Lucretius De Rerum Natura or On The Nature Of Things (c. 50 BCE)
We know essentially nothing about Titus Lucretius Carus, the author of this book, aside from the fact that the book was being read by 54 BCE and that its philosophy belongs originally to the Greek philosopher Epicurus.
Historians have argued that it is the discovery of this book, this poem of Lucretius, that is most responsible for the Renaissance and thus all modern thinking. Lost for a millennia until 1417, it certainly had a profound impact on some of the greatest Renaissance and "modern" thinkers, including Thomas Jefferson, who owned eight copies: “I too am an Epicurean. I consider the genuine doctrines of Epicurus as containing everything rational in moral philosophy which Greece and Rome have left us.” -- (Letter to Wm. Short, October 13, 1819).
At the end of that letter Jefferson also succinctly summarizes Epicurean philosophy:
"Moral —Happiness the aim of life.
Virtue the foundation of happiness.
Utility the test of virtue.
“Epicureanism” now refers to the pursuit of, usually,
gastronomic pleasures – eating and drinking fine food and wine – a
bastardization of Epicurus’ original philosophy that would leave Epicurus
spinning in his grave, were it not for the fact that Epicurus didn’t believe
there was any sort of life after death.
Although all of
Epicurus’ original writing has long since disappeared, we have much of his
philosophy via Lucretius' On The Nature Of
Things (50 BCE), three letters, including his
40 Principle Doctrines, and the ruins of wall
summarizing his philosophy, created by the 2nd
Century AD philosopher Diogenes, in Oenoanda, Turkey.
Diogenes Wall,
Oenoanda, Turkey:
Atomism
Epicurus is, perhaps, the first pure rationalist (unless that
man is Socrates, devoid of Plato's influence). In stark contrast to Plato and
most other Ancient, Classical and pre-scientific philosophers, Epicurus
envisioned a strictly material universe: all things are constructed of elements or atoms
and there is no supernatural or spiritual element to existence, at least
relevant to our existence; he argued that the gods do exist but they were neither responsible
for creation nor involved in the running of the universe or our lives etc.
This led him to develop a philosophy that was both purely rational
("logical", devoid of faith) and empirical (based on a careful examination of the natural world).
Happiness As Pleasure; Pleasure As The Absence Of Pain
Like many philosophers, Epicurus
argued that happiness – eudaimonia – is the aim of life, and he then argued that
happiness is pleasure. But Epicurus is very specific about the nature of
"pleasure"; pleasure, he argued, as the absence of pain. He
also argued that “the magnitude of pleasure reaches its limit in the removal of all
pain.”
In other words, we cannot achieve more happiness, or more
pleasure, once we have alleviated pain:
if we experience the pain of hunger, once we’ve
eaten enough to remove that pain we are tapped out and topped off: that’s the
limit of our pleasure and happiness, so eating more food, or better tasting
food, will not cause more pleasure or happiness.
Suffering As Anxiety
Epicurus next noted that most of our
pain is caused not by physical but by mental suffering: fear
(anxiety). Logically, then
the surest route to happiness was to live in a manner that would alleviate our
fear.
Here’s how:
Do Not Fear Death
Of course the thing we fear the most
– and thus the largest cause of human
suffering/anxiety – is death, but in a purely material world fearing death is
utterly illogical:
“Death is nothing to us; for the body, when it has been resolved into its elements, has no feeling, and that which has no feeling is nothing to us" (Epicurus, Principal Doctrines).
Before Epicurus, Socrates had argued that we need not fear
death because we don’t know what it is (and it would thus be irrational to fear
it: it might be very nice, or it might be nothing at all), and Epicurus took
this further and argued that as we are simply matter (atoms), our deaths
amounted to nothing whatsoever; death is simply matter changing form; at death
the atoms of our soul return to the atmosphere, like water to the ground when
the vessel holding it is smashed.
Most of us think of happiness/pleasure as satisfying physical desire -- food, sex, playing games -- but often following our desires simply increases our anxiety, and thus our suffering. For example, you like playing video games -- it's "pleasurable" -- and so you spend more time gaming than working. But notice that after about an hour you are becoming increasingly anxious, because you know you should be working. You eat those first Doritos and they're awesome, and then you can't stop, and now you feel anxious because your desire is controlling you....
Rationality, Virtue, Happiness
The rest of Epicurean philosophy
follows a similar arc:
at each point we are asked how to most logically
alleviate our anxiety, and often we will find it is to live virtuously and
simply.
If, for example, we fear that we will
lose our material wealth, we might do well to simply live without it in the
first place;
rather than lock the doors to keep our thieves, we might
ask ourselves why they are trying to steal from us in the first place: do they
have enough themselves?
Do we have fancy things that tempt others?
Mainly, why do we have these fancy things if they
simply cause us more anxiety?
Keep in mind that pleasure is simply the absence of
pain, and a $80,000 BMW doesn’t alleviate more pain than a $20,000 KIA, but an
expensive car is likely to make our neighbors covetous.
As you can guess, he argued that the
simplest life was that most likely to cause the least anxiety:
if you covet your property you will fear losing it;
if you feel you need a lot of money to maintain a lavish lifestyle, you’ll fear
losing your job; a man that craves fine things is, ultimately, as slave to those
things.
He argued that virtuous people are
more happy simply because they experience less anxiety:
the thief is always afraid he will be caught;
the liar is always afraid he’ll be found out; the
greedy live in fear they will be hated or harmed etc.
The Basic Human Needs
So, if we don’t need fancy things to be happy – and if,
indeed, fancy things actually tend to decrease our happiness – what do we need?
First, we need freedom.
We need the ability to choose the lifestyle that
will, indeed, lead to our happiness.
As you can guess, for Epicurus this included freedom
from our own desires, or, more accurately, freedom from the restraints these
desires tend to inspire.
Second, we need friends, community.
Epicurus recognized what most social psychologist
agree to be a fundamental human truth: we are social animals, and it matters
much less what we are doing than who we are doing it with.
Epicurus famously argued that it’s far less
important what you eat than who you eat it with, and he famously not only
refused to eat alone, but he and his friends bought a big house in which to live
together – a big house in the country, by the way, away from the meddling of
others in town (so that they could have more freedom).
Finally, we needed time to examine our
lives.
As you can see, most of Epicurus’ conclusions don’t come
naturally to us – in fact, most of us are busily hurtling ourselves away from
the very choices he suggest – and so we all need to simply make the time to
carefully think about whether or not our choices are in accord with out virtue
and whether or not our virtue is in accord with our ultimately goal: happiness,
freedom from suffering.