Hedonism

In this paper, I am going to explain how Epicurus’ approach to hedonism differs from the common notion of hedonism. Epicurus was a Greek philosopher. Deriving from Aristotle’s work on the greatest good and happiness, he came up with his form of hedonism that related pleasure to happiness. However, his works became unpopular with the rise of Christianity. Nonetheless, his ideas are still highly regarded to date. The understanding of hedonism, though, has slightly changed.

I intend to argue that indeed, the common notion of hedonism is different from how Epicurus viewed it. To comprehend why this is the case, one must first understand how both sides interpret hedonism. It is generally agreed that hedonism has to do with seeking pleasure and avoiding pain as a means of achieving happiness and well-being (Alwood, 2018). One of the differences arises in choosing the right kind of pleasures. According to Epicurus, pleasures must be chosen wisely to ensure long-term happiness. To clarify this, he divided pleasures into two: moving and static pleasures (Voorhoeve, 2018). Moving pleasures are felt when a person is in the process of satisfying a desire, such as eating a delicacy. On the other hand, static pleasures are a state of satisfaction or not being in want. Static pleasures are what Epicurus advocates for as the best pleasures. This is reflected in one of his quotes that “Being happy is knowing how to be content with little.” On the contrary, the common notion of hedonism assumes moving pleasures as the best source of happiness. This, therefore, leads to indulgence in materialistic gains and physical pleasures. This shows that the common idea of hedonism varies from Epicurus’ approach to hedonism.

Another difference between the two lies in worry and anxiety. Epicurus noted that for one to be truly happy, they must avoid pain. He identified that the greatest source of this pain is worry and anxiety. He named two things that people fear most: the gods and death. Epicurus insisted that one must get rid of these fears to be happy. Among his famous quotes is “Death is nothing to us.” This quote shows that Epicurus did not fear death. He viewed it as ‘ceasing to exist’ and did not believe in the afterlife (Walker, 2018). On the contrary, the common notion of hedonism involves so much worrying about the future. Others live by the saying that we ought to enjoy life to the fullest in anticipation that one day we will die. This view portrays fear or anxiety about life. It, therefore, varies from Epicurus views.

Epicurus believed that being content was the best pleasure. In doing this, he admitted the fact that some desires have to be fulfilled naturally such as food. These are unavoidable and necessary for survival. However, he maintained that there are other desires which are unnecessary and can never be fulfilled. These include a desire for wealth, power, and fame, among others. Such desires only lead to wanting more. For instance, it has been established that one can never have enough money. After all, even billionaires still set out to make more money. Hence, Epicurus advocated for suppressing those desires. However, contemporary hedonism is quite far from what Epicurus believed. Many people believe that happiness can be found in luxuries such as big houses, expensive cars, and fashionable items. They, therefore, spend their entire lives pursuing wealth to enable them to achieve these things which never seem to be enough.

According to Epicurus, worrying is the main source of pain. It only serves to build anxiety in our lives hence limiting happiness. For instance, it is common for people to worry about how tomorrow will be. They are anxious about future exams, a certain interview, or even whether a certain business deal will be closed. The issue of worry is closely related to the pursuit of moving pleasures as earlier described earlier. For instance, the chase for money and wealth leads to anxiety about jobs, business deals, and other sources of income. Other desires such as lust lead to anxieties such as wondering whether a certain partner will give in to one’s advances. Hence, this contradicts Epicurus on his views on hedonism.

In making this argument, I am aware that some might object to my definition of the common notion of hedonism. Arriving at such a definition may appear subjective to a certain extent. However, I argue that this is not the case. A look at many societies’ way of living is an indication of how they define pleasure. The building of the economy is at the center stage of every nation. This is proof that the common notion of hedonism involves deriving happiness from pleasures of wealth.

The search for happiness in wealth shows that the common notion of hedonism varies from Epicurus’ views of hedonism. This difference can be seen in the two aspects of Epicurus’ hedonism: Pleasure and Worry. The common notion is that the more one has the happier they become. This is unlike Epicurus who finds happiness in contentment with the little one has.

 

 

References

Alwood, A. (2018). Epicurean Hedonism as Qualitative Hedonism. The Journal of Value Inquiry, 52(4), 411-427.

Voorhoeve, A. (2018). VIII—Epicurus on Pleasure, a Complete Life, and Death: A Defence. In Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society,118(3), 225-253. Oxford University Press.

Walker, M. (2018). Don’t Fear the Reaper: Towards an Epicurean Grief Therapy. Philosophical Practice: Journal of the American Philosophical Practitioners Association (American Philosophical Practitioners Association), 13(2).