What this blog is about

Websites about Epicureanism seem to proliferate, most of them saying the same  things, with little new.  The problem with Epicureanism in particular is that so many of the ancient writings were either lost or were deliberately destroyed by early Christians, but this does not deter people from regurgitating the fragments left ad nauseam.   But to what end?

What is the point of philosophy if it cannot offer some guidance (or, at least, spark debate about) how one might react to events and social issues; most importantly, how to live one’s life, especially since morality is no longer taught and anything seems to go?

So much of philosophy is wrapped up in gobble-de-gook, and is incomprehensible or irrelevant to ordinary folk.  It has become a dead end (parts of  de Rerum Natura, by Lucretius are incomprehensible as well, if it comes to that).

What this blog seeks to do is to take the humane teachings of Epicurus, and try to relate them to real, modern life.  It seeks to take immediate issues and discuss what Epicurus, as far as we know his world view, might think about them.   How  should our moral and practical views of life be influenced by this great, enlightened humanist? How should we approach and think about things?

The regurgitators are absolutely free to regurgitate: they have a valuable telling role in educating people about what Epicurus said.  However, some totally miss the point of philosophy.  The hope is to steer a few interested people towards a more practical and usable view of Epicureanism.  Indeed,  all philosophy!  Philosophy shouldn’t be about the arcane meaning of words.

2 Comments

  1. “What this blog seeks to do is to take the humane teachings of Epicurus, and try to relate them to real, modern life.” ———————-

    Yes! and the insights you offer by synthesizing past and present are what set this blog apart from the rest. That’s why your posts have verve and relevance, applying helpful views from past centuries to so many enduring human problems.

    You’re quite right, I think, that so much of philosophy is “gobble-de-gook,” which is why it’s “incomprehensible” It’s a feature not a bug of modern philosophy.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.