Comparing Epicureanism And Lucretius On The Nature Of Things

Throughout his lecture on Lucretius’ On the Nature of Things (OTNOT), Professor Sills argues over the value of Epicurean Philosophy in modern times, especially with many people’s concern over apocalyptic thought. Professor Sills is a strong believer in Epicureanism and he preaches its values against a strictly Stoic belief that one should exhibit strong self-control to limit pain and hardship without displaying feelings. According to Lucretius, Epicureanism's sole principle, on the other hand, was to find pleasure through modesty and learning. Both philosophies have benefits and disadvantages and they can each offer something unique to its followers that the other cannot. Yet, there is about as much reason in arguing in favor of Epicureanism or Stoicism as there is in arguing for a “right” religion. What both Epicurus and Lucretius try and fail in doing is to find the perfect way to achieve balance and meaning in their own lives and the lives of their …show more content…
Mental pleasure is regarded more highly than physical, and the ultimate pleasure is to be free from anxiety and mental pain, especially pain that arises from a needless fear of death and of the gods. This leads to the priority of the self over the group. The Stoic antithesis of Epicureanism is to believe in virtue, the highest good. Stoicism asserts that the way to live is to have a firm self-control that allows the individual to overrule his emotions and to live for the good of the group firstly and his own good secondly. A major problem with Epicureanism in practice is that you cannot trust people to pursue pleasure without expecting a good number of them to take to food, drink, or drugs excessively. A major problem with Stoicism is that you cannot give persons the green light for an objective model of truth and reason without some of them creating intolerant, inflexible dogma. These are inevitable and unavoidable