So, when we discussed Epicureanism for the first day, I noticed a strongly negative reaction to Epicurus’ egoism. When the term moral selfishness gets thrown around, people picture a barbarian with a turkey leg in one hand, a club in the other, and sex in his eyes. Frankly, I think that this reaction is unwarranted and based on an incomplete understanding of what Epicurus meant. A division should be drawn between pleasure and deeper set ends/goals/values. To elucidate, someone may gain immense pleasure from an altruistic action. Take Mother Theresa for example. She obviously liked taking care of poor starving children. She found purpose, and thus pleasure in those actions. Her sense of purpose came from achieving her objectives, this was also the source of her pleasure, but the objectives themselves were far from selfish.
As is common with Epicurus, he focuses in on the most sensible aspect and equates it with totality. Epicurus noticed the pleasure that can come from offering, as well as receiving, compassion and love. Consequently, he spent little time contemplating the ultimate goal or value that was achieved, producing that pleasure, and instead focused in on the pleasure itself. Epicurus was saying the same thing as Mother Theresa, just with an extremely different emphasis. So step off.
I'm not sure this picture is entirely accurate for two reasons. The first of which is that I think more commonalities can be drawn between a Cynic and Mother Theresa. Mother Theresa most certainly had a fair amount of contempt for the way society was moving. It was characteristic of her to say, "Not enough," when people gave her money.
ReplyDeleteMother Theresa's life was also filled with doubt. While media coverage most certainly tried to paint this image as negatively as possible some times, it is generally regarded as the experience of the Dark Night of the Soul. During this time, she certainly experienced little pleasure (in either the Epicurean sense or the modern sense).
I certainly don't picture a big barbarian, but I understand what you are trying to say. Epicurus himself does not/would not have scared me. Neither would his students, I'm sure. What scares me is how grossly misconstrued his philosophy could become to the masses. Taken at face value and without further study, his egoism is, in my opinion, potentially dangerous.
ReplyDelete