Abstract
After the death of Aristotle and Alexander, Greece fragmented into small states and later invaded by Rome. Political crisis led to degradation of society, culture, and intellectuality. People indulged into practical affairs rather than on systematic intellectual activity. They were searching a new way to solve the practical problems of life. Hence, philosophy became means (rather than end) for the liberation from practical suffering. Philosophical theories and practical affairs had been reconciling. Ethics and social sciences got more importance and metaphysics was utilized to justify such practical science. This is known as Hellenistic period in Western philosophy.
The Epicureanism, founded by Epicurus (341-270 B.C.E.), which belongs to Hellenistic Philosophical period, is a holistic view upon life and world. It is an attempt to solve the practical problems by the modus operandi supplied by Metaphysics. It combines Democritian, mechanistic and materialistic, metaphysics with Cyrenaica’s Hedonism. This paper will examine whether Epicurean ethics consistently follows from metaphysics or not, whether mechanistic materialism always leads to Hedonism or not, and then whether ethics is possible from metaphysics or cannot be derived from metaphysics.
Key Words: perception, atom, soul, Free will, Mechanistic materialism, Hedonism, Individualism
- Epicurean Problem
According to Epicurus, the main objective of philosophy is to provide the ability to live happy life. He thought that the point of all one’s actions is to attain pleasure (conceived of as tranquility) for oneself and that this could be done by limiting one’s desires and by banishing the fear of the Gods and of death[1]. Epistemological and Metaphysical knowledge can help in this purpose because they, only, are the means of getting truth. If we find the ultimate truth existing autonomously, we can be sure that there is no intervention of supernatural power in our life. Therefore, in order to get rid of divine fear, we need to have Metaphysical knowledge.
- Epicurean Metaphysics
Epicurean Metaphysics is based upon empirical epistemology. According to Epicureanism, only the sense perception gives true knowledge. Although, perception at times may yield illusory knowledge, it is reliable for the reason that we can separate what is illusion and what is not, by repeating observation. Illusion is the fallacies of judgment but not of perception and hence skepticism is untenable. We know everything directly by perception and even the ideas or concepts like Platonic forms are merely the products of sense perception because it is solely generalization of similar objects or particulars. Epicurus holds that imagination is also effect of sense perception because we cannot imagine without having past experience.
Since there is only perceptual source of knowledge and whatever we can perceive are the material things, there is no place for supernatural and divine existence in Epicureanism[2]. Hence, Epicurus conceives that world is solely the constitution of matter, and immaterial things do not exist within our world.
Adopting the Democritus’ atomistic materialism[3], Epicurus assumes that invisible (microscopic), indivisible, unchangeable, indestructible, eternal, discrete, and solid atoms, moving vertically downward in empty space, are the ultimate ingredients of world. Here is a contradiction that how he knew invisible atom by perception. This is because such explanation of Epicurus does not base upon observation. He was not a scientist. He borrows such knowledge from his predecessors. He was also the pupil of atomist Nusiphanes. Hence, the atomism of Epicurus was simply a matter of his education and was not a matter of his own investigation[4].
Epicurean atoms have shape, size, and weight. Though it moves in empty space, it does not have any hole or emptiness within its own body. Atoms keep on falling in straight line. Atoms have various weights and here Epicurus seems pluralist. Heavier atoms fall with greater speed and lighter atoms fall with slower speed. So, the heavier atoms overrun the lighter ones and collide. In order to give sufficient justification for collision, Epicurus assumes that atoms fall swerving vertically. Swerve occurs randomly, which makes collision possible. If only straight downward fall with uniform velocity were nature of atoms, or if there were not property of swerving and different weight, collision would never happen or evolution would never occur.
- Mechanistic Explanation:
Epicureanism has defined all world events as natural phenomenon. Hence it is a mechanistic explanation rather than teleological. There is no purposiveness in nature; everything evolves spontaneously by chance because of random swerving of atoms having different weight. Even the soul evolves from fine, round, minute and speedy atoms. Soul seats in heart and rules will and desire of men. Our body is also complex combination of atoms. There is not any soul-body dichotomy in Epicureanism because both soul-bodies are nothing but different types of combination of atoms.
- God:
To besecure from being charged as godless philosophy, Epicurus accepts the existence of God. However, Epicurean concept of God differs with the conventional concept of God. God is in fact has no concern of other beings. He is completely happy and does not trouble himself caring about other’s distress.
- Epicurean Ethics
Epicureans, as hedonist, accept that man seeks pleasure and avoids pain, almost instinctively. Good of man is in the pursuit of pleasure and the avoidance of pain. Somehow, Epicurean borrowed this doctrine from Cyrenaic Aristippus but not at all. Epicureans distinguished between two different types of pleasure: mobile pleasure and static pleasure. Mobile pleasure occurs while satisfying mere desire like appetite. It is like the pleasure obtaining while eating food to satisfy hunger. However, when one satisfies his hunger completely, that is the state of ‘static’ pleasure. In this static pleasure state, one becomes desireless; she will not have any need or want. According to Epicurus, this state of static pleasure is the best pleasure than mobile pleasure.
There is also another distinction in Epicureanism regarding pleasure and pain, one is physical pleasure and pain, and then another is mental pleasure and pain. Mental pain has been emphasized more. Physical pains are solely concerned about non-fulfillment of present need or desire and physical pleasure is the satisfaction of present desire while mental pains are the regret of past and fear of future and mental pleasure is getting rid of such mental pain. According to Epicureans, the greatest destroyer of happiness is the anxiety about future, especially fear of gods and death. If such fears vanish, one can satisfies his desire and can attain tranquility (ataraxia). Here, one thing must be kept in mind is that happiness for Epicureans is not only physical pleasure rather it is mental tranquility. Hence, it does not directly resemble with modern Utilitarianism. For the mental pleasure, Epicurus emphasizes more on friendship. Since it is difficult to attain static pleasure and tranquility, Epicurean insists on removing pain from body and soul. Mainly, removing pain from soul is important than from body in order to attain tranquility. So, they conceive philosophy as ‘Therapy of Soul’.
- Inconsistencies
Epicurean ethics seems to be teleological as they insist on attainment of tranquility (ataraxia). Tranquility is the most exalted state of static mental pleasure. Nevertheless, Epicureanism does not provide place for teleology in metaphysics, rather Epicurean metaphysics holds the coincidental and spontaneous evolution, and then inconsistency occurs as to how non-teleological metaphysics brings teleological ethics. It is inconsistent that how human being, as a complex combination of mobile atoms, can attain static pleasure. If atom is mobile then atomic soul and its experience must be changeable. The concept of Static pleasure appears to be human dictatorship over laws of (dynamic) nature. Epicureanism would be consistent if there were continuous changeability in the conditions of pleasure and pain.
Moreover, any mechanical (determined) machine cannot have ethical values and moral obligations. Ethics is possible if and only if there is free will, but according to Epicureanism, even human and rational soul are the complex organization of various mechanical atoms, then how complexity of mechanical atoms can yield free will is another contradiction. Somehow, there will be freedom but it seems to be coincidence because evolution occurs, contingently, by chance or coincidence. Therefore, free will, in Epicureanism, is a contingent fact, which is not necessarily responsible to yield tranquility. A question remains unanswerable as to why tranquility does not occur spontaneously, contingently and coincidentally. If the soul had complete free will, as in case of Cartesian cogito, it would have led to ethics of tranquility attainable by free will. However, even the soul is brute physical component determined mechanically and evolutionally by chance. Yet, another question is that how human being gets desire? The evolution was not by the reason of any desire or ego or force of attraction. It is solely a mechanical event. Desire cannot occur mechanically, it is the psychological. Then how can atomic body be happy by fulfilling desire.
The final inconsistency found in Epicureanism is that it is too much individualistic philosophy. It does not discuss about the effects and harms by external environment upon individual. It seeks to detach person from society for the sake of individual pleasure. It interprets individual as creator of own pleasure and pain. It gives priority to the internal life. However, evolution and even the existence of man are possible only when atoms unite. Then its metaphysical unity is inconsistent with ethical detachment from worldly things. Moreover, it shows the metaphysical pluralism, pluralism of atom by different weight, and then if there are atoms of different weight, the products given by their union must be different. In this case, human soul also must have different nature and body also must have different nature, then how tranquility can be good for all is unanswerable. Pluralist metaphysics is inconsistent with absolutist ethics.
- Conclusion
Hence, it is not necessary that mechanistic materialism always lead to hedonistic ethics. In my view, mechanistic explanation of world cannot give rise to happiness. It can yield solely the hard determinism. It can conclude life as nothing in humans hand and what happens in life is contingent upon chance. Even the Epicurean ethics does not follow from their metaphysics.
[1] O’Keefe, Tim, Epicurus(341-271 B.C.E), Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
[2] However, Epicurus believes in the existence of non-intervening God, here what I am saying is that there is no place for supernatural power within our life and world or simply God and Deities are not important for our life.
[3] Here, one things must keep in mind is that Epicurean explanation of Metaphysics is not same with Democritus’ metaphysics. There is sufficient dissent between them. The main difference is that Democritus holds rotary movement of atoms while Epicurus holds vertically downward fall. Moreover Epicurus added weight and swerve property which had not explained by Democritus. For Democritus, sensible qualities are solely subjective for perceiver and not inherent quality of atom. For Epicurus, group of atom possesses these qualities depending upon relation between atoms.
[4] Masih, Y., A critical history of Western Philosophy, Motilal Banarasidas, 5th reprint, Delhi, 2013, Page 127
Prakash Chandra Gajurel 