this is the fourth in a new series of videos that are designed specifically to help those who want to engage in self-directed study of philosophy. In each of these videos, we focus on one particular philosopher or a philosophical tradition, and I walk you through a number of things that I hope will be helpful to you, like what text to take a look at, what order to study them in, issues that you should be concerned about, issues that you don't have to worry about, some advice about how to read texts and format, and what things to keep in mind. And we also talk about the importance of the figure or the tradition or school, whatever it happens to be. This time we're focusing on one of the great schools of ancient philosophy, which emerges in the Hellenistic period: the Epicurean school, which of course has its origin in this guy - Epicurus, although you can say it traces back a little bit further, at least in some of its origins, to Democritus, on whom we don't know that much about.

going to look at a lot of key features, and I'll give you some what I hope to be useful advice if you are a lifelong learner or somebody who's studying things on the side and wants to work at things on their own outside of a strictly academic setting. I always like to start by answering a very important question and a very legitimate question: why should I bother studying the Epicureans in the first place? So they're long dead, why should I care about it? Well, you know, one quick answer to that is they're not actually long dead, the originators of it, but there's a contemporary Epicurean movement which has adherents all over the world, and Facebook groups and websites, and they get together and study and practice that bacteria and philosophy, and there is a literature devoted to that, but let's put that aside for the moment, we'll get back to that in a little while. Why do you want to study at the Curia and philosophy, and what answer could be? Well, I've heard that

it's a really important early school. And so, I want to sort of, you know, make sure I don't fail to check off any of the boxes in the list of people who I ought to study. That's perfectly legitimate if you don't know anything about the Epicureans up to this point. And you say, well, I know that they're important because they see them in chapters. That's great. Why are they in the chapters? Well, because they were in fact one of the more important schools in the ancient world. So, you know, just on its own basis, if you want to know something about ancient philosophy, you can't skip over the Epicureans. There's another thing that you should keep in mind as well. So, although the Epicureans, you know, their fortunes, you know, wax and wane, and at some points in time, they're practically either off the scene or at least invisible, you know, keeping their heads down. They do have these recurrences throughout history, and they're taken seriously not just by ancient philosophers or really

in the culture in general, Epicureanism had a major impact. On, you know, Roman culture. For example, it's not just that you, you also see them, you know, as they pop up and reassert themselves. They're part of a cultural conversation. So, even people who aren't attracted to Epicureanism as such are referencing the Epicureans. And so, it's very useful to know, well, what are the Epicureans actually think if you want to, you know, David Hume, for example, has an essay specifically about the Epicurean philosopher. And you can, you can bet that, you know, Hume had Epicureanism in mind in thinking about other things. Later on, we're gonna see people like Marx or John Stuart Mill defending and reinterpreting the Epicureans. Thomas Jefferson was willing to call himself an Epicurean. So we might want to think about, you know, that sort of history of ideas area and the matter of influence. But when it comes to philosophical schools and thinkers, there's another really good

reason why we ought to study them, and that's you know, more than just well they influenced a lot of people, or they, you know, they're they're part of the culture that that I have to know about if I want to say that I understand the history of ideas. Their ideas are interesting, that that's part of why their texts became classics. So, the Epicureans introduces to a perspective that is thoroughly materialistic and hedonistic, which means that then they have to try to account for all sorts of other things that wouldn't seem to fit in that perspective. And you can decide whether they're more or less successful in doing that, but it's clear that they certainly made an effort to do that, and they're thinking out a way of living that would be based on a certain set of understandings about pleasure and pain, and what leads to pleasure, what helps to take away pain, what leads to pain as well that we should avoid, how to balance these off against each other, you know, what requirements of justice.

are and how they fit in with that, and even the question about relationships and friendship. We also see that the Epicureans devoted a considerable amount of thought and study - all sorts of other topics like the emotions and its relationship to rationality, or what the good life is, things that the other philosophers are concerned with as well. So it's really worth spending some time learning what the Epicurean position is. The one other thing that I'll say is Epicureanism, like Stoicism or certain understandings of Aristotelianism or Platonism or some other philosophies, is a philosophy of life. That means that it's something that we would look at not just as a set of doctrines, but we think about, well, what would it be like to actually live this way, because that was one of the key impetuses for Epicureanism catching on, why people, you know, embraced it. So that's something to keep in mind as well, and if you're looking for a philosophy

of life, which I think many people are as they're studying philosophy. I know I certainly have been at earlier stages in my own studies. That's part of what got me into philosophy in the first place. Then you might want to look at Epicureanism, not necessarily to embrace it, but at least they have if there is an option. So those are some good reasons for studying Epicureanism. The next set of questions that people typically want to ask me, and they're great questions, although you may not be super happy with the answers that I'm going to give, have to do with what texts and what translations, what editions you ought to get and start with. And like many ancient philosophers, Epicurus has been translated multiple times, and I'm not going to endorse one particular translation over another, in part because when it comes down to it, if I want to read Epicurus in the Greek, that's what I do. I actually simply go to my Diogenes Laertius, you know, Book Ten, which is all

about Epicurus and to a certain extent, the Epicurean school as well. And it's got the facing pages but you know for you, whatever Edition you can get your hands on, it is quite all right. There's a number of them out there. You should actually compare them against each other. There's online translations that you can get and not pay a cent for that. There's many other translations that you can get. When it comes to other authors in the Epicurean canon, then you know you might be a little bit more restrained. Like when we talk about Phil Oh Phil add Amos, for example, well, there's not many translations of his works because they're in the process of being translated. And I don't know whether alternate translations are going to be coming out because I don't run the project, right? But you know when it comes to say Lucretius, you know there are a lot of options as well. I wouldn't worry over much about getting the right translation or the right addition. Get something that you can sink your teeth.

into you're going to be reading and rereading it and going back over it. If you're really spending time with the Epicurean tradition anyway, so that we can kind of put to the side. I do want to say a few things about the availability of Epicurean literature though, and this will raise some questions later on that we'll address as well, but I just want to sort of set it out right now. So I mentioned Diogenes Laertes. Diogenes Laertes was an intellectual biographer, that is, he wrote a set of books that he called the lives and opinions of the philosophers. And in it, he's telling us, you know, what the philosophers did, where they came from, the biography, some of their bon mots or funny sayings, you could call them, and a lot about their doctrines. In the case of Epicurus, we really owe a massive debt to Diogenes. Why? Well, because there are so few works by Epicurus, who was supposed to have been one of the most prolific.

authors of antiquity there are so few works of his that have actually survived and, and we may in fact be able to find them sometime, you know, tucked away somewhere, and that would be great, but for the time being, all we really got are what Diogenes preserved in this part of his work. Now, what Diogenes did, because he liked Epicurus, he thought he was so cool, he actually wrote down verbatim what Epicurus had to say about a few things. So, there's what we call these, you know, principle doctrines. There's a couple different, you know, sovereign Maxim's is another way of translating it. Basically, it's sort of a list of Epicurean sayings that come from Epicurus, and then three letters. We also have his will in there, and, you know, some other discussion as well, but that's, that's pretty much it. And that was it until they discovered another alternate set of, of Maxim's or doctrines called the Vatican sayings. They found it in the Vatican, not because it was being hid.

away, but just because they don't actually know what's in their library a lot of the time, and you know some of this line line for line, the same thing as the principle doctrines. That's what we have, and it's rather fragmentary. We also, we have, you know, some other literature as well, which I'm going to talk about in just a bit, but but we want to keep that in mind. Now, that's not totally unusual for ancient literature. We don't possess most of what the Stoics wrote. We don't actually possess a lot of what Aristotle wrote. We know, you know, from Diogenes Lyra taste and his list of books, what we've gotten, what we don't have. There are there are some schools that we possess nothing of, so we're kind of lucky that we have what we do. I do want to say one other thing as well. One main source for Epicurean doctrines, and we could say Epicurean literature, is in fact the opponents of or critics of the Epicurean school. So you know Cicero.

is a major figure in that Plutarch. Who you may know from his biographies. But Plutarch was also a moral philosopher of the middle plate in his school. Seneca Seneca in especially in his early letters to Luc Ilyas is bringing up Epicurus quite a bit. Lucian the comedian the satirist of some soda. He you know tells us quite a bit about the Epicureans here and there. And you know others authors do as well like locked on seus. This early Christian writer who talks about the Epicureans in several of his works as well. So you know when it comes down to to the text. You know these practical questions which editions do I need to get. Don't worry so much about that get get your hands on some. Realize that the perspective that you're going to get on the Epicureans is a little fragmentary. And also some of it is coming from critics if not outright opponents of the epicurean tradition. How should you start what are the works

that you should begin with. And then, what would you start looking at later on after you've got, you know, a good solid foundation established for your understanding of the Epicureans. I always say go to original texts. You know, you can read secondary literature if you want to, and we'll talk about that in a bit. But, but I think if you shouldn't deprive yourself of the opportunity to actually read philosophy in its original form, or you know, in translation of course, and get your ideas straight from the source. Actually, that cuts out a lot of nonsense that you might get from secondary sources and being overly reliant upon them. So, who should you start with? Well, this is kind of a no-brainer. Epicurus, right? Now, you may say, Well, Dr. Sandler, didn't you just say that we don't actually have many texts by the guy? I did indeed, but those are the ones that you should start with. So, you want to get yourself. There's basically two kinds of literature coming from Epicurus.

himself, right. You've got these lists of sayings and they contain some claims, and some arguments, and some distinctions that are very important in Epicurean thought. You've got the, you know, principle doctrines, and you've got the Vatican sayings. So, you want to get your hands on those, and those are a very quick read because they're not very long at all. And then there's three letters that you would want to get as well. The one that's probably viewed as most important is the letter to Menoeceus, but there's also some letters that have to do, you know, with some of the same topics but also with the Epicureans' conception of the physical world: the letter to Herodotus and the letter to Pythocles. Along with those, I do think that you want to get Diogenes Laertius, and you can find that easily online. You can purchase a copy, or you can find translations of it, you know, available for free. So, you, you

want to read through chapter 10 of book 10 of Diogenes Laertius because before he actually gives you his copied out Epicurus, he also does several other things. He tells you about Epicurus and his history, and he tells you about his friends and the community that he established. He tells you about some of the things that people said about him and why Diogenes thinks these things are actually off-base. He also gives you the list of his works, which occupies more than one page, and then he tells you a bit about the doctrines of the Epicureans and a bit about what happened after Epicurus shuffled off the mortal coil and who took over. So you want to read Diogenes Laertius as well. Another key work that you're definitely going to want is Lucretius. This one's translated On the Nature of the Universe, it's often translated On the Nature of Things (De Rerum Natura). Lucretius was an Epicurean poet, but he's doing a lot of philosophy.

really hardcore philosophy in this poetic work. And he's giving you a pick. Aryan doctrines. He's also giving you a different take on Epicurus, where Epicurus is this sort of savior figure helping to, you know, free mankind of its silly superstitions and fears. And he's responding to some of the critics. Interestingly, a lot of people think that Cicero probably helped edit that work. So Lucretius is another one. Phil Adiemus. I mentioned the Phil of Danis project. So Phil Adiemus was an Epicurean philosopher who's, who's a little bit before Lucretius. And we discovered some of his texts, actually quite a few of his texts, on papyri in this place that is, you know, essentially had preserved the text but not in great form. And when they first tried to unroll them, I think it was either in the late 1700s or the early 1800s, they screwed it all up. So then they are like, oh, we got to put this

stuff aside and wait until we've got better technology. They do have better technology now and they're slowly opening up these texts and transcribing Felidae missus Greek and there's a filadyne lading and publishing his work. So we're actually in a very exciting time. I use phillyd a missus on anger which unfortunately is a bit fragmentary because the people who unroll that if we screwed it up. III focus on that but there's also you know some discussions of rhetoric. There's discussions of what's in Greek called pomeriggio or Frank speaking and so Phil Adiemus is another really important source for us who else oh so now we start getting well. There's there's one before we start thinking about people like Cicero. There's a philosopher who inscribed a whole bunch of epicurean literature and including letters that he wrote on a wall. His name is daya Jenni's of Buena onda and he created this inscription. Unfortunately the inscription which you can find

translations of online is very partial so it's it's quite fragmentary. It would be really cool if we actually have the original copy of it, but but we don't. But it adds a little bit to the to the picture. If you want something that actually does present the Epicurean position on some things, you might actually go to Cicero, because Cicero, although he's hostile to the Epicureans, he does present their positions in a more or less faithful way in the parts where he's presenting it, and then he'll attack it after that. So you know, if you want to know about the Epicurean theology, you go to On the Nature of the Gods and look at book 1. If you want to know about the Epicurean views on morality and the virtues and happiness and pleasure, go to On Moral Ends or On the Ends book 1 and and you'll you'll see him presenting it through the mouthpiece of Torquatus, who is an Epicurean. There's also some interesting discussions in On Fate.

which is a fragmentary text but talks about the Epicurean view on freedom. And then one other thinker who I think I could recommend. But now we're getting into sort of, you know, more advanced work, would be the early modern philosopher Pierre Gassendi, who by the way was a Catholic priest and an Epicurean. So he's got an interesting project, you know, a lot of reconciliation going on. 'Cause Gassendi was not, if you remember his name, it's probably because you're thinking of gases and stuff like that. He did do work in physical science. He was also a philosopher, and he was one of the people who wrote one of the set of objections to Descartes' Meditations. Descartes didn't actually like what he had to say, and he does so from an Epicurean perspective. So Gassendi can be worth checking out. And there's, there's a, you know, two works in particular. Not even sure if they're actually translated. One is his Anima, Animus, Adversus Annum Adversus Onias.

then the De Vita more ebooks Epicurus libre octo. There is translated a concerning happiness short piece that you can find on one of the Epicurean websites. But kasundi is an interesting guy, and what he shows us is the adaptability of the Epicurean doctrine. So you know where would you start, you know Epicurus. I would get yourself Lucretius. I would probably say, you know, Epicurious, Lucretius, Diogenes, lair, taste, Cicero's, you know, on the ends book one. That'll get you started. And then you can start getting into all these other things as well. And I mean the good news is it doesn't take you that long to go through the Epicurean literature, but that's also the bad news because we've lost so much of it. There's a few things that I would say are worth keeping in mind as you're approaching these texts. I'd have to do with their genre and also in this case with their completeness. So you know

one thing, right off the bat, that has to do with the completeness is when you're reading this stuff, don't expect to find like a full system so you know you've got what we've got, and you have to take what we have and extrapolate from that. You have to do a bit of thinking things through, you know. If we had Epicurus' book on nature, maybe we wouldn't have to do quite so much interpretive work, but we don't have it. So until we do finally find a copy of it somewhere and then translate it, that's the situation that we're in. With each type of work, you want to keep in mind what its actual shanwa is. So, Lucretius is writing a philosophical treatise, but it's also poetry, and it's intended to do both things. Poetry was used to teach back in the day, but you know, some of what he's writing, the way that he's framing it, is so that it can actually fit meter. By the way, Latin poetry is not about rhyming. Greek

and Latin poetry was really about the metre of things. So, the word choice will sometimes be a matter of what fits, you know. Epicurus writes these well. He provides us with these lists of doctrines. That's all they are, it is lists of doctrines. They're not in any particular order. You could move them around if you want. You can actually see in the Vatican sayings and the principal doctrines that some of the sayings are located in different places. Letters are written to particular people, but there you can think of them as sort of an open letter intended for teaching purposes, providing the doctrines. So, there's that as well. In Cicero's On the Ends, you get a fairly systematic but rather short presentation of Epicurean doctrine. And the mouth of Torquatus, similarly, his On the Nature of the Gods, you know, you get some Epicurean theology. I mean, the Epicureans, by the way, believed there were gods. This is a little bit of a side note. They just thought that the gods didn't care about

us the gods were blessed precisely because they don't bother with human beings right. They don't get involved in that. There's no Providence or anything like that. And Epicurus was particularly concerned with making sure that people understood that the gods are not out to get you. In part, 'cause the gods don't care. They're blessing. They don't get angry. They don't get envious. They don't get all these things that, you know, Homer or the other Greeks were saying that they did. When it comes to other works, you know, we could talk about the inscriptions and the fragmentary nature of that. Same thing with Phil O'Day --mess. If you're able to get your hands on copies of his works, he's writing philosophical treatises, but sometimes they're fragmentary. So we, you know, with the Epicurean tradition, perhaps more than others, we have to do a lot of filling in the blanks. And people do that in different ways. And there's more than one legitimate way to do that. So you don't

have to worry about like getting that right. Just worry about, you know, trying to understand the text that you're reading. The last thing that I do want to say about this issue of genre and style and the fragmentary nature is, as I mentioned before, Epicureanism is a philosophy of life. People embrace this not just because they were like, Oh, it's a cool new form of philosophy, purely theoretical. No, there was another important aspect to it. It helped inform the way that they ought to live. And for the Epicureans, that meant generally sort of withdrawing from society and, you know, most relationships other than very close relationships, living together in something almost like a communal, so do it on your own, and trying to arrange your life so you enjoyed as many pleasures that wouldn't get you into trouble and get pain. So, Epicurus themselves is not big sex, for example, or drinking, you know, as many pleasures as you could have and a life is free from trouble and pain and fear and sorrow as possible. And they

they viewed that as the good life, and they didn't just sort of set that up as their ideal, and then immediately get to it. There's a dialectic and back and forth between reading and thinking and applying it, and then learning some lessons from it, and then rethinking what you've got there. So keep that in mind as you are trying to make sense out of this philosophy. I'm not saying that you have to practice it, what you don't, but you should imaginatively put yourself in the position of a person who might be practicing it and think about what that sort of life would entail. And it'll help you understand the philosophy better. Now we get to the part of the discussion where we focus on secondary sources and literature, which might be very helpful for you. So when we think about that, there's a couple different kinds of literature that we want to have in mind. So one thing that you might think of right off the bat are histories of philosophy, and I've got cobblestone who

generally won't steer you to wrong. Usually, he's on point. He gives you some nice, you know, little bits and pieces and passages of the Philosopher's cobblestone. Actually, developed these so that he could teach his own students. And unfortunately, in this book on ancient Greek and Roman philosophy, you can see how little space he devotes to Epicureanism. Much of what you're getting here is actually what you could find in Diogenes Laertes. And I would suggest, again, you really do want to read Diogenes Laertes because that's where a lot of the stuff is coming from. It's kind of similar in many other histories of philosophy, precisely because we don't have that much to work on. You're gonna find this stuff on Epicureanism is going to be rather short. Now, you might also look at, say, contemporary works, more popular works that discuss Epicurean philosophy and the Epicurean school and things like that. And I do have one really good recommendation for you.

I've got a recommendation you could say against as well so let's start with that. A book came out fairly recently by Greenblatt called The Swerve, and it was referencing, you know, Lucretius. And it's about, you know, how the Renaissance came out of the Middle Ages. And as far as like history of ideas go, a lot of people have pointed this out. It's actually pretty bad. You see the sort of revival of this, you know, oh, it was all dark ages, and then there was the beautiful Renaissance coming after that, and these monks, you know, we're trying to control everything. And most of that's nonsense. I mean, all you got to do is read some medieval literature to figure that out, right? So I wouldn't go to The Swerve to learn about Epicureanism. I do have a book, however, which I'll actually be reviewing in the near future. I've had my hands on it for quite a while. The author sent it to me very graciously, and it's quite good. Now there's some parts of it

where there's some things you might say I goes a little bit too far at this but it's called tending the epicurean garden by Hyrum Crespo. And it's got a lot of nice discussions drawing on you know epicurean literature and trying to adapt it for modern times and giving you exercises. So this represents I mentioned there is a contemporary epicurean movement out there. This is one of the main people in that movement. And so you might want to get your hands on this book that's at the level of popular literature. We might also think about you know good secondary literature that's of a more academic nature. And there's quite a lot out there in terms of articles that are quite good. You know I'll mention not just some of the other people who I'm going to be showing you in just a sec but also Voula suna who is one of the translators fillo Danis. She's got some really interesting stuff. But I do want to mention also.

Anthony Long and sadly they are among the people who helped to sort of put Hellenistic philosophy back on the academic map within the English-speaking world. Of course, outside of that, there's, you know, French scholars and German scholars, much of which doesn't get translated, unfortunately, you know, because it's secondary literature. I do have a few reasons or at least fairly recent books that I think be quite good, and they're not just about Epicureanism, they're about ancient philosophy in general and the different schools, but they do each have some great sections on the Epicureans. So I'll begin with one of my favorites, The Morality of Happiness by Julia Annas, who's a real giant in the field. She's got, I mean, there's a lot of really great stuff in here, but she's got some sections specifically on the Epicureans, and not just in one part of the book. Well, you know, over and over again, she's looking at the Epicurean stuff and

she has got a lot of great articles on Epicurean tradition as well another person who gets brought up quite a lot who's also well worth reading certainly this work Martha Nussbaum the therapy of desire theory and practice and Hellenistic ethics again you're gonna find you know quite a few things on Epicureanism there's a chapter epicurean surgery and then there's another one mortal immortals which is about Lucretius the one on Seneca you know to some degree is addressing the Epicureans and then finally a book that came out fairly recently 2006 Christopher gills the structure itself and Hellenistic and Roman the thought I'm a big fan of Christopher Gill really great students of the the Stoics but he also does good work the Epicureans as well and there's a lot of cool stuff in here about the epicurean notion of the self reconstructing that so you might find those sorts of things useful I would also say you know when we're

talking about the Epicureans, it might be interesting to you to not focus just on say recent or even you know 20th-century secondary literature and reinterpretations of the Epicureans. You might also take a look at the way the Epicureans were reinterpreted, not just in people like Aseneth II, but also more recent authors. John Stuart Mill is viewing the Epicureans as precursors to the utilitarian tradition that he belongs to. Karl Marx, you know, wrote his early work, his dissertation, was on when Epicurus, right? And, and so there in Democritus, right? And you know, there's quite a few other thinkers who are discussing Epicurus and the Epicureans. Sometimes they're a little dismissive, you know, for example, Hegel's examination of the Epicureans or Nietzsche's, you know, almost dismissal of the Epicureans. But occasionally you'll find some thinkers like I mentioned David Hume has a very interesting essay on the Epicurean that you could check out.

well so you might find that stuff giving you interesting points of view that you can consider. And it'll also help to sort of connect the constellation in the history of ideas. So you'll see the effect that the Epicurean literature has had throughout its, you know, the long history of philosophy and its connection to other disciplines. Over the years, I've seen a lot of people approaching philosophical schools and thinkers for the first time, and there are often some problems that will arise that aren't really that worth worrying about, let alone getting bogged down in. And with the Epicurean school, I think that we can say that there's some issues like that as well. I wouldn't allow myself to become overly concerned with the polemics about Epicureans and religion. As I pointed out, the Epicureans were in fact theists. They weren't atheists, although a lot of people portray them as such. But they were theists of a really strange sort.

who thought that God or the gods don't really care about the world that the divine is disconnected and I would you know I mentioned the swerve and and the sort of you know it gets criticized for bringing in a Voltaire Ian's perspective. Voltaire was not a good historian a full of philosophy or of ideas in general he was one of the people who bought into this you know it was all dark ages in the Middle Ages. I would I would leave all that death stuff aside. I wouldn't worry about that unless you're already you know preoccupied with that. It's just kind of a distraction and it doesn't contribute much to understanding Epicureanism or to perhaps even trying it out in your own life. Another thing that you don't need to do is stake out a position on other criticisms of Epicureanism so I mentioned that like you know we know a bit about Epicureanism from people like Cicero or Plutarch or Lucian or even locked-on so yes I mean if you're

reading locked on see us more power to you right kind of a rare taste these days and you know you don't have to worry about whether they're totally fair have it right or anything like that in order for you to you know acquire a good conception of what the Epicureans actually taught. I mean it could be that Cicero is being unfair. I think he's on to the Epicureans at points but we can still learn from it. We don't have to say, Oh, a hostile critic, therefore we dismiss everything. That would be really foolish on our part, right, which from an Epicurean point of view it would be a bad thing because the Epicureans stress the virtue of prudence or practical wisdom, the opposite of which is foolishness. So I don't think you have to worry about that or and you don't have to worry too much about whether Marx or Mill or Hume are getting the Epicureans completely right. Just try to learn from their interpretations.

and then as your is you acquire a better and better understanding of it, that's when you can form those critical judgments. One other thing that I'll bring up, obviously, the Epicurean physics is pretty much just as outmoded as the Aristotelian one is. You know, you might say, Well, wait a second, didn't the Epicureans, you know, come up with the atomic doctrine? Well, I mean, Democritus did, and the Epicureans took it from them, but what they mean by atoms isn't remotely close to what we mean by atoms. And the Epicurean physics, you know, their conception of the physical universe, it's, it's, it's, you know, it's nice to imagine, but it's, you know, it's not really close to natural science. And the, as a matter of fact, the Stoics might be closer than the Epicureans with their concept of Talmud and, you know, this notion of matter and energy shifting back and forth that we have, but you don't need to worry about.

that that is not something that has to distract you from being able to read and appreciate and understand these texts. So I would put those sort of issues aside, I table them until later unless you really like to worry about that sort of stuff. So I do have a few final thoughts about the Epicurean school and Epicurus and you know your own task of self-directed study. First off, I want to say if you are going to study Epicurus, that's really great and continue it on and it'll help fill in the picture for you in so many important ways. You don't have to actually agree with him any more than you have to agree with Plato or the Stoics or Cicero or any other thinker in order to have a good solid appreciation of what it is that they're saying and understand how they fit in. So that that's an important thing, I think. You know, I read a lot of people and I teach a lot of people who myself I don't agree with but I find very interesting.

Epicureans really are an interesting bunch. I think it's worth spending some time thinking about what it is that they've said and looking at their assertions and arguments and distinctions. It will make you a better thinker, whether you agree with them or not. So I, you know, want to say one other thing too. You know, maybe a word of encouragement. If you're watching this, it's probably because you're interested in carrying out some self-directed, you could say, autonomous study, and you were just looking for a bit of guidance in how to do that. I think that's really great, and I hope that you enjoy reading Epicurus and his followers and successors and interpreters, and that it proves to be a fruitful and useful, you know, way of devoting yourself to philosophical study.

Self Directed Study in Philosophy | Epicurean Philosophy, Texts, and Practices | Sadler's Advice

I bring philosophy into practice, making complex classic philosophical ideas accessible for a wide audience of professionals, students, and life-long learners.  After a decade in traditional academic positions, I started my own business and began doing philosophical work in more practical contexts.  I am an APPA-certified philosophical counselor, a public speaker, an author, an ethics trainer, and an executive coach (among other things!).

To support the work I do, consider becoming a Patreon backer. Check it out, and consider pledging! https://www.patreon.com/sadler

You can subscribe to my newsletter for updates, news, and resources here - https://gregorybsadler.substack.com/

Interested in booking me for a talk, interview, workshop, consultation, or tutoring?  Check out ReasonIO - https://reasonio.wordpress.com/

(Amazon links are associate links. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases)
