How Did The World Come From

Aristippus believed this because the importance of pleasure would change and become uncertain when pleasures are hard to reach. He felt since there was no certainty in future pleasures, there is no reason to take a chance. Especially since one does not know what lies in the future. Pleasures must be your own and never someone else’s because only you can experience them. Happiness is considered only secondary to pleasure.

The principal Doctrines, are written by Epicurus who lived from 341B.C. to 270 B.C. His theory is hedonism, which is rooted in pleasure. The book speaks of pain as being only temporary, and that it is only a pleasure over pain (V). This is a way of life to see the pleasures that life offers are what Epicurus is saying. And although, “no Pleasure is a bad thing in itself,” The results of obtaining the pleasure can bring greater displeasures (VIII). He is looking for the most pleasures one can get, and I suppose if he was not happy with his job, that he would quit. I can see Epicurus, avoiding a lot of things within his life because they would bring pain and frustration, like driving in rush hour. The idea sounds like he is living the simple life, or a hermit’s life.

In the 18th century, scientists were strongly influenced by theories. In 350 B.C., Aristotle believed that everything was made from fire, earth, air and water. There later was a Greek physician named Galen. He practiced about 500 years after Aristotle. Galen believed that the body had four elements which he called humors. The four

Lucretius, a Roman philosopher, was greatly inspired by the teachings of Epicurus. In Lucretius’s book, On the Nature of Things, he expands on many Epicurean principles and at times even alters them. “Nothing comes from nothing”, the first principle that Lucretius endorses, is essential to his argument for the origin of the world. Using this principle, Lucretius against the accepted Roman religion by adding the concept that “divine intervention” is not the root of creation, instead he gives credit to atoms. These atoms, or beginnings of things, he reasoned, came together to form masses called bodies.

Epicurus believed that the idea of pleasure was important but had to restrained. He contributed to modern hedonism. He created the garden a sort of ancient Utopia that he used as a base for his teachings and claimed that all were welcome but must reject their old lives and society. His guide to the good life included the use and creation of Tetrapharmakos, which had four points that people should live by to attain the good life. These included, God is nothing to fear, one if Epicurus’ biggest idea was in his riddle, if god is so powerful and willing to help others, then why does evil exist? And if is not so powerful and is not willing then why are they called gods and why are they worshipped? Death is nothing to worry about, there is not immoral

In evaluating the philosopher’s goal of determining how to live a good life, Epicurean philosophers argue that pleasure is the greatest good and pain is the greatest bad. Foremost, for the purpose of this analysis, I must define the pleasure and pain described. Pleasure is seen as the state of being pleased or gratified. This term is defined more specifically by the subject to which the pleasure applies, depending on what he likes. Pain is the opposite of pleasure, which is a type of emotional or physical un-pleasure that results in something that the person dislikes. “Everything in which we rejoice is pleasure, just as everything that distresses us is pain,” (Cicero 1). Through this hedonistic assessment of pleasure and pain, epicurean philosophers come to the conclusion that, “the greatest pleasure [is that] which is perceived once all pain has been removed,” (Epicurus 1).

The philosophy of Epicurus sought virtue as a condition of serenity in the soul. According to his thought, Epicureanism is centered in the achievement of happiness through the elimination of one’s desires, and on pleasure and virtue claiming that “It is impossible to live pleasantly without living wisely and honorably and justly” (Epicurus, Doctrines, 1). This signifies that pleasure and virtue are interdependent and both sustain the concept of this ideology. To achieve happiness, one must do its best to live as virtuously as possible if they are to live a pleasant life. Pleasure is declared as the “beginning and end of the happy life” and by nature “the greatest good” (Epicurus, Doctrines, 13). This is so because living a life of pleasure means pain is absent and therefore makes life meaningful. Reason and virtue play an important role in the Epicurean notion of pleasure, leading the wise man to choose a simple life and rational action above

On the first point, Aristotle states that his account is simple, general and relevant, the opposite of Democritus', and therefore is the better account. He gives an example involving a cube and hoop, and implies of Democritus the invaluable question of "why" will the cube of side 2r not pass through the hoop of radius just slightly greater than r. He continues by saying that Democritus "denigrate[s] attempts like mine (Aristotle's) to make available a variety of answers to 'why' -questions; for you, the only scientific answer will be one that lists the atoms that compose the hoop and the two bronze figures, charts their distances and positions in the void, and gives a precise, elaborate account of

This philosophy of Epicurus ,holding that the world is a series of fortuitous combination of atom and the pleasure is the highest good. Interpreted as a freedom from disturbance or pain.

Epicurus was a hedonist, a materialist and a consequentialist who strongly believed that in order to attain the good life one must live a pleasant existence free of worry and pain. Through reflection of the concepts in Epicurus’s Letter to Menoeceus this paper will

It can be said in many ways that Democritus’ account on nature is superior to Anaxagoras’. Anaxagoras believes that a mover is the cause of motion in matter. He calls this “Mind,” (Frag. 12, Anaxagoras). Mind has the following attributes: it is self-ruling, unlimited, and unmixed with the infinite small and great. In short, it is completely independent of the movement of matter, and yet it “began to move things” (Frag. 12, Anaxagoras). Democritus has no corresponding idea to Anaxagoras. Instead, he believes that atoms, his version of first principles, have “always been moving, and will always move” (Frag. 9, Democritus). He does not have an original source of movement. He claims that the atoms move “by bumping and knocking one another,” (Frag 9, Democritus) but does not state a beginning for the bumping and knocking. As an analogy, think of falling dominos as matter moving. Anaxagoras believes that the dominos were falling since the Mind started motion. Democritus believes that the dominos have and will always be in motion, falling for infinity in both the past and future.

Epicurus was a man of modesty. He believed that happiness was the main goal for an individual to achieve, but he believed that living luxuriously was not the way to attain happiness. He thought that material objects and shopping was a false idea of happiness. Epicurus thought friendship, freedom and an analyzed life was of the utmost importance to being happy. His ideas state that even if you are dirt poor-you still can be happy, but you can have all the money in the world-and still be unhappy. These are pretty common ideas in today’s society as well. Everyone knows the cliché saying, “money can’t buy happiness”, or “you can’t take it with you when you die”, which showcase how the idea of being rich won’t solve the human condition. Of course I believe that Epicurus’s ideas could help people in today’s society, but I also think that today’s society is pretty much set up for commercialism and consumerism.

The ethics behind Epicureanism are very simple. Epicurus demonstrates that experience shows happiness is not best attained by directly seeking it. The selfish are not more happy but less so than the unselfish. This statement is very powerful for the simple person. Epicurus proves that if a person seeks to be happy he/she usually won't be able to find true happiness.

During Epicurus’s early years he looked towards other philosophers as an inspiration. Epicurus first discusses the idea and “importance of sensual pleasure” (50). To express these teachings Epicurus created a place where people could go to “study [the] pleasure” (51) that he preached about in his teachings. Many found this type of study to be morally uneasy, however, it consistently gained support, to many especially the wealthy. After some time, these places of study began to disappear. Epicurus then began to look at how one can achieve a happy and healthy life. To do this one must originally look towards what makes them unhappy and “dissatisfied” (54) in their lives whether that be their job or something else. Therefore, through Epicurus’s teachings one should not act “on first impulse” but look towards what our desires are telling us that we want in life. Epicurus looked at friendship to achieving a happy life. One must have a connection to others in order to feel complete in the world. Therefore, Epicurus lived amongst many friends where he noticed and expressed that “we don’t exist unless there is someone who can see us existing” (57) therefore, by having friends in our life we always feel that we are part of something in the world that is larger than ourselves. Epicurus also expresses that our friends “do not evaluate us… to worldly criteria” (57). Once one has friends who accept them and show unconditional love, one many look towards Epicurus’s view of freedom in finding happiness. One needs to be free of “everyday affairs and politics” (58) to live a happy life. From giving up these mundane affairs, Epicurus and his friends were able not be reliant on a “material basis” (58) but could find happiness on the simplicity of life. The next

One of the most basic philosophical questions, as well as at the same time being the most complicated, in the novel Sophie’s World is the question, who are we? This question alone is what embarks Sophie, the main character in the novel, on a never ending journey of questions and through the world of philosophy. As it is shown in Sophie’s World, the concepts of philosophy have been in constant change all throughout history, philosophers contradicting one another in a constant battle to achieve greatness, and proceeding in a constant never ending cycle of philosopher contradicting philosopher. Because of this non-stop constant change in philosophy, Democritus, one of the earliest philosophers, would have a