The Essence of Epicureanism

Posted by on

Epicureanism was never meant to be a dry academic philosophy. In fact, it is best kept away from academia, where, as usual with philosophy, long words render it dull, if not incomprehensible. Rather, it is a vital way of living, which seeks to free men and women from a life of unhappiness, fear and anxiety. It is a missionary philosophy for the practical-minded with common sense. While Epicureans have written scholarly works, they have always been most interested in explaining Epicureanism in a manner simple enough for anyone to understand and remember.

The following eight counsels are a basic guide to Epicurean living.
1) Don’t fear God.
2) Don’t worry about death.
3) Don’t fear pain.
4) Live simply.
5) Pursue pleasure wisely.
6) Make friends and be a good friend.
7) Be honest in your business and private life.
8) Avoid fame and political ambition.

I would add: think of others; be polite and considerate; try to see the other point of view; meet others half way, if possible. Take the smooth and pleasant road, as free from stress and conflict as possible. But don’t be put upon!

Happiness

Posted by on

Research by Matt Killingsworth of Harvard University suggests that we are happiest when we are not actively seeking happiness, but are wrapt in the moment.  Happiness is a mode of being, not a mode of seeking.  A bit like Schrodinger’s cat (the act of observing changes the situation): the moment we say we are happy we are distancing and isolating ourselves from the experience by the very act of observing. If we are at one moment wrapt in musical ecstasy, awareness renders the experience no longer ecstatic.  The bubble has burst. 

Moral: don’t actively search around for happiness; just immerse yourself in the moment.

Nostalgia and British television

Posted by on

British television has been enjoying its “finest hour” in the US. Shows such as Downton Abbey, Call the Midwife, Sherlock and Dr Who have attracted huge ratings and critical esteem. Indeed, Downton, while winning few awards at home, has become the most decorated foreign TV show in US history – a fact that “speaks to pathologies in both nations: in Britain, nothing so much fun is allowed to be good, whereas in the US, fancy accents and exquisite production automatically connote high artistic merit”. But these shows have more than just snob value. The key to their appeal is their cosy nostalgia. “The Brits’ chief imaginative export is the idea that a nation can reconcile with its past, and, crucially, that even if others may not forgive them, they have forgiven themselves.” Britain is no longer a great power but America is, and its “TV landscape is accordingly vast, bewilderingly profuse and almost dementedly creative”. Genres are colliding; taboos are being broken. But when it all gets too much, “Americans can gaze across the ocean and be reassured that decline, when it comes, is not to be feared, and that if the national memory is selective enough, you can get away with living quite contentedly entirely in a past of one’s choosing”. (adapted from an article by Damian Lanigan in “NewRepublic”)

This is just too silly.  The truth is simpler. Americans can indulge in a romantic fantasy with no class or historic overtones, such as exist in Britain, where the toffs are still reviled (the murderer/ baddie in Midsomer Murders is inevitably a toff, living in the local manor house).  Writers keep trotting out these class war plots, because they sell to still-resentful Brits, even though the really rich and exploitative people are now a totally different set than that depicted in movies (and are less attractive). It has nothing to do with decline – the British got used to that at least a generation ago. Indeed, few young people know or care about the Empire. This is about still fighting an old and tired class war. I love Downton Abbey but am sick of the war. Epicureans get over these things.

Is war with China inevitable?

Posted by on

President Xi Jinping has tried to play down the escalating tension between China and the US, insisting in a recent speech that “there is no such thing as the Thucydides Trap”. He was citing the ancient Greek historian, who argued that whenever a new power emerges to vie for supremacy with an established one (as Athens did with Sparta in Thucydides’s day), then war between the two is inevitable. Alas, the signs are that, whatever Xi may say, the US and China are on a collision course. Beijing has been steadily building its military strength, developing a “carrier killer” missile specifically designed to sink US aircraft carriers, and deploying surface-to-air missiles on one of the disputed islands, which China asserts are her territory. The US has reacted by carrying out “huge war games in the Pacific to practice fighting China”. Sino-US relations seem set on a scary trajectory. We can only hope that this time, Thucydides is proved wrong. (Peter Popham, The Independent)

With the exception of Bernie, the views of the US electoral candidates are not reassuring.  Hillary adopts aggressive stances on most occasions, while non-stop, endless warfare is a given under the Republicans anyway. “Making America great again” means even more money being wasted on the military for the benefit of the military-industrial complex.  And, if Trump were President, it would happen impulsively, without planning or thought for consequences, which don’t bear thinking about.  And this is without taking into account the dictator Xi, whose lust for power seems limitless.  The runes are not positive.

Epicurus loathed war and those who make it happen. Needless to say, Epicureans and millions of other people will suffer if the crazies start a new one. For pride? For a few tiny islands?

America – land of the giant monopolies

Posted by on

In an article entitled “The problem with profits” The Economist of March 23rd effectively agrees with those who say that the American political and economic system, once so vibrant and competitive, is broken (amazing, but refreshing, coming from the rather conventional Economist).

The Economist article says that in former times a profitable company would eventually have its profits competed away. Now there are monopolies everywhere.(Mention “monopoly” to a lawyer or economist and you get involved in a debate about the meaning of “monopoly”. But the man in the street recognises one when he sees it!). Ten trillion dollars worth of mergers since 2008 have increased concentration. The promises of savings seldom, if ever, benefit the public. The excess cash being generated domestically by corporations is running at $800 billion a year, over and above investment budgets. This represents 4% of GDP, and it is often not being hidden away in tax shelters (encouraged by the tax regime) or paid to the bosses.  Monopoly means artificially high prices, which, were they at normal levels, would reduce consumers’ bills by 2% or more.  

And then you have regulation. The Economist hates regulation, but regulation of companies and banks is essential to prevent the fraud, cheating and theft of consumers. Companies provoke new regulation by acting against the public interest, provoking new rules. Unfortunately, regulations cost companies and can be complex. This means that only the big boys have the resources to handle them, which in turn blocks the entry of smaller competitors.  Neat, isn’t it?  They complain, but actually the rules help the monopolists.

The system really is a self-perpetuating fraud.  We need more small companies and more competition. Unfortunately, this is not likely to happen given political corruption. The establishment dismisses Bernie, but he is right. And Epicurus would have deplored monopolies.