le tetrapharmacos d' epicure (en anglais)
Epicurus’ tetrapharmakos: a philosophy of health
Philosophy is reputed to be hardly applicable. Indeed, this particular use of rationality often leads to ideal conclusions, rationally understandable but which seem disconnected from reality and therefore hardly helpful concerning our lives. For instance, how can I experience and live according to Plato’s philosophy? His theory of ideas, his political views are highly logical, rationally understandable but however hardly realistic and therefore may be helpless in everyday life. If philosophy is a craft that concerns the soul (or mind and that helps) like medicine and gymnastic are the crafts concerning the body, as Socrates and/or Plato seemed to affirm in the Gorgias[1] dialogue, therefore it has to cure and cultivate the soul (mind). The study of Epicurus’ philosophy seems particularly appropriate to develop this idea of a curative philosophy, a philosophy of health.
In this paper, we will argue that Epicurus’ philosophy is a philosophy of health, through a specific organisation, the famous tetrapharmakos, or quadruple cure, and we will explore and discuss these specific cures Epicurus proposes. In this respect, we will start with a brief review of Epicurus life and the historical context in which he philosophized. Then, we will present this famous tetrapharmakos, and the philosophical system requested for such a cure. Then, we will discuss Epicurus philosophical solutions. At last, in a brief conclusion, we will summarize the main points of this paper and argue for a curative philosophical method.
Exploring the biography of a philosopher and the environment in which he lived can to some extent help to understand his philosophy. In Epicurus’ case, some facts seem particularly relevant. Epicurus belongs to what we call Hellenistic philosophy, which starts around the fourth century BC, with the death of Alexander the Great in 323 BC, and ends with Octavian accession as emperor in 31 BC. This period, and especially Epicurus lifetime, is characterised by the decline of Greek civilization, and therefore a general feeling of doubt, insecurity and anxiety, what as we will see has a great importance in Epicurus’ philosophy. Significantly, Epicurus’ life (341BC-270BC), as far as we know, was characterized by a constant terrible pain, due to his particularly painful disease, stone kidneys.
In this respect, Epicurus leaves a special room in his philosophy for the treatment of pain and anxiety: philosophy, according to him, has to free man from pain and anxiety: he affirms that “we must derive every choice and avoidance from the health of the body and the tranquillity of the soul since it is the end of a blessed life”[2]. Epicurus identifies this anxiety with the fear of death, fear of gods and doubts about morality. Since pain and anxiety are perceived as bad, we have to free ourselves from them and reach ataraxia, which is the absence of trouble. In this respect, Epicurus philosophy takes the form of a cure, and carries on a medical methodology: Epicurus interprets anxiety and pain as diseases and proposes a cure for it, the tetrapharmakos, backed by a self sufficient philosophical thought system. According to these four cures, we ought not to fear death, nor gods, good can be obtained, and pain can be avoided.
Firstly, Epicurus recommends not to fear death. Indeed, according to him, we fear death because we perceive it as bad, especially because we believe in a painful and therefore bad judgement after death. According to Epicurus moral theory, Evil and Good are not in the things themselves which are only temporal collections of atoms, but are perceptions, feelings. Moreover, Epicurus recognizes only one ultimate good: freedom from anxiety, and only one evil: pain. He wrote that”every good and evil is in sense perception”[3]. If evil or pain in death, that is the source of our fear, is in sense perception, therefore it must be felt through sense perception. But death is, according to Epicurus, “deprivation of sense perception”[4]. Thus, without sense perception, there is neither evil nor good, and therefore death is neither good nor bad and thus not to be feared. Paradoxically the mortality of the mind leads to freedom from anxiety concerning death. “Death is nothing to us”[5] Epicurus concludes.
Then, Epicurus recommends not to believe that gods care about us. Indeed, if we believe that gods care, then we ought to believe that they can punish us after death in case of bad action, and thus this belief adds to the fear of death. Moreover, the belief that gods care about the world is not coherent with atomism. Indeed, if gods exist, they are themselves material, since everything that exists is matter, and therefore can only have a material influence on us. Epicurus’ conception of gods is that they are the perfect beings, “free from destruction and blessed”[6] and “congenial to their own virtues”[7]. According to Epicurus we shall not suppose anything else about the gods because it is necessary in contradiction with this basic knowledge about gods. So, if I suppose that gods care about the world which is imperfect, both subject to destruction and unblessed, therefore I deny the gods their perfection, since caring is a form of affect, and that gods are free from disturbance in their perfection. Epicurus therefore denies any caring from the gods, and thus denies to the fear of god any sensible ground.
At last, the two last cures of Epicurus’ tetrapharmakos that are Good can be obtained and pain (or evil) can be avoided, can be treated as one: maximizing pleasure which is the same, for Epicurus, as minimizing displeasure. As
Epicurus’ philosophy being self-sufficient and a bit circular in its argumentation, it seems very hard to criticize; the only things we ought to criticize are his evident assumptions, the basis of his philosophy. Indeed, Epicurus appeals to a strong empiricism, a belief in the reliability of the senses. He uses this evident appearance brought by the sense to infer that since seeking pleasure and avoiding pain are self-explanatory or rather evident to the sense, pleasure and pain are therefore the ultimate good and evil.
If Epicurus uses his senses as a basis for his philosophy, we ought to remind the convincing arguments put forward by Protagoras on subjective truth. Protagoras of Abdera claimed the subjectivism of truth, especially truth brought by senses. Thus, we ought to infer that the way Epicurus “feels” pain and pleasure as the ultimate good and evil, may not be the same for everybody; and therefore that Epicurus philosophy may be only valid for Epicurus. Indeed, the fact that Epicurus suffered a terrible disease such as stone kidneys seems important to the way he feels pain and pleasure. Moreover, the fact that he lived in a period of general doubt and anxiety has also an influence on his conception of anxiety and happiness.
A second objection can be made to Epicurus very individualistic ethical philosophy. Indeed, Epicurus does not develop a moral philosophy, that is a universal (that is concerning more than one person) ethical system. In this way, he avoids the difficulty of philosophizing about social relations and moral. It is not hard to understand how social relations may destabilize Epicurus’ ethical system: my pleasure may be incompatible with the pleasure of another person. If we accept Aristotle claim that men are social animals, this lack of altruism in Epicurus philosophy rests on a weak point.
In this paper, we have presented Epicurus’ tetrapharmakos, and we have seen that according to this quadruple cure, we ought not to fear death, not to fear gods, that pleasure is easily reachable and that pain may be easily avoided. We also have seen that Epicurus philosophy is very individualistic and maybe even subjective.
However this individuality is coherent with the idea of a curative philosophy. Indeed, if in medicine each disease is treated with a specific treatment, it should be the same for the medicine of the soul, philosophy. Epicurus philosophy is a good treatment of Epicurus anxiety and pain, as Epicurus seems really happy, even the last day of his life:”I am writing o you while I pass a blessedly happy day that is also the last day of my life. I am pressed hard by urinary blockages and dysenteric discomforts, unsurpassable in their intensity. But in opposition to all these things stands my soul’s enjoyment in recollecting our past discussions”[9]. We can imagine that Epicurus could have only recommended everybody to find his personal cure, his own philosophy.
Sources:
[1] Plato, Gorgias 508 E-509 B, in Irwin T., Classical Philosophy, Oxford University Press, 1999, reed 2, p.113
[2] Epicurus = Diogenes Lahertius x.128, in Irwin T., Classical Philosophy, OUP, 1999, ,p.274
[3] Epicurus = Diogenes Lahertius x. 124, idem p.276
[4] idem
[5] idem
[6] Epicurus = Diogenes Lahertius x.123, idem, p.399
[7] idem