudiates this notion, and argues
Epicurus was not in truth an Atheist, and alleges that it was a mere
pretence on his part; and that from his very theory of knowledge the
existence of gods could be deduced. This has been much litigated, (vide
Electric Review for 1806, p. 606.) It is quite evident that Epicurus
neither regarded "the gods" in the capacity of Creators, controllers, or
rulers, so that his Theism (if it be Theism) twas not of a very
superstitious character. The God who neither created man, nor exercised
any influence whatever over his actions or thinkings, could have but
little to do with man at all.</p>
<p>If we attempt to review the whole of the teachings of Epicurus, we and
they are defective and imperfect in many respects, and necessarily so. We
say necessarily so, because the imperfect science of the day limited the
array of facts presented to the philosopher, and narrowed the base upon
which he was to erect his system. We must expect, therefore, to find the
structure weak in many points, because it was too large for the
foundation; but we are not, therefore, to pass it on one side, and without
further notice; it should rather be our task to lay good, wide, and sure
foundations, On which to build up a system, and develope a method, really
having, for its end, the happiness of mankind. We live 2000 years later
than the Athenian philosopher.—In those 2000 years many facts have
been dragged out of "the circle of the unknown and unused." Astronomy,
geology, physiology, psychology—all except theology are belter
understood. Men pretend they are searching after happiness, and where do
they try to find it? Not here amongst the known, but in the possible
hereafter amongst the unknowable. How do they try to find it? Not by the
aid of the known, not by the light of facts, gathered in years of toil,
and sanctified by the blood of some of the noblest of truth's noble
martyrs; no—but in the darkness of the unknown and unknowable; in
the next world. Question the men who fly to theology for happiness, and
they will tell you that the most learned of the theologians sum up their
knowledge in the word "incomprehensible." Is it wonderful that their
happiness is somewhat marred "here" by quarrels as to the true definition
of "hereafter?" G. H. Lewes says, of the Epicurean philosophy, "that the
attempt failed because the basis was not broad enough. The Epicureans are
therefore to be regarded as men who ventured on a great problem, and
failed because they only saw part of the truth." And we might add that
Christianity, and every other religious "anity," fails, because the
professors expect to obtain happiness in the next life, and neglect to
work for it in the present one.</p>
<p>Epicurus says, no life can be pleasant except a virtuous life; and he
charges you to avoid whatever maybe calculated to create disquiet in the
mind, or give pain to the body. The Rev. Habbakuk Smilenot, of little
Bethel, says that all pleasure here, is vanity and vexation in the
hereafter; and he charges you to continually worry and harass your mind
with fears that you may be condemned to hell, and doubts whether you will
be permitted to enter heaven. Which is the best, the philosophy of
Epicurus, or the theology of Smilenof?</p>
<p>G. H. Lewes says:—"Epicureanism, in leading man to a correct
appreciation of the moral end of his existence, in showing him how to be
truly happy, has to combat with many obstructions which hide from him the
real road of life. These obstructions are his illusions, his prejudices,
his errors, his ignorance. This ignorance is of two kinds, as Victor
Cousin points out; ignorance of the laws of the external world, which
creates absurd superstitions, and troubles the mind with false fears and
false hopes. Hence the necessity of some knowledge of physics." (We can
scarcely blame Epicurus that he was not in advance of his time, as far as
the physical sciences are concerned, and therefore imparted an imperfect
system of physics. We must, with our improved knowledge, ourselves remove
the obstruction.) "The second kind of ignorance is that of the nature of
man. Socrates had taught men to regard their own nature as the great
object of investigation; and this lesson Epicurus willingly gave ear to.—But
man does not interrogate his own nature out of simple curiosity, or simple
erudition; he studies his nature in order that he may improve it; he
learns the extent of his capacities, in order that he may properly direct
them. The aim, therefore, of all such inquiries must be happiness."</p>
<p>We may add that the result of all such inquiries will be happiness, if the
inquirer will but base his investigation and experiments upon facts. Let
him understand that, as he improves the circumstances which surround him,
so will he advance himself, becoming happier, and making his fellows happy
also. Remember the words of Epicurus, and seek that pleasure for yourself
which appears the most durable, and attended with the greatest pleasure to
your fellow men.</p>
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />