Member-only story

GUEST POST: Wrong Again? One more on Stoicism vs Epicureanism

Figs in Winter
15 min readDec 13, 2019
House philosopher, Altes Museum, Berlin, photo by M. Pigliucci

By Catherine Wilson

by Catherine Wilson

Stoicism is a comprehensive philosophy reaching from logic and epistemology into metaphysics and ethics and Epicureanism is equally comprehensive. The Epicureans and Stoics saw themselves and were seen as rival schools, and their differences were the subject of important dialogues by Cicero. Kant mused that the Stoics had the better ethics but no account of moral motivation, while the Epicureans, in declaring pleasure to be the only true good and pain the only true evil, had worse ethics, but a better account of moral motivation, insofar as they claimed that crime never paid off in the long run. Massimo and I continue in this ancient tradition of dialectic, with reference to the moral and political issues of special interest to us today.

The final chapter of my book How to be an Epicurean was called “Should I Be a Stoic Instead?’ There I noted that Stoicism is “dignified, uplifting, and indeed optimistic,” that its assertion of natural human equality is praiseworthy, and that there are considerable areas of overlap between the two philosophies. The avoidance of mental distress, insofar as it is within our power, is a goal of both. But my aim was to show that there are real differences — that you have a choice. Above all, I wanted to show that…

--

--

Figs in Winter
Figs in Winter

Written by Figs in Winter

by Massimo Pigliucci, a scientist, philosopher, and Professor at the City College of New York. Exploring and practicing Stoicism & other philosophies of life.

Responses (1)