The focus of Epicurus’ ethical writings [what little we have] is on
the individual and his self-interest. But there is far too much in the
Principle Doctrines and the Vatican aphorism about friendship and
justice for one to characterize his philosophy as purely, or even
predominately self-regarding. So, if were one to read only The Letter
to Menoeceus [the most accessible and oft-read of his extant
writings], you might get the impression that one’s self-interest was
all Epicurus urged us to "practice and study without ceasing."
Furthermore, many do the recognize the logical distinction
between "self-interest" and "selfishness. " And such a distinction must
be made, for the following statement is not self-contradicting,
incoherent, or impracticable: "It is not in your self-interest to be
selfish." Indeed, if one considers the four salient criteria offers
for judging which pleasures we should choose in the 8th and 9th
Principle Doctrines, selfish pleasures often prove unchoiceworthy
because they have bad consequences, because they are short-lived,
because they do not please the whole of our natures, or the highest
and noblest part of natures.
Ross Chapman on the Yahoo discussion site Friday 17 August
It is certainly not generally in one’s best interests to be selfish. To think otherwise appears to me to be counter-intuitive, although we are all from time to time selfish in minor matters, I’ve no doubt.
But if you accept that selfishness is not a good idea, how can you then resist the proposition the good of the community adds to one’s sum of happiness?
The more extreme of the (small body of ) Epicureans want you to totally ignore politics, war, poverty, the wider community etc. and concentrate on personal happiness and welfare. I think that, as in all things in life, everyone has a slightly different take on what constitutes happiness and how to achieve it. Maybe the key is toleration of other points of view. In short supply at the moment.