Tuesday, February 22, 2011

Epicureanism vs. Stoicism

Epicureanism is based almost completely on making oneself comfortable, looking out for yourself only, caring about, you guessed it, yourself. Stoicism is based on duty and morality. Don’t look to make yourself happier, because that is not in the grand design of Reason, or fate. Stoics focus on fulfilling their duty, playing their part in nature, be happy knowing that everything will turn out in the end. An epicurean wants to gain as much knowledge as possible to release their mind from worry, relieve it of stress, take comfort in their citadel of knowledge that raises them up and separates them from anyone else. A stoic wants to gain as much knowledge as possible to gain reason, and understanding of nature that brings you closer to equilibrium with nature. A stoic’s knowledge that there is a bigger picture, a grand scheme of Reason, a natural fate for all things is what is to be their source of happiness. They don’t need to complain, or celebrate, or criticize, there is no reason for it, because really, you didn’t do anything worth celebrating for or suffering anything worth complaining over seeing as fate dictates all actions. The most important thing for stoics to do is to do their duty, completing and carrying out fate. In order to understand this, and be happy in the stoic sense, you must learn and be in harmony with nature, if you attach yourself to any externals, you will not be in balance with nature therefore not carrying out fate properly, and therefore not reaching happiness. An epicurean does not believe in a grand design, or really action for anything but themselves. The ultimate goal is to make themselves and only themselves happy. Have friends because they make you happy, but don’t help someone if it discomforts you, other people should have the common sense to look after themselves. Don’t steal because, just think of the discomfort you would suffer if you got caught. However a stoic would not steal because it would not be doing your moral duty. Stealing, and the desire to steal, would put you out of harmony with nature. An epicurean is solely concerned with their own comfort, their own pleasure, and their own standing as they don’t believe in any sort of fate or grand design (if there are gods, they aren’t concerned with humans). A stoic is similarly concerned with their own standing, but they believe that in the end, everything will have reason and that everything will have balance so they should not concern themselves with emotion and do their duty in order to achieve/ fulfill their ultimate goal/ role in fate’s design.

1 comment:

  1. Be careful with the idea that Stoicism is "based on duty and morality." It's actually based on a belief in a rationally functioning world. The concern for executing one's duty well so your behavior mirrors the natural order of things springs from the belief in a rational world. Stoics don't believe in duty for duty's sake. Otherwise, I think most of your observations about both philosophies is pretty accurate.

    So you understand them well enough, but I can't seem to find the answer to my question: is one more life-affirming than the other? Or, another way to look at it: what do you see as a sounder core value: to endure as best you can or to be as happy as you can? Which should you follow (or is there a third option)?

    ReplyDelete