Happiness Is The Goal of Life. A Life of Happiness Is A Life In Which Pleasure Predominates Over Pain

Epicurus Used The Term “Happiness” To Refer To the Best Possible Life

As wth most ancient Greek philosophers, Epicurus appears to have held that “happiness” is the goal of life. The most vital question to ask is “What does Epicurus mean by “happiness?” but let’s first establish that Epicurus did in fact refers to “happiness” as the objective of life. Epicurus opens his letter to Menoeceus referring to happiness:

[122] Let no one when young delay to study philosophy, nor when he is old grow weary of his study. For no one can come too early or too late to secure the health of his soul. And the man who says that the age for philosophy has either not yet come or has gone by is like the man who says that the age for happiness is not yet come to him, or has passed away. Wherefore both when young and old a man must study philosophy, that as he grows old he may be young in blessings through the grateful recollection of what has been, and that in youth he may be old as well, since he will know no fear of what is to come. We must then meditate on the things that make our happiness, seeing that when that is with us we have all, but when it is absent we do all to win it.

In [127] Epicurus states: “We must consider that of desires some are natural, others vain, and of the natural some are necessary and others merely natural; and of the necessary some are necessary for happiness, others for the repose of the body, and others for very life.”

Epicurus rejects the concept of supernatural gods, but uses other terms often translated as “blessedness” in a way that is synonymous with happiness as the objective of life:

[123] The things which I used unceasingly to commend to you, these do and practice, considering them to be the first principles of the good life. First of all believe that god is a being immortal and blessed, even as the common idea of a god is engraved on men’s minds, and do not assign to him anything alien to his immortality or ill-suited to his blessedness: but believe about him everything that can uphold his blessedness and immortality.

[124] For the statements of the many about the gods are not conceptions derived from sensation, but false suppositions, according to which the greatest misfortunes befall the wicked and the greatest blessings (the good) by the gift of the god

[128] The right understanding of these facts enables us to refer all choice and avoidance to the health of the body and (the soul’s) freedom from disturbance, since this is the aim of the life of blessedness. For it is to obtain this end that we always act, namely, to avoid pain and fear. And when this is once secured for us, all the tempest of the soul is dispersed, since the living creature has not to wander as though in search of something that is missing, and to look for some other thing by which he can fulfill the good of the soul and the good of the body. For it is then that we have need of pleasure, when we feel pain owing to the absence of pleasure; (but when we do not feel pain), we no longer need pleasure.

[129] And for this cause we call pleasure the beginning and end of the blessed life. For we recognize pleasure as the first good innate in us, and from pleasure we begin every act of choice and avoidance, and to pleasure we return again, using the feeling as the standard by which we judge every good.

[134] For, indeed, it were better to follow the myths about the gods than to become a slave to the destiny of the natural philosophers: for the former suggests a hope of placating the gods by worship, whereas the latter involves a necessity which knows no placation. As to chance, he does not regard it as a god as most men do (for in a god’s acts there is no disorder), nor as an uncertain cause (of all things) for he does not believe that good and evil are given by chance to man for the framing of a blessed life, but that opportunities for great good and great evil are afforded by it.

[135] … Meditate therefore on these things and things akin to them night and day by yourself; and with a companion like to yourself, and never shall you be disturbed waking or asleep, but you shall live like a god among men. For a man who lives among immortal blessings is not like unto a mortal being.

Epicurus states to Pyothocles that he is providing information about celestial phenomena for the purpose of assisting in happy living:

“Epicurus to Pythocles, greeting. “In your letter to me, of which Cleon was the bearer, you continue to show me affection which I have merited by my devotion to you, and you try, not without success, to recall the considerations which make for a happy life.

Diogenes Laertius records that Epicurus held that even though the wise will not find torture to be pleasant, the wise man remains “happy” even then:

[117] Even on the rack the wise man is happy.

Epicurus wrote on the last day of his life to Idomeneus that despite his pain he was still “happy""

[22] When he was on the point of death he wrote the following letter to Idomeneus: ‘On this truly happy day of my life, as I am at the point of death, I write this to you. The disease in my bladder and stomach are pursuing their course, lacking nothing of their natural severity: but against all this is the joy in my heart at the recollection of my conversations with you.

Epicurus speaks in his Principal Doctrines about how death can be only an interruption in a “life of happiness.”

[146] Infinite and finite time both have equal pleasure, if any one measures its limits by reason. “If the flesh could experience boundless pleasure, it would want to dispose of eternity. “But reason, enabling us to conceive the end and dissolution of the body, and liberating us from the fears relative to eternity, procures for us all the happiness of which life is capable, so completely that we have no further occasion to include eternity in our desires. In this disposition of mind, man is happy even when his troubles engage him to quit life; and to die thus, is for him only to interrupt a life of happiness.

Epicurus Defined A Life Of Happiness As One In Which Pleasures Predominate Over Pain

As cited above, Epicurus in his letter to Menoeceus tied all that is good, which would certainly include happiness, to pleasure: [129] And for this cause we call pleasure the beginning and end of the blessed life. For we recognize pleasure as the first good innate in us, and from pleasure we begin every act of choice and avoidance, and to pleasure we return again, using the feeling as the standard by which we judge every good.

In addition, we have several other authoritative sources that confirm that Epicurus held a life of happiness to be a life of pleasure:

Diogenes of Oinoanda Fragment 32:

If, gentlemen, the point at issue between these people and us involved inquiry into «what is the means of happiness?» and they wanted to say «the virtues» (which would actually be true), it would be unnecessary to take any other step than to agree with them about this, without more ado. But since, as I say, the issue is not «what is the means of happiness?» but «what is happiness and what is the ultimate goal of our nature?», I say both now and always, shouting out loudly to all Greeks and non-Greeks, that pleasure is the end of the best mode of life, while the virtues, which are inopportunely messed about by these people (being transferred from the place of the means to that of the end), are in no way an end, but the means to the end.

Cicero makes regular mention of Epicurus tying happiness to pleasure:

On Ends Book One, 54: If then even the glory of the Virtues, on which all the other philosophers love to expatiate so eloquently, has in the last resort no meaning unless it be based on pleasure, whereas pleasure is the only thing that is intrinsically attractive and alluring, it cannot be doubted that pleasure is the one supreme and final Good and that a life of happiness is nothing else than a life of pleasure.

On Ends Book One, 62: But these doctrines may be stated in a certain manner so as not merely to disarm our criticism, but actually to secure our sanction. For this is the way in which Epicurus represents the wise man as continually happy; he keeps his passions within bounds; about death he is indifferent; he holds true views concerning the eternal gods apart from all dread; he has no hesitation in crossing the boundary of life, if that be the better course. *Furnished with these advantages he is continually in a state of pleasure, and there is in truth no moment at which he does not experience more pleasures than pains*. For he remembers the past with thankfulness, and the present is so much his own that he is aware of its importance and its agreeableness, nor is he in dependence on the future, but awaits it while enjoying the present; he is also very far removed from those defects of character which I quoted a little time ago, and when he compares the fool’s life with his own, he feels great pleasure. *And pains, if any befall him, have never power enough to prevent the wise man from finding more reasons for joy than for vexation.**

At the time of his death, Epicurus was in severe pain due to kidney disease. Nevertheless Epicurus wrote that these days were among the happiest of his life. How could Epicurus be happy even while in severe pain? Because happiness does not require complete absence of all pain. In fact, we often choose things that are painful when that choice leads to greater pleasure or less pain later. Epicurus’ physical pain did not prevent him from being happy. Even while in pain, Epicurus was still able to feel the pleasures of friendship and of philosophical insight. Pleasures in one part of life can outweigh pains in other parts of life when we realize that the perfect is not the enemy of the good.

Opposing philosophers argued that viewing happiness this way makes no sense because happiness is an all-or-nothing proposition. They argued that we can never reach complete pleasure because the desire for pleasure can never be satisfied. They also argued that bodily pleasure is beyond our control and that we can never be free of the fear of losing it.

Epicurus rejected those arguments. He pointed out that the desire for pleasure can in fact be satisfied. There is a limit to the number of things any single person can experience in life. It is impossible to fill our experience beyond that limit. Once we fill our experience with pleasure, it is impossible to experience any additional pleasure. Of course over time we can pursue new pleasures, but variety does not make what is already full more full. Variety adds no new intensity to our feeling, no new parts to our body, no more hours to our day. If we view pleasure wisely, no matter how long we live, we do not gain a level of pleasure beyond what we can experience here and now.

Epicurus also rejected the idea that we must live in fear of suffering more pain than pleasure. The wise Epicurean can find more pleasure than pain in almost any situation. No matter how severe it is, pain never has the power to hold us in its grip permanently.

Torquatus illustrated this view of pleasure by repeating a story once told by his father. As the story went, a Stoic philosopher held up his hand and asked, “Does a hand in its normal condition feel pleasure?” The Stoic expected his listeners to say “No,” because people tend to think that pleasure requires stimulation from the outside. The Stoic claimed that everyone who answered “No” was proving that Nature does not establish pleasure as the goal of life. He argued that if Nature wished us to pursue pleasure, Nature herself would complain whenever we are not feeling stimulation.

Torquatus pointed out that this argument is false and in no way undercuts Epicurus. So long as we are not feeling pain, our bodies do not complain about lack of stimulation. Nature herself recognizes that a healthy and normal life without pain is pleasurable.

Notes:

See: David Sedley: “Epicurean vs Cyreniac Happiness”

This position (that a life of happiness is a life of pleasure) also finds some measure of support in Aristotle:

Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, 7.13.2-4 (Rackham trans):

“This is why everybody thinks that the happy life must be a pleasant life, and regards pleasure as a necessary ingredient of happiness; and with good reason, since no impeded activity is perfect, whereas Happiness is essentially perfect; so that the happy man requires in addition the goods of the body, external goods and the gifts of fortune, in order that his activity may not be impeded through lack of them. Consequently those who say that, if a man be good, he will be happy even when on the rack, or when fallen into the direst misfortune, are intentionally or unintentionally talking nonsense. But because Happiness requires the gifts of fortune in addition, some people think that it is the same thing as good fortune; but this is not so, since even good fortune itself when excessive is an impediment to activity, and perhaps indeed no longer deserves to be called good fortune, since good fortune can only be defined in relation to Happiness.”

Quote From Sextus Empiricus, Against the Professors 9.43—7

The same reply can be made to Epicurus’ belief that the idea of gods arose from dream impressions of human-shaped images. For why should these have given rise to the idea of gods, rather than of outsized men? And in general it will be possible to reply to all the doctrines we have listed that men’s idea of god is not based on mere largeness in a human-shaped animal, but includes his being blessed and imperishable and wielding the greatest power in the world. But from what origin, or how, these thoughts occurred among the first men to draw a conception of god, is not explained by those who attribute the cause to dream impressions and to the orderly motion of the heavenly bodies. To this they reply that the idea of god’s existence originated from appearances in dreams, or from the world’s phenomena, but that the idea of god’s being everlasting and imperishable and perfect in happiness arose through a process of transition from men. For just as we acquired the idea of a Cyclops by enlarging the common man in our impression of him, so too we have started with the idea of a happy man, blessed with his full complement of goods, then intensified these features into the idea of god, their supreme fulfillment. And again, having formed an impression of a long-lived man, the men of old increased the time-span to infinity by combining the past and future with the present; and then, having thus arrived at the conception of the everlasting, they said that god was everlasting too. Those who say this are championing a plausible doctrine. But they easily slip into that most puzzling trap, circularity.

For in order first to get the idea of a happy man, and then that of god by transition, we must have an idea of what happiness is, since the idea of the happy man is of one who shares in happiness. But according to them happiness (eudaimonia) was a divine (daimonia) and godly nature, and the word ‘happy’ (eudaimon) was applied to someone who had his deity (daimon) disposed well (eu). Hence in order to grasp human happiness we must first have the idea of god and deity, but in order to have the idea of god we must first have a conception of a happy man. Therefore each, by presupposing the idea of the other, is unthinkable for us.

It seems Felix would be a good Latin translation of Μακάριος (makarios) “blessed, fortunate’

Charlton T. Lewis, Charles Short, A Latin Dictionary, fēlix

Lucretius states specifically that “Pleasure” is the guide of life in this way:

But some in opposition to this, ignorant of matter, believe that nature cannot without the providence of the gods, in such nice conformity to the ways of men, vary the seasons of the year and bring forth crops, aye and all the other things, which divine pleasure, the guide of life, prompts men to approach, escorting them in person and enticing them by her fondlings to continue their races through the arts of Venus, that mankind may not come to an end.”

• Lucretius 2:167 (Munro)

Of course Lucretius had also started off poem with a beautiful description of how Pleasure, as represented by Venus, leads all living things on to do the things that they do and to continue their kind:

[01] MOTHER of Aeneas’s sons, joy of men and gods, Venus the life-giver, who beneath the gliding stars of heaven fillest with life the sea that carries the ships and the land that bears the crops; for thanks to thee every tribe of living things is conceived, and comes forth to look upon the light of the sun. Thou, goddess, thou dost turn to flight the winds and the clouds of heaven, thou at thy coming; for thee earth, the quaint artificer, puts forth her sweet-scented flowers; for thee the levels of ocean smile, and the sky, its anger past, gleams with spreading light. For when once the face of the spring day is revealed and the teeming breeze of the west wind is loosed from prison and blows strong, first the birds in high heaven herald thee, goddess, and thine approach, their hearts thrilled with thy might. Then the tame beasts grow wild and bound over the fat pastures, and swim the racing rivers; so surely enchained by thy charm each follows thee in hot desire whither thou goest before to lead him on. Yea, through seas and mountains and tearing rivers and the leafy haunts of birds and verdant plains thou dost strike fond love into the hearts of all, and makest them in hot desire to renew the stock of their races, each after his own kind.

[21] And since thou alone art pilot to the nature of things, and nothing without thine aid comes forth into the bright coasts of light, nor waxes glad nor lovely, I long that thou shouldest be my helper in writing these verses, which I essay to trace on the nature of things for the son of the Memmii, my friend, whom thou, goddess, through all his life hast willed to be bright with every grace beyond his fellows. Therefore the more, goddess, grant a lasting loveliness to my words.

[29] Bring it to pass that meantime the wild works of warfare may be lulled to sleep over all seas and lands. For thou only canst bless mortal men with quiet peace, since ’tis Mavors, the lord of hosts, who guides the wild works of war, and he upon thy lap oft flings himself back, conquered by the eternal wound of love; and then pillowing his shapely neck upon thee and looking up he feeds with love his greedy eyes, gazing wistfully towards thee, while, as he lies back, his breath hangs upon thy lips. Do thou, goddess, as he leans resting on thy sacred limbs, bend to embrace him and pour forth sweet petition from thy lips, seeking, great lady, gentle peace for the Romans. For neither can we in our country’s time of trouble set to our task with mind undistressed, nor amid such doings can Memmius’s noble son fail the fortunes of the state.