Where Stoicism Meets Epicureanism
Stoics and Epicureans had a lot to say on the matter.
Various pursuits have existed since time immemorial in the world of Philosophy. As the principle dictates of philosophy are to guide us through whatever we seek to know, methodical and elaborate paths to achieve them came about. For this good reason, the development of philosophy is not restricted to the same set of goals. Philosophy is the tailor who takes our orders and prescribes to us a fitting solution.
Among the many prominent philosophies that have emerged since antiquity, very few stood the test of time and borders. The scarcity does not reduce the potential benefits that these estranged creations of man bring about.
Two prominent philosophies that have been able to withstand the test of time are Stoicism and Epicureanism. Stoicism is an elegant philosophy that is a practical guide to enduring the trials that life offers. Epicureanism, on the other hand, offers to fulfil a different purpose; happiness. Historically, Stoics had a disdain for the Epicureans, but they failed to see that their philosophies could quite possibly have been coined from the same embers.
Purpose
It is not a trivial feat to resort to a particular set of doctrines that improve both our lives and the possibility of a better future. Anyone who sets upon a path of such a cruel undertaking is braver than the majority. I call it cruel because of all the hardships one has to undergo to adjust to the struggles ahead of them.
And so now you have chosen to embark on a path that leads to happiness. Happiness is not a monolithic mass of radiant energy that we all resonate with. It is quite the opposite, and what we should realize is that this spectrum of happiness can be tapped on by using world views that vastly contradict each other.
A quick discussion with yourself should lead you to the point of saying that you could be happy and still work hard in service to others. You could live modestly and still enjoy a wealth that is unprecedented in your immediate life and beyond. YOU could achieve all these things without thinking in terms of polarity but more like fluidity.
Now that our purpose is ahead of us, the understanding that two differing world views are of value should sow a seed of growth.
The Stoic and The Epicurean become one.
1.Friendship
The eccentric figure called Epicurus left us some gems of truth in his writings and assertions. Many central lines of thought that he proposes also resonates with the teachings of the Stoics.
Among those acknowledgments is the ability of one to bring happiness to themselves without external influence. An Epicurean would define happiness in e a different way in comparison to a Stoic. The first would indulge in pleasurable things as a way to be happy, while the latter would affirm that happiness is a blend of practical concerns and things that inspire you.
…the idea that it is appropriate and desirable for people — at least, for educated and well- off adult men — to devote thought and energy to promoting their own happiness and well- being in addition to more immediate practical concerns. — Commentary of Meditations(Marcus Aurelius).
It was commonly misinterpreted that Epicureans lived expedient and extravagant lives. Rumours flew about that they had all kinds of orgies and ate the best foods that were available to them. Unknown to the majority is that they lived simple lives with the simple goal of attaining happiness and satisfaction. The backbone of this kind of life was the fact that friends lived together to satisfy each other’s needs. A genuine companionship.
The Stoics, as suggested by Seneca, also had a similar bond where they valued friendships(not friends). I explained the concept in one of my articles. Both of them would have agreed on the value of building what you have by leaning into a friendship with an acquaintance.
2.Death
For both parties, death was a hot matter of interest. In some ways, the two groups had certain parallels when it came to their firm beliefs on death. Epicurus famously used to say:
When we exist, death is not present, and when death is present, we do not exist.
The body withers away, and we have absolutely no clue what happens after we die. It is of no use bothering ourselves how bad our deaths will be or what will happen after that. After all, it is not in our power to change any of the events that are in place. It is for this good reason that the Stoics put an emphasis on meditating once you wake up in the morning.
A long mental induction into the state of reality that whatever may happen may not be in your favour always assists you. It puts you in a state of indifference, and whatever may come will only go so far to harm you. If you were to get into a situation that may lead to your death, the firm truth remains that we do not know what happens after that.
Epicurus goes further to assert that it is largely irrational to fear a fate that befalls every mortal. Why fear that which comes to everyone. Isn’t it, as he puts it, an irrationality?
Those are among the few observations that I could highlight from these two schools of thought. It is my firm belief, as one who seeks to learn from philosophy, that those who can blend the best of this world are armed to face adversities. Even in differences, sometimes we can find appealing and complementary features that only boost the individual.
